Wednesday, May 21, 2025
Blog Page 163

Let down?

0

Apparently, as a finalist, I should expect to leave Oxford with either a Blue, a spouse, or a First, and yet I won’t even be leaving having experienced the full three years of my degree. I have Covid to thank for that. 

I came to Oxford with few expectations, not thinking that I would go to university at all, but there is something about coming back for the final term of my degree, and talking to second and first years about their radically different experiences, that makes me realise how different my time at Oxford has been.    

I’ll start at the beginning. Freshers week – a chance for people to socialise, meet new people, and have fun. But this is harder than it seems when the only way that you can talk to people is at a ‘speed dating’ event with masks, two-meter social distancing, and the voices of twenty other people drowning you out. Or when you’re sat outside in October separated into neat, socially distanced, household bubbles by colourful bunting. Instead of being able to make friends, lose them, and create my own social circle, I found myself assigned to a household bubble of four of my course mates. Throughout first year, attending societies, bars, and clubs was impossible, and even lunch breaks and shopping trips were complicated – a sharp contrast to the buzz of social activity on the streets of Oxford today. Now don’t get me wrong – I loved my flatmates, and I still do, but there were many times when I felt isolated and disconnected, and I often reflect on how different my university experience would have been if I was allowed to meet people outside of my subject and college. And although Covid may have been forgotten, or banished to the past, this social legacy has continued to haunt me. I not only felt the traditional imposter syndrome that so many of us at this university do, but a social imposter syndrome, where the Covid friendship groups formed in first year seemed impossible to break. 

My academic experience has also suffered. The intimate and personal teaching environment of Oxford is something that makes this university distinct, and yet there is something about watching pre-recorded lectures in your room, and not having an in-person tute until second year that really flattens these experiences. First and second years often take these personal academic interactions for granted, or even dread them, but Covid made me realise how hard it is to care about your degree when you can mute yourself, turn off your camera, or have ‘internet problems’ and go on your phone in tutorials. I was also denied the opportunity to engage with my lecturers and tutors, some of the most world-renowned experts in topics which interested me, and I  feel as though this led me to often resent, and not appreciate and love my course. 

Despite this, I’m going to end on a positive note. I may not have a Blue, or a spouse, and I’m doubtful about getting a First, and I may be slightly bitter about the fun, socially packed lives that I have watched first and second years live. But that doesn’t mean that I haven’t enjoyed my time here. I have made lifelong friends, joined a society, explored the city, and attended academic events. I believe that it is important not to dwell of what could have been, but to look back and appreciate the happy moments that have happened. It’s the small things that make your university experience what it is, and I wouldn’t give up those moments for the world.

Image Credit: Daniel Foster/ CC BY-NC 2.0 via Flickr

The annual token black Love Island contestant

Winter Love Island has come to a close, and as we draw near to the summer season of Love Island, many black viewers are filled with apprehension, waiting to see who will be the next token black woman on our screens. It’s fair to say that black female contestants have not had the best time on the dating show.

Year after year, the black woman faces an intolerable amount of rejection. Every season’s first episode starts with the contestants picking who they would like to couple up with based on appearance. Samira, the first black female contestant, was picked last. A year later, Yewande was also picked last, followed by Leanne. Then Kaz was picked last, and this year’s love island saw the same trend continue. When Tanya made her debut as the newest token black girl, only one male contestant stepped forward to couple up with her –Shaq, the only black male contestant. The others not stepping forward promoted a narrative that the show has been promoting for years; black women are not desirable, and if they are desired, it’s only by black men.

We watched Samira get rejected by every guy she was interested in for the first four weeks. Then, when she finally coupled up with Frankie, we thought she found her match. Later episodes revealed that he preferred her white castmate, Megan, more. Indiyah seemed like the first black woman not to struggle to couple up in the villa. There was Ikenna, Dami, Deji, and Samuel, but this just displays the other side of the conversation. If the black woman is wanted, it is only by black men. Not once did the likes of Jacques or Luka show interest in Indiyah, and let us not forget that Davide referred to her as a “downgrade”. These episodes of implicit and explicit discrimination mirror dating life for black women. A study conducted on dating preferences on the dating site ‘OKCupid’ found that black women and Asian men have the hardest time matching on dating apps.

It’s painful to watch, especially when there is half a decade’s worth of televised mistreatment towards people who look like you.

Diversity is different from inclusion. Diversity involves having people from various backgrounds, whilst inclusion ensures that everyone feels welcomed and valued no matter their differences. Love Island may have a diverse set of contestants, but they fail to ensure that all the contestants will be able to find actual suitors. This encapsulates the entire issue with tokenism. To put it simply, tokenism is when the conversation starts and ends with “we need more BLANK people here”. It is a step in the right direction to acknowledge that there is a diversity issue, but the conversation must be extended further. It is not enough to meet a quota; we need to discuss how to accommodate the entrance of people from different backgrounds.

Love Island is not the first to practice tokenism, with other institutions like our university being culprits of the same practice. Have you ever seen a university post where the ethnic minority takes centre stage? It can appear disingenuous. Ultimately, it causes adverse effects for the token individual, like the feeling of isolation and being forced to deal with immense pressure. As we are edging towards our 10th season of Love Island, I hope this time will be different. And to my black women, we love you.

Image Credit: Bermuda/ CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 Via Flickr

“Being delusional is the best form of therapy”: In conversation with Mia Khalifa

Mia Khalifa at the Oxford Union

At 17:35 on May 3rd, I received an email from the Oxford Union Press that in about 2 hours I would be interviewing Mia Khalifa before her speech at the Union that evening. I paused mid-essay, suddenly struck by the fact that I had no questions prepared and was about to meet one of the most infamous, and most stylish as we all saw at her speech, women in the world. As I scrambled for questions, I realised that the image of Mia, the questions that people may expect me to ask is related to a past that doesn’t really represent Mia for who she really is. Woman to woman, I wanted to know Mia Khalifa, whose real name is Sarah Joe, for who she is now, as a person, a human being, a woman, and a person of colour. 

