Skip to main content

Day: 23 February 2016

What Next? Conference brings the best in tech to the North West

Written by Gemma Sowerby on . Posted in Features, News.

This February marks the fourth annual What Next? Conference, hosted by the Manchester Entrepreneurs Society. I sat down with Vice President Manit Sethi, and grilled him on what the conference is all about, why we should be there, and what we could learn from the wealth of entrepreneurial brains who will be in attendance.

Hi Manit. Firstly, what is the Manchester Entrepreneurs Society?

Manit: “The Manchester Entrepreneurs Society aims to connect students who have great ideas to the resources, mentors, and funding they need to kickstart their business. We do this through running workshops and talks, hosting and promoting networking events like Silicon Drinkabout Manchester, running a pre-seed accelerator called Accelerate ME, and organising our annual What Next? Conference.”

Tell me about the What Next? Conference, how it began, and what your goals are.

“We want to awaken your entrepreneurial potential with our annual What Next? Conference. The Manchester Entrepreneurs Society will be hosting a jam-packed day for the fourth time on the 27th of February 2016. You’ll hear from a range of leading entrepreneurs and visionaries, and participate in workshops designed specifically for you, enabling students and other attendees to explore the startup scene in Manchester and around the world.

Over the years the What Next? Conference has become the North West’s largest student business conference, attracting over 300 students, graduates, and entrepreneurial minds to network, learn, and be inspired. We want to inspire and motivate students who have amazing ideas and are thinking of kickstarting their own start up.

We’ve managed to attract and secure a fantastic lineup of speakers ever since the first conference, and these speakers do make an impact on the attendees. We have also incorporated workshops and pitch competitions into the conference to make it more dynamic.”

Photo: Hector Kolonas (by included.co)

How will the conference help an aspiring business owner to get ahead?

“This year, the theme is ‘Digital Disruption’. We are currently in the midst of the digital revolution and startups and entrepreneurs must take full advantage of digital technologies to gain a competitive advantage and be successful.

Take a minute and look at the young and up and coming startups today: The world’s largest taxi company owns no taxis (Uber), the largest accommodation provider owns no real estate (Airbnb), the world’s largest movie house owns no cinemas (Netflix), and the largest software vendors don’t write the apps (Apple and Google). The world is changing.”

What makes this year’s conference so special?

“Our headline speakers include Head of Technology for Partners at Microsoft, James Akrigg, Founder at Space Energy and Millionaire Business School, Peter Sage, Former Editor-in Chief at The Next Web, Martin Bryant, and many more! They will not only share their journey to success and provide advice and tips for young entrepreneurs, but they will also discuss their approach to embracing change and leveraging digital technologies to be successful.”

I don’t study Business—could I still benefit from the Conference?

“Regardless of what degree background you have or what you aspire to do in the future, attending the What Next? Conference will increase your awareness of the drastic changes that the business and startup environment is going through, as well as being a fantastic opportunity to make new friends and meet people. You’ll also have a chance to pitch an idea—no matter how big or small. Any participant can pitch their ideas under three different categories: Business, Technology, or Social Enterprise, for a chance to win £500 cash!”

It sounds great—where do I sign up?

“For more information about What Next? and to purchase tickets to the conference you can visit whatnextconference.co.uk. Student tickets cost £16.99; this includes breakfast, welcoming remarks, access to the talks by our headline speakers, workshops, lunch, and pitch competitions, as well as an afterparty at a nearby club, so I think it’s really great value.

It’s not to be missed!”

Photo: Hector Kolonas (by included.co)

In defence of Pharma-Bro Martin Shkreli

Written by Jessica Chow-Lau on . Posted in Opinion.

Mr Shrekli is what Mr Monopoly would look like if the board game were re-released to reach the hip, younger crowd. The signature jig replaced by an enthusiastically unperturbed shrug. Perhaps the most ridiculed part of his face, his hair, is consistently coiffed to a firm yet natural side swoop, standing in dichotomy with his childlike countenance. His most fascinating feature though, is his eyes, which are all at once virtuous and malefic, depending on the lighting. When we first meet someone, we judge them by the impression their eyes give. Likewise, understanding Martin Shkreli’s price increase of Daraprim should start from his eyes.

Late last year, Swiss-based pharmaceutical company Turing Pharmaceuticals raised the price of a 60-year-old drug from £9.47 to £525 a pill after acquiring the marketing rights from Impax Laboratories. Daraprim is used to treat parasitic infections like toxoplasmosis and malaria, extending to AIDS patients whose stifled immune system enable frequent infections. Because it has a low prescription rate—12,700 written in the United States in 2010—it would be considered a speciality drug. Daraprim was and is not a “cancer drug”. Meaning that it is vital only in the sense that it is a drug and not because many people need it. Turing, founded and formerly chaired by Shkreli, focuses on unique drug categories that have small markets. Before selling it, Impax changed the distribution system from wholesale to tightly controlled. It is now distributed through a single speciality distributor, Turing Pharmaceuticals.

The 5500% price increase is just in the United States; Daraprim still costs 43 pence a pill in the United Kingdom. Low pricing is found in other EU countries due to the high degree of regulation that does not exist in the US. Because malaria is virtually non-existent in developed countries, it would just be people afflicted by toxoplasmosis in the US (which has already been established as not many) that would be affected by this.

The few patients who do need Daraprim will not pay the £525 because the United States Federal government protects its people against spikes in prices through the health care programs Medicare and Medicaid. Additionally, Turing Pharmaceuticals participates in the US 340B Drug Discount Program. Created in 1992 by Congress as part of the Public Health Service Act, it protects specified clinics and hospitals from drug price increases by giving them access to price reductions. By taking part in 340B Turing enters into the pharmaceutical pricing agreement, which is a second agreement with the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide statutorily defined discounts on “covered outpatient drugs”. Expensive drugs are purchased by government-supported facilities to serve those unable to pay. 340B is one of the most powerful contractual pharmaceutical pricing systems in the world. People who need Daraprim will get Daraprim.

Turing Pharmaceuticals wasn’t taking advantage of a drug made in the 1950s. The patent ran out, its price fell, the market was small, and it still had to comply with FDA regulation. There was no incentive to produce it, but people still needed the drug. From a return on investment standpoint, £9.47 is too low to break even. Shkreli claims that £525 is exactly what was needed to turn a profit and invest in research. The people who need it, or at least the insurers that allow those people to acquire it, have to support the production line. The reason why Daraprim is so expensive is the same reason why there is no company jumping to produce a generic version: Not many people need it. A company would have to invest in research and development of a new generic drug, have it go through FDA regulatory approval, manufacturing design and development, regulatory approval of manufacturing, production, and packaging. It would be too expensive to enter the market and the generic pricing will be not much more competitive than Turing’s.

