Skip to main content

Month: September 2013

The Pussy Riot incarceration, repeated abuses of civil liberties and now damaging anti-gay laws

Russia has been in the news for all the wrong reasons over the past two years. The imprisonment of the feminist punk band Pussy Riot after an allegedly ‘blasphemous’ impromptu performance in a Moscow Cathedral in February 2012 caused an international outcry and widespread condemnation of Russia’s perceived political and religious intolerance. Subsequent tensions rose over the enduring Russian support for President Assad’s regime in Syria which hindered attempts by the UN to establish a consolidated international taskforce, and created a bureaucratic and political maelstrom within NATO that raged whilst thousands of Syrians were being shot, bombed and gassed. Most recently in June came the news that President Putin (himself recently re-elected after a dubiously ‘honest’ election) had passed a series of fundamentally anti-gay pieces of legislation; banning the ‘promotion’ of homosexuality and gay ‘propaganda’, crimes that have been made punishable with fines of $30,000, as well as up to fourteen days detainment and ensuing deportation for foreign visitors who breach the new codes.

The anti-gay legislation has caused many gay rights organisations and public figures to demand a boycott of the 2014 Winter Olympics that are due to be held in Sochi next year.  The call for a boycott intensified when the Russian Minister for Sport, Vitaly Mutko, made it clear that athletes will not be exempt from the ban and the safety of gay athletes could not be guaranteed. A petition asking the International Olympic Committee to relocate the games to Vancouver has gathered hundreds of thousands of signatures and a letter from Stephen Fry written to David Cameron and the International Olympic Committee explaining his opposition to the games went viral over Facebook within a few hours.

But what exactly is ‘gay propaganda’ and how can you legislate against it?  The law against “propaganda for non-traditional sexual relations” essentially bans not only the act of providing information about homosexuality to minors, but also speaking in defence of gay rights or comparing gay and heterosexual relationships as being of equal standing. The law was enacted in July when four Dutch filmmakers who had attended a conference on gay rights were held overnight and subsequently deported, for ‘exceeding the terms of their “cultural exchange” visas’. The law was passed through the Duma (the Russian Parliament) with only one abstention and the vitriol and fervour with which Putin explained how the new measures would cleanse Russia was sickening to observe.

As an international issue it initially seems unclear what impact Manchester can have in halting the tide of prejudice spewing from Russia. However this city is in fact in a unique position to apply pressure on a key city, as it is ‘twinned’ with St. Petersburg, formerly Leningrad, and Vladimir Putin’s hometown. During August city councillors used the link to condemn the new legislation with a letter to the governor of St. Petersburg, stating that that “inclusivity and tolerance” are essential for the “enrichment of a city”, although they stopped short of ‘severing ties’ with the city. But more needs to be done. The University of Manchester is an international institution of learning, ranked among the top universities in the world and attracts student from every corner of the globe. We should be the ones to begin a nationwide student campaign against Russia’s current crackdown on civil liberties and human rights.

Businesses in both Manchester and London that cater to the gay community have begun a boycott of Russian-manufactured spirits, one that should be joined by our Student Union. After all, if it can ban Robin Thicke for drearily singing a plagiarised song surrounded by semi-naked women, boycotting Russian vodka is a walk in the park. The university also contains a huge number of sporting organisations, how do they feel about the potential endangerment of athletes during the Winter Olympics as a result of their sexual orientation or simply their support for gay rights? Sport Against Sochi? It’s got a nice ring to it.

Because let’s get one thing straight, no pun intended;  this attack is not about being gay and whether you are one or not. It’s an attack on personal freedom, on liberty, on the right to love who you want regardless of their gender, race, religion, ethnicity, whatever. Personally I fear that the backlash against sexual freedom will, if it is not checked, expand and spread, infecting others with prejudice and hatred until even our government is once again referring to ‘deviants’, ‘perversions’ and advocating sexual correction. If you support the right to choose and to love freely, without fear of persecution, then I ask you to support a University boycott of Russian-manufactured spirits and a national boycott of the 2014 Winter Olympics. Oh, and you can send President Putin a dildo too, just for good measure.

Is Student activism dead?

YES

Joe Anthony

The process of taking me and my possessions to university for the first time had the inevitable effect of triggering within my father that most incorrigible of parental reflexes; nostaliga.
His stories of sit-ins and radical Trotskyists chain smoking roll-ups in the library café led me to believe that Fallowfield would be a thick den of heated debate and ideological discourse. Yet this turned out to be far from the truth. The reality is that most students are apathetic at best and actively opposed at worst to any sort of political involvement or display of passion. More often than not, a strongly held opinion receives a sneeringly cynical look of disdain.

Of course to say that student activism is dead is obviously a rather controversial and inflammatory statement. One could easily point to the scores of political societies that exist on the Union’s books as testament to student’s continued involvement in political issues. Yet my argument is not that there are no politically motivated students. The crux of the issue is that compared to the mass activism of previous generations, our student politics appears meek and disinterested. In comparison to the idealistic student protests of the 1960’s, the destruction of the Millbank building in 2010 seemed petty and selfish. Only when student’s self-interests were threatened could we be roused to action.

In this day and age political causes are only fleeting; the 24 hour news cycle washes away the issue before people can even respond it. We are barraged by news from hundreds of different sources as attention spans wane and distractions multiply. Therefore when an issue manages to break through the miasma and actually motivate people to action, it can be seen a significant success.

Last year we had just that, as the Kony 2012 campaign managed to grab the attention of young people everywhere. With its slick production, snazzy graphics and shameless tugging of the heart strings, the Kony campaign took a complex, multifaceted issue and reduced it to an easily digestible, simplistic narrative of good vs. evil. Throughout university people shared, ‘liked’ and retweeted the campaign without a shred of background knowledge of the actual issues, only to be bludgeoned with the dull reality that Kony was not in Uganda, had not been active for years and that the group behind the campaign were evangelical Christians who were pocketing millions of dollars out of the movement.

Kony 2012 is the textbook example of what political activism is for most students in recent years. Whether you call it ‘clicktivism’, ‘slacktivism’ or jumping on the band wagon; tweeting for a free Tibet or liking the ‘Save the NHS’ Facebook page cannot be viewed as serious political activism. Political involvment for students, once a bastion of university life, is now little more than a fringe activity. Therefore in relative terms, student activism is dead.

 

NO

Alice Rigby

Student activism reached its evident pinnacle in 2010 with nationwide tuition fee protests prompting hundreds of thousands of students to claim their own political voice. Those who argue that student activism is now dead routinely cite the apparent failure of these protests and others like them. However, that argument misses the point of student activism. Widespread student protests have become manifest since the 1960s when students established themselves as a distinct political demographic. By campaigning as a group on issues such as nuclear proliferation and the Vietnam War students demonstrated that they were an independent social entity with different opinions to other parts of the adult population.

Almost all of these trailblazing protests were unsuccessful in achieving the actual ends that they had envisioned. Yet they are burned onto the collective memory of the world. Clearly, this student activism had an impact. It is this form of activism that students today look to when they stand up to defend their own interests on social issues. Although this activism may not achieve any meaningful change, challenging the status quo and ensuring that a different voice is heard has its own merits.

For those who dismiss student activism, the fluctuating popularity of student protest is frustrating. It appears that this kind of activism is fashionable and that the majority of the participants’ involvement is encouraged by a momentary interest rather than a long-term concern. However, this should not diminish the value of student protest. At university, students are engaging with issues on an intellectual level for the first time. Without the prejudices of home distorting their personal perspective, teenagers can consider their own intuition on social issues and many form strong opinions on the basis of these. While the strength of these points of view is often only fleeting, they are the foundation on which that person’s political engagement will be based for the rest of their lives. Even if they only act on this conviction once, they are engaging with the political process and the world around them on a level some people never will. This gives student activism value in itself, regardless of results.

The most powerful response to those who dismiss student activism is the emotional reaction of those who, even momentarily, get involved in it. The power of uniting with peers and making your own opinion heard, for probably the first time, is something both irreplaceable and unforgettable. Whilst that power is still available students will continue to buy into it and student activism cannot be dead.

