Featured

The Conversation: Succeeding at Publication

I recently had the pleasure of being invited by the Nuffield Foundation (through their ‘Emerging Researchers Network’) to take part in a comprehensive training course from The Conversation‘s subsidiary Universal Impact. Thus, I thought it would be useful to write up some of my reflections on the lessons gleaned there with the hope they might be useful to the countless other early career researchers who are in the same space as me. Now for those that don’t know, The Conversation is one of the most well respected and well-read, researcher-friendly, publications around and is read by millions across the globe annually. If like me, you feel you have much to ‘say’ from a research point of view but no idea how to go about it, then you might find these insights as useful as I did.

Researchers as the new Public Figures

I think for me the first lesson was quite a personal one. The days of ‘objective’ researchers being personally removed from their work are gone. Whether we like it or not, we are increasingly expected to become pseudo-public figures and advocates for our respective frontiers. I’m sure I’m not the only one who has some reservations about that, we’re not all comfortable with bringing the science to (at times) critical audiences. So, this advice is in two parts, firstly this means that you have to be part of the story, when you are pitching an idea to any media source like The Conversation it’s critical to emphasise why you (yes you) are so suitable. Secondly, you might be hesitant with the label of expert, but the way I see it, if we don’t fill this void with cool-headed facts and evidence-based practice, then bad actors will fill that vacuum. This is why places like The Conversation are so important, and as I realised, you’ll have a lot more control in the process than you’d imagine.

The trainer talked about the lifecycle of a story, which included a whole host of editorial support to take you through the journey, with a team of staff writers/editors etc waiting to convert your academic insights into something that is completely accessible to general audiences. On the course, we had the ‘pleasure’ of dissecting our hypothetical pitches. Now, as uncomfortable as these processes can be (I don’t take to them naturally either) it’s a great way to learn how to curate your work for different audiences and ultimately how to defend your ideas. Honestly, If you have an idea for a pitch (any media source) then do it, even if it’s a no, the feedback can be invaluable.

The Power of Narrative

The next aspect I’ve reflected on since the course is the idea of narrative itself. Now most of us spend our time writing lit reviews, bids or long-form writing pieces – If we are honest, how often do we sit and think about the narrative of what we do? A big takeaway here is the importance of this in any sort of mainstream piece, throughout the session we routinely discussed the idea of the story arc; the conflict, solution and resolution. This isn’t just within the purview of fiction writers, it’s an essential tool and one that we must utilise in order to reach larger audiences. I think as human beings we have a deep connection with many forms of narrative, exemplified with our rich oral histories, that predate our written languages. So, I would argue that formatting your article in such a way is not only more compelling, but it can make really difficult concepts easier to understand. A key point here is that stories can still be compelling, informative, attention-grabbing and indeed academically significant.

Some Top Tips…

Okay, I hear you ‘Yes, yes, this is all well and good Anton but how do we actually write one?’. Well obviously, I can’t write it for you (I’m not 100% sure I can write my own yet) but I nabbed a whole host of tricks and tips, I’ll include some of them below so try them out yourself.

  • The ‘Top Line Test’ – try summarising your article idea, the whole thing into one sentence (if you can’t it’s probably too broad).
  • Think about the style first, are you informing, analysing, persuading or explaining?
  • Reflect on your target audience first as opposed to trying to shoehorn it later (far less painful).
  • What is the story, and in many ways more importantly, why should we as the reader care? (Your research is important, but we don’t know that).
  • Be clear about the purpose of the pitch/article and why you (and not someone else) should be the person to write it.

Finally, I thought I would end with a sort of ‘what not to do’. Mostly because I’m starting to realise it’s my main learning style apparently (but that’s a whole separate blog). The course included some great tips when dealing with editors etc, which to be honest I had no idea about, but these social conventions can make all the difference if you don’t know them. This may seem obvious but don’t overwrite, editors are insanely busy and all the pitches we looked at were no more than 280 words (never send the whole article cold). You want to give the illusion at least that you have written it just for them. Language is another common pitfall here, the trainer expertly picked us up on our apparent everyday language in our pitches, “What do you mean, what’s unclear about a ‘post-structuralist performative lens’ (not to my knowledge a real term, but wouldn’t surprise me if it is)?” No jargon people, we love it, but it’s just a barrier to our audience and is destroying our potential to reach them.

