Saturday, May 17, 2025
Blog Page 147

“That’s not misogyny, babe”. 

Violet Aitchison
-
0
“That’s not misogyny, babe”. 

If I were born four hundred years ago, I’m pretty certain I would have been burnt at the stake for being a witch. Being told to “shhh” and how “scary” I looked by a six foot-two, mullet-sporting man on Mayday morning at Magdalen Bridge reminded me of this fact. I forgot how ‘scary’ a woman with an opinion could be. 

Today we live in a society where the dialect surrounding misogyny has been transformed into something more clandestine. Whilst I cannot literally be condemned to death for possessing the qualities of a witch, I can still be condemned socially for the same reasons. If a woman is confident, passionate, or independent, it’s not uncommon that these traits will be translated by some men into ‘cocky’, ‘bossy’, or ‘overbearing’. Through these covert changes in language, misogyny is able to slip through the cracks. 

Four hundred years ago my left thumb might have been tied to my right toe before I was tossed in the moat surrounding the Oxford castle and prison. Had I sunk and drowned, I would have been innocent. Had I floated, I would have been a witch, fished out, and burnt at the stake. Not the best odds. The man on the bridge on Mayday looked like he’d have quite liked to toss me into a body of water, although he probably wouldn’t have gone as far as burning me. The reasons why a woman could be accused of witchcraft four hundred years ago were many and spurious. Watch out if your neighbour’s cow died or a child fell and hurt themselves outside your house or a man had impure thoughts about you. Also watch out if you lived alone, didn’t have children or were outspoken. The man on the bridge identified my ‘witchiness’ on similar grounds – I was wearing red eyeliner, which apparently made me look ‘scary.’ He repeated this word many times when I called him out. 

As I stood on the bridge being berated for being ‘scary’, I realised just how helpless these women must have felt when on trial. How does one prove they did not curse their neighbours’ milk? How could they show that their cat was not the devil incarnate? How would I respond to the allegations of sinisterness? When someone shouts something at you enough it starts to feel like your reality. After the fifth time, I began to wonder whether I should have spoken up in the first place, whether I was being unnecessarily provocative. It made me wonder whether, if a man in my town told me that I was a witch enough times, purely because of my stubbornness or because of the mole on my neck, I would believe it. I feel lucky to have been brought up to stand up for myself and for other women around me when faced with similar situations; however, this is not the case for everyone at Oxford, let alone across the world. I could not help but think of all the women stuck living with men such as the one on Magdalen Bridge, who have to take daily jabs at their intelligence, or have to make sacrifices in order to protect men’s fragile egos. Of course, encounters such as these may not seem like such a big deal in the grand scheme of things and, to an extent, they aren’t. Women across the world are still facing extreme persecution not dissimilar to, if not exactly like, actual witch trials. My experience with the casual misogyny on Mayday morning is incomparable. However, it is also important not to become complacent in the face of these types of interactions, as these casual, misogynistic behaviours will and have begun to become commonplace amongst young men. We must stop accepting misogynistic jokes in order to set an example for future generations. What does it say about modern society if men are allowed to start calling women ‘scary’ for speaking up. Is this not exactly how the witch-hunting craze started in the first place? 

Most astonishing was how the man in question began to back his claims with evidence, by pulling up a photograph of a witch on his phone. It was in this moment that I most sympathized with accused ‘witches’ of times past, not least Rachel Clinton, a Salem ‘witch’. Her accusers professed that she showed “the character of an embittered, meddlesome, demanding woman—perhaps in short, the character of a witch.’’ I felt as though the picture on the man’s phone was the modern-day equivalent. Fortunately, the absurdity of this man’s actions was enough to settle any anxiety I might have otherwise felt about being too ‘outspoken’. I told him that, had he just told me that he was misogynistic in the first place, we might have saved ourselves from the ensuing back and forths. At this point, his girlfriend felt it necessary to inform me that “that’s not misogyny, babe”. I found the misogyny pretty blatant in this interaction. A picture of an actual witch had been shown to me. However, it did make me think about all the small ways in which boys and men are able to belittle women without being called out or, in this case, by being defended. Even when I was clear in my mind of my ‘innocence’, I couldn’t convince him or his friends. Though we may no longer risk being tied to a cucking stool and dumped into the river Cherwell, we are nevertheless still tested on our ability to conform with standards set by men centuries ago. I did not fit his paradigm because I was not willing to accept his casual misogyny, so he used his physical dominance to shout down at me, I suppose in the hope of my surrender.

I suppose being a witch is a slightly self-fulfilling prophecy, one that I’m fond of myself. But whilst I might be able to laugh at my own ‘witchiness’, we must be careful that the road to casual misogyny doesn not become a slippery slope. Just consider how you might have reacted five years ago, had someone told you that Roe vs Wade would be overturned. Fairy tales, even the most sinister ones, can always turn out to be real. 

Image Credit: Robert Benner//CC BY 2.0 via Flickr

Hertford announces changes to bursary scheme

Jakub Trybull
-
0
Hertford announces changes to bursary scheme

Hertford College has announced changes to its bursary scheme, involving a cut to those receiving the Crankstart Scholarship. A range of changes have been announced, including increases in eligibility, the form of compensation, and distinguishing between Crankstart scholars and non-scholars.

With the aim to “provide improved levels of support, in a more targeted way, to a wider range of students”, the upper limit of household income required to qualify for an automatic award will be raised from £53k to £63k, the first time it has been raised in many years.

