Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Alison Habens, Head of Creative Writing, University of Portsmouth

The story of Apollo and Daphne was written around the year zero by Roman poet Ovid in the Metamorphoses. Ovid was a trainee lawyer and student of rhetoric. In the story, a woman named Daphne becomes a laurel tree to escape the unwanted advances of the sun god, Apollo.

It’s part of a collection of his stories in which humans transform into plants and animals (and vice-versa) amid the mountains and woodlands of early Greece. But I believe it must be reviewed in the era of #MeToo – a period marked by widespread awareness, activism and accountability around sexual harassment and assault.

The first literary celebrity, Ovid, was “cancelled” in his own day. There’s no record of an actual crime he committed, but he was exiled to a settlement on the Black Sea for something he called carmen et error (a poem and mistake).

---

This article is part of Rethinking the Classics. The stories in this series offer insightful new ways to think about and interpret classic books and artworks. This is the canon – with a twist.

---

Metamorphoses begins with Apollo slaying the monster python, a feat celebrated with the first Olympic Games. In competition with Cupid, Apollo is struck with an arrow that makes him fall him love. He then pursues Daphne, an unwilling nymph until, in desperation to escape his advances, she turns herself into a tree.

Like the famous sculptures and paintings, (by Paolo Veronese, Gian Lorenzo Bernini and John William Waterhouse to name a few) this transformation of lady into tree still emphasises her curves. “There with all about hir breast did grow a tender barke” and “a thin bark closed around her gentle bosom”.

Beyond this objectifying treatment, the poem focuses on the hurt feelings of Apollo at her rejection, effectively saying: “Don’t you know who I am?”

In a 1960s edition of the poem, retold by Enid Blyton, it’s all made out to be a misunderstanding: “You should not have been so fearful of me, I would not have harmed you.” But this isn’t what the aroused sun god tells Daphne in the classic text: “Resistless are my shafts.”

Daphne wishes to stay unwed, but her father, the river god Peneus, says that she is too pretty for spinsterhood. In the 1632 translation by George Sandys, he explains: “thy owne beautie thy desire with-stands” and in a 1717 version the young woman is told she’s fair game: “For so much youth, and so much beauty join’d / Oppos’d the state, which her desires design’d.”

Apollo’s fragile ego is prioritised and the affront to his self esteem is not permissible: “Perhaps thou know’st not my superior state/ And from that ignorance proceeds thy hate.” The sun god makes it clear who is the more insulted but, while he is listing his accomplishments (he invented music and medicine), Daphne runs away.

Even her escape is framed as erotic. In Arthur Golding’s 1567 translation: “Hir running made hir seeme more fayre”. The Puritan poet’s gaze lingers on her: “And as she ran the meeting windes hir garments backewarde blue / So that hir naked skinne apearde behinde hir as she flue.” And English poet and literary critic
John Dryden, too, found her fear titillating: “the wind … left her legs and thighs expos’d to view / Which made the God more eager to pursue”. In agonising rhyming couplets, the translators follow her flight.

Daphne’s looks are a curse – it is no blessing to be beautiful. Her pleas reach Peneus as she races with attacker in hot pursuit: “Destroy the beauty that has injured me / or change the body that destroys my life.” So finally, her feet take root, the toes digging in; her arms become branches, her fingertips leafy. In imagery more fit for horror than romance, the bark closes over her mouth and she says no more.

But Apollo still gropes her, though he calls it love. The poets describe him embracing the trunk, handling the boughs, kissing the boles, revealing how he: “fixt his lips upon the trembling rind / It swerv’d aside, and his embrace declin’d”.

If the sun god couldn’t tell she didn’t fancy him as a woman, he’s even less clear about her feelings now. He insists: “Although thou canst not bee / The wife I wisht, yet shalt thou be my Tree.” In another version he says: “Because thou canst not be / My mistress, I espouse thee for my tree.” He gleefully claims her leaves, wreathed around his own head, to symbolise his greatness for ever.

Does Daphne consent? She may be nodding in the account by Golding, “and wagging of hir seemely toppe, as if it were hir crowne”. Or is she coerced? In the 1922 translation by Brookes More: “unto him the Laurel bent her boughs, and it seemed to him her graceful nod gave answer to his love.”

The latest version of Metamorphoses (updated by Rolfe Humphries in 2018) emphasises the unreliability of Apollo: “He hopes for what he wants – all wishful thinking! – Is fooled by his own oracles.”

The tale’s awful moral can still be heard; men may use passion as a weapon and love as a reason to attack. Perhaps it’s finally time for a translation that offers the point of view of the tree, too.

Beyond the canon

As part of the Rethinking the Classics series, we’re asking our experts to recommend a book or artwork that tackles similar themes to the canonical work in question, but isn’t (yet) considered a classic itself. Here is Alison Habens’s suggestion:

The Chilean group Lastesis translate feminist theory into public performances. In 2019, they created perhaps the best example of a contemporary riposte to Apollo in the Daphne story, with their performance Un Violodor en tu Camino (A Rapist in Your Path).

Inspired by the writings of Argentine anthropologist Rita Segato, this popular protest was seen and heard around the world. It made a strong statement about victim-blaming and authoritarian violence against women. Its work of genius is to resist the silence and stillness of the laurel tree, using poetry and dance.

---

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

---

Alison Habens does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The story of Apollo and Daphne in Ovid’s Metamorphoses needs a new translation for the #MeToo era – https://theconversation.com/the-story-of-apollo-and-daphne-in-ovids-metamorphoses-needs-a-new-translation-for-the-metoo-era-235985

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mark Gatto, Assistant Professor in Critical Organisation Studies, Northumbria University, Newcastle

Warning: this article contains spoilers.

In One Battle After Another, three characters (Bob Ferguson, Colonel Steven Lockjaw and Sergio St Carlos) represent three different models of fatherhood.

Fatherhood is a timely theme. The place of men in society is being debated and challenged by polarising figures from both sides of the political spectrum.