My Political Hero: Ian Hislop

The defining moment that transformed someone I merely admired into my political hero came on an episode of Have I Got News for You in 2011. The debate was about the Occupy movement, who were at the time residing outside St. Pauls Cathedral in London protesting economic inequality and corporate greed. Louise Mensch, chick-lit author and Thatcherite extraordinaire was holding forth on how the views of the protesters were worthless, if you considered their partiality for iPhones, coffee from Starbucks and relatively nice tents, to the staggered indication of the other panellists. “It’s just so obvious I can’t be bothered” laughed Ian Hislop. “You don’t have to want to return to a barter system in the stone-age to complain about the way the financial crisis affected large numbers of people in the world, even if you’re having a cup of coffee and you’ve got a tent!” Pure, incisive, brilliance. I was hooked.

From that moment on I became a Hislop disciple, subscribing to Private Eye and revelling in its fortnightly cutting satire with the same joy as if I were the one uncovering the stories of grubby backhanders and salacious deals made during off-the-record lunches. An Oxford graduate, Hislop is one of the ‘good ole Oxbridge lot’, managing to shake off the elitism and privilege that abounded at the time to pursue a career in laughter and the exposure of corruption for the public good.

His appointment as the editor of Private Eye was controversial to say the least, hired by the then editor Richard Ingrams straight out of university he became editor in 1986 following Ingrams departure, to the horror of Eye journalists Peter McKay and Nigel Dempster. Considering Hislop a young upstart, they attempted a revolt, with McKay taking out the majority shareholder, Peter Cook, to a boozy lunch in an effort to dissuade him from appointing Hislop. This backfired spectacularly as Cook announced that he was “welcome aboard”, and Hislop subsequently sacked both adversaries upon becoming editor.

Since that contentious beginning, he has been hailed as the most sued man in English legal history, due to the many extensive libel cases brought against the publication. When you think that he has only won two out of the myriad of lawsuits brought to the Eye, his determination to continue to uncover and print allegations about the most powerful and corrupt is superbly kamikaze.

Apart from his role as chief satirist, he has also deeply impressed me with his consistent political independence; critical of all the major parties for the last twenty years, he favours rationality over political rigmarole and has praised and demeaned each parties policies as he sees fit. Never in all his appearances as team captain on Have I Got News for You (every episode since 1990), has he ever laid down the gauntlet for a specific party or belief, allowing him to rip into each guest politician without being encumbered by a sense of loyalty. It’s wonderful to see someone be so political, but not politically-affiliated.

Bouncers: an unchecked menace or preservers of the peace?

Courage can evaporate from even the toughest bartender  when they find themselves informing a customer who looks like a more sinister version of Bane that he’s had a Jaeger-bomb too many. Clearly, trying to evict a rowdy, inebriated group of steroid junkies celebrating their friend’s prison release is a traumatising ordeal for any member of staff at your average bar. Yet all these stresses melt away when the establishment in question has doormen. Knowing that you have a blank cheque of physicality backing you up turns what would otherwise be a perilously stressful shift into a relatively harmonious experience.

In recent weeks, many people across the country will have felt a softening of their antagonism towards private security staff after watching Channel Four’s new documentary ‘Bouncers’, as the show strives to humanise the men and women who guard our Friday night. How can one help but like ‘Gordon’, our protagonist, as he soulfully reflects on the nuances of his profession. At one point we listen as he waxes lyrical about how security staff are ‘a counsellor, social worker, philosopher, friend, enemy, sometimes just a shoulder to cry on – it’s all rolled into one’.

Bouncers inhabit a strange legal and ethical grey area in modern life. They have a monopoly on violence within their immediate jurisdiction. Theirs is one of the only professions that are legally sanctioned to make physical contact with members of the public, yet they are far from police officers in both rights and responsibilities. To govern this precarious scenario the government made it obligatory for all bouncers to get an official licence for which training is required. Currently in the UK, police officers receive two years probationary training before being deployed to the streets. To become a bouncer on the other hand is a lot less strenuous. In some cases, if you have three days spare and £200, the licence is yours for three years – hardly a rigorous selection process.

The hegemonic position these men and women find themselves in can often lead to what a casual observer might call a ‘god-complex’. With a legal right to use physical force, full backing of both the police and club owners and no system of oversight, club bouncers represent a powerful force in the average person’s night out. Throw into the mix the fact that a bouncer can ruin someone’s plans on a whim, plans for which the customer may already have invested time and money and we find a situation where Britain’s doormen enjoy an almost overbearing level of power.

This may all seem banal and petty until the consequences of this system take on far graver dimensions. A Manchester court found last year that the death of Julian Webster, 24, outside a Deansgate nightclub, was the result of the effects of the bouncer’s ‘chin-lock restraint technique’ combined with pre-existing medical issues. The restraint technique was not in itself illegal and used after Mr Webster acted in a way that was ‘deemed to be threatening’, resulting in no prosecutions being sought.

It is therefore not difficult to understand why bouncers have such a low reputation among student circles. Many of those who do go out have a story of abuse suffered at the hands of doormen; be it racial slurs, sexual harassment and physical altercations. Of course clouded by the haze of alcohol, the customer’s judgement is rarely astute, their sensitivities at pubescent levels and their manners only vaguely present. So perhaps confrontation is merely the inevitable result when two groups with antithetical interests and objectives collide.

It is important to remember that it is the general public that have created the demand for bouncers. We as a society have adopted an incredibly unhealthy ‘weekend warrior’ culture. One only needs to walk through any student halls to hear cheers of ‘down it fresher’ echoing ominously off the walls. Fuelled by cheap drink offers and social acceptance of extreme drunkenness, the British now drink ‘as regularly as Mediterraneans but binge like Scandinavians’ according to The Economist, resulting in a perfect storm of inebriation. Our high streets have got to the point where Sunderland City Council employ bouncers to guard taxi queues, Southend are making club doormen mandatory whilst Stoke on Trent ordered an OAP charity event to employ door staff for its ‘Goldenhill Sing-Song’.  Many of these jobs were formally the reserve of the police, but come kicking out time the official keepers of the peace are stretched to the limit. So business owners, the council and the police all turn to private security to help keep a lid on the potential chaos that is the typical 2.am British high street.

This article should not be read as an assault on the private security profession. The overwhelming majority of bouncers across the country are invariably decent, law-abiding citizens who perform an incredibly demanding job under tough conditions. Though they may appear to be the supreme enforcer of arbitrary rules they provide an essential service, made inevitable by our actions. It is just a pity so many do their job with such disdain for the customer.

Armitage Centre renovated: ‘We wanted to create a world class venue.’

In 2002, the Armitage Centre was at the heart of the Commonwealth Games and it was seen as a highly valued asset for University of Manchester students. However, as the years went by, other facilities cropped up around the city to rival the Fallowfield sporting campus and students and the public alike became dissatisfied with the quality and range of facilities.

However, over the summer, the Armitage Centre underwent extensive redevelopment works and The Mancunion Sport section were invited for a behind-the-scenes tour of the improvements.

The main developments are in the sports hall and the gym, but there are also refurbished changing and showering facilities in the previouslyinadequate firs pavilion, while the addition of a synthetic cricket pitch will be warmly welcomed by Manchester cricketers. The sports hall has had an immaculate new floor fitted and the various marked courts are international regulation size for netball, badminton and basketball.

There are new badminton nets and the basketball and netball hoops have been replaced. Further to this, there is now enough room for a safe run-off area at the end of the courts. However, the prize new additions in the main hall are the two giant electronic scoreboards, which add a real air of professionalism to the venue. Also, the LED lights can be varied to fit appropriate sporting requirements, for instance, the glare can be reduced for racquet sports – an adduced luxury admittedly, but one that sets the centre apart from others in the country.

In the gym, the free-weights area has been re-arranged and slightly extended to accommodate the huge demand for those hoping to ‘pump iron’ in the evenings, while even the smallest details have been considered with new carpets throughout the majority of the centre. The modernised, welcoming entrance area now gives an excellent first impression, a must considering the centre is hoping to convince students to part with a chunk of their loan at the start of the year.

