Skip to main content

Day: 12 October 2015

Safe space is open for debate

Written by Coby Tunnicliffe on . Posted in Opinion.

When I first saw the Students’ Union’s Facebook post about feminist activist and journalist Julie Bindel being banned from speaking at an event on censorship, I wasn’t sure if it was a Daily Mash article. Julie Bindel is an iconic feminist who I was looking forward to seeing speak in Manchester. Reading it made me question how much I knew about Bindel—I wasn’t aware she had been on a “crusade against the transcommunity.”

An article in The Guardian written in 2004 (and easily findable on the internet) titled ‘Gender benders, beware’ seems to be the main evidence for this, much of the content of which she later apologised for. Her writing in the article is crude, suggesting trans people should not be able to use women’s toilets, and arguably uses needlessly offensive language but under even the most extreme definitions it would not be reasonable to call it hate speech or even a crusade.

The Students’ Union however, said Bindel speaking at the university would “incite hatred against trans people.” It must be assumed this would be amongst students of the university, as it was to be a ticketed event. Bindel would not be speaking about trans people at this event—it is a debate on feminism and censorship, and as previously said, Bindel has apologised and distanced herself from the article that caused so much controversy.

Therefore, the Students’ Union must be suggesting that University of Manchester students may come to hate trans people because of going to a debate that features a person who once wrote an article that used offensive language that they later apologized for. If you really don’t like Bindel, you can choose not to go to the event. The mostly likely way this will affect trans people who choose not to go is by clogging up their Facebook wall with the firestorm that will probably continue in the near future.

Defenders of the Students’ Union’s safe space policy will often say free speech protects the right to say what you like without prosecution, not the right to make people listen to you. For free speech to be useful however, it must include the right to listen to what we want. The way the safe space policy has been implemented in this instance limits that right. It stops students being able to organise events, and at their university that there is demand for, and it gives the Students’ Union’s Executive a lot of power to decide who they can and cannot be exposed to based on their ideologies.

The Facebook post also directly criticizes a controversial event organised by The Free Speech and Secular Society regarding Sharia Law. I attended this event and found the audience more interesting than the speakers. I’d encourage you to watch the footage from the event. There was a lot of heckling from the audience, particularly the then executive members of the Students’ Union. The author of the post who was present however, describes the Chair’s attempt to stop heckling as an attempt to “silence and shush interjections from the audience challenging the speakers.” This is not a model of suitable discussion I would like societies to take from the Students’ Union.

As someone who is quite happy with the gender assigned to me from birth, I do think I must be careful when making judgements on what qualifies as transphobia. Despite most of the Students’ Union’s statement reading like a polemic against the devil, using more and more fanciful language to express their rage, the victimisation, abuse and the hardships faced by trans people are coldly real. I wouldn’t support an event that would make these worse or get in the way of progress.

Julie Bindel speaking at the University of Manchester will not change the terrible reality. Crude comments on trans people made in an article over a decade ago—that she has apologised for, does not mean her speaking about feminism in an event about censorship lend legitimacy to transphobia. Instead, her presence helps fuel a useful debate about censorship within the feminist movement today. The Students’ Union’s overarching safe space policy isn’t keeping anyone safe here. It is stopping students being exposed to a debate involving one of the most influential feminists of the last few years.

Disturbance at the protest – unacceptable, but inevitable

Written by Charlie Spargo on . Posted in Opinion.

Last Sunday, tens of thousands of people, young and old, marched through the streets of Manchester in protest of austerity, government cuts, and government policies such as the renewal of Trident.

It was inspiring to see people come together to clearly express their discontent and dissatisfaction, and bring certain important grievances to light, particularly problems that affect the least represented in society.

The unity portrayed by the ‘haves’ standing alongside the ‘have-nots’ was enough to give any cynic some hope that there is another way.

It was even described by one commentator as like a “family day out,” with children coming along with their parents and the march being, on the whole, fairly calm and peaceful.

Unsurprisingly, there were some less savoury moments throughout the day. It’s a credit to the peacefulness of the march that only four arrests were made, but police, journalists, and even Owen Jones received unnecessary abuse from over-zealous protesters.

The news that a young Conservative delegate, in fact a University of Manchester student, took an egg to the forehead was national news within hours. When two Telegraph journalists were spat at by a demonstrator, this also caused outrage.

These actions are condemnable and significantly reduce the credibility of the movement as a whole. However, without in any way excusing them, actions like these are inevitable at such events.

The ability of people to express valid opposition to the actions of government has been reduced steadily over time by those in power, until effectively the only way that remains is united movements like Sunday’s march.

Our broken electoral system, and a tendency for MPs to base their actions in Parliament solely on appealing to a certain bloc of voters, means that those who struggled to have their voice heard in the past now have even less influence. The only formal method of effecting change now is to wait until the next General Election,

The ability to move as a unified front against injustice is the last resort of the disabled, the desperately poor, and other minorities in society. These causes are also picked up by activists including unions, students, and those on the fringes of the political spectrum.

However, as soon as people come together in their thousands, a mob mentality begins to develop. Furthermore, for certain troublemakers, the possibility of causing a ruckus by throwing an egg at a young Tory for example, without being identified, is too tempting.

“Typical,” many will say. “Left-wingers think that they disrupt the democratic process. And say what they want about those who don’t agree with them.” But protest isn’t just a temper tantrum at something not going your way. It’s simply the only way to attract the attention of the country.

People are rightfully angry. No state has a populace who are all content with what’s going on in the upper tiers of power, and this government has made a habit of cutting help to the most vulnerable in society. So when chants such as “Tory scum” begin, I’d imagine that a lot of people are heavily influenced into joining.

When one person breaks ranks, it’s not a surprise that people who have consistently been belittled, ignored, and victimised are sparked into joining them.

The more this recursive action of pressure and reaction occurs, the more an outside viewer looking in sees an indiscriminate mob of shouting, spitting left-wingers.

And these wrongful actions of the few receive the same amount of media attention as the fact that 60,000 turned out onto Manchester’s streets in an attempt to be heard.

When you’re on the receiving end of a protest, the best thing to could hope for is for someone to overstep the line between reasonable and unacceptable. Immediately, you can paint those on the streets as anti-democratic, violent and petty.

But if you’re organising or supporting the protest, then all you can do is hope that people remember that the ultimate goal of your campaign is recognition, and that those who jump at the opportunity for a little public disobedience will stay away.

We need to recognise and uphold the power of the protest, but we also deserve a better method to show dissent than simply waiting until another candidate for local MP comes along.

We need a way of asking for change that doesn’t lead us blindly down the path that will let us easily be tarnished as ideologues just looking to make trouble. Unfortunately, I do recognise the irony inherent in asking for this when I’ve explained that we don’t have it. That’s the Catch-22 of the situation, so all we can do is keep demanding it.

Rugby and our rulers

Written by Joely Thomas on . Posted in Opinion.

The Rugby World Cup continues as nations from across the globe bring together teams of men with huge thighs to battle it out amidst blood, sweat and enough mud to excite a thousand elephants. But does anyone really care? From the reaction we have seen so far, the answer would probably be “no.”

In fact, you could be forgiven for not even having realised that the competition is taking place. A few banners hang shivering off lamp posts while memorabilia lies scattered amidst supermarkets, waiting in resignation for the sales, and even poor Shaun the Sheep, whom Argos, amongst others, have dressed in a miniature rugby top, looks embarrassed by his latest outfit.

An economic impact report carried out by Ernst & Young optimistically predicted that the competition would generate £2.2 billion in total output, but The Guardian recently reported ITV executives’ fears that England’s exit will translate into a loss in advertising revenue, with pubs, hotels and supermarkets also standing to make less gains than was hoped. As it was, figures for the games peaked at around 11 million—only 1 million more than the semi-final of The Great British Bake Off.

