EmmaMon

Freedom of speech is not overrated because without this freedom ideas cannot spread and be questioned, and society can become very polarised

When freedom of speech is reduced people can be afraid to question why they believe or act a certain way, and lead to polarised societies that cannot mix with other groups of people. I think this can lead to people not wanting to look at things from another point of view, because they are afraid to say anything beyond what they are permitted. This can lead to idea development becoming stalled and mingling between different groups of people becoming difficult.

Nintendo recently opened Super Nintendo World in Osaka Japan, which incorporates many famous characters from games such as Mario, Princess Peach and Luigi. This park is very interactive and already extremely popular with older and younger people internationally, has mushroom themed foods and is definitely not boring!

Super Nintendo World celebrates the Super Mario franchise in all its colourful, randomly hilarious glory and remains relevant through offering visitors a unique experience that is high tech and unseen in theme parks before: "power-up bands" which let you play against other park guests and upload your scored points to your home gaming Nintendo device.

This theme park was supposed to open before the 2020 Olympics as a huge attraction for global tourists, but the opening got postponed due to covid-19. This in itself shows how much the franchise still relates to people today as it was clearly going to sit centre stage for the tourism industry in Japan!

Also none of the Mario games I have ever played have been so difficult to understand that I find myself bored - they are always at the optimum sweet spot between challenging and rewarding!

It depends on the values of the couple in question

I think some people feel marriage represents an outdated idea that people need to be tied officially together in order to be a happy and successful couple. However, other people may love the idea of getting married, not because they feel they have to, but because their own experience of others' marriages has led them to like the idea of promising to love someone forever.

These contrasting ideas about what marriage means, may arise from the various representations of the idea that different people have been exposed to.

Therefore, I think that because marriage has different positive and negative associations for different people, it is difficult to ascertain if generally marriage is outdated or not, because what marriage is defined as is something different to every person you ask. It would be like trying to ask people if movies are outdated, when there are so many different types of movie genre that the question becomes very complicated.

It depends on the situation.

Currently group work is very difficult because all group meetings in uni are held online on platforms such as zoom, for places still in lockdown. This can make group work unpleasant because it is difficult to speak without speaking over someone else, and I find things take a lot longer to be sorted out because of everyone is at varying levels of computer-savvy-ness. Therefore currently I think group work in university should be scrapped.

However, if the group work could happen under normal circumstances I think it is very important and should be as frequent as is necessary!

It is strange to go out and have a fun time with someone you supposedly like but then at the end feel a monetary expectation from them. Neither gender should feel under pressure to pay for everything on the first date, because this adds an extra dimension of financial pressure to the date-scape that could lead to resentment if it goes awry

In the situation where person A has madly fallen for person B, but person B does not feel as strongly inclined towards a long-term relationship, if these two people went on a date and person A paid this could cause many issues.

For example, B could realise after the date that they are not so keen on A and break it off with them, but because A paid lots of money for the date A now feels angry, sad and is broke.

B now also feels really bad because they didn't pay and then broke A's heart, feeling like they wasted A's time and money.

Another outcome could be that because B feels so guilty about wasting A's money on the date, that B stays in the relationship for longer than they should, feeling like they owe the other person something. This is not good for either person involved.

Both of these scenarios could be avoided if both people split the bill in the first place, meaning no one would feel money-related resentment or relationship pressure and the only gamble is with people's hearts (which is a huge gamble on its own anyway!).

TL;DR: Mushu was absent from this live-action remake, his character replaced by a non-speaking aloof bird, and so it could never live up to the original animated version

The live-action remake of Disney’s Mulan was so disappointing because they missed out on the best character, Mushu! Previously voiced by the comedic genius of Eddie Murphy, Mushu made the previous Mulan film so entertaining and lighthearted, alongside the more serious themes of family troubles, war and sexism that are prevalent through the previous plot. The recently released live-action film, whilst the actors are excellent and the costumes are beautiful, I felt like the funny and ridiculous asides from Mushu were missing, the script was less well thought out, and the catchy songs that dominated my childhood were sadly left behind.

I thought this film would feel nostalgic to me because I loved Disney’s Mulan when I was small, but it fell flat because of the lack of: 1. musical numbers, 2. Ridiculous and funny facial expressions that can only be captured by animation (because real people can’t contort their faces that much!), and most of all 3. Mushu.

Although I did like the actor chosen to play Mulan, Liu Yifei, I think even she was cheated in this film because the script was so soulless it couldn’t showcase her talent and reveal her potential as an actor.

TL;DR: If children couldn’t legally buy high sugar fizzy drinks until the age of about 16, there would be less normalization of high sugar intake via these drinks in early childhood. This could potentially help children form healthier dietary habits that will last throughout their life and help reduce childhood obesity.

In 2018 the UK introduced a Soft Drinks Industry Levy, which meant that manufacturers and importers making drinks containing between 5-8 grams of sugar per 100ml faced a tax of around 18p per litre, and drinks with more than 8g of sugar per 100ml were taxed at around 24p per litre. Fruit juices and milk-based drinks are exempt from this tax.
This levy, commonly referred to as the “sugar tax”, was implemented to tackle childhood obesity and lead to drinks containing lots of sugar, like Coca Cola, Fanta and Pepsi, being either priced as more expensive for consumers or changed by the manufacturers so that they contained less sugar and therefore less expensive to produce.

However, I think a combined approach of an age-restriction and this tax would more effectively tackle the health issues many children face due to exposure from high levels of sugar consistently during their childhood. Consistently high dietary sugar intake increases the risk of dental caries, childhood obesity, and type 2 diabetes.

