Search

Woman baffled by mother-in-law’s insane ask over baby name

A woman has gone head-to-head with her mother-in-law over the name she has chosen for her unborn child. The pregnant woman took to Reddit to share her unusual predicament, explaining how her mother-in-law has demanded she change the name of her baby. The soon-to-be mum shared how she recently had dinner with her husband’s family, where she decided to reveal the baby’s gender and name. She had been keeping the information secret, but with only a few weeks of her pregnancy left, she decided to share the happy news that she was having a baby boy and had chosen the name Shawn for her son. But not everyone shared her happiness over the moniker, as her mother-in-law went pale with shock and demanded she choose a new name. “My in-laws got quiet for a moment before asking if there were other options we'd considered. Apparently, Shawn is the name of my 17-year-old sister-in-law Ashley's former bully who tormented her [for years],” the pregnant woman explained on Reddit. While she empathised with her in-laws, she didn’t want to change the name as it was the only one her and her husband agreed on for their son. She also explained that she hadn’t known about the family connection when they picked the name, and hadn’t picked it out of any malicious intent. “We took forever to pick a name,” she said. “Shawn is the only one we could agree on.” The dinner party soon ended after the argument began, but the mother-in-law didn’t back down, sending the expecting mum demanding messages. “She texted me and my husband again to ask us to find a new name for Ashley's sake.” “Would I be the a**hole for not wanting to change it? We were only able to agree on it a few weeks ago.” Commenters were torn over the subject, with many rushing to the pregnant woman’s defence, saying she can pick whatever name she wants for her son. “My spouse and sibling have the same name. Somehow, you just compartmentalise it,” one shared. “I feel like if a new baby in my family shared a name with my bully I'd just adapt,” another wrote. “After all, Shawn is a VERY common name, so I can't freak out every time I hear it and survive in this world.” However, a select few sided with the mother-in-law, sharing how stunned they were that the couple couldn't find enough compassion to pick another name. One person said, “I understand the difficulty of finding a name that feels right, but for me, after learning this, Shawn would quickly become another name that didn't work. It's only been decided on it for a few weeks so I'd just go back to the drawing board.” Image credits: Shutterstock

Family & Pets

Does the royal family have a right to privacy? What the law says

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gemma-horton-1515949">Gemma Horton</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sheffield-1147">University of Sheffield</a> From court cases to conspiracy theories, the royal family’s right to privacy is, somewhat ironically, nearly always in the spotlight. The latest focus is Kate Middleton, Princess of Wales, whose whereabouts have been the subject of <a href="https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a60008117/kate-middleton-health-speculation-conspiracy-theories-online/">online speculation</a> after it was announced she was undergoing abdominal surgery and would be away from public duties until after Easter. This comes just weeks after King Charles <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68208157">revealed that he is undergoing treatment for cancer</a>, and a legal settlement between Prince Harry and Mirror Group Newspapers over <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68249009">illegal phone hacking</a>. Interest in the personal lives of the royals and other celebrities <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1150193">is a constant</a>, driving newspaper sales and online clicks for decades. You only needs to consider the media frenzy that followed Princess Diana to <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17512786.2013.833678">see this</a>, and its potentially devastating consequences. From a legal perspective, the British courts have ruled that everyone – the royal family included – is entitled to a right to privacy. The Human Rights Act incorporates into British law the rights set out by the European Convention on Human Rights. This includes article 8, which focuses on the right to privacy. In the years after the Human Rights Act came into force, courts ruled on a string of cases from celebrities claiming that the press invaded their privacy. Courts had to balance article 8 of the convention against article 10, the right to freedom of expression. Rulings repeatedly stated that, despite being in and sometimes seeking the limelight, celebrities should still be afforded a right to privacy. Some disagree with this position, such as prominent journalist <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/prince-harry-hacking-piers-morgan-b2336442.html">Piers Morgan, who has criticised</a> the Duke and Duchess of Sussex asking for privacy when they have also released a Netflix documentary, a broadcast interview with Oprah Winfrey and published a memoir. But the courts have made the position clear, as in the case concerning Catherine Zeta-Jones and Michael Douglas after Hello! Magazine published unauthorised photographs from their wedding. The <a href="https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/190559/3/Final%20Edited%20Version%20-%20Celebrity%20Privacy%20and%20Celebrity%20Journalism-%20Has%20anything%20changed%20since%20the%20Leveson%20Inquiry_.pdf">court stated</a> that: “To hold that those who have sought any publicity lose all protection would be to repeal article 8’s application to very many of those who are likely to need it.” There is no universal definition of privacy, but scholars have identified key concepts encompassing what privacy can entail. In my own research, I have argued that the <a href="https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/190559/3/Final%20Edited%20Version%20-%20Celebrity%20Privacy%20and%20Celebrity%20Journalism-%20Has%20anything%20changed%20since%20the%20Leveson%20Inquiry_.pdf">notion of choice</a> is one of these. Privacy allows us to control the spread of information about ourselves and disclose information to whom we want. <h2>Privacy and the public interest</h2> There are exceptions to these protections if the person involved had no reasonable expectation of privacy, or if it was in the public interest for this information to be revealed. There is no solid, legal definition of the “public interest”, so this is decided on a case-by-case basis. <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17577632.2021.1889866">In the past</a>, the public interest defence has been applied because a public figure or official has acted hypocritically and the courts have stated there is a right for a publisher to set the record straight. When it comes to medical records and information concerning health, case law and journalistic <a href="https://www.ipso.co.uk/editors-code-of-practice/">editorial codes of conduct</a> are clear that this information is afforded the utmost protection. Model Naomi Campbell was pictured leaving a Narcotics Anonymous meeting and these images were published by the Daily Mirror. The court found that there had been a public interest in revealing the fact she was attending these meetings, as she had previously denied substance abuse. The House of Lords accepted that there was a public interest in the press “setting the record straight”. Nonetheless, the publication of additional, confidential details, and the photographs of her leaving the meeting were a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2004/may/06/mirror.pressandpublishing1">step too far</a>. The House of Lords highlighted the importance of being able to keep medical records and information private. <h2>Royal health</h2> When it comes to the royals, the history of <a href="https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a23798094/lindo-wing-st-marys-hospital-facts-photos/">publicity</a> around royal births, often posing with the newborn royal baby outside of the hospital, has set a precedent for what the public can expect about the royals’ medical information. When they choose to go against this tradition, it can frustrate both royal-watchers and publishers. King Charles made the choice to openly speak about his enlarged prostate to “assist public understanding”. And, as Prostate Cancer UK noted, this has worked – they noted a <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/king-charles-cancer-statement-treatment-b2494190.html">500% increase in people visiting their website</a>. However, he has chosen to not to divulge information about his cancer diagnosis beyond the fact that he is receiving treatment. This is his right. While revealing further information might stop speculation and rumours about his health, it is not the king’s duty to divulge private, medical information. However, if his health begins to impact his ability to act as monarch, the situation could change. It might be that the press finds more information about his health without his knowledge, but unless they have a genuine public interest in publishing this information, privacy should prevail. You would no doubt want your private medical information kept secret, not shared around your workplace and speculated on unless it was absolutely necessary. It is thanks to these laws and court precedent that you don’t have to worry about this. The royal family, regardless of their position, should expect the same standard. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gemma-horton-1515949">Gemma Horton</a>, Impact Fellow for Centre for Freedom of the Media, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sheffield-1147">University of Sheffield</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/does-the-royal-family-have-a-right-to-privacy-what-the-law-says-224881">original article</a>.

Legal

Running or yoga can help beat depression, research shows – even if exercise is the last thing you feel like