Some have tried harder than others to engage the public. BBC Radio 1 allowed space for fans to promote the game but their reasons were hardly riveting. Players showing respect to the referee and fans from both sides getting along is apparently the best the game has to offer. I could almost hear listeners shouting “But we don’t want a jolly day out where we all agree at the end that the best team won! We want to fight! We want a game that can be taken off the pitch and onto the battlefield! We want football!”

For while the upper class toddles off to a nice match of throw the egg, it is behind football that the masses unite, that the emotions normally expressed only as words finally explode from the reserved Englishman and Englishwoman.

It was among the working classes, of course, that football grew into the popular sport it is today. Armed only with a pig’s bladder, thousands would at times pour into whatever space could be found with the simple and honest aim of getting the ball into the opposition’s goal. It was banned from being played on the streets and Richard II even completely outlawed the game at one point, alarmed that the people were not practising their archery in preparation for the upcoming war with Scotland. But it came back in full force.

Then the posh boys at Rugby School had to cheat. Rumour has it that William Webb Ellis (after whom the World Cup’s trophy is named) couldn’t compete fairly but had to pick up the ball and run with it. Instead of disciplining such behaviour, it was claimed to be a new game. Rules were over-complicated and the shape of the ball changed. “This is our superior game that you don’t know how to play,” was the implication.

And this is the problem with politics—it has become a game of rugby. MPs may act all brawly, with a “hear, hear” there and a “there, there” here, but the public are left with the sense that, after all has been spoken, hands are shaken and everyone skips merrily home to enjoy a nice cream tea. “We’re not playing the game wrong,” is what people hear, “You just don’t understand the rules.”

Politicians have picked up on the popularity of football and have observed its power with envy. Wanting some for themselves, they have exaggerated their ties to the game. Ed Miliband claims to be a Leeds United fan whilst David Cameron’s PR even had him out jogging in an Aston Villa shirt until he amused the country last election by forgetting his apparent loyalty to the club and announcing, “Of course, I’d rather you supported West Ham.”

But if politics is to really engage the masses, it needs to go further than empty allegiances with sport. We already have team colours, now all that’s needed are the shirts. Printing “Corbyn”, “Cameron” or “Bennett” on the back can surely be claimed for under expenses, and the Left already has a songbook full of anti-austerity chants from which to choose.

I admit it might not be pretty but then revolutions rarely are. George Osborne may well head-butt Diane Abbott in the final minutes, as Hilary Benn takes advantage of tripping on a bench to shout “Mr Speaker, Mr Speaker, the Right Honourable Gentleman pushed me!”

But it would be lively, passionate, honest; and Prime Minister’s Question Time would certainly draw more viewers than the Rugby World Cup.

“Wrestling isn’t real,” you say?

Written by Ben Farren on . Posted in Features.

Wrestling, professional wrestling, sports entertainment; call it what you want. The product I watch and enjoy most weeks has gone through many forms and has had many rebirths. Throughout the years, physical performance driven by compelling storylines has kept millions of people interested in what, on the surface, looks silly or pointless. There are no stuntmen, there are no retakes; men and women put their bodies on the line in dangerous situations all for the reasons of storytelling, and loyalty to the fans and the brand. These people are artists, and they bring physicality like a sportsman, but with the heart and personality of any actor.

With all this mention of acting, it’s fair to ask: Is it real? To answer this, I forego my wrestling Magic Circle membership. The results of wrestling matches are predetermined and the wrestlers know it. Everyone “knows” it, bar children and other fans whose belief remains suspended. The matches are very roughly choreographed, with wrestlers being incredibly physically skilled, some being able to improvise lengthy matches. The extremely skilful wrestlers are able to “carry” others (make their matches look good even if there is a considerable skill mismatch) while others are more prone to “botches” (mistakes, which are either dangerous or just likely to ruin the illusion of “real” fighting).

Why bother watching then? Why bother watching a load of sweaty semi-clothed men and women dancing around a ring, leading us on? There is no competition and there is no suspense, apart from the fact the fans are being kept in the dark. Besides the semi-nudity, and perhaps even with, that could easily have been a description of Doctor Who, The Good Wife, or Game of Thrones.

It’s a bit cheap of me to try to explain it away so simply because WWE RAW, for example—the most popular wrestling show on TV now and for the last 14 years—is not like any of those programmes. Wrestling on TV includes far more danger than filming your average Wednesday night TV drama. Even though the matches are predetermined and may be roughly choreographed, it doesn’t mean that the ring is soft—when you fall from a height, you are falling onto solid wood. The reason there is a sound of impact is because there is an impact. When they go out of the ring, the padding on the floor is only so thick. When they go out into the crowd, the concrete is as real as any stadium you’ve stood in. A misplaced arm or an ill-timed “bump” (fall) can lead to serious injury, or even death, as has happened in the ring many times.

Long enough gone are the days where The Undertaker (surely you know him?) was throwing people from the top of a cage surrounding the ring. In 1998, the creepy death-themed wrestler threw Mick Foley (another name fans from old might recognise—Mankind) from a 20ft high cage, through a table, and onto the not-so-padded floor. To many, this moment epitomises the edgy, sometimes crazy attitudes of those who wish to perform for the sake of performance. When people say “wrestling isn’t real,” I sometimes wonder why they are thinking about the match results and not the match content. To say something isn’t real commits the sin of ignoring the beauty of the performance and the feeling it evokes.

That isn’t to say we watch wrestling only for an orgy of destruction and pain, although many people regard those memories as very fond—for nostalgia’s sake if nothing else. In wrestling, characters emerge by virtue of the wrestlers’ personalities and the creativity of the writing teams in their respective companies.

Over months, storylines build, just as in any entertainment. Bad guys (“heels”) and good guys (“faces”) have rivalries intended to stoke reactions from fans. Often “authority” figures (bosses or managers, for example) provide roadblocks to the good guys, causing frustration in them and in us, the fans. The bad guys insult the good guys, sometimes even attacking their families, injuring them, and doing anything they can do get “heat” (boos, jeers, hate) from the fans. Normally —eventually—the good guy overcomes the odds and wins. If the storyline is over, neat lines can be drawn under rivalry with a simple handshake. Real life backstage politics often overflows into the fiction of the ring, with endings changing based on contracts and real disputes.

Wrestling gives something to which fans can aspire. The characters, in a way, are incredibly real. They represent parts of us of which we are proud, and other parts of us to which we can relate deeply, though not necessarily with pride: Stone Cold Steve Austin giving the middle finger to the evil boss, Mr. McMahon, something many wish they could do to the authority figures in their lives. Conversely, Hulk Hogan, for all his recent troubles, was a symbol to children: “Say your prayers and eat your vitamins” stayed with young audiences for a long time.

The superhero characters, who rarely do wrong, are the epitome of this fighting spirit: they don’t give up, they rise above hate. Interestingly, many people find these characters the most frustrating, the Hulk Hogans, the John Cenas. They represent something not popular in the West right now. Superman at one point represented America, threatened by communism, war, and nukes.

Now, we are in the age of Batman. Morally ambiguous characters become far more relatable—perhaps it’s how much more we know about the morally ambiguous world out there. Through the end of the 1990s and the 2000s, punk rock, counter culture and strong anti-establishment sentiment came back. Wrestling used to be a driving force in culture, with characters like Stone Cold and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson being at the forefront.

The vanguard of not just teen but popular culture included wrestling. Wrestling is an important chapter in cultural history. For whatever reason, something in young adults resonates with these characters. And we know it’s not real, but it doesn’t matter. There is something real in there, be it a moral reality, pure athletic prowess, or the exact same reason you cry reading well-written fiction.