Furthermore, the standard award will be raised from £1,000 per annum to £1,500. However, this compensation will be applied in the form of discounted rent and free meals at the College Hall, as opposed to the current, direct lump discount on battels.

This has caused some contention among the student population, with a preference for direct compensation. The College, however, have affirmed this as part of their intention to “encourage greater use of hall and communal dining in College.” Although some students have told Cherwell that they fear they will not have enough evidence to support exemption requests, and that such a process might be invasive. In addition to this restriction, students have brought up concerns that those wishing to live privately will struggle with such changes.

The biggest point of contention is the halving of the award granted to Crankstart scholarships, with scholars being awarded £750 rather than the current £1,000. This reduction will only affect students who will matriculate from 2023 onwards.

Hertford College told Cherwell that: “No student will receive less support than they do now”, adding that the College “takes into account the University’s extension of the Crankstart scheme.”

JCR Treasurer, Amrit Ark, reassured students that throughout the rent negotiation process, efforts have been made to keep the bursary scehme inclusive and to “expand its value”, without making any current students worse off.
One student at Hertford told Cherwell: “I support the spirit of this, as I believe there is a middle squeeze where those on the very lowest incomes get lots of support, and those with high ones get support from families, [but a lack of support for those in the middle]. I think this will help with smoothing.”

Alcoholism at Oxford University: A Perspective

Anonymous
-
0
Alcoholism at Oxford University: A Perspective

I can still remember the first time I got drunk. I was around 13 years old. A friend had stolen some of his dad’s whisky, and we got through half a bottle together. The experience wasn’t particularly extraordinary, apart from one thing: even then I was astonished, terrified, by just how much I enjoyed being drunk. The rush, the feeling of the alcohol coursing through my veins, the way it made my worries and anxieties dissipate for a few blissful hours. I subconsciously realised something that, years later, I would spend countless hours grappling with; whatever joys I could experience sober, they would be even better with a bottle in hand.

The next few years went by relatively normally. The lack of independence borne from still living at home meant my alcohol use was kept in check. All that happened was that every week or two when me and my friends were out drinking, I’d always end up getting absolutely shitfaced –  far more than anyone else.

Then I arrived at Oxford University. It only took a few weeks for my alcohol use to absolutely soar. I was 18 at this point, and without my parents breathing down my back, I was free to drink as much as I pleased. In the Michaelmas and Hilary just gone, I drank an average of around 100 to 150 units a week. I drank virtually every day – and I mean drank, enough that almost every night ended with me stumbling up the stairs to my accommodation and collapsing in bed, drunk out of my mind. I spent well over a thousand pounds on alcohol, leaving less than half of my money for other expenses.

There are probably very few environments worse for would-be alcoholics than Oxford University. The atmosphere of constant stress, the omnipresent ‘work hard, play hard’ undertone, the fact that almost every society runs countless boozy events, combined with virtually every college having a cheap and accessible bar, meant that I stood little chance. It’s true that, regardless of where I went, alcohol problems would have probably arisen. Of the three factors often leading to alcoholism – a family history of alcohol abuse, beginning drinking at a young age, and past mental health problems – I tick every one.

But Oxford undoubtedly exacerbated my issues. It doesn’t have much of a drug culture (in my experience, at least), but it has one hell of a drinking culture. Very few people seemed to notice how out of hand my drinking was getting. In a society where getting drunk regularly is a common occurrence, it’s hard to differentiate between someone who likes to drink and someone who needs to drink. When I finally began the long and painful process of seeking sobriety, the lack of support provided by the university was shocking. My addiction advisor suggested I  seek out alcoholic support groups within the University. As far as I can tell, no such group presently exists.

The solution isn’t, however, some sort of puritanical clamp down on drinking among students. The vast majority of you reading this article will be perfectly capable of drinking healthily and in moderation – and I am deeply envious of you. College bars and drinking events provide most with a hugely enjoyable social space. Some alcohol free alternatives would be nice, but that’s all. Instead, the University needs to do more to assist those students who are struggling; and we all need to be more ready to look out for the warning signs of alcohol dependency. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to drink; but when we start noticing that ourselves, or others, need to drink, alarm bells should be raised.

The writing of this article marks the two month anniversary of my sobriety. These past few weeks have been tough, much tougher than I could have ever expected. But they’ve also been incredibly rewarding. Getting over an addiction requires a complete life reset; it requires reconnecting with the friends and passions that you lost to booze. The constant urge to drink still hasn’t left me, if it ever will. Knowing that you can’t under any circumstances do the thing you want to do more than anything else is torture. But finally, for the first time in many months, I’m able to appreciate the beauty of our world, the simple joys of friendship, without the distorting lens of the bottle – and that makes it all worth it.

But if there’s one piece of advice I want anyone who relates to this article to take to heart, it’s this: don’t go cold turkey. Alcohol is one of the few drugs whose withdrawal can be fatal. For me, it was so bad that I was rushed to the John Radcliffe emergency unit, suffering from delirium tremens – a condition arising from alcohol withdrawal with symptoms like tremors, delirium, hallucinations, and even seizures which could potentially lead to death. Talk to your doctor, or any other NHS resources, so you can withdraw with the help of medications to protect you.

Drinking in moderation can be great fun, but if you notice yourself or anyone else unable to put down the bottle, becoming dependent on alcohol to get through the day, it’s time to take a break. And if that’s too hard, speak to a pastoral adviser or counsellor. Alcohol nearly ruined my life. For many years to come, I think, I’ll still be grappling with its consequences. I don’t want it to ruin yours.

