I self-rusticated early last year, following a fairly lengthy period of depression. I had already taken a year out partway through my first year and this was due to be a second, but I decided fairly early on that I did not wish to return to college.
I found the tutors at Balliol to be very helpful for the most part, and I thought the college generally did well at balancing the academic and pastoral support I needed. However, I think this may have largely been due to the general excellence of the history tutors, rather than any official policy of Balliol. I can only imagine how hard it would be for someone in my situation faced with less sympathetic or able tutors.
I would agree with the quoted student that tutors may not be aware of any problems going on. In my case, it could often be up to me to report a problem which would obviously be a tremendous difficulty for many, and could well lead them to merely be regarded as shirking their work.
There are other elements I would criticise about how I was treated. There often seemed to be a degree of punishment, even when college was generally sympathetic – you are dissuaded from returning to college during years out and at one point I was even told that I would be “letting Balliol down” if I didn’t do the requisite work for a class. Clearly a more consistent university-wide policy would prevent at least some of these problems occurring, and hopefully would mark a shift in attitude away from apparently blaming the student for their problems.
The amount of support really depends on how much the tutor is willing and able to give. And, in my experience, the onus was very much on me to sort out any extra help I might have needed. Also very little thought seemed to be given to the fact that I might have enormous problems when it came to my prelims, especially as some modules I had not studied for over a year, and had struggled with at the time anyway. That definitely led to more stress and possibilities for mental health relapses.
I do not doubt that many tutors and officials want to help students, and indeed do so, but so much more can be done, especially if students actually have some idea of what to expect when they are struggling with mental health problems. At times I had no idea if Tutorial Board was going to send me down or not, and the waiting for the result was truly horrible. Still, I am glad for all the help I did receive and glad that this issue is being discussed more.
Analysis: Self-rustication
When it gets too much: a year out
Oxford students who are medically unfit to study are receiving inconsistent levels of support across colleges, an investigation by Cherwell shows this week. Freedom of Information act requests were sent to every college for the numbers of students taking time out of their courses for non-academic reasons.
An University-estimated average of six hundred and eighty undergraduate and post graduate students suspend their studies each year for non-disciplinary reasons, such as mental wellbeing.
Statistics obtained by Cherwell, however, indicate notable discrepancies in the attitudes of Colleges towards students who wish to intermit, or suspend, their course.
Averages calculated from University records of students who have intermitted over the past five years reveal great differences between Colleges. While at some it is usual for only two or three students to take time out, others averaged as high as fifteen students intermitting per year.
Both St Hilda’s College and New College have an undergraduate intake of four hundred and twenty students, yet in the past five academic years a total of sixty-one students temporarily withdrew from St Hilda’s, compared to twenty-seven undergraduates at New College.
These findings come as the University’s ‘Fitness to Study’ panel has announced that it is now considering the establishment of a body responsible for adjudicating between student and Colleges in cases where there is disagreement as to a student’s wellbeing and potential need to intermit.
All Colleges questioned by Cherwell stated that they had no ‘policy’ regarding the criteria required to intermit but that cases were treated on an individual basis.
Lucinda Rumsey, Senior Tutor at Mansfield College explained, “We treat all students on an individual level, looking at them on a case by case basis.”
She added, “we would never let students have time out simply because they couldn’t manage the work load – that would not be fair to other students.”
The lack of protocol can be bewildering to students, and results show disparities between Colleges regarding the circumstances under which undergraduates are allowed to suspend their academic studies.
Commenting on the University’s current approach to intermissions Dani Quinn, Welfare Officer for OUSU, said that “there can be confusion or difficulty for students who wish to appeal the College’s decision. It is usually the decision of one member of the SCR, and little is stated about where the student should go next.”
In addition to a lack of clarity regarding the options available to undergraduates, busy academic staff can fall short of meeting the pastoral needs of their students, particularly when there are problems relating to an individual’s mental health.
A second-year student who has now returned to the University after intermitting commented that her tutors were completely unaware that she had any mental health problems right up until they were informed she had suspended study.