Wrestling touches many people in a way other fictional cultures cannot, and many people would say there is something real about the saddest book they ever read, or the most euphoric high they get from “their guy” winning by overcoming the odds. If you work hard, and get a bit lucky on the way, you might touch, or even hold that big gold belt.

It’s still real to me, dammit.

Will the new generation discredit the Left?

Written by George Bolton on . Posted in Opinion.

“Spitting hatred as yobs ambush Tory conference” read the headline of last Monday’s Metro. The Conservative Party’s decision to hold their conference in Manchester was a piece of political genius. With the introduction of the Trade Union Bill still fresh in people’s minds, Cameron and co. knew very well that their presence in the North would provoke a tirade of violence, ill behaviour and a subsequent field day for the press.

Instead of focusing on the PM’s declaration that he would be prepared to use Britain’s nuclear weapons, to use just one example, the British public are instead feasting their eyes on a crowd of spitting, swearing “yobs.”

With the dawn of Corbynmania and a new age of fashionable socialism upon us, the younger generation, who find themselves at the centre of this political whirlwind, needs to make sure they use this energy positively. With more than 500,000 new members of the Labour Party, the youth of Britain is now more mobilised than any time in my memory. As an 18-year-old, I find myself surrounded by intellectually stimulated, politically engaged youngsters who are freshly inspired by Westminster politics for the first time in their lives.

Although this is promising, there is a possibility that this phase could fizzle out without making any impact, leaving the Conservatives as dominant as they were on May 7th. That said, the 60,000 or more protesters that marched on the Conservative Party Conference showed the nation and the world that the British public, or certainly a sizeable proportion of it, won’t take five more years of austerity without a fight.

The majority of this protest’s media coverage, however, did not focus on the abundance of democratic engagement and youthful politicisation that this day demonstrated. Instead, the unproductive and childish minority of the protestors were given the limelight. Eggs were thrown, and a 40-hour-rave was held in the middle of Piccadilly Gardens. These are the ‘highlights’ that this day of protest will be remembered for, and it is for this reason that the new leftist generation must be more cautious and disciplined if they expect to be taken seriously.

I hope that we will learn from our predecessors, who took to the streets in a furious flurry, habitually chanting “scum” and burning pictures of Thatcher. All these methods do is confirm to middle England that it is the calm and reserved Tories taking on the animalistic, obnoxious and dangerous hard Left. If, instead, 16- to 25 year-olds engaged in more respectful democratic practices to voice their dissent, perhaps the media would find it more difficult to dismiss the voices of thousands of people by painting them all as a few raving loonies.

Of course, there is nothing new about this media tactic. The justified outrage of the hike in tuition fees was quickly extinguished by the media due to the irresponsibility of a small minority of young people during the 2011 student riots. The media littered the coverage with violent, threatening words that frightened Middle England. What’s more, the endless coverage of the aftermath of the protests distracted from the actual issue of the fees itself. We must learn that being young and angry simply isn’t enough if real change is going to happen.

There are, believe it or not, a significant number of young people across the UK that are involved in respectable, rational politics. These are young people that are committed to democratic principles and are prepared to work with the system to achieve their ends, not simply throw eggs at it. Take the Citizens UK First Time Voter Assembly as an example: Organised by young people and attended by Chuka Umunna, Matthew Hancock and Millicent Scott, this event facilitated a productive and serious conversation between a room full of young people and their elected representatives.

There will only be a sustainable renewed Labour movement if the generation leading it is measured, purposeful and versatile. If not, the next generation of Tories will happily wipe the egg of their face and walk straight back into Number 10.

Can you afford to bulk at university?

Written by Robert Parris on . Posted in Features, Lifestyle.

£43 per week. That’s how much a lean 3,000-calorie-per-day diet with my personal protein-to-carb ratio would cost me in order to become robust. And that’s not even including the gym membership. Despite the costs associated with getting a lean and ripped body, I know many people who have and will try to bulk at university. Hell, I even tried it myself. Unfortunately, I failed, and not just for financial reasons.

What is bulking, you may ask? Bulking is a process commonly used by an individual wishing to gain muscle mass and/or weight. In recent years, bulking has developed into a strong subculture that is particularly popular amongst young men. During this year’s Welcome Week, the fitness website bodybuilding.com even had its own stand, which gave out free protein shakes, towels and other bulking accessories. Indeed, there is a definite market for bulking products amongst students, and the trend seems set to continue.

Why are so many young people deciding to bulk? Rob Wilson, Chairman of the Body Dysmorphic Disorder Foundation, explains in a BBC article that “men are increasingly conditioned to think that they need to look a certain way if they want to feel successful, powerful and attractive.” He then goes on to explain that one of the group’s theories behind this current trend is that men have not adjusted to the increasingly physical representations of themselves in the same way that women have over the years.

This is almost certainly a consequence of the rise of both social and traditional media. The explosion in popularity of apps such as Instagram, Snapchat, and Tinder in recent years has meant that there is more attention given to an individual’s physicality than ever before. For many, ensuring that one looks the best one possibly can for social media profiles is a real concern amongst young men. Numerous Facebook and Instagram profiles of fitness fanatics have become popular because they represent a physical perfection that most can only aspire to achieve.

One such example is Scott Herman Fitness. A self-made health freak, Scott is a giant—both physically and in the social sphere. His YouTube account has more than 800,000 subscribers and over 1,000 videos, and he owns a website and countless social media accounts. Combined with increased pressure from traditional media such as Hollywood superstar and ex-professional wrestler Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson, and Mark Wahlberg to name but two, looking buff has been given a spotlight that it has never before experienced.

My own bulking has been somewhat mixed, to say the least. Personal discipline is a huge factor that needs to be taken into consideration when deciding to bulk. Timing has to be perfect, diets need to be spot on, workouts completed in good form. In short, it’s exhausting. I trained for six months from March of this year until early September, and there were definite pros and cons.

During the summer break, I found that working out fitted around my lifestyle perfectly. I would wake up, have the first of my six meals per day (porridge and six eggs for breakfast), go to the gym, come out utterly exhausted, meet up with friends, and then repeat the next day. It worked for me because during the summer, life was simple. There were no lectures to which to rush, no societies to attend and eating enough food on a student budget was not an issue.

However, during term time it was a completely different story. Living in catered halls meant that I couldn’t choose what I wanted to eat and this caused problems. Sometimes I would skip a meal altogether if it wasn’t healthy enough, and when we went out for food I would always choose the leanest option, even if it broke the bank. I struggled to attend all of my society meetings, and I barely had enough money for nights out. I had friends who worked out, but our timings were always skewed. I would wake up very early and go to the gym even before I had my breakfast in order to fit the workouts into my day.

I eventually came to realise the contradiction at the heart of my ambition to bulk. I was bulking in order to become more comfortable in public, and when I realised that it was jeopardising rather than improving my social life, I decided I wouldn’t continue bulking in my second year at university.

That isn’t to say that bulking at university is impossible. One of my course-mates managed to pull it off in spectacular fashion. His forearms are the size of a small tree and he weighs nearly two stone more than I do despite being shorter than me. I asked him how he managed to afford bulking when he was at university and he revealed to me that he had done it through what is commonly referred to as a ‘dirty bulk’.

Essentially a dirty bulk is a means of achieving a calorie surplus with inexpensive and often carbohydrate-rich foods, such as pasta. I asked him of any downsides, and he simply replied: “I got really fat!” He later went on to say that he had adjusted the diet to reduce the calorie surplus. With him and his flatmate guiding and supporting each other and going to the gym together during his training, he has now succeeded in joining a sports division. I was left feeling seriously impressed with his achievement.

The purpose of this article isn’t to actively discourage the reader from bodybuilding, or from fitness. I certainly saw gains after my training. I was far less flabby, and my upper body was more muscular and defined. After all, an hour of exercise per day stimulates an individual both physically and mentally, so it won’t just make you look great, you could perform better in exams, too.