Assistant Manager Mike Kelly is delighted with the improvements: “We have acted on pretty much every suggestion the public and students have given us.

“We wanted to create a world class sporting venue for everyone as we firmly believe that sport has a huge part to play in the student experience.

“We also hope to encourage people to be active in body and mind, and we think these changes should encourage people to try new sports and enjoy themselves in a top facility.”

Manchester University sport is thriving on campus and in the 2012/13 season, the AU teams came ninth in the overall BUCS standings, ahead of some excellent sporting institutions including Cardiff Metropolitan University, Newcastle University and Christie Cup rivals the University of Leeds. Cracking the BUCS Top 10 list was a remarkable achievement which was greatly helped by teams such as the Women’s Rugby who won the BUCS Cup and excellent performances in Squash and Badminton. Sizable investment in Manchester sporting facilities is only going to help students go further and achieve their full potential in the purple colours of Manchester.

Mike also divulged that there are further exciting developments in the pipeline over the next few years however, for now, they remain a Mancunion Sport secret. Nonetheless, the Armitage Centre stands out as a venue of sporting excellence. Whether you are an international sportsman or a hapless five-a-side player, the facility has something for everyone in an ideal setting for our students.

Any feedback on the exciting new changes is warmly appreciated by the Armitage Centre, so please do post comments on their Facebook page and tweet the Mancunion Sport section @Mancunion_Sport to let us know what you think.

Frustrating start for Manchester’s men

Manchester men’s rugby union team preparation for the varsity took a hit with a defeat against the University of Nottingham at the Armitage centre.

The match started brightly for Manchester, crossing the try line after a grubber through from  Blyth, however, the ball was judged to have been knocked on over the line so the try was disallowed.

Despite Manchester seemingly controlling the early exchanges of the game, Nottingham went on to score against the run of play with a good line from their fly-half Williams splitting the Manchester defence making the score 5-0.

The match had a pre-season feel about it, and both teams will know that a more consistent performance in the backs will be needed if they hope to be successful this year.

Most of Manchester’s creativity in the midfield came through centre Coskie, but most periods of possession ended with the ball being lost through handling errors after a few phases. Nottingham had similar issues as they wasted a glorious two-on-one chance to take a commanding early lead.

Manchester were much stronger up front, they forced a turnover on their own try line and moments later a brilliant recovery tackle from Secker helped keep the score at bay.

Although there was a lack of match readiness in terms of skill, the intensity and effort of the players could not be doubted.

The commitment was epitomised through several strong runs from Manchester winger Akinloatn, as well as the incredible pace of the Nottingham full back Hemming.

A tit-for-tat first half climaxed five minutes before the interval when Manchester’s line was broken by another try against the run of play with flanker Sves crossing after a scrum close to the Manchester try line. The home side then managed to get on the score sheet just before half time. Manchester will hope to exploit their scrum dominance against MMU, as continued pressure finally paid off after destructive props Walden and Richardson caused the scrum to collapse, leaving the referee no choice but to award a penalty try.

The dramatic end to the first half saw Nottingham score again after strong play in the midfield left the half time scores at 17-5.

Nottingham extended their lead even further after the interval when full-back Hemming broke Manchester’s defence, running in unopposed to score under the posts, making the score 24-5.

This did create a resurgence amongst the Manchester ranks with great interplay between Blyth and Barrett forging a chance to score, but a lack of support left him isolated, before another Manchester break was turned over by Nottingham on the line. After a period of sustained pressure, centre Coskie managed to cross for Manchester after 15 minutes of the second half and a successful conversion made the score 24-12.

Nottingham continued their attempts to play everything through the middle but the physicality of Manchester saw their efforts go unrewarded. Then, in a mixture of skill, speed and a bit of luck as well, the ball broke to Nottingham substitute Foster, who picked and ran around the outside to score in the corner, leaving the score at 29-12.

With the match all but over, a small scrap emerged amongst a few players. Perhaps Manchester’s players felt small sparring session was needed before Wednesday’s game where tensions will be slightly higher than in this week’s match.

In many ways it was a bittersweet result for Manchester. They can be content in the fact that Nottingham will be playing in the league above them this season, whereas Wednesday’s Varsity opponents are a league below Manchester’s 2nd XV. However, Manchester will feel aggrieved by what was a flattering score line constructed by Manchester not taking their chances and a few defensive errors.

Elsewhere, the men’s 2nd XV played a thrilling match against Nottingham University 2nd XV coming from behind to win 14-12.

 

 

One dead, eight hospitalised at WHP opening weekend

One man died and eight more were hospitalised after taking drugs at the two opening nights of the Warehouse Project last week. A 32-year-old woman was also put into a medically-induced coma after falling ill at the club’s third event of the year on Friday 4th October.

The Warehouse Project are now working with the Home Office in setting up the first drug-testing initiative to feature in a UK club, as they revealed in a press conference on Wednesday 2nd October.

Nick Bonnie, 30, died in the early hours of Saturday morning after taking what police suspect was a bad batch of ‘ecstasy’, which he had purchased inside the venue. Four of his friends, who also took the drug inside the club, were admitted to hospital but all made full recoveries.

“He lost his life tragically, senselessly and needlessly on a lads’ weekend,” said his mother, Pauline Bonnie, a drugs rehabilitation worker. “We hope we may have gone some way in helping in the realisation that drinking and use of any illicit drugs are a killer with consequences that will devastate lives forever.

A 25-year-old man, who is suspected to have been dealing drugs inside the venue, was amongst those hospitalised following the Saturday event. After being detained by security and handed over to the police, his behaviour made them think that he had consumed the drugs in his possession, a total of 12 snap-bags. He remained in critical condition for days afterwards but has since recovered.

A 32-year-old woman was hospitalised after taking what is believed to have been a small amount of drugs with her friend at the Friday 04th October event. She fell into a coma however has since been making a recovery and although she remains in hospital, she is now sitting up and talking. Her friend remained unharmed.

The drugs which are believed to have killed Mr. Bonnie were in powder form and police are currently testing them to determine what they are.

Chief Superintendant Mark Roberts said, “After the tragic events of Friday night it almost defies belief that drug dealers would continue to target this venue and equally that people would risk their lives by taking drugs supplied by people who have no regard whatsoever for their well being and are purely interested in making money.

“The main point to get across is you do not know what is in the drugs you are taking and the potential effects they can have.”

The police have stated that they will be speaking to the management of the Warehouse Project to review security but it is unlikely that they will be reviewing the licence of the venue which Chief Superintendent Mark Roberts has referred to as “very well run”.

A statement from the Warehouse Project website said, “Everyone at The Warehouse Project are devastated about the news and our condolences are with his family.

“The Warehouse Project are assisting the police with their ongoing enquiries surrounding the circumstances of the man’s death. They have suggested that there may have been a bad batch of ecstasy in circulation as others who attended last night’s event are also unwell.

“The Warehouse Project operates a zero tolerance policy with regards to drugs. However if you have taken something and start to feel unwell please tell a member of staff.”

In a press conference last Wednesday, 2nd October, the Warehouse Project revealed that they are now working on groundbreaking drug-testing scheme in association with the Home Office and drugs charity The Loop.

Any drugs which are confiscated or voluntarily handed over will now be tested on-site to find what they consist of. Messages can then be sent out via social media to anyone who may be at the event to inform them if any drugs appear to be tainted.

Sacha Lord-Marchionne, a representative for the Warehouse Project, talked about the rising dangers of recreational club drugs.

“Drug use is of course widespread amongst young people in clubs, festivals and music events all over the country, every weekend. It is an issue we plan for carefully and in close collaboration with the police.”

“We put various measures in place at the events to both minimise the number of people using drugs at the venue and, as best we can, to look after those who have taken something and are feeling unwell.”

On question of having facilities where people could take their drugs to get them tested without fear of arrest he told the press, “We can’t legislate. The government has to legislate. Whether or not it is something we would support is up for debate because that would be condoning drug use which, of course, we don’t. ”

Mr. Lord-Marchionne insisted upon the importance of providing as safe a venue as possible for club-goers, “We have about 5,000 customers and if it isn’t happening they are not going to stay in, they are going to go elsewhere.

