Skip to main content

Day: 19 October 2015

Manchester Students’ Union adopts the Living Wage

Written by Jack Howell on . Posted in News.

All employees and contracted staff at the University of Manchester’s Students’ Union will now be paid a minimum of £7.85 an hour, a measure which means the Union is now a Living Wage Foundation accredited employer.

In accordance with government policy, the move also includes provisions that pay will continue to increase annually alongside the cost of living.

The measure was pushed through following an extensive and long-running campaign, and has again raised questions about the wage policies of the university.

The University of Manchester Living Wage Campaign said: “We are thrilled that the Student’s Union has now become officially accredited by the Living Wage Foundation, enshrining the rights of its workers to a living wage now and in the future.

“As one of the biggest employers in Manchester, we hope the university will follow suit, in line with its aims of social responsibility.”

The campaign has been pressuring for this change for some time.

Headlines were made and university chiefs were slammed last year after it had emerged that catering staff were being paid through a backdoor subsidy which allowed them to be paid less than the living wage. 217 of this subsidy’s 500 employees were working on zero-hours contracts, with 262 being paid less than the enhanced rate.

The university had promised that all of their employees would be paid the living wage in 2012, and the paycheques of top officials had risen by some 20 per cent by 2014.

University chiefs responded to the criticism by arguing that although workers employed directly by the university are paid the living wage, greater flexibility was needed for catering staff.

Campaigns and Citizenship Officer Hannah McCarthy praised the fact that the move came as a result of student-organised pressure, saying “this seals an extra layer of protection for permanent, temporary, casual and student staff—and represents a step forward in combatting the unjust and endemic rates of poverty pay in Britain today.

“While this is a great achievement in symbolising what students can achieve through organising, the work doesn’t stop here. As Campaigns Officer, I’ll be working tirelessly throughout the year to empower students and workers to be able to fight for better pay and working conditions across campus and the local community.”

The decision by the Students’ Union to pay all of its members the living wage has been estimated to add £80,000 to the organisation’s annual bill.

Both the University of Salford and the University of Bolton are Living Wage Foundation accredited.

UoM Careers Service: A critique

Written by Anon on . Posted in Lifestyle.

Take a quick visit to the Tin Can (otherwise known as University Place or ‘the giant bog roll’) and you’ll find it hard to miss the university’s proud adverts. The ones insisting that, if you book an appointment with the Careers service, you’ll probably walk out with a £30,000 a year salary and the keys to a company car (maybe a white Lexus?); and to be fair, if you think you’re likely to get a 2:2 in your sports management degree, they’re your people.

One quick glance at your degree subject and the results of an ‘online skills test’, and they’ll ascertain that, indeed, you’re destined for… you guessed it… Sports Management.

They can read you like a book.

Unfortunately, if your degree involves actually reading the odd book, you might not be so lucky. My experience of visiting the Careers Service as a Humanities student is markedly different from that described above (how I yearn for sports management). I walked in armed with a laptop, my ‘online skills test’ results, and even a mind map of all the things I did and didn’t want to do for a career.

“Right,” said the careers advisor, “so you don’t want to be a teacher or a journalist. How about advertising?” My heart sank. I’m no Don Draper. “How about working in Heritage?” Again, I’m not being some bloody boring museum curator. “Okay, I know you said you weren’t interested in this… but how about journalism?” I grimaced and thought about getting up and leaving right then and there. I may as well have done.

Their insistence on journalism (“because you write essays”) has, admittedly, led me to get back into writing for The Mancunion, something I had previously dismissed (after an enthusiastic spell for the Music section in first year) as ‘pointless’ if you don’t have your heart set on becoming Editor-in-chief of The Times. However, despite reminding me that even writing the odd piece for the Lifestyle section can be entertaining on a wet Thursday morning when you’re meant to be in a seminar about Erotic Poetry, it hasn’t been all that helpful—just sent me off on a tangent.

It’s at this stage that I think it’s important to point out that there are many merits to the Careers Service at this university. They’re highly organised, have a huge amount of resources such as the skills test I mentioned above and can point you to their own version of Milkround, where you’re most likely going to find a graduate scheme that suits you (unless you’re a belligerent Humanities student like me).

They’re also based in The Atrium, that great expanse of space in the middle of University Place, which is a haven if you’re sick of the Library/Ali G and just want a quiet place to do some work in for a while. Admittedly, once they realise you’re not waiting for an appointment, they’ll kick you out, but you can probably bag a good two hours in that lovely peaceful waiting room before that.

They also run an abundance of careers fairs and organise visits from representatives of the big names in each industry. It’s great that they’re doing this, and doing it so much, but I remember one gloomy Friday afternoon sitting in a Careers talk given from an advertising representative who clearly didn’t want to be there. As much as I hope this isn’t the case for all of the events that they run, who on earth would want to essentially recite their job description to a bunch of students, before being shot down with unnecessarily aggressive and unrealistically difficult questions about their industry?

I hate to rubbish a service run by the university, because it’s stuff like this that we’re all paying (read: the government is paying) £9,000 a year for. However, for all the plush waiting areas and internship search engines, where it’s seemingly as easy as typing your degree into a box and choosing your lifelong profession from the results, the Careers Service could probably be a little more personal, perhaps a bit more involved in actually helping you to work out what you want to do with your life. I, along with many others in Manchester, will spend most of my university life soul-searching, trying to figure out what the hell I’m going to do with a 2:1 straight outta Samuel Alexander, and the Careers Service doesn’t seem to be able to help me.

Russia’s impact in the war in the Middle East

Written by Alexander Lovatt on . Posted in Opinion.

If you cast your mind back to the haughty days of 2011, there are a few world events that immediately come to mind. The wave of uprisings against previously invincible Middle Eastern regimes was in full swing: Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and—with a little help from the British military—Libya all witnessed rapid, violent regime changes that unseated despots febrile with power.

Suddenly, they were being dragged from their palaces and hauled before the gallows in what could only be described as a very vindictive form of justice. Meanwhile, in the corridors of power, the leaders of the Western world could hardly believe their luck. Finally, it seemed that there would be no more rogue states, a few less bloodthirsty warlords, and maybe a return to sanity for a region that had been ravaged by instability since time immemorial.

When Syria began to show signs of uprising, the west rejoiced, the call for the international community to supply arms and support for the rebels was almost deafening.

Then, along came Russia.

While America and Britain had been watching the events in the Middle East with jubilation, the Russian mood was decidedly sombre. Libya and Egypt had been large buyers of Russian arms, and their opposition to western interference had been a key aspect of Putin’s foreign policy. And so, when the US and the UK began discussions about supplying aid to the rebels fighting the Syrian government, Russia began implementing measures to preserve its dwindling list of friends, and promised to veto any attempt to interfere in Syria through the UN.

President Obama could only simmer in frustration and supply small amounts of arms to the Syrians whom he supported, while Putin sat back and did the same, and it looked like the Syrian civil war would devolve into another nation of superpower-sponsored warlords. But of course, the story of Syria took yet another twist with the rise of IS—an international, ultra-violent, radical militia, bolstered with a new generation of radicalised European and American fighters, and armed with captured US weapons.