If there was an age-restriction on these high-sugar fizzy drinks, for example until the age of 16, I think many children wouldn’t notice the lack of fizzy drinks full of sugar if they have never been introduced to them in the first place. Also, this could save parents money and would provide an extra incentive not to buy these sugary drinks for their kids: a monetary charge if they do buy them and a social norm not to buy them, as no younger kids will have them and their child will not be the odd one out.

This could encourage the normalisation of different rights for men and women, which women have fought against for most of history. Aiming to promote female emancipation and well-being by trying to control the rights of all men, due to the actions of a small male minority, could be considered hypocritical

I disagree because I think this moves into dangerous territory of creating different rights for men and women. This concept could create anger between men and women ,and lead to a build up of resentment which I think would create more issues than it would solve.

I also wouldn't like a society where I couldn't socialise with my male friends after, for example, a curfew of 9pm; this could mean men couldn't attend concerts, clubs or even late-night restaurants which I think is discriminatory.

It would be very wrong to punish an entire country's population just because some extremists committed horrendous crimes. An innocent population punished for something they haven't done could potentially only incite anger.

Therefore, I do not think this would encourage most of the male population to understand the difficulties women face when women assume a protective curfew. I think this could act instead to make people resentful, angry and unwilling to listen to these issues in the first place.

TL;DR: The European governments are listening to medical bodies, adapting to what is best for people as new medical data unfolds

While I understand that this potentially temporary suspension may discourage people from getting vaccinated, I think this situation is difficult because science evolves constantly as more data and evidence is gathered. The Norwegian Institute of Public Health, following 4 younger adults admitted showing blood clots, and other reports, released this appeal:

"People who have received the AstraZeneca vaccine and feel increasingly unwell more than three days after vaccination, and who notice larger or smaller blue spots in the skin (skin haemorrhages) must consult a doctor or out-of-hours medical service as soon as possible. ".

The issue is that while there is no current evidence that this vaccine is directly linked to these clots, the people and government who give the go-ahead on mass vaccination programmes are gambling with other people's lives, and I think they are right to be cautious. Until the European Medicines Agency has given the green flag and conducted a thorough investigation into the occurrence of these clots, I think that it is understandable to suspend such a new vaccine, especially in lieu of the fact that younger adults are less at risk from the complications of a COVID-19 infection compared to the older population.

While COVID-19 increases the likelihood of blood clots itself, I think it is a weigh-up for people to decide, and important that the governments promoting vaccination show that they are listening to the advice from medical bodies.

Watermelon tastes like nothing so it definitely is not the best fruit

I disagree because I think watermelon is pretty tasteless, it's too watery, and the texture is like wet kitchen roll! This may be because watermelons shipped to the UK are not eaten when they're fresh, as they would be in some hotter countries. However, either way the fruit I find to be the best is probably bananas because you can do so many things with them: make banana bread, put them on toast, put them on pancakes and make banana splits. Also bananas are not too sweet, they are not as expensive as berries or other fruits, and they can be given to babies because they are not too hard. All round I think they are the best fruit!

Thursday is definitely the best day, hands down

Thursday is definitely the best day because you still have time to revel in how the weekend is nearly here, but there is still time left in the week to accomplish things that need to be done before Friday. For me if it gets to Friday or beyond Friday and I have left something out that needed to get done for work, I spend a lot of the weekend thinking about it and it kind of ruins it. But Thursdays still offer much hopeful time for solutions, and time to be excited for the weekend!

Also on Thursdays if you have accomplished lots during the first half of the week you know you can take it easy on Friday, and can go to sleep feeling chilled out !

I agree in that technology helps us detect crime and to potentially more effectively prove that someone has committed a crime, however I think in some cases technology acts to incite more crime than before.

By this I mean organised crime can be achieved so much more easily now, due to complex and multifaceted phones and social media servers that provide a platform for organising large scale crime.

An example of this was the top-secret online communications system that was used to illegally trade drugs and guns, busted by the UK's National Crime Agency (NCA) in July 2020. Although this site was found by the NCA, this high and easy level of communication and illegal exchange was possible due to the current high-tech state of our world.

Also I think due to the current advancements in AI, many people enter into echo chambers of the same political or ideological rhetoric when they search online or through social media for information. I think this contributes people's belief systems becoming much more isolating and radical, which can lead to offline hate crimes like bullying or harassment of a specific group of innocent people.

Therefore I think that our advances in technology also increase the likelihood of some types of crime, such as political, hate or organised crimes.

TL;DR The population differences between the four states of the UK are so vast, with England by far the largest, that economic choices made by England need the influence of all UK members - as choices made by England could vastly affect the entire UK and the value of the pound.

In the UK there are 650 parliamentary constituencies each of which is represented by 1 MP in the House of commons. There are 533 constituencies representing England (82% of the total constituencies) , there are 59 (9.07%) is Scotland, 40 in Wales (6.15%) and 18 (2.77%) in Northern Ireland.

Currently England has the greatest power in the Westminster parliament compared to the other nations. Therefore if a law was to be passed regarding England, the English politicians have the greatest sway in the outcome even without their own parliament.

Another issue in a solitary English parliament may lie in the population differences between England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. England has a much larger population than the other 3 places; it may be that a danger lies in creating an English parliament devoid of representation from the other colonised areas, that choices made within England could be harmful for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

For example, certain economic choices could be made in England that may benefit the English population, but might be detrimental to business in Scotland. Because the population of England is much larger choices affecting the British pound, that would affect all members of the UK, could be exacerbated by such a large population.

Therefore it could be argued that the representation of the other members for such a choice is important, because it will affect each of the four nations.

TL;DR The health outcomes of drinking alcohol are detrimental and cannot justify it being legal

Even though when out with friends or around Christmas I love a drink, I agree that when looking at the over arching health detriments of alcohol, it should be banned.