Entering the room at 19:55 pm I greet Mia who is all smiles. She’s shorter than I thought she would be but much kinder. I tell her she looks amazing and she compliments my eyeshadow. While we bond over our love of Fenty I realise Mia truly is a girl’s girl. She’s the kind of girl that gets on better with other girls, a quality that I think is the greenest flag to spot in any girl. 

We finally manage to settle down and I ask her what it was like growing up as a Lebanese girl, and how that influenced or affected her relationship with feminism. She told me “It’s really difficult to grow up Catholic and Middle Eastern because I feel like there’s a lot of just inherent misogyny, inherent roles that get assigned to, like, daughters get treated so much differently than sons, which I feel like can be related to in so many other cultures, not just Lebanese culture. It’s very much that in the Middle East. The man is the provider. The woman is the supporter, that kind of mindset. So my outlook on feminism growing up was what I was taught around me, which is why I feel like I had so much internalised misogyny. It took me a while to grow out of that, but I don’t think it positively skewed my view on feminism.” We bond over our experiences as women of colour. “I’m Nigerian,” I tell her, and we agree on how our cultures influence our views on how we should act as women and how we are perceived.

But our cultures also look down heavily on sex work and the adult entertainment industry, despite the hypocrisy in that men still see us women as sexual objects. I ask Mia how she relates or reacts, given her experience in the industry, to the increasing number of women getting involved in sex work, whether stripping or OnlyFans, and citing feminism and empowerment as their reason for it. Her answer is firm, speaking from her own experience in the industry, she answers, “I do not think it’s an act of empowerment, I think it’s actually very dangerous to push that rhetoric. I think that it should never be a first option or something that’s packaged as empowering or freeing or anything like that. I think that’s very dangerous, and it’s borderline grooming. I think there are empowering ways to do it once you’re in if there are no other options for you, but I would never promote it as something simply empowering. Don’t do it if you’re looking to do something empowering.”

In November of Michaelmas Term 2022, the Union was visited by another personality who opened an OnlyFans account in 2021 just a few days after her 18th birthday, and allegedly earned over $1 million in revenue in the first six hours, and an alleged total of over $50 million. Facts like this put into perspective what Mia is saying in regard to grooming. In her talk in the Union, she elaborated on this, stating that the narrative that OnlyFans and being a sugar baby and other forms of sex work are being pushed to you young women as safe and easy ways to make money and express themselves, yet this is not the case. Mia maintained that it was “absolutely grooming”, and expressed a wish that young women would not turn to sex work unless they really had to for fear that that digital footprint would follow them for most of their lives. 

Speaking of a digital footprint, it was time to ask Mia about what she was most well-known for. In all honesty, I did not want to ask this question. Despite being curious myself, I knew too well what she had gone through at that time, and to ask her to relive that experience felt wrong. Yet, I ask, “You’ve been criticised by men for daring to have a sexuality and by women for supposedly misrepresenting them, for example, the hijab video. As a woman and as a person of colour as well, how do you react to the backlash from your history in the adult entertainment industry?”. Mia says “I don’t really get let it get to me too much. I know that I’m not the one who invented the fetishization of the hijab or of the Muslim culture or anything like that. In fact, it was straight white men who wrote the scene.” What Mia is referring to is Orientalism, a term established by 20th-century Palestinian philosopher Edward Said. The term criticises the West’s derisive depiction of The East. The over-sexualisation of Arab women found in movies, one of the most notable examples being Princess Jasmine from the Disney movie Aladdin, is a massive problem within the West. Men are obsessed with the idea of unveiling Muslim women, hence the market for it, not only in porn, but also in TV shows and movies which feature a female Muslim character removing her hijab for minute reasons, oftentimes irrelevant to the plotline. The over-sexualisation of Arab women doesn’t stop there, Native American, East Asian, Black, South Asian, Romani and Latin American women are all victims of the over-sexualisation of their bodies and their culture. It is unsurprising that these groups of minority ethnic women experience rape and sexual assault at significantly higher rates than white women, with the National Center on Violence Against Women in the Black Community stating that one in four Black girls will be sexually abused before the age of 18. The fetishization of ethnic minority women is commonplace, and a dangerous phenomenon that puts women in danger, but Mia says it is important to remember that these stereotypes were invented by “straight white men in suits”. It was these men who were the ones who pressured her into that hijab scene when she was 21, despite her protests that it was wrong, as she revealed in her Union speech.

Knowing this, it’s unsurprising that Mia veered away from the sports world. “I was heavily involved. I had a sports show a couple of years ago it was complex. And I was very heavily involved in the sports world up until about two years ago when I actively made a decision to kind of stop taking jobs that were centred around that, just because I feel like the fan base isn’t one that I wanted to cultivate. It was young men, and it wasn’t serving me. It’s just not a fan base I want. So I realised the more sports I’m involved with the more I’m going to be exposing myself to that demographic. So I made a conscious decision not to do it anymore. It was a very difficult decision, like very difficult.” 

So if she’s no longer doing sports commentary, what’s in store for Mia Khalifa? What does the future hold for the influencer and activist? According to Mia: “So much!” Her enthusiasm about her future is infectious as she tells me, “I’m launching a jewellery line. I’m doing a lot of things that I never dreamed I’d be doing, like speaking. Honestly. There’s a lot on the horizon that I’m very much looking forward to the end. It aligns with me and who I am. And I’m also happy with the audience that motivates.”

As Mia seeks to cultivate an audience of women who are inspired by her and move away from the young impressionable boys who seek her content for laughs, she re-establishes herself and takes back control of her name, her social media, and her actions. Though she jokes that “Being delusion is the best form of therapy” she advocates for going to therapy and mending your mental health, which is just as important as your physical health. 

Her talk at the Union resonated with many audience members, from women to fellow Middle Easterners, enjoying both Matthew’s questions and Mia’s answers. Consequently, we look forward to Mia’s future and all that she hopes to achieve as her talk at the Union signifies her first step to building a better audience.

Oxford’s Coronation connection

0

Oxford University Press will be playing a role in the King’s Coronation today, having produced the Coronation Bible which will be used by King Charles III during the Coronation ceremony. Commissioned by the Archbishop of Canterbury, this Bible is to be used by the King at Westminster Abbey during the ceremony when the King will place his hand upon it while reciting the Coronation Oath.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby said: “On this momentous occasion, the Bible will be the first, and most important, gift offered to the King.” The tradition of using an Oxford Bible at the Coronation of British monarchs can be traced back to King George III in 1761 and Oxford University Press have been chosen to produce specific Coronation Bibles for British monarchs since Edward VII.