One side promotes a regressive vision of the patriarchal man harking back to ideals of fathers as dominant breadwinners and protectors. The other side argues for caring masculinity, involved fatherhood and men taking responsibility in their communities to break the cycle of intergenerational gender inequity.

This is a battle for hearts and minds, and such battles are rarely won with stats and figures. As the success of TV shows like Adolescence has demonstrated, there is nothing like a great story to cut through political stagnation and reach a wider audience.

One Battle After Another offers another opportunity to reflect on the past, present and future of fatherhood. This is established territory for director Paul Thomas Anderson, whose masterpiece There Will be Blood (2007) depicts the complex and dysfunctional relationship between Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) and his adopted son, H.W (Dillon Freasier). The gut-wrenching scenes of paternal abandonment in that film offer an enduring example of the all-too-familiar “absent father”.

Lockjaw: the absent father

The absent father is a culturally embedded version of masculinity present in many popular films, that has been experienced by generations of children. TV series like Mad Men (2007) have explored a simultaneously utopian and dystopian version of 1960s fathers as emotionally absent.

In One Battle After Another, actor Sean Penn’s visceral depiction of the aptly named Colonel Steven Lockjaw provides an extreme example of patriarchal fatherhood: absent yet casting a dreadful shadow over a family. Lockjaw is driven to bloody revenge in pursuit of his biological daughter, a daughter he has had no hand in raising.

We know from studies on absent fathers that such absence can have a lifelong effect on children. Lockjaw, with his bizarre behaviours and fawning pursuit of neo-Nazi recognition, offers an allegory for the current rise of alt-right masculinity as jarringly jingoistic and egoist.

Such satire is valuable but also aligns with existing critiques of the manosphere. We need only look to Elon Musk’s infamous hand gesture at the second inauguration of Donald Trump, and his later appearance with his son in the oval office to conjure similarly disturbing visuals of fatherhood. This film breaks newer ground with its depiction of flawed father involvement and the less researched community leadership.

Bob Ferguson: the involved father

Involved fatherhood has been researched for many decades. The triad of a dad’s interaction, availability and responsibility with and for their children is the core criteria.

With Leonardo DiCaprio’s Bob Ferguson, we are introduced to a relatable, “good enough” involved father. He is the product of state hostility to father involvement. Research has shown that the intent of fathers to be involved is often stifled by patriarchal gender norms and workplace stigma.

As an involved father, single dad Bob comfortably meets two of the three criteria – he is physically and emotionally engaged with his daughter, Willa (Chase Infiniti). His enduring presence is partial evidence of responsibility. However, we also see the deleterious impact his drug and alcohol abuse has had on his role as responsible caregiver. The roles have reversed for him and 16-year-old Willa. Bob’s version of involvement is symbolic of the father that cares and stays, but is flawed and unsupported.

Sergio St Carlos: the caring father

Finally, we come to Benicio del Toro’s, Sergio St Carlos, a Karate sensei, Willa’s teacher and father to the community. Offering a counternarrative to bombastic male leaders, Sergio calmly resists tyranny. As a leader, he might be interpreted as emblematic of the much-vaunted male role model, yet Sergio is also flawed. He drinks and drives, leaves much domestic care to his family and revels in his role as antagonist to the law. Yet, such flaws allow this caring father to feel recognisable, relatable and attainable.

Researchers have been writing about caring masculinities for years. Central to understanding this idea is the prioritisation of caring values of positive emotion, interdependence and relationality, and the rejection of domination.

In Sergio, we find a father who cares for his family and his community. Through him, we see a new depiction of fatherhood as the role of a caregiver and care receiver in harmony with his wider community.

Such admirable qualities may seem utopian and fantastical, yet these dads exist. Close to where I live, North East Young Dads and Lads offers a community lifeline to young dads: many later become support workers. One Battle After Another reminds us that community fathers can make a real difference.

---

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

---

Mark Gatto received funding from BA Leverhulme from 2022-2024.
Mark Gatto is an Academic Board member for Working Families

– ref. One Battle After Another: Sean Penn, Leonardo DiCaprio and Benicio Del Toro explore three visions of fatherhood – https://theconversation.com/one-battle-after-another-sean-penn-leonardo-dicaprio-and-benicio-del-toro-explore-three-visions-of-fatherhood-266858

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Callum Roberts, Professor of Marine Conservation, University of Exeter

Most of the UK’s commercial fish stocks are not in a healthy state, according to a new landmark report.

Marine conservation charity Oceana UK’s Deep Decline report – one of the most comprehensive analyses of fish stocks since Brexit – finds that half of the UK’s top ten commercial fish stocks are either critically low, overexploited, or both. These include icons of our seas such as North Sea cod, North Sea herring and north-east Atlantic mackerel.

Only 41% of the UK’s commercial fish populations have been found to be healthy. A quarter are being fished beyond sustainable limits. And one in six are both critically low and yet still being overfished, placing them on a course to collapse. Many others, like skates, have been so historically depleted that they have all but disappeared and no longer even appear in statistics.

This disaster was entirely predictable and avoidable. Nearly five years on from the UK’s historic rupture from Europe, most people struggle to name any benefits from Brexit. One of the few benefits I can think of is the power to manage our fisheries without being beholden to the annual horse trading for fishing quotas in Brussels.

Freed at last from the constraints of collective bargaining, the UK could make rational decisions to delivery healthier seas and prosperity for the fishing industry.

Management under the EU’s common fisheries policy was famously flawed. Rather than confront difficult decisions about how to share limited resources, politicians routinely set quotas far above scientific recommendation for sustainable fishing – exceeding them on average by a third over more than 20 years.

If a farmer took more sheep to market every year than they produced, they would soon be out of business. Fisheries ministers failed to apply the same logic, so fish stocks dwindled and fishermen lost their jobs.

But for UK fisheries ministers, it seems that bad habits are hard to unlearn, and they continue to ignore expert advice. Rather than enjoying a rebound, our seas remain in deep decline.

Take the humble cod. Once the cornerstone of UK’s national dish fish and chips, North Sea cod is now at such low levels that, in September 2025, the international body providing scientific evidence for fish catch regulation – the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (Ices) – advised a zero catch quota to safeguard the future of the cod fishery. Yet North Sea cod is still being overexploited. Ignoring science risks a future where the nation’s favourite dish is no longer affordable or even available.