A Final Thought

Now I hope you have found this blog useful, and leaving the pitfalls aside the whole experience was a really positive one. My main learning here is that the world of mainstream media publishing is not quite as scary as we might think it is – there is a whole host of media outlets that are interested in what you have to say. Now get out and start writing, because whatever your field or areas of expertise is, there is a story there that only you can tell…so I implore you, tell it!

Anton Roberts – Sociologist at Manchester Metropolitan University

Featured

‘You’re ALL Talk’ – why we are what we speak’ + Author Interview

Book Review

Listen to the episode here

Join me and my co host Saiqa as we explore the wonderful world of language and accents for this fascinating book review ‘Your All Talk: why we are what we speak’. We discuss class, identity, inequality, prejudice around accents, history of speech, and share plenty of our personal experiences on the subject.

In the second part of the episode I am also joined by Rob Drummond himself (author) to give us the low down on his book, the challenges of writing, and some great advice around how to write one too.

About the Author:

Rob Drummond is Professor of Sociolinguistics at Manchester Metropolitan University, where he researches and teaches about the relationship between how we speak and who we are. He recently completed a large project exploring the accents and dialects of Greater Manchester, touring the region in his Accent Van. He appears regularly on radio and TV talking about language-related issues and spent some time as ‘resident linguist’ on BBC Radio 3’s The Verb, as well as appearing on the BBC Breakfast sofa.

More info can be found here:

https://scribepublications.co.uk/books-authors/books/youare-all-talk-9781914484285

You can order his book here:

Featured

Podcast – ‘Fire in the Belly: On Being a Man’ by Sam Keen

Book Review

Listen to the episode here

In this thought provoking review I am joined by my comrade in arms Saiqa Butt, a performing poet and fiction writer. We delve into Sam Keen’s classic – a personal journey into masculinity, where he explores notions of male potency, strength, insecurity, personal development, violence and their relationship to women. There is so much here, we touched on war, class, sexual assault, folk lore/mythology, patriarchy, anthropology, and even a bit of psychoanalysis as I recall.

Featured

How To Survive (And Dare I Say It Flourish) On Your Research Journey With Prof Steve Miles

Listen to the episode here

Professor Steve Miles is a sociologist at Manchester Metropolitan University based in the Postgraduate Arts and Humanities Centre (PAHC). His area of expertise is in consumption and he is the Head of Faculty Research Degrees here at MMU. Steve completed his PhD in 1996 from the University of Huddersfield – his thesis is titled ‘You just wear what you want don’t yer’? An empirical examination of the relationship between youth consumption and the construction of identity.’ Join us as we discuss the challenges and opportunities that come with a PhD and a further career in academic research. We naturally touch on a variety of other topics such as social mobility, class, gender, race, discourse, identity and working cultures. It’s packed full of useful tips for any post grad or early career researcher.

Featured

Prison and Social Destruction

I have recently been conducting a fair bit of prison-based research, which has involved not only spending considerable time inside the prison walls but also spending a substantial amount of time speaking with many of the prisoners in there, and this has led me to reflect on the nature and importance of human relationships. Many of the men in there not only have families they love, but young children and newborn babies they will not see/meet for extended periods (if ever) – many choose to not see their loved ones for the shame it induces. The interesting aspect of incarceration is that we tend to think of it as individually punitive, but this is not how the human animal works. We are defined by the relationships we choose – for better or worse. Speaking with these men has got me thinking about the immeasurable secondary impacts of their imprisonment. The state has not only inflicted harm upon them, but the countless individuals they are connected to, and provide support for. How would we even go about putting a number on such a blight to our societal harmony? – With hundreds of lives impacted for the price of one individual (which we also pay for by the way).