“Ninety nine per cent of other places don’t have private police on the door, don’t have drug sniffer dogs, don’t search everybody and don’t have paramedics on site.”

“My argument is this is a safer environment for customers to be in than the majority of other places.”

The club have said that they have since stepped up security, sniffer dogs and paramedics at the venue. They have also introduced an on-site doctor and are considering the implementation of more air-conditioning.

The war against free speech on campus

Over the past year student unions across the country have banned, boycotted or no platformed everything from the nation’s biggest newspaper to the most popular song of the summer. Against this backdrop of campus censorship, I spoke to US activist Greg Lukianoff, President of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE).

Lukianoff weighed in on the current controversy surrounding UK students’ unions – the banning of Robin Thicke’s Blurred Lines.

“Trying to eliminate a pop song because it might be interpreted as offensive is just entirely wrongheaded. It misunderstands the point of free speech and it misunderstands the point of art.

“If you want to know human nature, if you want to know something about the good and bad aspects of human nature, then look at art.”

Lukianoff sees banning Blurred Lines as not an isolated incident, but as part of a harmful trend within higher education that started in the 1980s.

“It is funny that there are these strains within society, and particularly within academia that wants to bleach out anything that can be construed as offensive. The University of Edinburgh Students’ Union probably thinks it is being extremely progressive and compassionate by engaging in censorship. But really to me, this seems like something straight out of the Victorian era.

“There are deep and beautiful works of art that are so much more offensive than Blurred Lines. If you’re going to be at all intellectually consistent, then you are going to have to get rid of an awful lot of the canon. If you’re going to say that anything that can be experienced as offensive should be banned. To me the banning of Blurred Lines shows we have reached an absurd level on college campuses.

“By banning a song that involves aggressiveness and sexuality you don’t address the problem. That’s one of the things that makes this so analogous to the Victorian age. There is an idea that you can get away from things that make you uncomfortable about human nature by sticking your head in the ground like an ostrich.

“In a pluralistic society, I think you start realising pretty quickly that free speech is a sensible rule. You suffer the consequences. People might not like you for what you say, but you cannot have a rule against saying it.

“It really got brought home to me in a very real way when I was an undergraduate in Washington DC. I was a student journalist, and if there’s one thing you learn as a student journalist even the best-intentioned regime for censorship will get turned against the press.”

History professor Alan Charles Kors and constitutional lawyer Harvey Silvergate founded FIRE in 1999. Its mission is to defend free speech, due process and freedom of conscience across America’s college campuses. They defend any student of any political persuasion, from socialist students in Alaska to college republicans in California. Yet, looking at their cases, it seems they defend one group more than the rest.

“People tend to censor opinions they disagree with and not so much opinions they agree with. Since universities tilt decidedly liberal, if you’re going to punish someone for what they say, for their ideas, it tends to be politically conservative ideas more often than not.”

While many of the students FIRE defends do lean to the right, you could hardly say the same about Lukianoff. The Wall Street Journal described him as, “a lifelong Democrat” and a “passionate believer” in gay marriage and abortion rights. But, many of the students FIRE defends do not seem political at all.

“There are cases where someone is criticising a parking garage or trying to talk about tuition on [their] campus. A lot of the censorship we see on campus is very old fashioned. Administrators do not like their policies and practices being criticised and they wildly overreact.”

Lukianoff points to a case at Oswego, which is part of the State University of New York system.

“Oswego was very proud of its hockey team. An Australian student journalist, as part of a class, wrote to other university hockey coaches to do a profile about the schools hockey coach. At the end of his letters to other coaches he put a line saying, ‘Don’t feel the need just to say nice things’. One of the hockey coaches to which he wrote, took this as so offensive to even imply that there might be something negative to say about our esteemed hockey coach, they brought him up on harassment charges.

“He was kicked off campus, treated as a threat to the lives to the students of Oswego, even though nobody really thought he was.

“It was once again a case where because we took it public and because it got picked up by the website Gawker, we were able to get the university to back down. But it was amazing that it would even occur to universities to overreact to speech this tame.“

FIRE’s strategy to defend free speech is to use the threat of publicity. They send a letter to universities telling them to “get their act together” and if they fail to respond appropriately FIRE send out a press release.

“The main tool that we have is that universities can’t defend in public what they do in private. For example, there was a student in Indiana, who got in trouble for reading a book called Notre Dame versus the Klan, it was about the defeat of the Ku Klux Klan when they marched on Notre Dame in 1924. Because the book, which was an anti-Klan book, had a picture of a Klan rally on the cover he was found guilty of racial harassment without so much as a hearing.

“We follow the typical procedure in these cases – we send a letter to the university telling them to get their act together, and then if they don’t come to their senses we do a press release. Nine times out of ten, the press release does it, sometimes just the letter is enough.”

When the press release is unsuccessful FIRE defends students in the courts, in which they have been incredibly successful, winning every single challenge they have ever made against speech codes.

When FIRE does correct a university either through publicity or the courts, the institution rarely apologises for the harm they have done.

“Universities generally begrudgingly accept, they very rarely apologise for abusing student rights. It’s not totally clear that some of them even learn a lesson from it, except that you get in trouble with the US public if you violate free speech rules on what is supposed to be the greatest forum for the exchange of ideas in our country, US higher education.”

Questions are raised as to whether students’ unions are in touch with the average student’s opinion.

“When student governments make these kinds of decisions they are showing that they are very much not in touch with your average student.

“If these ideas were put to a vote they would be, I hope, deemed absurd by most students. But when you put them in the voice of authority, people don’t want to question when people seem to be pure of heart or have good motives. But here’s the problem, every movement in the history of censorship believed at some level it was saving the world. Victorians believed they were saving their country from eternal damnation. During the red scares, we believed we were saving ourselves from nuclear annihilation on one hand and Communist infiltration on the other. When people were going after abolitionist speech, their strongest argument was that this would lead to a civil war.

“That’s not a good argument particularly because those intentions, the way they usually manifest is so amorphous that it turns into something that can justify any inclination people in power want. That’s why you need to have, ironically, very clear lines. You need to say art can be expressive, art can be offensive, art can be challenging, and indeed probably it should be. As soon as you make the ability to express yourself contingent on the feelings of the listener, you open the possibility of silencing literally everyone.”

Lukianoff discussed the recent controversy with Manchester Debating Union’s debate on pornography coming up against censorship from the Union. Flyers featuring a provocative image of the porn star Sasha Grey were banned from Union property. One of the speakers, Guardian columnist Julie Bindel, was forced to drop out after receiving rape and death threats from people who felt her presence a threat to their safety.

Lukianoff believes using safety to justify restrictions on speech is dangerous.

“I think that sexual minorities, and people who otherwise benefit from the rights of individuality and the rights of free speech should be very careful with how they use terms like safety. I think that it’s really unfortunate that this is happening over higher education.

“Safety is supposed to mean that you are in physical danger, but it’s being used as a term that means you don’t want to be around people who anger you, who offend you, who deeply offend you. You don’t need a principle like freedom of speech to protect mainstream popular thought or opinion. You need it specifically to protect the kind of speech that might offend or might disturb.”

Lukianoff sees a cry wolf aspect to the invocation of safety.

“If you say you are in physical danger, when you just despise what someone has to say about you. When you are actually in physical danger people might think you mean that you’re just uncomfortable.

“I think that students should be very concerned by the way in which safety and the safe learning environment has been expanded to mean something as much as a right not to be offended.

“The students who objected to Bindel’s column benefit from free speech. They can and should protest the speaker. They absolutely have the right to do that. But when it turns into the idea that because someone’s speech was so fundamentally objectionable that this gives them the right to stop them speaking, then they are misunderstanding some of the fundamentals of the concept. By invoking safety in that case, they are pulling out a very big weapon that potentially in the long run could censor them and a lot of ideas that they believe in that are controversial.”

When the Students’ Union Exec banned the MDU’s flyers it was on the grounds they violated the Union’s policy of Zero Tolerance of Sexual Harassment. The Exec deemed the image objectifying because it was “a highly sexualised image of a woman in very little clothing.”