The Irish Sea is the worst affected region of the UK with four in ten of its stocks overfished according to Oceana’s report, up from a quarter just five years ago. In the Celtic Sea, quotas for cod in 2024 were set higher than the estimated number of adult fish left.

This is political negligence, not ignorance. The UK has world class fisheries science, yet ministers repeatedly ignore their own experts.

Ocean health underpins the UK’s blue economy, from fishing to tourism. Fishing alone supports tens of thousands of jobs, particularly in communities with few alternatives. When stocks collapse, boats tie up, processors shut down and skills honed over generations are lost.

Who is to blame for this avoidable calamity? Ministers obviously, but who are they listening to if not their scientific advisors? Paradoxically, for over 50 years, the large corporates of the fishing industry have been tireless cheerleaders for their own demise, urging ministers to let them catch more fish, in doing so putting short-term benefit over long-term sustainability and job security.

Those with small, local boats – those not raking in the big money – are left trying to eke out a living from a depleted ecosystem. The fact is, if you keep within nature’s limits, you can fish forever.

---

Read more:
The secret to healthy and sustainable fish fingers – an expert explains

---

Ocean ally

There is more at stake than just emptied seas and ailing fisheries. The sea is one of our strongest allies in fighting climate change. Seagrass meadows, kelp forests and seabed sediments capture and store carbon, acting as natural defences. Overfishing and destructive bottom trawling damage these habitats and release carbon dioxide into the sea and atmosphere, stripping away our climate resilience just when we need it most.

Imagine instead a future of abundance. Herring shoals flashing silver. Puffins plunging into dense fish swarms. Porpoises chasing mackerel. Fin whales blowing once more in our waters. This vision is not fanciful.

---

Read more:
Mussel power: how an offshore shellfish farm is boosting marine life

---

The good news is that recovery is possible. We need only look at healthiest stocks in Oceana’s report, such as west of Scotland haddock, western Channel sole and North Sea plaice. What did they all have in common? Catch limits set in line with scientific advice.

The truth is that strong nature protection is the friend of fishing, not the enemy it is often painted as. Globally, when areas of the sea are genuinely protected and destructive fishing methods are banned, nature rebounds at speed. Fish populations multiply, wildlife flourishes and coastal communities gain a secure future. Protected areas rebuild fish stocks and feed productive fisheries in surrounding waters.

With the right choices, the UK could have more abundant seas that provide both food and jobs while restoring the wonders of marine life. Overfishing is a political choice.

For too long, governments have chosen short term quotas over long term security. Recovery is also a choice: the UK should set a new course that gives both ocean life and fishing communities a fair deal and a prosperous future.

---

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

---

Callum Roberts receives funding from Convex Insurance Group and EU Synergy, and UK Natural Environment Research Council. He is a board member of Nekton and Maldives Coral Institute.

– ref. Half the UK’s fish stocks are overfished – but the evidence shows how they can be revived – https://theconversation.com/half-the-uks-fish-stocks-are-overfished-but-the-evidence-shows-how-they-can-be-revived-266285

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Maha Rafi Atal, Adam Smith Senior Lecturer in Political Economy, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow

UK chancellor Rachel Reeves has set out a “youth guarantee” aimed at ending long-term unemployment among young people. Under the plan, a young person who has been out of work for 18 months would be offered a temporary job, apprenticeship or college place.

The UK has just under a million young people who are not in employment, education or training (Neet) – thought to be around 13% of the country’s 16- to 24-year-olds.

Under Reeves’ plans, those who refuse the offer could face benefit sanctions. The scheme is being positioned as a way to boost growth while keeping to Labour’s fiscal rules ahead of November’s budget.

The idea has some logic. Long-term youth unemployment has consequences that reach far beyond the individual. Research from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the Institute for Fiscal Studies shows that young people who are out of work for extended periods often face lower earnings for decades afterwards, as well as poorer health and social outcomes.

Economists sometimes describe this as “scarring” – that is, lasting negative economic effects. By contrast, job losses that come mid-career tend to have less lasting economic impact because these workers have more experience or skills that they can use to get their next job.

So the argument that tackling youth unemployment offers particularly high returns is, in theory, credible.

Long-term future

The difficulty is whether the guarantee, as outlined by Reeves, can deliver anything more than temporary relief. It is not yet clear where the promised jobs will come from.

If the government pays firms to create placements, they will have been specially created for the scheme, rather than representing real gaps that the firms need to fill to grow their business. When the government subsidy ends, the firms may have no reason to keep the young person on. And a short placement may not provide enough skills development to allow the young person to get a job elsewhere.

What’s more, the government is not proposing to pay the full cost of these placements. If the onus falls on businesses to absorb additional young workers in newly created roles at their own expense, the effect may be negligible. This is because Labour’s wider programme – from higher employer national insurance contributions to new employment rights – already imposes extra costs on employers.

That tension points to a broader issue in Reeves’ strategy. She has pledged not to increase headline tax rates. Instead she is seeking to expand the overall tax base by growing employment and productivity.

Yet that kind of growth usually requires sustained public investment in skills, infrastructure and industrial policy. A scheme that subsidises wages for 12 months may help individuals back into work, but it is unlikely to shift the productivity dial or generate lasting fiscal dividends without a wide programme of investment.

For Reeves, the challenge is that the guarantee must be large enough to create real career pathways and business growth. But to do so requires precisely the kind of government expenditure that is made difficult by her own “non-negotiable” fiscal rules.

Instead of a way to grow within the rules then, the youth guarantee may be added to the list of promises the government cannot fulfil without bending them.

Maha Rafi Atal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Will Rachel Reeves’ youth unemployment scheme force her to bend her own rules? – https://theconversation.com/will-rachel-reeves-youth-unemployment-scheme-force-her-to-bend-her-own-rules-266716

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Abigail Taylor, Research Fellow, City-Region Economic Development Institute (City-REDI), University of Birmingham

More than a year after the UK government abandoned the phrase “levelling up”, it has now launched a fresh strategy to distribute funding to disadvantaged communities. The promise to these deprived areas is three-pronged: investment in community facilities, enhancing public spaces like parks, and revitalising town centres and high streets.