Simply put, my message is that it is vital to not lose track of the important things while you’re at university. Student life should be about learning, meeting new people, joining societies and experiencing everything that your university has to offer. I stopped bulking simply because I found myself saying no to these aspects far too often. Exercise should enhance your life, not become your life.

After all, you don’t need to be a big guy to have a big personality.

Who protested the Tory Conference?

Written by Daniel Saville on . Posted in Features.

On Sunday 4th of October, at least 60,000 marchers gathered on Oxford Road at All Saints Park and made the three hour walk to and around the conference centre where the Conservative Party Conference was being held.

All the tribes of the left were represented: Steel workers from the mothballed SSI plant in Redcar, pro-cannabis legalisation activists, Stop the War Coalition members, anarchists, Anonymous supporters, a plethora of trade unionists, families, students, and seemingly every other individual with an axe to grind against Dave and the Gang.

I spoke with a few of them to find out why they were there and to see if they thought their actions could have any long-term impact on the country and its political sphere.

Protestors came in all manner of outfits—but porcine-based costumes were incredibly popular. Photo: The Mancunion

Caoimhe studies English Literature and Drama at the University of Manchester and was keen to tell me what her motivations were for being there: “I’m very anti-austerity, and I think that the Tories have such a small mandate to do what they are doing. It’s affecting people’s lives so negatively, and we just need change.

“The fact that they’re holding their conference in Manchester, which is a left-wing area, shows their insensitivity to people here who are living below the poverty line or are affected by tax credit cuts.”

Throughout the day it became clear that people were not just angry with Conservative party policy, but the fact that they chose Manchester as their conference location. This fact seemed to breed resentment across the board, and brought accusations of insensitivity.

Further into the protest, after a rally and the mandatory Billy Bragg songs, I caught up with Izzy and Ellen, also students at the University of Manchester.

Ellen, studying English at the University of Manchester said: “As a student, I find the cuts to education really really scary; not just for our younger siblings and people we know who want to go to university now, but nationally.

“I think the most important thing for young people is education, and a Tory policy that prioritises the 1 per cent means that fewer young people will be able to get an education. That’s what we’re protesting today.”

Ellen and Izzy hoped that taking part would grab the attention of the government. Photo: Daniel Saville

I asked Izzy, who is also studying English, if she thought the march would achieve anything.

“I think it will send a message—whether they listen to the message or not is their issue—but it’s really nice to be with like-minded people. Young people can seem ambivalent, so to see so many students here is amazing.”

It was not, however, just the disaffected youth on the streets of Manchester City Centre, but a real kaleidoscope of people across all ethnicities, areas, and backgrounds. Just before the protest reached Albert Square, Joseph, a part-time construction worker, told me how the Trade Union Bill has brought people back to activism.

“The Trade Union Bill affects all of our lives. Whether you’re at work or at home, you’re in the community and it affects all of our lives and it affects poor people more so… I hope Corbyn can sort some of these problems.

“He’s got to create an environment where you might say people who had been sleeping have been awakened—like a sleeping giant—and we are helping to move that forward.”

Joseph is confident that the demonstrations will awaken the ‘sleeping giant’ of the Labour movement. Photo: The Mancunion

There was one notable exception to the list of groups attending the march: The Labour party was not represented as a single entity and instead it fell to local branches or individuals to oppose Conservative austerity policies.

Stella told me: “I’m a member of the Labour party. I wanted to come and fight for Labour as sometimes I don’t think we’re visible. I’m sure a lot of Labour members are here but we don’t arrange ourselves under one banner, like the Greens, so I wanted to be really clear that the Labour party is anti-austerity.”

However, not all of the protesters were out on the streets looking for peaceful political change. Two teenagers wearing Anonymous masks were standing at the edge of the protest and when approached for a comment over why they were protesting, one said: “I came here to fuck over the Tories. They’re looking for class war at the minute—that’s what we came here for—but we can’t find them.”

Members of the Anonymous group feel that the government is spoiling for a fight—and they’re more than happy to oblige. Photo: The Mancunion

Other than the egging of a Conservative student the march remained reasonably peaceful, with only four arrests over the entire day, and one of those arrested charged with drunk and disorderly behaviour.

It seems that we’re not quite at the tipping point of class war. Yet, with many of those out on Sunday hoping for peaceful political change, and an end to tighter regulations of trade unions, the scrapping of tax credits and an end to crippling austerity, class tension is certainly palpable.

Review: 45 Years

Written by Jake Sanders on . Posted in Film.

Having already impressed audiences with his feature debut Weekend and short-lived HBO series Looking, British director Andrew Haigh is back with his second feature, 45 Years. Haigh once again demonstrates his incredible ability to express enormous emotion in moments of apparent mundanity as he explores the dissolution of a relationship in its twilight years.

After the discovery of a young woman’s frozen body in a glacier in the Alps prompts a trip down memory lane for Geoff Mercer (Tom Courtenay), his wife, Kate (Charlotte Rampling), must contend with the fact that she might not have been the great love of her husband’s life. Haigh makes the intelligent decision to take a step back and simply allow his enormously talented cast to shine. Rampling, especially, is an absolute delight to watch, perfectly capturing the way a well-adjusted, mature person can be brought to their knees by the destructive powers of obsession and insecurity. Courtenay also enthrals—as a man whose age has left him weakened both physically and mentally, but whose non-threatening outward appearance masks enormous depths of anger and regret.

The film’s title refers to a party Geoff and Kate are planning, to celebrate their 45-year anniversary after their 40th anniversary was disturbed by Geoff’s ill health. This naturally puts Kate and Geoff in a place where they are more prone to putting their lives in perspective, especially as they look at their friends—whose now adult children serve as a reminder of Geoff and Kate’s lack of tangible legacy. This mutual introspection is impacted by the sudden discovery of a young woman’s body, perfectly preserved, buried in a glacier in the Alps.

This frozen corpse spurs the narrative, but also serves as a canny metaphor for Geoff’s relationship with his suppressed memories. Though Geoff might be content with his comfortable-yet-childless living situation, and though he might even love his wife, once he starts delivering long, meandering monologues describing his feelings for his lost love, it becomes clear that his loss is something that he has never really processed or moved on from. His own reluctance to succumb to the inevitable tides of age exacerbates his obsession with this still youthful body and all that it represents.

Naturally, the all-consuming nature of Geoff’s fixation quickly seeps into Kate’s own mind, poisoning her perception of the life that she has built and leading her to begin her own ill-fated exploration of her husband’s past. Watching Rampling engage with her increasingly erratic husband, going from humouring him initially before growing angry then eventually submitting to her despair—is equal parts fascinating and agonizing. Both Courtenay and Rampling bring so much depth to these characters that they feel almost entirely like real people, rendering the film’s most emotionally bleak scenes all the more difficult to bear.

Though Haigh’s style of filmmaking generally leans towards at Dogme 95-esque commitment to realism, he does reward the audience with at least one visually stunning scene where Kate cycles through pictures from Geoff’s fateful hiking trip, her face a mask of anguish, illuminated only by a projector. Beyond this scene, however, the grey foggy colour palette of this film grounds the audience in the melancholy world of the couple, punctured occasionally with warmer earth-tones in the film’s less aggressively downbeat domestic scenes.

The decision to divide the film into chapters for each day of the week make the film seem fractured or disjointed at times, giving the film an episodic feel that tarnishes the elegant slow crawl towards the inevitable anniversary party. This, however, does little to lessen the film’s impact, and it remains an astounding piece of cinema. Haigh once again proves himself to be one of the most interesting voices in British cinema and deserves enormous praise for crafting an exceptional showcase for his veteran stars.

4/5

Review: Keith Richards: Under the Influence

Written by Jane Simmons on . Posted in Film.

