Earlier this week, a video was posted online about an undercover investigation conducted by ITV news on the alleged homosexual “conversion” in Winner’s Chapel ministry – causing uproar in the online Christian community. A reporter supposedly faked being a homosexual man in a pathetic attempt to attack the ministry. There are many problems with this investigation but because this isn’t a dissertation – I’ll keep this as a brief article on the few concerns held with this investigation.
Distortion of Christian values
The Christian community, for so long, has been defined as an intolerant section of society that reject anyone that doesn’t believe in Jesus, when this is simply false. At the end of the video, a caption states: “[The church] say they comply with the law and follow the “biblical teachings of love for everyone regardless of their belief, gender, background or sexual orientation”. That alone, is the gospel. Without pulling out scripture as evidence, the primary goal of the Christian community is to reach out to those who do not believe and, instead of excluding them, exemplify the love of God to them, which is exactly what the accused Pastor did. He took the time to sit in his office with the fake-homosexual reporter, educate him on his beliefs and even prayed with him in solitude for 20 minutes. This is all an example of love, the very foundation of the Christian faith. It is an outrage that ITV would try to use language such as “conversion therapy” to manipulate the public.
Believer sticks to their beliefs – shock horror (!)
In addition, the pastor of Winner’s Chapel ministry said and did NOTHING that was contrary to the Christian faith. It is no secret that Christians typically believe that homosexuality is against the teachings in the Bible – however; this does not mean that the entire Christian community hates all homosexual people. Like every religion, there are extremists that preach hate towards people that engage in homosexual activity when in fact – believers typically separate the act from the person – because they believe that all have sinned so none can judge other than God. The point is, not all believers are the same and no one should be shamed for what they believe in. Stop defining all Christians as hateful homophobes. It is unsettling that ITV would go undercover to investigate a church that believes and practices what the Bible teaches about homosexuality and call it “conversion therapy” so that legal action might be taken. They would never go to a mosque with this sort of energy, but the passivity of the Christian faith is often taken for granted. UK Media, either accurately report the values of the Christian community, or steer clear entirely. Enough distortion.
Last week, the United States held their bi-annual midterm elections to congress – which typically occur between presidential races (every 4 years). Each of the 435 individuals from the House of Representatives are up for election whilst only a third of the Senate are. So, members of the House serve only 2 year terms whilst Senators serve 6 year terms. During the midterm elections, a party requires 51 seats in order to control the Senate and 218 are required for the House. There are a number of issues with the US voting system. However, there are two big issues exclusive to the midterm elections – gerrymandering and the spoiler effect.
What is gerrymandering?
The act of gerrymandering is to manipulate/control the boundaries of electoral districts in order to give one party an unfair advantage over its rivals. This is used to weaken political enemies as well as protect incumbents – a common practice under plurality voting systems. During the 2016 midterm elections, many congressional seats won at the national and state levels were caused by some degree of gerrymandering by both Republicans and Democrats. One of the most famous examples concern District 1 and District 12 in North Carolina, where racial lines were unconstitutionally drawn to increase the populations of African American majorities.
Why ‘trusted’ political representatives even hold the power to draw boundary lines for their own political advantage is beyond any sort of sound reasoning. The US political system prides itself in checks and balances and the separation of powers between the executive, legislature and judiciary – yet the legislature holds the right to manipulate boundaries to increase chances of re-election. Although the Supreme Court has and can declare some instances of gerrymandering to be unconstitutional (as was the case with the two districts in North Carolina) it is difficult to understand why gerrymandering isn’t declared unconstitutional altogether. This manipulation of electoral results is likely to make anyone constituent feel uncomfortable.
What is the spoiler effect?
The US elections are prone to the spoiler effect. A spoiler is a non-winning candidate whose presence on the ballot affects which candidate wins, essentially a political candidate. In other words, they exist on the ballot simply to mess up the results.
This causes the “winner” of an election to be the candidate whom the majority of voters liked least. Such was the case in 2016, in the New Hampshire Senate midterm elections, “conservative independent candidate Aaron Day won about 18,000 votes. Given his political leanings, it is likely that the vast majority of his voters otherwise would have voted for incumbent Senator Kelly Ayotte, who lost to Governor Maggie Hassan by about 1,000 votes, thus costing Ayotte reelection”.
This characteristic of plurality elections leads to a bigger issues. With the end goal to keep the spoiler impact from adversely affecting their odds, political parties will confine the quantity of competitors running. This then leaves voters with no viable decision as races frequently include voters only endorsing the competitor picked by the majority party in their region.
Philip Bump for the Washington Post found that “1.5% of general election races in the U.S. from 2006 to 2012 were spoiled by third-party candidates”.
Though this is an almost non-existent amount, the very fact that this is even a tactic that exists, permits the co-existence of voter insecurity. I stand by the fact that no existing voting system is perfect, even the First-Past-The-Post voting system in the UK leads to the existence of safe seats and thus results in a number of wasted votes – however, the manipulation of electoral results in the UK is rare – and far too widely used or even considered in the United States. Abolition of gerrymandering is necessary, as for the spoiler effect, there is no legal grounds to oppose adding a “non winning candidate” to a ballot – it’s just an unfortunate loophole in the US electoral system.
Founder and CEO of The Common Sense Network, Mike Omoniyi has been Recognised as Top 100 BAME Leader in Tech.
Mike Omoniyi has today been announced as one of the top 100 most influential Black, Asian Minority Ethnic (BAME) leaders in the UK tech sector. The list, produced by board appointments firm Inclusive Boards, will be released today at the House of Commons as part of the official launch of the Inclusive Tech Alliance.