Durkheim famously talked about the notion of anomie, which is the inherent risk within any community of a social breakdown of norms and values. This existential risk occurs when individuals experience a separation or ‘alienation’ to use the term of the time, from their perceived wider society. He wrote about it in the context of explaining suicide rates, although it doesn’t take a genius to see some comparisons. These men, upon release often feel a profound sense of separation and lack of purposefulness – their social networks all but obliterated, the world can often appear as a very alien place. I suspect in many respects this feeds back into the perpetual cycle of re-offending – denied the support of close meaningful relationships they fall back into more destructive criminal networks.

I can already hear the counter arguments ‘They have committed a crime, they deserve it, they should have thought about that before committing the offence’ etc etc. But I would argue this misses the point entirely, this isn’t about whether we should imprison people or not, this concerns societal re-integration, which we all agree should happen at some point (with the appropriate consideration of risk of course). Our community is the way we measure our values, how we define good and importantly morally ‘bad’, social norms. The reality is it is difficult for us to appreciate the level of social damage that occurs within the carceral space – to be denied healthy relationships, personal growth and connections that allow for the essential sharing of vulnerability without cost. We enjoy relative free reign in the relationships we seek to develop in our everyday lives. In the prison space, you can expect displays of emotion to be met with suspicion and/or violence, with your only other option being solitary confinement in the segregation part of the prison (considered a form of torture by the UN for a reason).

With so much focus on the various ‘skills’ programmes in the prison estate within criminology, it would be nice to have a renewed focus on the more human factors to imprisonment and how they can be mitigated against i.e. how to maintain a healthy social self within the person. As this same self is expected to spectacularly reintegrate into civilian life without issues.

Featured

Hatred and Homeless…

Even before I was a researcher I was always puzzled by the rather odd societal relationship we have with the homeless. In one respect they are sites of disgust, objects to pathologise and to degrade in some way. They are the focus for untold hate and victimisation, and not just from faceless organisations such as law enforcement, but also from members of the general public – many of them routinely suffer violence while sleeping rough on our streets. However, to any that knows of their plight, they often elicit great compassion within us. I’ve worked with armies of selfless individuals through in sorts of charities and organisations and I can confirm they think of nothing else but their welfare (and often at great personal cost to their own lives and their relationships). So what explains this odd state of affairs? Why do we both care for and penalise this population?

I think it is worth remembering what individuals experiencing homelessness represent to most people. In one sense they are a living reminder of the structural inequalities present in our day-to-day life, and also a living warning of what could be if you are not content with the hand you have been dealt. And not to get too philosophical here but rough sleepers represent something much deeper, that goes beyond just the individual. If we are honest with ourselves, and take care not to ignore the tremendous trauma they endure, to many they embody a radical form of personal freedom. Those experiencing street sleeping (the only form of homelessness the public see) are seen to be ‘free’ of many of the trapping of modern capitalist life. They are assumed to:

  • Not work (many do, both legally and illegally)
  • Have no physical abode, or pay bills etc (may have a property that is unsafe to occupy e.g. threat of violence)
  • Their time is their own and they are free to come and go where they please (service times and facilities usually heavily conditional and restricted)
  • To just be ‘enjoying’ themselves, on various substances (not all homeless folk are substance users are those that are, are using them as a form of coping).

I would argue that this almost romantic (and incorrect view) of homelessness creates a form of jealousy, that can fuel resentment in the general population that can underwrite much of the rage and disgust rough sleepers experience. If you thought about your own life, I mean really thought about it, how free do you feel in it? How much control do you possess? In reality, we have jobs we often hate and are forced to pay for things we don’t need. Is it that hard to imagine that many would envy the (illusion) of that freedom and lack of responsibility? The anger stems from the perceived powerlessness that many feel in their lives, it must go somewhere. Those marginalised, invisible people experiencing homelessness are the perfect target, an apparently ‘morally corrupt’ and socially excluded group. The uncomfortable truth here is they show us something about ourselves that is quite profound, that perhaps we ‘successful, happy and well functioning’ members of society are actually deeply unhappy with the status quo – that there is a quiet desperation to modern times; some existential missing piece, a void in the lives of our passive consumption.