Netflix’s documentary Keith Richards: Under the Influence follows ex Rolling Stones guitar player, Richards himself, as he records his new solo album Cross-Eyed Heart, and takes us on a tour of his blues music influences around America. A must-see for avid Keith Richards/Rolling Stones fans, but a self-indulgent whimsy for the average film viewer.

The first striking thing that one notices when watching this documentary—as the film opens with Richards in a studio singing his new song ‘Cross-Eyed Heart’ (the baffling title song of his new blues inspired album)—is how this documentary is very obviously a promotional puff-piece just to publicise his new album.

It reeks of amateur filmmaking—it seems to have absolutely no structure; aimlessly recording the ramblings and musings of Richards as he travels briefly from New York to Nashville, citing blues legends such as Muddy Waters as his “best pals, man,” before the next scene is quickly transitioned in.

The distinct fault with this documentary is that it does not explore Richards’ past in any depth whatsoever—you would hope in a documentary celebrating a huge musical icon, that the film would include hard-hitting, in-depth interviews from those who are closest to him—maybe someone like Mick Jagger or Ronnie Wood (why have they not been interviewed for the film?) You would hope that it would explore his inspirations in finer detail, documenting the exciting beginnings of his musical interest to its full development.

It also overlooks what Keith Richards is most famous for—his reputation as an absolute party animal and drug abuser. The film hints at his past by portraying him constantly with a fag and a glass of whisky on the go, but does not in any way explore his past demons or troubles. Instead, the documentary offers a whistle-stop tour of his childhood, a quick-fire guide to his favourite artists, and interviews from Pierre the guitar technician, which seem to have no relevance whatsoever in terms of building an impression of the icon.

One quality of Under the Influence however, is the archive footage of The Rolling Stones in play. This will delight true Rolling Stones fans, as you can see videos of ‘Street Fighting Man’ and ‘Sympathy for the Devil’ first being recorded in the studio—brilliant footage. There is a great clip of The Rolling Stones introducing one of their favourite blues artists onto a TV programme, as a cheeky Brian Jones quips “it’s about time you shut up and we have Howlin’ Wolf onstage!” Unfortunately, however, many of these clips are obscured by an intrusive soundtrack, the rasping commentary of Richards himself, and choppy editing.

It is in fact the editing itself that flags up how amateur this film is. Scenes are short with too many clips to watch—it is difficult to keep up with what in particular the scenes are trying to communicate. Although this is a film about a music icon and the soundtrack is very important, the way in which the sound is placed in the narrative is distracting, and drowns out the dialogue.

Netflix describes the film as a “rare, intimate journey” with the man behind the myths, a credible summary of the film. It is intimate indeed—the camera records Keith Richards alone with his guitar, the awkward filler conversation he makes as the camera rests on him after finishing an anecdote. For a true Richards fan, this will be a necessary watch, to cherish those in-between moments of their idol’s life. For the general film viewer who decides to give this film a watch after seeing it on Netflix, it is almost too intimate, embarrassingly close.

All in all, Keith Richards: Under the Influence is a disappointment. Maybe, if you are in adoration of Keith Richards, you would enjoy every second of it. Or maybe you would also be let down by the lack of exploration at Richards’ past, and the confusing narrative. In short, this documentary is a good watch for a diehard Rolling Stones fan, but not so much for anyone else.

2/5

VIP Launch: Banyan Bar & Kitchen

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in News.

Arc Inspirations have delivered a successful range of trendy restaurants situated throughout the UK, so when the opportunity came to try the new Banyan Bar and Kitchen, we jumped at the chance. The new restaurant is situated in the heart of Manchester and adds to the collection of eateries found within the historic Grade II listed-building known as the Corn Exchange.

We attended their launch night on Thursday the 1st of October for a taster of what the trendy new hangout had on offer, and we were not disappointed. From first glance, the new restaurant is inviting and enticing, with its floor-to-ceiling windows and impressive outdoor terrace. The inside lives up to the expectations set by its exterior: The bar is a sleek area against the backdrop of the bustling city, and its ambience creates an intimate feel through low-level lighting.

For a more formal setting, the dining area is tucked away up some stairs, with an impressive open kitchen. Downstairs there are two private dining rooms, The Root and The Well, which can be hired out for parties and functions.

On arrival we were greeted with cocktails, which came from the menu of amazing creations. We were lucky enough to sample the Pea and Mint Bellini, which ingredients included dry Prosecco layered on top of their homemade sugar snap pea syrup, mint and St Germain elderflower liqueur. This drink is vibrant, refreshing and the perfect way to begin a cool evening. The Pea and Mint Bellini turned out to be one of the best cocktails we tasted from the menu and in fact one of the best we have ever had. Charged at the reasonable price of £6.95, it is a definite must if you are heading here for drinks.

Adding to the cocktails that we also sampled were the Raspberry Cooler, a Blueberry and Raspberry Sour, and an Espresso Martini. All of the cocktails and drinks were priced fairly enough to not make a huge dent in your student loan, making Banyan Bar and Kitchen the perfect place for a chilled and easy night out.

After the cocktails exceeded our expectations, we were looking forward to trying the food that Banyan Bar and Kitchen had to offer. We tasted a small selection of nibbles that the bar produces and the only thing that we were let down by was the fact that we were unable to sample more. We managed to try a mouthful of their Teriyaki Salmon, which was a taste of heaven and melted in our mouths. We also sampled a bite-size portion of their Crispy Cajun Chicken Burger, which was soft and succulent.

However, without a doubt our taster of the Tempura King Prawns stole the show. They were buttery, soft and cooked to perfection. The selection that we were able to try has definitely left us wanting more so we will be heading back for a second round in order to gain a wider taste of the menu.

Banyan Bar and Kitchen is the perfect place for anyone looking for delicious food and creative cocktails. We were extremely impressed by the appearance of the bar, the food and drink and the attentive staff. We have been left wanting more and will be booking our next table as soon as possible. Watch this space for a second review of this fabulous new bar and kitchen!

Banyan, Manchester
Exchange Square
Manchester
M4 3TR

Visit their website at: http://arcinspirations.com/banyan-manchester

My Big Fat Greek Date

Written by Lucy Brenner on . Posted in News.

I absolutely love Greek food, so when I heard that Tzatziki’s Greek Deli and Take Away had opened in the heart of Fallowfield, just five minutes from my house, I could not contain my excitement. There was definitely a gap in the Fallowfield food scene for some wholesome healthy food to steal the limelight from Kebab King.

However, after my Greek-themed date night my excitement quickly subsided. Tzatziki’s is a family-run business on Wilmslow Road that has a simple menu of authentic Greek cuisine. From mezze platters to moussaka, the menu encapsulated everything that a traditional Greek deli should have.

My boyfriend and I ordered our takeaway and it arrived just thirty minutes later. The meal came to £11, which was decently priced for the amount that we ordered. I ordered the souvlaki chicken, which consisted of marinated chicken with tomatoes and onions, chips and tzatziki, which is a Greek side dish of yogurt with cucumber, garlic and mint. In my opinion this was a pretty safe option that the menu had on offer and therefore the dish was satisfactory, as expected.

The chicken flavours were rather bland and this was perhaps due to the lack of specification as to what the chicken was marinated in… perhaps nothing at all.  The chips that came as a side portion were flavorsome and it is with regret that I did not order just a large portion of them for myself.

My boyfriend ordered the moussaka, which was served with Greek salad and pita bread. He opened the box and pulled a face of disgust. It looked incredibly unappetising. Under the top soggy layer of cheese was some aubergine and lamb, which if you closed your mouth and tasted it was, at best, alright.

The salad consisted of a few sparse pieces of lettuce, tomatoes, and two olives, so I am not sure why they thought it was appropriate to put the word ‘Greek’ in front of it. I could have pulled together something much better myself so this really felt like a waste of my money. The salad also lacked any dressing, which did not help, as it was already very boring and could have done with the extra kick.