Three copies of this Coronation Bible have been produced. The Bible used during the service will be placed in the Lamberth Palace’s archive. The King will be gifted a personal copy while a further two will be placed in the archives of Westminster Abbey and Oxford University Press’ head office. 

The specific version that will be used by the King is hand-bound in leather and adorned in gold leaf. Additionally, Oxford University Press has also published an illustrated Coronation edition of the Authorised King James Bible. This edition includes a special commemorative gifting bookplate, colour images of Westminster Abbey, the Coronation Chair and King Charles and Queen Camilla as well as Biblical illustrations.  

Malala Yousafzai awarded honorary fellowship at Linacre College

0

Malala Yousafzai, Nobel Peace Prize winner and Oxford University alumnus, was recently awarded an honorary fellowship at Linacre College. 

This follows the advent of the Oxford Pakistan Programme (OPP) to which Yousafzai contributed. Linacre’s principal, Nick Leimu-Brown, has been supporting this programme since it began in 2020 and has continued to be involved. 

Linacre told Cherwell that the “strong relationship between Linacre College and the OPP was further strengthened by the awarding of an honorary fellowship to Malala”, recognising her consistent efforts in support of accessible education for women and those from less advantaged backgrounds. 

The Programme has successfully provided scholarships for 5 students of Pakistani origin at Oxford University, as well as 6 work placements at the World Bank office in Pakistan. According to the co-founder of the Programme, Dr Talha Jamal Pirzada (Linacre), “the OPP has become a beacon of hope for thousands of Pakistani students aspiring to pursue higher education at top institutions worldwide”.

“As we celebrate Malala’s extraordinary achievements, let us recognise the transformative power of education in shaping lives, communities, and nations,” he continued. Dr Pirzada made an emphasis on young girls and women working in STEM subjects in his vision of a “prosperous and equitable future for generations to come”.

Yousafzai’s father, Ziauddin Yousafzai, was also present at the ceremony. He stated that the opportunity will allow his daughter to “further expand her work and collaborate with others to find solutions to the challenges in access to education for girls”. Malala’s ethos was reasserted; she “aspires to transform the lives of students and serve as a beacon of hope for students in Pakistan.”

Ukraine’s population displacement mapped using social media

0

Oxford’s researchers have released a significant report tracking the complex internal displacement of Ukraine’s population.

Published in the Population and Development Review, the team from the Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science estimated that 5.3 million people had been displaced between 25th February and 14th March 2022. The study has been credited alongside others for encouraging the United Nations to amend its initial figure of 1.6 million internally displaced people to 6.5 million by 16th March 2022.

Using a unique metric, researchers were able to incorporate UN data on border-crossings with their own data which tracked active Facebook usage by Ukrainians in the weeks following the Russian invasion. According to lead author Dr Douglas Leasure, these modern methods avoid the inefficiencies of traditional surveying techniques. He explains “by using social media and targeted advertising data, we were able to very quickly collect information on daily active users on Facebook in Ukraine provinces and break them down into five-year age groups and sex.”

Alongside estimates on the absolute number of persons displaced from their home province, the study was also able to map regional displacement, especially among women and children migrating westward. Professor Melinda Miles, Director of the Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science and senior author of the report, remarked upon the metric’s humanitarian applications: “This metric is one of the only quantitative estimates of internal displacement in virtual real-time, which we are continuing to develop to help those in need during humanitarian crises.”

The researchers are hopeful that the report’s findings could be used to aid vulnerable people still within Ukraine. Prior to the publication of the study, data on displacement in Ukraine had mainly focused on those crossing borders into neighbouring countries.

However, Dr Leasure noted that he and his team had become aware of the need to shed more light on the thirty-eight million Ukrainians who remained in the country: “it became really clear to us that our daily population estimates could help the United Nations and others to assess humanitarian needs and develop a targeted response strategy.”

The Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science continues to strive to provide research in the hope of reaching those Ukrainian civilians who require aid the most. The full report can be found via the Centre’s website: https://www.demographicscience.ox.ac.uk/

“They used greasepaint on me as a foundation”: In conversation with British actress Llewella Gideon

Llewella Gideon is a British actress, comedian and writer best known for Absolutely Fabulous, a TV series from 1992 to 2012, and The Little Big Woman, a radio show from 2001 to 2003. She has made appearances in movies such as Paddington (2014) and Rye Lane (2023). 

Cherwell has obtained an interview with the British actress where she discusses her background as an actress and the changes she’s seen in the Black British media scene.

To begin with, Gideon takes us into what a typical day working as an actress looks like. She says “That would be a typical working day would depend on the production. And also whether it’s for television or theatre. If it’s for theatre, then it’s much easier because you’ll have rehearsals during the day, like ten to six, then you might have that six days a week. And then once the day is up and running, then you just go in half an hour before the play starts. So if the plays at seven o’clock, you’ll go in at sort of like half-past six, or 20 past six, and then you do the show, and you go home, so it’s much easier once the play is up and running. It’s just the rehearsal period…that can take a long, long time. But once the show’s up and running, it’s fine. And then if you have a matinee, then you’ll stay in the theatre all day. If your matinee’s at two o’clock we’ll be there from one o’clock right through to maybe 10 o’clock in the evening. If your production and your part in it, your day can start as early as six o’clock in the morning, or they might come and collect you at five o’clock, depending on where your location is, and you have to be on set for like eight o’clock. So those days are not so great because you have to get up like three o’clock in the morning or four o’clock. But it’s not too stressful, because you have a car, pick you up and take you there, but you’re barely awake. Though by the time you get into makeup at about six or seven o’clock, it’s all good. And you could work right through till, you know ten, eleven, twelve, at night, depending on what you’re shooting. So some days, it can be an incredibly long, long day and get very tired, but yeah, it’s all good.”