Cancer Research UK [explain](https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cancer/alcohol-and-cancer/does-alcohol-cause-cancer#:~:text=Drinking%20alcohol%20increases%20the%20risk%20of%20mouth%20cancer%2C%20pharyngeal%20(upper,damage%20all%20around%20the%20body.) on their website that drinking alcohol increases the risk of mouth, pharyngeal (upper throat), oesophageal (food pipe), laryngeal (voice box), breast, bowel and liver cancer. This is a huge range of risk just for the fun of an additional social lubricant.

This page highlights that for breast cancer, which is the most common cancer in the UK, 8% of cases every year are a result of drinking alcohol. This risk increases even when drinking very little/low levels of alcohol.

Gov.co.uk released a health document from Public Health England regarding alcohol and smoking in England 2019. This revealed that in 2017 over 24,000 died due to an alcohol-related cause. From 2017 to 2018, nearly 1.2 million hospital admissions occurred relating to alcohol. In 338,000 of these cases alcohol was the primary reason for admission.

Apart from the severe effects drinking can have on people's well-being, it is also destructive for the economy. The economic burden of alcohol is thought to lie between 1.3% and 2.7% of annual GDP.

Around 75% of NHS annual budget is incurred by people who are not dependent on alcohol, but misuse alcohol and this causes ill health.

I do not think the benefits of alcohol are justifiable in the face of its vast potential to cause ill-health or harm to people. I think if it was banned or limited, then the associated psychological and monetary cost would also be reduced and these reserved resources could be used for better things.

I disagree only because the wire of ring bound sketch books always got bent in my school bag! I found that with shoving a lot of book in the rings, if they were quite big, got bent and squashed making it difficult to turn pages.

For me, book bound sketchbooks did not present this problem, but I definitely do agree that it is frustrating when you lose drawing space to a the fold on every page.

good idea! Thanks Turi :)

I disagree because I think television can provide entertainment incorporating music, an aspect missing or only propelled through imagination, in books. I love to read but I think the entertainment experience for both are very different and neither one is better because they both offer different strengths. For me books are a better entertainment platform for complicated stories because they can incorporate easily lots more detail about a plot, and it is not big problem to go back a few pages on your own if you get confused or lost - but this is irritating for others when watching TV if you consistently have to ask questions about what is happening.

However, I think TV is better for entertaining stories about love because writers and producers tend to use good soundtracks, and funky style to convey different senses of love and romance. Therefore I think both these platforms provide quality entertainment!

TL;DR: “The Boys” presents various situations that reflect actions taken in real life politics, in an entertaining way

After just finishing season 1 of “The Boys” I was struck by how many aspects of politics the superpower-infused series touched on. Please do not read on if you don’t want the show to be spoiled!!

In the opening episodes the viewer sees gentle Hughy’s girlfriend accidentally murdered by a famous member of the powerful superhero squad “The Seven”. To tackle this situation, preserve public favour and keep A-Train’s name squeaky clean, the company Vought send a man to offer Hughy a huge sum of money in return for never revealing that their famous “superhero” actually killed a woman.

This was the first thing I think the show revealed about politics in large companies: their marketed image may veil horrible atrocities that they can afford to cover up by exploiting poorer people in need of the money.

For example, some very powerful research institutions may conduct their drug research in areas of lower socioeconomic status, taking advantage of individual’s inability to access or afford other medicines, or their impoverished situation as a financial incentive ultimately may push people into taking part in a dangerous drug trial they may otherwise not have chosen to do.

Hughy’s character works in a shop, is heavily bereft after the death of his girlfriend, and lives with his father who states they both need the money, and it is shown Vought expect Hughy to be pushed into this political agreement.

Another thing that I thought this series conveyed very effectively was that politicians or people in positions of power often promote a message that they personally do not actually align with. This is shown in “The Boys” through how Ezekiel who is gay himself, condemns homosexuality because that is the image his company wants his to have at Christian festivals.

This struck me as synonymous with something a real person did in the documentary film “Boys’ State”, which explores the junior political sphere in America. One of the males in this documentary pretends to be pro-life when discussing abortion policy in public, as he thinks voters from the show’s setting of Austin, Texas wouldn’t vote for him if he was honest about being pro-choice.

There are many other ways that “The Boys” presents aspects of politics in a satirical way and I found this series made me think about the complexities of power in an entertaining way.

References:
Clinical research with economically disadvantaged populations
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598135/

The Human Factor: Globalizing Ethical Standards in Drug Trials through Market Exclusion
https://heinonline.org/HOL/Pagehandle=hein.journals/deplr57&id=887&collection=journals&index=

What Happens When You Let 1,000 Teenage Boys Run a Government
https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2020/08/boys-state-documentary/615307/

When I was growing up, I met some people who believed you would go to Hell for being gay. I think some people may be so afraid of going to Hell, they believe that even consciously thinking it’s acceptable for people to be gay, they will send them to Hell too. However, I got the impression these people only thought this way to save themselves from the Hell they believed in. This made me feel that the choice to act this way was not made through free will, but with someone, figuratively, pointing a gun at their head.

It is human nature to survive and to protect yourself – however I think religion often takes advantage of this aspect in people, pointing an ultimatum gun and high jacking human survival instinct to push people to act or think in a particular way.

I do not think every religion does this, however I feel that people should be encouraged to explore the incentives behind their belief system, and evaluate whether they are choosing to act a certain way due to choice, or due to fear.

I disagree only because once I started trying the Latin section on Duolingo, it made the French and Italian languages a lot easier to try and figure out at a very basic level! I never studied Latin before, as it was never offered at my school, but I think it would be useful for a linguist or someone interested in how the romantic languages evolved over time. Therefore I think that in the same way for someone interested in art history, learning about renaissance paintings is not pointless, that for someone interested in the roots of language, learning Latin would not be pointless.