The Alliance has been set up in response to new research by Inclusive Boards that will show the sector is significantly lagging behind others on diversity within senior leadership. The founder of the Inclusive Tech Alliance (ITA), Samuel Kasumu, who is also a member of the Prime Minister’s Race Disparity Advisory Board said:
“Technology is increasingly playing an important role in driving our economy and there is a great need to ensure that everyone can fully participate in the jobs and opportunities technology brings. Mike Omoniyi and others featured in this list today are role models that will inspire the next generation, and hopefully help to improve diversity within the sector.”
Excerpt on Mike Omoniyi in the Report.
Those featured in the top 100 include senior leaders from Facebook, LinkedIn, IBM, Twitter and financial services firm EY. Judges include Tim Sawyer CBE (COO, Innovate UK), Sandra Kerr OBE (Race Equality Director, Business in the Community), and Catherine Muirden (Director of HR, Co-Op Foods).
The Golden State Warriors is an organisation that has propelled its rankings in the NBA history books with Championships, MVP’s, record breaking numbers and being a modern super team that is considered as being in if not top 3 then certainly top 5 ever. Players have revolutionised today’s NBA in the way the game is played. They’ve brought back to back champions home, winning 3 championships in 4 years. They only have one singular goal in mind. To win.
Giannis Antetokounmpo (Photo by Stacy Revere/Getty Images)
On November 9th the Golden State Warriors faced the Milwaukee Bucks at the Oracle Arena. To put it bluntly, it was a blowout and not something expectant of an NBA champion team.
The back to back champions with 2x MVP and best 3-point shooter in the game, 2x NBA final MVP and one of the best offensive weapons ever, the second-best shooter in the game and a defensive juggernaut the Golden State have no shortage of stars and fire power. However this game proved that the biggest stumbling block to that illusive three-peat title will be the Warriors themselves, with injuries from Draymond Green and the key bench player Shaun Livingston already out for this game. The depth of the team is weakened but with 3 All stars on the court and 2 of them being MVP winners and 1 of the 2 being a 2x MVP winners, surely the test of the Bucks who boast a very impressive record so far in the NBA championship could be a competitive thriller.
Giannis Antetokounmpo a.k.a the Greek Freak led his team to a win 134-111, with 24 points, 9 rebounds and 4 assists. Adding to his approval of possibly being this year’s MVP, his presence in the paint causes teams to shift their focus creating spaces for his perimeter teammates to shoot, especially having the ability to get to the basket in merely 2 steps means he’s an instant threat. Eric Bledsoe also had a great game putting up 26 points, 4 rebounds, 6 assists. The Bucks outscored the Warriors in the first 3 quarters with the final quarter having the Warriors only outscoring them by 3 points, by that time it was already over. With 5 of the Bucks players all at least having 15 points in the game, it was going to be a very good night for them. Klay Thompson was the only warrior with above 20 points whilst Kevin Durant had 17 points himself which is unusual of the 2017 NBA finals MVP. The Bucks are the number 1 team in the NBA at making 3-point shots closely followed by the Golden state Warriors, clearly the style the Bucks are adopting is quite reminiscent to the style that made Golden State so revolutionary in their 2015-16 season.
Steph Curry’s subpar performance against the Milwaukee Bucks that also ended with him coming off injured
With only 10 points in the game, Steph Curry pulled up injured with what seemed to be a muscle groin injury that came on unexpectedly and coincidentally also happened while he was having a terrible game overall.
It’s come to a few people’s attention that when Curry isn’t being as proficient or playing to his ability, an excuse in the form of an injury usually follows. I believe he was injured, but his performance was truly woeful with 5 for 14 shooting whilst playing 26 mins of basketball, he did manage 6 assists but really didn’t do enough to keep his team in the game. Overall this might all be blown out of proportion for the Warriors or it might genuinely be a chink in their armour and possibly a way how to beat them. Any doubts that the Bucks are not the real deal should be dispelled as their asserting themselves as an elite team in the NBA. The NBA season so far has been a thriller with the title contending teams not competing at the levels they should and out of contention teams picking themselves by the boots by having relatively winning starts.
The midterms, are a set of elections that take place every four years halfway into the current US President’s four-year term. The 2018 US midterm elections were an opportunity for Americans to judge and scrutinise Donald Trump and his administration since the start of his presidency two years ago. The 2018 results show a significant shift in power in the House of Representatives, weakening Trump’s position.
A Night Of Firsts
This year’s midterms recorded an unprecedented number of women winning, making history in Congress and American politics. Currently, 84 women serve in the U.S. House (61 Democrat and 23 Republican) and 23 (17 Democrat and 6 Republican) in the Senate. Overall, female representation in Congress has increased from 20% to 22%. In total, it is projected that at least 118 women will serve in the House and Senate, which marks major accomplishments for women.
It was a historic night in so many ways: For the first time ever, over 100 women were elected to Congress—including a record number of women of color.
Several individual candidates achieved historic firsts: The nation’s first female House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi. Kansas’s Sharice Davids became the first-ever Native American and gay woman elected to Congress, along with New Mexico who elected Deb Haaland, a member of the Laguna Pueblo tribe. Michigan Democrat Rashida Tlaib and Democrat Ilhan Omar from Minnesota will become the first Muslim women in Congress; with also Tlaib being the first Palestinian-American, and Omar as the first Somali-American and Muslim refugee to take office.
African-American women will represent Massachusetts and Connecticut in Congress for the first time ever with Ayanna Pressley and Jahana Hayes. Veronica Escobar and Sylvia Garcia were elected by Texas voters as the first Hispanic women in Congress. At 29 years old, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezwas elected in New York, making her the youngest woman to ever be elected in Congress. The first woman and first African-American to hold the role of attorney general, Democrat Letitia James, was also elected by New York. South Dakota (claimed by Kristi Noem), Maine (won by Janet Mills), and Guam (role filled by Lou Leo Guerrero) voters elected their first ever female governors in history.
