I went to Cambridge a few weeks ago, and attended a Cambridge Union debate on whether feminism and religion were compatible. I should warn you at this stage that this is most certainly not an article about our esteemed Oxford Union. Any similarities (or perhaps unfavourable contrasts) between the two institutions are purely incidental and drawn at the reader’s own discretion.
Their Union is a relaxed space. The debating chamber is warm, quite small, and intimate. No Union people or anyone else — besides the Officers and speakers — wore anything more than smart casual. I was greeted at the door with a smile and waved through with my OU card, no questions asked. Many people enjoyed a pint as they watched the debate from the crammed balcony.
There were precisely zero minutes of pre-debate shenanigans. To my astonishment, the officers and speakers arrived promptly, the president announced the floor prize, and then the whole thing kicked off. There was no mention of anybody’s ‘business’. Instead, we got straight onto the real business and the whole reason we were all there: to hear the debate.
There were four speakers on each side and nobody spoke for too long. Only one speaker was a student, and they were a fresher. There were no roasts or parliamentary theatrics. Just a frank debate between atheists and liberal religious figures. It was refreshing to hear articulate adults provide different points of view.
Afterwards, everyone was treated to free chips in the bar, with speakers, Officers, and attendees all mixing together. Nobody was whisked away to a private post-drinks reception. Results were announced promptly by the president: it was conclusively decided that religion and feminism were not compatible. As cheers went up, I sat back in my chair to reflect on the night. The Cambridge Union is a smaller, less significant institution than its Oxford equivalent — but I can’t help but feel that a visit to the other place for one Union in particular might well be in order.
