He even has his own Wikipedia page

Titus Hjelm is a lecturer in Finnish Society and Culture at UCL, and moonlights as the bassist and vocalist of metal band “Thunderstone”.

Thunderstone, a cornerstone of Finnish metal culture presumably, even finished runners up in the national heats for 2007 Eurovision.

Titus, a lecturer in Finnish Society and Culture has been with UCL since 2007. He admits that academia was never his intended career route.

He says: “If I met anybody who was nine years old and thought Sociology was the best thing in the world I would be very concerned”.

He started studying at the University of Helsinki just in case, “but that just in case turned out to be my profession eventually”.


the man himself

Music has been part of Titus’s life since childhood, with his father being a musician and his mother a ballet dancer.

He has been part of Finnish metal band Thunderstone since 2000, and they’ve released five albums so far.

In 2007 they were runners up to play at Eurovision. But he’s not bitter about not winning.

Titus says: “It was an ideal scenario. It was good to get the publicity without the shame of not winning which was of course the expectation of everyone”.

He states that his influences are Jimmy Hendricks, Deep Purple and most bands from the classic rock period, whereas his band mates prefer the harder material from the 80s and 90s. “My favourite song of all time… hmmm… it depends on the the mood…well lets say Deep Purple’s ‘burn’, that is something that always gets me going when I have had a couple of beers”.

The professor takes his influences from Jimmy Hendrix, Deep Purple and says his favourite song of all time is Deep Purple’s “Burn”.

“That’s something that always gets me going when I’ve had a couple of beers.”

His research into Sociology and Religion has influenced his music – “There is an association between metal music and satanic imagery”.

“My friends were labelled as satanists as they used satanic symbolism but I knew that they weren’t Satanists in any sense of the word, and there’s a gap in the interpretation of the music and what it means to the fans”.

Metal also plays a big part in Titus’ teaching.

He says: “I originally felt too close to the metal scene to say anything scholarly about it, but then it turned out when I interviewed people for the Finnish degree all of them, without exception, said they were there because they listened to Finnish metal music.”

Sadly, none of his students have admitted to being big fans, something that Titus says is “quite healthy”.

“I’ve had people come up to me and say ‘I like your band’ but not in a stalker kind of way.”

Too star-struck to do the correct hand sign

Too star-struck to do the correct hand sign

He describes himself as lucky as he has never been forced to choose between Sociology and his music, as he is always able to take his research on the road.

And although he loves academia he says he can never give up on music.

“You can never get that experience of being on stage anywhere else. Whether it is 4,000 or 40 people screaming their lungs off when you get on stage, it’s just brilliant”.

Finally, he sadly admitted he didn’t know any Taylor Swift songs.

“I have to say that i’m a complete dinosaur in terms of contemporary pop music. I have to admit that I don’t know any of her songs.”

  • Charles

    Why did the feminist cross the road?

    To suck my dick

    • Brock

      Why did the woman cross the road?

      I don’t know either but what the fuck was she doing out of the kitchen in the first place?



      • Steve

        I hope you have fun eating your sandwhich filled with shit ^-^ It’s just like you

  • Daniel

    Article immediately justified by first comment….

    • However…

      I do believe the penultimate picture is wrong. Isn’t it “Robin Thicke has a big dick”?

  • MM

    do you like biscuits?

  • Yeah, but


  • Pipe


  • Exeter Female

    For the most part this is a well-written and balanced article and consequently I’m far more inclined to agree with you than I am with the counter argument in the other article. However, I do think to say that ‘there is no biological disposition that makes women inferior to men’ is not entirely correct. Yes, for most professions (especially in the corporate world) it is completely unjustified that women should be paid less than men for a role they can do equally well, but you can’t escape the fact that we ARE biologically different. Different hormones, different anatomy… it does make a difference. E.g there’s a reason that I would never apply for a job in heavy lifting – because though I can try to escape it as best I can, I’m personally not as physically strong as most men who could do the job far better than me. I’m incredibly glad that women have fought for my rights, and I think it’s so important that we now have the choice to work or not rather than being confined to traditional ‘women’s ‘roles like ‘housewife’ or ‘stay-at-home mum’, but I also embrace and accept the fact that I’m a woman. However you want to define the concept of ‘being a woman’, you’re not a man.