In his book Unlearning Liberty:  Campus censorship and the end of American debate, Lukianoff argues harassment codes have been misinterpreted and are threatening free speech.

“The student at SUNY Oswego was brought up on harassment. The student who was punished for publicly reading a book about the Klan was found guilty of racial harassment.

“The abuse of harassment codes on college campuses is real and it makes people uncomfortable because they say ‘but people shouldn’t be racially and sexually harassed!’ We all agree that people should not be racially and sexually harassed. But racial and sexual harassment rules were never meant to restrict free speech.

“The problem is because there is such a strong belief in the rightness of preventing harassment…administrators are allowed to get away with the broadest possible interpretation of harassment, that effectively turns into the right not to be offended.”

The NUS has a No Platform policy, which prevents controversial speakers who hold far-right racist views from speaking. Speakers banned under the No Platform policy include Nick Griffin MEP, EDL Leader Tommy Robinson and Respect party leader George Galloway MP. Lukianoff added, that he believes such policies end up hurting the very students they aim to protect.

“Even if you hear the voice of ignorance, it helps you understand why you believe what you believe in the first place. If you have a set of beliefs that have never been challenged, there’s a tendency to not know why you had those beliefs in the first place. Holding your beliefs in the same way, in the same way people hold political prejudices means you are very good at explaining what they think on every single political issue. But, you are very poor at explaining why.

“Being offended is what happens when you have your deepest beliefs challenged, if you make it through four years of university without having your deepest beliefs challenged, you should ask for your money back.

“You can’t beat racism and discrimination by changing the law. You put some people into the position where it’s actually is easier to be racist because they don’t have to defend their ideas in the first place. They can just whisper the idea in someone’s ear and spread hateful opinions.”

Lukianoff talks of a further problem that restrictions on free speech contribute towards a climate of racial paranoia.

“John L Jackson, an African-American scholar at University of Pennsylvania, explains in his book Racial Paranoia that you can actually make people much more paranoid about the world they live in. You can have people believe that society is so savage, so hostile, so offensive, that the only thing that’s going to make this bearable for anyone to live in this society is the coercion of the law.

“If you want to know what the world actually looks like you have to hear what people think.

“There’s a value in knowing what people think, that if someone is racist or is hateful, the best thing they can do for you is to let you know that. If there’s a room of 24 people, and three are horrible Nazis it’s probably best that I know that.”

Lukianoff argues that the best action a student can take to fight censorship is to raise awareness about violations of free speech.

“I think in Britain there has to be a return to the idea of free speech being essential, even when it means hearing things that can potentially be hurtful. One thing that people have lost, particularly on campuses, is that at the core of freedom of speech is a deep-seated humility.

“We could all benefit by knowing a little bit more about what the other thinks, and approaching things with a little more humility about what we do, and what we can know. That’s the principle behind tolerance.

“You can’t predict what individual speech might incite someone to good action, incite someone to deep thought. The humility of a pluralistic system of free speech is something those who have a soft spot for censorship would do well to remember. “

Horoscopes with Mystic Moya

LIBRA (24 SEPTEMBER – 23 OCTOBER)

Your determination to give everything your all is admirable, but be careful you don’t burn yourself out. Going out four nights a week, making it to every lecture, getting involved with extracurricular activities and keeping in touch with friends and family are all important, but so is taking time for yourself. Downtime isn’t a luxury – it’s a necessity.

SCORPIO (24 OCTOBER – 22 NOVEMBER)

Scorpios are known for being feisty, but not everyone has your tough shell. Be careful with your words this week. There’s a time and a place for blunt honesty, and it’s not all day, every day. You don’t have to be insincere, just mindful of other people’s feelings.

SAGITTARIUS (23 NOVEMBER – 21 DECEMBER)

You’ve been a little reckless with your spending recently, but – sadly – this can’t go on forever. Sit down, check your bank balance, and figure out how much money you’ve actually got to last you until January. It might be terrifying. It might make you feel physically sick. Console yourself with the knowledge that you’re not one Sagittarius known to Mystic Moya, who has blown £900 since Freshers. Unless you are that certain Sagittarius, in which case, you’re an idiot.

CAPRICORN (22 DECEMBER – 20 JANUARY)

When it comes to matters of the heart, you are level-headed to the point of cynicism: no silly crushes or love-at-first-sight for you. You’ve convinced yourself that you’re perfectly happy plodding along with your mates, and your work, and your cats. But are you really? It’s OK to want to believe in the idea of love – even if you struggle with it sometimes.

AQUARIUS (21 JANUARY – 19 FEBRUARY)

There’s so much else going on that work can sometimes end up last on your list of priorities. This week, force yourself to be productive. Get out of bed before 10am, do your reading before your seminars, stick to appointments, stop spending hours trawling Facebook and, you know, generally sort your life out. You’ll be surprised at how good it feels.

PISCES (20 FEBRUARY – 20 MARCH)

Someone has been keeping you guessing for a while as to how they actually feel about you. And how does this make you feel? Pretty rubbish, actually. Be brave and ask them where they stand. Whatever answer you get, it’ll be a weight off your shoulders.

ARIES (21 MARCH – 20 APRIL)

You’re always the one people go to for advice and pep talks, but you’re not so good at being open yourself. Your ability to keep smiling is admirable, but it can mean people forget that you might be struggling with stuff too. Next time a friend asks you how you are, be honest with them. You don’t always have to be the strong one.

TAURUS (21 APRIL – 21 MAY)

“I was wasted” is a reasonable excuse for most things, but it might be worth having a think about why certain issues keep coming up when you’re drunk. If you’re getting upset about the same thing every time you go out, then it’s not the alcohol that’s the problem. Addressing stuff in the cold, sober light of day can be scary, but it’s worth it in the long run.

GEMINI (22 MAY – 21 JUNE)

You say indecisive, we say schizophrenic: whatever, Geminis are known for finding it difficult to make up their minds. You’re unsure about your feelings for a certain friend, but it’s not fair to drag them along for the ride while you figure things out. If you like them, go for it – but if you just like the attention, it’s time to bow out gracefully.

CANCER (22 JUNE – 22 JULY)

It’s easy to get stuck in a rut, whether you’re spending all your time with your boyfriend or girlfriend, eating the same thing every night, not bothering to try and meet new people or declining offers of nights out because you want to watch Breaking Bad. This week, make a conscious effort to try new things.

LEO (23 JULY – 22 AUGUST)

You’ve had a big knock lately, and even the prospect of getting out of bed to drag yourself to a lecture can sometimes feel like TOO. BLOODY. MUCH. But nothing was ever improved by lying in a dark room listening to Bon Iver, except maybe a hangover. Get up, have a shower, and don’t worry about burdening your friends – that’s what they’re there for.

VIRGO (23 AUGUST – 23 SEPTEMBER)

Confident as you are, you still sometimes feel awkward in new situations. Remember that everyone else, even those who seem totally cool and aloof, are probably feeling just as nervous as you. “Fake it ‘til you make it” is a cliche because it’s true. Slap on a smile and introduce yourself to people; it’ll work better than you think.

Top 5: One-Eyed Movie Characters

Having eyes is pretty mainstream.  This optically challenged crew is made up of the most fearsome individuals in cinematic history and their monovision actually works in their favour, making them even more memorable.  They are also infinitely cooler than those bloody one-ears.

5. One Eye – Valhalla Rising

Why is he called One Eye you ask? Well, that would be because he only has one eye.  This is no hindrance to the mute demi-god warrior of Winding Refn’s 2009 masterpiece Valhalla Rising. Partial to a spot of disembowelment or a nice, refreshing hallucinogenic beverage.

4. Elle Driver aka California Mountain Snake – Kill Bill

Femme Fatale nemesis of The Bride in Tarantino’s superb martial arts double bill. Weaknesses: Low ceilings, lampshades to the face, Kung Fu moves of the eye removing variety.