In the Russian media, Obama has been derided for his debating and posturing, while Putin has been lauded for co-ordinating with both Iraq and Iran to launch missiles over their skies towards Syria. In short, Putin has portrayed himself as the man who acts, who can be tough on terrorism and who can solve problems.

But all is not quite as it seems.

The Russian airstrikes, while undoubtedly effective against IS, have also injured alarming numbers of civilians; the cruise missiles launched from the Caspian Sea have not only been hitting IS targets, but also wreaking havoc upon the free Syrian army and any other rebels still fighting against Assad’s government. While Putin laps up the headlines with his grandstanding, the Russian army is moving massive battalions of troops and equipment to bolster Assad’s forces, and is rumoured to be deploying large numbers of special forces into Syria to support Assad’s army.

Russia is doing far more than fighting Terrorism. Russia is crushing the Syrian insurrection, and by the way things are going, it is clear that preventing collateral damage is not a priority for the Russian military.

What does it all mean for the future of Syria? There’s no way to be sure, but there are some outcomes that seem probable. In terms of IS, the combination of airstrikes and a Russian-equipped Syrian military will certainly give them problems, but as we saw in Iraq, air power alone will simply drive the IS militia into hiding or across borders where they can’t be followed.

To cause lasting damage to the would-be Caliphate would require a multinational response across several borders in the region. Russia has signalled that it is willing to work with a coalition to defeat IS, but with all other potential allies stating the removal of president Assad from power as a condition for support (something Russia is unlikely to compromise on), an alliance seems unlikely as Russia seeks to protect its Mediterranean naval base in Syria and the client state itself.

The Russian intervention is both a blessing and a curse for different Syrian groups. On one side, it holds the promise of a possible end to the fighting and fanatical insanity that has plagued their country for the last three years, plus some stability in Assad’s territory; on the other side, that peace involves the continuing reign of Bashar al-Assad, a dictator who has committed war crimes against his own people in a desperate bid to cling to power.

How to eat like the French

Written by Eva Katz on . Posted in News.

With their notorious appreciation of good food and apparent admiration for garlic, the French have always left me in wonder of how they manage to maintain such fine physiques with an excess of beautiful gastronomy.

In order to find out (amongst other reasons) I travelled to France. Over the course of my year on the continent, I observed many secrets firsthand and developed an appreciation of the finer—and unfortunately more expensive—delicacies, too.

Firstly, every meal in France is a show. Eating in front of the telly or beside a computer is unheard of, even for students.

Food is there to be enjoyed; to say that the French “live to eat” rather than “eat to live” is an understatement.

Mealtimes are a leisurely affair. The rushed and slightly disappointing sandwiches that plague Britain’s lunch boxes are replaced by a sit-down meal among friends, with wine, laughter, and plenty of bread. Most professionals are given the minimum of a full hour for lunch, hence why shopping around “midi” (midday) is a rather unsuccessful activity.

Secondly, the French just know when to stop. My friend’s French mother has always preached “l’art de degustation.” Although there is no direct translation, the phrase essentially means that one should savour every mouthful. The idea of “too much of a good thing” is also ingrained into the psyche of les Francais.

It was the lack of this mindset that resulted in me unintentionally gaining a little more than a fondness for freshly baked croissants during my time abroad. Portion control is key and often an aromatic espresso accompanied by a single square of dark chocolate can fill the same hole as a pain au chocolat and hot chocolate.

Last but not least, the Holy Grail of the French’s formidable secret is only eating the crème de la crème. So many of us have resorted to eating that burnt dinner through sheer laziness and scoffing that less-than-average take away because it was just easier than cooking something healthier. The French, however, would be horrified at the thought.

One does not buy macaroons from just anywhere, after all! If you’re going to splurge out, it makes sense to spend a little more time and money for a truly heavenly mouthful rather than something “assez bon.”

It’s safe to say that their attitude to food is an enviable one, and one that many of us Britons could most certainly learn from.

Review: Golem

Written by Rob Paterson on . Posted in Arts, Theatre.

As I exited the theatre, it was hard to tell if I had actually left the absurd world of ‘Golem’; the scene that met my eyes was one that could be replicated in any given room in 2015. It was a wash of identical glass rectangles attached firmly to human thumbs and glazed-over stares. This snapshot of how we live now could have been lifted straight from a satirical cartoon, and was exactly the kind of image that pioneering company 1927 had sliced up, warped and smudged into the terrifying collage of consumerism that I had just watched.

I can hear my readers flickering off like the touch screens that your’re probably reading this on, and I don’t blame you; the whole Black Mirror thing is done to death. But ‘Golem’ is far cleverer and more appealing than metaphors hastily thrown together by a pretentious journalist. Directed by Suzanne Andrade, ‘Golem’ is one of the most visually and theatrically stunning pieces I’ve seen in a while. Performed by five multi-rolling actors against a giant projection screen, the characters interacted with, and integrated into, a multitude of fantastical environments. From actors walking on the spot and having the street unfurl ahead of them, to Annie Hall-style subtextual subtitles appearing above characters’ heads as they speak, there’s barely a moment without surprise and ingenuity.

The projected animation itself is far from instrumental to party tricks, but serves an integral role in their meticulously-thought-out aesthetic. It features cut-outs of 1920s style photographs, which hark back to the golden age of consumerism. This is compounded by a jazzy soundtrack and noir style spotlights erasing backdrops. Most of these backdrops are cartoons, with which the actors meld seamlessly due to their nuanced performances, where every movement is stuttered and exaggerated. After 20 minutes in I had forgotten that the screen and the actors were separate.

Despite 1927’s relentless intelligence (in one scene a bathroom attendant is reading Sartre, for Christ’s sake), their sense of humour is decidedly crass. One particularly outrageous moment came when one of the actors stuck their face through a hole in the screen to have the body of an overweight stripper projected on to them, which proceeded to perform ridiculous contortions. Film animator and designer Paul Barritt’s creation, the comedic tone, and the 90-minute run time make big ideas easy to swallow.

In many ways, I was reminded of the last play I saw at HOME; Kneehigh’s Dead Dog in A Suitcase. It too was crass, stylish and visually stunning, but ‘Golem’ triumphs in a way that many plays of this nature fall flat. Where many of the scenes in ‘Dead Dog’ did little more than dazzle and delight the audience, ‘Golem’ avoids becoming a circus and puts story and message first. This is not to say it comes across as preachy; the parallels drawn to modern life are subtle, but expansive. It’s the kind of theatre that sticks with you, and makes me shudder on recollection, despite having me in stitches at the time.

My criticisms are few; the live music seemed redundant given that you couldn’t audibly distinguish it from the soundtrack, and the rapid scene changes often slowed the pace. Overall, an impressive case of high concept and ambitious direction coming together to their full potential.

‘Golem’ ran at HOME until Saturday the 17th of October.

The Gum List

Written by Henry Scanlan on . Posted in Food & Drink.

1.  Trident
A loose, perky gum, perfect for easing the jaw into action. The 2012 ‘Cinnamon’ batch has a rough viscosity, making for excellent mastication. The 2013 ‘Splashing Fruit’ incarnation, meanwhile, makes for a light, summery chewing gum.

2. Wrigley’s Spearmint
A full-bodied gum. Recommended for adding to a tired ball of Trident for a sharp injection of reinvigorating spearmint. Suitable with red meat.