The “Pride in Place” programme will provide up to £5 billion over ten years to support around 250 communities. A further £150 million will be shared between around 95 places across England, Scotland and Wales through an associated impact fund.

The funding is aimed at building stronger, more empowered communities and enhancing physical infrastructure. It also forms part of the Labour government’s efforts to tackle the electoral threat posed by Reform UK in some of the country’s left-behind areas.

The programme is not a wholly new announcement. In its spending review earlier this year, the government announced that 25 trailblazer neighbourhoods would each receive up to £20 million over the next decade. This funding has now been rolled into the Pride in Place programme. For the additional 144 areas named recently, this will be new funding.

The programme is putting more decision-making power in local hands – and this is certainly a good thing. It includes proposals for facilities for young people, backed by a £66 million fund called #iwill as well as a £175 million Community Wealth Fund.

Another welcome aspect are plans to help communities share learning and best practice, and to empower them to drive change locally. For now though, there is little detail on how this will work.

What’s different about this fund is that it involves allocative rather than competitive funding. This means that there is no bidding or tender process. The plan to allocate funding directly to areas based on need is likely to be welcomed by councils that previously criticised competitive funding processes for being costly and time-consuming to apply for.

---

Read more:
The ‘levelling up’ bidding process wastes time and money – here’s how to improve it

---

Funding is allocated based on a ranking of neighbourhoods using indices that measure deprivation and community needs. The needs of some areas may have changed since the deprivation index was compiled but compared to the Levelling Up Fund, which was criticised for a lack of clarity, this selection process appears to be clearer and more robust.

Challenges and constraints

But the fund is disappointing in its scale and scope. Specifically, it appears to be focused on smaller-scale cosmetic improvements rather than larger-scale transformational change.

Compared to the New Deal for Communities (NDC) programme, which ran from 1998 to 2011 across the UK, funding for Pride in Place is small. The 39 area partnerships involved in NDC received an average of £50 million – equivalent to nearly £78 million today. By contrast, the highest award from the Pride in Place programme is £20 million.

And the aims of the NDC programme were broader than those of Pride in Place. When NDC was evaluated, litter and anti-social behaviour ranked highly among the issues that people wanted to see addressed. But the funding also supported holistic change by addressing the root causes of challenges such as creating jobs, improving education and training, action against crime, improving the environment and housing and social services.

It was measured against three place outcomes (crime, community, and housing and the physical environment) and three people-related outcomes (education, health and worklessness).

Today, it seems very unlikely that the new programme will offer substantial funding to develop training, education and housing given the sums involved. What’s more, the focus is on revitalising community spaces and boosting local pride rather than tackling inequality in housing or education. All these elements are crucial in driving change in disadvantaged neighbourhoods.

Research has emphasised the importance of long-term holistic funding in addressing regional inequalities in other countries. And a recent study that reviewed UK community and economic development programmes emphasised how important it is to create conditions for communities to harness their “agency and resources”.

But it is difficult to predict the impact of this fund on current or future Reform UK voters. Heading off the challenge from Nigel Farage’s party to Labour’s vote is likely to depend on how deeply the impact is seen and felt by voters at a local level.

This in turn depends on the scale and approach of the programme – things like holistic efforts to tackle social issues and a long-term commitment to the communities involved. This, together with events (the budget this autumn, for example), are likely to shape views both in terms of physical improvements to the areas involved and voters’ perceptions of being heard in policy decisions.

Research has found that constituencies that previously received levelling-up funding saw a lower Reform vote in the 2024 general election. This suggests that visible improvements may indeed erode some of the support for Reform.

But many of the planned projects may not bear fruit until after the next general election. So if the programme is to have a significant impact, it will be important that projects have a tangible impact promptly. Reducing litter, for example, could be a quick win.

The twin approaches of youth engagement and citizen participation are positive aspects of the Pride in Place programme. The sum of funding for developing community facilities is large. But at its core, the plan falls short in addressing economic disadvantages such as skills, employment and housing. Developing a more coherent strategy around these issues is vital if the government really wants to help voters feel pride in their communities.

Abigail Taylor has received funding from the Chartered Instiute of Public Policy and Accountancy (CIPFA) for research exploring success factors in how international city regions have made progress in addressing regional inequalities and how these factors map to the UK. Abigail has also received funding from CIPFA, the Daiwa Anglo-Japanese Foundation, the Great Britain Sasakawa Foundation and the Japan Foundation Endowment Committee for research examining how regional growth can be enabled outside of national capitals. It draws on lessons from two second cities: Birmingham in England and Osaka in Japan, and focuses on four critical issues: institutional conditions for growth, regional group formation, funding mechanisms, and monitoring and evaluation. Abigail is also a Co-Investigator on the ESRC, AHRC and UKRI funded Local Policy Innovation (LPIP) Hub.

Alice is the theme led for ‘Inclusive and Sustainable Local Economic Performance’ on the Local Policy Innovation Partnership Hub, funded by the ESRC, AHRC and UKRI. Alice is also currently on a part-time secondment to the Centre for Local Economic Strategies a charity focusing on the promotion of community wealth building for local economies.

Jason Lowther does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Can Labour’s plan to fund deprived communities see off Reform? What the evidence shows – https://theconversation.com/can-labours-plan-to-fund-deprived-communities-see-off-reform-what-the-evidence-shows-266304

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ipshita Basu, Associate professor (Reader) in Global Development and Politics, University of Westminster

When asked how she was doing during her second pregnancy, Neethu, 24, told us she felt worried and cautious. “The doctor said the baby is in a sensitive state,” said Neethu who is from the Irula community in Attappadi in Kerala, India, which lies in the biodiversity hotspot of the Western Ghats mountain range.