    • Erin

      This ties up gender far too much with secondary sex characteristics, which vary greatly from person to person. Aside from erasing trans folk, it also ignores women who have naturally higher levels of testosterone, men with higher oestrogen levels, etc., etc.
      GENERALLY SPEAKING we can indeed make some broad statements e.g. people assigned male gender at birth will generally have more muscle mass than someone AFAB. However, that’s not a hard and fast rule, and we can do things to change that. All those weightlifters who are women?

      • Exeter female

        I appreciate what you’re saying and had considered that in my argument, but as you say I do speak generally. For a significant number of us, the fact that we have two X chromosomes rather than x y does limit what we can achieve physically in relation to men. There’s a reason that men and women compete separately at sport. It’s not true for everyone ( and I have a lot of admiration for women that do achieve great physical feats) but most of us, when undertaking the same training as a man, would still not be able to equal his physical strength.

  • Please just shut up

    First line entirely misses the point of the previous article. It’s not about historical feminism but the modern movement that won’t leave women alone to get on with their life and feel happy and ready to do well!

  • Silly pidge

    Coo coo

  • sad guy

    boo you whore

  • surprised

    what’s this? a decent, well thought out, well researched article in the Tab?

  • Feminism is for woman

    My main problem with feminism is the fact that a lot of feminist woman only fight for females and not actually gender equality. Does this mean that I can strike a woman if she strikes me first in a fight as to defend myself or would I be taunted by feminists for doing so?

    • no

      Literally missing the point. “A lot of feminist woman” does not cover the feminist movement. Yes, there are women that are narrow-minded about what feminism means and includes, but that’s not a reason to blame the entire movement for the few bad apples. If you’d had done any research you would know, for example, that feminist groups have taken part in making sure new dads get more “maternity” leave days and that there is more focus on male victims of domestic and sexual violence. But I guess you wouldn’t know that since you only want to focus on those few “feminists” who were being a bit mean to you.

      • Electric Dwight Yorkestra

        Didn’t answer the question. Can he hit her back?

        • matt

          men clearly have the upper hand in terms of physical strength, hitting a woman would be taking advantage of this. not that either one should be hitting each other in the first pace

        • Erin


  • Tom

    Just ‘yes.’ Tor should check her priviledge

    • Pigeon Detective

      And you should check your spelling ability.

      • Tom

        Acknowledged, yet my communication and input remain explicit and relevant (unlike your petulant, beside the point remark)

        • just some guy

          maybe, Tom you should check your privilege too
          (If for some reason Tom, you are female feel free to disregard that)

          • Tom

            Woah, I’m fully aware of my gender privileges, as well as the easy ride I get for being white, straight and anglophonic. Not sure what point you’re trying to make here ….

  • Intrigued male

    I very much hope you split the bill if anyone ever takes you out for drinks/a date and that when you do like someone you make the first move as well as buy them flowers and chocolates. I hope you walk to pick them up from a club when otherwise they would walk home alone, buy them food to sober them up, protect them in a fight and don’t generally assume they can look after themselves based on gender. After all, we’re all equal.

    • Yes, you’re right!

      Feminism/gender equality is a movement based on the breaking down of stereotypical gender-based assumptions and expectations. So yeah, you are correct in thinking that, for many self-identifying feminists, myself and my boyfriend included, we would not expect the men to be always doing the things expected of them by society in the relationship (making the first move, buying flowers, paying for things) as that is unfair on people of both genders (some women are more forward than the guys they date, some prefer to do the buying, and for many couples these things just happen in equal amounts). Also: how do you think these things work in same-sex couples, or with couples where someone identifies themselves outside of the gender binary?

  • Erin

    Brilliant article. A round of applause indeed.

  • Pigeon patrol

    “No means no” dont worry darling I wasn’t asking…

  • Edmonds

    Nah love, you’re distinctly below average.

  • Aaron

    Why would the fat ugly bird ever say no, surely she should take what she can get. Know your limits!

  • Don’t Overreact

    As a woman I have.no issue for the case for feminism as has been described here (mostly anyway).

    What I do take issue with is the highly, and overly, sensetive women who scream sexism at a joke that should just be take as banter. Every joke about “a womans place is in the kitchen”, should be taken as just that…. a joke.

    The women who also scream sexism when a man offers them a seat, or holds open a door, or carries their bags also infuriate me. YOU may not like it and may percieve it as some ridiculous notion that inficates you are a weaker sex, but do not damage it for the rest of us who feel such actions demonstrate kindness, good manners and the general attitude I would want an decent gentleman to have.