3. Sauron/The Great Eye – The Lord of the Rings

Omniscient fireball perched atop the dark tower of Barad-Dur. Hell bent on finding the One Ring (he spends over 9 hours doing this, though it’s more like 12 if you have the special edition DVDs), he has serious anger issues which he can’t seem to keep a lid on…

2. Number Two – Austin Powers

Gambling addict with built in laser vision, cleverly concealed behind his devilish eye patch. Unless you like to live dangerously, playing Blackjack with this cyborg swindler is not advised.

1. Cyclops – The 7th Voyage of Sinbad

The late, great animator Ray Harryhausen brings the stop motion beastie to glorious life in this 1958 classic. Although Homer purists may begrudge the theft of the man eating monster from The Odyssey, it’s still fun to watch him battle a dragon and crush hapless sailors with a tree trunk.

Contrary Corner: Julia Roberts – more than just a pretty woman

There are few things more pathetic than getting a laugh at the expense of an easy target. This seems to be Julia Roberts 21st century occupation, and I don’t like it at all. Sure, she might not be the best actress of all time. She’s no de Niro, no Hanks, no Bullock, but she does not deserve the abuse she gets. You can’t watch an episode of Family Guy without a Julia Roberts joke, but why? Is it her overly large facial features? Her lack of creative integrity? Her repetitive character choices? Perhaps. Nevertheless, I cannot accept that she is a fundamentally bad actress or crime against the film industry.

She’s made some of the most popular films of the last 30 years. Maybe they haven’t all been controversial statements about the human condition, but they’ve been enjoyed by millions all around the world. Pretty Woman? Gave hope to prostitutes everywhere that one day, just maybe, their Richard Gere would come and save them. Erin Brockovich? Well that’s just female empowerment right there. She’s starred in some of the greatest romantic comedies ever. My Best Friend’s Wedding is possibly one of the best wedding-centric movies, apart from another Roberts great, Runaway Bride. Many criticise her performance in homegrown Notting Hill, but she plays the perfect straight talker to Hugh Grant’s standard bumbler.

Her more gripping roles in movies like Sleeping With the Enemy and John Grisham’s Pelican Brief show her to be not only legitimate and passable, but actually quite good. Don’t get me wrong, I know she has her faults. Eat Pray Love was a disappointment to say the least. Larry Crowne, even more so. Everyone makes mistakes. She’s had far less exposure of personal problems than most actors these days, and always keeps her opinions on others to herself. She’s a respectable woman with moderate talent, and in no way deserving of the abuse she gets.

After all, shes just a girl, standing in front of a movie going population, asking you to love her. And if you still refuse? Big mistake. Huge.

From the Vault: The Beatles – Abbey Road

Released September 1969.

Apple Records.

Few bands have emulated the success of The Beatles and while everyone has their favourite album, Abbey Road is surely up there at the band’s zenith. Their penultimate studio album was ranked the 14th greatest album of all time by Rolling Stone and has an iconic place in both British culture and music history.

The album features a contrast of sounds, arguably tying together a decade’s worth of work as the Beatles would be no more by the following year. Classic love-based tracks are featured such as ‘Oh! Darling’, while more psychedelic songs appeared in the form of ‘Because’ and ‘I Want You (She’s So Heavy)’. The opening track ‘Come Together’ is one of the finest late gifts The Beatles would leave behind. A mellow McCartney bass line underpinned the classic, as Lennon sang the lyrics in staccato style. Singing ‘One thing I can tell you is you’ve got to be free’, it’s almost as if they knew the infamous Sixties, and everything that came with the period, were over. A fine guitar solo is featured midway through the song, reflective of The Beatles at their best and showing they were by no means out of ideas come this album.

Contrary to the Lennon/McCartney focus, Harrison was also a vital part of The Beatles and the songs he wrote were among their best (yes he was my favourite Beatle). ‘Something’ and ‘Here Comes the Sun’ show his musical ability could align with the over spoken front duo. ‘Something’ holds true to the classic love ballads that have won over so many, while ‘Here Comes the Sun’ has a certain feel good factor. As the acoustic guitar plays and the lyrics begin, one knows the winter is well and truly gone. While it would be unfair not to mention Ringo’s ‘Octopus’s Garden’, his features have always seemed like a frivolous bonus track to each album, despite holding a questionably enjoyable appeal.

Abbey Road remains an iconic album and image today, with the artwork displaying the quartet on the zebra crossing outside EMI studios being a famous staple of popular culture. At the very least Abbey Road holds a sentimental value, as the Beatles wound down their unrivalled career. At its best, it represented a decade of musicianship whose image and sound would be recognised to this day.

Free textbooks for freshers

The days of dog-eared textbooks arriving from Amazon marketplace may soon be a thing of the past, with the first ‘#TextbookRescue’ event in Freshers’ Week.

Hundreds of first year students turned up to the giveaway at libraries across campus on the morning of Wednesday September 18 to grab free books for their courses.

‘#TextbookRescue’ is based on an idea submitted to the Eureka! Library Innovation Challenge by a student at the University, who wanted to leave old textbooks behind instead of taking them home when they graduated.

More than a thousand ‘high quality’ textbooks were donated by generous graduates to drop-off points in University libraries over the summer.

The scheme has been lauded by library staff as a “great success”.

Lisa Donnelly, Market Research and Marketing Officer, said “all of us here at the Library are really happy to have had the opportunity to complete such an exciting project driven by students, for students.

“We hope to continue Textbook Rescue and develop even more student-led innovation in the years to come”.

The event also proved successful at further integrating the library into Welcome Week events.

““It feels like the library is much more a part of welcome week than in past years”, said Esther Miller, Library Customer Services Co-ordinator. “The academic staff have also been impressed with the scheme.”

Gary Penrice, Customer Services Co-ordinator, said, “It’s been a real success here – attracting lots of people into the library so that we can say hello and introduce ourselves.”

The scheme will return in time for Welcome Week next year, with the organisers hoping to make the event “even bigger and better”.

Hearing voices potentially helpful?

University scientists are planning to investigate the possibility hearing voices may help people to achieve life goals.

Dr. Filippo Varese and Dr. Sara Tai, from the University’s School of Psychological Sciences, are conducting the study. They are looking for volunteers from Greater Manchester with experience hearing voices, whether this experience is positive, negative or neutral.

According to earlier studies, between 2-3% of the general population have reported hearing voices, which gives hope that there may be a wide pool of potential volunteers for the study.

This study is leading on from earlier research which suggests that, rather than being a sign of mental illness or necessarily distressing, hearing voices may in fact have the potential to enrich the lives of those who experience them.

“Historically, we know there have been some very successful people who were reported to hear voices – a separate voice outside their head – including scientists, artists and spiritual leaders.” said Dr. Varese, “In Western society, hearing voices have often been labelled as symptoms of something abnormal, but they are considered a valuable experience in other cultures – such as a sign of contact with the spiritual world.

“People are more likely to hear voices after a trauma or particularly stressful period of their life, such as being abused or experiencing bereavement. But, even after such traumas, the voices that people hear are not always distressing. Recent research tells us that even in Western societies many people consider their voices to be a positive part of their lives.”

The team are looking for volunteers aged 16 and over who have been hearing voices for six months or longer.
Volunteers will be asked to complete a questionnaire about their experiences, as well as take part in a one-off, private interview which will be carried out at the University. Travel expenses will be reimbursed.

Anyone interested in taking part in the study can call 07583 608 167 or email: [email protected].

For more information about the study visit: www.manchester.ac.uk/psych-sci/hearing-voices

MyManchester crash causes chaos

Students were left flustered last Monday after the Manchester Student Portal crashed, causing confusion to thousands as they began their first day of lectures.

After some problems were reported on Friday 22nd, the MyManchester system crashed during the following Monday morning and remained inaccessible to students for the rest of the day.

Students were left unable to access Blackboard or their university emails. Although a link was later added to the homepage of MyManchester, there were numerous reports that despite multiple attempts, logging on to university email accounts remained impossible.

Third year PPE student Connie Kelly was furious, “It was very irritating. I couldn’t find out what lectures I had on Tuesday until 11pm the night before.”

To add to the problems, certain students from Manchester Business School and the School of Arts, Languages and Culture found that, due to a change in how timetables are accessed, they were unable to find the locations for their lectures or seminars.

