Students from Brasenose voted on Monday for a motion to turn the college into a ‘constitutional monarchy’ under the rule of a bust of the previous JCR President, Paul Gladwell. The motion will be voted on at a future date, before ratification makes it constitutional.

According to the motion proposed by Alex Sayers, there were “insufficient checks and balances” within the JCR constitution, and the bust of Paul Gladwell is “most revered”. The motion said that the bust’s “position as de facto figurehead of the JCR ought to be recognised” by investing “all executive power” in the bust, whose wishes will be interpreted by the JCR President.

The proposal also claimed the plan will “engender a renewed feeling of pride amongst the student body, it will increase BNC’s standing within the University; and it will provide an additional check on the feckless and irresponsible spending of the JCR.”

Sources told Cherwell that the proposal “passed by a landslide”, despite concern over how to overthrow the bust if it became tyrannical, as it would be impossible to behead it.

If the motion passes, the JCR President will now be formally styled as “President of Brasenose College JCR, Interpreter of the Will of the Bust”, and must swear fealty to the bust. All motions will pass or fail according to previous procedure “unless the Bust signals its disapproval”.

Jack Moore, a Brasenose student, praised the motion, saying, “I think this is an excellent idea. In the year of the jubilee, it seems especially appropriate to bring constitutional monarchy under the bust to the Brasenose JCR.”

Brasenose PPEist Eylon Aslan-Levy noted that the JCR as a whole was more cautious, commenting, “People were sceptical at first, but when it became clear that the JCR President would have to present this constitutional amendment to [the] governing body, it was a done deal.”

At the same meeting another proposed motion, noting both the absence of orange-haired people in the JCR Committee and the “very distinctive” eyebrows of OUSU and Careers Rep Pablo Zendjas-Medina, suggested mandating him to dye his eyebrows orange.

Brasenose student Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi commented, “The fact that the JCR essentially wants to confer an honorific on a fetish object proves it does not have much better to do with its time. In truth, however, I am not worried about the possibility of the Bust ruling as a dictator: in fact, it would be a great thing.

“The reality show known to some as the ‘Arab Spring’ just shows that liberal democracy is nothing more than an instrument of chaos and more chaos.

“Being a student of Classics with Oriental Studies (having completed Honour Moderations in Classics last term with the second highest overall mark in the University), I know perfectly well how one-man rule is essential for achieving stability.”

The bust was purchased for £500 in 2011 following a JCR motion. The subsequent contribution of £4,000 towards the loss made by the 2011 college ball has prompted more than one motion to control JCR spending.

12 months ago, Gladwell apologised for the purchase of the bust, given the state of JCR finances, “It was a poor use of money and not the best of ideas.” A repeal of the motion that created the bust noted, “The whole affair has been very damaging to the reputation of Brasenose.”

Oxford’s residents and students are being encouraged to “Tweet and Eat” as bananas are placed around Oxford’s landmarks as part of Oxfam’s new Control Arms Campaign.

The bananas, bearing the hashtag #armstreaty, are being distributed by the Oxford Students’ Oxfam Group (OSOG) in the hope that passers-by will tweet a picture of the fruit and sign an online petition. The project aims to highlight that the legislation regulating the trade of arms is currently less stringent than that of bananas. It hopes to put pressure on governments to ensure that the new Arms Trade Treaty, to be formed by the UN in July, is as stringent as possible. The banana saturation will also see bananas placed in finalists’ survival packs.

Phil Coales, President of Oxford Students Oxfam Group, explained, “The Arms Trade Treaty is the culmination of the seven year long Control Arms Campaign. Oxfam see that there is only one chance to get it right. OSOG are campaigning for a strong, bulletproof treaty, which binds all its signatories not to allow the transfer of arms, including ammunition, to areas in which they are likely to be used to violate human rights, to perpetrate war crimes, or to increase poverty.”

Chris Garrand, a member of OSOG involved in the campaign, said, “We want that treaty to be the toughest it can possibly be. Oxfam have taken the staggering fact that arms can currently be traded more easily than bananas and created a quirky, fun campaign to raise awareness and get people involved.”