This surge in female representation was driven largely by Democrats who took control of the House. Women will now historically represent two-thirds of the districts.
How Does This Compare To The UK?
With a new America on its way, resulting in a surge of female representation from the midterms, is the UK leading by example or do we need to follow America’s lead?
In the 2017 General Election, a record high of 208 women MPs were elected to the House of Commons, making up 32% of the House. As of January 2018, 206 female peers are Members of the House of Lords, making up 26% of the male-dominated House. Currently, there are 6 women including the Prime Minister (Theresa May), which is 26% of the total 23 permanent Cabinet posts. As of 1st October 2018, the UK is globally ranked at 38th and the U.S. ranked at 104th for the percentage of female representation in the Lower and Upper House.
Presently, the female population in the UK is 50.8% so we still have a long journey to go until females get an accurate representation in Parliament. However, we cannot ignore the fact that female representation in Parliament has increased, especially with Theresa May being the second female Prime Minister this country has had. As reported by YouGov polls, May has a rating of 32% positive opinion, 46% negative opinion and 21% are said to be neutral. Additionally, Margaret Thatcher (first female PM) was also not very much liked by the British public – with the Wizard of Oz song ‘Ding Dong! The Witch Is Dead’ reaching number two in the music charts following Thatcher’s death. This notably highlights the lack of fondness for the only female Prime Ministers the UK has ever had, perpetuating the view that women are not fit for a role in power.
Nevertheless, it is safe to say that the UK is leading by example for female representation compared to the US (current female population of 50.6%), but America deserves the praise it gets for making history in the 2018 midterms, not only in Congress but also in American politics. According to the CNN exit polls, nearly 80% of voters thought it was very important or somewhat important to see more women elected in public office. It is without a doubt that America will eventually climb the global ranking for female representation, bringing in new perspectives that could reshape policy in the future to come.
Jamie Aira Agbuya was born in the Philippines and grew up in the UK. She is currently studying American Studies at Swansea University. She blogs about mental health, writes poetry and short stories, and is currently a contributor for TCS. Her interests are in American history, culture and politics. Follow her on twitter @jamieaira.
Earlier this year the government introduced the highly controversial sugar tax and now, with this ongoing rhetoric of a “healthier Britain”, public health lobbies seek to extend this tax to red meat. The “meat tax” was suggested by the same pioneer of the controversial sugar levy – Oxford Professor Reverend Mike Rayner who is part of the Nuffield Department of Population Health.
What are the benefits of the meat tax?
Nutritional experts believe that this is the only way forward, if we are to reduce obesity in the United Kingdom, with researchers from the University of Oxford suggesting it could prevent more than 6,000 deaths and saving the NHS more than £700m in healthcare costs.
Why is red meat harmful?
The simple answer is – Coronary Heart Disease (CHD). CHD – sometimes known as ischemic heart disease, has until recently (falling slightly behind dementia) been the biggest killer in the UK. It is characterised by the build-up of fat (atheroma) in the arteries, causing them to narrow and restrict blood flow to the heart.
A digram of the heart and arteries
The disease it turns out can be completely avoided and one of the biggest risk factors for it is obesity. Weight gain can increase the risk of diabetes (another risk factor for CHD), cause deposition of fat in arteries and increase blood pressure which all add to the likelihood of developing the condition.
Red meat can also increase the risk of other diseases. In 2015 the World Health Organisation warned that processed meats such as ham and bacon and red meat could increase the risk of developing cancer; pair that with habits like smoking and the risk gets even larger.
Other than health, our demand for red meat is also damaging the environment. 15% of greenhouse gases are contributed by farming of animals. Outside of the fact we burn fossil fuels for the transport and processing of meat, the sheer number of cattle being farmed – already impacts global warming. Cows contribute hugely to the build-up of greenhouse gases – through their expulsion of methane daily, and the more meat we eat the more cattle we need to farm – ultimately the more damage we do to our planet.
How much is this going to cost us?
A tax of 14% on red meat and 79% on processed meat could reduce consumption by two portions per week. So, an 8 pack of sausages could rise from £1.50 to £2.69. Sirloin steak from Tesco’s would rise from £3.80 to £4.33 for just 277g and a tin of span would rise from £1.50 to £2.68 and the list goes on.
The opposition
Whilst I’m sure vegans and vegetarians are either celebrating or laughing in the face of meat addicts – there is off course huge opposition. Liz Truss, the Secretary to the Treasury being just one of them. After hearing the proposal, she took to twitter to furiously share her opinions on the matter, writing “what a claptrap” to the suggestion of how many lives this tax could save. Chris Snowdon of the Institute of Economic Affairs also showed his frustrations.
“They’re now teaming up with the vegetarians and eco-warriors to make a meat more expensive.”
One thing that concerns some people is the effect the meat tax will have on low income households.
While this meat tax will take several years to see effect, one thing that is certain, it most definitely is inevitable. A big question does come to mind, will it work? The price of a fry up may increase, but the appetite of meat lovers certainly won’t reduce. Unfortunately taxing of red meat doesn’t mean the price of fruit and veg will go down, showing that the meat tax is only solving half the problem.
As someone who wants to go to into public health – spending many lessons in anatomy and physiology, learning about the consequences of obesity; at first glance, the meat tax seems like the saviour that could remedy this country’s emerging health crisis. Despite this, I have full social awareness, that unhealthy food tends to be the cheapest, which ultimately leaves me wondering – is this tax making the nation healthier – or punishing those on the poverty line for being poor?
Tanya is currently studying Biomedical Sciences at the University of Manchester and hopes to pursue a career in public health and African development. She is a lover of fashion, travelling and has a keen interest in racial- social issues. She enjoys learning languages, being fluent in two and is currently adding Spanish to her resume.