Neethu’s first child did not survive beyond a few weeks after birth. Between 2012 and 2021 there were 136 officially reported infant deaths in Attappadi (the actual number is expected to be much higher), where Adivasis (Indigenous people) make up an estimated 43% of the population. This is considered high in a state which has the lowest infant death rates in the country.

Although these deaths had a variety of causes, malnutrition is a well documented problem among Indigenous people in this region. And malnutrition more generally is known to contribute to infant mortality by affecting the health of pregnant or breastfeeding mothers and their children.

The Adivasi families we have spoken to in Attapadi firmly believe that these are avoidable deaths. And our research into long-term changes in Attappadi’s landscape confirmed that the loss of land owned by Adivasis has eroded traditional sources of nutrition.

The state government has responded to the issue of infant mortality and malnutrition through an extension of health and agriculture projects. The “tribal multispecialty hospital” in Kottathara in Attapadi, a specialised medical care facility launched in 2007, is a striking symbol of these efforts.

To ensure everyone has access to nutritious food, special provisions are made for the Adivasis. Field-level community health workers regularly visit pregnant and breastfeeding women. Representatives from the local government and volunteers work hard to ensure Adivasi women deliver their newborns in hospitals.

However, the Adivasi residents of Attappadi are not convinced that this is going to resolve the matter. Maariyamma, an elderly Irula woman is a part of the local women’s collective that was formed in the mid 1990s for ecological regeneration and against alcohol trade in Attapadi. She firmly believes that these infant deaths have been caused by the historical curtailment of traditional millet farming, ecological destruction and the more recent land alienation.

Attappadi was exploited for timber since the early 19th century under colonial rule. Although the lands were claimed by an upper-caste, feudal landlord family, it stayed away in the plains, giving the Adivasis significant control over the land and forests.

The Irula, Muduga and Kurumba communities had farmed diverse varieties of millet in a shifting mode whereby patches of forests were slashed and burnt for farming and left fallow until they regenerated. The elderly respondents we spoke to pointed out that on the eastern slopes of the Attappadi hills, where rains are scarce, Adivasi families farmed enough millet in a season to last for the whole year.

---

Read more:
Young Indian farmers are turning to an ancient crop to fight water stress and climate change

---

Maariyamma fondly remembered old times: “There were hundreds of green leafy vegetable varieties in those days that kept us strong” she said, before breaking into an upbeat song that listed the names of villages and the greens they were known for.

The phase out of millet farming began in the mid-19th century, when the colonial forest department became anxious about conservation, resulting in increased checks on shifting cultivation. In postcolonial times, the widespread distribution of state-subsidised rice slowly started to change food habits. Meanwhile, millet cultivation received no financial state support.

This issue was compounded by two other developments: land alienation and ecological degradation. The arrival of settlers has resulted in many Adivasi communities losing lands. Several oorus (hamlets) lost over 3,000 acres over a span of three generations. This broke down their traditional governance system that managed food sovereignty, consisting of a mooppan (chief), mannukkaaran (soil manager), vandaari (treasurer) and kurunthala (rituals manager).

Reparation and regeneration

Several Adivasi households are now caught up in court cases over land ownership. In the late 2000s, a new wind energy farm sparked a land alienation controversy. A recent tourism boom in Attappadi exacerbates land encroachment by settlers and businessmen, backed by forged land documents.

As Maaran mooppan says, while the link might not be obvious, loss of land and infant deaths are closely connected. Adivasis now depend on cheap rice from fair price shops that have no nutritional value. His words resonate with the demands for food sovereignty being made by Indigenous people in several parts of the world. A 2023 study by the Indian Council of Medical Research pointed at the poor health of the Adivasis in Attappadi, but relegated land alienation (the loss of ownership and access to ancestral lands) as a passing concern in its conclusions.

---

Read more:
Thousands of babies needlessly die each year, but women’s groups can save many

---

The colonial and postcolonial intrusions by the state and settlers in Attappadi also resulted in deforestation and desertification. The state response in recent times was to initiate the Attappadi Hills Area Development Society, an organisation that divided Attappadi into watersheds and encouraged reforestation to raise the groundwater levels that were earlier depleted.

Although Adivasis nominally participated in this programme, it lacked a vision to ensure the restoration of Adivasis’ food and land sovereignty, producing short-term gains in access to water that were reversed when funding stopped in 2012.

A few recent attempts by the state government, such as the Millet Village initiative to revive millet farming, highlight the pitfalls of welfare interventions that do not address the land question. Though some Adivasi households participated in these initiatives, our respondents insist that the seeds are not native and that the products are aimed at urban consumers for whom millets are marketed as superfoods.

Neethu’s generation, several of whom we talked to and stayed with, display a complete aversion to millet-based meals and affinity towards processed foods, a habit developed in boarding schools where Adivasi children are taught in yet another state-sponsored model of engaging with the Adivasis.

This challenges the idea that Indigenous health can only be improved with increased medical care and highlights how the ecological destruction and loss of land and food sovereignty has affected the health of today’s population.

Ecological reparations involve directly addressing the historical relationship between colonialism and Indigenous health. Our research shows that a sustainable future requires listening to Indigenous peoples’ demands for food sovereignty as the key to improving health resilience.

---

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

---

Ipshita Basu receives funding from the British Academy on the Knowledge Frontiers grant project titled “Planetary Health and Relational Wellbeing: Investigating the Ecological and Health Dimensions of Adivasi Lifeworlds.”

Sudheesh R.C. receives funding from the British Academy on the Knowledge Frontiers grant project titled “Planetary Health and Relational Wellbeing: Investigating the Ecological and Health Dimensions of Adivasi Lifeworlds.”

– ref. How land restoration could address malnutrition among India’s Indigenous families – https://theconversation.com/how-land-restoration-could-address-malnutrition-among-indias-indigenous-families-263297

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Pooja Saini, Professor in Suicide and Self Harm Prevention, Liverpool John Moores University

Hormonal changes during menopause can drive suicidal thoughts – a crisis that healthcare services have failed to recognise or adequately address. The devastating link is laid bare in research my colleagues and I conducted recently.