Hannah Edwards wins uncontested Union election amidst low voter turnout

Maggie Wilcox
-
0
Hannah Edwards wins uncontested Union election amidst low voter turnout

Hannah Edwards has been elected Union President for Hilary 2023 and her #Impact slate swept all officer positions. The election saw some of the lowest voter turnout in recent memory and few contested positions.

Ebrahim Osman Mowafy and Julia Maranhao-Wong won their uncontested elctions for Librarain and Secretary respectively. Finlay Armstrong beat out Leo Buckley for the position for Treasurer by 284 votes to 175. All officer positions also received on average 121 Re-open nominations (RON) votes.

All candidates who put themselves forward for Standing Committee positions were elected. Chloe Pomfret, Charlotte Fallon, Caleb van Ryneveld, Peter Chen, Robert McGlone, Ana Rosca, Oliver JL, Ashley Cheong, Charlie Chadwick, Devon Darley and Aimee Adey have been elected to Secretary’s committee.

This term’s election saw only 590 votes cast, a steep drop down from the 910 cast last term or the 779 cast in last Trinity’s election.

“I’d rather have regrets about not doing something, than regret doing it”: In conversation with Game of Thrones star, John Bradley

Deborah Ogunnoiki and Freddie Evans
-
0
“I’d rather have regrets about not doing something, than regret doing it”: In conversation with Game of Thrones star, John Bradley

John Bradley West is an English actor famous for his role as Samwell Tarly in HBO’s massive global hit fantasy TV series, Game of Thrones. Since then, he has starred in Patient Zero, Moonfall, and the romcom Marry Me, alongside Jennifer Lopez and Owen Wilson, and he has also been cast in the TV series North Shore.

Freddie: How did the overwhelming success of Game of Thrones impact your life and career? How did you handle the immense fan response both positive and negative to your character and the show?

“I think people who were in it from Season One, like I was, saw a gradual build of its success. It’s not like those who joined later on in the series, who would join what was already a huge show. For us, it always felt a little more manageable. It wasn’t an overnight thing where you would join something that already had a lot of pressure from the second you joined. It was a level of fame that was actually quite manageable, as people who watched it, loved it. People who didn’t watch it would have no idea who you were, especially for somebody like me, who wasn’t on the posters, like Emilia or Kit, for example. That led to a level of recognition that was really nice. Everybody was always very polite and respectful. We all love the show as well; there’s nothing worse than having people talking about a project that you’re not invested in yourself. So, in terms of career, it’s a mark of approval that you can act. If people in charge of a show like that trust you with it, then in regard to the negativity it’s just about shaking it off – it was such an all-consuming thing. Now we just want to show that we can do other things, but even if it’s the only thing you do in a career it’s still been a good career.”

Freddie: Looking back on your time on Game of Thrones, what aspects of the show do you miss the most?

“It’s all about the people. The fact that we got to work together as a team for nine years is so rare. It’s like a family. When you do movies you get to know people extremely well for a few months and then you may never see them again, but we always had the last six months of the year with each other, and the friendships that developed were special. There’s something very unique about that. The hardest part for someone naturally shy like myself is making all those friendships quickly. However, every time we went back it was like putting on comfortable clothes. An artistic acting rapport naturally developed between us. You can’t manufacture that. It just happens. We were incredibly lucky to not have a single bad personality or toxic energy within the entire cast. That’s rare.”

Freddie: I actually went to Split and Dubrovnik to see where some Game of Thrones scenes were filmed. What was it like filming abroad?

“That’s a great thing about it as well. Iceland was the one for me because I did a couple of consecutive years in Iceland. It wasn’t even in Reykjavik, but a glacier, hundreds of miles away from Reykjavik. In a situation like that you think, “Well, if it wasn’t for this show I’d never be here. Not only am I here but I’m with people that I really like and I’m doing work that I’m really proud of”. Those were pinch-yourself moments which were a real privilege. I’ll never forget them.”

Freddie: What would you say contributed significantly to the success of Game of Thrones?

“It comes from the books, but it gained such wide recognition when the show came out; that is, the risks that it takes getting rid of characters. I think George R.R. Martin had written so much for TV where the rule of TV is – don’t kill your lead character too early. He became sick of that restriction and so wanted to write books that broke all of those rules and which led to his lead characters being killed off at the end of the first book. When that was made for TV they were stuck with the fact that the lead characters were now killed at the end of the first season. It’s how constantly surprising it was. Once you get to a level where people are expecting to be surprised, how do you then surprise them? The whole show was based on surprise. In terms of surprising moments, they executed those brilliantly, time after time.” 

Freddie: How do you personally relate to your characters, such as fantasy-based protagonists such as Samwell Tarly and in other roles, in more real-life-based roles such as Max in North Shore?

“You should always try to establish a connection between yourself and your characters. Humanity and life are all about grey areas. If you look closely enough, you will find something in common, even with the most extreme characters. Who you are as a child really influences who you are as an adult. And so, from my own therapy and self-reflection, I’ve taken this approach with characters, trying to find glimpses of who they were at six years old, even if they’re portrayed as 30 years old in the film. It gives you motivation for their actions as adults. It’s tempting to think that a character doesn’t exist until they first appear in the film, but if you delve into their childhood you will discover an incident or a moment in their life that connects with something in your own life. Then you might see the parallel between the two of you.”