She said that, when notified that she was intermitting “[they] replied that they had ‘no idea’ this had been going on, despite the fact that I hadn’t been handing in essays, was turning up to tutorials obviously unprepared, and so on.”
She said, “I think perhaps they were at a bit of a loss as how best to support me.”
Undergraduates who had been successful in taking time out from their degree were content that Colleges had been fully supportive of their decision and described receiving help with financial matters.
Yet many commented that they were less satisfied with the levels of assistance available upon their return to College.
Academic support in particular was highlighted as an area in which Colleges were failing to accommodate students. Undergraduates who had previously spent time away from University stressed that it was vital that they were able to carry out preparatory study prior to resuming their place in college, yet many students experienced difficulties even in accessing academic resources.
Students often found College authorities uncooperative, with one undergraduate recalling their experience of asking to return early to University. “I asked just so I could use the libraries and so on – I come from a small country town with essentially no usable library facilities”, but she explained “it was college policy that I couldn’t come back before the prearranged time.”
An undergraduate who has recently resumed his studies after recovering from illness emphasised that there can be little support for students needing to catch-up with studies, “I had some difficulty contacting busy tutors and obtaining material for the Michaelmas term when I was away, to the point that I decided to come up to Oxford midway through term to speak to them directly.
“In one of the disciplines I am still very far behind and the onus to catch up seems to be entirely on me. On the other hand, in another subject my tutor has been fantastic in giving me catch up tutorials.”
Statistics suggest that the likelihood of students withdrawing completely from University after having intermitted fluctuates across the collegiate system. A sample from the past five academic years indicates that over thirty per cent of students intermitting at Christ Church subsequently withdrew from their studies altogether.
This compares with three per cent of students at New College and eight per cent of undergraduates at Jesus or St Hugh’s who left the University completely after having undergone a period of voluntary suspension. University wide figures indicate that around eighty-eight per cent of the students who intermit will return to complete their studies.
OUSU passes motion on paid internships
A motion demanding that interns are paid was passed at OUSU Council on Wednesday night.
The motion, proposed by Ben Lyons, notes that unpaid work is “essentially inaccessible for those from lower income backgrounds.”
The MPs for Oxford East and Oxford West were also contacted to raise awareness of the issue through a letter signed by 15 JCR Presidents.
Lyons is co-director of the Intern Aware campaign, which is supported by the NUS. He recently set up a Facebook group “Interns Must Be Paid The Minimum Wage” and “was amazed when in a very short time over 2,000 people joined.”
Lyons said, “The answer to the problem of social mobility lies not in kitemark standards or small-scale loans to interns. It lies in the Government’s own National Minimum Wage legislation. Currently interns are being treated as employees, without their rights – or, crucially, their wages.
“The Reading employment tribunal ruled in November that expenses-only internships are illegal. Intern Aware believes it is only through clarifying and implementing this law that real change can be made.”
The letter to MPs states, “It is a basic principle that no career path should be closed. It is an even more basic principle that people doing work should be paid for it.
The current system of internships depends on geographical, social and financial advantages that prevent social mobility and will lead to ever increasing inequality within our country.”
Jonny Medland commented, “It’s great news that Oxford students are leading the national campaign to end unpaid internships. Many students want to take up internships but are unable to do it as they need to support themselves and their families. Ensuring that the valuable work which interns do is recognised with a decent wage is crucial both for social mobility and to ensure that leading professions are open to all.
“It’s also important that internships are publicised effectively – the danger otherwise is that regardless of how well interns are paid, only a narrow subset of society will even know that internships exist in the first place”.
The Intern Aware campaign has some high profile supporters, including Phil Woolas, Nick Palmer and Glenda Jackson.
An amendment to the motion was also passed, which highlighted the importance of increasing access to internship opportunities through improved publicity. All discussions and motions resulting from this motion must now also consider access.
Hannah Cusworth, OUSU’s Academic Affairs Officer, who proposed the amendment commented, “While I think it is admirable that the motion is highlighting the lack of social mobility raised by the Milburn report, my biggest issue is with lack of access.”
She explained that for many people the problem is a lack of information about what is on offer, as “internships are often done on an informal basis, and rely on connections”.