Despite the clearly hectic days the actress has, she tells me she still tries to make time for family, “I don’t really get much catch-up time until weekends, I tend to see if I’m doing if I’m filming, it is really hectic in terms of learning lines, going to bed, getting up to go on set, spending a whole day there. So I don’t tend to see family so much when I’m filming. So I really make an effort at the weekends definitely to see my mum and hang out with my sister. As we’re close in that regard. So but filming extras is just like being on the treadmill…But at weekends we tend to get everybody together and have Sunday dinner.”

With a hectic filming schedule like that Gideon is sure to have some projects she’s worked on that make it all worth it. According to Gideon, she has “quite a few” of her favourite projects as she jokes that she’s “been around for a while”. She tells me “I’m very proud of recently doing The Long Song by Andrea Levy at the Chichester theatre, very proud of playing Old July. And for film, I think would be ‘Small Axe’ by Steve McQueen. But it’s ever-changing, I’m doing more stuff and I’ve got more stuff coming up and might be really proud of but in terms of story and impact on the community, Small Axe and The Long Song, those were very powerful pieces I’m quite proud to have been involved in.” Many of us can relate to this sentiment. Wanting to do work that you feel makes a difference, or at the least, you can look back on and say that you’re proud to have done at least one thing impactful. I ask Gideon if this is a sentiment that she expresses in her work. She answers “Absolutely. I mean, there are not many jobs that I say I’ll just do it for the money. I always believe what Sidney Poitier used to say, that he does work that his grandchildren can watch for years to come. So I don’t want to do anything that I would be ashamed of years later…If I have grandchildren years later, so I try and do something that I actually believe in on some level, or that I feel is gonna get people thinking or is based in truth, whether or not I agree with that truth, but it is something that’s powerful because there is some truth in that story that will impact people.” She explains that “There’s always got to be some kind of connection unless they have specifically asked for me for a role. And then I look at the role and see if there’s something that I can do bring something to.”

Gideon has a son around the same age as me. I can’t imagine having a parent with the legacy of Gideon. A seasoned actress, whose been acting even when the media and film scene was not particularly kind to up-and-coming Black actors and actresses. She explains her legacy “But when I started…my first television job was at 21 and I’m 55 now, things were a lot different to what they are now, you know, racism, sexism, every -ism existed then, and was either unconscious bias, or just the way things were. So the landscape that I had to navigate at 21 in 1989, is so much different. And even in terms of makeup and what we wore…when I started, at the BBC, there wasn’t black makeup, that makeup wasn’t a thing. They had to literally go on courses, the makeup artists that worked on our show, to learn about makeup for black skin, and colours and shades that we could use. I remember one of my first acting jobs, they used grease paint on me as a foundation, and I remember a costume lady saying to me, ‘Oh no, you can’t wear black, black people don’t wear black’. They were always trying to put me in tiger stripes and leopard skin, which I hate. Up to now, if I ever see a costume designer come towards me with ‘Oh, we thought you might look good in this’ and it’s any sort of tiger print, or a leopard print shirt, I’m automatically like ‘No, I don’t. I just don’t’. And they’ll say, ‘Oh but it’s lovely and colourful’. And I’ll say, ‘No, not happening’. I’m not in the jungle. I may be black but not happening. So you know, we’ve had to change a lot of people’s attitudes to us as performers. And it’s so much better for young people today than it was then. And we didn’t have Facebook. And we didn’t have Instagram. So we didn’t have instant success. We had to earn it by how many people are watching us on television at that time. How much exposure you got through them advertised in that programme, etc. But usually, it was word of mouth. Because there were so few black people on the television if you did see one, you’d let everybody know ‘Oh, there’s this programme on and there’s black people in so you should watch it’. A completely different time. And we’ve come a long way since then.”

Though I’m not a seasoned actress, when I was about 12 I was in a Scouts and Guides gang show, a musical theatre production produced by the local Scouts and Girl Guiding groups. Rehearsals were about 4 months and I went every Sunday. I thought the people I was rehearsing with knew me well, at the very least, knew that I was Black. But when it got to the day of the performance, I was disheartened to discover not only had they not got makeup in my shade (like not even close), but they also hadn’t got the right shade of skin-coloured tights. I called my mum crying, and I never did the production again. It truly did alter my sense of self in the world of theatre, I didn’t think I would ever belong. Gideon confirms this “They do have an impact on you and on your psyche. So if you’re constantly in situations where you’re there to perform to your highest standard, and you believe that you’re equal, and people continually do these things, like not getting tights in the right shade, not putting your makeup on correctly, it can grind you down. You’re constantly, one, having to prove your creative talent. But you’re also trying to educate people who are used to doing things in a certain way. And sometimes there’s a bit of resistance to change, but I think we’re at a place where you have to be on top of your game. You know, people know how to like Black people. Now none of these excuses apply anymore. So to be on top of your game, you’ve got to be able to be inclusive in your work, in your makeup, in your costume design, in your hair design, in your lighting design, there’s no excuse not to allow us to shine as it were, literally and figuratively.”

The British media world is indeed changing, nowadays we have Black British actors and actresses like Daniel Kaluuya, John Boyega, Letitia Wright, and Damson Idris to name a few. The media world is starting to become more inclusive and our stories are being told on the big screen. Most notably Rye Lane (2023), which is dubbed the first Black British rom-com. Gideon is featured in the movie and she praises one of the two writers, Nathan Byron, “I’ve known Nathan very well for many, many, many years, ever since he started out in his writing career. He’s such a prolific writer, he’s such a fresh young voice. He talks about people of colour outside of those stereotypes that existed in the three-dimensional, which is so refreshing. So anytime he calls me to come and do a play I definitely do it because I believe in the stories that he’s telling. So I’ve known Nathan for a while. So when he asked if I would do a little part in Rye Lane, I knew it was going to be good. I knew it was going to have integrity. And I knew it was going to be telling a story from a voice that we haven’t heard before. And that was going to be funny because it’s incredibly funny. I had every faith in him so I had no hesitation. It was such a delight, the movie was such fun to make.