3. Fisherman’s friend
A fabulous vintage chewing gum with a thick, minty accent. A dry, taut chew. Additionally useful as a rugged throat lozenge for the throes of winter. Serve chilled for best results.

4. Juicy Fruit
Gentler on the mandibles than more robust brands such as Wrigley’s or Extra. Dry and unoaked, with a fragrant character, though the overbearing fruitiness may be a little crass for more refined tastes.

5. The inside cheek
There are moments—in which one loses all sense of time, place, and chewing gum—when one must simply chew something, be that as it may the inside of one’s own face.

Review: The Importance of Being Earnest

Written by Joel Culver on . Posted in Theatre.

One of the big issues that seems to face many theatre companies at the present, is the desire to keep old classics fresh, and to present them in a novel way. The Lowry’s current production of ‘The Importance of Being Earnest’ is a decent attempt at this. This production seeks a departure from the somewhat clichéd performances by introducing the play in illusory dress rehearsal—a play within a play. This enables the genius of the comedic content written by Oscar Wilde to be enjoyed along with the actors, as they argue over end-of-act winks and other issues. Still, though, I lamented the addition of the material slightly. I did not feel that the added material was of sufficient quality to render the experience better overall. While there was originality, I felt that the changes left me less able to immerse myself within the world of the play.

The story focuses on two friends, Jack Worthing (Martin Jarvis), and Algernon Moncrief (Nigel Havers), who both use an invented character in order to escape from their respective spheres and social responsibilities. For country dweller Jack, his wicked (and fallacious) brother, Ernest, provides regular excuses to jolly off into the city. Jack’s engagement to Gwendolen is not acceptable to her mother, the ‘gorgon’ Lady Bracknell (Sian Phillips), because Jack is a foundling. The engagement will remain unacceptable unless he can “’produce at any rate one parent, of either sex, before the season is quite over,’.

The ‘play within a play’ aspect was thoughtfully done, and the concept of watching a rehearsal of an amateur production was quite convincing. The stage design, in particular, enforced this concept, because the room did not change in-between acts, but rather the furniture was moved around. This initially came as a disappointment, but I warmed to it since it is firmly grounded in the context of this modified version. Additionally, the use of the older actors to play these young characters worked well. When Jarvis declared – in an almost mocking way – that his character was 29 years of age, the house erupted with laughter.

The production was, however, a little too serious for what is clearly supposed to be a mockery of the attitudes of the aristocracy of Wilde’s time. Many of the lines were not delivered to maximum comical effect. Compare this production, for example, to the recent London production with David Suchet as Lady Bracknell, and it is hard to come to the conclusion that this one is superior. The lack of affirming comedy was perhaps due to below-par performances in some places; partly due, perhaps, to the calibre of the actors being over-specified.

Lucy Bailey’s ‘The Importance of Being Earnest’ continues to tour the UK until the end of November, with added dates to be announced. For further information, see here.

China, America, and the future of Afghanistan

Written by Tristan Parsons on . Posted in Opinion.

New and old Islamic militants. New and old superpowers. A great game is being played out in Afghanistan, and it is just getting started.

The only comfort in this depressing tale is the nostalgic familiarity of an old name—the Taliban are getting back up to speed. Their capturing of the city of Kunduz is the cherry on the cake for their recent military campaign, a campaign that now sees them as controllers of around half of the nation. Kabul still stands, though, supported by 10,000 US officials.

But relations with the new superpower, China, are crucial. Afghanistan’s President Ghani has recently talked of plans to engage in closer relations, since his country has been somewhat left out recently. Although Afghanistan shares a border with China, unlike many other nearby nations, it is not yet prominent in China’s schemes for outward investment.

Firstly, the proposed new Silk Road—a trading route including a series of pipelines and rail networks that will further link the economies of Europe, Central Asia, and South East Asia (a project worth around $40 billion)—mostly avoids Afghanistan. Secondly, the Pakistani Economic Corridor is key for China, but again, there is little talk of that extending to Afghanistan.

There is some possibility that the Central Asian Network (branches of the Silk Road within Central Asia) will eventually be extended into Afghanistan, and China is by far the biggest player in resource extraction investment in the country. For example, Jiangxi Copper Corporation and the Zijin Mining Group Company have jointly won a recent bid of $3.5 billion for the largest undeveloped copper field in the world, estimated to contain $88 billion of copper.

Afghanistan also has large reserves of iron, oil, gas, and gold. However, investment becomes more risky in times when The Taliban are becoming a stronger presence. There is IS, too. The growth of the group prompted the US to add another 1,000 soldiers to their current force, even though the last forces are suppose to be out some time in 2016. China has given training to just a few hundred police, but perhaps with IS and Taliban presences, and competition with the US, it may want to step up its military role.

 

Consider the people of Afghanistan, though. How would they react to a growing Chinese influence? They may well celebrate. Their poverty and their past and current oppression, as well as their political instability, are key causes of desperation, and there is demand for, at the very least, a stable government. There is a long history of broken promises to the people of Afghanistan: the British, the Mujahedeen, the USSR, The Taliban, the US, and the British again.

But China will be a fresh face; and the recent accidental NATO attack on Kunduz Hospital, as well as the failure of the US and UK to remove The Taliban, will provide an extra narrative for any potential Chinese involvement.

China has another advantage, too. Their firms may bring employment and desperately-needed economic development. Prosperity may follow, although, based on historical and current cases, prosperity from overseas investment is usually locked up within the corporate and political elite. Out of 174 countries, China and Afghanistan sit 80th and 174th respectively in the Transpacrency.org ratings (Afghanistan shares 174th with North Korea and Somalia). Any kind of investment is not likely to greatly benefit the average Afghan.

However, a look back into history shows us two things. Firstly, that Afghanistan is one of the most fought-over nations in the world, and therefore its people have a long memory of war and occupation. Secondly, that military success in Afghanistan has never come to anyone other than local guerrilla forces.

With this in mind, a Chinese military policy might, at first, involve sending small concentrations of troops to protect infrastructure and investment projects. If more soldiers proved to be required—which they probably would be, judging by the advance of militant Islam across the Middle East—then China would have an opening for further influence. However, although Afghanistan has plenty of resources to exploit, it is by no means the jewel of the region. China’s true desire, and its true efforts, still lie in Central Asia and its links to the markets of Europe and Russia.

The true design of China’s future expansion is impossible to foretell. Arguably, they have a potential greater than the USA had in the wake of the Second World War, with a far larger population and a greater amount of land borders. They are emerging in both a quickly-developing region, and a better-connected world. They have a dubious government and harbour substantial inequality within their own borders. Both internally and externally, China’s capacity for damage to humanity is just as large as its potential for economic growth.

Thus, does the future of Afghanistan hinge on the investment proposals, boardroom meetings, and auctions of the Chinese corporate and political elite?

No, not quite. The Taliban and IS provide a growing threat (which China could utilise to justify intervention), and there is the US, too. They have spent just over $104 billion on ‘reconstruction’ in Afghanistan. That’s a little higher than the Marshall Plan, adjusted for inflation. The total cost of the war is estimated at around $1 trillion. America will not let that money go to waste. With The Taliban and IS on the rise, expanding Chinese interests, and a panicked US government, expect a troublesome future for Afghanistan.