TL;DR: Fairy tales have artistic value that young children can benefit from.

While I agree that fairy tales often do present a very restrictive position for girls, often as the “damsel in distress”, for me, fairy tales also include Disney Pixar’s Tangled, and Frozen, which follow a story of both strong male and female characters, and both save the day together. I strongly believe fairy tales help children learn how to use their imagination and escape a reality that may be very difficult, in some children’s cases.

Also, I think that the description of costumes and the colourful pages that often accompany the story in children’s fairy tales expose young kids to different ideas and forms of art that could inspire them, and ignite a potential flair for design or illustration through these beautiful books. Many older fairy tales are rereleased with new illustrations in books every year, and these stories continue to inspire new works of art such as paintings and films, taking new and intriguing perspectives on the messages within them.

I think young children benefit from some older fairy tales as some are so well-known they are a large part of human’s cultural history. Due to the fame some stories such as Hansel and Gretel account for, and that they have been around for so long, there is a huge bank of diversely stylised art, theatre and film, that children would miss out on as an explorative gateway for imagination and inspiration if they were not exposed to these stories.

Therefore, due to the huge artistic platform provided by these imaginative tales, I do not think the potential negative affect of fairy tales outweighs the positive influence they could have on young children.

https://artuk.org/discover/stories/art-matters-podcast-the-magic-of-fairy-tales-in-art

https://www.brainpickings.org/2015/07/20/best-brothers-grimm-illustrations/

TL;DR: Many vital medical advances rely on GMOs, for example the production of insulin used to treat diabetes.

I disagree because many advances in medicine that are used commonly today depend on genetically modified organisms. One key medical advance, that thousands of people with diabetes rely on every day, is the large-scale production of human insulin. This is achieved using bacterial organisms that has been genetically modified.

I think the way this works is really amazing.

First, a human gene that holds the blue print to make insulin is taken from a human cell. Insulin is the human hormone that is needed to help control our blood sugar levels and is used to help control Type 1 and 2 Diabetes.

This gene, which tells a cell to make insulin, is then inserted into a bacteria’s DNA.

This bacterial cell is now a genetically modified organism and can make human insulin when it is then placed in a big fermentation tank.

In this tank, the conditions allow the safe bacteria to multiply really fast.

The large-scale production of these genetically modified organisms mean scientists can now make loads of human insulin safely, and we do not need to rely on extracting insulin from animals like pigs which is more likely to be rejected by the human body than GMO-made human insulin.

Around 7% of the UK are currently living with diabetes, with the NHS spending around 10% of its annual budget on diabetes management, and 80% on treating complications associated with diabetes.

I think to ban GMOs would be a big problem, risking backtracking in many necessary medical advances.

References:

https://microbialcellfactories.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12934-014-0141-0

https://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/fromdnatobeer/exhibition-interactive/recombinant-DNA/recombinant-dna-technology-alternative.html#:~:text=put%20the%20%E2%80%9Crecombinant%E2%80%9D%20bacteria%20in,as%20a%20medicine%20for%20people.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1755738020958752

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/dme.14225

I disagree because corn is more fun to eat on the cob with butter and ketchup! I don't know why it tastes better to me on the cob but it does, and also I think it is a good food to eat on a date because due to being a strange big corn lump that you eat with your hands it is funny to eat with someone, encourages jokey fun behaviour and can act as an ice-breaker. Corn removed from the cob offers no such advantages.

I think listening to music while painting is the best hobby for relaxing because you are creating something while keeping your mind occupied!

I disagree because I think digital platform enable illustrators to explore more tools in their art such as the tools on Procreate that allow artists to turn illustrations into animation. I think also digital platforms enable the sharing of artwork more easily on social media, as the work is already in a digital format. Therefore I do not think digital platforms are a threat to illustration.

Tea is definitely better than coffee because it contains less caffeine and so can be drunk closer to bed-time! What I like in a hot drink is the ability to cuddle up on the sofa before bed, watch a movie and have a cuppa, but because coffee contains so much caffeine I think tea is better for this purpose to allow for some sleep afterwards.

Also decaffeinated tea is tastier in my opinion than decaf coffee and therefore my all standards I think tea is better than coffee, as the decaf and the regular breakfast version are tastier and more consumable late at night than coffee. I also love fruity teas which contain little/no caffeine and feel very refreshing to drink, in contrast to the quite heavy flavour of coffee which can be overpowering sometimes.

No one can really be sure that God exists, but even if no external omnipotent force is out there listening, I think that prayer in your own words can form a helpful mental routine. I think the thought process surrounding prayer like trying to be thankful, thinking about and praying for other people, and thinking through what you want to ask for in life, can help people prioritise what they are striving for, be more mindful and feel less lost.

Psychological studies have provided conflicting evidence surrounding this area but several studies that I found have shown that prayer can help people maintain hope and reduce anxiety, such as in patients with coronary heart disease (1).

1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6390433/

I think button down shirts are beautiful when worn by both men and women.

These shirts are timeless, classic and can be worn in lots of different ways – like with the sleeves rolled up, buttoned up, unbuttoned, and tied at the front.

I love how, because shirts are often bigger than a t-shirt, there is much more space on the fabric for a funky pattern or piece of embroidery, or even just a huge splash of colour.

I think that Barack Obama was the most influential U.S. President. I believe this because, as the 44th elected President of the US in 2008, he set a new precedent for racial equality in the American political sphere, as the first African-American US President.

I think this was reflected by how the electorate in the 2008 presidential election was the most racially and ethnically diverse in U.S. history at the time. To me, this shows how influential Barack Obama was even before he got elected, as he represented hope and change for many people - some who previously had never turned out to vote.

This is why I think Barack Obama was the most influential U.S. president!

