Prominent philosopher and academic A.C. Grayling has written to OUSU Vice-President for Women Sarah Pine defending his decision to speak at the Oxford Union following the arrest of President Ben Sullivan. Grayling’s letter is in response to the open letter written by Pine and Helena Dollimore of St. Hilda’s, which urged Sullivan to resign and speakers to cancel planned visits to the Union.

Grayling’s letter stated, “I simply cannot, in all conscience, allow myself to act only on the basis of allegations and suspicions, or of conviction by the kangaroo court of opinion, or trial by press.”

This statement comes after Julie Meyer, Eric Whitacre, and the Secretary General of Interpol all pulled out of scheduled speaking engagements at the Union, citing concerns about the society’s leadership after reading the open letter which argued that “Mr Sullivan should step aside while still under investigation.”

Grayling wrote, “Because I am very much in sympathy with the motivations behind your call, it puts me in a difficult position! While wishing to support to the full the underlying concerns you have in view, there is the consideration that we have to take seriously that fundamental principle of the rule of law and the rights of individuals, namely, that all those accused of crimes are innocent until proved guilty.”

He continued, “These words seem such a cliché, but they really are the bedrock of a system of protection of the innocent against the power of the state or mightier individuals; and when someone is found to be guilty of crimes it is most often, in our system, on the basis of sound evidence and good argument. I think it is a duty to respect these principles.“ The letter goes on to discuss what Grayling calls “trial by press”. 

He states, “I simply cannot, in all conscience, allow myself to act only on the basis of allegations and suspicions, or of conviction by the kangaroo court of opinion, or trial by press – the means too often employed even in our own society to condemn before the evidence and the arguments have been properly examined.”

Grayling urged OUSU to reconsider their stance on the matter too, writing, “Indeed I very much wish that OUSU would be serious about this principle too – asking people to convict and punish someone before due process of law has taken its course is a bad direction to go in, and with great respect I urge you to reflect on that. You may of course know things about what lies behind the allegations in this current case, suggesting that there is real fire below the smoke – but even this would lie in the terrain of report and accusation until the matter has come to court.”

He finished the letter by clarifying that his appearance at the Union “is in no way an expression of opinion either way about the current situation of the Union’s President, or of support or otherwise for the individual himself.”

In response, Sarah Pine told Cherwell, “‘Helena and I acted from our personal perspectives and sense of justice. This isn’t an OUSU project. However, I am sure that my colleagues will be heartened to know that A.C. Grayling wishes them well.

“In relation to his paragraphs on human rights, I think the International Police are right on this one, Secretary General Noble said earlier this week that, ‘I am the Secretary General of INTERPOL, a law professor and a former prosecutor who fiercely believes that a person is innocent until proven guilty. What should the head of a society like the Oxford Union do if he is under investigation for rape and attempted rape? In my view, he should be guided by the best interests of his organization. He should not be guided by his own interests. In this case my advice to Ben Sullivan would be either to resign or take a leave of absence.’ Noble’s a law professor and realises that innocent until proven guilty does not mean business as usual. I also believe it sends a strong message of disempowerment to women.”

Professor Grayling’s talk, entitled ‘Arguing with the Gods’ went ahead without reference to either letter, the President’s arrest, or the ongoing unrest at the Union.

Oxford University has come twenty-third in the second annual University Sex League.

The survey, conducted by Student Beans, ranked universities according to the average number of sexual partners students have had since starting their course. Student Beans interviewed 6,129 UK students from over 100 universities on their sex lives, relationships and sexual health.

The survey found that Oxford students have had an average of 5.89 sexual partners since starting university, well ahead of Cambridge, in fifty-fourth place with an average of 4.70 partners, but behind Oxford Brookes, who came seventh with an average of 7.42.

Nevertheless, Oxford University beat the national average of 4.88 sexual partners, and has climbed from thirty-third place in the 2013 league, where Oxonians reported an average of 4.17. In 2013, the national average was 3.68. Brighton University topped this year’s survey, with an average of 10.59 sexual partners, having climbed from twentieth place in the 2013 survey. Last year, Roehampton University came first place, with students there reporting an average of 6.32 sexual partners since starting university; a score which would not even qualify for the top ten in this year’s results.

