Six years after the ceasefire that halted the 2006 war between Lebanon and Israel, southern Lebanese indicted the remains of Israel's weapons for contaminating their lands, stunting their crops, and making them sick. Against local and international discourses claiming inconclusive evidence and uncertainty about the toxic effects of the war, my southern Lebanese interlocutors insisted on causally linking Israel's weapons to the perceived surge in cancer, infertility, and environmental degradation since 2006. Their insistence that war was causing this ongoing bodily and environmental malaise exposes the slow violence of war and challenges the liberal idea of war as a temporary event and paroxysm of violence. Taking southern Lebanese accounts seriously reveals how the liberal idea of war keeps Israeli weapons, toxic environments, and embodied pathologies causally separate and restricts what gets counted as a casualty of war. Based on a year of ethnographic fieldwork, this article approaches the confirmed and suspected toxic remnants of war as toxic infrastructures that sediment and distribute war's lethal potential, years after the last bomb was dropped. Building on local accounts of the 2006 war that emphasize enduring environmental toxicity and its gendered effects, this article argues that southerners deployed their embodied knowledge of toxic infrastructures to contest the uncertainty about Israel's weapons and to produce new truths about the war. Southerners thus disputed liberal assumptions about the end of the war, challenged normative understandings of war casualties, and enacted new ethical frameworks for recognizing the belated injuries of the 2006 war.

No abstract

Though many studies have documented the high prevalence, morbidity, mortality and costs attributable to intimate partner violence (IPV), it is still unclear how our health care system should address this major public health problem. Many have advocated for routine screening, yet there is still insufficient evidence that routine IPV screening can lead to improved outcomes. Though recognition of IPV is very important, a screening paradigm may not be the optimal way to approach IPV within the health care system. For many patients, exposure to violence is a chronic condition, characterized by long-term abusive relationships, histories of childhood and community violence, multiple associated chronic symptoms, and extra barriers to addressing their other chronic illnesses. Thus, there may be important lessons to be learned from work being done in the area of chronic care. We explore how Wagner's Chronic Care model may guide efforts to improve health care for IPV survivors and may serve as a framework for future research studies.

SUMMARYAdjunct is the term used in the United States to refer to the contingent instructors that work in higher education with poor pay, no benefits and short-term contracts. Adjuncts now make up the majority of the teaching professoriate at United States colleges and universities. Drawing on three years' experience working as an adjunct, the author offers an account of precarity in academia in the United States. While academic precarity is often assumed to affect all adjuncts equally, race, gender and class in fact lead to an uneven distribution, rendering certain bodies precarious even when they do not comprise adjuncts or contingent laborers. This makes it imperative to recognise that academic precarity encompasses a range of often incommensurable experiences. At the same time, discussions of precarity often overlook the complicity of full-time faculty staff and administrators who enforce precarity and reproduce hierarchies of academic lives by keeping adjuncts closed off from university resources and by asking them to work without compensation. How might a collective refusal of the reproduction of academic hierarchies be practiced without being depicted as evidence of not caring enough about our work? And how might such a refusal be a strategy for demanding better working conditions for all?

Though many studies have documented the high prevalence, morbidity, mortality and costs attributable to intimate partner violence (IPV), it is still unclear how our health care system should address this major public health problem. Many have advocated for routine screening, yet there is still insufficient evidence that routine IPV screening can lead to improved outcomes. Though recognition of IPV is very important, a screening paradigm may not be the optimal way to approach IPV within the health care system. For many patients, exposure to violence is a chronic condition, characterized by long-term abusive relationships, histories of childhood and community violence, multiple associated chronic symptoms, and extra barriers to addressing their other chronic illnesses. Thus, there may be important lessons to be learned from work being done in the area of chronic care. We explore how Wagner's Chronic Care model may guide efforts to improve health care for IPV survivors and may serve as a framework for future research studies.