Freddie: How do you handle criticism? You recently starred in Moonfall, a so-called “box office bomb”, and yet your performance was “the best thing about Moonfall” according to critics, such as NMEs James McMahon.

“It’s tricky because nobody shows up to do a job, anywhere, trying to do something that won’t take off. Everyone is giving their best effort to make it work. It’s a lesson really. I think it may be the most expensive independent film of all time, around 150 million dollars. It had an Oscar winner, Halle, who was awesome, and Roland Emmerich, who knows his way around a disaster movie. I had a great time on it, and it’s very flattering that James McMahon said that. It just goes to show that sometimes, during a pandemic, there are some things you just can’t plan for, but it’s about having a good experience, and I’m glad I did it.”

Freddie: What has been the most valuable lesson you’ve learned throughout your acting career so far?

“It’s about not being afraid to turn things down and not do them, if you believe you’re not doing them for the right reasons. In an industry where uncertainty is so prevalent and you’re never sure if you’ll work again, it’s tempting to grab hold of everything. However, if your gut instinct is telling you that something feels off or that it’s not a character you want to play, or there are problematic elements to it, then simply trust your own instincts and choose not to do it. I’d rather have regrets about not doing something than regret doing it.”

Freddie: What does the future hold for John Bradley West?

“Theatre, definitely, because I trained in theatre but never pursued it professionally. When I finished Game of Thrones, which was such a significant part of my life, the idea of doing movies where you only commit for a couple of months and then move on to something else was really appealing. However, my former Game of Thrones bosses, David and Dan, approached me with a show they had written for Netflix – their first project after Game of Thrones. They asked if I would like to join them and be a part of it. I think I have had a long enough break in-between to go back into series now so I’m doing the Netflix show with them. It’s nearly finished so that will be out towards the end of the year!”

Freddie: What advice would you give to aspiring actors who are just starting out in the industry?

“Enjoy it for as long as you can possibly enjoy it and while the stakes are low. As soon as something becomes your job; as soon as there are 200 people filming you and there’s a budget of tens of billions of dollars – that’s when the pressure’s on. You still love it, but you develop a slightly different relationship with it after that. So, enjoy it while you can. If a mistake happens just forget about it. You’ve got a long life ahead of you to make things right.”

Deborah: Is it weird being a Northerner in a sea of posh, privately educated actors? As someone from Essex myself, I always have people questioning my accent, did you have the same experience?

“I went into the industry expecting that to be the case. And I think maybe I just joined the industry at a time when that was on the decline a bit. But I know that attitude was prevalent for a while. But I think that’s a great thing about acting, it’s that you’re dealing with humanity, you’re dealing with telling stories right across the board, especially now. It’s getting so much better with telling diverse stories, and stories from different voices that you wouldn’t have heard stories from before. So, it’s kind of a level playing field where all stories are treated with respect. And if you want stories to be told authentically, you have to get authentic people to do them. So now, if you’re a posh actor, you’re at a disadvantage if the role on the table is somebody working-class or somebody from an ethnic minority background or something like that. You’re now not the right person to play that part and you never were, but now you’ll never get a chance to play that in a million years, and that’s only right. Because of that more voices are being amplified, and everybody’s having their say, everybody’s earning their place at the table. I think it’s a good thing.”

Deborah: I mean amazingly I am going to see The Little Mermaid tomorrow. It’s one of the big benefits of how the acting industry is becoming more diverse and now amplifying different voices at the same time. It’s giving so many more people a chance to play characters that would typically just be given to the same old people.

“Of course. That’s what it’s all about. And, you know, there are people who have a problem with that, and I’m not quite sure what their problem is. Because the people do have a problem with that now didn’t have a problem when it was people playing out of their race, when it was white people playing in ethnic parts in the 60s, those people don’t really talk about that the same, but that’s just all agenda pushing. It’s never about that. It’s all about how they see the world. And hopefully, the voices of those people who have a problem with it will get more and more marginalised, and the next generation won’t even think about it.”

Deborah: So was being on TV alongside Kit Harrington’s character strange? Because Samwell was quite a cheery and funny character, and then Jon Snow it was like gloom and doom. I mean, that’s why Sam was, my favourite character, I wasn’t a big fan of Jon Snow.

“Oh, nice! Thanks, I’ll tell him! Yeah, I think that’s what made it such an appealing watch, the fact that it’s such a broad spectrum of characters, all of humanity was there. And if it was just the serious side of things, if it was just the brooding hero, you’d just get sick of that tone. You have to have people in there to break that open. I think that was why Sam and Jon’s relationship was so effective because they are so different. But at different times, they were exactly what the other person needed. Sometimes, you know, Sam needed a protector physically, and sometimes Jon needed some sage advice. And so, between them, they make up for each other’s shortcomings, and they become a complete person between them.”

Deborah: That’s actually quite beautiful. But landing a big role fresh out of drama school must have been quite daunting. How did you cope with suddenly acting alongside big names, as well as being suddenly thrust into the limelight?

“It was really scary. Because as I said, I come from a very theatrically centred training. So we didn’t really have a lot of camera training at all, we have the three hours across three years, so it doesn’t really prepare you for that job. And the thing that saved all of us, I think, was that it was myself and Kit Harrington and Emilia Clarke and Richard Madden and others, who were going on that journey for the first time all together. Kit had done some plays, Emilia had done theatre and a few telly things, but none of us had ever done TV on that scale before. And I think that when you’re with people who are feeling the same way as you are, you sort of cling to each other. So we didn’t necessarily feel intimidated because when I was doing scenes with Kit, we were both feeling our way through it. And the friends that you make when you’re scared are the friends that you tend to bond with for life, I think.”

