Oxford's oldest student newspaper

Independent since 1920

Blog Page 1985

Keble bear down on Teddy Hall

By
Katie Whicher
-

The cream of college rugby, Keble and St Edmund Hall, found themselves up against each other in the final hurdle of a tough season. The Oxford inter college league drew to a close with a winner-takes all decider.

With the title of league champions ready for claiming just eighty minutes away, the pressure on both teams was visible. Crowds gathered in University Parks to witness these two well established rivals battle it out once again.

Would Teddy Hall be able to repeat their Cuppers final performance from two years ago and steal the title from within Keble’s grasp? An electric atmosphere rose from the side lines as the match kicked off and the action began.

A shaky first half for both sides left the score close at half time. Both teams had been pumped up after coming off the back of eight game winning streaks, but it was Teddy Hall that emerged as the stronger side, on the back of an impressive season, despite being relegated last year. Keble was forced into needless mistakes, with a few bemoaned dropped passes at vital points and some crucial missed kicks.

Teddy Hall, determined and focused, were quick to cause trouble at the base of scrums, creating opportunities for attack at several points. Hall meant business, and despite a strong performance from Keble’s defence, the persistence of Teddy Hall’s front line meant that Keble conceded two penalties. Hall raced into a six point lead, thanks to the talented boot of Angus Eames, who had an outstanding game as kicker.

This, however, could not stop Keble’s well organised and powerful forward pack striking. Thanks to a toppling maul from a line out within ten metres of Hall’s try line Richard Brown was able to score a try in the fifteenth minute, in a move lifted straight from training and characteristic of Keble’s attack. This left Keble only one point behind, causing the game’s intensity to rise paralleling the support from the crowd. The tension was reflected in both teams’ play, tackling hard and leaving little mercy for the opposition, with some big hits all over the field, and a few close escapes from the sin bin.

Building on their superior performance though Teddy Hall managed to secure their lead for the second half with another successful penalty from Eames on eighteen minutes, resulting in a 9-5 score line at half time. Keble’s defence returned to maximum strength in the second half of the game as Alex Arcourt-Rippingale came on to complete the Keble back line. A strong first ten minutes saw a few opportunities for Keble to score, but Teddy Hall continued to thwart them with their substantial number of powerful players, which gave their side important depth. It wasn’t until ten minutes in that a slight lapse from Hall allowed Keble’s talismanic No. 8, Bob Pittam, to touch down from yet another rolling maul. Keble had taken the lead for the first time in the match, but at 10-9 the game was far from won.

Possession and territory continued to swing between the teams throughout the second half, and it wasn’t until the thirtieth minute that Keble fly half Charlie King was eventually able to secure three points for the title holders. With a 13-9 lead going into the last ten minutes, the game was still neck and neck.

Chanting from the sidelines laced the edges of a pitch where it would take more than s.ome mud and wind to crack the determination of these premium college players. Hearts were racing when in the final five minutes a cracking break and ambitious pass by Teddy Hall’s number 11 was rendered futile by a vital fumble, a reminder that this was by no means going to be an easy win.

As the final whistle blew, 13-9 secured Keble’s eighth consecutive league win, reinforcing their strong hold on the college rugby scene, and ensuring they remain a cut above the rest. No doubt the trophy will serve as a useful addition to their celebrations.

Scenic View: New Zealand

By
Hector Keate
-

The first thing that one has to mention about New Zealand is that it really is the end of the earth. Arriving at Auckland airport one cannot escape the impression that to go any further would be to fall off the edge of the map, and within hours one will find oneself desperate to do so, because, in all truthfulness, New Zealand is simply the most god-awful place to which I’ve ever been.

For some reason New Zealand is currently in vogue as a holiday destination, and the attraction of the ‘Welcome to Narnia/Middle Earth’ advertising campaigns I’m sure are part of its success. Beautiful the country may be, but the similarity to those fictional lands lies less with the stunning scenery and more with Lewis and Tolkien’s white supremacism.