The Canadian government has announced its plan to introduce a pay equity legislation that is constructed to ensure that women and men receive equal pay in the federal workplace. The main objective of the legislation to protect women’s rights in the workplace by closing the pay gap between men and women in the workplace.
Under this legislation, federally regulated workplaces will be required to review their compensation practices and ensure that women and men receive equal pay for their value in the workplace such as the federal private sector, federal public service, Parliamentary workplaces and Minister’s offices will all need to abide by the pay equity legislation. They will have three years to implement the requirements stated by the legislation. The new regime will apply to federal employers with 10 or more employees. The government has set out two sets of requirements, one for employers with 10 to 99 employees and one for employers with over 100 employees.
Justin Trudeau Prime Minister of Canada and Leader of the Liberal Party
The Canadian government have also announced that under this new legislation a Pay Equity Commissioner will be appointed, which will be under the support of the Canada Human Rights Commission. Under the decree of this law the Commissioner has several objectives under this legislation, such as ensuring that employers and workers know all the guidelines of the new law. Additionally, they are responsible for resolving pay disputes, carrying out audits and inquiries and imposing penalties for the violation of the pay equity legislation.
To highlight this conundrum that women face of underpayment in the workplace, Statistics Canada data revealed in 2017 that for every dollar a man earned, a woman earned 88.5 cents on the dollar as measured in hourly wages for full-time workers. Additionally, it was also underlined that when comparing the overall earnings on an annual basis, women earned even less by earning 69 cents for every dollar earned by men, despite having the same education qualifications and experience as their male counterparts.
Equal Pay Campaigners in the UK in 1954
Advocates of Pay equity in Canada such as MP Terry Sheehan who has been a long advocate for pay equity in Canada, argues that this legislation has been long overdue at the same time he lauds the Government’s efforts to close this gender pay crisis in Canada. On the other hand, critics such as MP Sheila Malcolmson from the (NDP) New Democratic Party contend that the new legislation plan is a positive step in achieving equality for women, she also underlines the fact that the law does not consider the pay discrimination which minorities encounter, as the income disparity amongst minorities and people with disability is even wider, according to Statistics Canada Data.
Enoch Akinlade is a writer who has a profound interest in British, American and Canadian politics, and other topics such as health, social inequalities, crime and sport. Furthermore, he is also deeply interested in topics such as the criminal justice system in the United States, Britain, Australia and Canada. He is also highly interested in the Prison industrial complex in America.
It’s leading up to that time where people get excited about Christmas and start counting down the days. Your friends may ask you whether you’ve have started your Christmas shopping or if you’re leaving it to the last minute like a lot of people do.
A big aspect of Christmas shopping are the adverts you see on TV encouraging you to buy from their shop. The start of Christmas for some is marked by Halloween, and others is marked by the first Christmas adverts on TV. In the past few years, Christmas seems to be a competition of who can make the best Christmas advert, with its aim to make you envision Christmas exactly as you see it on screen, whether it be food, presents or decorations.
A number of outlets have released their advert for this year. Brands such as John Lewis, Marks & Spencers have been known to create exceptional adverts costing a lot of money. This year Iceland has been in the headlines for an interesting reason. Their £500,000 advert didn’t even make it to our TV screens after being deemed too political.
The advert, a cartoon of an orangutan in a child’s bedroom messing it up and the child in the cartoon, tells the story of a child trying to get the ape to go away but first she wants to find out why it was in her room. The advert then goes on to highlight the impact on palm oil on deforestation.
Clearcast, the body that is responsible for screening ads before they are broadcast to the public, said it was in breach of rules banning political advertising laid down by the 2003 Communications Act. Iceland posted the advert on YouTube and within 24 hours, it already gained 1.5m views
Earlier this year, Iceland became the first supermarket to pledge to remove palm oil from all its own-brand foods. The orangutan is being classified as critically endangered as habitat loss in countries such as Malaysia is contributing to to the production of palm oil.
Listen we all feel something needs done after watching that wee orangutan Iceland advert. Nobody cares about wee ginger rascals more than me.
The advert, that was made by Greenpeace who are an independent organisation campaigning to ensure a peaceful and sustainable world by investigating, exposes and confronts environmental abuse by governments and corporations around the world.
Iceland’s founder, Malcolm Walker said “we got the permission to use it and take off the Greenpeace logo and use it as the Iceland Christmas ad. It would have blown the John Lewis ad out of the window. It was so emotional. Not only do we have to think of the effects loosing animals and their natural habit but also the processing of it leads to rising gas emissions and climate change.”
Thank you for the overwhelming support for Rang-tan!
We’re proud to be sharing the story of rainforest destruction, and its devastating impact on the critically endangered orangutan.
The video might have been not as effective if they used a real human or ape but telling the story in the format of a cartoon touches our inner child. It affects us, because it grabs our attention and the attention of children. The idea being, that if a child can understand and sympathise with the organgutan, can’t we?
Why is wanting to save the rainforest and orangutans political? In what kind of perverted universe can that be?
Last Year, another controversial advert grabbed out attention. Debenhams released a Christmas advert where a white woman and black man fell in love on a train. This seemed to get people talking about it but was never banned. However, it is a reflection of today’s society and people have a right to fall in love with whoever they choose. Some people might say that we’re forcing this reality down their throat but wouldn’t say the same thing about the Iceland advert?
Dolline is a traveller, journalist and blogger who has palate to try new things. She is a very spontaneous person; you might find her skydiving over the Kenyan coast to kayaking in the Lake District. She can be an over thinker who thinks of every outcome but if she doesn’t she welcomes the change that wasn’t planned. However, she is a very simple person who is up for a good laugh or a book and enjoys living the moment. Dolline also writes for her small personal blog called ‘Swatches of Beauty’ and is currently a production journalist trainee at ITV Border.