Featured

The Anatomy of Violence

Please enjoy my documentary film, in collaboration with NorthRavenFilm exploring the role of violence in our culture. I talk with a range of academic experts in this one and from a whole host of separate disciplines. Haven’t you ever wondered if there was more to violence than a simple loss of control? Why do people perpetrate acts of violence, and which types of aggression and violence do we find acceptable or unacceptable in our society? We hear from experts in knife crime, video games, drill and heavy metal music and as well as experts by lived experience such as those involved in the criminal justice system. Anyone wishing to understand the underlying mechanisms and reasons for such acts should find this film really useful.

Featured

The Rage of Our Times

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about some of the unique contradictions of our time, such as the simultaneous proximity and distance that technology affords us – but mostly what interests me most is anger, offence, and experienced slights. Simple (mostly online) media narratives are propelled at us at every avenue, instructing us on the latest travesty or global emergency we should be concerned about. They inform us of the next heinous ‘out group’ we should distance ourselves from, to fear, and in some cases silence with varying degrees of force. As a sociologist in the field of gender research, I’m no stranger to polarising discourses, it’s become a sad feature of our time, but I’ve introspected a lot as to what are the likely culprits of these offence wars along with some of their negative consequences. The question that often keeps me up at night is why speaking with our fellow human beings has become so difficult. Conflict is not new to the species; interpersonal violence is an unfortunate staple of our past and present. What I am writing about here though is offence, the subjective experience of being wronged by another party. They are caused by the violations of our often imperceivable sacred values, or the social norms of a group.

As anyone reading this will know our current reality is a around the clock offence meter, with various groups and factions constantly competing for some form of victim status and the demonisation of their respective opponents. These debates vary and are many, examples include; trans rights, abortion rights, religious freedoms, freedom of speech, political affiliations, racial equality etc. So why can’t we rationally talk about any of these issues anymore? I think it’s best to start with the nature of discourse – typically, positive discourse requires that parties face one another on equal terms and speak their mind honestly and in good faith. Their viewpoints are explained and no matter how alien to the others they may be, their arguments are suddenly etched with nuance and with the biographical experiences which informed/created their perspectives. As you communicate you begin to mirror one another, you seek common ground, mutual ways of understanding, and if you’re lucky gain a newfound understanding of a world, alien to your own. With a background in rhetoric/philosophy, I learned long ago that the greatest asset you can bring to the table in any discussion is an attitude of non-judgement and a genuine curiosity (even if their views may be morally offensive to me personally).

The acclaimed primatologist Frans de Waal calls us the ‘bi-polar ape’ for our inherently insane capacity for both violence and cooperation. I think this goes some way to explain the unique problems of modernity. Humans are hard-wired for cooperation; we are the most social of all the apes – interacting with groups infinitely larger than any of our other primate brethren and the signs of this are everywhere if you look hard enough. As author Leo Keohane remarks in his book The Power of Strangers, even the white pigment of our eyes is an evolved social feature, a way of communicating something of interest to another human being. I would argue that as a result of our modern civilisation, the way in which we communicate has fundamentally shifted, and not for the better. On an individual basis we are having less social interaction than ever – reflected in the soaring rates of loneliness in the young and old alike. Naturally, when negative thoughts and feelings are left to their own devices, absent of reassurance, social capital, support, or comparison from the community, views can rapidly err on the side of more extreme and negative thinking.

Instead, we communicate in increasingly narrow and superficial ways, yes with more people, but that human recognition is lost under a veil of internet anonymity. Social media outlets distort our words to create the illusion of a constant civil war when in truth it’s merely the result of a pesky algorithm that prioritises offence over other more ‘boring’ but rational and reasonable voices, ensuring a constant supply of offended, marginal and extreme voices. These features are then combined with the inherent limitations of the medium itself. We are forced to compress our perspectives, experiences (and often trauma), and world views, into a handful of soundbites or letter characters in order for our information to be consumed/commodified into click content for the rage mill. What could be more unpleasant than finding out that you are the consumer product here? In my view, these two factors combine to create a perfect storm of human misunderstanding.

But…let’s not close on a negative, there is a bright side here. For one thing, you can choose how you engage with individuals with views different to your own. Always choose face-to-face contact if possible, or at least engage with social media with an understanding of its limitations and how it uses you as content. The main positive takeaway from this though is that the world is not actually as divided or polarised as you may think, in reality, our differences are small, our similarities great, and most of those differences can be smoothed over with a brew.