Commenting on the statistics, second year linguist Erin Goldfinch told Cherwell, “seems about right to me!”

James Read, editor of Student Beans, said, “Sex remains a hot issue for Britain’s students, evidenced by the over 6000 responses to this survey. University is often about freedom and experimentation, and sex and relationships are a key part of this. We’ve seen that students are generally pretty adventurous, with spanking, anal and threesomes all on the up.”

He added, “They are also keen to use tech as a sex aid, with forty per cent having talked dirty online, and nearly two thirds sending explicit pics of themselves to a partner. This has mirrored the rise of dating apps, which three times as many students prefer over dating sites.”

Deputy Prime Minister and leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg visited Oxford on Tuesday to speak at two public events.

He spoke first at Wesley Memorial Church on New Inn Hall Street, at a question and answer forum hosted by the Oxford Mail.  About 140 people attended the event, including several students.

Clegg also delivered the European Studies Centre Annual Lecture 2014 at St Antony’s College, speaking for approximately an hour. The subject of his talk was ‘Britain’s Place in the EU’. The talk was meant to begin at 3.30pm and last until 4.30pm, but the Deputy Prime Minister was running about ten minutes late.

Speaking to the Oxford Mail, Clegg denied that he was visting Oxford two days before an election, because he was concerned about his party’s potential performance.

The Oxford Activist Network organised a protest against the Deputy Prime Minister’s visit, dubbed ‘Clegg off campus’. The protestors assembled at 2.30pm outside of the Taylor Institution Library, with around thirty people participating in the protest. The protestors’ chants included “abolish fees now” and “shame on you for turning blue”.

The Oxford Activist Network also issued a clarification on the Facebook page for the event, “We are by no means trying to enforce a policy of ‘no platform’ on the Deputy Prime Minister. We’re quite sure he has lots of easily accessible platforms, and that tactic is reserved for fascists and the like. Instead, the aim is to demonstrate that, after betraying students, Clegg is not welcome on our campuses or in our universities. By protesting on Tuesday, we’re showing that the student movement has not forgotten this stab in the back, that we continue to oppose the marketisation of education, and that we will fight for free education.”

Xavier Cohen, who attended the protest, commented, “I protested against Nick Clegg because I don’t think someone who betrayed students by promising free education and then trebled tuition fees should be welcome in our university. We were forcefully kept out of our own university by police who were pushing us, whilst Nick Clegg was ushered onto campus.”

One first year Balliol PPE student, commenting on the protest, told Cherwell, “Nick Clegg may not have fulfilled his promises on tuition fees, but a spirit of compromise is essential to achieving other policy objectives that the Liberal Democrats have. The claim by the far left that they are representative of the student body is farcical, all they are doing is shutting down debate and free speech rather than engaging in constructive discussion – such as by questioning Clegg in a debate.”

The University of Oxford is one of seventy-two organisations to have signed a Concordat on Openness in Animal Research this week, pledging to provide greater transparency on how, why and when they use animals in research.

Signatories of the Concordat sign up to four commitments: “We will be clear about when, how and why we use animals in research; we will enhance our communications with the media and the public about our research using animals; we will be proactive in providing opportunities for the public to find out about research using animals; we will report on progress annually and share our experiences”.

At the same time, the University has launched a new programme studying the neurology of twenty macaque monkeys.

The project is funded by the Wellcome Trust, a co-signatory of the Concordat, and is one of the first to be conducted under the agreement. It will receive £4.95m over five years and it is a study of how the brain supports complex mental processes which will use MRI brain imaging in addition to more invasive procedures. In order to justify its use of primates, the University has committed itself to providing precise descriptions of the research and practical information about its potential benefits.

An article on the University website said, “The macaques will be housed in state-of-the-art facilities in the Biomedical Sciences Building, where they can express their natural behaviours – such as living in social groups, playing, climbing and foraging for food.”