Deborah: Well that definitely describes Oxford ha! I mean you’ve kind of spoken about how different TV acting is from theatre, but how different is acting in a fantasy show compared to any other genre?

“Even if it is a fantasy show, I always try and make it as real as possible. I don’t think I ever made my performance in Game of Thrones, a fantasy performance. I tried to make it real because there are a lot of heightened performances going on. So, the stuff that I did, I tried to make as real, and as small, and as credible, and as unshowy, as possible. And I think I always bring that to it. So, the way I went about performing it doesn’t really differ. For example, when you take someone like Martin Freeman in The Hobbit movies, he’s playing a quite natural character. He’s not really playing the world; he’s just playing a person. That’s exactly what I’ve always tried to do as well. So, the characters differ, but my approach to it and what I try and bring to it is always the same.”

Deborah: Speaking of previous questions about actors sometimes not being able to say ‘No’ to some scenes in the acting industry. With Game of Thrones having very high sex content, was it weird acting alongside that? Was anyone really uncomfortable with some sex scenes, and what was that environment like for those actors?

“I think everybody’s on this journey of enlightenment and education all the time. And they all seem to happen way too late. These moments, whether it be Black Lives Matter, or whether it be Me Too, and that kind of thing. They all happen way too late in history. But it’s just all about how we learn from them and how we make amends. Before those movements, you wouldn’t even have thought about how they can be seen with a different light shined on them. And I’d like to think that everybody on our show felt safe and looked after. I’d never really heard of any otherwise. Everybody involved in it are still friends, it doesn’t feel like there’s any bad blood but you know, if there was then nobody should have any compunction about speaking out about it.”

Deborah: And what do you think happened to Samwell post-Bram-as-king, did he get his happily ever after?

“It feels it, when you leave Sam in that chamber with Davos, and Bram, and Tyrion and all of those people, that he’s finally in a position where the skills that he has, and his expertise are finally being valued. And he can actually have an impact on the wider world. He was never going to be able to influence things on the battlefield or in the military, or any of that stuff. But he’s found a place where what he brings to the table is respected and valued. And that’s all he ever wanted.”

Deborah: And are you comfortable with being known as the guy who played Samwell in Game of Thrones, or do you wish to kind of branch out from such an iconic role?

“Yeah, I think that’s the thing about having your first role be one of the biggest things you’ll ever do, if not the biggest thing. Because not only do people think you can’t play anything else, but they also think that is actually what you’re like because they’ve got nothing to reference the real you. So now I find myself playing characters that are more similar to me, but people think that’s acting, and they think I am Samwell, and that when I’m playing close to myself, that’s the big transformative part. But I think it’s always good in a way because I think everyone, whether you’re an actor or not, everyone’s got one part in them that they can play better than any other because it speaks a lot about your life. It’s just about trusting yourself to play other parts. And it’s also about other people in the industry, trusting you to play different parts and hoping that people will believe it. So, it’s a long process. But, you know, if that’s the only thing that you get judged by for the rest of your career, nobody’s complaining.”

Deborah: And would you join in a sequel of Game of Thrones? Or is that chapter of your life closed?

“I was thinking about this the other day, actually, I don’t think I could play him anymore. It’s weird. The sort of, you know, I’ve spoken before about what was happening in my life immediately before Game of Thrones. And I think as Sam grew, I was growing as well as a person as I was playing in my private life. So the Sam that ended the season wasn’t the Sam that started at the beginning of the series, and I wasn’t the same person either. So if I did play him now, I could probably play him, but it wouldn’t be the Samwell that everybody knows, because he’ll have moved on, as we all have. Whether I’ve got the sort of will to do that, I’m not quite sure. But some things are just best left alone.”

Cheesy “castration” causes stir

Daniel Thomas
-
0
Cheesy “castration” causes stir

The Oxford Cheese Company has found itself in a larger-than-life controversy, criticised for “emasculating” a Dorset landmark on its packaging.

The Cerne Abbas Giant, a hill figure and scheduled monument depicting a nude, club-wielding man with an erect penis, has long been an icon of the West Country, and is used as an emblem by the company on its ‘Cerne Abbas Man’ label of vintage cheddar. But there is one key difference: the variant on the label lacks the chalk giant’s notorious anatomical correctness, instead wearing a pair of trousers.

The change has sparked consternation among locals in Dorset, with Vic Irvine, head brewer at Cerne Abbas Brewery, describing it as a “castration”, and a county councillor decrying the company for “chopping his bits off”.

But Harley Fouget, son of the company’s founder, insists the change is not a defacement or emasculation, and that the modified figure is simply “wearing trousers for modesty’s sake”. 

Fouget says that the altered label was printed following a formal complaint from a member of staff at a retail outlet the company supplies, who argued that the Giant might potentially upset customers. This was deemed serious enough to remove the label from the company’s pre-packaged cheeses, but Fouget notes that the symbol is retained on the company’s larger cutting cheeses. 

Supplying supermarkets is a lucrative line of business for the company, and they thus take complaints from staff members at customer outlets seriously – no matter how small the matter in question. 

The altered label has now been in use for five years. Fouget is unsure why the change has come to the attention of the public and press now of all times, although he notes that branding and design changes by small START businesses often “take a while to filter through”.