In closing, go outside, talk to someone!

Featured

The Challenge Of County Lines With DI Gary Stratton And Zoe Macdonald

Listen to the episode here

County Lines is a form of criminal activity that utilises/exploits vulnerable people such as children, to create networks for the supply of illegal substances. The vulnerable individuals are exploited by gangs in a range of ways, from illegal transport, storing substances at their residences and even used in the selling itself. We are joined by Gary Stratton D/Insp County Lines Investigation, INV Syndicate County Lines Investigation. Along with colleague Zoe MacDonald, a DI in charge of the county lines task force within GMP who has been in the police for 25 years, working all over the force in various different roles and rank and headed up the County Lines team since July 2022. Both will discuss the risks, the warning signs to look at for and how they combat this criminality in their work.

Featured

Research In Hostile/Challenging Environments: From Consent To The Management Of Guilt

Listen to the episode here

Conducting research in the field can be one of the most ethically fraught experiences of your career (maybe even life), and this can become even more salient if you are working with populations that are in some ways marginal and/or vulnerable. This episode should be especially useful to PhD students/early year researchers who are about to enter the field and would like to know about some of the ethical/moral challenges that they will face. We tackle:

What does ‘informed’ consent really mean? And is it truly possible?

How do you navigate feelings of guilt?

Will your research have an impact on you?

What does the blurring of boundaries mean for you as a researcher and as a person?

Does it have implications for your own sense of identity?

Why do your previous experiences/perspectives matter?

I consider myself an ethnographic researcher looking into the experiences of rough sleepers here in Manchester. To help me discuss some of these complex questions I’m joined by phenomenological researcher Dr Steve Kelsey, who’s PhD was titled A Hermeneutic Phenomenological Study of the Lived Experience of Homeless Men. Steve has been working in the field of people and organisation development for over 25 years. Today he works around the world with organisations to deliver innovative development programmes, supporting strategic change and coaching business leaders. He brings his knowledge from psychology and a deep understanding of business to help solve problems and challenge unhelpful paradigms. His approach is both dynamic and sensitive, always aimed at discovering the root cause of issues and creating positive change. Outside of his work, Steve spends much of his time teaching martial arts and travelling back to Japan, where he lived for 10 years.

You can see one of Steve’s pieces on homelessness for the Guardian here

You can reach Steve here: kestrelinnovations@gmail.com

Featured

A Sociological Take on Zombie Cinema

Our screens are often filled with the blood-curdling screams of the victims of flesh-eating zombie hordes, of one form or another. From the T virus of Resident Evil series to the ‘rage’ virus of 28 Weeks Later, to the recent mind-bending fungus of the Last of Us Series – countless films explore the notion of the ‘zombie’, the undead, mindless automaton. A creature that seems solely content with the consumption of our precious brain matter. But how much have we reflected on the sociological implications of this film genre, and what learnings can be gleaned from these pathologized representations for our society? What do they mean for humanity at large as well as own sense of personal identity? As a sociologist, I’ve always tried to understand our fascination with this creature and wondered why we return to it again and again, as a site of renewed curiosity, disgust and fear. It differs from some of the other undead tropes such as of the vampire, which for some reason enjoys a far more glittery and sexually appealing representation. 

The De-Moralisation of the Undead

The first thing we may want to think about is the moral implications of the zombie. Regardless of which version of this cinematic mainstay you partake in, the protagonists wrestle with the moral implications of the zombie, existing as they do in a strange liminal space of humanness. Justifications for the extermination of this existential threat are routinely referenced but never explored. Such cinema toys with humanities (at times) de-humanising tendencies. Arguably, one the reason is that our intelligence has been removed, something has been lost. What is particularly uncomfortable about the zombie motif is the blurring of this line, that such creatures still resemble their prehuman selves, they wear the same clothes and retain enough of their human spark to ignite a pang of recognition in those that knew them before they turned. In some versions of the story, they even retain a measure of their memory such as at the end of Shaun of the Dead, where the protagonists now undead zombie best friend ‘Ed’, continues to play video games with him. This quandary is especially poignant considering our dehumanising history, of delegating certain groups as somehow not human ‘enough’. Nazi propaganda successfully reduced the status of Jewish people to be viewed as less than human, this reduction to that of an almost animal, then provided a viable method of guilt avoidance and justified all manner of human cruelty. Not only can this status as a human being worthy of compassion be removed, but it can also be difficult to create. More recently, this moral ambiguity can be seen in our advancements in artificial intelligence, with creations hitting the so-called ‘uncanny valley’, where our humanoid creations are experienced as disturbing, and not achieving that hard-to-define human threshold. There seems to exist a hard define point where human ‘like’ lifeforms are suddenly offered our moral protection, and this lack of a fixed boundary as shown in the zombie, can make us uncomfortable.