The US Midterm Elections saw a record number of minorities voted into Congress. This includes members of the LGBT+ community, which many have dubbed a ‘Rainbow Wave’.
OMG there is a rainbow over the Capitol Building right now.
This was a historic event in US history, especially given the recent homophobic actions taken by Donald Trump, his administration and other members of the US government. Since Trump’s 2016 election, he has taken numerous anti-LGBT+ actions. He nominated Neil Gorsuch, who has made several rulings against LGBT+ rights, to replace infamously anti-LGBT+ Associate Justice Antonin Scalia. Trump’s administration has also rescinded memos made by the Obama administration that provided protection to trans people, arguing that trans students are not protected under civil rights and enabling the federal government to claim that anti-trans discrimination is not illegal. Trump also attempted to reinstate the ban on trans people serving in the military in 2016, which the Obama administration planned to reverse in 2017.
The anti-LGBT+ legislation continued when Kansas Governor signed a bill into law that permitted adoption agencies to refuse foster care or adoption to same-sex couples, claiming religious exemption. This was shortly followed by a similar bill in Oklahoma allowing adoption agencies to discriminate against LGBT+ couples on the basis of religion. Additionally, in June, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of a Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
However, the 2018 midterm elections saw a small increase in LGBT+ representation across the board. Colorado’s Jared Polis became the first openly gay man to be elected as a US Governor. He became the second openly LGBT+ US Governor, joining Oregon’s Kate Brown who was re-elected on November 6th. Democratic LGBT+ Senator Tammy Baldwin was also re-elected, remaining the only openly LGBT+ politician in the US Senate.
Several LGBTQ candidates made history, including the first openly gay man to be elected governor; New Hampshire’s first gay congressman; and a Native American lesbian who became the first queer person to represent Kansas in Congress. #Midterms2018https://t.co/as1DR1WxMq
The US House of Representatives gained more out LGBT+ incumbents, with Kansas’ Sharice Davids, Minnesota’s Angie Craig and New Hampshire’s Chris Pappas. Craig’s win unseated Jason Lewis, the anti-LGBT+ previous seat holder, and Kentucky’s anti-LGBT+ Kim Davis was also not re-elected.
Representation also increased at the state level: Gerri Cannon and Lisa Bunker, two transgender women, were elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives. Susan Ruiz and Brandon Woolard also became the first LGBT+ members of Kansas state legislature, and Malcom Kenyatta became the first LGBT+ person of colour to be elected to the Pennsylvania state legislature. In addition, Massachusetts voted against a bill that would repeal transgender rights.
The 2018 U.S. midterm election resulted in the Democrats taking overall control of the house, while the Republicans gained more seats in the Senate. This marks an important power shift for the Democrats in office, as well as for women, POCs, and members of the LGBT+ community. Sarah Kate Ellis, the president and CEO of GLAAD said: “This election is shaping up to be truly historic for LGBTQ candidates and, coupled with the change in leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives, shows a rejection of the hate-fueled politics of the Trump Administration that have heartlessly targeted LGBTQ people, women, immigrants, Muslims and all vulnerable populations.”
Charlotte Davis is an American who currently lives in London. She has recently graduated with an MA in the Reception of the Classical World. She currently also writes for an art history website and her interests are in art, art history, culture and politics.
Written by Afshan D’souza-Lodhi born in Dubai and bred in Manchester. She is a writer of plays and poetry.
Its November, and as well as it being Movember (a month to raise awareness of men’s health issues) it is apparently also Islamophobia Awareness Month (IAM). To be honest, until this year I didn’t even know it was a thing. But after researching a little I’ve seen that it’s not a new campaign. In fact, MEND (Muslim Engagement & Development), have been running this campaign for over 5 years. MEND (Muslim engagement and development) is a UK NGO. It focuses on media monitoring, advocacy in Westminster and improving the media/political literacy of British Muslims. The aim of the organisation is to tackle Islamophobia and to encourage political, civic and social engagement within British Muslim communities.
In 2011, Baroness Sayeeda Warsi famously said that prejudice towards Muslims had “passed the dinner table test” and become socially acceptable to express bigotry against Muslims. – a quote from the MEND website about the increase in islamophobia over the years.
I’m not going to do the whole ‘we don’t need month for something like this when it happens all year round’ argument, because I understand the importance of what a month of raising awareness does. I am however bored of the Muslim victim narrative. While I applaud MEND and the creators of the Islamophobia Awareness Month for raising awareness about Islamophobia, this campaign is not the way to end it. Reports, poems, conferences, talks and even tweets have helped to spread the word that society and particularly the mainstream media is biased against muslims. The various commissions show that islamophobia has existed for a long time, but to memorialise it in the form of an awareness month is to say that it will last forever.
Islamophobia
Islamophobia, while not necessarily a new thing, is not something that will occur forever. The Mirriam Webster definition of the word is “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against Islam or people who practice Islam.” Muslims, prior to the terrorist narrative were labelled as exotic. The East was seen (and in some places is still seen) to be exotic, as something to be desired. People from the East, were people the West saw as, cultured entities i.e. ‘we can learn something from them’. Multiculturalism (which David Cameron in his first speech as Prime Minister claimed had failed), saw migrants and ‘othered’ people as a means to an end. There was this idea that as a country, the UK could gain a lot – mainly music, clothes and food. And then 9/11 happened and the narrative surrounding Muslims switched from exotic to terrorist. Since then, there was a rise in attacks against Muslims or those assumed to be Muslim. It isn’t so much that the Muslims were never a target, just that the fear/discrimination associated with Muslims prior to 9/11 was more racially charged. It could be argued that Islamophobia is a form of racism, even though Islam is a religion not a race. In the same way that Jews are racialised, so now are Muslims.