In response to claims that an Oxford company has no right to exploit the image of a Dorset monument, Fouget cites his own personal history with the county; he was educated in Dorchester, and has many friends living and working in the surrounding countryside. The Oxford Cheese Company has produced and sold Cerne Abbas Man cheddar for over 20 years, always using milk sourced from Dorset farms.

The hill figure at Cerne Abbas, which is first attested in 17th-century records but may date back to the Neolithic era, is one of several across the UK, including the Long Man of Wilmington and Oxfordshire’s own ancient Uffington White Horse. 

This is not the first time its phallus has led to controversy. A Gillingham resident led a campaign to cover up the Giant in the 1920s, with the backing of local clergy, while in 2016, Cerne Abbas Brewery’s own logo was censored in a Parliamentary bar.

Fouget remains unfazed by the press furore, which he describes as “perfectly harmless”. The company would be entirely happy to restore the Giant to its unaltered state, he says, and may use the current spate of public interest as an opportunity to do just that.

The Oxford Cheese Company sees nothing malicious or ill-intentioned in the reporting on the logo. Fouget describes it as simply a “talking point over dinner”. 

Indeed, the publicity could even prove helpful for a local business always looking to spread the word about its products.

Oxford Union doesn’t believe Modi’s India is on the right path

Bintia Dennog
-
0
Oxford Union doesn’t believe Modi’s India is on the right path

The Oxford Union doesn’t believe that Modi’s India is on the right path, following a strong majority of voters rejecting the debate motion on Thursday.

This came after a lively debate concerning the Indian leader’s political record. Since Modi’s ascent to power in 2014, India has seen rapid economic growth and social progress. However, with an election looming large next year, some have criticised Modi’s BJP for religious conflict and dwindling funding of social services.

Speaking in support of the motion was Indian foreign affairs journalist Palki Sharma and the previous Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for International Development Rt. Hon. Baroness Sandip Verma. Alongside them, the founder of the Deshbhakt, India’s largest political satire platform, Akash Banerjee, and President-elect of the Union Disha Hegde spoke for the proposition. 

The opposition guest speakers included the president of the All India Kisan Sabha and member of the Polit Bureau of the Communist Party of India, Ashok Dhawale, and the previous Indian Minister of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Ajay Maken. Co-founder of the Aam Aadmi Party and later of Swaraj Abhiyan, Prashant Bushan, also argued against the motion along with the Union’s Ethnic Minorities officer Misha Mian. 

In a filled chamber, Hegde began by describing Modi as “one of the most popular political leaders in the world” and that “you do not need to believe that Modi has fixed all the problems of India… all we need to convince you is that the India today is moving in the right direction.”

Misha Mian, opening up for the opposition, touched on Hegde’s decision to argue for the proposition: “I thought she’d stop selling her soul once she was successfully elected Union president but I see that she’s defending the side of the proposition tonight – a side she doesn’t believe in.” Citing the overriding of Article 370, which stripped Kashmir of its autonomy, the exclusion of Muslims from the Citizen Amendment Act, and the lack of sustainable development, she argued that India could not be on the right track. 

Journalist Palki Sharma contrasted this by drawing on India’s digital developments, for instance, financial inclusion and internet penetration. These signify the path that India is on, she claimed. Sharma went on to describe India as a “soft power giant”, which “rubs shoulders with the West but also leads the Global South.” It is also a consensus-maker, not a trouble-maker, she asserted, referencing India’s neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine war. “[India] does not have a national interest to pick sides and make things worse.” This, Sharma claimed, is like when two of your friends fight; as a good friend, you try to talk sense into them and bridge the divide. 

Ashok Dhwalale, up next, made liberal use of the ten-minute speech time and argued that India is “on the worst possible path” for the overwhelming majority of the population. It is on the ‘right path’, only so far as the interests of the Adanis and Ambanis are concerned.” This led to cheers and applause from the audience. He also claimed that the recent railway accident, which led to over 280 deaths, occurred “because the Modi government is starving the railway industry.” 

Responding to this, Akash Banerjee thanked Dhwalale for “an amazing electoral speech”, inciting laughter from the crowd. “You’re forgetting what’s bigger – India or Modi” he argued. “To say that one person can decide the destiny of this nation is to do injustice [to India].” Banerjee also asked the audience to consider how the UK is perceived abroad. Headlines in India, he stated, often take the form of: “Oh Brexit, oh Boris, oh cost of living… oh England is going down”. But, when he was in London, he didn’t see a country in decline or collapse, but rather the opposite. 

Prashant Bushan, who spoke next, immediately laid out why he stood in the opposition: 

“Because of the war, the Modi government has declared war on the poor.” The annual income of the poorest 20%, he said, has plunged 53% in the past five years. He lamented the rule of law being “demolished”, the compromised independence of institutions, and the degradation of critical thinking and democracy, the latter having been turned into “a game of money and propaganda.” 

One of the floor speeches, for the proposition, also argued that Modi’s India is indeed on the right path – albeit, the path towards authoritarianism. 

The last proposition speech was given by Baroness Verma. “Thank you ladies and gentlemen, and those rushing out, hurry up,” she began. As someone looking from the outside in, she said she has seen “transformational change [in India], particularly in the past nine years”, noting improvements in women’s rights and infrastructure. She went on to argue that Kashmir is now “a safe environment” and urged the audience to enjoy the fact that people now want to invest in the region. 

Closing the debate, Ajay Maken made his case for the opposition. Citing the expulsion of India’s opposition leader from parliament earlier this year, he questioned: “Is democracy [in India] still alive?” Maken also expressed his dissatisfaction over the lengthy time it took to set up an anti-corruption body. 