“It’s a movie that makes you come out of the cinema feeling good because it shows us, it shows people of colour, as real people who have aspirations, who have disappointments, who have quirkiness. And most of all, who have the same insecurities as anybody else and, who have love. And we don’t see enough Black love in the media or Black British love. It’s fun, it’s the rom-com as you’ve never seen it before. As a structure, it has everything that a rom-com is supposed to have. As a genre, it’s excellent, you can’t fault it, where people might be cynical because they’ve never seen Black people in a structured rom-com and it’s mainstream. But the difference is you’ve got young people in this structure. More importantly, as well, you’ve got young, dark skin in this structure. This is about two young people in love. And I hate to say that they just happened to be dark because it’s not a mistake. If you’re Black, we shouldn’t have to apologise ‘Oh, I’m sorry, I just happen to be Black.’ It’s three-dimensional characters. It’s us as we live, speak, and function within a particular community. This is one aspect of it of us. That’s why there are so many different voices in so many stories that are coming through and will come through from the voices of Black British people. And this is just one of them. So I love the movie. I absolutely love it.”

The actress has solidified herself in the Black British acting world. Her passion for her craft and her dedication to impactful projects shines through when she talks about her job as an actress. I can’t wait to see what else the actress has in store, and I wish her all the very best.

“I was told never to tell this story”: In conversation with journalist, Suzanne Kianpour

Suzanne Kianpour is a Foreign Affairs journalist whose work has taken her to over 50 countries. She has reported in war zones and followed presidential scandals, like the Russian involvement in the 2016 US election. Her work in uplifting women’s voices in conflict zones, like her series Women Building Peace, has brought a new tone to conflict reporting worldwide. Wong Yi Xuan and I, representing the Oxford Human Rights Student Society and Oxford Society for International Development, collaborated to ask Ms. Kianpour about her life as a war zone reporter.

Oswald: As a young person, you were interested in politics and international relations. How did you decide on journalism as the best way of expressing your political voice?

Kianpour: I was actually told never to tell this story by one of my bosses, which is exactly why I’m going to tell it. When I was in about fourth grade, I don’t know what that is in UK school standards, but I was about nine or ten, we had Current Affairs Friday. So we had an assignment every Friday where we had to go and take a newspaper and find an article and clip it off and hand write a summary of the article and then present it in front of the class. And I loved Fridays specifically because I got to look forward to this. I basically do this for you living at home. I grew up during an era of a lot of conflicts, and I just realised how important documenting history is and how important being an impartial witness is. That’s really what drove my decision to go into this part of journalism. Of course, I was just getting started in journalism when the Arab Spring happened. And then the rise of ISIS. My first real foreign posting was in Lebanon, and it was quiet when I arrived. And then suddenly next thing you know, there’s this Islamic extremist group that was wreaking havoc across the region and they’re chopping heads off an hour away from where I was living in Beirut.

Oswald: How has the world of journalism changed since the time when you came into it?

Kianpour: I mean, so much. Now there are so many outlets, and it seems like every day somebody’s starting a new news outlet and it’s great. And there’s a whole other ecosystem when it comes to social media and new social media outlets coming up, and I see the upside in that. Particularly in my work, it has never been easier for sources and contacts to get in touch with journalists. When I first started in journalism, the U.S. economy was in the worst recession since the Great Depression. So, my family thought it was crazy – I had just graduated from university and education was pretty expensive in the U.S. And so they’re thinking, oh, great she’s going to go and get this great high paying job. And then I called them and said, Guys, I have a job. I’m working at NBC News, which is like working for the BBC here. And they said, Oh, that’s wonderful. What are you doing? I said, I’m working in the mail room. I’m delivering mail. But I said, Listen, you have to do anything to get your foot in the door. I said, I promise it’ll work out. And sure enough, a year later, I was following Obama around and meeting Kobe Bryant. And so it did work out, let me hear. But at that time, I didn’t have as many options like I had. Now students interested in journalism have so many options. With the emergence of A.I., I think the media landscape is going to change even more. I personally think it’s a positive development. Others might not agree.

Oswald: How do you see the role of journalism changing with AI?

Kianpour: The reason why I think it’s a good thing is people will pay for good content. Because of this fear of A.I., there’s less room for mediocrity. Everyone has to be on their game, and thinking creatively. You need to be thinking about what you can deliver to your audience that a robot can’t. It’s really as simple as that. People will pay for good content and they don’t need to be afraid of A.I., it’s not going to take all of our jobs. It’s going to take the jobs that keep us from being able to do our jobs in the way that we really want to. I really see it as helping with the busy work, frankly. And I say that as somebody who hosted an episode of the BBC’s inquiry, which was all about killer robots and the rise of AI in warfare, and I am still optimistic. So I think that’s saying something.

Oswald: You’ve been to many countries and have had an extremely broad career. How do you change your approach to navigate those shifts between cultures in your journalism?

Kianpour: I think that being from a diverse cultural background has been an asset for me, particularly. My dad’s family is Iranian, and so when I have been speaking to foreign policy officials who are not exactly friends with the US, and they’ve found out that I’m Iranian, there’s an element of intrigue, but there’s maybe less mistrust. As a woman, you have better chances of getting the stories of the women who are in the war zones. Oftentimes they have the most profound stories, but they’re less likely to open up to men. So I’m grateful that I’ve come from a background where I can sort of manoeuvre between cultures. But even in the U.S., some parts of the country just feel like a completely different world to others. Being from the southern part of the country, when Donald Trump was elected and I was doing stories about MAGA country, I would approach people and they would first see me with a bit of suspicion because they would say they saw that BBC as a bit of an elitist organisation because Trump was really big on pumping up the whole fake news thing. But then when they would find out that I’m from Georgia, they would soften. And so I think as a journalist, it’s good to tap into the parts of what makes you who you are and your identity, not only to empathise with your subjects, the subjects of your stories, but also be able to make them feel safe and put them in a position to soften.

Oswald: You’ve done a lot of work in your journalism on uplifting women’s voices and finding their stories, which has been really quite inspiring and fascinating. I was wondering, as a female journalist, have you ever struggled with asserting or demanding your legitimacy in those kinds of political spaces?