The Zombie and the Threat to the Self

In many ways, a zombie represents the destruction of our identity, a more grotesque version of advanced dementia where everything that was ‘you’ is stripped away, your likes and dislikes, intelligence, reason, connections with others etc and only this ‘zombie’ husk remains. Zombies reflect an all too familiar fear of being forgotten without note, to be reduced to a mere number with no individual agency. Although it would not be fair to say that zombies aren’t social in some sense, what could be more social than travelling with thousands of friends, eating out together and often cooperating (albeit simply) on shared goals? This power of the group is reflected best in the Last of Series, in the way the infected are connected via an elaborate biological network. In many ways, it represents the inversion of our individuality and a reminder of the strength of the mindless collective. I ponder to what extent this fear translates to more collectivist cultures where group interests are considered more salient than our western personal quest/obsession, for self-actualisation.

Societal Insecurity

There is more than an epidemiological grain of truth in the zombie genre, if we have learned anything from the past few years it’s that our institutions/governments are not quite as stable and secure as would have liked. In many respects, the aspects of our advanced globalised economy are part of what makes us vulnerable to both fictional and real apocalypses, as we have learned from COVID and other related near misses. The foundations of our modern world, i.e., hyper-connection are the very tool that is turned against us, in World War Z for example, air travel provides the perfect vector for the spread of zombie infections, as indeed it did in the pandemic. In many ways, zombies represent the perfect analogy of Durkheim’s anomie, that certain instances can create a societal disorder that breaks down the social bonds and norms of our society – less structure and less regulation of all kinds. Here we see that dichotomy, on the one side this societal chaos’, which leads to high rates of crime and a lack of social cooperation/obligation to one another – undoubtedly a real and founded fear in this world. Conversely, such cinema strikes a chord with us, it reminds us of our own internal tensions and frustrations with the wider intuitions that govern our lives.

Zombie films are more than simple entertainment, they us offer a vision, a world of total, and horrifying freedom.

Featured

‘The Last of Us’ Review – From Academic Analysis To Mind Altering Fungus

Listen to the episode here

‘The Last of Us’ games were hugely successful, offering one of the most immersive and terrifying gaming experiences to date for many a nerd (myself included). The recent release of the televised adaptation starring Pedro Pascal and Bella Ramsey has proven equally as successful and warrants a deep dive. Joined by my usual co-host Andrea, as we do an exploration of the series, covering the episodes and comparisons with the original game etc. In addition for a bit of fun I have provided on sociological analysis on both the show and the zombie film genre more generally. Have you ever wondered why we’re so obsessed with apocalyptic scenarios? Why do we return to the zombie motif again and again – what does it say about society and human identity? I also make comparisons with the Last of Us and reality and whether there is an element of truth in the terrifying fungus featured in the series.

Featured

‘Proving Atheism’ – An Evening With A C Grayling

Listen to the episode here

Myself and fellow sociologist Richard Remelie discuss an event we attended from the esteemed AC Grayling, one of the most eminent philosophers and authors in the realm of atheism (although he writes on a range of other subjects too). We analysis/review Graylings arguments for atheism and cover a wide range of ideas he covers in his lecture, e.g. his thoughts on inductive and deductive reasoning, uncertainty and the nature of knowledge, as well as reflecting on what atheism actually is. This lecture took place at the Manchester Meeting House and was run in collaboration with Atheism UK and the Great Manchester Humanists (links below to learn more).