The study, which involved interviews with 42 women who experienced suicidal thoughts and behaviour during perimenopause or menopause, exposes a troubling pattern. Women in crisis are being prescribed antidepressants instead of hormone replacement therapy (HRT), despite clear menopause guidelines stating that antidepressants should not be a first-choice treatment for menopause-related low mood.

Over the past two decades, suicide rates have climbed among women in their mid-40s to mid-50s – precisely the age when most experience the menopausal transition. Yet the role of hormonal changes in this mental health crisis has been largely ignored.

Women in the study described feelings of profound hopelessness and entrapment. One participant said: “What’s the point in being alive? What purpose, what function do I have? I’ve got nothing left to give, nothing left to contribute. Why am I still here?”

The perimenopausal depression they described went beyond ordinary low mood, encompassing crushing fatigue, a sense of worthlessness and the feeling of being a burden to loved ones. Many questioned whether their lives had any remaining value or purpose.

A healthcare blind spot

The research revealed alarming gaps in medical knowledge and care. Women reported lengthy delays in receiving appropriate hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and frequent misdiagnoses. Many said their GPs lacked a basic understanding of how hormones affect mental health.

“There was zero knowledge about hormones,” one woman said of her GP. “They were doing their best with what they felt they knew, but they didn’t know anything about this subject whatsoever. It’s not on their assessments to ask about women’s menstrual cycles.”

Even when women explicitly requested hormone treatment, some were refused due to a rigid interpretation of clinical guidelines. Research shows that antidepressants are being prescribed disproportionately to women – a pattern that, in some cases reported in the study, worsened symptoms rather than relieved them.

The hormonal upheaval of menopause doesn’t occur in isolation. In midlife, women often juggle caring responsibilities, career pressures and domestic demands. These are pressures that layer on to the biological changes they’re experiencing, creating an intense mix of physical and emotional strain.

Women are now widely recognised to be losing jobs, relationships and, in some cases, their capacity to make decisions due to menopausal symptoms. Mood swings, anxiety, brain fog, hot flushes and feelings of profound sadness can be debilitating. Yet, for many, these symptoms are dismissed or misunderstood.

This dismissal has deep historical roots. The outdated diagnosis of female “hysteria” – a misogynistic label used to pathologise women’s emotions – once justified treatments as extreme as asylum confinement and electroconvulsive therapy. The word may be gone, but its legacy endures in the way women’s hormonal suffering is still minimised as exaggeration or overreaction.

There are signs of change. In 2021, an independent UK government report made ten recommendations to support menopausal women in the workplace and beyond. And, in November 2024, clinical guidelines were updated to recommend psychological support for women experiencing early menopause.

But suicide risk for midlife women has not been adequately highlighted in menopause guidance – a gap that urgently needs addressing.

Many women in the study reported dramatic improvements in mental wellbeing and a reduction in suicidal thoughts after receiving timely HRT and support from healthcare professionals who actually listened. Some described their lives as becoming tolerable again after years of suffering.

Not all women will benefit from hormone replacement, but all deserve to have their hormones checked and to be offered treatment when appropriate. The choice should be theirs – informed, supported and taken seriously.

The silence around menopausal mental health has lasted too long. It’s time healthcare services recognised this crisis for what it is: a matter of life and death.

Pooja Saini is affiliated with NHS organisations, charities and non-for profit organisations.

– ref. The mental toll of menopause – what women really feel – https://theconversation.com/the-mental-toll-of-menopause-what-women-really-feel-261982

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mark Gatto, Assistant Professor in Critical Organisation Studies, Northumbria University, Newcastle

Warning: this article contains spoilers.

In One Battle After Another, three characters (Bob Ferguson, Colonel Steven Lockjaw and Sergio St Carlos) represent three different models of fatherhood.

Fatherhood is a timely theme. The place of men in society is being debated and challenged by polarising figures from both sides of the political spectrum.

One side promotes a regressive vision of the patriarchal man harking back to ideals of fathers as dominant breadwinners and protectors. The other side argues for caring masculinity, involved fatherhood and men taking responsibility in their communities to break the cycle of intergenerational gender inequity.

This is a battle for hearts and minds, and such battles are rarely won with stats and figures. As the success of TV shows like Adolescence has demonstrated, there is nothing like a great story to cut through political stagnation and reach a wider audience.

One Battle After Another offers another opportunity to reflect on the past, present and future of fatherhood. This is established territory for director Paul Thomas Anderson, whose masterpiece There Will be Blood (2007) depicts the complex and dysfunctional relationship between Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) and his adopted son, H.W (Dillon Freasier). The gut-wrenching scenes of paternal abandonment in that film offer an enduring example of the all-too-familiar “absent father”.

Lockjaw: the absent father

The absent father is a culturally embedded version of masculinity present in many popular films, that has been experienced by generations of children. TV series like Mad Men (2007) have explored a simultaneously utopian and dystopian version of 1960s fathers as emotionally absent.

In One Battle After Another, actor Sean Penn’s visceral depiction of the aptly named Colonel Steven Lockjaw provides an extreme example of patriarchal fatherhood: absent yet casting a dreadful shadow over a family. Lockjaw is driven to bloody revenge in pursuit of his biological daughter, a daughter he has had no hand in raising.

We know from studies on absent fathers that such absence can have a lifelong effect on children. Lockjaw, with his bizarre behaviours and fawning pursuit of neo-Nazi recognition, offers an allegory for the current rise of alt-right masculinity as jarringly jingoistic and egoist.

Such satire is valuable but also aligns with existing critiques of the manosphere. We need only look to Elon Musk’s infamous hand gesture at the second inauguration of Donald Trump, and his later appearance with his son in the oval office to conjure similarly disturbing visuals of fatherhood. This film breaks newer ground with its depiction of flawed father involvement and the less researched community leadership.

Bob Ferguson: the involved father

Involved fatherhood has been researched for many decades. The triad of a dad’s interaction, availability and responsibility with and for their children is the core criteria.