England: Failure was not an option

Written by Toby Webb on . Posted in Sport.

Devastation and embarrassment. There can be no doubt that these words summarise the feelings of the England rugby team following their elimination from the Rugby World Cup 2015 with a game to spare. Not only are they the first host nation ever to exit the World Cup at the group stage, but the players face the prospect of being back playing for their clubs while the other nations compete in the quarter-finals.

Dissecting tournament failure has become normative regarding English sport in recent history, for the men’s teams, anyway. Here is my assessment.

For me, several crucial errors were made in squad selection for the World Cup. This is solely the fault of Stuart Lancaster. The momentum built over the last two years was lost through both squad selection and indecision over the primary fifteen.

In terms of selection, leaving out exciting players like Luther Burrell and Danny Cipriani was foolish. Burrell was prolific in last year’s Six Nations and, while it has emerged this week that Cipriani had a bust-up with England coach Mike Catt in the weeks preceding the World Cup, the attacking flair he possesses could have made the difference. For example, the demoralizing defeat to Wales – a game that was lost during the last ten minutes due to England’s lack of cutting edge – was the perfect scenario to introduce Cipriani and Burrell as substitutes. Cipriani can be filed next to Kevin Pietersen as a maverick with whom England lacked the conviction to invest faith.

Instead, the likes of Brad Barritt, Sam Burgess and Henry Slade were included. Barritt is a belligerent defender, yet, he is devoid of attacking flair. Slade was selected with the future in mind. In hindsight, it would have been more shrewd to pick blooded, more experienced players who could affect matches.

This brings me to Sam Burgess. The Burgess saga has been on-going ever since his 2014 conversion from Rugby League. I believe that he has the raw ingredients to be a good Rugby Union player. However, there is obviously a huge difference between a Premiership-standard player and an international-standard player. It is, frankly, ludicrous, that Burgess was even considered for the World Cup squad, let alone selected. He has played only twenty-one professional games of Rugby Union for Bath. His appearances in England World Cup warm-up games were his first taste of international rugby. For me, Lancaster was caught up in the Burgess hysteria. Blinded by the belief that Burgess’s raw power and resolute defence were England’s missing ingredients. Burgess’s lack of experience went unheeded. Conversely, the RFU’s investment in the Burgess conversion put overwhelming pressure on Lancaster to select him. Either way, the decision was a huge mistake.

In terms of playing style, Lancaster showed little regard for the successful formula used during the 2015 Six Nations. Playmaker George Ford was quickly replaced by the defensive Owen Farrell at fly-half, a decision illustrating Lancaster’s fear of losing. The last game of the Six Nations – England’s last fully competitive game before the world cup – finished 55-35 in England’s favour. It demonstrated the attacking potential England possessed.

England lacked said attacking intent during the World Cup. Lancaster’s tactics are to blame; his fear of losing consumed his attacking ambition.

Throughout his four year tenure, Lancaster has used 72 players in total. This suggests that English rugby has an abundance of players deemed worthy for the international stage. However, while a lot of these players would have been experiments, it does illustrate that Lancaster has tinkered hugely with his team, and leads me to believe that he does not know his best fifteen—an issue in itself.

England’s overseas policy must be mentioned: the rule that, aside from ‘exceptional circumstances’, only those who play in the English domestic league can be selected for the national team. Steffon Armitage, Dylan Armitage (Both at Toulon) and Nick Abendanon (Clermont Auvergne) all play in France. All three are arguably World Cup squad quality. In recent years, Steffon Armitage has been one of the best rugby players in Europe. His ability to make turn-overs – something so crucial in modern rugby – is exceptional. Australia’s philosophy and their victory over England illustrated the importance of being able to make turn-overs in modern rugby.

It is interesting that Australia have made exemptions to their overseas policy, particularly with Matt Giteau, previously exempt from playing, now a crucial member of the team. The rule is here for a reason (if the whole national team played abroad it would be a co-ordination nightmare), yet, S. Armitage would definitely class as an ‘exceptional circumstance’ in my mind. Lancaster and the RFU must take the blame for their recalcitrance.

It cannot be denied that the team have made progress since Lancaster took the reins. England have lost the Six Nations only on points difference for the last two years, and have competed well against the Southern Hemisphere teams. However, comparisons with Schmidt (Ireland’s coach) and Gatland (Wales’ coach) illustrate his flaws. Both possess a level of coaching experience that Lancaster lacks: both have coached club teams to European cup success (Leinster and London Wasps respectively). Their teams play a calibre of rugby that is greater than the sum of each individual part, and this is down to the respective coaches.

I don’t think that the difference is huge between Schmidt/Gatland and Lancaster. In his defence, Lancaster has triumphed over the two coaches several times in the last 4 years. Yet, in the big games, Lancaster has almost always been defeated by the nous of these coaches (vs Wales in 2013; vs Ireland in 2015; vs Wales in 2015). While Lancaster has an unquestionable ability to demand respect and to motivate a team, I feel that he lacks the ideas and the depth of experience to win the big games.

However, consider this: If you were to think of a World XV of active players, how many of them would be English?

Personally, I think you’d struggle to fit in any. This is relevant because, while we have a lot of high quality players, we lack any who are world-class. In a sense, the quality is diluted within a large player pool, rather than concentrated within a smaller number of individuals. We lack a David Pocock or a Jonny Sexton—a game-changer, a player whose overwhelming quality and skill raises the games of those around him. While selection can be heavily criticised, another way to look at it is that we simply did and do not have good enough players.

Looking forward, the RFU have to decide on Lancaster’s future. His current contract will see him through to the next World Cup. Personally, I think if a coach of international calibre (like Gatland or Schmidt) is available, then Lancaster should be replaced. A decision must be made soon, because whoever is in charge must be given a full World Cup cycle to build a team capable of writing 2015’s wrongs. If Lancaster remains, he will undoubtedly learn plenty from England’s humiliation. The painful thing about rugby, though, is that England must wait four years to redeem themselves. It is going to be a long four years.

Leaving the EU: The case from the left

Written by Ben Farren on . Posted in Opinion.

The European Union was once a group of nations who decided to draw closer in trade and politics. It is in ways a wonderful institution, allowing free trade and free travel across borders, something previously unimaginable, particularly for those deep in the Soviet bloc.

It is difficult to explain how important I think this was and is. The shift from authoritarian documented restriction to transcendent liberal cooperation was remarkable, and entirely unpredictable, even soon after 1989. While the coming together of nations and the expression of mutual trust was admirable and ostensibly a sign of human solidarity, perhaps more sinister intentions remained beneath.

Since the beginning much has changed. Early on I’m sure I would have been in favour of some sort of a union across Europe, and in a way I still am. This European Union is a bureaucratic nightmare, which has been paralysed by political disagreements and pettiness across states. It is now clear that Germany calls the shots, whereas for a long time there was at least some, albeit self-interested, opposition from the French.

This new European hegemony has propagated and enforced the neo-liberal corporatist economics that will be the shame of our century. Corporation-centred economics has overlooked financial crises while they were certainly not unpredictable. Bubbles grew and burst and grew and burst again and again. Countries continued to misbehave. Private institutions—with permission, either explicit or tacit—behaved irresponsibly and potentially criminally, for example Goldman Sachs helping Greece hide debts in 2001 whilst joining the Euro.