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michael-noetel-147460">Michael Noetel</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805">The University of Queensland</a> At least <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.665019/full">one in ten people</a> have depression at some point in their lives, with some estimates <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379720301793">closer to one in four</a>. It’s one of the worst things for someone’s wellbeing – worse than <a href="https://www.happinessresearchinstitute.com/_files/ugd/928487_4a99b6e23f014f85b38495b7ab1ac24b.pdf">debt, divorce or diabetes</a>. <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-are-so-many-australians-taking-antidepressants-221857">One in seven</a> Australians take antidepressants. Psychologists are in <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-cant-solve-australias-mental-health-emergency-if-we-dont-train-enough-psychologists-here-are-5-fixes-190135">high demand</a>. Still, only <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003901">half</a> of people with depression in high-income countries get treatment. Our <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj-2023-075847">new research</a> shows that exercise should be considered alongside therapy and antidepressants. It can be just as impactful in treating depression as therapy, but it matters what type of exercise you do and how you do it. <h2>Walk, run, lift, or dance away depression</h2> We found 218 randomised trials on exercise for depression, with 14,170 participants. We analysed them using a method called a network meta-analysis. This allowed us to see how different types of exercise compared, instead of lumping all types together. We found walking, running, strength training, yoga and mixed aerobic exercise were about as effective as <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-cognitive-behaviour-therapy-37351">cognitive behaviour therapy</a> – one of the <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00004/full">gold-standard treatments</a> for depression. The effects of dancing were also powerful. However, this came from analysing just five studies, mostly involving young women. Other exercise types had more evidence to back them. Walking, running, strength training, yoga and mixed aerobic exercise seemed more effective than antidepressant medication alone, and were about as effective as exercise alongside antidepressants. But of these exercises, people were most likely to stick with strength training and yoga. <iframe id="cZaWb" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/cZaWb/2/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> Antidepressants certainly help <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(17)32802-7/fulltext">some people</a>. And of course, anyone getting treatment for depression should talk to their doctor <a href="https://australia.cochrane.org/news/new-cochrane-review-explores-latest-evidence-approaches-stopping-long-term-antidepressants">before changing</a> what they are doing. Still, our evidence shows that if you have depression, you should get a psychologist and an exercise plan, whether or not you’re taking antidepressants. <h2>Join a program and go hard (with support)</h2> Before we analysed the data, we thought people with depression might need to “ease into it” with generic advice, <a href="https://www.who.int/initiatives/behealthy/physical-activity">such as</a> “some physical activity is better than doing none.” But we found it was far better to have a clear program that aimed to push you, at least a little. Programs with clear structure worked better, compared with those that gave people lots of freedom. Exercising by yourself might also make it hard to set the bar at the right level, given low self-esteem is a symptom of depression. We also found it didn’t matter how much people exercised, in terms of sessions or minutes a week. It also didn’t really matter how long the exercise program lasted. What mattered was the intensity of the exercise: the higher the intensity, the better the results. <h2>Yes, it’s hard to keep motivated</h2> We should exercise caution in interpreting the findings. Unlike drug trials, participants in exercise trials know which “treatment” they’ve been randomised to receive, so this may skew the results. Many people with depression have physical, psychological or social barriers to participating in formal exercise programs. And getting support to exercise isn’t free. We also still don’t know the best way to stay motivated to exercise, which can be even harder if you have depression. Our study tried to find out whether things like setting exercise goals helped, but we couldn’t get a clear result. Other reviews found it’s important to have a <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31923898/">clear action plan</a> (for example, putting exercise in your calendar) and to <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19916637/">track your progress</a> (for example, using an app or smartwatch). But predicting which of these interventions work is notoriously difficult. A <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04128-4">2021 mega-study</a> of more than 60,000 gym-goers <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04128-4/figures/1">found</a> experts struggled to predict which strategies might get people into the gym more often. Even making workouts fun didn’t seem to motivate people. However, listening to audiobooks while exercising helped a lot, which no experts predicted. Still, we can be confident that people benefit from personalised support and accountability. The support helps overcome the hurdles they’re sure to hit. The accountability keeps people going even when their brains are telling them to avoid it. So, when starting out, it seems wise to avoid going it alone. Instead: <ul> <li> join a fitness group or yoga studio </li> <li> get a trainer or an exercise physiologist </li> <li> ask a friend or family member to go for a walk with you. </li> </ul> Taking a few steps towards getting that support makes it more likely you’ll keep exercising. <h2>Let’s make this official</h2> Some countries see exercise as a backup plan for treating depression. For example, the American Psychological Association only <a href="https://www.apa.org/depression-guideline/">conditionally recommends</a> exercise as a “complementary and alternative treatment” when “psychotherapy or pharmacotherapy is either ineffective or unacceptable”. Based on our research, this recommendation is withholding a potent treatment from many people who need it. In contrast, The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists <a href="https://www.ranzcp.org/getmedia/a4678cf4-91f5-4746-99d4-03dc7379ae51/mood-disorders-clinical-practice-guideline-2020.pdf">recommends</a> vigorous aerobic activity at least two to three times a week for all people with depression. Given how common depression is, and the number failing to receive care, other countries should follow suit and recommend exercise alongside front-line treatments for depression. I would like to acknowledge my colleagues Taren Sanders, Chris Lonsdale and the rest of the coauthors of the paper on which this article is based. If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223441/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michael-noetel-147460">Michael Noetel</a>, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805">The University of Queensland</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/running-or-yoga-can-help-beat-depression-research-shows-even-if-exercise-is-the-last-thing-you-feel-like-223441">original article</a>.

Body

“My sister-in-law announced she was pregnant at my child’s funeral”

A woman has asked for advice on how to navigate her relationship with her sister-in-law, after the woman overheard an inappropriate conversation at her child’s funeral. The grieving mother, a 28-year-old named Melissa, took to Reddit to share the heartbreaking story of how her toddler passed away after a battle with cancer. Melissa described the time as the “hardest in my life”, explaining how she felt she lost “a part of herself” after the funeral. While Melissa expected her toddlers’ memorial service to be difficult, she never predicted a family member would make it even harder. The mother said that when she heard her sister-in-law telling people about her pregnancy, she thought the move was just cruel. “She didn't make a big announcement but more than ten people at the service 'heard' and it's what everyone was talking about. To understate it, I was livid,” Melissa wrote on Reddit. Melissa’s post then asked social media users for advice, as she was unsure how much of a relationship she wanted to have with her sister-in-law after the stunt. The 28-year-old shared that she had fallen pregnant herself, and was facing pressure to have a party in celebration, but she didn’t want her whole family in attendance. “I've been working on who I want to invite, and I really don't want my SIL there,” she said. “Besides what she did, she's a vindictive and mean person and I cannot stand her.” “I mentioned it to my husband and he says he couldn't care less whether she's there or not. But for the sake of saving face, I want opinions before I do this.” She asked the online forum if she would be “an a**hole” for not inviting her, addin that she would still be inviting her husband's other sister and husband's brother's wife. “The original SIL will be the only one not invited,” she clarified. The post was flooded with comments as many backed up Melissa, slamming the sister-in-law for her selfish behaviour. “I wouldn't want someone like that around me. Announcing a pregnancy at a child's funeral is insane,” one said. “Cut her off and ignore everyone close to her. You are right to have nothing to do with her. She's totally classless.” However, others encouraged her to have an adult conversation with her sister-in-law in an attempt to mend their relationship. “Please let it go,” one person began. “This happened on a terrible day during a bad time for you. It's possible that could be clouding how you're looking at this, she may not have been malicious at all.” Image credits: Shutterstock

Family & Pets

Out of the rabbit hole: new research shows people can change their minds about conspiracy theories

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/matt-williams-666794">Matt Williams</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/massey-university-806">Massey University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/john-kerr-1073102">John Kerr</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-otago-1304">University of Otago</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mathew-marques-14884">Mathew Marques</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/la-trobe-university-842">La Trobe University</a> Many people <a href="https://theconversation.com/was-phar-lap-killed-by-gangsters-new-research-shows-which-conspiracies-people-believe-in-and-why-158610">believe at least one</a> conspiracy theory. And that isn’t necessarily a bad thing – conspiracies do happen. To take just one example, the CIA really did engage in <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/13/cia-mind-control-1266649">illegal experiments</a> in the 1950s to identify drugs and procedures that might produce confessions from captured spies. However, many conspiracy theories are not supported by evidence, yet still attract believers. For example, in a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12746">previous study</a>, we found about 7% of New Zealanders and Australians agreed with the theory that <a href="https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/sensing-our-planet/on-the-trail-of-contrails">visible trails behind aircraft</a> are “chemtrails” of chemical agents sprayed as part of a secret government program. That’s despite the theory being <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/8/084011">roundly rejected</a> by the scientific community. The fact that conspiracy theories attract believers despite a lack of credible evidence remains a puzzle for researchers in psychology and other academic disciplines. Indeed, there has been a great deal of research on conspiracy theories published in the past few years. We now know more about how many people believe them, as well as the psychological and political factors that <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-25617-0">correlate with that belief</a>. But we know much less about how often people change their minds. Do they do so frequently, or do they to stick tenaciously to their beliefs, regardless of what evidence they come across? <h2>From 9/11 to COVID</h2> We set out to answer this question using a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-51653-z">longitudinal survey</a>. We recruited 498 Australians and New Zealanders (using the <a href="http://prolific.com">Prolific</a> website, which recruits people to take part in paid research). Each month from March to September 2021, we presented our sample group with a survey, including ten conspiracy theories, and asked them how much they agreed with each one. All of these theories related to claims about events that are either ongoing, or occurred this millennium: the September 11 attacks, the rollout of 5G telecommunications technology, and COVID-19, among others. While there were definitely some believers in our sample, most participants disagreed with each of the theories. The most popular theory was that “pharmaceutical companies (‘Big Pharma’) have suppressed a cure for cancer to protect their profits”. Some 18% of the sample group agreed when first asked. The least popular was the theory that “COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ contain microchips to monitor and control people”. Only 2% agreed. <h2>Conspiracy beliefs probably aren’t increasing</h2> Despite contemporary concerns about a “<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7320252/">pandemic of misinformation</a>” or “<a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30461-X/fulltext">infodemic</a>”, we found no evidence that individual beliefs in conspiracy theories increased on average over time. This was despite our data collection happening during the tumultuous second year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Lockdowns were still happening occasionally in both <a href="https://www.timeout.com/melbourne/things-to-do/a-timeline-of-covid-19-in-australia-two-years-on">Australia</a> and <a href="https://covid19.govt.nz/about-our-covid-19-response/history-of-the-covid-19-alert-system/">New Zealand</a>, and anti-government sentiment was building. While we only tracked participants for six months, <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0270429">other studies</a> over much longer time frames have also found little evidence that beliefs in conspiracy theories are increasing over time. <hr /> <iframe class="flourish-embed-iframe" style="width: 100%; height: 600px;" title="Interactive or visual content" src="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/16665395/embed" width="100%" height="400" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-forms allow-scripts allow-downloads allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe> <div style="width: 100%!; margin-top: 4px!important; text-align: right!important;"><a class="flourish-credit" href="https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/16665395/?utm_source=embed&utm_campaign=visualisation/16665395" target="_top"><img src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/made_with_flourish.svg" alt="Made with Flourish" /></a></div> <hr /> Finally, we found that beliefs (or non-beliefs) in conspiracy theories were stable – but not completely fixed. For any given theory, the vast majority of participants were “consistent sceptics” – not agreeing with the theory at any point. There were also some “consistent believers” who agreed at every point in the survey they responded to. For most theories, this was the second-largest group. Yet for every conspiracy theory, there was also a small proportion of converts. They disagreed with the theory at the start of the study, but agreed with it by the end. There was also a small proportion of “apostates” who agreed with the theory at the start, but disagreed by the end. Nevertheless, the percentages of converts and apostates tended to balance each other pretty closely, leaving the percentage of believers fairly stable over time. <h2>Inside the ‘rabbit hole’</h2> This relative stability is interesting, because <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2564659">one criticism</a> of conspiracy theories is that they may not be “<a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/criterion-of-falsifiability">falsifiable</a>”: what seems like evidence against a conspiracy theory can just be written off by believers as part of the cover up. Yet people clearly do sometimes decide to reject conspiracy theories they previously believed. Our findings bring into question the popular notion of the “rabbit hole” – that people rapidly develop beliefs in a succession of conspiracy theories, much as Alice tumbles down into Wonderland in Lewis Carroll’s <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/11">famous story</a>. While it’s possible this does happen for a small number of people, our results suggest it isn’t a typical experience. For most, the <a href="https://www.latrobe.edu.au/news/articles/2023/opinion/how-to-talk-to-someone-about-conspiracy-theories">journey into</a> conspiracy theory belief might involve a more gradual slope – a bit like a <a href="https://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1985.tb05649.x">real rabbit burrow</a>, from which one can also emerge. <hr /> Mathew Ling (<a href="https://www.neaminational.org.au/">Neami National</a>), Stephen Hill (Massey University) and Edward Clarke (Philipps-Universität Marburg) contributed to the research referred to in this article.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222507/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <hr /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/matt-williams-666794">Matt Williams</a>, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/massey-university-806">Massey University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/john-kerr-1073102">John Kerr</a>, Senior Research Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-otago-1304">University of Otago</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mathew-marques-14884">Mathew Marques</a>, Senior Lecturer in Social Psychology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/la-trobe-university-842">La Trobe University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/out-of-the-rabbit-hole-new-research-shows-people-can-change-their-minds-about-conspiracy-theories-222507">original article</a>.