Link to one of his most popular books below:

Full talk can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsWJ-evms4s

Humanist link – gmh.humanist.org.uk
Atheism UK – http://www.atheismuk.com

Featured

The Secrets To Pleasure And Pain – Book Review – ‘The Sweet Spot’ By Psychologist Paul Bloom

Listen to the episode here

Joined again by my co-host and fellow bookworm Andrea to review another fascinating book. This time we are exploring the weird and wonderful world of pleasure and pain. Why do we seek it? What are the types? What connection exists between pain and our sense of life purpose? What explains our fascination with suffering in fiction? This episode is filled with insights that will not only help you understand your own interval processes better, but also allow you make better choices in your own life, towards happiness and well-being (although even more can be found in the book). We follow Paul Bloom as he takes us through the science, philosophy and morality of this poorly understood aspect to the human condition. 

Featured

Trauma in the Ancient World

Listen to the episode here

I am joined this week by PhD researcher Adam Aderman, a doctoral student at Manchester Metropolitan University – located in the history department. There is considerable buzz now around adopting so called ‘trauma informed’ approaches, from prison spaces, work environments, to even our social polices. Issues of our mental health have never been more open to discussion, however it remains one of the biggest challenges of our time. In his amazing work Adam is uncovering how the ancient Roman world understood trauma. He explains the sources he is using, the lifestyle these men led, and of course the horrors of war they encountered. As well as more philosophical ideas such as their cultural ideas around death, he also shares some of the themes that are already coming through his findings. The lessons Adam is revealing here are especially timely, considering the contemporary problems we face as a society when attempting to re-settle formerly military personal back into civic life – with so many having experienced trauma in conflict zones.

Featured

A Cross Over Special – Interview With Dr Kim Heyes

Listen to the episode here

In a change to our normal programming I, your host, is interviewed by Kim on her new Podcast the Accessible Academic (link below) about my own research. Kim is a Senior Lecturer of Health and Social Justice in the Department of Nursing at MMU. For those that don’t know I look into the intersection between homelessness and gender and how radically different your experience can be because of it. Kim also asks me about the struggles of making it to a PhD as a working class student and the challenges of being one e.g. the social isolation. We delve into a few interesting intellectual cul-de-sacs e.g. researcher ethics and the sources of our motivation. I really enjoyed appearing on her show and encourage of all you to check it out going forward. Please enjoy anyway!

You can access Kim’s Podcast here:

Or Follow her on Twitter here:

@DrKimHeyes

Featured

How Working In Marginal Spaces Changes You

Listen to the episode here

This time I am joined by recent Manchester Metropolitan University PhD graduate Simon Armour, who is the Mental Health and Wellbeing programme manager at Stockport Council. In this episode we explore his PGR research into the effect that volunteering has upon well-being, for those that give up their time to serve in challenging environments such as food banks and homelessness provisions etc. We’ve all heard the adage that volunteering for those less fortunate than us is good for the soul and has a solely positive impact, but is this always the case? Simon shares some of his thesis findings with us today, he talks about the power of identity change, how he draws on psychosocial psychology, the role that faith plays in these spaces as well as the complex power dynamics that exist when helping some of society’s most vulnerable. In a change from the usual script Simon also uses some of his participant questions on me, to see if my own perceptions from this area chime with some of the other stories he has collected and analysed. We also have a broader discussion around the role such organisations play, both in the positive and negative i.e. where blame and responsibility is and should be located. For those wishing to follow Simon’s journey or discuss his research you can reach him on Twitter here: @simonarmour62

Featured

Book Review – A Serial Killer’s Daughter

Listen to the episode here

Denis Rader aka ‘BTK’ (bind, torture, kill) was one of America’s more prolific serial killers, leaving a path of murder and destruction decades long. Join me this episode with my co host Andrea Nicklin as we review Kerri Rawson’s book, which is the daughters biographical account of growing up with a serial killer. We discuss the family history/dynamics, early signs of pathology, role that religion plays, some of details of the gruesome murders, and some of the psychology of the killer that is revealed through BTK’s prison correspondence with his daughter (and much more).