This wrongdoing has poisoned the EU, and in time this poison has spread to inhibit the very Union itself, representing the wrong values rather than merely being tainted. This point has been made by individual members, but not by the EU as a whole and they failed to take action. This new European culture is poisoned, and I will not be associated with it any longer.

The single turning point, if one is needed, was the amazing referendum effectively on the Grexit. The Greek people turned down the bailout conditions placed on the table from the EU (conditions which had actually expired by the time of the referendum anyway, but details be damned) magnificently. At the time I remember specifically the euphoria and pride across the world’s Left. The behemoths of Germany and the EU Commission were stood up to by the now empty shell of post-austerity Greece. The people who had no money in the bank, services left on skeleton duty, many who were starving, and importantly many middle class people, still voted no. This final landslide victory gave a massive middle finger to the financial elite. Staring into the abyss of an unprecedented financial crisis, the Germans found the abyss staring back into them, with a defiant grin.

After that referendum the EU could have won me over, so disposed I was (and am) to European co-operation, but they did not. Rather than appreciate the fundamental rejection of their principles and methods, the EU’s machinery sought to tighten the screws on Greece, and demonstrate their power. The Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras did all he could to not step down. There are decisions for which he must take responsibility, but at the same time we can appreciate that at the time he was possibly the most pressurised man in the world.

The case against Greece is strong, including accounts fraud and irresponsible borrowing, to which I would like to add if there was irresponsible borrowing there was also irresponsible lending. Greece has suffered a lot, but the lenders have not. They were the biggest benefactors of the Greek crisis, as that is where the bailout money went in its majority: To German banks. One positive step I would take to make Europe better would be a strong message being enforced—lenders beware. The EU should not be held ransom to banks and financial leverage.

This is to say nothing of the purely economic mistakes made in the currency union. To give the same interest rates to Greece and Portugal as you give to Germany was never going to be sensible. I would like to say thank you to John Major and Ed Balls for keeping us out of that mess.

The EU is not on the side of the people. The EU is on the side of financial institutions and those who would prefer the corporatist status quo. If you trust David Cameron to renegotiate what you would call a “better Europe,” then go ahead, but I do not. I will not place my trust in him and I would rather start again. I feel very little European citizenship now. Perhaps productivity, and thus the economy, in this country would increase if we were working for each other, rather than for the interests of Angela Merkel?

Understanding the media’s transgender explosion

Written by Harriet New on . Posted in Opinion.

To put it simply, the transgender community are breaking strict traditional rules when it comes to gender and sexuality, and since the patriarchy’s very existence depends on everyone’s compliance, those who break the rules are a threat and usually silenced. That is, until now.

The trans movement has been slowly growing for some years, a prominent moment being black trans actress Laverne Cox gracing the cover of esteemed US magazine TIME in 2014, with a heading marking it as the ‘Transgender Tipping Point’. This, though, is somewhat small in comparison to the impact of Caitlyn Jenner, whose transition from US Olympic champion, reality TV dad and trash magazine punching bag to powerful female icon has catapulted transgender issues and stories into the mainstream.

The mass media interest in transgender issues can be baffling to someone with little previous exposure to trans identities. More confusing still is media outlets regarding transgender people as a completely new phenomenon, when equally high-profile gender reassignment surgeries were happening 60 years ago.

This though, is not just as some have suggested, a hot topic trend being pushed by a trendy celebrity endorsement, but a monumental shift in society. It is giving a voice to a previously forgotten, abused group, and encouraging them to express it. In short, the coverage only feels excessive in comparison to the nothing that came before.

I have little sympathy for those who complain that their media exposure is dominated by stories from those in the LGBT community, arguing that trans is not, as the media would apparently have them believe, a common mainstream phenomena. But after analysing the mass media’s general approach to the trans movement it is clear why people may see this civil rights movement as trivial.

Viral media picked up on the growing acceptance of this next frontier of civil rights, coming out with a series of rather vapid stories that stray away from the goals of the movement and reducing it to just a mere celebrity phase. I have heard more on Caitlyn Jenner’s wardrobe than I have about her efforts to reach out to the trans community, which just clarifies how one-dimensional this phenomena is in danger of being.

While the tabloid establishment praises Jenner’s glamourised appearance and manner, this coverage diverts attention from more serious issues facing those who identify as transgender. The tabloid media has almost completely ignored the enormous spike in murders of US transwomen of colour, and how transphobic hate crimes are rising in the UK. The sidelining of such issues highlights the media’s avoidance when it comes to addressing real issues faced by the trans community.

The current media surge is ignoring a whole spectrum of transgender people, trans men for example, who have rarely been invited into the discussion. This leads on the following troubling issue with the tackling of this community, the degrading obsession with trans-bodies. As with stories concerning Caitlyn Jenner’s ability to apply makeup, considerable amounts of the journalism concerning trans men are fluff pieces. Articles about those who conform to conventional standards of male beauty, with titles like “Look at this transman, he’s so hot” and “Insanely hot men you will not believe are trans”. These, like much of the appearance-centric media, provide unrealistic expectations for transmen, and more importantly prevent them from being seen as multifaceted human beings.

Ultimately with her perfectly feminised white face that has the widest appeal to the cisgender public, as well as celebrity connections, Caitlyn Jenner is really the most myopic view of transgender people that has been constructed. Drawing back to the disgruntled attitude of some members of the public when it comes to the amount coverage of trans issues in the media, the ‘Call Me Caitlyn’ story plays a huge role.

For as exciting as Jenner’s story has been in the past few months, it is inevitable that people will—as some already are—grow tired of her, as most have with the whole Kardashian clan. This presents an issue, as most of the transgender acceptance in the media has been funnelled through Jenner, the burnout of her moment may cause a burnout on transgender issues on the whole.

Is someone who is sick of hearing about Jenner’s experience going to be prepared to treat their trans co-worker with respect and kindness? The fear is no, and this is the real danger caused by the media’s perspective, encouraging people to form their entire opinion on a community based on one high profile individual.

There are of course other elements of the media other than the tabloids embracing the transgender movement—TV shows Transparent, I am Jazz and the BBC’s own Boy Meets Girl, all provide fresher approaches to the community, and I would recommend them wholeheartedly.

Ultimately there is no denying that this development is a momentous moment for civil rights and human acceptance. It is disheartening, then, that elements of the mainstream media refuse to approach it as such, and in turn threaten equality and understanding for the transgender community.

Overheard in Manchester

Written by Alice Williams on . Posted in Lifestyle.

“Do you remember when that guy came round with a samurai sword?”

–Overheard in Fallowfield

 

“It’s so hard not to get paralytic in Manchester”

–Overheard on a Magic Bus

 

“All the French do is fucking protest”

–Overheard in the Library

 

“I personally find menstrual blood foul. It’s just a different texture isn’t it? I mean, it’s got bits in”

–Overheard in Withington

 

“Apparently he’s bi, but I’m not buying it”

–Overheard in Didsbury

 

“A guy on the floor above me came down and did a shit in our kettle. No honestly, an actual shit”

–Overheard in Big Hands

 

“You chat so much shit but you have a pretty face so it’s fine”

–Overheard in Fallowfield

 

“I’m going to start ordering sex like fast food. Would you like a medium or an extra large?”