Mind

Mother bans in-laws from seeing her baby after they go against her wishes

A woman has banned her in-laws from seeing her newborn daughter after they “betrayed her trust” and directly went against her wishes. The new mum shared the story to Reddit, as she explained why she was cutting contact with her husband’s parents after they pierced her child’s ears without their knowledge or consent. “My husband is from a culture where it's not uncommon to pierce baby girls' ears and his mother started pestering me about getting my daughter's ears pierced a few days after she was born,” the 32-year-old mum began. “I made it clear that I would not be doing that, and that I'd be waiting until she's old enough to ask for it herself. We live in my country where piercing a baby's ears isn't common at all.” The new mum's world soon came crashing down after the baby spent a weekend with her grandparents, before she went back to her parents red in the face and screaming. “My mother-in-law was looking after her over the weekend and decided to pierce her ears without my knowledge or consent.” “When I saw this I threw a fit. My baby was crying in pain, and I actually took her to the doctor to get their advice on whether or not to take them out.” The doctor advised the parent to take the earrings out as they were irritating the baby, but the issue didn’t end there. “I decided at that moment that my mother-in-law and everyone else on that side of the family (except for my sister-in-law, who's on my side about this) is going to have no alone contact with my daughter ever again - or at least until she's a teenager.” “My worry is that she'll do the same thing again, and to be frank, she's lost my trust entirely. I told her that if she had a problem with that, I'd report what she did to the police.” The husband of the baby girl reluctantly sided with his wife over the issue, despite saying it wasn’t a big deal and suggesting everyone move on from the incident. The story prompted a mixed response online, with some people saying the woman was overreacting and should work towards rebuilding trust with her in-laws. Others, however, had the opposite opinion, with one person saying, “Forget rebuilding trust, I'd be having them charged with assault.” Another person said, “They mutilated a child and they knew it was against the parents wishes. These people have serious problems. Not that I'd press charges, but getting holes poked in someone else's kid is a huge thing.” Image credits: Getty Images

Family & Pets

"Good luck!": Pink stops show as pregnant fan goes into labour

It's not every day that you can say pop icon Pink stopped her show as you were going into labour, but for one Sydney fan this was her reality. The So What singer briefly stopped her show after spotting a pregnant woman getting wheeled out of her concert by a medic on Friday. Wanting to know what all the commotion was about, Pink stopped half way through her performance of Our Song and excitedly tried to find out the baby-to-be's gender, after discovering that the concertgoer was experiencing contractions. "Is it Alicia or Alex being born?" she asked from the stage, referencing her birth name, Alecia Beth Moore. The singer then playfully said that they shouldn't "be looking" anymore and urged the crowd to give the woman some "privacy." <div class="embed" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline; outline: none !important;"><iframe class="embedly-embed" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline; outline: none !important; width: 573px; max-width: 100%;" title="tiktok embed" src="https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiktok.com%2Fembed%2Fv2%2F7333559856185593090&display_name=tiktok&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiktok.com%2F%40miss_chantal%2Fvideo%2F7333559856185593090&image=https%3A%2F%2Fp16-sign-sg.tiktokcdn.com%2Fobj%2Ftos-alisg-p-0037%2F22874a6d4d174a149b284ecb5a642be4_1707477473%3Fx-expires%3D1707865200%26x-signature%3DNsu2Nw7zUT%252Bf6ndURt3fjSjaZfg%253D&key=59e3ae3acaa649a5a98672932445e203&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=tiktok" width="340" height="700" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div> "Wow, Our Song, that was the one that did it. Wouldn't have called that one! I thought it would've been Get The Party Started or 'Never Not Gonna Dance Again," she said, before congratulating the mum-to-be. "That's exciting. I don't even know what to say. But we have to sing now. Good luck! It's gonna be great! You're gonna do great," she said. A clip of the moment was shared on TikTok, with fans hoping that the mum had a safe delivery. "Baby is like nah I wanna see pink I don’t wanna just hear. Hope mama had a safe delivery 💕💕" one wrote. "Yep or maybe bubba is thinking will this make pink my godmother 😂💕" another added. Images: TikTok

Family & Pets

Newly revealed diary entry shows Queen Elizabeth's final moments

A previously unseen diary entry from Queen Elizabeth's private secretary has revealed the final moments of the late monarch's life. Sir Edward Young dutifully recorded every moment of the Queen's life, including Her Majesty's last moments at Balmoral surrounded by her family. “Very peaceful,” he wrote. “In her sleep. Slipped away. Old age. She wouldn’t have been aware of anything. No pain.” The private diary entry was lodged in the Royal Archives and has not been made public until now. Queen Elizabeth passed away at the age of 96 on September 8th 2022 at her beloved Balmoral Castle in Scotland, as she was surrounded by the royal family. Others who were by the Queen’s bedside included the Queen’s senior dresser and trusted confidante, Angela Kelly, along with the Rev Kenneth MacKenzie, a minister, who read to her from the Bible. The diary entry comes from a new book Charles III: New King, New Court. The Inside Story, written by royal expert Robert Hardman, who shared other details from the Queen's final moments. The book notes that after King Charles sat by his mother's bedside for hours before her death, he went out to forage mushrooms to clear his head. It was when he was returning to Balmoral Castle that he was informed his mother has died. After her death, a footman brought a locked red box of paperwork found by her deathbed. In it, were two sealed letters: one to her son and heir, Charles, and the other, addressed to Young. The box also contained her final royal order: her choice of candidates for the prestigious Order of Merit for ‘exceptionally meritorious service’ across the Commonwealth. Hardman writes in the new book, “Even on her deathbed, there had been work to do. And she had done it.” Image credits: Getty Images

Caring

"I was terrified": Law & Order star reveals traumatic past

Warning: This story contains graphic content. Mariska Hargitay, who plays Olivia Benson, a character that investigate rapists on Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, has revealed that she too is a victim of sexual assault. The actress opened up about her traumatic past in a powerful essay written for <a href="https://people.com/mariska-hargitay-experience-rape-renewal-reckoning-8424247" target="_blank" rel="noopener">People Magazine</a>, where she revealed that she was raped by “a friend" when she was in her thirties. "A man raped me in my thirties," she bravely revealed in the essay. "It wasn’t sexual at all. It was dominance and control. Overpowering control." The actress revealed that he was a friend who "made a unilateral decision" and recalled the fear she felt when the incident occurred. "He grabbed me by the arms and held me down. I was terrified," she said. "I didn’t want it to escalate to violence. I now know it was already sexual violence, but I was afraid he would become physically violent. "I went into freeze mode, a common trauma response when there is no option to escape. I checked out of my body," she recalled. Hargitay, who is the daughter of the late actress Jane Mansfield, said that she never thought of herself as a "survivor", and often "minimised" what happened to her when she talked about it with others. "My husband Peter remembers me saying, “I mean, it wasn’t rape," she wrote. "Then things started shifting in me, and I began talking about it more in earnest with those closest to me. They were the first ones to call it what it was." The actress said that she wants other survivors to feel "no shame" about sexual assault and wants "this violence to end." She added that justice "may look different for each survivor," but for her she wants "an acknowledgment and an apology" after what happened. "This is a painful part of my story. The experience was horrible. But it doesn’t come close to defining me, in the same way that no other single part of my story defines me," she concluded, adding that she feels for all sexual violence survivors. "I’m turning 60, and I’m so deeply grateful for where I am. I’m renewed and I’m flooded with compassion for all of us who have suffered. And I’m still proudly in process." Hargitay started her own foundation, the Joyful Heart Foundation, in 2004 to help survivors of sexual assault. Image: Getty