References:
https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2009/04/30/dissecting-the-2008-electorate-most-diverse-in-us-history/
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/presidents/barack-obama/

A pizza cutter, and by this I mean the little utensil that is a wheel with a handle that you roll over a pizza to cut it, is the best object to use to cut pizza.

I have seen people use knives and scissors to cut pizza, but these are not as smooth or as efficient to use in cutting pizza into slices. Also, pizza cutters are really fun to use because they feel like a pretend tool from a children’s kitchen set.

All in all, rolling pizza cutters are the superior utensils for cutting this cheesy dish.

I think the death penalty is hypocritical because in using this penalty governing bodies are upholding the notion that people have the right to decide whether another person should live or die. This notion could have been employed by the very prisoners sentenced to death– for example someone who murdered the man who killed their wife. In this scenario someone has decided a person must die as punishment for a crime they committed, which is a standard practice set by the courts where the death penalty is legal. Therefore, I think the death penalty is hypocritical in this way: how can laws expect people to respect life if they do not.

Also, I believe that no human court in which a person could be sentenced to death is 100% infallible or non-biased; there is always the chance that someone is unjustly convicted for a crime they did not commit. In this case the ruling body are hypocritical as they are just as bad as any murderer – sentencing an innocent person to death, which is an irreversible, and inexcusable punishment for the person and their family.

I think chocolate is better than vanilla. Chocolate and cocoa powder contain antioxidant molecules that are mainly flavonoids such as epicatechin, which have beneficial effects in the brain. Epicatechin, for example, can improve cognition in humans and animals, and flavonoids decrease the risk of developing Alzheimer’s Disease and stroke in humans.

Chocolate has been scientifically proven to boost mood also. I do not think vanilla is as good as chocolate because whilst it also contains flavonoids, vanilla is more expensive than chocolate and not as tasty.

Therefore chocolate, as the tastier, healthy and more abundantly cheaper option, is better than vanilla.

References:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5644282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575938/

I think Joker was meaningful in a few ways. For example when Bruce Wayne’s father punches Arthur brutally in the bathroom, because Arthur is questioning him about his parenthood.

I thought this was meaningful because it made me think Mr Wayne was a brutal cruel man. To me this exemplifies that the perspective or slant someone is presented in heavily influences your perception of who the villain and hero is in a story.

In all the previous batman related films I have seen, the parents of Batman are never presented in poor or immoral light but this could be because the focus was on presenting Batman as a hero, albeit a flawed one.

I think poetry can take different forms that mean it doesn’t always need to be heard. For example, there are some poems that use visual elements to demonstrate a pause or hesitation, or tumble of words due to their use of white or blank spaces, which you might not appreciate if you only heard them aloud (1).

Also there are communities of deaf people who perform poetry using sign language, like the Deaf Poets Society and the ASL SLAM which is a space for American poets to perform their poems using American Sign Language (2, 3).

These people experience poetry through visual expression instead of audibly and I don’t think it decreases the meaning or the power of the poems, it is just expressed in a different way.

1. http://www.poemfarm.amylv.com/2011/04/line-breaks-and-white-space-in-poems.html
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LZGYwDO-QE&ab_channel=TEDxTalks
3. https://youtu.be/dmsqXwnqIw4

Fresh orange juice (OJ) is better with the bits, or orange pulp, that gathers at the bottom of the carton because it tastes better and it feels more substantial when you have it for breakfast, compared to its bitless counterpart.

Even though I know both options are very sugary, in my head drinking OJ with the little pieces of orange in it feels healthier and the texture makes me feel more like I am eating healthy fruit, rather than just drinking something sugary (1).

Also, it could be argued that bitted OJ promotes less waste from the industry if the pulp-less OJ manufacturing process just throws away the pulp. I currently have been finding it difficult to find out what the companies do with this waste.
All in all, I think fresh OJ with the bits is much better than without the bits.

1. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/jan/17/how-fruit-juice-health-food-junk-food

Positivity can be toxic if it used as a vehicle to ignore problems, allowing them to fester and get worse. For example, being told to always look on the bright-side and being shamed for raising negative points regarding a situation, can lead to a person not ever learning how to deal with and resolve any issues, opting instead always for the “grin and bear it” attitude.

This issue of “toxic positivity” promotes a system that sets people up for failure; if someone is made to feel bad or dismissed for voicing their worries or concerns about something, this person may learn to repress their feelings, and the problem itself does not get sorted out. Toxic positivity is like asking someone who is going through a difficult time to lighten up if they mention feeling sad. Repressing feelings can result in feeling isolated, sad and misunderstood, which in turn can lead to long-term mental health problems.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/ie/blog/the-man-cave/201908/toxic-positivity-dont-always-look-the-bright-side

https://thepsychologygroup.com/toxic-positivity/

I will, thank you Turi!

Although I definitely feel that there are behaviours and ideas that are bad or wrong, I think in today’s culture people who say something against the grain of mainstream ideals are often “cancelled” or berrated online before they have been given the chance to explain why they think a certain way.

I believe this cancellation culture can act as a form of censorship as it can make people feel afraid to ask questions, discuss or debate about something, because they are afraid to say the wrong thing or offend someone accidentally.

I think this fear of discussion, which could allow two groups to see the argument from the other point of view can often, I think, result in a stronger polarisation of opinion than if the people had had their initial disagreements and then talked it out to reach an understanding of one another.

Although the Goblet of Fire is a great Harry Potter movie, my favourite is Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. This movie is the best one in my opinion because it is so light hearted, funny and can be watched by people of all ages, including small kids.

Most of the Harry Potter films made after the Goblet of Fire, have a darker, more adult plot-line and dynamic as the war against Voldemort begins to increasingly materialise. These movies are aimed at an older audience and so aren't as inclusive as say, the first HP movie.