Scenic View: Serbia
You are slightly in trouble, in Serbia, if you cannot read the Russian alphabet. You are in less trouble if you can read the Russian alphabet, but actually, it doesn’t really matter either way, because you will definitely get lost as all the signs are in Serbian Cyrillic anyway.
This was the second lesson I learnt upon my arrival in Serbia. The first was that booking flights which cost less than a Domino’s Pizza – with an airline whose name sounds like someone clearing their throat of phlegm – will never, ever mean a luxury flight, and just might result in the boarding staff writing their phone numbers on your boarding passes (they did).
Our not-so-brief spell of wandering round the city of Belgrade, in the dark, with a map that was about as useful as a London Underground map would be to navigating the streets of London, ended when a kind couple took pity on us and decided to walk us to the street that we needed. The hostel was not promising – behind huge cast iron gates was an enormous, dusty council block. But as we got closer we saw the glimmer of fairy lights and the sound of laughter (ah, bring on the travelling clichés).
We, of course, after dumping huge rucksacks that we had prided ourselves on filling to their full capacity (error), did what most students do when they find themselves lost, uncomfortable, or in the company of strangers: accept the first alcoholic drink going, and precede to make merry. On local spirits. That the hostel had made themselves. That could quite possibly have been pure ethanol. Luckily, the fact that is was so unbelievably pungent meant that one glass was enough to be polite, but was also enough to make us very keen to try out the famed Belgradian nightlife. Reputably, every night in Belgrade is a Friday night, and whilst I’m unsure quite how that works, it was praise enough for us to want to go in search of that ‘Friday feeling’.
The most recognizable nightlife feature of Belgrade are the floating river clubs or barges (called ‘splavs’) that are spread along the banks rivers. In summer they form a party centre on the Makiš side of Ada Ciganlija Lake. We arrived, found one club absolutely rammed and decided by virtue of popular consensus that this was the place to go. It opened out onto the lake, which was a good thing in hindsight, because it was hot, sweaty and full to the brim. Everyone had come to enjoy what we discovered to be a live act, singing what appeared to be folk songs to dance tracks.
An ageing boy band reject was in the spotlight, wearing a lot of tight white, with a few too many shirt buttons undone and my companion and I entered, fully expecting to turn to the people surrounding us and have a bit of a joke at the poor man’s expense. Oh no. Everyone – and I mean everyone, including bar staff and surly bouncers – was singing along, with gusto. We were embarrassed not to know the words. I have been struggling to think of an English equivalent, and the only thing I could come up with was everyone in Bridge, militantly singing along to a remix of Jerusalem. It wasn’t quite our scene, but it summed up Serbia for me: taking you out of your comfort zone, but in the friendliest and most inclusive of ways.
Serbia, with its rather turbulent past, has yet to come within most people’s radar as a potential travel destination – the idea of travelling there is certainly not within most people’s comfort zone. The most exciting spot is undoubtedly its capital – a gritty, energetic city. It’s not a beautiful city by any stretch of the imagination, but it’s well worth a visit. Promise.
All-time Classic: Oxford stun Tabs 7-6 in overtime after last-minute rally
Thirty more seconds, and the book was ready to close on one of the most dominant dynasties in Varsity Ice Hockey history in front of a capacity crowd at the Oxford Ice Rink on Saturday afternoon.
Fortunately for the defending national champion Dark Blues, forward Jarrad Aguirre had other plans.
Positioning himself to the right of Cambridge goaltender Carl Mazurek, Aguirre deftly netted a rebound off a slapshot from Oxford player/ coach Landis Stankievech to tie the game at 6-6 in the last desperate moments, sending the 800-strong crowd into paroxysms of celebration as the Dark Blues clawed back into the game and forced overtime.
The pressure could not have been higher for the home team on this rain-soaked “Olympic” weekend in West Oxford. Burdened with the expectations that come with home ice, a five-year run of Varsity success, the 100th anniversary of the ‘Oxford Canadians’ (arguably the first ever Team Canada), and a crowd packed with team alumni from as far back as the 1950s, the pre-game tension in the dressing room was palpable. This was compounded by the fact that the team had been dogged by injury over the course of the previous few weeks, and the knowledge that this was perhaps the strongest Light Blue side to be iced in over half a decade.
