ABSTRACT
International debate on COVID-19 policy issues, notably negative social consequences, is vital when grappling with the pandemic legacy. Drawing from the second author's experiences in the Irish healthcare and higher education sectors, this commentary scrutinises measures that discriminated against students who declined novel COVID-19 pharmaceuticals. In so doing, it serves as a point of contrast to fear-based interventions. Connections are made with relevant literature when urging those in authority to ensure that policies intended to maximise vaccine coverage are seen to be fair and convincing. The commentary concludes with some reflections that could underpin more defensible policymaking and inform future research. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Critical Social Policy is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)
ABSTRACT
Mass communications frame fatness and COVID-19 as a dual threat. This discourse furthers well-established tendencies to degrade bodies labelled overweight or obese, positioning them as deficient and requiring correction. Empirically, this article draws from an online US right-wing news media platform, Campus Reform, including readers? comments (n?=?135) on an article denouncing professors working in fat studies during the COVID-19 lockdown. This status degradation ceremony?backed by ?big money? that funds campus culture wars?not only targeted fat people but also academic disciplines, expertise, universities and social justice agenda. Analytically, this study draws from ethnomethodology and literature on media and bodyweight, meddling or health fascism, weaponized stigma and the politics of cruelty. Going beyond the flesh and a particular case study, it also challenges the ways in which cruelty enacted towards those deemed fat (especially women) can spiral into corrosive nationalist discourse in pandemic times.
ABSTRACT
In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and mass lockdowns that continue to shake the world, sociologists of health and illness have been advised to undertake research only when the time feels right and to avoid premature evaluation. Such advice makes sense, especially amidst an epidemic of interpretation that has resulted in substandard work. However, this contribution argues that when trying to understand and perhaps analyse early societal responses to COVID-19, medical sociology comprises a toolbox of ideas that are 'good to think with' and should not be ignored. Indeed, our community is well placed to make its presence felt sooner rather than later as we collectively live through a deepening critical situation. Divided into two sections, this piece first offers a critical appreciation of Philip Strong's classic essay on 'epidemic psychology', noting some insights and posing research questions for pandemic times. Second, going from micro- to macro-sociological concerns, it builds on Graham Scambler's calls for not only critique but also foresight and action within a 'fractured society' comprising class-generated fissures and tensions. Early interventions from other leading medical sociologists and publicly engaged intellectuals are also cited when asking 'what sort of society are we heading towards and what sort of world do we want to share?'