Not everyone is aware that Islamophobia exists. A lot of it is subtle, from the way that the TV show Bodyguard portrayed muslims to Boris Johnson’s comments about the niqaab it can be difficult to single out instances where Islamophobia is taking place.
So why I am so bugged by Islamophobia Awareness Month?
Awareness Months
Awareness months are typically months dedicated to bringing diseases and illnesses to the forefront of our minds. Like Mental Health Awareness Month or, Breast Cancer Awareness Month, these months are typically about issues that have always occurred or will always occur. The idea of making people aware is that, even though these illnesses and diseases are inbedded into the very fabric of our beings, we want to remove the stigma attached to them and therefore stop them early.
In the way that mental health issues will always exist, and breast cancer will always exist (albeit caught sooner), Islamophobia won’t. I’m not saying that islamophobia isn’t real. Quite the opposite. I’m asking, like other awareness months, if IAM’s priority de-stigmitisation? Is it that MEND sees islamophobia as one of societies ills? If so what is the cure to it?
Whats interesting about awareness months, is that they are a corrective measure to the problem – focussed on the attitudes we have about those issues. With Islamophobia however, it isn’t so much people’s attitudes that need changing, rather the adjustments (and even lack of adjustments) in government policy (Brexit, state sanctioned violence in the form of deportations, detention centres and deaths in police custody) that allows for rampant hatred against Muslims to occur needs to be looked at. The hostile environment caused by the former Home Secretary (now Prime Minister) Theresa May actually polarised the communities and made it possible for Islamophobia to exist and be acceptable. The immigration vans, sanctioned by Theresa May, is just one instance where the public were being encouraged to look at people of colour (and Muslims) as ‘other’. A month dedicated to actually doing the work and addressing these policies rather than paying lip service to it would actually be welcome.
The Border Agency Immigration bus sanctioned by Theresa May was sent into densely populated BAME areas and encouraged people to ‘grass up’ their friends and neighbours.
Words Matter
We don’t have racism awareness month or homophobia awareness month. So why do we have Islamophobia Awareness Month. Instead what we do have, is Black History Month, to counter racism, and LGBT History Month to counter homophobia. To focus on the negative, in this case Islamophobia, is to give it more weight. Both Black History Month and LGBT History Month are about celebration of black and LGBT lives. They are saying look, black people have been around for a while, lets look and celebrate the contributions by black people in the UK and around the world. We could have has a slavery awareness month, or racism awareness month which would have focussed less on solutions and actions and would have focussed us on telling people and convincing them that racism and slavery exists. Surely our energies would be better focused on highlighting Muslim history and presence? Lets move the power away from the bigots and focus on the positive.
Muslims are allowed to exist outside the Islamophobia narrative, in the same way that black people can exist outside the slavery narrative. Memorialising it like this causes problems. It reinforces the victim narrative.
A still from the BBC show Bodyguard.
The Victim v Terrorist Narrative
Negative and victimhood narratives have continued in popular culture perpetuating stereotypes and leaving us with a false dichotomy – terrorist or victim.
We live in a society of victimization, where people are much more comfortable being victimized than actually standing up for themselves. — Marilyn Manson
Yes, I just quoted Marilyn Manson in an op-ed about Islamophobia but it phrases what I’ve been feeling, ever since I saw the tweets around Islamophobia Awareness Month, really well.
I get it, IAM is aiming to show that Muslims are more than per perpetrators and terrorists, but Muslims are also more than victims. This binary doesn’t have to exist. But Islamopobia Awareness Month just reinforces that binary.
This problem is illustrated well in the TV show Bodyguard. Let me just say that I had multiple problems with this show but most of all the representation of Muslims (particularly Muslim women pissed me off.
[SPOILER ALERT] The female Muslim character, went from being a submissive woman and victim (which she played really well) to being the real villain. It turns out that she is the one who created the bomb. Now, there is a moment whilst watching this that I felt truly proud of British TV. The woman claims she made the bombs to make money. This, as a motive, was a step forward in the way muslim villains are portrayed on TV and Film. And then the writers of the show had to ruin it by making the character a religious terrorist – it turn out she wasn’t just money hungry, she wanted money to fund terrorist activities. I switched off. The point is, that the obvious way in which we tackle Islamophobia is to make Muslims the victim.
We need to be more responsible especially with populism. It is these simple reductive narratives that have given the right wing agenda exactly what it needs.
Islamophobia Awareness Month isn’t empowering, its patronising and paternalistic and problematic.
There are organisations that do more than just Lip Service. Everyday Muslims looks to create a central archive of Muslim lives, arts, education and cultures from across the UK.
To find out ways you can stop Islamophobia check out the NUS website.
Afshan D’souza-Lodhi was born in Dubai and bred in Manchester. She is a writer of plays and poetry.
A no deal Brexit is exactly what it says it is – it simply means that the UK will withdraw from the European Union without reaching an agreement. Theresa May is currently looking into proposing a 2-year transition period, which would not take place if no agreement can be reached. Although a no-deal agreement does not prevent the UK from leaving the EU, it does mean that there will be no clarity on what takes place next.
May’s stance on a no-deal Brexit
According to research conducted by comresglobal.com, when people were asked the specific soft vs. hard Brexit question, the majority sided with soft. Before the UK General Election last year, Theresa May stated that she would deliberate over leaving the European Union without a deal as “no deal is better than a bad deal”, and that the UK must be ready to just “walk out”.
Theresa May told the BBC that MPs will have a choice between her proposed Chequers deal with the EU – or no deal at all – also admitting that a “no-deal agreement” would possibly cause “short-term disruption”.
As Christmas comes around some twitter users are making memes to make light of the situation Theresa May is having to deal with. Many having little faith that May will back anything other than a hard Brexit.
She went on to claim that a no-deal Brexit “wouldn’t be the end of the world” if the UK was unable to reach a satisfactory agreement – though she recognises that leaving without a deal “wouldn’t be a walk in the park”.