With Leonardo DiCaprio’s Bob Ferguson, we are introduced to a relatable, “good enough” involved father. He is the product of state hostility to father involvement. Research has shown that the intent of fathers to be involved is often stifled by patriarchal gender norms and workplace stigma.

As an involved father, single dad Bob comfortably meets two of the three criteria – he is physically and emotionally engaged with his daughter, Willa (Chase Infiniti). His enduring presence is partial evidence of responsibility. However, we also see the deleterious impact his drug and alcohol abuse has had on his role as responsible caregiver. The roles have reversed for him and 16-year-old Willa. Bob’s version of involvement is symbolic of the father that cares and stays, but is flawed and unsupported.

Sergio St Carlos: the caring father

Finally, we come to Benicio del Toro’s, Sergio St Carlos, a Karate sensei, Willa’s teacher and father to the community. Offering a counternarrative to bombastic male leaders, Sergio calmly resists tyranny. As a leader, he might be interpreted as emblematic of the much-vaunted male role model, yet Sergio is also flawed. He drinks and drives, leaves much domestic care to his family and revels in his role as antagonist to the law. Yet, such flaws allow this caring father to feel recognisable, relatable and attainable.

Researchers have been writing about caring masculinities for years. Central to understanding this idea is the prioritisation of caring values of positive emotion, interdependence and relationality, and the rejection of domination.

In Sergio, we find a father who cares for his family and his community. Through him, we see a new depiction of fatherhood as the role of a caregiver and care receiver in harmony with his wider community.

Such admirable qualities may seem utopian and fantastical, yet these dads exist. Close to where I live, North East Young Dads and Lads offers a community lifeline to young dads: many later become support workers. One Battle After Another reminds us that community fathers can make a real difference.

---

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

---

Mark Gatto received funding from BA Leverhulme from 2022-2024.
Mark Gatto is an Academic Board member for Working Families

– ref. One Battle Another: Sean Penn, Leonardo DiCaprio and Benicio Del Toro explore three visions of fatherhood – https://theconversation.com/one-battle-another-sean-penn-leonardo-dicaprio-and-benicio-del-toro-explore-three-visions-of-fatherhood-266858

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Matt Walsh, Head of the School of Journalism, Media and Culture, Cardiff University

The BBC’s livestreaming of the Glastonbury performance by punk-rap duo Bob Vylan broke editorial guidelines on preventing harm and offence to viewers, according to the corporation’s complaints unit. More than 5,000 people complained about the broadcast after the duo chanted “death, death to the IDF” and made other derogatory comments.

However, the BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit cleared the BBC of breaching rules on impartiality, saying: “Coverage of a music festival is clearly not on the same footing as coverage of news and current affairs; […] a wide tolerance for expressions of opinion by performers or audiences would be in keeping with audience expectations for events it does cover.”

This aligns with a pattern revealed by our ongoing research into impartiality at Cardiff University – viewers have significant concerns about BBC impartiality and frequently lodge complaints about it. But those complaints are rarely upheld.

We tracked all the complaints to Ofcom and the BBC between January and August 2025.

Ofcom received 33,108 complaints about all UK broadcasters. Of those, 71.7% were about ITV programming, with over 50% related to Love Island. In the latest series, audiences made thousands of complaints alleging gaslighting and bullying on screen. The regulator rejected all of the complaints.

By comparison, news programming such as GB News – which often attracts headlines for allegedly breaching rules on impartiality – and Sky News received far fewer complaints (making up 5.1% and 4.7%, respectively).

Ten most complained about broadcasters (Ofcom)

The most common complaint category was “generally accepted standards”. This is an Ofcom complaint category designed to protect the public from harmful or offensive material, including offensive language, discrimination, and sexual or violent content. More than half of all complaints fell into this category.

By contrast, there were far fewer complaints related to the impartiality of broadcasters: due accuracy (4.5%), due impartiality/bias (3.3%), and due impartiality (just four cases).

BBC complaints

Unlike other UK broadcasters, the BBC operates its own complaints process, BBC First. Under this system, concerns must be raised with the BBC directly before they can be escalated to Ofcom.

If broadcasters are found in breach of the rules, Ofcom can impose a range of penalties including fines and even revoking a broadcaster’s licence.

Between January and August 2025, the BBC received 9,602 complaints. More than half (52.5%) concerned BBC iPlayer, followed by BBC One (19.6%), BBC Radio 4 (12.6%) and BBC News (8.7%).

Ten most complained about services (BBC)

As with Ofcom, entertainment and music were the biggest drivers of complaints for the BBC. These were dominated by Glastonbury and Bob Vylan’s performance, which made up 52% of complaints. News and current affairs followed (32.5%), with BBC News and Today among the frequently complained about.

Ten most complained about series (BBC)

Our analysis reveals a major difference in the types of complaints the BBC receives about its output compared to those made to Ofcom about other broadcasters.

For the BBC, impartiality overwhelmingly dominated, accounting for 72.9% of all complaints. By comparison, fairness (4.6%), gender discrimination/offence (4.4%) and accuracy (4.4%) were far less prominent.

This suggests audiences strongly associate the BBC with impartiality, and complaints are more likely where it is believed one party or political issue was favoured over another.

Complaints rarely upheld

Despite differences in what audiences complain about to the BBC and Ofcom, the outcome of complaints was broadly similar across both organisations. In both cases, it was extremely rare for the regulator or broadcaster to uphold the complaints (find the content to have breached standards).

At Ofcom, only eleven complaints were upheld (0.03%). At the BBC, 4.6% were upheld and 0.2% upheld in part. However, outcomes for 21.9% of BBC complaints remain unknown, as the organisation does not always publish full details online.

Our review of the specifics finds that complaints which are upheld are often concerning concrete, provable breaches. For Ofcom, this included offensive language likely to be heard by children, and programming giving undue prominence to a product. At the BBC, upheld complaints were most often about accuracy, such as the misrepresentation of political figures.

When it comes to impartiality specifically, the majority of complaints were halted early.

Complaints dealt with by Ofcom, show 97.9% related to due accuracy, 100% related to due impartiality, and 77.4% related to due impartiality/bias were not pursued. At the BBC, 98.8% of impartiality complaints, 99.5% of bias complaints, and 83.4% of accuracy complaints were resolved at the initial stage.