Martin Shkreli would like to improve on Daraprim so that patients just need to take one pill. It has only been a couple months since the acquisition, too early to tell whether he will follow through with funding research.

Healthcare costs will not rise because of Mr. Shkreli’s decision. Since the total market is so small, the net effect of this price increase is close to negligible. The US government does have to pay more but pharmaceuticals do not make up the largest part of healthcare, nor are they the fastest growing. Between 2010 and 2013, drugs have had sharp reductions in growth, shrinking in real per capital terms at a 1.6 per cent annual rate. Shrinking as in negative, less than zero. Again, this is because not many people are prescribed Daraprim. The gargantuan industry that is pharmaceuticals will be able to absorb this type of shock, as opposed to a drug that treated diabetes.

Mr. Shkreli is acting as the scapegoat for a heavily disdained industry and at least informed people of menacing pharmaceutical practices. As a by-product of his very public persecution, hopefully we will understand that some pharmaceutical companies negotiate with countries and insurance systems so that certain medicine is covered for as many patients as possible. The cruel reality of rare diseases like cystic fibrosis and muscular dystrophy is that unless treatment costs are exorbitantly high, patients will likely get no help at all.

As an impatiently patient Martin Shkreli sat in his congressional hearing, he piously recited: “On the advice of council, I invoke my 5th Amendment privilege and respectfully decline to answer your question”, to each question he was asked. Perhaps he is arrogant, but when you have a clear moral compass and an intimidatingly difficult agenda, you too would be irritated at trivial obstacles.

First our toilet paper, whatever will be next?

Written by Will Baldwin-Pask on . Posted in Opinion.

If there is one thing that should not be compromised beyond what is necessary, it is the toilet-going experience. As an Oak House resident, this is even more important, the toilet being one of the few locations of individual and meditative escape available. But I’m afraid to say that there is something preventing my number twos from feeling first class. The plight of the centre-feed toilet roll dispenser is ruining my second favourite past-time involving bodily functions, and subtly making life that little bit harder for students. This lifeless plastic shell (pictured) that stores my soft white hopes and dreams is haunting the university toilets and restricting our ability to tend to our ‘business’ freely.

I’m a big fan of toilet paper. When life gets messy, you can always rely on a strong, compassionate roll of toilet paper to help you out. However, with the current situation, I feel I’m being robbed of the rights to the roll that I and everyone else deserve. When it comes to number twos, I’m a two-piece man—a simple fold and wipe is generally all I need. The dispensers don’t like this. It is impossible to withdraw any more than one piece of paper at a time from these things; if you’re lucky you might get two, but if you’re grappling with the consequences of a particularly boozy curry night, three or more pieces—maybe even a makeshift toilet paper glove—are completely justified.

The harsh nature of this One Piece Policy has left many people searching for alternative methods, such as the rope-like tugging from the dispenser base to build a stable bed of paper for use. However, I would argue this is not a practical alternative to the classic horizontal roll holder, and completely kills the relaxed mood required for perfect performances.

Why have we been given such limitations on our freedom? What are the university worried about exactly? Do they think we’re all opportunistic delinquents intent on stealing all the paper, taking it back to our home counties and dealing it like a rare drug to make some sort of profit? Quite frankly I think I’m old enough and sensible enough now to be trusted with using an appropriate amount of toilet paper, and the lack of faith the university has in me is insulting and outrageous.

Not only does the dispenser provide issues with paper handling, but every now and then one might be unlucky enough to experience the trauma of the paper tearing before it has left the dispenser, and thus falling helplessly within it. Trapped. Irretrievable. The cruellest of fate-twists.

To make matters worse, the bloody thing is kind of transparent—it’s like the creators of this merciless machine are mocking you by providing a constant reminder of how terrible your life has become. The incarcerated nature of the poor, tortured paper—lying there, staring up at you in desperate need of some assistance—is a perfect metaphor for how one feels, pained, lonely, and ready to cry.

It doesn’t just end there though. These things have been fitted with a robust locking system so that you have no chance of saving the situation. For people in Oak House, this means that when the paper source inevitably runs out, they have no choice but to wait for the key-holding authorities to replace it whenever they arbitrarily show up, relying desperately on something beyond their control, the hapless victims of an abhorrent system. I wonder if the perverse administrators at the university laugh to themselves at the thought of all those students hopping around hopelessly, trousers around their legs, attempting to spare themselves maximum humiliation.

But this state of reliance and subjugation at the hands of the dispenser may be exactly what the university want. We all know how left-wing and liberal the Students’ Union and the university like to be, but the system they’ve implemented with the campus toilet paper is akin to sheer communism. The interference with and regulation of one’s toilet paper usage, presumably so there’s “enough to go around”, as unintentional as it may be, is unjust.

Now, I’m as left as they come, but even I can recognise when we’re drifting into Stalin territory. I never thought I’d turn to the private sector, but now it seems only a hefty box of store bought Kleenex can ease the pain I’m going through. Students’ Union? More like Soviet Union. We should not have to suffer whilst the university bastardises the natural art of defecation; they say with great poo comes great power, but I don’t feel that powerful right now. All evil empires end up dismantled, with the power eventually returned to the people. Everyone loved the classic horizontal holder—would it really be that hard to reinstate?

We need to flush away this oppressive system. We need to put the seat down on this cold maltreatment. We need a return to a format that makes everyone happy, or the university will have a blocked bog of disgruntled students to deal with. Then they’ll be the ones wiping with their bare hands for a change.

Campaign launched to help homeless women on their periods

Written by Merle Streck on . Posted in News.

The problem of homeless women and the difficulty of sanitary care during their menstruation will be addressed by students at the University of Manchester. Student Action, a volunteering branch within the Students’ Union, is launching Time of the Month (TOTM), a campaign to distribute sanitary products, such as tampons, underwear, sanitary pads and baby wipes to women facing homelessness in Manchester.

The campaign is set to launch on 25th February 2016—the same day of the student-led “Reclaim the Night” march which aims to tackle violence against women and advocates a safer environment for female students. After the march, the TOTM campaign will seek to raise awareness and donations for the project by asking for sanitary products as entrance fees.