Caring

Netflix reveals top TV shows of 2023

Netflix has released its first ever biannual report into how their original shows and performed on the platform. The report titled “What We Watched: A Netflix Engagement Report”, covers over 18,000 titles and nearly 100 billion hours viewed between a six-month period from January and June. Content is included in the report if it's been watched for over 50,000 hours. According to the list the most-watched TV show during the six month period, was Season 1 of The Night Agent, a US show which stars Gabriel Basso and Luciane Buchanan. The show racked up a massive 812.1 million hours of viewership. Comedy-drama Ginny & Georgia took second spot, which was streamed for over 665 million hours. The third most-watched show was the first season of the South Korean thriller The Glory with 622 million hours of viewership. Worldwide hit Wednesday, starring Jenna Ortega ranked fourth, with half a billion hours from January to June, even though it technically had over one billion hours of viewership in the first 19 days since after it was released in November 2022. But since the show premiered late last year, most viewers had already finished the series by the time the Netflix report began. Netflix co – chief executive Ted Sarandos said that the streaming platform is making continuous effort to make viewership information more public, in order to build trust with their audience. “In the earliest days, it really wasn’t really in our interest to be that transparent because we were building a new business and we also needed room to learn but we also didn’t want to provide road maps to future competitors,” Sarandos told reporters, according to Vulture. “The unintended consequence of not having more transparent data about our engagement was it created an atmosphere of mistrust over time with producers and creators and the press about what was happening on Netflix,” Sarados said. “So we’ve been on this continuum of opening things up.” Image: Phil Barker/Future Publishing via Getty Images

"You've restored my faith": Community shows up for lonely birthday boy

One dad's desperate plea has "restored" his faith after his local community showed up for his son's third birthday party. Pre-schooler William Buck and his dad Steven sat patiently on a beach in Wellington, waiting for his friends to arrive and begin the celebrations for his third birthday party. As time passed, William and his dad grew more hopeless, and they worried about the fate of the celebrations. "He kept asking where everyone was, and we were like 'they’re coming soon'," Steven Buck told <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/wellbeing/parenting/133203054/familys-plea-after-nobody-shows-at-3yearolds-birthday-brings-community-to-beach" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener" data-i13n="cpos:2;pos:1" data-ylk="slk:Stuff;cpos:2;pos:1;elm:context_link;itc:0" data-rapid_p="9" data-v9y="1">Stuff</a>. Steven felt "guilty" that none of his son's mates had come to the party, especially given how excited his son had been for this birthday, as he had been talking about the celebration for weeks. In a last ditch effort to make William's day special, Steven turned to social media for help. Steven posted an image of the pair online and invited any locals wanting "some sun and sand" to join them. "William would love some friends to play with. He has Hot Wheels, sand toys, dinos, and we have some snacks and drinks. Any and all welcome," he wrote. Amazingly, locals responded in their thousands, wishing William a 'Happy Birthday' while many others joined the three-year-old and his parents. "Going there. See you soon," one local wrote, before arriving with her family. The partygoers arrived with bubbles and inflatables, parking themselves down on beach chairs ready to celebrate the sunny day with William. "Thank you so much everyone for the birthday wishes and support," Steven wrote online after the day. "Wellington you always restore my faith in humanity!" Image credits: Facebook

Family & Pets

No gavels, no hearsay and lots of drinking: a law expert ranks legal dramas by their accuracy

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/dale-mitchell-1468293">Dale Mitchell</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-the-sunshine-coast-1068">University of the Sunshine Coast</a> From Elle Woods in Legally Blonde to <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10383441.2015.1087367">Jennifer Walters in She-Hulk</a>, Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird to Denny Crane in Boston Legal, our popular culture is often where we first see and witness legal practice. Sometimes this comes via the silver screen, other times television. But it would be wrong to think that all we see on legal television shows is accurate – even when it claims to capture reality. Most legal dramas are terrible at capturing the realities of law. <h2>Not accurate: Law(less) and (dis)Order</h2> Law and Order (1990-) innovated television drama by showcasing both the investigation of a crime by police, and then its prosecution in court. With its multiple spin-offs, including Law and Order: Special Victims Unit (1999-) and the shortlived Law and Order: Trial by Jury (2005-2006) (which had the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aolG65V1Dx8">best theme song of all the series</a>), the Law and Order franchise is a televisual legal juggernaut. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aolG65V1Dx8?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> As with most serials, Law and Order presents the criminal justice system as moving quicker than you can say dun dun. This couldn’t be further from the truth. The mean duration of criminal law matters in Australian higher courts was <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/crime-and-justice/criminal-courts-australia/latest-release">almost one year</a> (50 weeks) across 2021-22. While <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_reg/ucpr1999305/s5.html">procedural rules in civil matters</a> require courts to facilitate the “just and efficient resolution of disputes at minimum expense”, in criminal law, speed and efficiency must not be prioritised over accuracy: a person’s liberty is at stake. Most criminal matters do not proceed to a full trial as an accused will often plead guilty to the charges. As a result, the matter proceeds to sentencing without prosecutors needing to prove the offence. The rates of this occurring are quite alarming. <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/crime-and-justice/criminal-courts-australia/latest-release">Data across 2021-22</a> reveals over 75% of defendants in Australian courts entered a guilty plea, and almost four in five criminal convictions (79%) resulted from a guilty plea. <a href="https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/1705761/32_1_8.pdf">Research suggests</a> defendants plead guilty for a variety of reasons, including to avoid the cost of a trial and to receive a lesser sentence. <a href="https://theconversation.com/pandemic-pushed-defendants-to-plead-guilty-more-often-including-innocent-people-pleading-to-crimes-they-didnt-commit-165056">Data from the United States</a> suggests the pressures of the pandemic led to innocent people pleading guilty to crimes they didn’t commit. If Law and Order was a more accurate reflection of criminal law, matters would proceed immediately to sentencing due to guilty pleas. And should an accused be found guilty, a chunk of their sentence would be reduced by time served awaiting trial. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/60GV5lv8h3o?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>Not accurate: Suits</h2> Suits (2011-19) centres around law firm partner Harvey Specter (Gabriel Macht) and his mentorship of Mike Ross (Patrick Adams) – the “lawyer” who never graduated law school and provides legal advice thanks to his photographic memory. This is, obviously, a brutal ethical breach for all involved, and clearly fraud. In Australia, law students who present themselves to be lawyers are <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-07/law-graduate-jacob-reichman-fined-posing-solicitor-gold-coast/7824324">subject to sanctions</a> by the Legal Services Commission. They can <a href="https://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/biglaw/35821-fake-lawyer-cops-suspended-jail-sentence">cause harm to clients</a> who have hired their services. And the Legal Admissions Board may <a href="https://www.qlsproctor.com.au/2020/11/chief-justice-wants-answers-before-considering-lawyer-impersonators-bid-to-become-legal-practitioner/">deny their entry</a> into the profession. (Spoilers) Ross is eventually sentenced to two years in prison for this fraud, a similar sentence to <a href="https://www.law.com/thelegalintelligencer/almID/1202786675709/">a recent case in the United States</a>, but he only serves three months before solving a crime and earning early release. More unrealistic than this early release is that Ross does fairly quickly thereafter gain admission to the profession, which seems unlikely to occur so soon after such an act of fraud. While Suits has left its mark(le) on the popular imagination of law, it fails to address one of the primary duties of civil litigation: the duty of disclosure. The MacGuffin-ing of law is common in TV serials. It’s the “smoking gun” found on the day of the trial, or for the lawyers in Suits, the random document which shows up during the trial to turn the case - dramatically presented by our protagonists as they flail into court armed with this data sans ethics. This is not quite accurate. In adversarial legal systems like Australia, New Zealand, the UK and the US, civil litigation rules <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_reg/ucpr1999305/s211.html">require parties</a> to disclose to one another all documents in their possession or control which are directly relevant to a matter in dispute. This is a continuing duty, so if you discover such a document at any time during the case, it must be disclosed. While <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_reg/ucpr1999305/s212.html">exceptions</a> based on various privileges may apply, this essentially means civil litigation must be run in an “all cards on the table” manner. Randomly producing undisclosed material at trial requires the leave of the court and may result in orders of contempt and <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_reg/ucpr1999305/s225.html">cost penalties</a>. It’s not like the lawyers of Suits have ever really been concerned about ethics, though. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wUh9jomHZp4?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>Not accurate: How to Get Away with Murder(ing rules of evidence)</h2> While most lawyers would support making it a criminal offence to critique Viola Davis, How to Get Away with Murder (2014-20) presents one of the most common offences within legal dramas: the haphazard approach to rules of evidence. Annalise Keating (Davis) and her ragtag team of morally illiterate law students (although I never see them studying?!?!) manipulate people to obtain evidence and then dramatically prompt witnesses on the stand to read this information into the record, or otherwise “sneak” it into the trial. This is not accurate. And it ignores the basic reality that so much of legal practice is about not just obtaining evidence, but ensuring that evidence is admissible in court. One of the most important rules of evidence deals with <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ea199580/s59.html">hearsay evidence</a>. A court cannot allow evidence to be considered if its reliability is unable to be interrogated. Witnesses can only present evidence that they saw, heard or perceived themselves. Unless an exception to the hearsay rule applies, such evidence would be inadmissible. Like in Suits, these approaches to presenting evidence may have serious implications. This poor trial management results in <a href="https://www.aic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-05/rpp074.pdf">delays to criminal trials.</a>. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rMB_Gw5-T-I?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>Accurate: Fisk</h2> Fisk (2021-) follows Helen Tudor-Fisk (Kitty Flanagan), an established contract lawyer whose personal dramas lead her to move to the boutique Melbourne probate law firm of Gruber and Gruber (played by Marty Sheargold and Julia Zamero). Fisk excels in showing the importance of lawyer-client relations and the word-of-mouth that sustains much of small legal practice. It’s the anti-Suits, and Fisk is more powerful for it. The discussions of wills and estates and most basic legal principles in Fisk are mostly sound – and the show doesn’t need to get into “legalese” as matters are resolved out-of-court. This is a distinct reality of law: litigation is a last resort. Forms of <a href="https://www.qls.com.au/Practising-law-in-Qld/ADR/Alternative-Dispute-Resolution/Types-of-Alternative-Dispute-Resolution-(ADR)">alternative dispute resolution</a>, including mediation, negotiation and conciliation, have become the primary way of resolving legal disputes. Fuelled by <a href="https://www.ag.gov.au/legal-system/alternative-dispute-resolution/civil-dispute-resolution-act-2011">legislative changes</a> which require the exhaustion of alternative dispute resolution measures before proceeding to litigation, and a pursuit of reduced costs, the drama of trial is not something anyone should yearn for. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/N1Qt0Wo1gGo?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>Accurate: Rake</h2> Cleaver Greene, a character said to be loosely based on the career of a Sydney barrister, shows us the absolute madness of work as a “<a href="https://nswbar.asn.au/the-bar-association/senior-counsel#:%7E:text=Senior%20counsel%20are%20barristers%20who,a%20QC%20or%20queen's%20counsel.">silk</a>”. Rake excels at showing the reality of law. The show raises interesting and accurate questions of law (yes, it is true there is no <a href="https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/10453/18992/1/2011006119.pdf">explicit offence</a> of cannibalism in New South Wales) and presents Australian court process accurately. Thankfully, there’s not a gavel in sight. <a href="https://www.survivelaw.com/post/941-working-hardly-random-facts-about-the-gavel">Australian courts do not use gavels</a>, and their presence in legal dramas in Australian and UK courts shows a lack of attention to detail. The presence of the gavel as a symbol of justice is <a href="http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/NSWBarAssocNews/1994/17.pdf">an entirely American invention</a>. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qWWI2EdOssk?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> Rake is accurate, in part, because the site of drama is rarely the courtroom, but rather Greene’s personal life. The accuracy of that element for law I will leave up to the jury. But with a <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13218719.2013.822783">2014 study</a> finding 35% of lawyers engaged in hazardous or harmful drinking and another showing <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-15/study-finds-high-rates-anxiety-depression-in-legal-profession/11412832">high rates of anxiety and depression</a> in the legal profession, the evidence is compelling.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/212880/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/dale-mitchell-1468293">Dale Mitchell</a>, Lecturer in Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-the-sunshine-coast-1068">University of the Sunshine Coast</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-gavels-no-hearsay-and-lots-of-drinking-a-law-expert-ranks-legal-dramas-by-their-accuracy-212880">original article</a>.