Kianpour: Oh, yeah, definitely. I mean, I’ve found that sometimes it’s good if you’re underestimated because then they’re off their game and you can use that to your advantage. I’ve taken that to work for me rather than, you know, getting offended by it. And I think one’s work speaks for itself. And it’s also one of the reasons why I felt that it was important for particularly women and conflict stories to be amplified. So that was really one of the roots of Women Building Peace because I was going to these conflict zones and I was talking to these women and I didn’t see them. I didn’t see those stories amplified. There was this U.N. women’s statistic that came out pretty shortly before my series debuted on the BBC. And it was that to this day, still, only 25% of stories have women as the subject. This was in early 2022. Yet women don’t make up 25% of the world’s population. So, I mean, we still have work to do. So seeing women amplifying the stories of women not only in leadership but also connecting them with women. In the case of my program, in the conflict zones and literally facilitating the conversation between two people who would normally not have access to each other lifts them up. And we need more of that. And I hope to contribute to more of that. I hope that more women join me in contributing to more of that and stay tuned.

Wong: I actually wanted to ask about your views on the protests in Iran. You’ve done a lot of reporting on it—could you just give our listeners a bit of context? How are they going right now and what do you think is the future of these protests?

Kianpour: So I’ve just recently published an article in Politico magazine called ‘The Women of Iran Are Not Backing Down’, and that stands. I believe I also ended that article with ‘this genie is not going back in the bottle’, and it’s not. This revolution is a revolution, and it is the first women-led revolution. Iran is no stranger to protests; whether it’s Iran when it was to the monarchy, or Iran under the rule of the Islamic Republic. But this time it’s led by the women, it’s supported by men, and the regime is losing ground and they know they’re losing ground, and therefore they know they have to reform. There are factions within the regime who have admitted this and are advising the supreme leader. I’ve had sources tell me this who have knowledge of these conversations and have had the conversations themselves.

When you get to that point, this is why I very confidently say that this genie is not going back in the bottle. As it stands, the hijab, which is what sparked protests, has been rebelled against for a long time. In the opening of the article, I talked about my last trip to Iran which was in 2007 and even then, me and my cousin were also part of the rebellion because we were trying to wear as little hijab as possible. I saw how the women were quietly protesting using fashion, frankly. They were slowly pulling at the thread of the hijab which would eventually begin to unravel one of the pillars of the regime, and that is what’s happening now and they know that, and that’s why they’re in crisis mode.

I think we have to continue to see how it unfolds, but it’s not a matter of “change is coming”—change has already happened, change is in the past. Women are just going out in the streets not wearing hijab. They’re trying to find all these ways to enforce it and enforce the law, basically, and women don’t care. The ones who don’t want to wear it aren’t wearing it and the ones who do want to wear it are. Some say it’s over because they’re not pouring into the streets like they were in the fall, but that’s not true—a revolution isn’t “you’re in the streets marching every single day”. We’ll see how it unfolds.

Wong: I read the article, it was really good. I just wanted to pick up on something you said about the women themselves leading the protests—how does that specifically contribute to the longevity of the revolution?

Kianpour: I think it’s a battle of the wills, right? The authorities are banking on the women giving up, and they’re not going to give up. I’ve had conversations with people who have been non-political for most of their lives and now are suddenly political. This isn’t a political movement—and by political, I mean they’re saying “We don’t want the regime”. It’s less about politics; it’s about civil rights. The regime really miscalculated, quite frankly, in its crackdown. They thought they would get away with what they’ve gotten away with in the past, but nobody is forgetting the number of people who have died. The women, the kids, the men—nobody’s forgetting that, so that doesn’t just go away. That’s why women are continuing to lead the charge. What prompted the protests, what was the match that lit this up? I’ve been living in Dubai, part-time at least, and it felt like living in a tinderbox in the Fall. I thought, because I was also hosting this documentary on the Iran-Israel shadow war, I thought that it was a miscalculation in the covert war between Iran and Israel, but it wasn’t. It was a routine detention of a woman who wasn’t wearing her hijab properly. This is an important distinction—it’s not that she wasn’t wearing a hijab at all, she just wasn’t wearing it properly. They detained her, which happens all the time, and it went wrong. And that was it.

Wong: I also wanted to pick up on something in the “Women Building Peace” series—I listened to the episode on the Colombian peace agreement. What do you think women-centric conflict resolution looks like, and do you think it’s a trend we can expect to continue seeing in the future, or is it still very tentative?

Kianpour: Well, I hope that we see more of it in the future. I think that the reason why we decided to do an episode on Colombia even though Latin America is largely ignored by the media unless it’s something going off in Venezuela—I’m thinking specifically of American news—that was the perfect example of why women need to be at the table when it comes to peace negotiations. But also, we often speak a lot about women in peace; I did a story of women in the Iran nuclear deal, the women who actually brought home the Iran nuclear deal. But I also want to focus on the role of women in power when it comes to building peace. That’s what it really comes down to. There is power in being able to be at a table to bring about peace. I think up until now there’s been the idea that “peacebuilding is safe, let’s allow the women to do it”. Now we’re seeing that actually, this is quite effective. I think, to go back to the women of Iran, there was a huge coup. This cohort of women managed to get Iran kicked off the UN Committee for Protection of Women’s Rights, which is pretty ironic. That in and of itself is an example of why women should have a seat at this table.

Wong: I was actually going to ask you about that coup from the UN: what role do you think international organisations like the UN have to play in these protests? Do you think they’ve made a significant impact, or what more could they be doing?

Kianpour: I mean, people will debate this and they’ll say how much that means. But I think particularly when it comes to Iran, so much of the hold on power is psychological. Psychologically speaking, that was a defeat for the regime. Obviously, when it comes to a hands-on approach, there’s a lot of debate around that—particularly around violations of human rights, which is what they’re looking at right now in terms of what mechanisms they can use in order to hold the perpetrators of human rights violations in Iran specifically, but also elsewhere in Ukraine, accountable. But the UN is a bureaucracy; that’s why its efficacy as an organisation has historically been called into question—Donald Trump is one of them, right? But then we see the victories of the women who took this case to the UN and succeeded. At the end of the day, everybody is on the same page—whether they’re in the diaspora, or whether they’re inside the country or the UN, or the US government or the UK government, everyone is in agreement that the future of the country lies in the hands of the people living inside the country. They all live in the shadow of the 1953 coup which has really been weaponised, in a way, by the regime to reinforce the idea that the West is just coming into meddle. There are a lot of discrepancies with those stories, but that’s another conversation

Wong: On the topic of protests more broadly, you recently posted on your stories about social media as the new organising tool for protests. What do you think is the role of social media in protests now, and how do you think they’ll shape the evolution of protests in the future?