In her statement to The Mancunion, Vice-Chair of Student Action and co-ordinator of the campaign, Jodie Louise Connor, said that her idea of setting up the TOTM in Manchester was inspired by a similar campaign entitled #TheHomelessPeriod, in which three interns working at Bartle Bogle Hegarty—an advertisement company in London—sought to draw public attention to the issue of homeless women and their menstruation cycles, a topic that has not been widely discussed. The campaign influenced students to set up their own sanitary collections to be set up across universities. “It was really great,” Connor says, “we had loads of things donated but then it hit me that all of those things would have ran out soon after that.

“We all hate getting our period and most of us like to speak as little as possible about them, but we need to realise the grim reality of how bad they must be for the women who don’t have the means of dealing with them the way we do.”

Although, as announced in the Autumn Statement, tampon tax will be used to fund women’s shelters across the country. The problem of sanitation for women, particularly for rough sleepers, remains to be addressed. This is why Student Action, Connor and a group of student volunteers have put it upon themselves to help raise awareness. Talking about the origins of the project, Connor tells The Mancunion: “the amount of people that have said to me “you know, I never thought of that, I never even thought about what homeless women would do on their period!” And that’s exactly it. I didn’t realise until #TheHomelessPeriod launched and it’s such an important thing to be aware of.”

“We had the idea to launch it with Reclaim [the Night] because it just seemed like the perfect timing,” says Connor. “In February, everyone is all fired up with feminism which is really great and I think that works to our advantage massively, given the nature of the campaign.”

After the Reclaim the Night march, the co-ordinators of TOTM and a group of volunteers will be selling handmade tampon badges at the launch, with the profits being sent to Emmeline’s Pantry Parlour, a food and clothes bank for women who have suffered domestic violence based in Manchester. The co-ordinators have formulated plans to arrange donation collection points all around campus in the last week of every month, with two permanent collection bins all year round.

If you want to get involved or find out more information on the “Time of the Month” campaign, please visit their Facebook page: Time of the Month Manchester.

Peter Tatchell accused of being transphobic and racist

Written by Merle Streck on . Posted in News.

Fran Cowling, the LGBT Officer for the National Union of Students, refused to attend an event alongside gay rights activist Peter Tatchell at Canterbury Christ Church University, after accusing Tatchell of being “transphobic” and “racist”. The event, titled ‘Re-radicalising Queers’, was aimed at tackling discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and organisers have expressed disappointment at Cowling’s absence at the talk.

It was reported that Cowling sent an e-mail to the organisers prior to the event detailing her decision not to attend, referring to Tatchell’s signature in an open letter in The Observer against the common trend of “no-platforming” at UK universities as part of the “safe space” policy. According to Cowling, the letter incites hateful behaviour and violence against transgender people.

He recently made headlines when his position on free speech was challenged after he openly supported a Christian bakery in Belfast that refused to decorate a cake with the gay rights slogan. Justifying his decision, Tatchell claims that a Muslim printer should not have to publish cartoons of Muhammad, or a Jewish printer publish books of a Holocaust denier, so why should Christian bakery be denied the right to refuse service to customers whose beliefs stand in direct contrast to the firm’s owners.

In light of Tatchell’s history as a leading gay rights activist, news of his support of the Northern Irish bakery surprised some of his fans. In his life, he has been arrested over 300 times, co-founded Outrage!, an LGBT* rights direct action group, attempted a citizen’s arrest of President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe for his homophobic stance, and in 2007 he was among a group of protestors fighting for the right to hold a gay parade in Moscow, who were harshly beaten by a group of Russian men.

In response to Cowling’s accusations, Tatchell has stated publicly that he would be happy to debate with Cowling in order to challenge each other’s views in a professional manner. He has since expressed his discontent about Cowling’s decision, saying “Fran and the NUS have refused point blank to engage with me […] They have turned down debating me on Newsnight. It seems she is willing to make accusations that have no foundation and then is not prepared to defend her position.”

Following the controversy surrounding the talk, he tweeted: “Fran Cowling made false allegations re my supposed racism & transphobia. Her supporters now try to make out she’s the victim. Shameless!”

In a statement to The Mancunion, the University of Manchester Free Speech and Secular Society said: “Looking at past reporting on Peter Tatchell, the accusations made against him by Fran Cowling seem unlikely. He’s not transphobic, he simply stood up for the freedoms of people who’ve said transphobic things.

“He’s also not racist; he’s simply challenged people from those countries where homosexuality still carries a jail sentence or the death penalty. However, that is not the relevant point here. The fact that this is now being proposed against a renowned progressive campaigner highlights the pitfalls of no-platforming. It quickly spreads to everyone who does not conform to a narrow set of ideals held by the censors.”

In a statement to The Observer, the NUS commented that Tatchell has not been “no-platformed” by the union in general, adding that the decision has been left entirely up to Cowling regarding her plans for the event. Cowling has yet to issue an official statement about her failure to attend the talk.

Refugees & The Homeless: Real Stories

Written by Harriett Gaynor on . Posted in News.

A ‘Refugees and the Homeless – Real Life Stories’ event was organised by the student-run Manchester Global Health Society, who aim to educate students and the public on the importance of health care and public health through the use of workshops, events, and blogs.

The society believes that the solution to many global health issues must be sustainable in order to provide the most effective help, and that we should adopt a ‘think globally, but act locally’ attitude when tackling such issues. As a society they have already received a number of prestigious awards, such as Best New Society and an award for services to health and wellbeing at the International Festival for Public Health.

Both the refugee crisis and homelessness issues, such as the newly-constructed camps in Manchester city centre by homeless protesters, have received immense coverage in the media recently. The sold out event consisted of talks from two guest speakers, Gulwali Passarlay and Haider Khokhar, and a ‘People’s Panel’ discussion.

The People’s Panel consisted of Victoria Fowler, a dental student at the university who recently undertook voluntary work at the refugee camp in Calais; Ryan Khurana, a soup kitchen facilitator and president of a student-led homeless charity, Saint Vincent de Paul Society; Josh Strange, a third year medical student involved in Ancoats Urban Village Health Outreach Project; and Dr Pip Fisher, a GP with an interest in the homeless, refugees, and the marginalised.

The event began with Gulwali Passarlay, author of The Lightless Sky, TEDx speaker, and student at The University of Manchester. At the age of twelve, he embarked on a year long journey from his war-torn home in Afghanistan to Britain. It took five years for him to be granted refugee status and a further five years to be granted citizenship.

Gulwali recently returned to the refugee camp in Calais, which has now been branded by the media as the “Jungle”. He described the situation as inhumane, and spoke of his frustration that situations reflective of his own experiences are still very much apparent in the 21st century. He ended his talk with a simple but powerful question: “What will you do if your homes become war zones?”