Third year English Literature student Jaisal Marmion told us that after only half of his group showed up to their introductory seminar, the tutor, aware that many students were facing problems accessing their timetables, cut the three hour class short after one hour.

Although a representative from ALC explained that the change in how timetables are accessed was detailed in the University’s Essential Guide, many students felt this change was poorly advertised.

Third Year English Literature student Jessica Wyer said, “I had no idea the way timetables were to be accessed had changed, I assumed the reason why we had no class locations was because the department had been lazy in updating them on the system as they have been before.

I check my university email account regularly and hadn’t received any information about changes to accessing the timetable so did not assume that was the cause of the problem.

Then I couldn’t even rectify the situation by finding out where my classes were because even though I had emailed my lecturer to find out, I could not log into MyManchester to see the reply when the system crashed.

I had to rely on other students that had just happened to see the locations up on a piece of paper in Samuel Alexander, but even then we were sent no email saying that was where you could find the locations, until it was too late that is.

The chaos was preventable, all the university had to do was just send a pre-emptive email before term started about the new way of accessing the timetable.”

Third year Management student Rohan Rana told us “’I didn’t know that the way we access our timetables had changed. I don’t feel like anyone really told us about it.”

Economics student Will Mcgregor ended up missing a lecture due to technical issues. He stated, “I’ve always checked my timetable through Student system but apparently now we’re supposed to check using Blackboard. The timetable on student system was still saying that all my room locations were TBA. The people running my course sent out an email an hour before my lecture but I didn’t get it.”

When asked for comment, a representative for the University told The Mancunion, “Over recent days, there have been some technical issues preventing users from accessing some of their University IT services – access has now been restored to all services.”

MMU Didsbury campus makes way for residential homes

Manchester Metropolitan University has put forward plans to sell off its Didsbury campus and make way for a new Council led development which will include a primary school and executive housing.

The 17 acre estate includes one Grade II listed property and a number of Grade II listed buildings. Although, these will not be touched and the focus will be on new homes in the area and the preservation on a historic playing field which also resides on the campus.

A report is being put forward to the City Council Executive, which if approved will allow a public consultation in the Autumn.

This joint venture between MMU and Manchester City Council is part of the City Councils residential growth prospectus. This sets out the city’s requirement for housing of mixed cost, size and tenure in areas all around the city.

Expanding residential homes in the area will also, within time, increase the demand for school places in the Didsbury area. Which is why prospectus plans have also been put forward to build a primary school on the site.

Cllr Richard Leese, Leader of the Manchester City Council, said, “Manchester’s success means we desperately need thousands of new homes of every type and size and we are working with a variety of partners to develop suitable sites across the city”.

Professor John Brooks, Vice-Chancellor of Manchester Metropolitan University said: “Our move to new facilities at Birley Fields in Hulme in September 2014 brings down the curtain on our long-association with Didsbury but opens up new opportunities for the city and the community in the shape of this draft framework.”

It can be seen that the Council and MMU have been working effectively together to help free up assets of the University which will benefit both parties in the relationship, whilst always working towards the residential growth prospectus of the city.

Opinion: Scuba vs. Zomby

Scuba is insufferable, that’s well known; it’s even been covered in The Mancunion before. However, this is often acknowledged in conjunction with labelling Zomby in the same way, unfairly in my view. The latest twitter spat between the two resulted in Zomby being unceremoniously scrubbed from the bill of WHP’s Modeselektion night, allegedly on Scuba’s demand. This left many ticket holders greatly disappointed at being deprived of a rare chance to see the elusive Zomby. The recent addition of fellow masked DJ, but purveyor of mediocrity, SBTRKT to the line up only heightened the devastated pangs at what might have been. Others favour Scuba. I fall firmly on the side of Zomby and I offer this compare and contrast to explain why you should too.

Zomby is a talented and versatile producer, adept at creating tunes across many genres from jungle to UKGarage.  Scuba has deteriorated from making credible techno music to filling his sets with Ibiza trance anthems that I bet the ‘bros’ at the main stage of Creamfields really love. Sure this criticism is just personal preference and I‘m sure I appear snobby, but hey this is my opinion piece.

Musical differences is not the end of it. Both DJs are frequent twitter users and their conduct on the social network has been a decisive factor in creating their love/hate status. In my view, Zomby comes across as a loveable dick. Sure he goes off on arbitrary rants at people but everything he says is so wrapped up in hyperbole and ridiculousness that I can’t believe anyone takes it seriously. He also provides excellent cultural commentary like “His fade is terrible”, said of Kim Jong-Un, and tackles social injustice: “superman was arrogant..he chose to pick who to save at will usually white americans ..racist and also elitist”. Scuba on the other hand exudes smugness with every loathsome tweet he spews. These range from mocking the suffering of the recently deceased, “Whoever at Apple made the decision to use .m4a as the itunes audio format should be subjected to a long and painful death. Actually that’s probably already happened hasn’t it?”, to plain self-infatuation which the fulfilled promise of a naked photo at 40,000 followers demonstrated.

Perhaps Scuba is also playing a character, surely no one could genuinely be so arrogant? Wrong. This is evidenced by the most damning factor of all, he’s a misogynist. This was proven by his public agreement with the statement “Feminism is not so much an ideology as a minority of women attempting to assert control on other women”. Only a sexist would twist the most recognised female empowerment beliefs into anti-feminist bile. I’ve strayed from opinion to objectiveness here, right?  Meanwhile, Zomby has stated his political views as “not in protest against anything but shit music and shit clothes..and bad fades” – a noble pursuit, I’m sure you agree.

So if you’re at Modeselektion, make sure you’re on the barrier during Scuba’s set, wearing a V for Vendetta mask and shouting abuse. #TeamZomby.

Should we hate those ‘Blurred Lines’?

Robin Thicke’s controversial ‘Blurred Lines’ has been boycotted by six students’ unions across the UK.

The student’s unions of Leeds, Edinburgh, Sheffield Hallam, Derby, Kingston and West Scotland have all removed the song from the playlists within union buildings.

Alice Smart, from Leeds Students’ Union, told The Independent that the decision had been made because the song “undermines and degrades women.”

Kirsty Haigh from Edinburgh Students’ Union said that they have “a policy on zero tolerance towards sexual harassment, a policy to end lad culture on campus and a safe space policy – all of which this song violates.”

The National Union of Students has come out in support of the ban, calling ‘Blurred Lines’ “deeply offensive and dangerous” and encouraging other students’ unions to join the boycott of the song.

‘Blurred Lines’, which includes lyrics such as “I’ll give you something big enough to tear your ass in two”, “do it like it hurt” and “he was too square for you / he don’t smack that ass and pull your hair like that” has sparked condemnation from women’s groups and rape charities across the world.

It has also become the fastest selling digital song in history, achieving Number One in 14 countries including the UK.

In an interview with GQ magazine, Robin Thicke said that the song originated from him and Pharrell Williams “Acting like we were two old men on a porch hollering at girls like, “Hey, where you going, girl? Come over here!””.

However, he defended his song from its criticism, saying: “All three of us are happily married with children, we were like, “We’re the perfect guys to make fun of this.”

“People say, “Hey, do you think this is degrading to women?” I’m like, “Of course it is. What a pleasure it is to degrade a woman. I’ve never gotten to do that before. I’ve always respected women.”

“So we just wanted to turn it over on its head and make people go, “Women and their bodies are beautiful. Men are always gonna want to follow them around.””

Helen McCarthy, a third year English Literature student, told The Mancunion: “I think people generally assume that a catchy chart-topper is going to be perfectly innocent, but ‘Blurred Lines’ is actually a really abhorrent song.

“Lyrics like “I know you want it” and “The way you grab me, just wanna get nasty” are going to perpetuate this idea that women should always be up for sex, and be making themselves readily available for sex.

“Anyone who thinks ‘Just don’t listen to it then’ is the answer, has clearly not experienced the kind of harassment that the song endorses.

She added: “I think the union should follow suit and ban it, and not doing so is just damn hypocritical.

“They want the union to be a safe place for people of all genders, races, religions and sexualities, and playing a song that endorses rape and sexual harassment is not going to aid that cause.”