Legal

An X-Files expert on the show’s enduring appeal – 30 years on

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bethan-jones-1345648">Bethan Jones</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-york-1344">University of York</a> On September 10 1993 the pilot episode of The X-Files aired. Thirty years later to the day, I was at a <a href="https://www.twincities.com/2023/04/17/moa-30th-anniversary-x-files-convention/">convention centre in Minneapolis</a> with 500 other fans and the show’s creator, Chris Carter, celebrating its legacy. Ostensibly a show about aliens, The X-Files swiftly became part of the cultural lexicon and remains there to this day. In part its success was down to the chemistry of its two leads – David Duchovny, who played FBI Special Agent Fox Mulder and Gillian Anderson, who played FBI Special Agent Dana Scully. After all, it was the X-Files fandom that invented the term <a href="https://www.vox.com/2016/6/7/11858680/fandom-glossary-fanfiction-explained">“shipping”</a> (rooting for characters to get together romantically). But, as I argue in my new book, <a href="https://www.tuckerdspress.com/product-page/the-x-files-the-truth-is-still-out-there">The Truth Is Still Out There: Thirty Years of The X-Files</a>, what really made the series successful was its ability to tap into contemporary cultural moments and ask us to really think about the times we’re living in. When the series began in 1993, the US was still grappling with the effects of <a href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Watergate-Scandal">Watergate</a> and the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Vietnam-War">Vietnam war</a>, but concerns were also rising about the approaching millennium and the economic and cultural divisions within US society. It also coincided with Bill Clinton becoming president – marking the end of more than a decade of Republican leadership. It’s little surprise that fears about immigration, globalisation, national identity and technology emerged and were adopted – and sometimes foreshadowed – by The X-Files’ writers. Several episodes throughout the first nine seasons dealt with artificial technology, for example, and <a href="https://x-files.fandom.com/wiki/Eve">Eve</a>, an episode in season one about clones, came four years before the birth of <a href="https://dolly.roslin.ed.ac.uk/facts/the-life-of-dolly/index.html">Dolly the Sheep</a>. Critical theorist Douglas Kellner <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/432310?casa_token=44PnlIC58_oAAAAA%3AyDF-53m8WsQCfec-VrVjlF8nav_Q2y24s9ldHo7bFPUvAwUrbcieUZoEk7DZe6R3Mma-WcaUNskkC4CR4baLoAHz7EdFEqcAONLgeI4SiU85I-LPIjNk">argued in 1994</a> that The X-Files “generated distrust toward established authority, representing institutions of government and the established order as highly flawed, even complicit in the worst crimes and evil imaginable”. Though I’d argue it was less that the show generated this distrust and more that it leveraged the growing number of reports about the government’s secretive activities to inspire its storylines. As the public became more aware of the government’s role in – and surveillance of – public life, so too The X-Files considered the ways in which technology could be used as a means of control. In the season three episode <a href="https://x-files.fandom.com/wiki/Wetwired">Wetwired</a>, for example, a device attached to a telephone pole emits signals that tap into people’s paranoid delusions and lead them to kill. And in the season six episode, <a href="https://x-files.fandom.com/wiki/S.R._819">SR 819</a>, a character’s circulatory system fails because he has been infected with nanotechnology controlled by a remote device belonging to a shadow government. These themes reflected growing concerns about government agencies using technology to both spy on and influence the public. <h2>The X-Files’ enduring appeal</h2> During my X-Files research, carried out with viewers after a revival was announced in 2015, it became clear that the show has remained part of the cultural lexicon. As one fan explained: “The cultural context of conspiracy theories has changed since the beginning of X-Files. Nowadays, every pseudoscience documentary uses similar soundtrack and narrative.” Of course, the X-Files didn’t invent conspiracy theories, but as one of the show’s writers and producers, Jim Wong, <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/lifestyle/how-x-files-brought-conspiracy-theories-into-mainstream-culture">points out</a>, it did “tap into something that was more or less hidden in the beginning when we were doing it”. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-P-07yN806A?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe><figcaption>The trailer for The X-Files revival.</figcaption></figure> The focus on the rise of the alt-right, disinformation and fake news in seasons 10 and 11 seemed like a logical angle from which to approach the changing cultural context the revival came into. Carter and his co-writers dove straight in to what Guardian critic <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/tvandradioblog/2016/feb/09/your-government-lies-why-the-x-files-revival-is-just-right-for-our-climate-of-extreme-scepticism">Mark Lawson calls</a> “a new era of governmental paranoia and public scepticism”, fuelled by the 2008 financial crisis, the fall out of the war on terror and scores of political scandals. Season 10 saw the introduction of a right-wing internet talk show host who argues that 9/11 was a “false flag operation” and that the mainstream liberal media lie to Americans about life, liberty and the right to bear arms. The parallels to conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones and Glenn Beck were obvious. Carter’s incorporation of topics like surveillance, governments’ misuse of power and methods of social control meant that seasons ten and 11 were very much situated in the contemporary moment. This is perhaps most obvious in the season 11 episode, <a href="https://x-files.fandom.com/wiki/The_Lost_Art_of_Forehead_Sweat">The Lost Art of Forehead Sweat</a>, which deals with the disinformation of the Trump era head on. The episode’s protagonist, Dr. They, tells Mulder that “no one can tell the difference anymore between what’s real and what’s fake”. While The X-Files’ search for the truth in the 1990s may have ultimately been a philosophical endeavour, in the 21st century it is a commentary on how emotion and belief can be more influential than objective facts. Watching the show again while researching my book, I was struck by how it was dated predominantly by its lack of technology, rather than the ideas it expresses. In the second season episode <a href="https://x-files.fandom.com/wiki/Ascension">Ascension</a>, Mulder pulls a phone book off a shelf in his search for Scully – now we’d use Google. But in other aspects the show remains as relevant today as it was in the 1990s, encouraging us to think about the big questions relating to faith, authority and truth. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bethan-jones-1345648">Bethan Jones</a>, Research Associate, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-york-1344">University of York</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/an-x-files-expert-on-the-shows-enduring-appeal-30-years-on-213610">original article</a>.