A Wadham student has stepped down from running for LGBTQSoc President following heated Facebook exchanges in the run up to the election.

The presidential election has been surrounded by controversy, in large part owing to statements made by the student, and his campaign ideas.

Society members took particular issue with his transphobic language after he posted on Facebook, “I’ve had a lot of guys in me, but never a t*****”. The word  is extremely offensive to trans* people. He also suggested separating the society “into an LGB society for sexuality based welfare and social events, and a Trans* society for gender based socials/welfare”.

Following a number of heated exchanges in which other Facebook users reacted with outrage to such comments, he eventually posted, “I have well and truly had enough of LGBTQ society student politics. I will not be standing for election this Sunday. Good luck to whoever gets to clean up this mess, but there’s no honour in the position.”

In an attempt to justify his comments regarding the trans* community, he said, “The UK’s largest gay rights activist charity, Stonewall, are ‘working for equality and justice for lesbians, gay men and bisexuals’. Trans* issues are different and more complex, warranting separate representation within the university. Identifying as LGB does not mean association with a political movement or alliance with transgender people.

‘All of the Facebook arguments have centred around language use and its policing, I am frustrated [by] the trans* community’s continued victimisation of LGB students who are perceived to be offensive. Focus should be about where offence is intentional as opposed to indulgent language games. Rather than scapegoating its members, the society should acknowledge the LGB students it has alienated.”

He continued, “I advocate legal rights of transgender people and support through the transition process.”

The student added, “The continued vitriol of a relatively small number of people has led LGBTQ Society to be seen as the great tranny freak show. I have no desire to be President of a society of outcasts, because the infighting has eroded all of my passion for the community.

“We should be proud of who we are, that means less elections more erections. How many letters should the acronym have? Easy – call it FreakSoc, you’ll attract the same bunch.”

Bramham’s former opponent, and now sole candidate for President, Simone Webb responded, “I absolutely oppose what [the student] has been saying. My strongest objections are against his wish to see trans* people essentially removed from the society. He rejects the idea that the society should play a welfare role, and has made it clear that he sees the concept of a safe space for LGBTQ people as “bigoted” and “militant”.

“I believe he has been transphobic, but even were he not, he holds views which I believe made it clear that he should not become president. In my manifesto, I have emphasised the dual role the society plays as a space for welfare and socialising: I very firmly believe that one cannot be had without the other.”

She added, “I think, in the light of the comments which [he] made, he was right to stand down, and I appreciate the courage it took to do this. However, I am worried about the Presidential election going uncontested, as this fear was among the reasons I originally stood.”

Society member Eli Keran agreed, commenting, “Along with everyone else who’s been vocal on the issue so far, I wholeheartedly oppose what [he] has been saying. Gender and sexuality are very closely related issues in society, and to suggest kicking all the trans* people out of the society is abhorrent.”

However, one Facebook user unrelated to events came to his defence, stating, “I did not know that either ‘tranny’ or ‘fraped’ would be considered offensive. And I am quite shocked to find out from Simone that the term ‘gay marriage’ is not one that should be used.

‘Perhaps you can call me a Neanderthal for this, but it is true. Had I used the word ‘tranny’ believing it to be an acceptable word, or, at least, not believing it was an offensive term, then I would feel I was harshly treated if I had received a similar reaction to that provided by some on this thread.”

Trinity student David Simmons conceded, “At the start of the discussion, many of [his] comments were not transphobic but merely ignorant of issues surrounding trans* people. Many do not realise that “tranny” is perceived in a pejorative sense. Similarly, without further consideration, the issues surrounding gender identity and those surrounding sexual orientation may seem distinct.

However, he added, “what has annoyed so many people is [his] inability to respond to people’s later criticism and offence.”

Merton student Peter Berry disagreed, commenting, “I think it would be highly unfair to describe [him] as transphobic. I think highlighting that gender issues and sexuality issues need different treatment is important, and there will always be problems when you try to treat them as one issue. On the other hand, the issues are so closely interwoven that it would be ridiculous to try to separate them into two societies.