An instant classic being hailed as one of the finest ice hockey Varsity Matches in memory, the excruciating tension of the game, in which neither team ever held a two-goal advantage and in which the lead changed five times, came to a sudden and dramatic end when Canadian MBA student Parker Carney scored three minutes into overtime to secure Oxford’s 62nd Varsity victory.
The shock of the reversal of fortunes in the closing seconds was etched on the faces of the visiting team as Oxford’s squad burst into celebration at centre ice.
The Light Blues had come into the game with clear intent, and despite an early goal by the home team, they held a 2-1 advantage after 20 minutes. The Tabs set the tone for the match from the outset, playing a physically punishing game that left Oxford reeling. “They outworked us for a lot of the match, they played physically, and they didn’t give up any more than we did” said Oxford captain Ruben Leavitt after the game, adding “they were the best opponent we’ve played in my time at Oxford.” Forward Julian de Hoog concurred: “Cambridge played smart, tough hockey, and won many of the individual battles.”
A brace of penalties by the Light Blues early in the second period allowed Oxford’s powerplay unit to go to work, resulting in a tying goal by Tennessean sharp-shooter William Bruce. The visitors regained the lead with a smart wrap-around goal less than a minute later by Daniel Tavana, who in scoring completed a hat-trick. A perennial clutch performer, Oxford’s Stankievech was quick to redress the balance, potting two even-strength goals by playing with characteristic tenacity around the goalmouth. After the smoke had cleared at the end of 40 minutes, the score was level at 4-4, despite a dramatic late surge by Cambridge during which they rang a shot off the post.
Throughout the season, Oxford’s top line of Carney, Bruce and Stankievech have dominated the league scoring charts, and been pivotal in every one of the Dark Blues’ victories. On this night, the line combined for 6 goals and 14 points. “Landis’ performance was the single most outstanding individual performance I have seen by a hockey player in any game, ever” said de Hoog. “He left it all on the ice, and we would never have won this game without him.”
However the damage could have been far worse, with Oxford’s big guns being denied more often than they are used to by the often sublime goaltending of Mazurek for Cambridge, who put on a show with his quick glove and faultless positioning to keep the game close, making one brilliant save after another.
The overtime victory marked the end of an era for Oxford, as only two of the current squad are eligible to play in 2011. For de Hoog, who was playing his fifth and final varsity match in front of family who had flown in from both Germany and Canada, it was clearly a good note to end on: “the best crowd I’ve played in front of, and it was fantastic to receive such support” he enthused. Leavitt was equally exuberant: “raising the Cup over my head with a huge roar from my teammates and the crowd…I won’t ever forget it. Best match of my life.”
Notes:
Oxford outshot Cambridge 51 to 37 in victory.
Match MVP went to Landis Stankievech, who had two goals and four assists. Cambridge’s Man of the Match was captain Luc St-Pierre, with his Oxford counterpart being goaltender Calum Nicholson.
With the win, the Oxford Blues secured second place in the BUIHA southern division, setting up a semi-final match-up with, ironically enough, Cambridge.
OCA: Now we care and share
The Oxford Conservative Association (OCA) is launching a new policy document highlighting concerns regarding inequality and social mobility this week.
The Executive Summary of the policy document states, “the most damaging divide [is] between those who can afford choice and those who cannot”. The stated aims are to “analyse the problems faced by people from disadvantaged backgrounds” and “examine possible solutions to reduce inequality and promote social mobility in the UK”.
Members celebrated the imminent launch of the first policy document since Thatcher headed up the association by throwing a lavish dinner party at a highly exclusive Private Members Club in London on Tuesday night.
The Facebook group for the event states, “As we move towards putting out our OCA Policy Document on Education and Social Mobility (working title!) we will be having some drinks, including a champagne reception, at the Landsdowne Club with one of our favourite up-and-coming members of a future Tory government.”