Why the no deal Brexit has failed?
However, according to the Independent: “Britain has left it too late to prepare its borders for a no-deal Brexit, which would be a gift for organised criminals and chaotic for traders, the UK’s spending watchdog warns Theresa May today… as planning was undermined by “political uncertainty and delays in negotiations”, the National Audit Office (NAO) has concluded.” Theresa May has been so focused on convincing everyone that a no-deal Brexit was a good idea, that it wasn’t “the end of the world”, that she forgot to put a plan in place for it, and now the time is up. Leaving us now in a “where do we go from here” state – a position the UK has become all too familiar with.
While leaving the EU is not the same as leaving a TV subscription service, we must give credit to the EU for not ‘putting the phone down on us’
What happens now?
Currently, May has told the majority of Conservative MPs that she will be exploring “every possible option” to break the stagnancy in Brexit negotiations – the Irish border issue she claims is still a “considering sticking point”. If this deadlock does not reach a resolution and the UK ends up sticking with a no deal a agreement by the time of the EU summit in mid-December, there are four possible options stated by the express.co.uk:
“Do nothing. We leave without a deal.”
“Delay departure, seeking an extension of Article 50”
“Put it to a vote, holding another public referendum”
“Try to have another last-ditch attempt at negotiating”
However, the most realistic option at this point in time would be to continue negotiations – mainly because it is the least worst option.
Pakistani woman, Asia Bibi was to be acquitted by the Pakistani supreme court after being convicted in 2010. This however signposts the attacks on Christians in Pakistan. Blasphemy laws are intense and insults on the reverenced prophet Muhammad are not taken lightly by the Pakistani government and by Muslims in Pakistan.
A march to abolish blasphemy laws
Asia Bibi whose real name is Aisia Noreen confessed to have made insulting remarks to the Prophet in June 2009 in a row with her neighbors after that, she was beaten up and arrested.
The Ruling
The ruling faced protests outside the court by supporters of blasphemy laws. Heavy police presence was also reported at the Supreme court in Islamabad, due to fear of violence breaking out. Serious protests against the verdict are also taking place in Karachi, Lahore and Peshawari and the Islamabad and Rawalpindi have also been blocked by hundreds of protesters.
Chief Justice Saqip Nisam who read out the ruling, stated that Asia Bibi could walk out of the jail in Sheikupura, near Lahore immediately if she was not wanted in connection to any other offence.
The background of Asia’s offence was that she was harvesting fruit with some other women in her neighborhood when an argument broke out. She was not allowed to touch a bucket because the other women said her faith (Christian) made her unclean. Prosecutors alleged that the women told Asia to convert to Islam after which she responded by making three insulting statements about the Prophet Muhammed.
Asia was later beaten in her home, where her accusers say she confessed to blasphemy, she was arrested after police investigation. Asia and her family fear for their safety and several countries have offered her and her family asylum. It is reported that the family might be leaving Pakistan.
The Blasphemy Laws In Pakistan
Laws in Pakistan about Blasphemy dates back to 1927, the law carries a potential death sentence for anyone who insults Islam, critics of the blasphemy laws argue that the law is used to prosecute faiths seen as minority and unfairly targets them.
This talk about Blasphemy has become an increasingly discussed subject in the media, but where does Pakistani Blasphemy laws come from? Laws concerning offences against a religion were laid out by the British who ruled India in 1860, the law was expanded in 1927 and Pakistan inherited these laws after it came into existence when India was partitioned in 1947.
Freedom For Asia
Asia’s freedom isn’t just a victory for free speech activists, but it shows the growth and ever changing nature of Pakistan. Pakistan was formed as a religious state, and many non-muslims were left in the country as they were unable to move prior to the partition of India. This meant that non-muslims became a minority in Pakistan leading to their persecution and rejection from society. The overturned death sentence of Asia Bibi shows amore tolerant side to Pakistan, one many Christians living in Pakistan have been praying for for a long time.
Zulaikha Abiri is a graduate of Media with Media Practices from Nottingham Trent University. Her interests include youth, women and children empowerment, especially in under developed and in developing countries
As it fast approaches, Remembrance day marks the specific moment that World War One ended, at the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month. As such, a two-minute silence is held at that precise time every year, to remember the fallen of all wars.
In the past, a minority of Muslims have viewed any positive association with poppies as wrong. The logic is that poppies support soldiers who have killed countless Muslims across the world, particularly the Middle East. On the opposite end of the spectrum, the far-right also take issue with Muslims who wear or sell poppies. Their logic is that a poppy-selling Muslim are pretending and secretly want Islam to conquer the world through so-called ‘’religious wars’’ – the taqia trope (Arabic meaning to hide or disguise oneself – which has nothing to do with the teachings of Islam).
The problem with both perspectives is that they use the insecurities and fears of their respective audiences to hijack the Poppy Appeal for political gain – never for religious or ethical advancement.
This campaign (2014) caused a lot of uproar from both Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
However, like many Muslim brothers and sisters in the UK, and as an Ahmadi Muslim, I have a very different perspective of the Poppy Appeal. One that stems from what I hold as a deep desire to please God. The sacred text that acts as my roadmap to life is the Holy Qur’an. Regarding helping others, it states ‘And in their wealth was a share for one who asked for help and for one who could not (51:20).’
Therefore, when I am asked to contribute towards helping soldiers who have been seriously injured or the families of the fallen, I do so because this is my religious obligation as a Muslim. I do this in the same way that I support disadvantaged children in Palestine, Syrian refugees in Jordan, the Rohingya, and Christians in various African countries.
This is never a moral dilemma for me because Islam tells me that the goodness in helping the needy is lost the second that the giver discriminates those assisted.