The Oxford Union’s final debate of the term will take place next week.

The Mad Hatters

Declan Ryder
-
0
The Mad Hatters

Luton’s recent promotion to the Premier League, after beating Coventry in the Championship Play-Off Final on penalties on the 27th May, signals their return to the English top-flight for the first time in 31 years. Their downfall and subsequent rise since then have been well documented, and they were still playing in the Conference League, the fifth tier, less than 10 years ago. With a stadium capacity of just 10,356, the away stand of which literally requires fans to walk through steps in someone’s back garden, their newfound status in the Premier League has unsurprisingly been heralded as a magnificently bizarre fairy tale. 

Whether they will be able to survive immediate relegation back to Championship football next season, however, is up for debate. Some have already written off their hopes of survival, but the extent of success of fellow relatively footballing minnows such as Bournemouth and Brentford in the Premier League over the past decade is a testament to how an intelligent, and well-run club can potentially flourish, regardless of the league’s notorious difficulty. Brentford, in particular, has operated on a rather shoe-string budget, with a net spend of just £781,000 over the past five years, considerably lower than that of all other Premier League sides for the 22/23 season over the same period. Chelsea, for example, who finished 15 points lower than the Bees last season, have a net spend of £653.21m over the five years, over 836 times the amount. In a footballing climate in which the uber-rich tend to dominate accordingly, such remarkable figures clearly show the potential to succeed without spending extortionate amounts. 

Can Luton replicate the success of clubs such as Brentford, then? The speed and extent of their recent success would suggest that they are indeed a well-run club. Complex financial difficulties afflicted the club in the late 00s and resulted in inexplicably high points deductions, causing them to fall from the second tier of English football to the fifth in successive seasons. Yet, since then they have stabilised with the ownership system of a fan-backed consortium ‘Luton Town Football Club 2020’ in 2008, which issued 50,000 shares to the Luton Supporters’ Trust. Chief Executive Gary Sweet recently won the Championship Chief Executive of the Year award, too, further emphasising the effectiveness of the current footballing hierarchy in place for the Hatters.  

Not only have Sweet and co been able to steer Luton smoothly away from such a financial mess, but the quality of recruitment of late, too, has been nothing short of exceptional. In the 22/23 season, they utilised the loan market superbly, with key first-team players such as Cody Drameh, Marvelous Nakamba, and Ethan Horvath, all being brought in from Premier League sides and playing pivotal roles in their promotion. There is, of course, the perennial concern with successful loan spells that their parent club will want them to return and Luton will miss out on the opportunity of signing such players on a permanent basis, or indeed be priced out by the superior financial might of their parent clubs. If this does ultimately prove the case, then they will be required to be equally shrewd in the transfer market this summer, in order to bring in the necessary Premier League quality to thrive in the league.  

The majority of non-Big Six Premier League sides regularly face the issues of losing their standout individuals, however, and are often able to adapt accordingly and cope with the issue. Brighton are perhaps the most glowing example of such a business model, regularly selling their greatest assets to bigger sides for large fees, and consistently bringing in more than capable replacements for comparably small fees. One particularly impressive example of this arose out of their sale of Marc Cucurella to Chelsea last summer for £65m. While Cucurella has struggled in West London, Brighton’s replacement of Pervis Estupiñán, bought from Villarreal for £17.8m, a fraction of the cost, has arguably been the league’s best left-back this campaign.   

Luton, therefore, will need to be similarly impressive over the coming months to stand a chance of survival. Their manager, Rob Edwards, has undoubtedly done an exceptional job since replacing Nathan Jones in November, as has his squad, to achieve promotion, but as of right now, it is clear that they are likely not comparable in quality to those they will be competing against next season. In many ways, their activity over the summer will be crucial in defining their season – before a ball has even been kicked. It is likely that they will base their bid for survival on defensive solidity, first and foremost. They conceded just 39 goals in the Championship last season, the joint second-best defensive record and this foundation will have to remain relatively sturdy for them to stand a chance.  What they do also possess, however, is an immense sense of team spirit, a bizarre yet intimidating stadium, and a sustained track record of impressive recruitment.  

These factors, combined with necessary signings to bolster the squad, may very well prove enough for them to avoid the drop in the Premier League next year. But regardless of how the Hatters fare in the season to come, it is a breath of fresh air to see them competing at the pinnacle of English football once more. The likes of Erling Haaland, Mohamed Salah and Kevin De Bruyne will be competing in a stadium that’s stands overlook the washing lines of locals. It is weird and wonderful and a thrilling proposition for a league that has for too long been plagued with talk of Super Leagues and million-pound-a-week contracts. Football in its purest form.

Image Credit: Dave Gunn // CC BY-NC 2.0 via Flickr

The cutback and growth of Britain’s urban hedges

Louis Johnson
-
0
The cutback and growth of Britain’s urban hedges

On a recent visit back home, I was absent-mindedly staring out the window when I saw an astonishing sight: hedges. The leafy suburbs of west London are home to an artefact that has vanished from many of urban Britain’s front gardens. The story of this nation’s hedges is a story of shifting national attitudes, but there are encouraging signs that point towards the restoration of this fascinatingly ordinary part of British life.