Dr Paul Browne, a spokesperson from Speaking of Research, an organisation that aims to provide the public with accurate information about animal testing and its importance, told Cherwell, “The Concordat on Openness is a major step in encouraging institutions to be more open about the work they conduct, and builds on the substantial progress that institutions like Oxford University have already made towards this goal.

“Animal research is critical to many aspects of medical progress in the 21st century, and the research community must continue to work hard explaining what happens in animal facilities and why the public should support it.”

Some charities concerned with animal research are unhappy with the move. Michelle Thew, CEO of British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection said, “The BUAV has campaigned for greater transparency in animal research for many years so naturally welcomes any steps towards genuine openness. Effective scrutiny – parliamentary and public – of the way animal experiments are carried out and regulated is impossible under the current system.

“We are concerned, however, that genuine transparency is not what the recent Concordat on Animal Testing delivers. It is simply transparency on their terms with researchers having complete control over what the public gets to see.

“This is about human health as much as animal welfare and the public has a right to know. Apart from the terrible suffering of animals in laboratories, we all have a stake in ensuring that medical research is scientifically sound and that scarce research resources are wisely targeted.”

For most students, the news was a positive development. As one Classics undergraduate from Oriel remarked, “Greater transparency must be a good thing; it can only lead to better treatment and compassion towards animals. What I can’t understand is why it hasn’t been implemented before.”

Many remain unsatisfied with the developments, however. As a first-year at Trinity observed, “Yes, animal research undoubtedly leads to cures and developments in medicine and yes it’s true that I selfishly enjoy being a recipient of the improvements it has brought about.

“However such a justification still sits uncomfortably with me. It comes dangerously close to suggesting that all animals are merely instrumental for our own needs – what gives us the right to be the superior species? I know men who are definitely far less intelligent than monkeys.

“Research can only be conducted on animals where there is no other alternative. This is required by law and is strictly regulated by the Home Office. Where use of animals is essential, the University is committed to very high standards of animal welfare using the latest research methods. Almost all the animals used in Oxford research are mice.”

A spokesperson for the University commented, “Research on animals has contributed to almost every medical advance of the last century. Without animal research, medicine as we know it today wouldn’t exist.

The number of animals held by Oxford fluctuates regularly according to the studies taking place. As of January 2014, ninety-eight per cent of the animals kept at Oxford were mice or fish, with 52,886 and 23,165 specimens respectively. There were only twenty-three primates.

Oxford students appear largely unfazed by the revelation that some colleges have been serving halal meat without informing students.

An investigation carried out by student journalists at the Birmingham Tab last week found that out of the 35 Oxbridge colleges who responded to the survey, only two did not serve halal meat in any form. In particular, Lady Margaret Hall and Somerville College were found to be serving halal meat without labelling.

The investigation involved sending Freedom of Information requests to 126 universities, with only 25 responding. The study found that nationwide, nearly half of the universities that responded are serving halal meat without making students aware.

‘Halal’ refers to objects permissible by Islamic law, extending not only to food and drink but also to other matters of daily life. For meat to be halal, the animal must be killed using a sharp knife to make a swift, deep incision that cuts from the front of the throat, the carotid artery, windpipe, and jugular veins, whilst the slaughter is accompanied by a prayer.

European animal welfare regulations currently require all farm animals to be stunned before they are killed, but religious methods of slaughter such as halal or shechita (a similar process for the preparation of Jewish meat) are exempt. However, the Halal Food Authority permits stunning the animal before slaughter, and statistics show that 88% of Britain’s halal meat comes from animals that have been stunned.

The findings come in the wake of a media furore after it was discovered last month that unlabelled halal meat had been served in supermarkets and restaurants.

The response from Oxford students, however, has been far more subdued.

A spokesperson for Oxford Students for Animals told Cherwell, “[We] object to any methods of slaughter which cause needless suffering for animals, but we find the focus on halal strikingly narrow-minded. People would do well to reflect on the vast suffering almost all animals raised for food experience, regardless of whether they count as halal or not.”

Likewise, a first year Magdalen PPEist commented, “It does surprise me that some colleges are serving halal meat without informing students”, but added, “it would not bother me if I found out my college was doing the same.”