Ed Sheeran fans left devastated moments before show

Ed Sheeran has been forced to abruptly cancel his show in Las Vegas, just hours before it was set to begin. The British singer-songwriter, who is coming to the end of his Mathematics World Tour, broke the news to devastated fans on Sunday, saying he was "so sorry" for the last minute cancellation. Sheeran wrote on Instagram, “I can’t believe I’m typing this but there’s been some challenges encountered during the load in of our Vegas show." He continued, “It’s impossible to go forward with the show. I’m so sorry. I know everyone has travelled in for this and I wish I could change it." “The gig will be postponed to Saturday October 28th and all purchased tickets will be valid for that date. I’m so, so sorry x.” Fans were quick to express their disappointment, with many saying they had travelled to attend the show and weren't able to come back for the postponed gig. One fan wrote, “I can’t believe we travelled all the way to Vegas 10 hours to see Ed Sheeran for him to cancel less than an hour before the show." “My poor husband a disabled vet along with so many people standing waiting on 103 degree heat to be turned away!!! I can’t come back in October, and no refund!!” Many demanded an explanation as to how the gig could be cancelled at such short notice, to which Ed took to Instagram again in the hours after the cancellation to shed some light on the issue. According to his statement on Instagram, the show was cancelled over safety concerns when two tall towers, used to hold up the stage and lighting equipment, had become unstable. Despite best efforts to restabilise the structures, the issue then travelled to the safety of the floor, which was set to hold 65,000 concertgoers, and the whole show had to be cancelled. Adding to the explanation, Sheeran wrote, "I really am gutted, this was very much out of my control but I do take full responsibility for everyone that was put out from the cancellation. Of course refunds are available at point of purchase, and there is a rescheduled show October the 28th if people still want to come, I promise it will be special." "We really thought the show was going to happen up until the very last moment but it just couldn’t for safety reasons. Sorry again to everyone affected, and hopefully see you in October x". Image credits: Getty Images

Music

"Buddy is the star": Jamie Oliver's son scores his own show

Buddy Oliver is a chip off the old block after landing his own cooking show for the BBC, according to reports. The 12-year-old has already made a name for himself with his YouTube channel Cooking Buddies, where he creates cooking tutorials with his famous dad, the iconic Jamie Oliver, in their family home. With an impressive fanbase of over 133,000 subscribers, Buddy's skills have been recognised and he is now reportedly set to appear on the small screen. "Buddy has taken all of his dad's experience on board and is about to put it into play with his own cookery show," a source told The Sun. The budding cook will reportedly be joined by other kids on the show, who will learn tips from him on how to get started on cooking. "Jamie's fans have long been asking for his son to have his own show for their kids to enjoy," the source added, claiming that Buddy will be the star of the show. "Buddy is the star of the show. Jamie is keen for his son to prove himself to telly audiences, not just live off the family name. "So Buddy's got to showcase his technical skills and presenting ability. But if his YouTube work is anything to go by, it'll be natural for him," the source said. Buddy is the second youngest of Jamie's children with his wife Jools. He has three older sisters Poppy, 21, Daisy Boo, 20, and Petal, 14, and a younger brother seven-year-old River Rocket. Image: YouTube

Food & Wine

Harrowing footage shows passengers clinging for life in falling cable car

Harrowing new footage has shown the moment 12 people were forced to hold on for dear life inside a falling cable car in Pakistan. The video footage, captured by a <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-66597447" target="_blank" rel="noopener">BBC News</a> drone, shows the terrified passengers - six children and six adults - clinging on to parts of the cable car as they dangled stranded for 12 hours. The group were travelling to a school in the cable car when a cable broke halfway through their journey high above the remote Allai valley in Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. They were more than 300 metres in the air when they became stranded. A daring rescue operation took more than 12 hours to complete, with the use of a military helicopter and several zip wire experts. <blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/reel/CwS_rAiMksY/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"> </div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;"> <div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: 8px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: auto;"> <div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"> </div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/CwS_rAiMksY/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by BBC News (@bbcnews)</a> </div> </blockquote> The children were rescued first, with the adults the last to be plucked free. Some of the passengers told AFP that several times they lost hope in ever being rescued, and had considered leaping from the chairlift. “Some of the children were so frustrated and were considering to jump down, but the elder passengers gave us confidence,” 15-year-old Rizwan Ullah told AFP. “When the cable car was twisting, we were terrified and we started reciting the Koran and gave confidence to each other not to jump down.” Gul Faraz, a 25-year-old shopkeeper who was in the cable car, said they had started to lose hope that they would be rescued. “During the whole process we thought we would die. There were some times when we thought we would not survive,” he said. On Twitter, now known as X, Caretaker Prime Minister Anwaar-ul-Haq Kak said he was “relieved” after the safe rescue. “Great team work by the military, rescue departments, district administration as well as the local people.” The owner of the cable car company in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province was later arrested by police on multiple charges including negligence and endangering valuable lives. Image credits: BBC News

Travel Trouble

Bruce Springsteen cancels shows after being "taken ill"

Bruce Springsteen's upcoming performances have been unexpectedly put on hold due to his falling ill, leading to the postponement of his scheduled shows. A sudden announcement, posted on the singer's official X account, has informed fans that the show dates will be rescheduled. "Due to Bruce Springsteen having been taken ill, his concerts with The E Street Band at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia on August 16 and 18 have been postponed. We are working on rescheduling the dates so please hold on to your tickets as they will be valid for the rescheduled shows." This announcement emerged mere hours before the debut show, just as eager fans were anticipating a memorable experience with Springsteen and his band. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Due to Bruce Springsteen having been taken ill, his concerts with The E Street Band at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia on August 16 and 18 have been postponed. We are working on rescheduling the dates so please hold on to your tickets as they will be valid for the rescheduled… — Bruce Springsteen (@springsteen) <a href="https://twitter.com/springsteen/status/1691872953414115424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 16, 2023</a></blockquote> This occurrence isn't the first instance where the music icon had to modify a show at the 11th hour due to health issues. Earlier this year, Springsteen communicated the postponement of his March 9 event at the Nationwide Arena in Ohio, attributing it to "illness." No explicit details about his health condition were disclosed in that instance either, but fans were encouraged to retain their original tickets for the rescheduled shows. Following the Ohio cancellation, two more postponements were subsequently declared. The performance originally slated for March 12 at the Mohegan Sun Arena in Connecticut has been rescheduled to September, while the March 14 show at the MVP Arena in Albany, upstate New York, was similarly postponed. Both changes were tied to unspecified health concerns. During this period, Steven Van Zandt, a member of the E Street Band, assuaged fans' concerns. He reassured them via Twitter, stating: "No need to be anxious or afraid. Nothing serious. Just a temporary situation. We will all be back in full force very soon." The band embarked on their tour in February, commencing in Tampa and traversing the United States before crossing the Atlantic to Europe in April. Returning to the United States in August, Springsteen and his crew intended to entertain audiences for several more months before culminating the extensive tour on December 10 in San Francisco. With a career spanning over 50 years, the seasoned singer-songwriter shows no signs of slowing down anytime soon.

Caring

Ken’s rights? Our research shows Barbie is surprisingly accurate on how ‘men’s rights activists’ are radicalised