Gulwali’s heartfelt story highlighted the true extent of the crisis. When asked what more could be done to help refugees, Gulwali explained the importance of engaging with society and showing compassion. He spoke of welcoming refugees with both respect and dignity and providing more opportunities, such as scholarships for universities to allow refugees to achieve their aspirations.

Haider Khokhar, a University of Manchester graduate and social entrepreneur, focused his talk on homelessness. In February 2013 Haider decided to use the money he won in a competition to help kick start a window cleaning company for a homeless man known as Glaswegian George. Anonymous donations and support from local businesses allowed George to develop skills and gain an income. However, the story took a dramatic turn when George was evicted from a property and was found to be using illegal substances. Haider explained how at first he believed that the solution to this problem was money, however he now believes that sustainability, patience, and persistence play a more fundamental role in tackling the issue of homelessness.

When asked what advice could be given to students that wished to get involved with helping both refugees and the homeless, the People’s Panel pointed to a variety of charities and organisations that specialise in this field. Such organisations included the St Vincent de Paul Society, Barnabus, Cornerstones, Refugee Action Manchester, Manchester Central Food Bank, and the Students’ Union Outreach project. The group also encouraged people to speak to homeless individuals, as this may often be the only conversation they have had that day.

The People’s Panel pointed out that a lot of work has been and is currently being done to help both refugees and the homeless. This includes providing the homeless with food packages and rough sleeper information packs that highlight places offering help and emergency accommodation. Voluntary work and donations at the refugee camps in Calais have helped to provide emergency health care and shelter.

If you are keen to become a part of the Manchester Global Health Society, or would like more information on global health issues, please visit their website at mcrglobalhealth.com or alternatively you can follow them on Twitter @GlobalHealthMCR.

Read The Mancunion’s interview with Gulwali Passarlay here.

It’s getting hot in here, so bring two towels

Written by Liam Kelly on . Posted in Lifestyle.

In a bid to further my quest to become a total parody of myself, and to add a semblance of productivity to my crippling, chronic procrastination, I decided to spend £30 and sign up for a 30-day trial period at Bikram Yoga in the Northern Quarter.

For the uninitiated, Bikram Yoga is a yoga class done in a studio heated up to 40°C, and with 40 per cent humidity—which, for 90 minutes, sees its practitioners do 26 postures of various difficulty, as well as two breathing exercises.

The proprietors of Bikram Yoga promise a lot, claiming that regular practice improves mindfulness, flexibility, strength, muscle tone, and general fitness. As none of those have ever applied to me, I was intrigued to see what effect regular yoga classes would have.

Now, while I was not a total novice to yoga practice (I started following an online video in my Oak House bedroom, which was not great for achieving proper form), the first session of Bikram was a real shock to the system.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the most shocking aspect was the combination of the heat and humidity, along with their inevitable partner: sweat. Before going to the studio, you are asked to bring two towels with you, as well as plenty of water. If anything, that is not enough.

By the end of the 90 minutes, after the final breathing exercise, every member of that class came out drenched in their own fluid and carried out their a totally saturated towel, as well as a sense of having accomplished something.

As I went to more and more classes, the routine became more manageable; however, as each class is choreographed in exactly the same way, there is a danger of it becoming dull.

Each class proved more than capable of totally tiring me out, making the rest of day a recuperative affair, with an average session burning roughly 400 calories. Inexplicably, there are sadists who exist in the Manchester area that take on the 30 Day Challenge—taking part in Bikram classes for 30 consecutive days, or more.

Even more inexplicably (and unacceptably), the attire of one older gentleman who was a regular at the class consisted solely of a canary yellow pair of Speedo-style swimsuit. It is an image I will try to shake, but I fear it may live with me for the rest of my days.

“Inner peace” is an inherently difficult state of mind to achieve, and I’m not sure if I have ever, or ever will, achieve it. However, all of these sessions of Bikram that I attended were so taxing mentally and physically that it was almost impossible to think about anything that was happening outside that room. Never before have I felt so “in the moment”, which was a hugely welcomed change from exam and essay stress.

Plus, I never knew that I was capable of standing on one leg whilst pulling the other towards the top of my head. Or, as Bikram instructors call it, the standing bow pose.

On balance, whilst I enjoyed my month of Bikram, it is not for the faint of heart (or body). And with its cheapest subscription being £65 per month for 12 months (10 per cent less with a student card) I do not anticipate returning to the Bikram studio any time soon.

Veganism: Just an udder first world problem?

Written by Helena Maxwell-Jackson on . Posted in News.

If you’re fan of first world problems, you’ve probably ordered an almond milk latte from one Northern Quarter coffee establishment or another. You may have sighed, with resigned indignation, as the single-origin espresso curdles unpleasantly with the tree-nut maltodextrin solution; and watched as each coagulated clot plunges into the depths of your now-black coffee.

At about this time, you might be thinking to yourself: wouldn’t a regular cup of joe with some full fat milk just have been simpler? You may have even wonder this out loud to your friends.

That would be a mistake. Let’s face it, you’re only at the organic café because it’s one of the only places in town that offer dairy-free brownies. Now, that’s important to your friend. She is a vegan. She has watched Cowspiracy. She’s made you watch it too, and that’s why you’re here, sipping your congealed almond milk latte and trying not to look at the man eating cheese on toast. The scent of molten savoury goodness is wafting over, going up your nose. Your eyes drift toward the cheese. God, that looks good. Quickly, you tear your gaze away. It’s too late. She’s seen you looking, she’s on to you. Quick, find an excuse. You mumble something about liking his flannel shirt. Will she believe you?

There are many reasons that people abstain from dairy products, but for your average non-lactose intolerant student living in the UK, is dairy really something to be worried about? Documentaries such as Cowspiracy, and organisations like PETA, certainly make it seem like it is, and they certainly offer a compelling argument too.

However, with the most anti-dairy activists based in the US, is the message really that relevant to those of us who live in the UK? Surely we can enjoy our cheese and onion pasties in peace? At least until TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership)? I decided to contact a local Lancashire farmer to find out just what was really going on on a dairy farm. I wanted to know the answers to the issues surrounding dairy farming which really concerned me.

Cows need to be impregnated annually in order to continue on lactating. Animal activists often compare the artificial insemination of the dairy cows to rape. As a feminist, I couldn’t help but find this comparison more than a little offensive. Although, in all honesty, I am not quite sure if I was outraged by such an extreme example of anthropomorphism, or because I was eating cheesy pasta when I found out.