Hannah Cusworth, Co-Chair of OULC commented, “It’s good that OCA are addressing issues of social depravity in their new policy document. However, it is bizarre that they chose to launch this policy over a lavish dinner at a private club in London. I don’t think this will do much dispel the image that they are an exclusive group of people.
“But that’s just their attitude…If they understood anything about social depravation they would not launch their policy document in this way.”
The policy document was written by the Oxford Conservative Policy Forum (OCPF), which is closely tied to OCA.
Oliver Harvey, President of OCA, explained that the policy launch was part of an effort to move away from OCA’s traditional image, “We have had a serious problem denying the stereotype of OCA as a private club for public school boys. But OCA has been very strong, and we came out of the crisis last year with a realisation that change needs to happen”.
Harvey continued, “I think the society is extremely inclusive. We are trying to get away from the perception that this is an exclusive wannabe social club.”
Max Lewis, Chairman of OCPF, explained that the policy document is primarily a “discussion document”, which investigates the social problems facing Britain using anecdotal and statistical evidence, and then proposes solutions based on this analysis. It concludes that education is crucial for the struggle against social deprivation.
Lewis was keen to emphasise the impact this document could have at a national level.
“What is fundamental about this is that we have been liaising closely with the central Conservative Party. We are presenting our findings to a number of Think Tanks who have produced a lot of Conservative Party policy in the past. We have also arranged to meet with Kenneth Clarke, and we will hand the document over to him on behalf of OCA. It is likely that our policy document will be welcomed and considered alongside the findings from any independent group.”
The speaker at the event was MP Tim Loughton, Shadow Minister for Children, School and Families. He was hosted in the famous Lansdowne Club in Mayfair, which charges a membership fee of £700 per annum for “town membership” plus a one off joining fee of £520. During dinner six portions of Foie Gras were served, as well as three bottles of Vega Merlot and a further three bottles of Chablis.
Loughton joined members of OCA for drinks in the Adam Room, followed by dinner. Following the dinner, Tim Loughton gave a talk in the Sun Room, which usually costs £410 to hire for the day.
Loughton explained that he had been invited to the Lansdowne to have a “quiet little chat about child policy”. However, since he thought that discussing child issues would be too “dull and gory at this time of night” he spoke instead about the Channel Four programme that he recently featured in, where he was filmed staying with various deprived families on a council estate in Birmingham. He discussed his experiences on the estate, describing one apartment that he stayed in as a “complete crap hole”.
Lewis expressed anger at the levels of social mobility on the UK, “Fundamentally, we are angry that this society has failed so many people. We are angry that when you walk around Oxford, virtually everyone is from a higher socio-economic class. We think its appalling that people have no way of leaving the cycle of poverty and fulfilling their dreams in life. We Care. OCA cares, that so many people are trapped in a really awful situation. The Conservative Party does have an obligation to help people in society.”
Oliver Harvey was contacted for comment on the choice of the Landsowne club for the speaker event relating to the social mobility policy document, but he declined to comment.
The Lansdowne Club describes itself as a “haven of tranquillity…set in the heart of Mayfair”. It became famous during the 1920s, when it was leased to Gordon Selfridge, the department store magnate. With his tenants, the Hungarian Cabaret Artistes known as “The Dolly Sisters”, the house became renowned for its dancing parties. In 1782, Prime Minister Shelburne conceded independence to the United States, under the Treaty of Paris, which drawn up with Benjamin Franklin in the Round Room of the Lansdowne Club.
The last time a policy document was produced was over fifty years ago. The formal launch of the policy document will take place next Wednesday.
The non-monogamy train
I think we should see other people.” “Are you breaking-up with me?” “No, I just think we should see other people.”
The open relationship. Non-monogamy. She’s dating other men, and you’re free to date other women. You can even sleep with thes
e other people. In a way it’s like any other relationship, two people joined together in the search for passion, inspiration and fulfilment. Only this time the backdrop is richly coloured, varied and nuanced, never blurring in the traditional tumble-down, head-over-heels…it’s like the sun is shining just for you but from a thousand little lamps, blinking out across the city, an ocean of pleasure awaits.