Featured

An Interview With Best Selling Author Darren McGarvey – (New Book) ‘The Social Distance Between Us’

Listen to the episode here

In this episode I virtually sit down with Darren McGarvey to do a deep dive on his new book The Social Distance Between Us: How Remote Politics Wrecked Britain. In one of my favourite conversations to date we explore all the nuances of class. Darren is already an Orwell prize winning bestselling author, due to his last publication Poverty Safari, as well being a columnist and film maker for the BBC. We discuss, the myth of the meritocracy and the complexities of privilege, how language is used to divide and discriminate, our implicit and explicit class identifiers, working class attitudes to authority and the fascinating idea of class deference. We hit on how certain communities are actively constructed differently to exclude certain populations and there is also a lot of interesting crossover with my own research on homelessness/addiction. Darren also shares his hilarious assessment of our political situation and the political class more generally. Apologises there is a little swearing in this one, but as the old saying goes…swearing is just punctuation where I come from.

Copies of his new book can be purchased from his website (click Home button below).

Home

Featured

The Secrets To Motivation – What Drives Human Flourishing?

Listen to the episode here

In this episode I am Joined by Richard Remelie, a PhD researcher at Manchester Metropolitan University, who is based in the department of education. How you ever wondered why some people are motivated to climb mountains, while others are only motivated to watch others climb mountains? – Well wonder no longer. In this episode Richard talks to us about his amazing research into understanding relationships between motivations and human flourishing, in the context of education and the student experience. We talk about the types of motivation e.g., intrinsic and extrinsic, the model he used to understand this mystery i.e. self-determination theory (SDT), the importance of reflexivity, and the differences between our physical and psychological needs. In exploring this subject, we also touch on the effect of poverty and class etc on students’ educational journeys, as well as the impact that culture can have on determining what’s important in human flourishing (collectivist versus individualist societies). Richard also talks about his experiences of working for the House of Commons Education Committee, and the difficulties associated with making changes in our political system. 

More info can be found about Richard here:

https://www.mmu.ac.uk/alumni/meet/richard-remelie.php

Featured

What Does The Anti-Terrorism Policy Of Prevent Actually Prevent? A Critical Conversation With Dr Holmwood And Dr Gavin Bailey

Listen to the episode here

Prevent is one of four limbs of the government’s anti-terrorism policy. It is directed at behaviours and ideas that the government deems to be extreme and to represent a possible ‘gateway’ to violent offences. The Prevent duty applies in schools, colleges and universities and many other public spaces. It professes to safeguard individuals and funnel those at risk to programmes/interventions of de-radicalisation. In light of the Government’s upcoming Independent Review under William Shawcross, many have voiced opposition to this policy, arguing that Prevent entails marginalisation, racism and problematises certain ‘communities’ that are perceived as being against ‘British Values’. Today I am joined by Prof John Holmwood and Dr Gavin Bailey, who are both counter terrorism experts as we discuss the future of prevent, it’s criticisms and the recently published People’s Review of Prevent. We also talk about John’s book (together with Therese O’Toole) on the Birmingham Trojan Horse affair and the problems of intervening in a pre-criminal space with the most vulnerable in our society.

Featured

How To Survive (And Maybe Even Thrive) In Academia With Author Dr Alaina Talboy

Listen to the episode here

Coming (virtually) from the states Alaina (a cognitive scientist in decision making by trade) drops in to talk to us about her new book ‘What I Wish I knew: A field Guide For Thriving in Graduate Studies’. In this episode we discuss the trials and tribulations of academic life, how to succeed, how to explain what you do to non-academics, how to apply your skills outside of the academic world if you ever want to leave it (God forbid!). Not only do we cover some of the more pragmatic aspects to the researcher life, but we also cover lessons usually ignored in university guides; How do you balance a PhD while having child? How do find out what kind of educator you want to be? How do you hide the fact you don’t know anything (that’s a joke, you are there for a reason)? How do you stay sane, well-adjusted and connected to others when your life becomes a solitary expedition into frozen tundra of your subject area? This book is filled to the brim with useful advice for new researchers of any subject, please enjoy.  

A copy of her book can be found here:

You can find Alaina here:

Twitter – @statistress
Website – https://alainatalboy.com