I wondered if our local farmer could clear some things up for me. What was the reality of artificial insemination?

“It’s just like a bull, but a man with a straw instead of a bull with a penis.”

He went on to explain that the process occurred when the cow was in heat: “Our cows have a collar with a microphone on that listens to the cow and also measures how far the cow walks everyday, when the cow walks a long way and stops eating for a day it means she’s looking for a bull. We then call the Artificial Insemination Technician 24-hours later…Hopefully one insemination and it’s all over….”

From his answer, it seemed like the cow might, at least slightly, mind being artificially inseminated. I wondered why the farmer said he hoped it would all be over in one insemination. Was that because it was a disturbing process for the technician, or an expensive one for the farmer, or was it because, although in heat, the cow didn’t enjoy being penetrated by a man brandishing a straw?

The farmer didn’t say much about the process after the pregnancy. I had read that the cow mourned for her calf when they were separated from one another. When I asked the farmer about this, he admitted he disliked that part of the job. I asked him how he felt about grass as one of the methods to feed cattle. One of the concerns that many people have about dairy is that using grain to feed cattle is environmentally unsustainable.

“As a farm that measures and tries to use as much grass as possible I’m biased toward grass fed systems! I do feel cows are generally happier when out at grass… I do use small amounts of grains to supplement when grass quality is poor and cow’s health would suffer, but dairy farms using vast amounts of grain to substitute grass seems ridiculous both at current milk prices and unless the farm actually grows all the grains it uses itself and can convert them efficiently to milk, the carbon footprint is greatly affected. Obviously growing grains to use for the cows on the farm is great as it sets up a crop rotation that kills weeds without pesticides, which to me makes sense as a holistic approach to farming”

I liked the idea of taking a holistic approach to farming, and the idea of a closed circuit method of farming, and questioned him as to how the low buying price of milk affected dairy farmers in the UK: “A low price may make some UK farmers think more about moving to a grass-based system, and it may force producers out, that simply cannot afford to reinvest—whilst this is a bad situation it’s maybe better to exit than compromise on long term welfare and environmental investment.”

I was concerned that the low buying prices might turn more farmers to mass dairy farming, and asked him what he thought about dairy farming on such a mass scale: “If it’s done well, it can have higher welfare standards over and above what anyone would expect, but it’s based on people wanting cheap food and who possibly don’t care where their food comes from – these systems try and produce as cheaply as possible. Ultimately it’s the consumers choice—I feel it’s wrong we are more bothered about new types of phones and televisions… and want to spend so little on food!”

It seemed that, for our dairy farmer, the future of the industry rested largely with the consumers.

The farmer seemed very aware of the potential environmental implications of dairy farming, and was sympathetic to animal welfare concerns. Speaking to this local farmer didn’t completely put my mind at rest, and whilst I can’t say that I will be indulging in dairy with a completely clear conscious, I do want to learn more about the industry, whilst still maintaining an open mind.

No place for morality in Cameron’s Britain

Written by Joely Thomas on . Posted in Opinion.

Under dictatorships, protests are met with sharp attempts at repression. Where the rope is kept taut, it takes only the tiniest of forces for the vibrations to be felt. Yet, in the ‘great democracies of the West’, free speech is welcomed, debate is encouraged, and civil liberties are granted unanimously; or so the saying goes. While there is certainly more space for protests, this space is carefully monitored and increasingly restricted. Like the prisoners who are allowed enough time in the yard to release their energy, so too, are citizens given only enough space to vent their grievances without posing a threat.

Yet even demonstrations have to stick to a set route, thereby systematising that, which is supposed to be subversive. Meanwhile, protest camps are viewed as eye sores and eventually cleared away, such as the global Occupy movement and The Ark outside of Manchester Metropolitan University; or institutionalised as attractions, such as the tents stationed in London’s Parliament Square that featured amongst many a tourist’s holiday pics.

But protests are not the irksome complaints of a few sore losers. People driven to protest displays a flaw in the political system. People are unable to channel their grievances democratically because the channels to do so, do not exist. It is not simply enough for Conservatives to claim that because they were voted in, they are automatically legitimised to carry out all that was in their mandate.

Still, police tactics, such as kettling, are frequently used to encourage demonstrations to turn sour, whilst those who stick to agreed routes and remain peaceful find their messages sabotaged by sensationalist headlines that focus on a few deviances and fail to scrutinise police conduct.

And, ultimately, the Tories know they can ignore such manifestations of frustration. Jeremy Hunt—the face of the government’s attack on the NHS—was all too happy to push through the new contract for junior doctors as they stood with their placards across the country. People in Lancashire are also still having to protest against the government pressure for fracking to begin, despite having been told that the ultimate decision would rest with local councils.

It makes the conscience cringe, but in a money-minded world, such government decisions are not irrational—at least not in the short-term. No consideration needs to be given to the toxic water, earthquakes and various illnesses, including nose bleeds and headaches, that have been proven by more than 500 studies to result from fracking, when it can help those two most insidious of terms—‘security’ and ‘growth’.

Pushing the capacities of doctors and nurses to the limit rather than employing more staff and paying acceptable wages, is far better for the public purse. Who cares about broken bones when power is wielded by arms made of steel?

It is an affliction to which the ‘Heathrow 13’—activists who chained themselves to railings at Heathrow terminal in protest of plans to build a new runway—fell foul. Having discovered a means to carry out essential protests in a way that actually had an impact, they were taken to court and recently found guilty. Assertions that they will be jailed leave us wondering where were political prisoners included in the Conservative party manifesto.

Banknotes are what lies, too, at the heart of the criminalisation of other forms of protest. Strikes have always held more power than demonstrations, with their ability to hit company and government pockets hard, and it is as a result of doctors’ willingness to strike that it has taken this long for the junior doctors’ contracts to be pushed through.

Public transport workers have found strikes to be their slingshot in the fight against Goliath but now the Trade Union Bill seeks to curtail the few remaining rights of workers by undermining industrial action. Plans and details, as minute as the social media to be used, will have to be published within 14 days in advance, and employers will be able to substitute agency workers for those striking. It is a move the United Nations are even warning risks breaking international labour law, further illuminating the undemocratic workings of our beloved democracy.

Perhaps the worst blow, however, is the move to ban local councils and public bodies from boycotting unethical companies—meaning that not only is ethical action criminalised, but also ethical inaction. Amnesty International have severely criticised the restriction on ethical consumer choice, which disincentivises ethical business practices and supports those willing to cut corners; in such ways like using child labour and environmentally harmful methods. The link to vested interests in Israel and the arms trade is clear, with claims that boycotts undermine national security and encourage anti-Semitism—the latter being an argument typically made by Zionists of human rights supporters.