–Overheard in the Students’ Union

 

I want to ride my bicycle

Written by Alice Williams on . Posted in Lifestyle.

Anybody who happens to mention that they cycle around campus will be familiar with the common responses. Ranging from “oh yeah, I keep meaning to get my mum to bring my bike,” to the hyperbolic “aren’t you scared you’ll die on the Curry Mile?!”, these responses make it very clear that, despite the rash of cyclists across Manchester, many students are simply not willing to take the risk.

Across the student population in general, you tend to find that people are firmly divided into two camps. There are those who merely observe the many cyclists and might be peeved at the recent amount of roadworks for the new cycle lanes. Then there are the actual cyclists, who often get weirdly invested in their cycling habit. Exchanges of the quickest route; horror stories from the Curry Mile; and discussions about whether their bike is a hybrid or a road bike… these palavers can ring out for hours.

When first beginning to cycle around Manchester, it can often feel like everyone else knows what they are doing in comparison to you. The very best thing to do when you first start cycling around a city is make sure that you are hyper-aware of your road safety. You’re at an advantage if you already know how to drive, or have had at least a few driving lessons. If you haven’t, it’s probably worth brushing up on your road safety—it’s easy to do online—if only to make yourself feel more secure when you first go out.

There is also a very useful function on Google Maps that allows you to find the quickest or quietest route, or even the route with the least sheer incline if you’re feeling lazy. If you’re worried about getting lost on top of making sure that you haven’t pulled out in front of the 142, you can put one headphone in and set your phone up to robotically deliver directions as you cycle along. For safety’s sake, once you get used to the route, it’s probably best to cycle completely sans-headphones.

While you’ll see many casual cyclists around Manchester without helmets, it’s not always the best idea as a novice on the roads. Likewise, it’s actually illegal to not have lights on your bike after dark; it’s worth purchasing some before you get caught out after a late lecture.

In terms of actual cycling, the best thing to keep in mind is to always be looking around you to check for any potential hazards. Make use of the cycle boxes at traffic lights in order to pull away quickly from left-turning vehicles, and always be aware of the speed at which you are actually capable of pulling away from junctions in line with oncoming traffic. The general rule for buses or other large vehicles is that, if you can’t see their mirrors, then they can’t see you.

Keeping your bicycle safe should also be a priority, try to lock it within well-lit areas if it’s after dark, and invest in a sturdy bike lock that you can put around both the frame and the front wheel (to avoid this being removed from the bike).

Many people make cycling around Manchester sound terrifying, but if you take care and respect other road users, it can be a great way of getting some exercise whilst also saving money.

Overwatch – Preview

Written by Connor McBride on . Posted in Games.

When loading up Overwatch, at a first glance you may be forgiven for thinking that you have stumbled into the Team Fortress 3 public beta. During my brief play at Gamescom, I was thrust into a payload-style game mode, where I could choose from different characters arranged into different classes. If I looked hard enough, I could have found the hat shop.

In an attempt to wean us addicts off Steam, first with MOBA replacement therapy in the form of Heroes of The Storm, and now with this, Overwatch is an objective-based First Person Shooter, where you compete in teams of 6 in two different game modes: Point Capture and Payload. Both of these are very fun, but not really ground-breaking.

The roster of characters is imaginative and they are split into four classes: Offense, Defense, Tank, and Support. There is a wide variety of characters to choose from, and subsequently a lot of team compositions to keep any competitive scene interesting.

Is it fun? Yes. Would I recommend giving it a shot? Yes. Could I convince a Team Fortress 2 player to convert? Well, it has a gorilla with glasses and a tesla cannon.

Marketing: Who’s in control of what you spend?

Written by Robert Parris on . Posted in Opinion.

Ever heard of Edward Bernays? Chances are high that you haven’t. Outside of the marketing and advertising fields, Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Freud, is a relative unknown. However, the legacy of Bernays is both sensational and haunting.

This man was almost singlehandedly responsible for making female smoking socially acceptable through the heavy use of psychology in his marketing techniques. Bernays is credited with being the first to theorize that people could be made to buy things that they do not actually need, by appealing to their unconscious desires.

Bernays was hired by the American Tobacco Company to encourage women to smoke. This is because, up until the early 20th century, it was not publicly acceptable for women to do so. In 1929, Bernays staged the Easter Parade in New York City, presenting models smoking Lucky Strike cigarettes, or as he captioned them: “Torches of Freedom”.

He presented this event as a news story, and then told the press to expect that women suffragists would light up “torches of freedom” during the parade to display their equality alongside the male sex. After the event, women smoking gradually became more commonplace, and subsequently the American Tobacco Company made a fortune.

The true legacy of Bernays, however, is the blueprint that he sculpted for the field of marketing and advertising, which is still largely used to this day. Various psychological tricks that Bernays developed are used to entice consumers into buying items that they do not necessarily want or even need. With advertising and marketing more prevalent in our lives than ever before, we must ask: To what extent are we truly in control of our own expenditure? Are we mere puppets influenced to a startling degree by corporations?

Advertising is everywhere and good advertising campaigns are frequently noticed. When you scroll through the Facebook feed on your phone, there are adverts interspersed among forgettable statuses and photos of your idiot friends wearing traffic cones on their heads. Often, these online adverts are tailored to the individual based on their browsing habits and online purchasing decisions. Furthermore, they are marketed in such a way to target your unconscious desires. Whether it be a discounted gym membership because you think you’re overweight, or a sale at a clothes store because you think you are out of fashion, all are targeted at our unconscious desires. Adverts are designed to generate brand loyalty and target these insecurities, then ultimately make you spend money on their products.

You may think that you are in complete control of your expenditure, but that might not be so. Some techniques are obvious. Apple often hypes up a new iOS update with an intense publicity campaign in order to get as many users as possible to download the new update. Often these come at a severe performance cost and you are enticed to upgrade to the latest model.

Other techniques are less obvious. Case in point—the free pizza given out by Domino’s during Welcome Week. Chances are, you thought that the main reason for this was to generate brand loyalty, and to a large degree, you are correct. However, there is some dark psychology behind this. Regans Reciprocity Experiment in 1979 revealed that if a person or a business gives something to you, you feel obligated to give something back, even if it’s more expensive. Bear this in mind upon the next time you are buying yet another iPhone, or maybe ordering a Domino’s at 11pm.

In 2014, McDonald’s, the largest chain of hamburger fast food restaurants in the world, spent a colossal $1.42 billion on advertising alone, according to statista.com. This insane, colossal budget is justified by one simple fact—it works. McDonald’s didn’t become the largest hamburger franchise because it provided the tastiest, most varied, and most nutritional meals. No no.

The chain succeeded because it was able to market its food in the most psychologically appealing way. This is why the Big Mac that you are served often looks nothing like the goods advertised. Various lighting and editing techniques are used to achieve this image without breaking advertising regulations. Due to the fact that McDonald’s advertising is commonplace and frequent, it has become the place to go to for a quick snack after a night of clubbing. Well, that’s what our subconscious tells us.