I love watching the Philosopher's Stone because it feels almost like watching a taped childhood play starring Emma Watson, Rupert Grint and Daniel Radcliffe ,who now are all quite serious actors. In this movie these beloved actors who we watched growing up through the Harry Potter series are small kids drowned in their new uniform cloaks, who wave their wands, fight a big dog thing and Hermione says funny things like "Ron, it's leviOWsa not leviosAAAA! sighs" and "We could have all been killed, or WORSE...expelled!".

The other movies in the series draw far shorter on the charm scale compared to this movie, and nothing compares to the excitement that is infectious of Harry and the squad boarding the Hogwarts express for the first time.

I think all opinions do matter because each one reveals something about the person that formed it. The polarisation of opinion that can be seen today happening across the world, is thought to be partly due to aspects like algorithms in smart devices feeding people the same type of political content on a loop.

To me, opinions from people of different demographic backgrounds, all matter because they can help us understand what factors influence people to think certain ways. Only by treating all opinions as if they matter can you map out what things make people form the opinions in the first place.

Before the invention of mobile phones that could display the time, wrist watches, and before this pocket watches, were the primary portable time-telling devices people used when on the move. The portable watch industry developed in Switzerland in the 1540s because a man called John Calvin banned people from wearing jewellery. Jewellers learned how to make watches so that they still had a product to sell – one that was useful and didn’t count as jewellery (1). The first wristwatch was developed in 1812 and since then, for a long time, was a necessity for many human conquests. One example included soldiers fighting in World War I, who wore wristwatches to map the time whilst keeping their hands free.

I think in modern times wrist watches now are more of a fashion item as most people use their smartphone or feature phone, which they carry everywhere, to tell the time. People also now can use “smart” device features if they are using their hands for something else, to verbally ask their phone or device the time and be told it audibly. Therefore, I think now wristwatches are often a fashion item instead of a necessity.

1. https://www.govbergwatches.com/blog/history-of-horology/

When you choose clothes to put on in the morning, not including a uniform, you are expressing yourself even if you aren’t conscious of doing so. I think the colours, fabrics, and style of clothes that people select to put on their body is an expression of how they are feeling on that day, or what they think aesthetically represents how they want to be perceived – for example good, cool, fashionable, respectable, attractive or even rebellious, intimidating, or free spirited.

The clothes a person chooses to wear can tell a lot about them even if the person doesn’t want to, or feel as if they do, express themself through their clothes.

For example, you might choose a red top and not realise you chose this red because you saw a film with a man wearing a red tie that you liked. I think even this qualifies as an expression of the person’s psyche through their garment choice.

I think people are influenced by many subliminal things in their lives that points them to choose particular items to wear, and in this way their clothes tell a story, even if they didn’t intend them to.

I agree Sofia!

I think you're right Sofia! This article discusses that you could be drawn to a particular style because of the way you were raised, for example if your mum wore a particular type of jacket you would be more likely to buy one.

It also suggests that the style of the people you surround yourself with at your job will influence what styles you gravitate towards.

It points out too that there could be emotional reasons why you choose to wear for example one style of jeans instead of another - it could be that you associate one style with a time you felt safe, secure or happy, and maybe fear changing to a different one.

https://graziadaily.co.uk/fashion/news/psychological-reason-wear-clothes-wear/

Our memories are the filter through which we perceive the present, and therefore they are just as important as the new experiences we have. Memories have the power to influence the feelings surrounding our new experiences, for example, if you have sad memories surrounding beaches, when you go to a new beach you may feel sad even though nothing specifically sad happened at this unfamiliar beach.

Often memories are what great artists use to inspire works of fiction or paintings, making how they remember something intrinsic in their new experience of creating something which expresses this memory.

The concept of the futility of forgetting the past or being selective about the memories that define us, and only looking towards the future, is present in much of our cultural outlets including novels such as "The Great Gatsby". In this novel the protagonist Gatsby is determined not to let himself be defined by his past, however whilst focussing on moving on he also dwells on selective memories, such as those of his former lover Daisy, quite a lot.

Ultimately this novel, and many other works such as the 1946 film "It’s a Wonderful Life", reveal that no matter how hard we try to escape our memories, our perception of them is what defines our present experience, and our future.

Therefore, I think memories are just as important as new experiences.

References used:

https://www.shmoop.com/study-guides/literature/great-gatsby/themes

https://www.helpingwritersbecomeauthors.com/movie-storystructure/its-a-wonderful-life/

I think memories are just as important as new experiences in forming the current perspective you have on things that are happening in your life. Does this make more sense Turi? I think maybe the way I phrased the opinion was too vague!

In life, both men and women argue, fight and go to war, both between members of the same sex and the opposite sex.

Margaret Thatcher, for example, was a female British Prime minister who went to war in 1982 against the Argentinian military junta who had set up camp in the Falkland Islands - an overseas British colony. After 74 days, the British won, and this political victory put Thatcher back in favour with many British people, at a time when she was becoming unpopular (1).

I do not believe that if the Argentinian military junta was run by women, this war would have been avoided as women can also be territorial, as is proved by Thatcher herself in this instance.

Therefore, I think even in a world of all women, between different global areas and governing bodies (which will have different geographical, historical and social problems to prioritize) political leaders will still fight and disagree with each other.

Women as leaders could still become power hungry, and would still be susceptible to the ideological polarization that occurs in our current world, which can lead to war. Therefore, I believe even in a world with only women, war would still occur.

1. https://www.history.com/news/margaret-thatcher-falklands-war

Natalie this is an amazing idea, I would definitely be down for ball-room dancing. Also dancing in a big group to live music is so fun, like a club but with extra-fun outfits!