Overall, I was unimpressed with Tzatziki’s takeaway and I will not be ordering from there again.

Tzatziki’s
325 Wilmslow Road,
Fallowfield,
M14 6NW

Free delivery

Review: The Martian

Written by Charlotte Gough on . Posted in Film.

Ridley Scott, the visionary director at the helm of Hollywood game-changers (Gladiator, Thelma & Louise), particularly in the world of science-fiction (Alien, Blade Runner), delivers an exhilarating space-survival thriller based on the best-selling novel by Andy Weir. This project appeared to be one Matthew McConaughey short of Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar, with similar roles played by Matt Damon and Jessica Chastain. The Martian’s departure from this, however, with its light-heartedness and refreshingly funny tone—engaging for even the most reluctant sci-fi viewers—makes it one of the must-see releases of 2015.

The film has three main plot strands that unfold simultaneously:

1) Mark Watney, a NASA agent, is presumed dead and abandoned after being hit by a flying ship-part during the crew’s departure through the treacherous storm conditions on Mars. It is soon revealed that he is still alive and now stranded – he must re-establish communication with NASA back on earth and use his botany genius to stretch his meagre supplies.

2) Meanwhile, the NASA team work to bring Watney home, and…

3) When his fellow crewmates construct a nigh-impossible rescue operation of their own. Interestingly, these scenarios were all shot in separate stints as if they were three separate films, yet they managed to maintain a slick cohesion.

Matt Damon is perfectly cast as Watney, the All-American everyman who has the whole world (that is, as per usual, the US) rooting for him. Despite his circumstances he remains positive and practical with his wisecracking charisma in one-man video journals and almost superhuman problem-solving. We remain completely behind him even though we never really get to know him as a person.

Much like its protagonist, The Martian very much gets down to business and successfully juggles its many components plot-wise. It is exciting and fast-paced from the beginning and throughout whilst championing a brains-over-brawn approach to crisis. Indeed, Watney’s main activity is growing potatoes from his own poo, and the NASA team spend the majority of the film sitting and bickering over the best course of action.

The film also doesn’t get bogged down in sprawling landscape shots of Mars, space- jargon or schmaltziness, which is a breath of fresh air, especially after the heavy scientific theories and sentimentalities of Interstellar. It is not, however, dumbed down, and the film’s constant quips and self-reflexive nerd-humour, like the 1970s disco music throughout, give a playful wink to the sci-fi genre as a whole. One can’t help but laugh at such lines “I’m going to science the shit out of this,” said by Watney, and soundtracks to Watney’s defiance against Mars’ hostile atmosphere, Gloria Gaynor’s ‘I Will Survive’ and ABBA’s ‘Waterloo’.

The film’s supporting cast are fortunately not relegated to stereotypes, and all have a crucial part to play in Watney’s rescue. The motley crew of NASA is made up of impressive star performances that don’t overshadow each other—including Jeff Daniels, Sean Bean, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Kristen Wiig and a particularly enjoyable comedic turn from Donald Glover, a dishevelled yet ingenious underling. Watney’s crewmates are also well-developed characters, spearheaded by Commander Melissa Lewis, played by an always dignified Jessica Chastain. Chastain, Wiig and Kate Mara once again exemplify Scott’s tendencies towards the inclusion of strong female characters—even in his early work before it was cool in Hollywood. Wiig, however, does not bring much to the party beyond sheer novelty and an excess of concerned expressions in close-up.

Scott’s film shines a heroic and triumphant light on space travel and NASA in particular as a real life institution of great minds from different, yet equally important scientific disciplines—especially the underdog botanist. The Martian is an uplifting celebration of human intelligence, self-reliance and, in Matt Damon’s words—a film about the importance of “living for something bigger than ourselves.” For a thriller it lacks conflict and tension, but that does mean that by the time it reaches the climatic rescue attempt, with its spectacular action and visuals, you will be suitably awestruck and on the edge of your seat.

3/5

TV Binge: How to Get Away with Murder

Written by Parizad Mangi on . Posted in Film.

The suspenseful and scintillating first season of this ABC crime drama may have unravelled a few mysteries that it built up, but the season finale cultivated plenty of new ones to be pieced together.

The show follows a group of law students and their professor Annaliese Keating as they become entangled in a murder plot of their own while trying to solve cases of other clients. With rapid switches between past and present day narrative, the twists and turns have got its audience at the edges of their seats.

Praised for both a stellar performances from lead Viola Davis (who recently won an Emmy for her role) and a fast pace, the show added another success to Shonda Rhimes’ resume, who is dominating US television network ABC with her Thursday night line-up (affectionately called Shondaland), which includes this show as well as Grey’s Anatomy, and Scandal.

It scored big ratings in both the US and the UK and seems set to continue that trend when it returns to British screens this year with a second season.  It joins a new wave of TV shows launched by ABC to increase diversity on television, as a result of an ongoing debate regarding representation and why it matters.

Diverse shows such as How To Get Away With Murder, Scandal, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, and Modern Family are already hits in the UK, and ABC is ready to export more to the roster with Fresh Off The Boat, Cristela, Black-ish, and Quantico to the UK in 2016. One can only hope they enjoy the same success, as it encourages the television industry to expand its diversity quota.

When Viola Davis became the first woman of colour to win in the Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Category at the Emmys, she made a speech on this particular subject and was brutally honest about it: “The only thing that separates women of colour from anyone else is opportunity. You cannot win an Emmy for roles that are simply not there.”

Supporting these shows means more opportunities for those who are otherwise rarely represented properly, and representation matters.

How To Get Away With Murder returns on the 28th of October at 10pm, on Universal Channel.

Recipe: Thai prawn curry

Written by Josephine Harrington on . Posted in News.

As freshers flu starts to kick in, you’re probably in need of a warming and healthy meal, and especially for this, we have a fragrant Thai curry. If you’re in a hurry, use jarred Thai curry paste rather than make the homemade one. Personally, I prefer the homemade paste as it has a great depth of flavour and is much healthier. This paste can also keep for a couple of months in the fridge, so could be made in bulk and used again. Prawns can be swapped for chicken or omitted completely if catering for vegetarians.

Ingredients:

Serves 3-4

Time: 20 minutes

  • Bag of frozen prawns, defrosted
  • 300g white rice
  • 2 spring onions
  • Packet of baby sweetcorn
  • 2 peppers
  • Handful of spinach
  • 50g green beans
  • 400ml coconut milk
  • Sesame seeds (optional)
  • 1 stick of lemongrass
  • 1 lime
  • 1 lemon
  • Fresh coriander
  • 1.5 teaspoons of ground coriander
  • ½ teaspoon of ground cumin,
  • 3 teaspoons minced ginger
  • 3 cloves garlic
  • 2 mild chillies
  • Oil
  • Soy sauce

 

Method:

Start by blending together the ground cumin, ground coriander, chillies, ginger, garlic, lemongrass stalks, freshly chopped coriander, zest and juice of lime, two tablespoons of oil until a thick paste has formed.

Before heating the wok, ensure that the prawns are defrosted to remove the water. Then add a splash of oil to your Wok and fry the prawns, baby corn, pepper strips and green beans for a couple of minutes until starting to brown.

Add the paste, mix together, and add a can of coconut milk, adding a little water if it looks too dry. Bring to boil and add two teaspoons of soy sauce.

Just before serving, mix in the spinach. Serve with rice, chopped spring onions, sesame seeds and a wedge of lemon.

What’s so sweet about sweet potatoes?

Written by Evie Horsell on . Posted in News.

I’m sure those of you who are interested in food, which if you’re reading this you probably are, have noticed the sudden craze about ‘superfoods’. Even Jamie Oliver has lost a sizeable amount of bulk to correspond with his new book ‘Everyday Super Food’.