I certainly do not think that we are yet at a point where our free will, with regards to our purchasing decisions, is dominated by marketing. In fact, I think that now more than ever, people are beginning to catch on to the absurdity of media imaging and brand loyalty. The use of plus size models is a notable example of a consumer backlash to these techniques, this time against the fashion industry’s use of models with unrealistic proportions. But I think that it is important that we are aware of these techniques, even if it is simply to avoid a regrettable purchasing decision. Just remember that the next time that you make an impulse buy, it may not be entirely your own decision.

Papyrus

Written by Marina Iskander on . Posted in Lifestyle.

With the issue of mental health problems rising exponentially, schools and universities are merely reaching the verge of realizing the importance of addressing these problems.

Fortunately, there are many societies, social media pages, and websites that offer free (and anonymous) help to victims of depression, especially people contemplating suicide. PAPYRUS is an organization that not only hosts a helpline to advise those in need, but also trains professionals and gives talks at universities and colleges. PAPYRUS helps those facing the idea of suicide, but also aids the people around the sufferer.

On a larger scale, PAPYRUS also use their experience to campaign for the cause. In fact, their website quotes that they “draw from the experience of many whom have been touched personally by young suicide across the UK and speak on their behalf in our campaigns and in our endeavors to save young lives.” PAPYRUS does not just aim to directly help those contemplating suicide, but rather aims to raise awareness through the media and the internet. Physically, they have two offices and are regularly looking for volunteers to spread their message.

The path leading up to PAPYRUS was one of personal passion; it was founded by a mother who lost her son to suicide, and the project expanded as more parents joined. Since 1997, they have been sharing their stories and experiences in order to help to remove the stigma around suicide and to help parents and family members of victims cope.

PAPYRUS believe that one of the main reasons the number of young suicides is rising is because of the stigma around it, which keeps people from speaking out or asking for help. And so, being an anonymous website, PAPYRUS is a great place to start—whether for yourself or for someone whom you know. Ultimately, the most basic human instinct is to survive, but sometimes we forget that our greatest enemy is ourselves.

The Sound of Music

Written by Aj Mal on . Posted in Lifestyle.

Crossing the road with headphones on is up there on the stupid list alongside running with scissors and cooking whilst drunk. All of the above are activities which are likely to end in injury or worse, yet so many of us persist in doing them. I have lost count of the number of times I have seen people blindly step out in front of traffic, oblivious to the beeping of horns, whilst humming along to their favourite tune.

Headphones are ubiquitous, whether they are giving us an inspirational beat to walk or jog to, providing a soundtrack to our day, looking trendy or just keeping our ears warm. However, removing one of our senses whilst navigating the extremely busy roads of this city can be lethal. The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents reports a massive rise in incidents involving headphone wearers. These have included people being hit by cars or even trains, and a large percentage of incidents have lead to death.

To avoid accidents and harm to yourself (or even those expensive new headphones), pause the music or take them off when navigating busy traffic, and take extreme care when stepping into the road. This can be a life saver.

Studies by the University of Maryland state that in most accidents, a horn was sounded to warn the pedestrian, but headphones prevented this from being heard. In some cases this was combined with mobile phone use leading to almost complete loss of awareness of surroundings.

We suggest removing headphones entirely and enjoying the sounds of life around us. Without those obstructive beats in our ears, we can enjoy the sounds of crowds, people telling us to move, beeping horns, comments on our dress sense, and those annoying people in matching T-shirts in the city centre asking us for ‘just a minute’ of our time. There is so much to hear, so think twice the next time you venture out with headphones on.

Slashing the status quo, and Hillary Clinton’s lead

Written by Coby Tunnicliffe on . Posted in Opinion.

Donald Trump has been dominating conversation about the 2016 Presidential Election. His mix of bold claims and controversial statements have successfully kept the media talking about both him and the Republican nomination.

In contrast, much less attention has been given to the Democratic nomination. Most pundits have presumed that Hillary Clinton would take it without much of a fight, and although she’s still in the lead, her win is now less certain than when she announced her intention to run. A series of scandals, particularly criticism of her using a private email address while Secretary of State, have dogged her campaign and chipped away at her approval ratings.

Despite this, Clinton doesn’t exactly have anyone close on her heels; Bernie Sanders is still 18 points behind in second place, but still much closer and making gains, defying cynical expectations of many for the self-described socialist. An even bigger threat for her could be the much rumored entering of Joe Biden, the current Vice-President, into the race. Biden would be less likely to pull support away from Sanders’ younger and more radical camp but instead from Clinton’s more centrist supporters. If people in her campaign office are still complacent, they may need a shake.

It is easy to see why Trump has gained so much attention. Crude insults make what has previously been considered a dry and boring political process by many unpredictable and entertaining. So much so that the latest Republican debate gave CNN its highest ever ratings. However, time spent talking about insults and personal feuds has come at the expense of conservation about virtually everything else. Other issues, and the Democratic race, have not found a platform and are being neglected in the public discourse.

Joe Biden sits comfortably in the ‘Washington Circle’ that Trump and Sanders have done well to not appear a part of. In this respect he is a very different threat to Clinton than Sanders. Biden being in the political mainstream means he will be able to pick up the big donors that Sanders will never have, allowing him to challenge Clinton with the infamous expensive television ads and campaigning that win American elections.

There is already talk of some donors preparing to jump ship from the Clinton campaign in favour of Biden. Despite all this, Biden is not currently officially running for President, but rumours of him running are so rife that many pundits and polls speak about him as if he is. There are reasons why Biden may not make a bid, the most prominent being the tragic death of his son earlier this year, however if he does enter the race it may provide the media attention that the Democratic election thus far lacks.

The student vote is crucial for the Democrats, but they are a group that Clinton fails to impress. Recent polls show she has just 18 per cent of students support compared to Sanders 59 per cent. The self described socialist has successfully positioned himself as the anti-establishment candidate—something that Hillary certainly is not. She’s been a face in government for as long as most current students can remember, and shares her surname with a former President. This is an area where Biden is unlikely to seriously challenge—he scored an even lower at 14 per cent—and is much less likely to impress students than Clinton or Sanders.

The support of students is important and as they are much more likely to volunteer their time to support a candidate than people in employment, so are a valuable asset to a campaign, particularly one like Sanders’ that lacks big sponsors.

Liam, a 21-year-old student in New York, a solid Democratic state, said: “I don’t trust Hillary less than anyone else in politics; I like Sanders but I don’t really know enough about him to say for sure; Biden seems likeable but I don’t have any real thoughts about him.” This lack of interest in politics, and question of trust in politicians, appears to be the rule on campuses around America. Never have I heard a student talk enthusiastically about the prospect of Hillary becoming President, but talk of Sanders goes some way to getting an interest from people who are otherwise apathetic.

After losing the Democratic nomination to Obama in 2008, Clinton remained active in politics. She served as Secretary of State from 2009 – 2013. In many ways her tenure was relatively successful considering the challenges she faced during that time: For starters, she began the negotiation of the Iran Nuclear Deal.

However there were enough mistakes and failures to give her detractors ammunition to challenge her competence, which they have done viciously. Clinton has been unable to silence talk about her use of a private email address while Secretary of State. Her often contradictory responses to questions on the matter have in some ways added legitimacy to portrayals of her as untrustworthy.