A small number of cases did progress. Between 2021 and 2025, Ofcom recorded just ten confirmed breaches of impartiality. GB News accounted for five of these cases, followed by the BBC with three, and then isolated incidents involving other broadcasters such as Times Radio and ITV.

Our systematic examination of complaints and whether they were upheld reveals a clear distinction between the importance of impartiality in the public’s perception of broadcasters and actual regulatory outcomes. Despite thousands of complaints, audience concerns are rarely deemed to officially be breaches of broadcasting standards.

Matt Walsh receives funding from the AHRC for research into broadcasters’ impartiality.

Keighley Perkins receives funding from the AHRC for research into broadcasters’ impartiality.

Maxwell Modell receives funding from the AHRC for research into broadcasters’ impartiality.

– ref. Bob Vylan Glastonbury complaints upheld: here’s what viewers complain to Ofcom and the BBC about most – https://theconversation.com/bob-vylan-glastonbury-complaints-upheld-heres-what-viewers-complain-to-ofcom-and-the-bbc-about-most-266726

Source: The Conversation – UK – By David J. Bailey, Associate Professor in Politics, University of Birmingham

The UK government has announced plans for police to get new powers to restrict “repeat protests”, including banning such protests outright. The home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, said that police should be able to consider the “cumulative impact” of protest activity when placing conditions on where and when protests can take place.

The move comes after two people were killed at a Manchester synagogue on October 2. Following the attack, pro-Palestine groups were asked to reconsider planned marches and “respect the grief of British Jews”. The demonstrations nevertheless went ahead. The organisers said that cancelling a peaceful protest would be to “let terror win”.

The home secretary then announced the plans for new powers over the weekend, saying that large and repeated protests left communities “feeling unsafe and intimidated”.

Having researched protest and dissent over many years, I find the the position the government is taking on repeat protests, and the threat it poses to democratic rights, highly concerning.

Sustained campaigns are widely considered necessary for democracies to function. Successful attempts by the public to influence politicians are often the direct result of repeated actions seeking to hold the powerful to account through protest.

In recent research I conducted into environmentalist protest campaigns, “perseverance” was one of the most important factors determining whether a campaign would be successful. Those campaigns that lasted for at least one year, and staged repeated protests throughout their campaign, were highly likely to be successful.

The decision to halt fracking in the UK in 2019 came at the end of an anti-fracking campaign that involved repeated protests over the course of a decade. The controversial drilling method was ended once it became clear that it risked causing earthquakes for nearby residents.

The Reclaim the Power campaign against the UK’s largest opencast coal mine in Ffos-y-fran, south Wales, involved multiple protests over several years. Eventually the Merthyr Tydfil council refused the mine operator’s licence extension. Now that the mine has been closed, its full impact – on local residents’ wellbeing and on the environment – is finally being acknowledged.

There are plenty of similar examples both in the UK and elsewhere. Earlier this year, the government announced it would hold the Battle of Orgreave national inquiry. This followed sustained pressure by the Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign that lasted 13 years and involved multiple repeat protests and demonstrations.

In Israel, massive national protests took place from January to October 2023, in opposition to judicial reforms that threatened to weaken the power of the country’s supreme court. While the reforms went ahead, they remained contested, and were subsequently reversed.

History is full of prolonged protest campaigns producing significant democratic outcomes. The national independence movement in India lasted for three decades. The fall of the Berlin Wall was partly due to an ongoing campaign of weekly Monday demonstrations.

The suffragette protest campaign calling for the vote for women in Britain lasted for nearly ten years. The British state repeatedly imprisoned and force fed protesting women before eventually granting them the vote.

The important contribution to democratic life that sustained and repeated protests can have – typically as a direct result of their “cumulative impact” – is not only recognised by academics and civil liberty campaigners.

The current deputy prime minister, David Lammy, made exactly the same point in 2021 when Labour opposed the first attempt to curtail protest by the previous Conservative government. At that time he remembered how the “anti-apartheid movement, of which I was part, marched continuously on Trafalgar Square for black and white people to be treated as equal”.

The (restricted) right to protest

The home secretary has argued that the latest proposals are not a ban on protest, but “about restrictions and conditions”.

Similar language was also used by the previous Conservative government when it introduced a first round of anti-protest legislation in 2022. In defending that legislation, the Conservative government repeatedly promised that it was not banning peaceful protest.

Conservative home office minister Victoria Atkins claimed at the time: “Peaceful protest is absolutely fundamental to a free society. The right to peaceful protest will not be, and will never be, in question by this Government.”

Yet, the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 introduced a range of restrictions to prevent noisy or disruptive protests. This has had a concerning impact on the right to protest, and led to some of the most draconian sentences for environmental protest that the UK has ever seen.

The Labour party opposed that earlier anti-protest law. David Lammy (then shadow justice secretary) described how the legislation was “giving the police the power to prohibit the fundamental freedoms of protest that the British public hold dear”.

Since entering office, however, the Labour government has further tightened restrictions on the right to protest. The crime and policing bill currently going through parliament will ban the wearing of face masks during certain protests.

---

Read more:
Banning face coverings, expanding facial recognition – how the UK government and police are eroding protest rights

---

The recent proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation has led to hundreds of arrests of peaceful protesters, and been widely criticised by civil liberties groups. The UN’s high commissioner for human rights described the banning of the organisation as “at odds with the UK’s obligations under international human rights law”.

If “cumulative impact” is now to be grounds for limiting or prohibiting protest, it could mean certain protests are only allowed on a restricted number of occasions. As the evidence suggests, this risks permitting only those protests that have no chance of success. In curtailing or removing the potential for those in power to be held to account through public demonstration, the UK would lose a crucial democratic and human right.

---

Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

---

David J. Bailey does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Labour wants to restrict repeat protests – but that’s what makes campaigns successful – https://theconversation.com/labour-wants-to-restrict-repeat-protests-but-thats-what-makes-campaigns-successful-266825