Kianpour: I think I also posted this on my social media that there are days where I’m so sick of social media, and I’m just like “Why do I have to keep this up?” But then I remember why—because it’s literally a lifeline for people like the Afghan woman who we called ‘Lama’ to protect her identity at the time. Now she’s out of the country, she’s continuing her studies in exile, and she’s holding UN officials’ feet to the fire. The reason why she made it onto my first episode about Afghanistan and women’s education in Afghanistan where she had a conversation with Hillary Clinton—Hillary Clinton actually just retweeted her the other day and she was really cute, she was freaking out about it as you would—was that she contacted me on Twitter. It’s a whole separate thing, but this is why social media’s important, verification is important, Elon Musk is throwing all of this up in the air and there’s a lot of debate about this right now. But all of that is important because this is a tool for getting your voice heard. For the women of Iran, the 2009 Green Revolution, which was a political movement about having the right to free and fair elections, was the Twitter revolution. That really put Twitter on the map—it was the Iranian revolution and political campaign that got Twitter on the map. And then the Arab Spring came after and solidified it. This time around, the women-led revolution in Iran is on Instagram. It’s all Instagram, and so much of the reporting I’ve done came from random people just sending me DMs and voice notes. At one point when the protests were happening every single day and it was really bloody, I was waking up to voice notes every single day. If it wasn’t for that, I wouldn’t know what was happening in Iran even though I was 70 kilometres away from it because I couldn’t get in; they weren’t letting Western journalists in. And so social media is a really important tool—I find it as a double-edged sword, and it’s here to stay. It’ll evolve, but it’s here to stay.

Wong: As more protests take place on social media, do you think there are any forms of activism on social media that are performative, or is that a distinction that isn’t worth drawing?

Kianpour: Yes, I think unfortunately in activism and journalism and all kinds of ‘ism’s, there is the performative. But I think at the end of the day when it comes to human rights it is the journalist’s job to sift through the performative. I think performativism is inevitable no matter where you go and no matter what you’re doing and who you’re talking to.

Wong: I also just wanted to ask—and this is kind of bringing in things from Women Building Peace and the articles you’ve written about the desire of the Iranian people to keep telling their stories—what’s the role that storytelling plays in advocacy?

Kianpour: There was a time when a friend told another friend that they had heard this amazing podcast called “Women Building Peace” and it was the Ethiopia episode. It was so moving that they had to turn in to pull over into a driveway and continue listening to it. When I hear stuff like that as feedback to the journalism that I’ve put out into the world, I realise how important storytelling is. It’s not just the story—it’s also how you tell it. For me, for “Women Building Peace”, it was of utmost priority to really focus on the stories of the people living the story on the ground in the conflict zone. Some of the episodes were post-conflict—as you know, Colombia and Bosnia. It’s about the story and the person and what they’ve experienced. There’s this quote that I can’t remember now, but I love this quote and think about it often and I think it’s a big part of why I do what I do: “Tell the story of the mountain you climbed because it could be a page in somebody else’s survival guide”. I think that that can resonate across so many different kinds of stories. Joan Didion said, “We tell ourselves stories in order to survive”. Storytelling is so important and I think it’s important to be protected and that’s why I keep doing what I’m doing.

Scrapping for Survival 

0

The scrap for survival in the Premier League is always a thrilling spectacle from the neutral’s perspective, but one with potentially devastating consequences for those involved. Last season, Burnley, Watford and Norwich City were relegated. While Burnley have already been promoted from the Championship to ensure an instant return to the top-flight, both Watford and Norwich are struggling to even make it into the play-off positions.  

This season, the battle looks to be more thrillingly tense than ever, with just 10 points separating Wolves in 13th   position (34 points) from Southampton at the foot of the league (24 points).  

The two teams at the bottom of the league, Nottingham Forest and Southampton, have both hit a poor run of form at the wrong time of the season. Southampton, however, did produce a wonderful 3-3 result away to league leaders Arsenal at the weekend, demonstrating significant attacking verve. Their game management can perhaps still be questioned, but such a performance must provide great encouragement. They have 6 games remaining to try and recover the 6-point deficit that separates them from the drop, but this includes daunting away days to Newcastle and more – I don’t see them picking up enough points to make up the ground. 

Nottingham Forest may stand more of a chance at surviving, as despite only picking up a single point in their last 6 league games, they showed great threat in the 3-2 loss away at Liverpool at the weekend and were perhaps unlucky to leave Anfield without a point, with Brennan Johnson striking the crossbar late in the game. Their fixtures are relatively tough on paper, with 3 of their remaining 6 games against teams in the top half, as well a tricky away game against a resurgent Crystal Palace under Roy Hodgson.  

The three teams I see battling it out to avoid the final relegation spot, therefore, are Everton, Leicester City, and Leeds United. All three teams have just 6 games left to play, with both Everton and Leicester on 28 and Leeds just a point ahead on 29. All the teams are in similarly unspectacular form of late, and even though Leeds have the most points of the three in their last six games (6), they have suffered devastating losses in the last 4 of the last 5 games, a concerning trend. Leeds crucially face Leicester in their next game which could prove decisive come the end of the season. Aside from that their run-in is highly varied, with games against Manchester City but also West Ham. 

Leicester’s run is perhaps slightly more favourable, facing Newcastle, too, as well as Liverpool, but also with home games against Everton and West Ham on the final day. The fact that Leicester is set to face both Everton and Leeds in the run in could be enough to determine the fate of the three teams. 

When Everton appointed Sean Dyche on the 4th February, many believed he was the perfect man to steer the club steadily away from the threat of relegation. This has not exactly been the case, however, with the club averaging 1.08 points a game since his appointment compared to 0.83 before. There has, therefore, been an improvement in results, but not a highly significant one.  Again, their remaining fixtures are relatively mixed; but will the Toffees be able to able to pick up enough points to ensure their status as one of just 6 clubs that has never been relegated from the Premier League?  