I was staying with my cousins in the countryside outside Wellington and sitting around a dinner table one night, wallowing in post-colonial guilt, when particular discussion was given to the massacres in Tasmania where the natives were hunted like animals, to the extent that Tasmania no longer has an indigenous population. “That’s what they should have done here” was one of the Kiwi responses. He was not being ironic.

Terrifyingly this kind of talk was apparent everywhere we went. It seemed that people were unable to refer to Maoris without the addition of some derogatory epithet whilst all views on immigration were firmly in the “flog ‘em and send ‘em home” camp. Some were, of course, worse than others but whilst I was not surprised to hear my cousin talk of how the non-white girls were ostracised at school (she is the sort of person who would have fitted into 1930s Germany very nicely), my aunt, who probably held the least objectionable views, having been brought up in Britain, still admitted that Maori babies “were probably better off dead”.

It seems so incongruous that such a poisonous society lives in such an idyll. At one point we drove through Masterton’s most impoverished suburb, and yet despite the one abandoned car, the place was filled with little wooden houses with half acre gardens basking in the sunshine. Maybe I was just unfortunate that I was stuck where I was, and that maybe things are slightly better in the comparatively cosmopolitan north, but given the fact that the people I was meeting were all members of the educated middle classes (although not educated enough, it seemed, to know that the Punjab was an area of India/Pakistan rather than just a racial slur) gave me little hope.

For a country with such a low population density, one would think that people would be open to immigration, particular for the much needed expansion of the workforce. Yet, apparently, all the immigrants want to do is live off welfare (a topic of particular prevalence in kiwi conversation). Upon the suggestion that the economic boost given by immigration may help New Zealand become more significant as a global player the response was along the lines of “But we are; we have the best rugby team in the world”, quite how that will get them a permanent seat on the UN security council I don’t know, and anyway, is it not the case that their team is composed mainly of “lazy islanders”?

If ever tempted to consider going to visit New Zealand, I would advise you to consider the other 194 more exciting countries to which you could go. Because the essential problem with New Zealand is that it is backwards and boring, an insignificant, cultureless void on the Pacific Rim. For half the price and flight time I would recommend one went somewhere more interesting; Russia, the Middle East, or maybe even the Punjab.

The search for the gay gene

By
Diamanto Mamuneas
-

Since the Gay Pride movement began just over ten decades ago, we have come far in our acceptance and understanding of ‘non-standard’ sexual orientations. In 1967 we finally began the amendment to Biritsh law to decriminalise sex between men. In 2001, the age of consent was equalised and in 2003 and 2005, same-sex couples were allowed to adopt and enter into civil partnerships respectively.

Though same-sex marriage is not yet legal, we appear to be heading in that direction with some recent polls indicating up to 61% of the public in favour. And in spite of the occasional bigoted Jan-Moir-esque article, the straight majority has come to recognise the validity of the ‘alternative’ sexual orientation as a natural inclination rather than as a ‘life choice’.

We still have a way to go, no doubt, but perhaps part of the plateau of approval can be blamed on science not quite keeping up with our cultural bounds. But science does, in fact, hold some of the answers.

Most people have heard rumour of the ‘gay gene’ and some Daily-Mail-reading-uber-traditional-Tory-types may even lose sleep over its pattern of inheritance (though as an interesting aside, it is intriguing to note that it is, in fact, Labour supporters – 12% versus 11% for Conservatives and 8% for Liberal Democrats – who would reject their gay child on the grounds of the orientation being ‘unnatural’ according to a 2009 Populus poll). Those of us of a biological persuasion, however, are excited to be able to finally draw some – albeit still rudimentary – conclusions about the nature of the ‘gay gene’.

As homosexuality has become more accepted in recent years, one might have expected a decline in the number of forced mariages (and fornications) and thus a reduced chance of inheriting any ‘gay genes’. The notion of inheritance poses a problem – how could such a gene persist in the population so that people are effectively born gay? The change in the number of in-the-idiomatic-closet homosexuals is unknown, thus we cannot make any conclusive statements. All we can say is that, if for any reason we suspect this mythical gene may be troubled by the thought of finding its way into the next generation, science offers many solutions to its predicament.