I disagree because I think that Italian cuisine is the best!

From pizza to pasta, the Italians know how to make food that tastes delicious and always makes me feel full - maybe it to do with the hefty use of cheese, bread or pasta in many of their dishes that makes it so filling, and makes me feel so satisfied afterwards.

Also Italian cuisine has a strong tradition of post-meal coffee which smells wonderful and is accompanied by little amaretto biscuits sometimes, which are great if you are too full for dessert.

Another reason why Italian, not French cuisine, is the best cuisine is because of the huge variety of ice-cream, or gelato, that are present in current Italian culture. Although ice-cream may have not been invented in Italy, the Italians developed so many styles and flavours of gelato that it is omnipresent in current Italian culture. Ice-cream makes people happy and Italian cuisine is full of tons of flavours of gelato, my favourite being cherry, or amarena, gelato.

Italy is also known for inventing alot of frozen or cold-style desserts like Tiramisù, which originates from the north of Italy. I prefer cold deserts because I think you eat them a little bit slower and savour them more, also Tiramisù is super tasty as a coffee infused dessert with a hint of liqeour.

All in all I believe Italian cuisine is the best cuisine because it always leaves me feeling happy, full and satisfied - and maybe a little tipsy from a post meal shot of sambuca!

Sources:

https://www.greatitalianchefs.com/features/traditional-italian-desserts

https://www.hardenberg-wilthen.de/products-sambuca.html#:~:text=Sambuca%20%E2%80%93%20an%20Italian%20original,green%20anise%20and%20star%20anise.

While I normally don't enjoy normal, non-melted cheese I have to say grilled cheese sandwiches are good in the sense that they are good for you, and that they taste delicious!

Intake of fermented dairy products like cheese has been linked with a reduced risk of type 2 diabetes, and cheese provides calcium which is good for your teeth and bones (1). Eating cheese as part of a daily diet has also been linked with a decreased cardiovascular and stroke risk, according to some studies (1).

Cheese is also a great source of protein, so having a grilled cheese sandwich is a good source of both protein and calcium!

Also melted cheese, in my opinion, tastes much better than non-melted cheese, and this combined with toasted bread and maybe a little bit of ketchup makes grilled cheese sandwiches definitely one of the best sandwiches of all time!

1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5122229/

Taking photographs using film is more fun than taking photographs digitally using, for example, an iPhone, because there are a finite number of photos you can take on one film. Therefore, film makes you think more about what exactly, or what moment, you want to capture and why - as you only have a certain number of photos you can take per roll. I think this can push you to think more creatively about yourself, considering why you like certain things enough to hold on to them, and make you appreciate moments more.

Due to the ease and unlimited number of photos you can snap and replace with a digital device, I don’t believe it makes you think as much about what you are photographing, making it less fun and less explorative.

When taking photos digitally you can be more critical of yourself, as you can see the images right after you take them and can compare them with the real scene, which could emphasise the photo’s flaws and make you feel compelled to retake it until it is right.

When using most film cameras, you cannot see the image you have snapped before the film is developed, making the process more rewarding and fulfilling when you finally get the developed photos. Then, when the film photos are developed, if they turned out brilliantly, they feel more valuable because you captured something after taking a risk that it could have turned out terribly. I think it is this gamble that makes film photography more fun and addictive than its digital counterpart!

If schools for young people with SEN were amalgamated with mainstream schools, I think this would build a society more aware and understanding of many underrepresented needs.

Many people who have SEN are often faced with a wall of misunderstanding by wider society, as some people cannot voice their feelings or needs the way others can – such as through social media or speech. People can very often be reliant on close family or dedicated organisations to articulate and make others aware of certain societal challenges and needs, such as the need for quiet spaces in public places like airports or shopping centres, for some people with autism.

Although there are issues in terms of practicalities, as SEN schools often require equipment like chair lifts and sensory toys, and trained staff such as occupational or music therapists, which are not required in mainstream schools, if schools were more mixed this would normalise and emphasise the need for such equipment and requirements in everyday life.

I think if more people grew up aware of what people experiencing SEN enjoy, require in social spaces and require for an equal quality of life, laws and choices made in wider society would represent and reflect these needs more effectively.

While I definitely agree with Catrin who poses a brilliant argument, that homework can place extra pressure on young people at home, especially as all children do not all have the same support or quiet living space to complete it, I think homework is needed.

I think this because often in school there is not enough time to complete the topics and cover all of the practice questions necessary to ensure a young person understands a subject.

Homework offers teachers a chance to check how a child is coping with the academic or creative workload, and possibly tailor their approach to specific children if they see they are struggling when working independently.

Also homework may offer a chance for some children who are not very good at learning in large groups to excel academically. Some young people may not wish to appear interested in work in the classroom, due to social pressure, and some people may find it difficult to write essays or answers due to distractions or noise in the class.

I believe if a teacher can map out which forms of homework certain people adapt to and learn more from, the form of homework could be adapted to make it as useful as possible! For example if the topic is the plant cell, the homework could be to draw, write or create a model to explain a plant cell. Hopefully then people who learn in different ways could all benefit from the homework!

I definitely agree Andrew! I think that while it is important to understand and keep on top of global affairs, cultural criticism offers a vehicle to emphasize that art and culture are also vitally important aspects of daily human existence - important enough that they need to be reported on as equally as news.

The music we listen to and the books we read, also shape our ideas and identities as people. Cultural criticism holds art and culture accountable for the ideas it presents to its audience - for example a critic pointing out the racial inequalities in a film cast can alert people to this as an issue in the film industry. This could pave the way for change if the critique accumulates enough attention.

Social media, including but not limited to Instagram, Snapchat, twitter and Facebook, has increased in both popularity and its power to affect people’s emotions and psychological well-being since it’s development in recent years. There is a growing body of evidence that discusses the negative effects of social media on humans psychologically.