“[He] does definitely need to be more aware of how he can inadvertently cause offence. The society is at risk, however, of becoming over-sensitive to small matters of language.”

Jess Pumphrey, OUSU LGBTQ Officer, said, “These discussions have shown that there are many LGB people in the society who are not trans* but who wish the society to cater to trans* students and understand that it is inappropriate, immature and dangerous to throw around transphobic slurs, as this trivialises transphobia and gives it a false legitimacy that endangers trans* students.”

Magdalen College JCR has passed a motion to spend £2,200 on a Diamond Jubilee Garden Party and to mandate three JCR members to organise the event which will include “cucumber sandwiches, Pimm’s, grilled beef, beer, and ice cream.” The total budget for the party is £2,500, of which £300 will come from battel charges.

Despite the motion passing with a vote of 46 in favour, 17 opposed, and 11 abstaining, some members of the JCR have expressed concern over the royal dimension to the party and the large budget allocated.

Cameron J. Quinn, a member of the Magdalen JCR committee, told Cherwell, “I think the JCR shouldn’t be funding something which amounts to an ideological statement in favour of the monarchy and in terms of JCR budgetary priorities, I think providing £2,200 for what is essentially a piss-up in celebration of class privilege is an obscene sum and a poor idea.”

Hamish Hunter, one of the students responsible for the motion and mandated to organise the party, refuted these claims, stating, “The rarity of the event was raised at the meeting and it was generally thought that it was worth celebrating the landmark in style. There was recognition that the Diamond Jubilee was a very special event and the Magdalen JCR should join the national and college celebrations.”

However, Ryan Kahn, a second year Student Community Warden, criticised the plans and suggested that the Magdalen JCR should “put the funds and their efforts into one of the many street fairs that will spring up in Oxford over the Jubilee weekend, instead of spending ridiculous amounts of money on an exclusive Garden Party that will only benefit themselves.”

One student from Magdalen, who wished to remain anonymous, made the claim that those who proposed the motion “packed out the General Meeting with friends to help it pass”. 

He cited the relative ease with which the motion succeeded, despite lengthy debates over budget allocations in the past, and revealed to Cherwell that during the meeting, “rather than accepting an amendment from the JCR President to lower the amount requested to £1,500, [it was] simply proposed that they move to a vote”, resulting in the immediate passing of the motion. He added, “3/5 of the people there left the meeting after the motion passed, leading the independent chair to feel the need to count in order to make sure the meeting was still quorate.”

In response to claims that students sympathetic to the motion had been encouraged to attend the General Meeting, Hunter admitted that the event had had a high turnout and responded, “Many people at Magdalen supported the motion on the basis that it would be a chance for the JCR to come together in a summer celebration with relatively little cost to the attendee (there will be a £2 charge).”

Hunter also defended the allocation of funds, stating, “The question of ‘good use of JCR funds’ was, as you might imagine, robustly discussed at the General Meeting on Sunday. It was thought by many that Magdalen JCR takes part in, and funds, a good deal of charitable projects and that, considering the JCR’s constitutional objective to ‘[provide] recreational and leisure time activities in the interests of their social welfare’, this kind of celebration was appropriate to what the JCR is about.

“It must also be noted that the funding for this garden party is coming out of a fund specifically designated for allocation by the General Meeting.” The fund in question is set at £9,000 per term and has been used in the past to fund an arts magazine and to replace the JCR croquet set.

Ben Hudson, a Classics and English student at Regent’s, called the party “an absolute bargain at £2,200 when you take into account the Royal Family’s cost of about £185 million per year.” He added, “I’m sure the scouts on substandard wages will enjoy clearing up after the sumptuous party to celebrate Elizabeth Windsor’s knack for not dying.

“No doubt great fun will be had by all over the Jubilee holiday and it will all be explained away by the claim that it’s a fair price to pay for all the tourism the Royal Family are bringing in, despite the fact that Buckingham Palace raises almost no money, Windsor Castle isn’t even the biggest tourist attraction in Windsor, and the Tower of London has historical appeal that would only be increased if we beheaded the whole bloody lot of them there.”