He continued, “Most animals slaughtered for halal meat are pre-stunned so there aren’t strong ethical objections to colleges doing this. The only real problem here, if there is one, is that students who do only eat halal meat would not know that it’s available at their college.”

In a statement to Cherwell, a spokesperson for Oxford University Islamic Society commented, “We don’t think there is any harm in making a case for clearer labeling so that consumers can make an informed choice according to their own personal preference.”

Commenting on the recent media coverage of unmarked halal meat, they continued, “We think that there is a possibility that the whole media attention has something to do with Islamophobia. The terminology used, such as ‘stealthy takeover’, ‘Islamification of food’, seems to suggest that this has something to do with a fear of the other.”

They added, “We are not saying that we should shut down any debate on how animals can be slaughtered in a more humane fashion. A debate that raises public awareness of these issues is sorely needed.

“But we get the nagging feeling that some participants in this debate are not concerned with animal rights.”

An anonymous vegetarian remarked, “I think there are a lot of double standards within the halal meat debate; people are far too ready to criticise specific, in this case religious, practices, without looking at the problematic nature of the meat industry as a whole. You’re eating dead things either way, and the pedantics of how it died are largely irrelevant.”

However, another student told Cherwell, “We have the right to know exactly where the meat that is served in colleges comes from. Then it is up to the individual to choose whether or not to eat it, according to their views.

“I think it is really important that colleges admit to serving it. Personally, if I knew that the meat being served was halal, I would avoid eating it, as I do not want to in any way support this cruelty towards animals.”

The University declined to comment.

The annual Student Experience Survey carried out by Times Higher Education has placed Oxford fourth of 111 UK universities.

The poll saw over 14,000 undergraduates quizzed on aspects such as lecture provision, societies, welfare and facilities.

It placed the University of Sheffield at the top of the table, up from its position in third last year. Sheffield’s Pro Vice-Chancellor for learning and teaching, Paul White, said, “It shows that we have a good all-round offer, excelling on both the academic and social sides”.

White cited the University’s move to provide academic skills classes and the opportunity to learn a foreign language – available across the whole university – as helping Sheffield grab the top spot.

The report on the Times Higher Education website also noted that students and staff at Sheffield hold the Guinness World Record for the most people simultaneously flipping pancakes.

Second-year Sheffield student Chris Musgrave told Cherwell, “The opportunities are infinite, it’s such a welcoming environment.”

Coming joint fourth with the University of Dundee, with a score of 82.8, Oxford ranks just above Cambridge, which came a close fifth. Oxford scored highly in the academic categories, notably getting at 6.5 in the category of ‘high quality staff/lecturers’ and a 6.4 in the category of ‘helpful/interested staff’.

However, in the category of ‘fair workload’ both Oxford and Cambridge universities came at the bottom of the table. Another mutual weak point was ‘good students’ union’ with Oxford scoring a very low 4.1. Both also scored very low in the category of ‘cheap bar/shop amenities’, an understandable result given the March 2014 Lloyd’s bank report, which found that Oxford was the UK’s least affordable city.

Oxford scored very highly in the category ‘good social life’, clocking up an average six points from a seven-point scale, on par with universities such as Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. Cambridge, on the other hand, came in with a shoddy 5.6 – the lowest of the twenty-five top-ranked universities. Oxford also scored very highly was in ‘good sports facilities’. Here the university scored a 5.6 compared to Cambridge’s 5.3.

A fresher studying Physical Natural Sciences at Cambridge said, “It’s not true that Cambridge students don’t have a life. I went to a JCR meeting last week. It was really good”.

The survey also asked students whether they would recommend their university to a friend. Oxford scored a reasonably high 6.4, coming in slightly lower than Cambridge and Sheffield’s 6.5.

Oxford students were eager to corroborate the survey’s findings. Second year English student Kate Guariento remarked, “I’m very pleased that the table reflects the outstanding social provision for which Oxford is famous – nay, venerated. In the words of my favourite stomping ground – let the good times roll!”

A first-year History student at Magdalen commented, “The University’s on point with the teaching, I would just say that it is the variety of cheap amenities and accommodation that is the problem. I love Oxford but it is definitely expensive.”