My verdict is yes, just. Both Everton and Leicester should just about scrape over the line at Leeds’ expense. Fortunately for Leeds, Nottingham Forest and Southampton fans is the sheer unpredictability of the Premier League. Each matchday is accompanied by various surprise results and no doubt they will continue to occur until the end of the season. 

Image Credit:Solent Creatives//CC BY 2.0 via Flikr

Freedom of speech in 2023: Why the Oxford Union will never cancel controversial speakers

0

Oxford University is the best university in the world. Coming here, I expected a culture of debate, academic challenges, and to be surrounded by students who would seek new ideas and adamantly defend their opinions once formed. For the most part, I am proud to come from a politically active university. However, after getting involved in the Oxford Union, I realise how some individuals avoid the opportunity to actively engage with and challenge those they disagree with.

This term, the Oxford Union has hit the student and national press by inviting Dr Kathleen Stock OBE to speak on her views about gender identity theory at the end of May. Stock gained notoriety in 2018 after opposing proposed changes to the 2004 UK Gender Recognition Act. These changes would allow people of any age to legally self-identify as a particular gender, without the requirement of a psychological or medical diagnosis. Last term, the Union made international headlines by hosting the Israeli Ambassador, Tzipi Hotovely, resulting in the President facing an invalid motion of no confidence and protestors chanting ‘Charlie, Charlie, you can’t hide, you’re supporting apartheid’. Along with hosting David Starkey in that same term, the Oxford Union is consistently at the heart of controversy. The student population in Oxford is fantastically outspoken, brave and intelligent, consistently voicing their opinions, protesting, writing for student papers and raising awareness online by condemning these speakers’ views, as well as the Union for hosting them. However, there seems to be an increasingly stark difference between the number of people who disapprove of such views and those willing to come to challenge them. 

Challenging these speakers in person, and in front of peers, can be difficult. I don’t support young people who may already come from minority or oppressed groups having to take on the burden of defending their own rights in the chamber. I do, however, believe that, as much as I find some speakers offensive, the Union should not rescind invites on the basis of Oxford students disagreeing with their views. The Union does not create controversy for its own sake. Speakers are chosen because their opinions may be important for today’s discussions or appropriate to one side of a debate. With the Union remaining separate from the University, the former having been formed 200 years ago, it is the only place where students can have access to these conversations. To start selecting what is ‘beyond discussion’ feels like a slippery slope to losing a rare platform, which endeavours to challenge all opinions opening up the left-leaning student sphere to views we might otherwise never have been able to hear.

So why does the Union not cancel speakers? 

At the centre of this debate is the idea of ‘platforming’. The Union was not made to platform, but to challenge speakers. As such, the Union neither platforms or de-platforms speakers. It would, for instance, be hard to argue that the Israeli Ambassador did not already have a significant platform before her invite to the Union. Admittedly, I did not know who Dr Kathleen Stock was until she appeared on the term card. Stock was, however, awarded an OBE. Surely the recognition of the state constitutes an existing platform? The comment heard so often when these speakers come is: ‘Nobody knows who they are, why is the Union raising awareness of these views?’ This is a fundamental problem, given that the student population is likely not to support preventing a ban on conversion therapy or prohibiting self-identification. Equally, there is a significant amount of people in the UK, and particularly in America, where Stock’s rhetoric is seen not as hateful but as reflecting the views of many. As the Union makes headlines around the world, it is responsible for providing a place for all views to be expressed, even if the student population does not agree with hosting certain people within their student sphere. 

Like many, I came to this University to gain exposure to other opinions and to be encouraged to learn and understand views I might disagree with. I have spent the past week in silence not because I wanted to be complicit in harming a community, but to take the time to educate myself so that I can challenge Stock in the chamber. Everyone will respond to hurt differently, but rescinding her invitation also prevents people who are willing to challenge her from speaking. When the YouTube video of Stock is published, most of the viewers will either be those who follow her or those who despise her. There is no better way to support the trans community than going into the spaces that oppose it and bringing the challenge to them. Defending one’s right to exist is awful, and should not be anybody’s burden, but for those willing to speak directly to those who oppose their views, in a controlled environment, is an opportunity I think they should seize. 

Rescinding an invitation or not inviting certain speakers also poses the question of how far free speech should go in this university and to whom it should not extend? Opening this up seems like opening a floodgate to an impossible challenge that could bring another harmful culture of comparing the offence experienced by different minority groups. For example, the Israeli Ambassador faced a large enough number of students who felt personally affected by her invitation that large protests could take place online or in person. But what would happen to smaller minority groups who feel equally attacked but cannot make as much noise to get invites rescinded? How would the Union decide which topics are off limits and which events will do more harm than good?

Finally, the core reason why so many speakers remain free to speak at the Union is that they are protected by Human Rights Law, namely freedom of expression. In Stock’s case, she has not currently committed hate speech, and her views as of 2021 are protected under the Equality Act of 2010, as gender-critical beliefs are protected. Thus, cancelling is not only a political battle but a legal one too. To ignore the rights of anyone simply because one opposes their views is, I believe, to stifle conversation and critical thinking.  

‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it’. – Voltaire 

As the Union celebrates its bicentenary year, its need to uphold free speech is stronger than ever as the world begins to face new challenges it has not recognised before. With Stock’s appearance at the Union coming against the backdrop of Florida Republicans calling for a bill to remove trans kids from their parents, the need for views like  Stock’s to be challenged on the Union’s platform is not only important but necessary. The need to acknowledge the opinions of the community the Union sits in has become more important as students struggle to accept an institution that some so adamantly disagree with. The future of university cancel culture, free speech and the aim of building bridges between the Union’s global perspective and Oxford’s student-wide one remains unclear. Like many institutions, the Union has not always managed to challenge speakers properly. As such, it is valid to question whether or not it really does. However, with the Union standing and continuing to stand, I believe that its future relies on more members coming to challenge speakers rather than just protesting them online, where it is much easier to be ignored. As of last term, the Union now enables members to send in questions, meaning that those who may feel threatened by a speaker’s views do not need to enter the chamber but can know they will be heard. My only hope for the Union and for students of this university is that enough of have the strength to question speakers like Stock, David Starkey and the Israeli Ambassador in person, allowing us to challenge, not de-platform, them.

Image Credit: U.S. Department of State//Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons