Genealogy

This study explored the experiences, perspectives and confidence of teaching and research staff of discussing race and ethnicity, and associated equalities matters, at a post-1992 university in North West England, UK. In particular, it studied whether colleagues, who were largely white, had the understanding and personal skills to deliver on race equity in teaching and learning in a Higher Education Institution (HEI). Further, it examined whether there was a disconnect between the intention of an HEI working towards the Race Equality Charter (REC) mark and the detrimental effects this may have on its minoritised ethnic staff. The study was based on focus groups and interviews of 43 academic staff as participants using Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Intersectionality as the theoretical lens. These address discrepancies between institutional declarations and realities within higher education, which is important, as HEIs are increasingly positioning themselves as committed to diversity and equity, while the practical implementation often remains inconsistent. The findings demonstrate that the white participants were not confident, competent or pro-active enough to effect any meaningful change in race equity. At the same time, the minoritised ethnic participants often felt the burden of having to relive the trauma and pain of racism and take the lead in any race equity initiatives. In sum, the study demonstrates that HEI initiatives that purport to tackle systemic racism through decolonisation and the REC mark have little chance of effecting institutional change if the staff do not have the confidence, competence and necessary skills to make it happen.

Among the Anaañ people in Akwa Ibom State, Southeastern Nigeria, the practice of naming serves as a central mechanism for communicating personal identity, recollecting memory and preserving social hierarchy across generations. The act of naming a child after a revered ancestor or existing relative is a form of moral inheritance that binds the name bearer to certain virtues, histories, and expected cultural nuance associated with the namesake. This article investigates the social functions of namesaking and in its role in family inheritance amongst the Anaañ people. This study examines the rituals, ceremonies, and narratives associated with namesaking, and further analyses the intergenerational authority and social status embedded in the practice. The analysis is rooted in social memory theory by Halbwachs (1992), which views names as memory carriers that connect individuals to their nativity and ancestors. Drawing from ethnographic research design, using participant observation and semi-structured interviews with 30 participants who were purposively sampled, the analysis reveals that namesaking and inheritance are interwoven cultural processes that promote social identity, reproduce lineage hierarchies, and individuate the bearer within the social universe of the community. This study concludes that in the Anaañ society namesaking is a symbol of continuity, with specific social expectations, moral obligations and traditional roles tied to the original name-holder.

The world is burgeoning with ever-growing disparities, nation-states are becoming increasingly oppressive with centrist politics, conflicts are intensifying, and climate change is causing natural disasters, which are increasingly displacing families and children. That is, 473 million children worldwide are living in conflict zones today. By the end of 2023, 47.2 million children had been displaced due to conflict and violence, while natural disasters had driven 26.4 million internal displacements, of which 8.8 million were children This article then responds to the uneven landscapes and dominant imaginaries confronted by contemporary childhoods. In doing so, it locates how children bear the burden of adult agendas in the waiting room of the past, present and future. This lends to the analyses of the wider politics that frame childhoods. In response, the article calls for a conceptual turn in childhood studies urging a radical politics of hope rather than the oppressive politics of tomorrow. It proposes a (re-)imagining of just futures for children whereby adults move from apathy towards childhood reparations and think about what might have been stolen from children and what we may owe them. The paper concludes that any imagination of reparative futures cannot be crafted without children.