Then you discover the pit of your stomach, explore it, feel it grow and tingle, constantly reminding that out of sight is not so easily out of mind. What do these other people have that you don’t? How long must you keep up this experiment, which every day feels less and less like a mere (a safe) pretence? What if your partner meets someone they like better?
Thus we have a composite of experiences of, and expectations about, non-monogamy, drawn from conversations with over a dozen individuals and couples during the past eight months. The impetus for this exercise was this writer’s own experiments with non-monogamy, as what were initially casual chats – have you ever done this before? – quickly snowballed into much more substantive discussions.
First, let’s get clear what we mean by non-monogamy: not a single man or woman dating around, with or without sex. What we mean is some kind of committed relationship, characterized by feelings of affection and respect. The sort of relationship where you would describe the other person as your partner, boyfriend or girlfriend.
Alice and Paul are a good example. (Not their real names.) They have been living together for a few years, during which time both have taken several lovers. (Did you know there is an iPhone application that tracks a woman’s menstrual cycle? Alice uses it to make her rendezvous doubly safe, it’s one of their rules. The other is perfect honesty.) They tell each other all about their lovers, what sorts of feelings or emotions led to the attraction, and in the process learn a huge amount about each other. Alice and Paul are the most ‘in love’ couple I have ever seen.
Alas, Alice and Paul are also amongst a very small minority of people with positive views of non-monogamy. Ask around Oxford (or even New York, my former home) and one is much more likely to encounter uncertainty, suspicion, even hostility.
“I think it makes sense in theory, but there’s no way I would be comfortable with that.”
“I could do it, but I know my partner wouldn’t be able to handle it, so I’ve never raised the question.” (How could you know this if you’ve never asked? “I just know.”)
“No.” (While shaking an index finger back and forth.)
Why so much negativity about non-monogamy? After all, from an evolutionary perspective, non-monogamy seems to make a lot of sense: the chances of successful reproduction are enhanced, for both males and females, by taking multiple sexual partners, and scientists have documented a huge range of species that behave accordingly. (This includes humans, incidentally, who demonstrate a surprisingly consistent cross -cultural penchant for cheating, extra-marital affairs and divorce.) What’s more, to the extent monogamy benefits child-rearing (two are better than one in this expensive and time-consuming process), the impetus here is clearly temporary (even for humans), and in any event can be (and often is) satisfied with less-than perfect monogamy.
More to the point, ‘parental responsibility’ is just not the reason most people give if you ask them why they dislike the idea of non-monogamy. Instead, appeal is made to a wide-range of influences and norms, including: religion (“It is against the Ten Commandments, it’s sin, it’s just not on.”); culture (“It has a lot to do with out-dated ideas of manliness.”); social (“Girls aren’t allowed to date any of the guys their friends like. People can stake claims.”); even personal experience (“Every time I’ve tried it, the end result is everyone getting hurt.”)
Of course, regardless of what one thinks about the persuasiveness of these reasons, the fact is no one really needs to justify their practice other than to their partner. (More than one person made this point in the course of conversation with this writer. Point taken.) But what about that? Assume your partner would derive some kind of different pleasure or fulfilment from some other person. Possibly this includes a sexual relationship, but not necessarily. Would you want your partner to ignore this impulse and remain ‘faithful’ to you?
“Well… I think that’s an interesting question…”
Really? Isn’t that an easy question? If it means anything to love another person, surely it means to want for them their greatest happiness.
“Yes, but why should that happiness come at the cost of turning my world upside down?”
Why does this have to be the end of the relationship? Oh, right. See above. So much drama, but I wonder how much of it is really necessary. It’s just not clear that all those good things about relationships are zero-sum propositions. Surely we would all be better-off not throwing our feelings up like glass houses all over town. More pointedly, is the right reaction to your partner finding some more or different happiness, to wish away that happiness? Is that what you would have them wish for you?
Unless you maintain that being in a committed relationship means no longer finding other people as attractive, monogamy raises some difficult questions about the expectations we must have for the behaviour of those whose happiness we purport to care most about. It also seems that the only good answer to those questions involves thinking seriously about some kind of honest, open relationship. Time to board the non-monogamy train.