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lucy-nicholas-145660">Lucy Nicholas</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> In the Barbie movie, we open with a picture of a perfect Barbieland where (almost) everyone is happy, diversity and sisterhood are embraced, and Barbies hold all positions of power. The Kens however, reflecting the popularity of the dolls in the real world, play a mainly decorative role. Spoilers for Barbie follow. In the film, we see a disgruntled Ken (played hilariously by Ryan Gosling) follow “Stereotypical” Barbie (Margot Robbie) to the real world where she has to find her human owner. This is all to fix an error that is allowing the real world to seep into Barbie land, with symptoms such as Barbie having an existential crisis. In the real world, Ken discovers the concept of the patriarchy. This sees him take a journey that is clearly influenced by, and pokes fun at, many aspects of contemporary anti-feminist men’s rights culture. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pBk4NYhWNMM?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>Barbieland and the matriarchy</h2> It has been proposed that <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-greta-gerwigs-barbie-land-the-matriarchy-can-be-just-as-bad-as-the-patriarchy-209317">Barbieland is a matriarchy</a>, but I would argue that their attitude to Kens is instead indifference. Ken was aggrieved that Barbie didn’t notice him and reciprocate his affections. This is not dissimilar to the grievances of some real-life men under contemporary feminism. Why don’t women’s lives revolve around them? And what can they do to address this perceived injustice? The movie cleverly parallels the emotions, narratives and logics that lead men to extreme antifeminist and misogynistic thinking, and in doing so exposes the flimsiness of their foundations. Having undertaken <a href="https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2020-12/apo-nid307612.pdf">research</a> on online antifeminist discourses, Ken’s journey from aggrievement to masculine “enlightenment” parallels themes we found in Men’s Rights Activist spaces. Radicalisation into this world is often motivated by a feeling among boys and men of being left behind by a feminist world or system that doesn’t value them. This then leads them to long for an imagined natural order of patriarchy where women are back in their place and men regain their entitlements. These logics underpin <a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-the-incel-community-has-a-sexism-problem-but-we-can-do-something-about-it-207206">incel</a> culture, a movement that is increasingly understood as a terror threat, and has been associated with various acts of terror, such as the 2022 Aotearoa New Zealand <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/closest-to-an-incel-attack-nz-has-had-experts-concern-after-attempted-murder-of-auckland-schoolgirls/HYPEVZ6F4BFT3CV2O4SXS5FR7U/">Epsom crash case</a>. <h2>The manosphere and MRAS</h2> The “<a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-68360-7_2">manosphere</a>” can be understood as a loose coalition of antifeminist online subcultures. This includes MRAs (<a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1097184X15574338">Men’s Rights Activists</a>) who claim reverse discrimination and that feminism has gone too far, and <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1097184X18816118">Redpillers</a> who claim to have swallowed the “red pill” to see the truth about feminism’s dominance. PUAs (<a href="https://repository.upenn.edu/entities/publication/d8971ded-1ec3-4939-8c0a-ab248dad62ba">Pick up Artists</a>) teach men how to manipulate the women they feel they are entitled to, to give them sex; and MGTOWs (<a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1751867">Men Going Their Own Way</a>), who are antifeminist separatists (from women). Some of the most well known members of the manosphere are incels (involuntary celibates) a misogynistic community of self identified “beta-males” who want an end to women’s rights which prevent them from getting sex. <h2>Ken’s grievances</h2> Like many MRAs, Ken struggles with a sense of entitlement romantically (rather than sexually in genital-free Barbieland), and in attitudes to power and respect. Ken was being “<a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/friend%20zone">friend-zoned</a>” by Barbie, who despite being “boyfriend and girlfriend” wouldn’t let him stay over at the Dream House, because “every night is girl’s night”. This is coupled with a feeling of not being special, as Ken is essentially interchangeable with any other Ken. He is also “alpha’d” by other Kens: in the language of the manosphere, Barbie is a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-27/incels-inside-their-terrifying-online-world/9700932">“Stacy” and the other Ken is an alpha “Chad”</a> preventing him from getting what he wants. In <a href="https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2020-12/apo-nid307612.pdf">our data</a> we found women are often described as “overlords”, man-haters, misandrists and “feminazis”. Among other concerns, men perceive economic loss due to women’s participation in the workplace, and crucially a lack of men’s sexual access to women brought about by the gains of feminism such as the awareness raised around consent by the #metoo movement. These men all share a starting point of grievance at women and their perceived indifference towards them. When Ken goes to the real world, he discovers patriarchy and he LOVES it. He has been “redpilled”. Patriarchy explains his aggrievement, and affirms his feelings. He takes patriarchy back to Barbieland and transforms it to Kendom, where the men change it to a society oriented around men and their power (and horses…). <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Y1IgAEejvqM?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>Redpilled ken</h2> This redpilled Ken is a hilarious parody of the “neomasculinity” of the pick up artist (PUA) movement, that seeks to restore a masculine-centred world. Neomasculinity is about a belief in biological difference, traditional masculinity and heteronormative gender roles. The amusing depiction of the Kens trying to perform traditional <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/hypermasculinity">hypermasculinity</a> and needing their egos stroked – such as in a hilarious scene where the Kens are serenading the Barbies on the beach with an acoustic rendition of Matchbox Twenty’s <a href="https://youtu.be/HAkHqYlqops">Push</a> (“I wanna push you around … I wanna take you for granted”) – brilliantly shows the extent to which toxic masculinity is learned. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/HAkHqYlqops?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> Additionally, the competition among the Kens (that the Barbies ultimately stoke to overturn the Kentriarchy) is the perfect illustration of the damage toxic models of masculinity does to men. As Australian sociologist Raewyn Connell has long argued, almost no men can live up to <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/27640853">masculine ideals</a>, resulting in negative outcomes not just for women but also for men themselves. <h2>Finding the real Ken</h2> The movie ends with Barbie, her human (America Ferrera), “Weird Barbie” (Kate McKinnon) and Allan (Michael Cera) deprogramming the brainwashed Barbies and turning the Kens against each other. But what of Just Beach Ken? And what can we learn from this for preventing or managing radicalisation of this feeling of aggrievement in real men or boys? Well, Barbie and Ken reach a middle ground. Barbie encourages Ken to work out who he is outside of his relation to Barbie, and to learn being Just Ken is enough. This isn’t dissimilar to the methods of men’s behaviour change programs and counselling for men who use violence, which use <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10926771.2023.2189043">trauma-informed motivational interviewing</a>, reflect on challenging gender norms and breaking down rigid thought processes, and developing emotional literacy and communication strategies. But it also illustrates that men and boys need alternative narratives to make sense of themselves in the world, and alternative communities for affirmation, before it gets to this stage. In <a href="https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2020-12/apo-nid307612.pdf">our report</a>, we recommended: "Providing alternative narratives and considering how far-right [or MRA] groups provide men with emotional support networks, with a view to providing better alternatives." Feminism has consistently been about separating attributes from their gendered associations, breaking down the Barbie/Ken binary. So if there is one thing we can take away from the Barbie movie, it is that hierarchy and rigid gender benefits nobody, and power and social roles have nothing to do with the genitals you are born with.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/210273/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lucy-nicholas-145660">Lucy Nicholas</a>, Associate professor Sexualities and Genders / Sociology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> Image credits: Warner Bros. This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/kens-rights-our-research-shows-barbie-is-surprisingly-accurate-on-how-mens-rights-activists-are-radicalised-210273">original article</a>.

Caring

Why am I online? Research shows it’s often about managing emotions

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/wally-smith-1450210">Wally Smith</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/greg-wadley-203663">Greg Wadley</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Most of us <a href="https://wearesocial.com/au/blog/2022/02/digital-2022-australia-online-like-never-before/">go online</a> multiple times a day. About half of 18–29 year olds surveyed in a 2021 <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/03/26/about-three-in-ten-u-s-adults-say-they-are-almost-constantly-online/">Pew Research Study</a> said they are “almost constantly” connected. How are we to make sense of this significant digital dimension of modern life? Many questions have rightly been asked about its broader consequences for society and the economy. But there remains a simpler question about what motivates people across a range of ages, occupations and cultures to be so absorbed in digital connection. And we can turn this question on ourselves: why am I online? <h2>What are we doing when we go online?</h2> As the American sociologist Erving Goffman <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1975/02/16/archives/frame-analysis.html">pointed out</a>, asking “What is it that’s going on here?” about human behaviour can yield answers framed at different levels. These range from our superficial motives to a deeper understanding of what we are “really” doing. Sometimes we might be content to explain our online behaviour in purely practical terms, like checking traffic routes or paying a bill. Other times we might struggle to articulate our reasons for going or remaining online. Why are we continually looking at our phones or computers, when we could be getting on with physical tasks, or exercising, or meditating, or engaging more fully with the people who are physically around us? <h2>The ever-present need to manage our emotions</h2> As researchers of human-computer interaction, we are exploring answers in terms of the ever-present need to manage our emotions. Psychologists refer to this activity as <a href="https://www.guilford.com/books/Handbook-of-Emotion-Regulation/James-Gross/9781462520732">emotion regulation</a>. Theories of the nature and function of emotions are complex and contested. However, it is safe to say they are expressions of felt needs and motivations that arise in us through some fusion of physiology and culture. During a typical day, we often feel a need to <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271">alter our emotional state</a>. We may wish to feel more serious about a competitive task or more sad at a funeral. Perhaps we would like to be less sad about events of the past, less angry when meeting an errant family member, or more angry about something we know in our heart is wrong. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PQkNb4CLjJ8?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe><figcaption>Digital emotion regulation is becoming increasingly common in our everyday lives.</figcaption></figure> One way to understand our frequent immersions into online experience is to see them as acts within a broader scheme of managing such daily emotional demands. Indeed, in <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1071581922001732">earlier research</a> we found up to half of all smartphone use may be for the purpose of emotional regulation. <h2>Digital technologies are becoming key tools of emotion regulation</h2> Over the pandemic lockdowns of 2020–21 in Melbourne, Australia, we investigated how digital technologies are becoming <a href="https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3517573">key tools of emotion regulation</a>. We were surprised to find that people readily talked of their technology use in these emotion-managing terms. Occasionally, this involved specially designed apps, for mindfulness and so on. But more often people relied on mundane tools, such as using social media alongside Zoom to combat feelings of boredom or isolation, browsing for “retail therapy”, playing phone games to de-stress, and searching online to alleviate anxiety about world events. To some extent, these uses of digital technology can be seen as re-packaging <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/026999399379285">traditional methods</a> of emotion management, such as listening to music, strengthening social connections, or enjoying the company of adorable animals. Indeed, people in our study used digital technologies to enact familiar strategies, such as immersion in selected situations, seeking distractions, and reappraising what a situation means. However, we also found indications that digital tools are changing the intensity and nature of how we regulate emotions. They provide emotional resources that are <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubiquitous_computing">nearly always available</a>, and virtual situations can be accessed, juxtaposed and navigated more deftly than their physical counterparts. Some participants in our study described how they built what we called “emotional toolkits”. These are collections of digital resources ready to be deployed when needed, each for a particular emotional effect. <h2>A new kind of digital emotional intelligence</h2> None of this is to say emotion regulation is automatically and always a good thing. It can be a means of avoiding important and meaningful endeavours and it can itself become dysfunctional. In our study of a small sample of Melburnians, we found that although digital applications appeared to be generally effective in this role, they are volatile and can lead to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/27/social-dilemma-media-facebook-twitter-society">unpredictable emotional outcomes</a>. A search for energising music or reassuring social contact, for example, can produce random or unwanted results. A new kind of <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10187756/">digital emotional intelligence</a> might be needed to effectively navigate digital emotional landscapes. <h2>An historic shift in everyday life</h2> Returning to the question: what am I doing online? Emotion regulation may well be the part of the answer. You may be online for valid instrumental reasons. But equally, you are likely to be enacting your own strategies of <a href="https://cis.unimelb.edu.au/hci/projects/digitalemotionregulation">emotion regulation through digital means</a>. It is part of an historic shift playing out in how people negotiate the demands of everyday life. <img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208483/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/wally-smith-1450210">Wally Smith</a>, Professor, School of Computing and Information Systems, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/greg-wadley-203663">Greg Wadley</a>, Senior Lecturer, Computing and Information Systems, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-am-i-online-research-shows-its-often-about-managing-emotions-208483">original article</a>.