With this new trend at its peak, even we poor students have been investing in the likes of quinoa, acai, goji berries and coconut oil. I have taken personal delight in investigating the golden nugget of the superfoods: the sweet potato. When researching the sweet potato, a superfood with a lower carbohydrate content than white potatoes, I found that it is full of Vitamin A, Vitamin C and plenty of antioxidants. Even one portion of sweet potato can give you up to 90 per cent of your recommended Vitamin A.

So, I decided it was time to cook with this curious ingredient. The recipe that I tried out was delicious, super easy, very kind on the wallet, and freezer-friendly.
Spiced sweet potato and lentil soup

Prep time: 20 mins

Cook time: 20 mins

 

Serves 8

 

Ingredients:

2 tsp medium curry powder

1 tsp ground cumin

3 tbsp olive oil

1 apple, peeled, cored and chopped

2 small onions finely chopped

Bunch of coriander, leaves and stems chopped (reserving some leaves for decoration)

1 inch piece of root ginger, grated

1.2 ltr of chicken/vegetable stock

800g sweet potatoes, peeled and grated

100g lentils (red, brown or green)

300ml milk
Optional:
1 lime

Crème fraiche and coriander leaves, to decorate

Method:

In a saucepan, toast the spices over a medium heat for about a minute, then toss in the onion. Fry gently until soft, then add the chopped apple. Continue cooking over a medium heat for 3-5 minutes, then add the grated ginger and coriander, cook until aromatic.

Add the peeled and grated sweet potato (grating is a slight pain but shortens the cooking time), then add the lentils and stock. Bring to a boil and simmer covered for 20 mins, stirring occasionally.

When the lentils are tender, take the pan off the heat and whiz the soup with a handheld electric blender. Pulse until smooth. The consistency should be very thick.

Put the pan back on the heat and add the milk, if the consistency is still too thick for your liking add some more stock or milk, but be sure to taste and add more spice if it starts becoming too bland.

Once the soup is warmed through again, add the juice of the lime.  Season to taste.

Serve with a swirl of crème fraiche and scatter with coriander leaves.

EAT ME: Mud Crab Bar & Cafe

Written by Eva Katz on . Posted in News.

Following numerous raving reports from friends, I was keen to try Mud Crab for myself. But before I begin my review, I would like to credit my wonderful friend Flo for waiting for me for 45 minutes following some minor miscommunication due to lack of phones. Thanks Flo, you’re a great pal.

Located in Didsbury, the restaurant is conveniently a stone’s throw from the nearest bus stop (take the 42/142 into East Didsbury) and therefore hard to miss.

A trendy venue with some quirky artwork, Mud Crab resonates with Manchester’s chic hipster heaven vibe, refreshingly outside of the Northern Quarter. The menu has a gastro-pub feel to it and features pizza, salads and grilled meats with some interesting taste combinations. I, suffering with post-night antics beer belly, chose the Mud Crab Caesar Salad, whilst my friend chose the Chorizo and Balsamic Red Onion Pizza.

The Caesar Salad was so delectable that it most certainly made me regret agreeing to halve it with my lunch partner. The chicken had great taste from being grilled whilst maintaining its succulent texture, and the anchovies and dressing all complimented one another perfectly. The croutons, which were made using brioche, made it stand out from the crowd.

Although our stomachs were satisfied from our mains, we felt it wrong to deny Mud Crab the opportunity to show us its sweet side. We followed up with a Bourbon Sticky Toffee Pudding which we asked to be accompanied with ice cream instead of clotted cream, though this request was sadly forgotten.

Our waitress was friendly but unfortunately not as attentive as we would have liked. Having worked in chain restaurants before, my standards and expectations for service are high but reasonable, and on this occasion they were not met. Considering that we were one of only two occupied tables in the restaurant, the service we received was rushed, and there was no checking back to ask if we wanted anything else or to see how our meals were. We felt that the restaurant was taking its desire to be relaxed and easygoing rather too literally, which really let down what was otherwise a good visit.

All in all, the food was tasty and Mud Crab is a pretty cool place to grab a bite to eat. Definitely somewhere to take visiting parents or friends if you don’t want to break the bank or head into the city centre.  To top it off, they have some generous student discounts: 40 per cent off on Mondays, 20 per cent off at lunchtime, and 10 per cent off at dinner time.

So, would I recommend Mud Crab? The answer is: Not for any special occasions. For a quick bite to eat in a fuss-free environment where you’ll be left to your own thoughts or conversation it could be ideal; but this restaurant, unfortunately, is not the place to sample Manchester’s capability of providing friendly Northern service at its best.

Did Britain botch its defence budget?

Written by Adam on . Posted in Opinion.

On the 22nd of September 2015, Michael Fallon, the Defence Secretary of State, delineated the government’s view of the “strategic context” of the United Kingdom’s defence plan to a packed audience at the Royal United Services Institute. Fallon outlined the basis of the new Strategic Defence and Security Review, one of the most important defence plans since the Falklands conflict, which will summarize how Britain sees itself in the world, along with any potential threats to the United Kingdom.

In this speech he emphasized the UK’s commitment to annually spend 2 per cent of GDP on defence until the end of the present Parliament, which would allow the development of new capabilities along with the sustaining existing levels of manpower and capability. Fallon also mentioned that the SDSR would look ahead “ten years and beyond” with a properly funded equipment plan, and “multi-national solutions” in terms of defence equipment procurement and operational commitment.

The speech was succinct, but not particularly revealing. However, with close to 40 wars around the globe, and British troops currently deployed in 80 countries for one security/peacekeeping capacity or another, it is perhaps wise to have some sort of plan on Britain’s place in the world as a middling global power. Only last week, David Cameron announced that up to 300 UK soldiers would soon be deployed in South Sudan and a further 70 in Somalia to aid the United Nations peacekeeping forces.

With several regional wars in the Middle East; large parts of the African continent being subject to conflict and repression; an increasing militarization of territorial disputes in the South China Sea and conflicts in Eastern Europe involving a resurgent Russia, the case for an urgent defence review has never been clearer.

In reality, the 2 per cent of GDP commitment means little. Why? The Ministry of Defence is seemingly incapable of procuring equipment that does what it is supposed to do at the price that was supposed to be paid—such as the F35, whose costs have more than doubled (now £154m per plane), and whose arrival is four years late to go onto aircraft carriers that have cost twice the original estimations—there is little to suggest that the 2 per cent GDP will have any effect on sustaining existing levels of manpower, equipment and capability.

Just like the 2010 SDSR, the 2 per cent GDP target tells us that the government is again fixating on an arbitrary objective as a means of measuring defence spending for the simple reason that it becomes the objective of defence policy.

Similar to the NHS targets that saw ‘hello nurses‘ being deployed to treat A&E targets, the danger is that defence policy becomes fixated on meeting a single erratic target that has no relation to actual needs. For example, ethical debate of the Libyan intervention aside, the fact that during the 2011 operation, HMS Westminster was reportedly carrying just four missiles for its Sea Wolf System while operating close to the North African coast, is frankly worrying when considering the fact that this system was the primary self-defence weapon to be used if attacked by the Libyan air force.

Moreover, the RAF used 230 Brimstone missiles and 900 Paveway IV bombs, both of whose stocks came perilously close to running out, which highlights how small the inventories must have been in the first place. To give some perspective, the entire UK inventory of Brimstone and Paveway IV would have been sufficient to destroy the equipment of only one out of the dozens of Iraqi armoured brigade during the liberation of Kuwait in the 1991 Gulf War. Those armoured brigades weren’t exactly the modern and efficient fighting formations that we would expect from today’s potential adversaries.