A first-year Law student noted, “I don’t need a survey to tell me life is better here than in Cambridge, but generally I have little to complain about except the rain.” However, an anonymous fresher at Hertford College complained, “I still have too much work.”

A spokesperson from the University of Oxford commented, “We’re always pleased to be listed highly in any table like this”.

There may be a new link between generosity and trustworthiness according to new research conducted by Oxford University.

The research looked into the signals we rely on to decide who is trustworthy, with findings showing that we tend to distrust those who are stingy with their money. The study claimed that stingy people were also more likely to lie about their generosity to present themselves in a better light.

The researchers set up an experiment in which participants played interactive games in which they had to decide who to trust, based on information about the generosity of other players in previous games.

Researcher Dr. Wojtek Przepiorka, from the Department of Sociology at the university, said, “When acts of generosity occur naturally with no concern for how they are perceived by others, they can be effective signals of trustworthiness. Charity balls are places where people can openly display their generosity, but in this case because people know they are going to be observed, this might be a strategic gesture and less telling of their true character.

“We regard acts of genuine generosity as those produced spontaneously and these are widely seen as a reliable indicator of trustworthiness, even when they are small gestures.”

Professor Diego Gambetta, an Official Fellow at Nuffield College commented, “Our experiments showed that cheating comes in clusters- a large portion of people who were mean were also prepared to lie about it, and those who lied were much more untrustworthy, as if one sin promotes another. It appears that people widely regard generosity and trustworthiness as being “cut from the same cloth” as far as human characteristics are concerned.

“However, some people display generosity when it is likely to be in their own advantage. In our experiments, we also find that those who are guilty of ‘strategic’ displays of generosity themselves are more likely to spot strategic generosity in others.”

One first year student from New College noted, “This is interesting research, though I’m not too sure how applicable it is in real life.”

Another said, “I am slightly concerned that this study has jumped to conclusions too quickly. There could be other factors that the study has failed to consider.”

A serious outbreak of mumps at Brasenose has drawn concern from students who are critical of the college and JCR’s handling of the incident.

According to the most recent university report, there are currently 20 cases of mumps at Brasenose, including at least 10 “live” cases.

On Monday, Brasenose JCR President Henry Zeffman made undergraduates aware of an outbreak of mumps at the college via e-mail. He added that unwell students had been given the option of going home or being quarantined in college for five days from the onset of symptoms.

Students living in college quarantine have reportedly been confined to their rooms and given access to a bathroom in a specific staircase. Brasenose Hall staff have been delivering them three hot meals a day, free of charge.

Despite concerns about contagious students, Brasenose JCR nevertheless held a literary character-themed bop this weekend for approximately 100 people in the college bar and the new Babylove. Zeffman told Cherwell that he and JCR Entz Rep Liam Langley had spoken to college authorities about potentially cancelling the event for medical reasons, but were given the all-clear.

“It is clearly unfortunate that there has been a small outbreak of mumps at Brasenose at a time when many people, particularly finalists,
are under considerable stress,” Zeffman told Cherwell.

“I am satisfied that College has taken the correct precautionary measures throughout. The Bop went ahead on the advice of the College authorities, who are receiving medical advice from the College Doctor and the College
Nurse.”

Nevertheless, the Brasenose bop drew national attention when an anonymous student was quoted in the Daily Mail criticising the JCR and college’s decision to continue with the event.

Speaking to the Mail, a third-year English student called the event “absolutely ridiculous”.

They told the Mail, “We got an email from the college nurse telling everyone to be wary of mumps and then two days later we had a massive party. 

“This place is like a ghost town – so many people have either gone home because they don’t want to get sick, or are lying in bed ill. This is exam season – these are the most important exams of my life, so I really don’t want to get
ill. It’s so irresponsible for the JCR not to cancel the bop on Saturday night.”

Mumps cases have also been reported at St. Hilda’s College.

Students have been encouraged to go home for five days after displaying symptoms, which develop after a two-to three-week incubation period and include high fever, joint pain, and swelling of parotid glands just below the ears.