Even if a soldier has wronged another person by harming them or killing them, a Muslim is still required to help. For Muslims, there is no greater example and role model than the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him). During the heart of war – not when there exists the comfort of security and hindsight – we know that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) instructed that his followers should treat the wounds of and provide water to those who tried to kill them.
It’s clear to me as a Muslim that Islam, its holy book and the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) want me to be a compassionate person who seeks to build bridges. It also wants me to be someone who speaks out with wisdom and balance against injustice in the world, regardless of the ‘who’ or the ‘where’.
It has to be kept in mind regarding soldiers that they are to help people in the time of their need. They would not hesitate to help Muslims and do help Muslims or people of other faiths. If one of us was affected by a calamity and the army was called in, such as when the Cumbria floods happened, we would take no issue with receiving help from the army and soldiers. So why would we be unwilling to help them in the time of their need? As a Muslim, this verse full of wisdom of the Holy Quran comes to mind: “Can the recompense of goodness be anything but goodness?
Therefore, this remembrance Sunday I will be selling poppies with hundreds of other young British Muslims to raise funds for those in need. And when the sobering time for remembrance comes, I will pray that Almighty Allah prevents us all from ever again entering into war.
As an Ahmadi Muslim, I leave you with a quote from the Promised Messiah (on him be peace) and the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, which I believe embodies the teachings of Islam with regards to serving others: “The principle to which we adhere is that we have kindness at heart for the whole of mankind. If anyone sees the house of a Hindu neighbour on fire and does not come forward to help extinguish the fire, most truly I declare that he does not belong to me. If anyone of my followers, having seen someone attempting to murder a Christian does not endeavour to save him, I most truly declare that he does not belong to us.”
Umar Zeshan Bhatti is currently studying Law and is interested in Human Rights. He is trying to challenge the negative perception of Muslims in the media and he is part of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Association. Follow him on Twitter @UmarZBhatti97
Last weekend saw what many believe was the most violent attack against Jewish Americans in American history. 46-year-old white supremacist, Robert Gregory Bowers, opened fire on the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, killing eleven people and injuring six others.
This tragedy, if that is not too small a word for it, has foremost devastated those directly impacted and the wider Jewish community in Pittsburgh. However, it has also added even more fuel to the blistering fire that is modern American politics, all the more so with the midterm elections less than a week away. The socio-political situation in the United States has been put under a microscope once more. Many are pointing fingers at the president himself. Accusing him of, at best ignoring, and at worst fostering a racist culture that encouraged this anti-semitic act.
It is understandable that people have come to such conclusions given the innumerable accounts of Trump using racialised language to purport his own isolationist global view. He infamously once described the white supremacists involved in the deadly Charlottesville march as ‘very fine people’.
Most reporting on the Pittsburgh shooting has focused on the widely ignored culture of anti-semitism, and the many ways this tragedy relates back to the president’s own misdeeds. There are, however, further racial connotations within this incident that have gone largely unexplored. The official reaction to this tragedy, and the treatment of Bowers before and since, are almost as emblematic of modern day racism as Trump himself.
some tweeters are praising the efforts of people raising money for the victims
In this instance, once the police had stormed the synagogue and been met with the chaos wreaked inside, Bowers managed to shoot four officers before his eventual surrender and arrest. The key detail here is that Bowers made it to being arrested. It truly is astonishing that Bowers made it out of that synagogue alive given the prolific culture of gun violence in the United States.
American policemen in particular have garnered quite the reputation for themselves as rather ‘trigger happy’ over recent years – particularly when faced with unarmed African Americans and people of colour . Thinktank The Counted released a study in 2016 which identified black males as 15-34 times more likely to be shot by the police than other demographics . This, then, raises the question of whether Bower’s skin colour protected him from the full force of American officials. Despite the fact that he was found screaming ‘all Jews must die’, armed, and in a massacre of his own making.
In the aftermath of the Tree of Life Synagogue Shooting, #FBI Pittsburgh has been made aware of potential scammers who are attempting to fraudulently solicit donations for the victims. You can report suspicious email solicitations or fraudulent websites to https://t.co/NJ3HW2Q9Wfpic.twitter.com/dAwmU2jWSL
Pittsburgh FBI is bringing to light the scams some people are running to make money from the victims of the shooting.
Additionally, something that has come to the fore since the breaking of this story is his prolific social media vendetta against Jewish Americans. Bowers had an active presence on the alt-right website Gab, where he publicly accused Jews of bringing about a ‘white genocide’. Furthermore, he pointedly accused the Hebrew Immigration Aid Society of assisting refugees who were ‘slaughtering’ Americans. If we were to place this social media activity in a different ethnic framework, specifically a Middle Eastern framework, would it not surprise you that the FBI weren’t monitoring him prior to this event? Yet, because this man was white, his racist rhetoric went seemingly unchecked and excused under the guise of ‘free speech and individual liberty’.
Essentially, Bowers got away with far more before and during this attack than an insurgent of a different race could have. Why, then, is Bowers different? Why did his overtly violent and abusive racist rhetoric go unmonitored? Why did it take a mass murder for the authorities to consider him a threat to society? It’s because he’s white. It’s because white privilege is so deeply entrenched in American society that he had to pick up all of his (legally owned) guns and shoot innocent people before he was questioned for his racist activities.
This makes the heartbreaking reality of this particular shooting all the more poignant. Not only has it exposed a form of racism that many hoped long dead, it also exposed the ugly, fatal extent of white privilege.
Ellie Tivey is a recent graduate in History and Politics from the University of Manchester. Originally from Bristol, Ellie moved to Manchester in 2015 and has no intention of leaving any time soon. She spent the final year of her degree as Editor of the university’s only historical publication, The Manchester Historian, and continues to present/produce weekly news videos for Manchester start up, Student Inspire Network. She hopes to embed her passion for politics and popular culture in all of her work.