Street pastors help Oxford
Oxford is to see the introduction of a ‘Street Pastor’ scheme later this year.
The Street Pastors will patrol Oxford’s streets on a Friday night from 10pm until 4am and will be armed with lollipops for drunks, flip flops for women unable to walk in high heels and a listening ear.
The church-run initiative was first introduced in London in 2003 and is currently running in 135 towns and cities across the country.
Mark Mills, a 3rd year History student at St Edmund’s Hall and Liberal Democrat Councillor for the Holywell ward, has praised the introduction of the program in Oxford.
He stated, ” I think this is a fantastic scheme that has real potential to make the city of Oxford safer and more pleasant for everybody.”
“The point is more that there are dangers out there and this is something we can do to reduce them.”
Street Pastors, which is run by the nationwide body Ascenion Trust, will first take to the streets in June. CRB checks and training will take place in the meantime.
The volunteers will receive 50 hours of thorough training, in part provided by the police, to ensure they are prepared for the problems they might face.
The pastors will be identifiable by their bright blue coats with ‘Street Pastors’ emblazoned on the back.
David Burrowes, MP for Enfield, said “Street Pastors is about Christians rolling up their sleeves and getting involved in practically responding to the problems of crime and safety. They are like beacons on our streets and I want to see them shining brightly in every constituency”
Students have also been expressing their support for the scheme.
Andy James, a second-year law student, said, “It is great to know that there is someone looking out for you. Most people have needed someone at one point or another and, if nothing else, its nice to know there is someone there to just to listen to your problems.”
The launch of the initiative, which took place on Monday evening, attracted more than forty potential volunteers.
Following endorsements from Oxford City Council and Thames Valley Police, co-founder Reverend Katherine Bracewell is excited to see the project gaining momentum.
“As well as offering a service to people, we want to listen to them; learning about the highs, lows, headaches and heartaches of many people who, for whatever reason, are on the streets at night-time in Oxford city centre.”
Review: A Chaste Maid in Cheapside
The Edward’s Boys’ performance of Thomas Middleton’s A Chaste Maid in Cheapside in Somerville chapel last night was a testament to the timelessness of great comedy, the value of imaginative direction and our frequent underestimation of young actors.
Middleton’s play of cuckoldry, bawdry and impotence may not seem typical youth theatre fodder but the comedy was indeed written for a children’s company and worked surprisingly well when returned to its cross-dressing roots, newly transported to modern-day Cheapside. The contemporary setting worked extremely well, creating a sense of place and community which a city comedy needs. Rap and freestyle dance sequences were probably a step too far, but only because this, in one case, detracted from the dialogue and distracted audience attention from what is a complicated plot.
The acting was exuberant and confident – even when onstage in large numbers, each boy seemed to be acting and reacting well – but a few performances showed particular promise. Jack Fielding’s Yellowhammer and Harry Davies’ Allwit stood out amongst the lead roles but Harry Bowen (as the Country Wench) was extremely memorable and did much with a relatively minor part.
The main problem, however, with the play was the very poor visibility in the chapel and I don’t see why a more suitable venue could not have been found for the Oxford leg of their tour – I missed a lot of the action at the front of the church, which was a little frustrating. The tone of Whorehound’s (Oliver Hayes’) repentance scene also seemed to miss the mark a little, but this particular episode is a challenge for any director as its language seems so far removed from the rest of the play.
Overall, director Perry Mills deserves credit for pulling off a production which an adult company could be proud of. The audience remained engaged and entertained, and not only at the novel elements – the actors were able to communicate Middleton’s words, to let a modern audience engage with seventeenth century wordplay. The spirit of city comedy found its place in Oxford last night and will too, I’m sure, in Stratford-upon-Avon in the final two performances.