A hedge, for the unfamiliar, is a row of shrubs planted together to create a boundary or act as a fence; a hedgerow is simply a longer hedge incorporating other features. The history of hedges in Britain goes back a long way, with hedgerows having been planted by the farmers of the prehistoric Bronze Age. However, the “enclosure” of England’s land, turning once common land used freely by peasant farmers into privately owned fields, led to vast mazes of hedges appearing across the country. While my socialist friends may receive this fact with indignation, the resulting hedges were a godsend for wildlife and Britain’s environment. They offer a habitat for many species such as hedgehogs, sparrows, wrens and robins, to name a few. Hedges have also been shown to boost air quality and lessen the impact of flooding, both increasingly useful benefits in our age of  extreme weather patterns. 

Urban hedges began to appear en masse in the Victorian period and the early 20th century. However, the surge in popularity in paved-over gardens has not been kind to the hedge. Many front gardens have been turned into driveways, while back gardens are being uprooted in favour of “sterile patio space”. These trends bode poorly for both the hedge and the vitally important green spaces that prevent Britain’s cities from becoming ecological wastelands. Indeed, the growing prevalence of paved surfaces in areas such as floodplains have worsened the extent of flooding, and causes warmer local temperatures because of heat-absorbing concrete. There has also been a steep but predictable decline in many hedge dwelling animals, such as sparrows, which are losing their nesting sites. While the observed decline in rural hedgerows that followed the Second World War has largely stopped, the destruction of the urban hedge is a likely culprit for the loss of these animals. 

The hedge’s fall represents a growing detachment from our roots (pun intended). According to the social historian Dr Joe Moran, front gardens were linked to community spirit, as each family would make sure that it looked nice for the neighbours. As Britain’s sense of community has eroded, so has the front garden’s importance. Thatcher’s right-to-buy policy also led to the loss of front gardens, as once council-mandated upkeep gave way to formless expanses of concrete. The atomised society of neoliberalism strikes again. 

Gardens are a tiny slice of the wonder of nature in our dense and grey cities. They are a living link with the insects that pollinate our crops, the trees that give us air. They are a connection to the vibrant past when our ancestors across the world lived off of the land, a communal space for neighbours to talk, and simply somewhere to see the intense beauty of the world not fashioned with human hands. Nature is humanity’s common heritage, and the fall of the urban hedge is somewhat of a metaphor for what our thoroughly individualistic world has lost. 

However, an unlikely coalition of gardeners, conservationists and ecological activists may be coming to the hedge’s aid. There is a growing reaction to the loss of urban green space, for example climate group Extinction Rebellion’s call to end the “crazy paving” being installed in Britain’s cities. This has been mirrored by the Royal Horticultural Society, who have praised the hedge’s role in tackling the climate crisis. More widely, the British government has laid out plans to re-introduce nature to Britain’s urban areas, as the detrimental effects of a lack of green spaces on the environment as well as on people’s physical and mental health have become known. 

The humble hedge has faced heavy trimming, but there is still life for this wonderfully quaint  and essential part of the nation’s cities. As we become increasingly aware of the dire reality of climate change, we must regain our respect for nature. The only way for humanity to survive the intersecting ecological crises of our age is to become a steward of this Earth rather than its imperious master. In our own very small but vital way, this begins at home. 

We need urgent planning reform to incentivise hedges as part of a return to the green gardens of old. Of course, for this to be successful, it must be accompanied by a culture shift away from cars in cities. But bringing back this fading feature of Britain’s front gardens is both a concrete move in fighting the environmental crisis and a symbolic one, recognising our commitment to the natural world which sustains humanity and embracing this quietly ancient British tradition.

Image Credit: r. a. paterson/ CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 Via Flickr

OUCA election in chaos as ousted president clashes with committee

Freya Jones
-
0
OUCA election in chaos as ousted president clashes with committee

Polling for the Oxford University Conservative Association (OUCA)’s termly election will go ahead today, 8th June, despite ongoing disputes over its validity. In an email sent last night, Caleb van Ryneveld called for polling to be postponed, but his authority to do this remains in question amid controversies over his Presidency.

OUCA’s Disciplinary Committee (DC) voted to remove Van Ryneveld as President on 24th May, although he has since appealed this decision to the Association’s Senior Member, Dr Marie Kawthar Daouda, who acts as a check on the DC’s rulings.

Dr Daouda then issued a review to reinstate Van Ryneveld, stating: “The sentence against Mr Van Ryneveld is hereby annulled by decree of the Senior Member until further discussion is possible. Mr Van Ryneveld will resume his position and duties as President.”

However, the individuals in the DC have contested this decree, raising concerns about the Senior Member’s understanding and implementation of the Association’s rules. One senior officer on OUCA committee told Cherwell: “The relationship between the DC and the Senior Member has always been cordial, although this ruling goes beyond the realms of her constitutional power”

This has resulted in a factional situation within committee, with the legitimacy of the President, the Acting-President Peter Walker, and the Returning Officer Jake Dibden’s roles being called into question on various sides.

In light of this, Van Ryneveld attempted to invoke Rule 4(10) of OUCA’s constitution, concerning the running of elections in exceptional circumstances. In an email sent last night, he stated: “the OUCA election shall be delayed until Thursday the 15th of June”. However, this was sent from an unofficial non-OUCA email account, using what one committee member has described as a “Frankenstein mailing list”. 

Polls will open at the Crown Pub on Cornmarket at noon today as planned, closing at 6pm. The legitimacy of the election and disputes over the legitimacy of Presidential nominee Conor Boyle will be the subject of ongoing discussion.

This article will be updated with further details pending responses and changes to the situation.

1...146147148...2,495Page 147 of 2,495

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by James Ashley