  • I don’t know why I’m here…

    The Tab needs feminism so it can start a debate and get lots of hits…

  • Mitt Cirr

    3/10 would bang

  • Ben Sullivan


  • bob

    I think they’re pretty scummy, but the police? really? That’s just too much. We have a right to be offensive, it’s free speech.

    Instead, people should refuse to interact with them until they stop being unpleasant. Don’t bring coercive state elements into it.

    Inb4 some postmodernist radical starts spouting off mental gymnastics at me.

    • Google Before You Speak

      We don’t actually have fee speech in this country. There are many things we are restricted from saying. There are clear restrictions on threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour. “intending or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress or cause a breach of the peace “. There essentially is a long list of things we cannot do and say. If you don’t know UK law just google it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_by_country#United_Kingdom

      • on your bike

        Yes, because legality is the same as morality…

        Just because something is illegal doesn’t mean it should be, or it is immoral.

        Or was the british empire OK because it was legal in this country??

        Lean some basic political philosophy before you speak.

        • Oh so?

          Basic political philosophy dates back to the fundamental right of self-preservation. Not only is rape a violation of that, but it is also fucking immoral.

          I advise you not only to brush up your political philosophy, but your common sense.

          • anon

            Chanting about rape does not harm anyone’s self-preservation, dipshit.

          • bob

            Right, so you’re not going to actually defend your point about illegal things automatically being bad?

            Alright hotshot. Nice logic.

            In regards to self preservation, I’m sure those being slammed by state force due to rude self expression would also worry about their self preservation.

        • Google Before You Speak

          There are many moral beliefs that support limitations of free speech for various reasons. Not that it was the point I was making. Bob claimed that there was no reason to get the police involved. If a law has been broken, as I pointed out, then that alone is a reason. Furthermore, there are few moral beliefs that believe in a right to be offensive. Utilitarians, those with religious morality and possibly even libertarians would argue against unlimited free speech. It can decrease the utility of others, be blasphemous or impede on others rights. You brought morality into this discussion when nob was not directly referring to any moral principle. He simply claimed we had a ‘right’ by which I presumed since he was referring to involvement of the police he meant legal. You wrongly brought morality in and then made a poor argument.

          I have learnt my basic political philosophy. perhaps you should have googled yours before you spoke.

          • kuck

            Just because something is a law, doesn’t mean it should be. That is my point.

            When we’re deciding what a law should be, whether it should be changed, whether it shouldn’t, we have to as a society look at what we believe – our morals.

            There are millions of people worldwide who believe in a right to be offensive.

            Utilitarians and religious fundamentalists are wrong.

            Libertarians would defend unlimited free speech.

            >repeating the same insult twice like some party whip politician

  • Flo Perry

    You can’t even hear what they’re saying

  • PZ

    I have a sister and a mother, and I couldn’t give less of a shit.

  • Calvin Sanders

    Better safe than fear the unknown. Imagine that they let sex offenders live where the business is known to have children residing for any duration of time. Stay away! I am suggesting you to use this application because it doesn’t only monitor your love ones but also to locate sex offenders so that you can at least assure that your kids are safe, also has a family locator that will let you know where your family’s are. I hope I helped you make a decision.To know all about this, check it out here: http://safekidzone.com/#!/page_home

  • Jack Ford

    Titus Hjelm seems an absolute legend. But the Tab’s inconsistent spelling of “Jimmy Hendrix” leaves something to be desired. I would have thought that someone would have proof read this before it was posted. Another shoddy job for the Tab. That is why I read Pi Media instead.

    • Alfred Fizzleback

      I concur with this young man, it really is a sad reflection of society now a days. The English Language is dying.

    • Xavier, Wrecker of Wreckers.

      Dear Giacomo Ford,

      I would suggest that your own grammar begs for a smiting by the Malleus Grammaticarum (i’faith, the Hammar of Grammer™).

      Forsooth, thus commences thy grammatical Wreckoning™:

      Article the First: verily, that Master Hjelm “seems to be an absolute legend”; for sans-verb, the phrase is sans-sense (or indeed, as I would project, is non-sense).

      Article the Second: verily, that the name of this tract which you most acerbically assault is a Noun Most Proper. It is, to elucidate and illuminate, fitting that the nomenclature is rendered thusly: as “The Tab” and not “the Tab”.

      Here ends the lesson. Look to the skies, for thy Wreckoning™ approacheth.