Technology

Why can’t I use my phone or take photos on the airport tarmac? Is it against the law?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/doug-drury-1277871">Doug Drury</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/cquniversity-australia-2140">CQUniversity Australia</a> Mobile phones are not allowed to be used while on a plane because they can interfere with the aeroplane’s navigation instruments and <a href="https://theconversation.com/heres-the-real-reason-to-turn-on-aeroplane-mode-when-you-fly-188585">cause various safety and social issues</a>. As soon as the plane lands, we’re permitted to turn off flight mode, but at some airports we can’t get much of a signal. That’s because airports are known as mobile signal “<a href="https://thepointsguy.com/news/slow-connection-airport-tarmacs/">dead zones</a>” due to a lack of mobile towers – they can’t be placed at the airport itself due to height restrictions. Any nearby mobile towers would be located away from the airport’s runway systems to avoid interfering with the aeroplane’s flight path, especially take-off and landing direction. Most airports put up indoor repeater antennas within the airport terminal; these help increase the mobile signal strength coming from the nearest mobile tower somewhere near the airport. But you won’t be allowed to make calls while walking away from the plane, anyway. <h2>Why can’t I use my phone on the tarmac?</h2> As we are taxiing in, the <a href="https://www.qantas.com/au/en/qantas-experience/onboard/communication.html">cabin crew</a> remind us not to smoke outside of designated areas at the terminal and not to use our mobile phones until we are inside the terminal building. If you exit the plane down the rear stairs, why aren’t you allowed to use your phone once away from the aeroplane, if you can get a signal? Surely it won’t affect navigation. The answer is manifold, and regulations aren’t the same across the world. In Australia, a <a href="https://www.casa.gov.au/operations-safety-and-travel/travel-and-passengers/onboard-safety-and-behaviour/using-your-electronic-devices-flights">government regulation</a> prohibits the use of mobile phones on the tarmac – the aeroplane movement and parking area of the airport. You won’t be fined if you whip your phone out while walking to the terminal, but the airline may admonish you for not following the rules. However, if you decide to (<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/victoria/woman-arrested-after-running-onto-tarmac-at-melbourne-airport-20151125-gl7bkq.html">run around on the tarmac</a>, you could get arrested by federal police. The airport tarmac is very busy not just with aircraft, but also baggage carts, catering trucks, aeroplane waste removal trucks, and fuel trucks. Getting passengers off the tarmac and into the terminal building quickly and safely is a priority for the staff. If you are distracted while walking to the terminal building because you’re talking on your phone, it can be <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/25/alabama-airport-worker-killed-jet-engine-safety-warnings">highly dangerous and even deadly</a> if you end up too close to an operating plane. An operating jet engine is extremely hot and has a strong exhaust. Additionally, the front of the engine has a low-pressure area called an <a href="https://www.ukfrs.com/guidance/search/aircraft-systems-and-construction">ingestion zone</a> that can suck in a person. Ground staff are trained to stay at least ten metres away from this area. However, this information is not shared with the passengers. <h2>A myth about fuel</h2> You may have heard that mobile phones are a fire hazard near fuel, and aeroplanes are, of course, refuelled on the tarmac. However, the chances of fuel catching fire during this process are extremely low, because the refuelling truck is <a href="https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/safe-aircraft-refuelling/">bonded and “grounded” to the plane</a>: the operator attaches a wire to the aircraft to move built-up static electricity to the ground to prevent any chance of a spark. <figure class="align-right zoomable"><figcaption></figcaption></figure> There have been stories in the press about mobile phones sparking <a href="https://www.verizon.com/about/news/vzw/2014/12/fact-or-fiction-using-a-cell-phone-at-the-gas-station-can-cause-a-fire">fires at petrol stations in Indonesia and Australia</a>, but these turned out to be inaccurate. There is <a href="https://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/AboutTheCodes/30A/FI%20-%20NFPA%2030A-2015%20Para%208.3.1%20-%20Attachments%2014-19.2017-04-04.pdf">no evidence a phone can spark a fire at a fuel pump</a>, despite the warning labels you might see. Either way, the chances of a mobile phone causing this on the tarmac with a refuelling truck that is grounded to the aeroplane are extremely low, not least because the passenger permitted areas and refuelling areas are completely separated. <h2>Why are we told not to take photos on the tarmac?</h2> This rule varies from airport to airport depending on their <a href="https://www.tsa.gov/travel/frequently-asked-questions/can-i-film-and-take-photos-security-checkpoint">security processes</a>. Such restrictions are carryovers from the changes to airport security following the <a href="https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/jlecono50&i=739">September 11 2001 terrorist attacks</a>. The now federalised security teams, TSA (Transportation Security Administration) in the United States and the Department of Home Affairs in Australia, change their processes frequently to prevent having any identifiable patterns that could be used to create a security breach. The increased security measures also mean new technologies were introduced; airport security sections do not want photos taken of how they operate. The airport security process is a major choke point in the flow of passenger movement due to the screening process. If a passenger is perceived to be slowing the process down by taking photos or talking on their phone, they will be reminded to turn off their device and/or stop taking photos of security personnel and equipment. If you refuse to follow the rules of the screening process, you will be <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about-us/what-we-do/travelsecure/passenger-screening">denied entry</a> into the airport terminal gate area and miss your flight. Can you also get arrested for using your phone? Depends on the airport and country. I, for one, do not want to find out.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207926/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/doug-drury-1277871">Doug Drury</a>, Professor/Head of Aviation, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/cquniversity-australia-2140">CQUniversity Australia</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-cant-i-use-my-phone-or-take-photos-on-the-airport-tarmac-is-it-against-the-law-207926">original article</a>.

Travel Tips

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Entertainment

Property

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Woman baffled by mother-in-law’s insane ask over baby name

Does the royal family have a right to privacy? What the law says

Running or yoga can help beat depression, research shows – even if exercise is the last thing you feel like

“My sister-in-law announced she was pregnant at my child’s funeral”

Out of the rabbit hole: new research shows people can change their minds about conspiracy theories

Mother bans in-laws from seeing her baby after they go against her wishes

"Good luck!": Pink stops show as pregnant fan goes into labour

Newly revealed diary entry shows Queen Elizabeth's final moments

"I was terrified": Law & Order star reveals traumatic past

Netflix reveals top TV shows of 2023

"You've restored my faith": Community shows up for lonely birthday boy

No gavels, no hearsay and lots of drinking: a law expert ranks legal dramas by their accuracy

An X-Files expert on the show’s enduring appeal – 30 years on

Ed Sheeran fans left devastated moments before show

"Buddy is the star": Jamie Oliver's son scores his own show

Harrowing footage shows passengers clinging for life in falling cable car

Bruce Springsteen cancels shows after being "taken ill"

Ken’s rights? Our research shows Barbie is surprisingly accurate on how ‘men’s rights activists’ are radicalised

Why am I online? Research shows it’s often about managing emotions

Why can’t I use my phone or take photos on the airport tarmac? Is it against the law?

News

Shop

Catalogues

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Entertainment

Property

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Woman baffled by mother-in-law’s insane ask over baby name

Does the royal family have a right to privacy? What the law says

Running or yoga can help beat depression, research shows – even if exercise is the last thing you feel like

“My sister-in-law announced she was pregnant at my child’s funeral”

Out of the rabbit hole: new research shows people can change their minds about conspiracy theories

Mother bans in-laws from seeing her baby after they go against her wishes

"Good luck!": Pink stops show as pregnant fan goes into labour

Newly revealed diary entry shows Queen Elizabeth's final moments

"I was terrified": Law & Order star reveals traumatic past

Netflix reveals top TV shows of 2023

"You've restored my faith": Community shows up for lonely birthday boy

No gavels, no hearsay and lots of drinking: a law expert ranks legal dramas by their accuracy

An X-Files expert on the show’s enduring appeal – 30 years on

Ed Sheeran fans left devastated moments before show

"Buddy is the star": Jamie Oliver's son scores his own show

Harrowing footage shows passengers clinging for life in falling cable car

Bruce Springsteen cancels shows after being "taken ill"

Ken’s rights? Our research shows Barbie is surprisingly accurate on how ‘men’s rights activists’ are radicalised

Why am I online? Research shows it’s often about managing emotions

Why can’t I use my phone or take photos on the airport tarmac? Is it against the law?

Join Over60