It thus appears that under a money-hungry regime, there is no place for morality. But, with no slack in the rope, will David Cameron and his cronies soon feel the vibrations and find themselves in a tug of war with those less used to having their freedoms curtailed? Or have the majority of citizens also become so capitalist in an increasingly consumerist society that they will prove to be too passive to take an ethical stand?

Nigerian student faces deportation to death

Written by Alexandra Bickell on . Posted in News.

Luqman Onikosi, a Master’s student studying at the University of Sussex, suffers from Hepatitis B, a potentially fatal disease. He is currently facing deportation back to Nigeria, where he claims that they “do not have the medical infrastructure” to keep him alive.

Onikosi first arrived in the UK in 2007 as an undergraduate; it was then that he was diagnosed with Hepatitis B, a condition that later killed two of his brothers in Nigeria, in 2011 and 2012. The illness is a chronic condition affecting the liver; according to the World Health Organisation, 240 million people are infected with the virus worldwide, 780,000 of whom die every year due to complications such as liver cancer and cirrhosis.

The Home Office first tried to deport Luqman in 2012, but he fought the decision and was permitted to stay. A crowd funding effort then allowed him to return to the university to undertake a Master’s degree after working at the Nigerian High Commission in London.

Now, he faces the issue for a second time. The Home Office states that they sent a letter to Onikosi informing him of his visa application rejection in May 2015, but the Nigerian student maintains that he only received it a matter of weeks ago. The ‘Campaign to Stop the Deportation of Luqman Onikosi’ writes that Luqman is “now at risk of detention and deportation at any time” as a result.

The stress of the situation has taken its toll on Luqman—he says that he is “struggling with physical and mental health” and is simply trying to get through the day and “stay sane” in the midst of the upheaval.

Luckily for Onikosi, he has been “overwhelmed by support” in the UK—grassroots groups both in and out of the University of Sussex have joined forces to create the campaign #dontdeportluqman, as well as to pay his legal expenses, through the crowd funding website ‘Generosity’.

Luqman has highlighted the similarity of his situation to several others on his official statement on ‘Novara Wire’, an online political media platform. This includes Ama Sumani, who was deported back to Ghana whilst receiving treatment for terminal cancer in Cardiff—she died three months later. Luqman argues that migrants have made significant economic and social contributions to the UK and so should not be dealt with in such a “dehumanising and humiliating” manner.

The ideal outcome for the campaign in the eyes of Onikosi and his supporters is for him to be given leave to stay in the UK, in order to receive the medical treatment that he needs “to stay alive”.

Reclaim the Night is back

Written by Rebecca Noël on . Posted in News.

On Thursday 25th February 2016, Reclaim the Night will once again take over the streets of Manchester, protesting against street harassment and sexual violence to women.

It is calling out on injustice and predation and showing that the women and supportive men of Manchester will fight until they feel safe in their city. The sexual violence epidemic, as it is now being called, is being fought through a “neon parade” heading along Wilmslow Road and Oxford Road, to Manchester Students’ Union where a festival of female empowerment awaits.

Women’s officer Jess Lishak has been one of the biggest driving forces in both the 2015 and 2016 Reclaim the Night events here in Manchester, and is striving to ensure that each year hits even harder than before. “We’re building a movement so that Reclaim the Night is not just about reclaiming one street on one night, but a force for change and empowerment for as many people as possible.”

So, what makes Reclaim the Night so important? In 2015, The Guardian reported that 1,802 cases of rape were dealt with by Greater Manchester Police and 30 incidents involved university students in the winter semester of 2014 alone, according to Manchester Evening News.

In spite of this, only 15 per cent of rapes are thought to be reported worldwide and the conviction rate is a shocking 5.3 per cent. With facts and figures like these, it’s no wonder that 95 per cent of women don’t feel safe at night and 73 per cent have a genuine concern about being raped.

Furthermore, over a third of people in Britain in 2005 commented that women were at least partly to blame for the sexual violence inflicted upon them. Therefore, as Jess Lishak reiterates: “Reclaim the Night is important for so many reasons; it draws attention to how much an issue street harassment and sexual violence against women is both to the general public and the authorities, but it also creates an incredibly empowering and uplifting event for women and people who have experienced these issues”.

Alongside its goal of raising awareness and protesting its cause, this event is able to bring people together in support of one another in what Jess calls a “truly liberating experience” as many students report back to her with the positive impact it has had on them.

With its claims of being “bigger, brighter and louder than ever”, 2016 hopes to target more people and more problems. Similar to last year, the parade will be split into blocks, a block for LQBTQ identifiers and a block for youth and families will be joining the original women-only and mixed gender block formation.

The purpose of the youth and families block is to advocate for compulsory PSHE education teaching about consent and the idea of a healthy relationship as part of a compulsory curriculum from an early age which has been campaigned for in local schools and youth groups by the Reclaim the Night team in weeks leading up.

A pre-march event in the Pankhurst Centre by Manchester Royal Infirmary at 5:30pm will be taking place as an opportunity for them to come together beforehand.
In the same manner as previous years, an after party will be taking place in the Student’s Union to showcase women talent through live music, speakers, poets and DJs.

Previews of the afterparty have been given throughout these weeks leading up, described as “pop-up events in areas of the city that students identified as places they feel most unsafe, reclaiming them for a few hours with music, poetry and light and spreading the word about the event and the cause even further”.

Thursday 25th February calls for students and locals, men and women, adults and children to get on board, unite and Reclaim the Night!

Identity politics is making a mockery out of the left wing

Written by Elrica Degirmen on . Posted in Opinion.

Politics divides students here at the University of Manchester, but it goes beyond mere political party affiliations and has descended into the student body being divided on the basis of their personal characteristics. Quoting from the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, people’s opinions are given greater legitimacy due to the “shared experiences of injustice of members of certain social groups”. This kind of politics—identity politics—seems to be endorsed by the Manchester Students’ Union and their cult of followers. These students are the vocal authoritarians wishing to forcefully impose their beliefs by censoring all other criticisms and dissent.

Much discourse is based on the idea that there is structural oppression within the United Kingdom, and their idea of mitigating the situation is to take control of the institutional bias that apparently exists here at the University of Manchester. I am still waiting for the evidence that suggests that it is the case. Their logic is as such that minority groups will face disadvantage in the outside world. Even so, artificially molly-coddling students in an educational institution will not serve them well post-graduation. Instead of discussing the ideas to redress socio-economic inequality, they instead try to make the university experience as “safe” as possible via the implementation of the safe space policy amongst other initiatives.

