1. Last night I finished #ItsASin @russelldavies63, the director, amazing cast have given us a beautiful gift with #ItsASin. The 80s music, the politics, the friendship. Perfect. Fun but also serious. By episode 3 (no spoilers) I was in bits. Tears continued until the end #La
\u201cThere\u2019s nothing stopping progress but political will. We have 10 years, but not a minute to wait.\u201d
— Terrence Higgins Trust (@THTorguk) December 1, 2020
Thank you @Keir_Starmer for committing @UKLabour to ending new cases of HIV by 2030. #0HIVby30 pic.twitter.com/Au0LS8vJ6s
1. Fund opt-out HIV testing across the NHS
3. Action on late diagnoses and returning patients to care
4. A massive anti-stigma campaign
5. Mental health support for those living with HIV
In addition, @LGBTLabour have not one but two events with @THTorguk & @AlexNorrisNN. Sign up now: https://t.co/gzckIg8CoK
Get a T-shirt here: https://t.co/lg7uUwVrgm
More from Culture
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x