Ever since Richard Dawkins’ book The Selfish Gene made the case for genes as elements whose sole purpose is to maximise their own chance of being passed on to the next generation, most biologists have adopted an attitude towards evolutionary conundrums that assumes genes are the basic unit that natural selection acts upon. The consequence is that we can think of a ‘gene’ as a character leaping (often invoking intercourse) from one oddly-suspended platform (a generation) to another on the screen of a newfangled games console (the environment) of your choosing… Not the perfect analogy, but hopefully you get the idea. The point is this: in every individual of every organism there are genes and each of these genes wants nothing more than to make it into as many of the next generation as possible.

To the non-geneticist the idea of a ‘gay gene’ may be difficult to fathom. Indeed, if homosexuality is in any way inherited, it is unlikely to be due to just one gene and it may well be that the trait is influenced by the environment.

There are examples of animals that display homosexual behaviours as a matter of course and some of these cases may even suggest a sound evolutionary reason for some humans to be gay.In the bluegill sunfish, three different mating strategies exist among males. The ‘parentals’ mature slowly and invest time and effort into both looking good (they are brightly coloured in the breeding season) and courting the females. The ‘sneakers’ however, do as their name suggests – they mature quickly, invest the most in sperm and sneak between parentals and females when they are mating to fertilise as many of the female’s eggs as possible as she releases them. Finally, the ‘satellite’ males use a more bizarre tactic – they grow up to look like females and, while mimicking them, can come between parentals and their real female mate and fertilise the eggs, while the parental is fooled into continuing to mate with both – presumably thinking he’s got lucky and has two females at his disposal. These tactics are not unique to this species either – while most prevalent in fish, female mimicry exists in many taxa and sneaking behaviour is commonplace throughout the animal kingdom.

The ways this applies to homosexuality in humans are two-fold. Firstly, it is conceivable that homosexuality first evolved as a tactic for getting closer to females – a theory that has the potential to ruffle some politically correct feathers. This may only explain how the behaviour initially arose – perhaps later the genes controlling the traits mutated as homosexuality became sustainable for some other reason. There is another way this hypothetical ‘gay gene’ could avoid extinction – X-linkage.

Like baldness in men, a ‘gay gene’ may be something carried down the maternal line so that the females can still pass the gene on to their offspring without being gay themselves. This pattern of inheritance may even account for the notable discrepancy between the number of gay men and les

bian women in the population (about double the percentage of men than women according to NATSAL data).

Alternatively, the bluegill story may simply be a lesson for us – in our search for an explanation we should take heed of the tendency for evolution to produce behaviours that are ‘by-products’ of something else. No one would argue that the parental male chooses to mate with the mimic in that he ought to be trying to maximise his offspring by mating with the true female – but animals do not act directly on evolutionary concepts. A male bluegill sunfish does not ‘know’ he wants to make baby fish – he just ‘feels’ compelled to mate. It is quite simply possible that a gene that is important for some other function produces homosexuality as a consequence – which was in our ancestors and is still neither detrimental (except in that it prevents reproduction) or advantageous (except in that it is the by-product of something useful). The two cancel out so that the gene persists.

Many other potential explanations exist that are beyond the scope of this article. What is exciting is that we may soon have an answer. DNA sequencing has revolutionised genetics and given rise to the biologist’s playground that is genomics. Anyone reading this who hoped for ‘straight’ answers will now be disappointed by both the cringe-worthy pun and the inconclusive nature of the above. However, the point is not that there is a scientific answer currently available, but rather it is work in progress and, far more importantly, that a genetic basis for homosexuality is neither totally out of reach nor a logical impossibility.

 

Fake fresher offers "coaching"

By
Camilla Turner
-

Last week Cherwell broke the story of an LMH fresher who faked 10 A-Levels and fabricated a personal statement to gain a place at Oxford. Now it has emerged that the student was also offering tutoring for Oxbridge applications.

Around the same time that he begun studying at Oxford,the student became involved at a high level with the website “Sucedo”, a company which sells coaching, tuition and advice to prospective Oxbridge applicants.