For example, the Students’ Union runs a number of campaigns on “liberation” of which it is specifically defined as the “freedom from oppression that a lot of different groups of people are still fighting for”. The insinuation that we should group people based on their sexual orientation, race, gender and disability as opposed to the viewing a person holistically and treating them as an individual demonstrates how they reaffirm divisions in society. This is Britain, one of the best places in the world for human rights, yet the right to the freedom of speech is slowly being curtailed in our universities for fear that someone may say something that could “harm” a member of a specific group. How dare they imply that those from disadvantaged backgrounds are incapable of responding to intellectual ideas that challenges their perceptions.

First of all, I am unconvinced that people are disadvantaged by their personal characteristics systemically. But it is flawed reasoning to suggest that because there are instances of discrimination, that the whole system is oppressive to those groups of people. You cannot homogenise individuals because they happen to share a personal characteristic; it reduces each one of us to the sum of our oppression points, where only those who are oppressed should be taken with sincerity and those from privileged positions are meant to be dismissed.

Secondly, in their eyes it is unfathomable to think that a privileged person should have a right to comment on issues that apparently, they are unable to discuss without possessing the supposed perquisite qualities needed to discuss them. This is false, everyone is entitled to their opinion and the validity of which is dependent on their reasoning and the arguments that they put forward. It is not dependent on the background of the speaker.

There has been current discussion on institutional racism at British universities. However, a report entitled Ethnicity and Degree Attainment by the Department of Education and Skills explicitly stated that their “findings do not automatically imply that there is some form of ethnic bias within the Higher Education system”, with a specific reference on how they excluded certain variables that may impact on degree performance such as “term-time working, parental income and education, English as an additional language, and prior institution attended”.

The experiences of the alleged racism of a few ethnic minority students does not make them intrinsically right, especially in the face of evidence presented by other students—regardless of the background of those students. It has not been proven that race is the dominant variable. It is not right wing nor offensive to point out that people’s flawed perceptions of the world are incorrect in this way, nor does this imply that they are discrediting their experiences. They are not denying those experiences; they are denying the faulty conclusions that you have derived from them.

Rest assured, that there are many left wing students that do not subscribe to the pernicious ideology of the social justice warriors that seeks to put up barriers against people. Increasingly, I am hearing stories of students becoming dissatisfied with the politics of the Student Union’s officers and the representatives of the supposed left-leaning student political societies. Their politics are being misrepresented by these individuals as they use the label that they are on the “left” to artificially elevate themselves on a moral high ground in order to distinguish themselves from the right wing. Heaven forbid if you are vaguely centre-right as you will be plagued with the many attacks on your personal character.

In all honesty, this kind of rhetoric does not harm the right wing as much as it does as the left wing. As of now, a false dichotomy of politics is created between identity and non-identity politics with the left and the right being affiliated to them respectively. Believing in identity politics is not synonymous with the left wing, it is a gross distortion of their values, and even I will admit that many of those on the right use the term “left wing” as a slur against those who subscribe to that ideology.

Practically speaking, the implementation of identity politics comes about via the concept of a safe space where an echo chamber of certain ideas can only be uttered, otherwise it is deemed as “hate speech”. Freedom from hate is seen to be more important than the freedom of speech, as Ally Routledge the co-chair of Manchester Labour Students can proclaim. However, the freedom of speech includes the right to offend. I will publicly say that it is not offensive to discuss other cultures to your own, other institutions that you have not experienced, or issues that are specific to certain groups and so forth. People should have the right to assert their own opinions no matter what.

Left wing values incorporate the notion that society should mitigate the barriers that prevent social mobility through institutions that also include our very universities. For everyone to have an honest discussion on how it is best to reduce inequality, or rather how it is best to empower individuals to make the most of their potential, then everyone’s opinions should be welcomed—provided that they are able to argue for it and not assert it as truth because of who they are. This means that we cannot resort to identity politics that serves to not just shut people out with views from the other side of the political spectrum but also those who are outraged at the mischaracterisation of left wing politics.

Universities criticised for censoring freedom of speech

Written by Lucy Menage on . Posted in News.

Student censorship has for some time been gaining media attention across the UK. The past few months have seen the likes of academic feminist Germaine Greer banned from one university and gay rights activist Peter Tatchell criticised after making comments that some have considered offensive.

Feminist activist Julie Bindel has spoken out in a video on The Guardian‘s website after huge amounts of people signed petitions on Change.org to prevent Roosh V and Donald Trump from entering the country.

In the video, Bindel explains that simply banning people from speaking does nothing to change a problem, it just reduces awareness that people hold offensive opinions. Bindel points out that “political movements such as civils rights and feminism have made such progress because we were able to hold people accountable” and “banning people from publicly stating their views, does not make those views disappear. Banning Donald Trump from the UK won’t stop Americans voting for him.”

Julie Bindel herself was no-platformed from several universities due to the accusation that she was “transphobic”, the University of Manchester’s Students’ Union being one of them. In fact, in the 2016 annual survey of campus attitudes to free speech made by Spiked, the University of Manchester’s Students’ Union has been branded as red in the traffic light rankings of student censorship.

This ranking was awarded due to the Students’ Union banning Julie Bindel and Brietbart associate editor, Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking at a feminist event. In addition, a copy of the Charlie Hebdo magazine was banned at the Refreshers’ Fair in 2015 and copies of The Sun were prevented from being sold in the Students’ Union in 2013. The highest number of bans goes to Aberystwyth University who have censored freedom of speech five times in 2013.

Since being posted on the 10th February 2016, Bindel’s video has gone viral with her view that opinions should be voiced as long as the words do not incite a crime: “let us hear the arguments put forward of those with which we disagree, so that we can expand our knowledge and show rational resistance”.

In UK law, article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to freedom of speech and prohibits censorship from the government and public bodies, including universities. This is true unless the speech needs to be stopped in the interest of protecting public safety, morals, the reputation of others, information given in confidence and to prevent the induction of violence or crime.

The future of fashion week

Written by Sarah Kilcourse on . Posted in Fashion & Beauty.

We are now heading into full fashion week swing—New York Fashion Week (NYFW) is just behind us, London is still tinkering on, while Milan and Paris are still to come. These four fashion capitals have instilled the running of the world’s fashion industry into a biannual catwalk show divided into seasonal collections; Spring/Summer and Autumn/Winter.