Fear of missing out (FOMO) and Likes

Social media like Snapchat or Instagram encourages people to share videos with their friends when they have something to say or when they are doing something fun. However, this can become problematic in several cases, as it can lead to feelings of FOMO – anxiety associated with the fear of missing out on an experience that is rewarding (1). For example, someone who is feeling low or going through a difficult time, sees videos such as “Snapchat Stories”, regularly, of their friends doing fun things without them (2). Sometimes this portrayal on social media that seemingly everyone is having a better time and coping with life more easily, can be very constant and can encourage people feeling low to feel more isolated and fearful that they are missing out on key events.

Another example could be during adolescence when people can suffer from low self-esteem and are trying to form friendships at school. Videos or photos shared on social media offer potentially accidental opportunities for teenagers to heighten someone’s insecurities. For example posting a lot of videos without a new member of a friendship group who could not attend the meet-up, or a person not receiving a lot of “Likes” on their selfie compared to their peers (3).

Feelings of Inadequacy – Reality vs Insta-Reality

It is human nature to compare yourself to those around you. This comparative behaviour that humans experience can lead to feelings of deep inadequacy when scrolling through apps such as Instagram.

Through Instagram, with all its editing tools, people can present an image of reality that can be very difficult to replicate in real life. Social media allows everyone to select out the happy moments from their lives that they wish to share.

The danger comes when people compare themselves or their lives to this airbrushed, all happy perfect reality that is presented online. This can make people feel very inadequate for experiencing normal universal human pitfalls for example having a bad skin day or going through a break-up. Studies have recently suggested that social media is linked with low self-esteem, anxiety and depressive symptoms (4).

References include:

1. Dogan V. Why Do People Experience the Fear of Missing Out (FoMO)? Exposing the Link Between the Self and the FoMO Through Self-Construal. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 2019;50(4):524-38.
2. Franchina V, Vanden Abeele M, van Rooij AJ, Lo Coco G, De Marez L. Fear of Missing Out as a Predictor of Problematic Social Media Use and Phubbing Behavior among Flemish Adolescents. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(10):2319.
3. Wang R, Yang F, Haigh MM. Let me take a selfie: Exploring the psychological effects of posting and viewing selfies and groupies on social media. Telematics and Informatics. 2017;34(4):274-83.
4. Pantic I. Online social networking and mental health. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2014;17(10):652-7.

Music should be a mandatory part of all childhood and potentially adolescent education, as currently financial barriers exist for some children who would otherwise benefit strongly from learning an instrument or attending music lessons.

Scientists have shown music aids the development of our brains from a young age, reduces stress, aggression, and anxiety, has rewarding and motivational effects, and helps to build relationships and trust.

Musical training has been found to increase the reading ability, verbal memory, pronunciation accuracy of a second language, and executive functions in children, aiding cognitive development (1).

Group music therapy has proven effective in reducing aggression and improving self-esteem in children (2). Several studies have found that music is helpful to reduce anxiety and stress in children after medical or dental intervention, experiences in the foster-care system, grief, abuse or stress (3-5, 6). Therefore in a diverse classroom with children from a variety of backgrounds music could be very beneficial in their social, personal and emotional development .

Music has rewarding and motivational effects that are akin to the pleasure human experience when learning. Studies have shown that humans learn through a process of constantly trying to predict what is going to happen based on our past experiences. When we get these predictions right, for example understanding a repetitive beat, there is a small dopamine release in the reward pathways of the brain making us feel good. But dopamine is also released when we get these predictions wrong, or in error, such as if there is a surprising key change in a song. This increases attention and the brain learns to adjust and to change the prediction for the next time (7).
Music is a rewarding challenge; pleasurable because the brain is hardwired to reward us for learning new things, as this helps humans to adapt to new environments and survive (7). This could help improve mood in the classroom and motivate children to learn.

Studies have shown that the levels of a hormone called oxytocin, which is involved in forming relationships and trust, is raised when people sing together - especially during improvisation (8). Singing together in a group during childhood could help children learn how to functionally co-exist and bond with others especially children who struggle verbally or socially (8) .

Music should be mandatory for all childhood education and potentially adolescent education to make the positive effects of musical training available equally to all developing people, regardless of financial status or parental musical background.

References used:

1. Miendlarzewska EA, Trost WJ. How musical training affects cognitive development: rhythm, reward and other modulating variables. Front Neurosci. 2014;7:279-.
2. Choi A-N, Lee MS, Lee J-S. Group Music Intervention Reduces Aggression and Improves Self-Esteem in Children with Highly Aggressive Behavior: A Pilot Controlled Trial. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 2010;7:465730.
3. Bekhuis T. Music therapy may reduce pain and anxiety in children undergoing medical and dental procedures. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2009;9(4):213-4.
4. Garrido S, Baker FA, Davidson JW, Moore G, Wasserman S. Music and trauma: the relationship between music, personality, and coping style. Front Psychol. 2015;6:977-.
5. Robarts J. Music Therapy with Sexually Abused Children. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2006;11(2):249-69.
6. Zanders ML. Music Therapy Practices and Processes with Foster-Care Youth: Formulating an Approach to Clinical Work. Music Therapy Perspectives. 2015;33(2):97-107.
7. Gold BP, Pearce MT, Mas-Herrero E, Dagher A, Zatorre RJ. Predictability and Uncertainty in the Pleasure of Music: A Reward for Learning? The Journal of Neuroscience. 2019;39(47):9397.
8. Keeler J, Roth E, Neuser B, Spitsbergen J, Waters D, Vianney J-M. The neurochemistry and social flow of singing: bonding and oxytocin. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2015;9(518).