The Sucedo website boasts that the fresher is the only candidate who scored 100% on the TSA [Thinking Skills Assesment], a claim that the LMH Admissions Office have refused to verify. Sucedo offers to arrange an question and answer session with the student about the TSA, which it promises will be an “informal session” where “your questions decide the content”.

Sucedo is a relatively new company, set up in June 2009 by Alexander James McPherson. The Sucedo website claims that its users will benefit from being taught by past or present Oxbridge students.

But the current Company Director, 24 year old James Meller, is not an Oxbridge alumni, but a graduate from Manchester University.

The site charges £200 for a mock interview, £320 for a “Skills” package, and £950 for the fully blown “Meet and Greet” experience, where applicants would be accompanied to their interviews by Sucedo representatives. Elsewhere, Sucedo offers “hundreds of USD” to anyone who refers Cambridge or Oxford applicants to them for coaching.
Sucedo told the Telegraph in November 2009 that it had seen a “massive upsurge” in demand for help to pass admissions tests, particularly from state school students.

Owen John, the LMH JCR Access & Academic Affairs Officer, commented that companies like Sucedo are “a big concern to the College. It is not in their interest to have students who have had the best preparation, but are not necessarily the best. The one thing [Sucedo and other companies] cannot give you is the raw ability that Oxford is looking for. The case of [LMH student] shows that just having the right techniques for interviews and admissions test can’t get you through the degree.” Fresher’s school Headmistress described his academic record as “strong but not outstanding”.

The Sucedo website warns, “We’re here to see you succeed in the long-term…We’re not here to give you shortcuts that will make life difficult further down the line.”
A spokesperson from Oxford said, “Oxford has one of the most rigorous selection processes for students applying for undergraduate study in the country. All tests must satisfy a range of criteria before they are used for selecting students.”

Oxford takes an uncompromising stance towards companies like Sucedo, “The University does not endorse any commercial coaching activities related to the selection process – we are always keen to let candidates know that there is free advice and guidance available direct from the University, with sample aptitude tests available to download and practise.”

Owen commented, “It’s a sad fact that when someone like [the first year student] is prepared to lie himself into a University place he doesn’t deserve, he will sometimes get away with it. Had he hoped that he’d get through an entire degree course at LMH without having met the entry requirements then he was quickly proved wrong.”

On the penultimate day of Michaelmas term, the pupil was asked to see the Dean, who told him to leave LMH with immediate effect while the evidence against him was reviewed. So far this term, he has not returned.

OUOTC accused of insensitivity

By
Rebecca Ratcliffe
-

Oxford University Officer Training Corps (OUOTC) have been accused of insensitivity, following their ‘Officers and Zulus’ themed fancy dress party last week.

The themed party concluded a series of training sessions focusing on the military tactics utilised by the British in the 1879 Zulu Wars and was an extension of the ‘military history’ syllabus due to run throughout Hilary term.

The invitation announcing the event stated that “the evening’s aim is to celebrate the martial prowess of both sides in the campaign”.

Yet the event has sparked much controversy within the Oxford University community.

In an email before the party, OUOTC advised attendees, “In order to avoid sullying our good name, please refrain from using body paints (you know what this means in practice).”

One member of Lincoln College was shocked by the party. She stated, “It strikes me that there may be something a teensy bit offensive about a group of future British Army officers (who all happen to be white, by the way) dressing up as a group of colonial invaders and the ‘savages’ they defeated.

“This sort of thing horribly trivialises not only another nation’s culture, but also the oppression and subjugation of that nation as a result of British colonialism.”

Others labelled the theme as ‘lacking in taste’, comparing it to Prince Harry’s infamously ill-chosen Nazi costume. A second-year English student argued, “For cadets to dress up as colonial soldiers, in order to attend a party- it’s just really disrespectful. Of course that’s going to cause offence.”

Attendees defended the party, arguing that it was thematically related to the day’s educational activities.

Patrick Page, a member of OUOTC and student at St Benet’s Hall commented: “I don’t think there is any question that the OTC were celebrating some sort of colonial victory. If it were, I certainly would not have gone.”