To hit the 2 per cent GDP target, clever sums will be deployed to ensure that the UK meets its aim, and we can already see this with costs being shuffled and elements qualifying as defence when they hadn’t previously—like fuel transfers and facility rental to allies, both of which will be maximized in order to hit the target. Looking at the summer budget of 2015, this can be seen with the shuffling of defence finances, which outlined that, “allowing for all of the public spending that supports the Ministry of Defence and the contribution made by the secret intelligence agencies, this Budget commits the government to meet the properly-measured NATO pledge to spend 2 per cent of national income on defence every year of this decade.”

Many questions can arise here. What do they mean by public spending that “supports” the MoD—is that simply another way of saying the MoD’s budget, or something else? Secondly, “the contribution made by the secret intelligence agencies” raises many problems. Since it is referring to MI5, MI6 and GCHQ, what does “contribution” from them actually mean? Is it inclusive of MI5’s budget on counter-espionage and organized crime, or just a proportion of MI5’s costs, that are devoted to counter-terrorism, to be used to prop up the 2 per cent target?

Even before the summer budget announcements, the MoD was “invited” to save £500m through “efficiency savings,” which resulted in the MoD’s £450m contribution to the joint MoD/FCO/DFiD ‘Conflict Stability and Security Fund’ (previously the Global Conflict Prevention Pool) to be included in the official definition of defence spending. Even the most devout pacifist should be concerned by these unnoticed shifts in definitions of defence equipment spending.

Lastly, in the past decades, British troops have been sent—ill-equipped and underfunded—to myriad warzones, often having to buy their own clothing and equipment to complete their tasks. During the Iraq war in 2003, 55 per cent of soldiers and 42 per cent of officers bought their own combat trousers, jackets, sleeping bags, torches and even boots. More recently in Afghanistan, soldiers have lacked basic equipment during training for operations, including the vital Vallon metal detectors that are used for seeking out improvised explosive devices.

If Britain is to be considered a serious military power, these incredibly basic problems must be addressed before any arbitrary targets to proportions of GDP and commitments to expensive equipment projects are made.

Racism: The unwanted generational gift?

Written by Deborah Asamoah on . Posted in Opinion.

One thing that I find striking about racism is the way in which, despite the tremendous efforts to try and combat it, prejudice and discrimination towards other races continue to circulate in our society. This leads me to question exactly what we really know when thinking about the root of the problem. Perhaps, our lack of knowledge regarding the subject is what is holding us back from doing more in the fight against racism. Yes, we are aware of what it is, and the effects it has had on millions of people throughout history. But the real question is, where does racism come from? It is my belief that if we figure out the origins of racism, this could perhaps lead us to discover the origins of the problem altogether.

Moroccan writer Tahar Ben Jelloun has said: “We are not born racist, we become it.” Clearly this statement holds a high degree of truth; racism is not genetic, therefore we are not born with feelings of hatred and prejudice for another race. There is no gene in our DNA that makes us discriminate, enslave and alienate other humans of a different race in the same way that there is a gene that allows us to develop a particular eye colour. With that being said, understanding that racism isn’t a biological attribute suggests that such behaviours that invoke us to hurl racist insults or harm another human being because of their skin colour or religious background, must stem from our environment. That is to say that we are taught and therefore learn to be racist.

Very rarely do we see a young child demonstrating racist behaviour of their own accord. Studies by the psychologist John Bowlby show that an infant’s first natural instinct is to desire security and a loving attachment from its caregiver. Note the word—loving. If that is the case, and racism is a learned behaviour, from whom is this behaviour learned from? Some may argue parents. As it is usually said, our parents are our first teachers. They teach us to differentiate right from wrong; most times without even realising it. Children find it natural to imitate what they see in order to learn how to do things. Children follow adult behaviour because they deem it to be correct, even when this is not always the case. These behaviours are imitated and engrained in the child’s mind as the “right thing to do.”

Another study by Albert Bandura in the 1960s on social learning theory, shows that children were more likely to act violent towards an inflatable ‘bobo’ doll after watching the adult treat the doll in a violent manner. I find it rather chilling that children pick up incorrect behaviours as fast as they do with the correct ones, and that once they are learned they are quite difficult to reverse. This leads to me to understand why something as pitiful and degrading as racism, and the discrimination and hatred it projects, has continued to remain in our society all these years.

Children are taught, by the older generation, to follow false ideals that treat racism as normal, where distinguishing the differences between each other is done by making the other race feel inferior. This corresponds to the way that children in the experiment felt it necessary to imitate the incorrect behaviours carried out by the researcher. This is why, despite all the measures taken by societies to rid themselves of racism, it remains. These flawed principles are carried on from one generation to the next and as a result pollute the minds of the youth. In my eyes, racism will continue as long as it is allowed to happen, and younger generations continue to accept these wrongs as truth and thus the devastations caused by racism will not cease.

One particular devastation that stands out to me, and can show how racism can be passed to younger generations, is the conflict between Israel and Palestine. What is underlying amongst the dispute is the discrimination that they both project towards each other. While they continue to attack each other, what is more evident is the way in which the future of the youth is being destroyed in the process. This saddens me, and makes me wonder if the parents that sustain this conflict realise this.

Finally, I do see a sliver of hope in younger generations, where racism is not as apparent as it was in their parents’ and grandparents’ generations. If we, as intelligent, open minded, young individuals reject these ideals then perhaps, it is a step in the right direction towards a brighter future where racism is left behind.

TV Binge: Mr Robot

Written by Nicole Tamer on . Posted in Film.

Fight Club fans are in for a treat with this new USA Network series. It follows anti-hero Elliot, an anxiety-plagued security engineer who can only connect with people by hacking them. On top of that, he’s an unreliable narrator due to his morphine usage and constant paranoia. His lonely life suddenly receives meaning when he gets recruited by an anarchist hacker called Mr Robot, whose aim is to cancel all debts and to take down a large corporation known as Evil Corp.

With a more realistic depiction of hacking, a strong plotline and gritty cinematography, this series has a lot of potential to become a massive hit. The pilot of the series was so well received that it was renewed for a second season before it premiered. Furthermore, current issues and American capitalist culture are portrayed so accurately that the release of the season finale had to be pushed back due to a scene that had similarities to a tragic shooting at a Virginia TV station that had taken place on the same day.

Rami Malek convinces in the role as the wide-eyed, naïve and socially inept protagonist Elliot, who acts as a cyber-vigilante in his free time. The series manages to portray an introvert without using too many clichés. His inner world is vivid and based on intuitive hints, which he applies logically in real life while hacking, but as so often with ingenious introverts, his life is solitary. People around him struggle to connect with him and attempts to integrate him fail repeatedly. His work colleague Portia (Angela Moss) and his psychiatrist try their best to get through to him but the only people to whom he feels connected are the hacktivist group called fsociety. The underground hackers led by Mr Robot (Christian Slater) are equally weird, and their common purpose connects them.

Although Elliot cannot identify with most people, his strength is to analyse and identify problems and he applies these skills to understand people so well that he guesses their Facebook passwords in seconds through social engineering. His abilities do not stay unnoticed, and in the beginning of the series, he is shortly tempted to work for the corporate site after getting an offer from the sly but charming Tyrell Wellick (Martin Wallström), who is the Senior Vice-President of Technology at E(vil) Corp. Elliot is often contrasted with Alpha males such as Tyrell and, similarly to Fight Club, Mr Robot deals with Elliot’s lack of traditional masculinity.

The series is definitely worth a watch, although the first few of the ten episodes have a rather slow pace, which is intended in order to emphasis the boring reality of Elliot’s office job. Character development has a high priority, too.

Another strong point is the inclusion of minority characters, especially since the series criticises societal problems. The series combines everything millennials could hope for, and trippy plot twists are guaranteed. Lean back and delve into the mind of Elliot, and don’t forget to make your passwords safer!