However, Brogan Thompson, a third year Criminology Student, said: “I don’t think it should be banned as it’s only a song, and you can’t blame a song for someone’s actions.

“You can’t put the blame on just one pop song, especially when there are lots of other songs and films that are probably worse than this.”

Chloe Barr, also a third year studying Environmental Management, agreed: “It’s just a song and its lyrics shouldn’t be taken too seriously.”

Tabz O’Brien Butcher, Women’s Officer, said to The Mancunion: “Manchester Students’ Union has not currently banned ‘Blurred Lines’. However, if women students wish to make this change in their Union then as Women’s Officer I am there to support them to explore how they might take this idea forward.

“Much popular music is derogatory and undermining to women, and Blurred Lines is no exception.

“However the scale and depth of feeling about this particular song from a wide range of students across the country can’t be ignored and it’s important that Students’ Unions continue to listen and respond to students’ experiences to make sure that student spaces are as safe and inclusive as possible.

She added: “Robin Thicke made a statement saying it was ‘a pleasure to degrade a woman’. I think we need to do more than banning a single song.”

Helen Isserlis talks teenage angst, Spike Milligan and e-cigarettes

Every so often I read something that reaches out and grabs me by the throat. Helen Isserlis’ poetry did just that. It is honest and pared-down, with dark undertones. And she is only 28.

Isserlis has just completed an MA in Creative Writing at the University of Manchester. Her work is featured in The Manchester Anthology, a collection of poems, short stories and novel extracts published by the University’s Centre for New Writing. When I met her at Kro Bar on Oxford Road, she had recently handed in her dissertation.

She started writing poetry in her mid teens, mainly as a form of escape. “I found it very cathartic,” she says. Although her poems are no longer prompted by teenage angst, her own feelings and life experiences still play an integral role in her work. Isserlis’ poems are autobiographical, “but only to an extent,” she hastens to add.

We get to talking about her influences. Isserlis cites Spike Milligan, whom she has been reading since she was a child. “I love everything from his silly stuff to his really serious stuff,” she says. Like her, Milligan struggled with mental illness. He wrote frankly about his battle with depression – a source of comfort for Isserlis. But her main influences are songwriters: Leonard Cohen, Fairport Convention and Neil Young, among others. “I saw Neil Young live this year,” she tells me, “he did a 25-minute rendition of ‘Like a Hurricane’ in the middle of a thunder storm.” “Neil Young pursued his values and his art to the point where he alienated a lot of people,” she muses. I ask her if she thinks of herself like that. “No,” she answers, “I put people first.”

Although Isserlis had been writing poetry for several years, it did not immediately occur to her to study it. She did her undergraduate degree in English and Philosophy at the University of Liverpool, then went to Nottingham to study Old English, but dropped out. This was a particularly difficult period. “I really hit rock bottom,” she says. “So,” she continues, “I thought ‘Why not do something that I really enjoy?’ ” She applied to study Creative Writing at the University of Manchester and, to her surprise, got in. “I was over the moon,” she says.

It is often said that the only way to get better at writing is to write. What is the advantage of actually studying Creative Writing, I ask. “It helps with the discipline,” she answers.

A lot of writers talk about writing being a nine to five job. I ask her if she is that strict with her own writing. “Not at all,” she laughs. “When I haven’t got inspiration, it’s like pulling teeth.”

Isserlis’ writing process is rather more impulsive. “I have an idea and I get to the point where I can’t resist it,” she explains. Usually this happens just as she is about to go sleep. “I write in bed a lot,” she confesses.

Though she has finished her degree, Isserlis tells me that she plans to stay in Manchester. “I have a pretty permanent apartment here,” she says.

Some say that Manchester is undergoing something of a literary renaissance at the moment, and I ask Isserlis if she agrees. “I think that, culturally, Manchester is ready,” she replies. She lists the written word events taking place across the city and tells me that she herself is planning to launch a poetry night at Fallow Café (formerly Trof Fallowfield). I am thrilled by this piece of information and will be sure to keep readers abreast of any further developments.

As we finish our coffees, I ask Isserlis if she plans to pursue a career in poetry. She shrugs. “There’s no money in it – you either do it for the fame or for the passion,” she answers. The advances on poetry books are very low, she tells me, and she often wonders if she is good enough. “But I’ll give it a go,” she says.

In the meantime, she will do interviews for coffee, she jokes, producing an e-cigarette and taking a drag. I can’t help but laugh. “You can charge it on your laptop,” she informs me, laughing too.

Pangaea: an unexpected success

Pangaea is traditionally the glorious finish to a hideous exam period, and has always been one of the most successful strings to the SU’s bow. You don’t have to know or care about university politics to want to put on a stupid costume, get really drunk and dance to Riot Jazz after being shut in the library for weeks. In many ways, then, the SU’s decision to stage the event at the end of this year’s Freshers’ Week wasn’t surprising. It’s as near to a guaranteed success as a student night can be, and the SU could do with a Freshers’ success, particularly after the disaster of last year. (The M13 Festival had to be cancelled at the last minute due to lack of interest. Ouch.)

But – I don’t know. There was something about a Pangaea before the start of term, rather than at the end of exams, which just seemed wrong, somehow. Maybe I’m surrounded by relentlessly negative people, but I heard many a grumble that it all seemed a bit unnecessary. “Pangaea’s meant to be a celebration,” my friend Jaz pointed out, “but if it comes at the end of Freshers’ it’s like, what are we celebrating? Being hungover for the seventh day in a row?” A general sense of apathy hung about. Rather than meticulously planning their costumes like they’d done for Pangaeas past, people sloped off to Luvyababes on Friday afternoon. Those partial to stimulation beyond a bottle of Basics vodka fretted about having to go to Monday lectures on a two-day comedown. Meanwhile, rumours of underselling tickets only stirred anxieties. A rubbish Pangaea would be like a rubbish Christmas. It’s always good. But what if this time, it’s… not?

Well, you know what they say: low expectations, high rewards. It was really, really, genuinely, honestly brilliant. We arrived just before 11 and waltzed straight in. Elsewhere, the easy pace of the queue might seem like a bad omen: we’ve all experienced the awkward horror of walking into a club to find three people bobbing about on an empty strobe-lit dancefloor. However, for anyone who remembers the murderous lines of previous Pangaeas, the easy entry was a blessed relief (yes, ha, ha, that’s what she said). There were no shoving hordes of lads in leotards. There were no girls in animal ears practically weeping because they needed a wee so badly. The security guards didn’t have to roar at everyone to “STOP – BLOODY – PUSHING!” It was a dream.

Inside, the cheery atmosphere continued. Pangaea is always fun, but it’s not usually relaxing, especially if you’re with a big group of people. Everyone wants to go to different rooms, then someone has to go and queue for the toilet for half an hour, then someone else goes to the bar, and then you get lost and end up stumbling round on your own for forty minutes. And of course, everyone’s in fancy dress, so spotting your friends in a crowd turns into a terrible, real-life game of Where’s Wally. But this time, everything was miraculously, happily hassle-free. Whether this was down to better organisation, more bar staff or simply fewer revellers I’ve no idea, but it was a vast improvement.

I won’t attempt a comprehensive review of all the acts that performed on the night. There were too many, and I was too drunk, and this isn’t the music section. But the Stevie Wonderland room deserves a special mention for keeping everyone – girls who like old R&B, boys who like house – boogieing away with ridiculous grins on their faces for what felt like hours, in a really, really good way. The unexpectedly balmy night meant that dancing by the outside stage felt almost, almost like being on holiday, at least until you saw a Magic Bus glide by. Kano, the big headliner of the night,  performed to a half-empty Academy 1, but rather than feeling awkward, it just meant everyone had  more room to dance, and reminisce about getting sent ‘P’s & Q’s’ via Bluetooth in Year 8.

There were, of course, enough sexy girl leopards to populate a jungle. There were one or two fights, people slumped in doorways, and lots of enlarged pupils. Someone got wheeled off on a stretcher, and everyone spent far too much money, and the next day we didn’t wake up until 4.30pm. But it’s Pangaea. We wouldn’t have it any other way.