Sanders has taken a lot of criticism for his socialist views but few would call him untrustworthy. It has not only left people thinking Clinton is untrustworthy but also incompetent. Jared is a 27-year-old independent resident in Pennsylvania, a state with a tendency to swing: “It has me asking, ‘Was she just too lazy to use an encoded email?’ I don’t want to put someone who can’t pay attention to the details in the highest office.”

It may seem peculiar that an e-mail account is becoming the defining feature of a 3-year stint in one of the most important positions in the USA, especially when other events included the first murder of a US ambassador in office in three decades and the beginning of talks that would help to unfreeze US-Iranian relations. Clinton’s lack of a satisfactory response to the rumors has also been pointed to as a sign of her complacency. She needs to answer the concerns of voters like Jared. It could also be seen as another example of the conversation in the debates not focusing on the most relevant issues.

Focus on Trump’s controversial statements have blinkered the public’s view of other areas of the presidential debate. This has limited discussion on the Democratic nomination, with what little there is having been about Clinton’s email scandal, the rise of Bernie Sanders and the potential of Joe Biden entering the race; in short, nothing positive for Hillary. It is no longer foolish to suggest someone other than Hillary Clinton will be facing the Republican candidate in the final debate.

Orthorexia: The healthy eating disorder

Written by Sonia Mansouri on . Posted in Lifestyle.

Fitness has never been cooler.  Scroll down your Instagram timeline and you will see numerous celebrities promoting ‘teatoxes’, namely Skinny Mint and Bootea, which promise magical phenomena, from banishing bloating to curing bad skin. They are also effectively laxatives. Switch on the TV or open any gossip weekly and you’ll find every member of reality shows past and present promoting their own fitness DVD or a workout regime that “changed their life.” After all, health is wealth, right? Yet the downfalls of a super-health-conscious lifestyle can sometimes outweigh the benefits.

In 2003, Kate Finn was reported to have died from orthorexia, a ‘modern-day eating disorder’. Coined by Dr. Steven Bratman, it refers to an obsession with health that can lead to mental and physical problems. While not an officially recognised eating disorder, orthorexia highlights the unfortunately ironic idea that a fixation on eating ‘right’ can lead to bad health through over-restriction of food groups and calories, and an obsession with perfection that can lead to self-punishment and can negatively affect relationships, interests, and self-esteem.

Cutting out foods is not new. Be it vegetarians with meat, Muslims with pork, Coeliacs with gluten, people have for a long time been fastidious with their food for health, political and/or religious reasons to name but a few. Orthorexia often starts out as a well-meaning attempt to get healthy, but it is the transition from cutting out one or two food groups—such as carbs—to cutting out so many that a person becomes malnourished, that makes it physically dangerous. But what fuels this fixation on perfect eating and the fear of ‘bad’ food?

That question takes us to the internet—that endless abyss of information, inspiration and desperation. In this particular case: Fitspiration, or #fitspo. The images are familiar—Victoria’s Secret models or headless, shredded bodies, oiled up and made of steel. The quotes vary—“unless you puke, faint, or die, keep going” to “skinny girls look good in clothes, fit girls look good naked.”

Instagram’s First Lady of fitness, Jen Selter (@jenselter), has over 7 million followers. If you haven’t heard of “the most famous bum on Instagram”, well, I think that title pretty much sums it up. Known for her super-toned figure and photos of her healthy lifestyle, Selter is a poster child of both the trend in curvy athletic bodies and of how social media created and creates celebrities based on looks. Consider Serena Williams’s Instagram account, which has only 2.1 million followers in comparison—perhaps it’s not legitimate athleticism and fitness that we are interested in, but pretty, filtered images of it.

You could suggest that the rise of orthorexia stems from the ascending attraction of having a super-toned body, like the media representations and celebrity aspirations in previous years of size 0 models or Kim Kardashian, just with a different body type that cannot be achieved by surgery or starvation. But unlike them, super-fitness—and its risk of orthorexia—applies to men and women equally.

Consider marketing campaigns for protein powders and supplements. Aimed at men and driven by ‘gym culture’, selling aesthetic perfection under the smiling mask of good health. The products may be healthy but the messages… not so much. Perhaps comparing yourself with others can be used as a way to assess your accomplishments, but unfortunately, the marketing industry is using this to manipulate the public in a negative way. A sense of competitiveness with other people could very well contribute to that unhealthy mindset and to extreme behaviour. Without an end destination, being ‘fit’ can seem unattainable, and many are unaware of when to stop.

Orthorexia could be dismissed as a kind of ultimate first world problem, but the fact that reported cases are on the rise, and it is being talked about more and more recently, is surely cause for concern, regardless of whether it is an ‘official’ disorder or not. A difference with orthorexia is that its associated behaviours are socially acceptable, but the message here is certainly not that exercising, eating carefully, determination, working towards goals and looking after yourself are bad things!

The obsession and the fixation on ‘perfection’ are dangerous. And these just so happen to be augmented by media and marketing in a culture where too much is never enough; that is what makes it dangerous, and we must start taking it seriously.

Is SAD making you miserable?

Written by Eva Katz on . Posted in Lifestyle.

Manchester’s uncharacteristically good weather may have temporarily lifted your hopes into believing that maybe Manchester isn’t the UK’s rainiest city but, trust me, the rain will come. For some people, however, the darkening skies, shorter days and colder weather will have a bigger effect than the encouragement to whip out your trusty winter coat.

Seasonal Affective Disorder is now a recognised depressive illness. It is affecting many who are unfortunate enough to live in a country that is plagued by miserable weather all year round. But at what point does a preference for the ‘sunnier’ months become a mental illness? According to SADA (the UK’s only non-commercial support organisation for SAD) symptoms for the disorder include lethargy, poor cognitive function, increased vulnerability to winter illnesses, sleep problems, over-eating, social problems, loss of libido and an altered mood in springtime. However, for those who suffer more intensely, depression and anxiety may occur, too.

But why do sunless skies and chilly temperatures affect some people in such a way? SADA says that “Light passes through the eye to the hypothalamus, a part of the brain that controls a wide range of functions.” Sounds a little complex though, right? Your hypothalamus is a section of the brain responsible for the production of copious essential hormones. These hormones control many functions, including body temperature, thirst, hunger, fatigue, sleep and libido.

When this part of your brain doesn’t get its daily dose of sunshine, it may cease to work correctly. Being the producer of so many important chemicals, this can negatively affect the mind and body of an SAD sufferer. Changes will include a spike in melatonin, which will result in increased fatigue, whereas their serotonin levels (controlling mood, appetite and sleep) will plummet, resulting in feelings of depression. Their circadian rhythm (the body’s internal clock) will also be affected, thus worsening the symptoms.

If all the symptoms sound a little too familiar and you’re dreading the impending winter months, you don’t need to start saving for your expatriation to the Caribbean (although that would be nice, wouldn’t it?). There is treatment available. Solutions include a change in lifestyle measures, light therapy, talking therapy or antidepressant medication. Diagnosis is usually made after the sufferer shows symptoms for three or more consecutive winters. But there’s no time like the present to communicate with your GP if you’re feeling blue. After all, ‘winter is coming’.