However, in recent years this format has become outdated. With the advent of online shopping and social media, the see-now-buy-now movement has grown hugely. The traditional fashion week is aimed at the press and buyers who have the opportunity to see a designer’s collection six months before its eventual sale, deciding which pieces they believe will suit their customers. But the internet has allowed potential customers to voice their reaction alongside the show, and in six months time when it is available to purchase, customers have lost interest.

Big names including Burberry and Tom Ford have completely disregarded this system; Tom Ford has recently cancelled his NYFW show in February, in favour of one A/W collection in September, so customers can buy when the clothes are relevant. Henry Holland has designed special rings with Visa, enabling customers to buy the pieces off the catwalk with their jewellery—embracing technology in fashion and modern, fast-paced consumer habits.

Fashion weeks in their current layout are clearly going to change but they are unlikely to disappear. They drum up a huge amount of interest and money for the designers, retailers, press, and cities involved. One consideration recently reported in Vogue is changing fashion week into an event for the customers, more similar to how couture week is established—aiming to elevate certain clients and encourage more ‘of the moment’ purchases.

Fashion has always managed to retain its position as an elite industry that takes pride in its artistry, and thus isn’t as business-oriented. These new steps clearly highlight the influence of business that is gradually infiltrating the fashion world, as they are moves to prioritise the customer over the press. But never fear; fashion week is the ultimate press stunt. So the press, designer, retailer, and customer will continue to enjoy it together.

Review: Deadpool

Written by Nicole Tamer on . Posted in Film.

Deadpool is a record-breaking phenomenon that will have a lasting impact on the film industry, but not necessarily in a good way. Once a concept becomes successful, studios try to replicate it in order to make a quick buck. Deadpool’s success can be explained by its self-awareness which is difficult to replicate. Throughout the film, the fourth wall is broken; references to real-life events and trends are (literally) thrown around and the ridiculousness of the whole premise is questioned. Thrillingly funny, overtly sexual, and deadpan honest, the film captured the audience. This was especially apparent by the number of audience members dressed up as the character and the unusual amount of cheering.

The film starts with a brilliant opening sequence which accurately described the writers as “the real heroes here” and the director as “an overpaid tool”. If the audience has not had the chance to see the trailer beforehand—which received a standing ovation and encore at the 2015 Comic-Con—they were drawn into Deadpool’s brash world from the first second. The film title is based on the Marvel Comics’ superhero of the same name. Ryan Reynolds seems to be born to portray the superhero; especially in the tight Deadpool costume, he managed to underline his constant puns with expressive body language.

Ironically advertised as a love story, the plot is about taking revenge on the British villain (Ed Skrein) who disfigured him and turned him into a mutant. Deadpool’s excruciating journey to his mutant powers is told in flashbacks which are integrated tightly into the narrative. After proposing to his girlfriend Vanessa (Morena Baccarin), he collapses and gets diagnosed with terminal cancer. Hunted down by a slimy recruiter, he is offered a place in a secret programme with the promise of a cure of cancer and superpowers at the same time.

The portrayal of his struggle with cancer was especially poignant. The hardest fact about cancer is that it will always affect the people closest to the sufferer. He does not want Vanessa to witness his physical deterioration. His motivations to join the secret programme did not stem from selfishness, but from wishing to lead a normal life with his fiancée. The bitter irony is that after his involvement with the programme, he will never look the same again, and his vanity does not allow him to go after her.

Unlike other superheroes, Deadpool made all the senseless decisions himself that led to his precarious situation: A disfigured body, a thirst for revenge to get his normal skin back, and no guts to confront his fiancée. Deadpool is a character with major flaws, and whilst he is aware of them, he does not try to fix them which makes him relatable. His rashness and pride make his life difficult but also define his persona. One point of critique is that the audience does not find out much about the scope of his superpowers, because the film focuses too much on his wacky personality.

I was curious to see the film’s portrayal of his pansexuality which is mentioned in the original comics. The R-rating allowed a lot of creative freedom contrasting other Marvel superhero films which played it safe in order to appeal to a younger audience. Deadpool does not care for subtlety, and sexual jokes are made throughout the film. These jokes are not condescending, but simply acknowledge that sex is a major part of our society and is nothing to be ashamed of.

The film managed to integrate Deadpool’s sexuality contextually and as a major comic relief. One danger the film might run into is the jokes on popular culture that, over time, could lose relevance and make the film less of a classic. On the other hand, there were enough jokes that were made without being time relevant, and I even spotted a few Monty Python references. The self-referential Marvel universe jokes will also delight anyone with a knowledge of the other franchises. And for a Ferris Bueller reference, do not miss out on the rolling credits!

4/5

Travelling through the accessory time machine

Written by Perisha Kudhail on . Posted in Fashion & Beauty.

Coming from an Indian household, bling is king and no one ever questions it. But it was never always this way; in my Biji’s (grandma’s) day, a good piece of gold would be considered enough and the key to beauty was to keep it simple. From necklaces to bangles, everything was made of gold, and this tradition is yet to fade. Even after marriage, the amount of jewellery worn was kept to a minimum. My Biji’s everyday jewellery was a few gold bangles and a gold ring. This might sound very blingy, but this combo never changed. It went with every outfit and was never compromised for anything.

Although gold is worn less now, it’s still a staple for an Indian accessory collection. My Mum’s wedding ring is made of gold, and gold necklaces are a great asset to any outfit. The sentiment of gold is very high within Indian families. Gold sets are often given as wedding gifts and worn to weddings and parties. The plainer your outfit, the more excuse you have to bling up. I have taken the sentiment of everyday jewellery and the blinginess of today’s style and incorporated it into my own accessory look. I wear a gold piece every day because of my love for jewellery, especially timeless pieces, and I love to bling out for a party.

Here are some key pieces that have made an appearance throughout the generations of my family.

The Gold Ring

This seems to be a running accessory, from my Grandma, to my Mum, and now me. A gold ring is an accessory that can be worn by any generation.

A Jewellery Set

You will be adorned with gold jewellery sets if you get married but, before then, a good quality jewellery set is a must to complete your saree look. These sets can range in heaviness and detail and have been seen as part of my Mum’s accessory collection, and now have become part of mine.

A Saree Belt

This accessory is making a comeback. After fading out in my Mum’s early years, the saree belt is a great way to give you a classic look with a unique piece of jewellery. If your Grandma or Mum has one, I’m sure they won’t mind if you borrow it.

After looking at my family’s accessories, I can say that I love the Eastern influence that my heritage gives me. Not only does it add flair to my outfits, but it shows the wonderful ways in which the women in my family have influenced my style.