4 stars
A Chaste Maid in Cheapside will be performed in the Levi Fox Hall, K.E.S., Stratford-upon-Avon on the 4th and 6th of March
Sex blogs and social subversion
Zoe Margolis has a lot to say about sex. Having it, wanting it, fantasising about it, and most of all, not denying that she has a lot of it. In her famous and now published blog, Girl With a One Track Mind, she writes about her variety of sex-related experiences with complete frankness and clarity. Intercourse, oral sex, threesomes, masturbation, it’s all there, with no explicitness left out. As Zoe herself says, “it’s graphic, but then, that’s shagging for you – it’s a sticky thing, no matter how you approach it.” But there’s one f-word she makes no apologies for using – feminism. She is unafraid of calling herself a feminist, and clearly sees her writing as more than one blogger writing about her (albeit incredibly interesting) sex life. On behalf of the Women’s Campaign, I invited her to speak at the Moser Theatre in Wadham to an audience of men and women, and interviewed her on her blogging, and social attitudes to sexuality.
I ask Zoe how her sex-blogging differs from the huge volume of sex-related writing out there in our sex-saturated media. “I had to try to create a different space, because I thought women’s magazines were incredibly restrictive in terms of how they portrayed women and female sexuality – it was always about making yourself the object of desire to men, rather than about owning that desire and desiring men. The other alternative to women’s magazines seemed to be the idea that you get liberation through selling your body for sex. I wanted to be able to talk about sex in a really open and honest way, and say “Yep, I want sex, I have my own desires and I’m happy about that, you can call me what you want – I don’t give a shit.”” She certainly was called a whole range of names, from “slut” to “seedy” to “shameless”, and those playground epithets appeared in newspapers as mainstream and respectable as the Times. “The only reason I still have confidence, after all that, is because I get emails from young women saying the book helped them. I think well, that’s what it’s all about – letting young women look at their sexuality in a different way.”
It’s clear that spreading the message that women can be active in sex and in their desire is very important to Zoe. “It’s not said often enough or loudly enough, but there are a lot of us out there, I know. When I first started writing, I got thousands and thousands of emails saying “we feel the same””. But it’s even more astonishing that this is not a mainstream idea for women’s media. “I recently pitched an idea to a very well-known women’s magazine, about masturbation for women, about owning your pleasure, and they said – can’t you just write a piece about how to give your man pleasure in bed? It’s always about positioning women’s desire in terms of men and not in terms of their own pleasure. It’s so undermining – I wanted to be able to say, I have my own desire, and I want to express it myself.” Surely, I say to her, this bizarre view of passive desire is counterproductive on the part of women’s magazines – surely women want to know about pleasure as much as men do, because pleasure is so central to a sex life? “I hope more women begin to realise that the way sex is talked about can be so undermining of female pleasure. If you take it all in, it’s almost like brainwashing, and you start to see yourself as an object rather than the subject of desire.”
I ask Zoe how she thinks the mainstream discussion of sexuality is changing. She isn’t optimistic. “I’m desperate to separate out the conflation between sexual desire and the sex industry, which has started to emerge. My work is about making it easier for women to express their desires about sex, rather than trying to persuade them to become a stripper or sell their bodies. There’s the freedom to sell your body, but that’s not the same as the freedom to express sexual desire. The sex industry is often falsely talked about as liberating – it may be liberating in a financial way, but it’s not liberating in a sexual way, and those are very different things.”
Zoe talks on a whole range of issues, from the way female bodies are always presented in the media from a male point of view, to the lack of pornography made for the female perspective, to the need for better and more open sexual education in schools. There is a real feeling that Zoe is saying things that are both true, revealing and important about the way we treat sexuality in society, and the men and women in the audience burst into applause several times. Towards the end of the talk, one audience member asks how we, in the student community, can create a better social attitude of understanding one another’s sexualities. Zoe responds, “I say aural sex is the most important part of sex – the ability to listen to what women and men want and need. People don’t listen enough and talk enough. Men want love as much as women want sex, but it’s unmasculine or unfeminine to admit to those things. By talking about them honestly, we can challenge those stereotypes, and have better relationships, both sexually and emotionally. We need spaces to do that in, in which we can be open about our wants and needs.” This is why Zoe’s writing is not just about one woman and her sex life – she is trying to show us an alternative voice, a voice that says that women desire sex in so many different ways, and it’s okay to talk about that.
Zoe Margolis is the Author of Girl With a One Track Mind: Exposed, published 5th March 2010 (Pan Macmillan £7.99)