Captain Christian San Jose of OUOTC added that the group were interested in examining the Zulu wars from an “Entirely military viewpoint as opposed to political or moral, we were looking at the military tactics used by the British infantry.”

He conceded, “We’re not so naive that we are not aware that there is potential for offence and we made note to cadets that they should exercise restraint and that fancy dress should not emphasise any political undertones.”

“People get offended about all sorts of things”, he added. “There wouldn’t be any point in not holding the evening in case we offended people. I certainly didn’t hear any complaints about it from within the OTC.”

He suggested the possibility that those criticising the party may simply be trying “to get at the OTC” but stated that complaints probably came from people who “weren’t at the evening and had no understanding of what our aims were.” 

St John’s set to get a tortoise

By
Rebecca Ratcliffe
-

A motion has been passed by St John’s College JCR and MCR in favour of adopting a tortoise as a College pet.

Undergraduates are now awaiting final approval from college authorities before purchasing the animal which will inhabit the College gardens and ‘boost the collegiate spirit’.

Commenting on the new addition to St John’s, JCR President Martha MacKenzie commented, “Everyone was very enthusiastic about getting a pet… The MCR went on to pass a motion in favour of a tortoise so it was brought back this week and there was much excitement. The motion passed without any objections and with lots of enthusiasm!”
 
St John’s student Rachel Dedmen stated “We chose a tortoise because they are relatively low maintenance, and could live quite happily in our gardens, with dedicated Tortoise Reps to guard their welfare.”

She added, “The tortoise will only enrich the St John’s experience, and quickly be a source of College pride – taking part in the annual Corpus Tortoise Race – and becoming a figure in St John’s history, (it will outlive all of us).”

Jeremy Evans, also a student at St John’s College stated “I’m fairly neutral to the tortoise”, but commented “The extent to which it would alter my St John’s experience would probably be going to see it once or twice.”

Though funds are yet to be finalised it has been agreed that the start-up expenses, as well as an annual running cost, will be shared between the JCR and the MCR.

It is hoped that the tortoise will help to create closer ties between the JCR and the MCR. 

Sweeping cuts to university budgets announced

By
Thomas Kidney
-

Funding cuts announced on Monday will slash university budgets by £518m.

The first university budget cuts since Labour came to power in 1997 will see £215m cut from teaching budgets, a real terms cut 1.6%. Capital spending will be reduced by 15% for the academic year 2010/11.

These cuts come at a time when applications for Universities were ‘surging’, stoking fears of vast cuts in student numbers and a hiking of fees in order to balance their budgets.

Already universities are experiencing an unprecedented rise in applications, with some reporting increases of up to 40%. Steve Smith, president of the Vice-Chancellor’s group Universities UK, estimates that some 200,000 people could lose out on place.

Fears about place cuts have led the President of the National Union of Student (NUS) to condemn the announcement.

Wes Streeting argues that the cuts will cause “irreversible damage” to higher education. He stated, “Singling out universities for cuts of this kind seems to me to be an extraordinary act of self harm by the government”.

The vast cuts have also led to fears amongst students about the quality of teaching and fees.

Oxford students have widely condemned the government’s decision to cut the Universities budget with such ferocity.

“The scale of these cuts is bound to have an effect on teaching. Larger tutorials, larger classes and less of them will surely be the result”, Kate Travers commented. “The plans will only serve to blunt nation’s competitive edge in the labour market.”

Camilla Jones, a finalist, commented “access is surely going to be hit by this decision. All the work that Oxford and other universities have done to improve social mobility will be undone. Fees will have to rise considerably to meet this shortfall and will put the poorest off applying.”

With universities receiving their individual budgets in the coming weeks, Oxford will have to brace itself for a huge swathe of cuts. The University already has to provide around 50% of the teaching costs for its students.

The announcement of cuts can only add to fears that there will be a rise in student fees. With student debt already at record highs in the UK, a rise in fees could worsen the situation.

It seems now, almost inevitable that fees will have to rise, and by a large extent. This is especially true if the government want half of the population to meet to attend university, whilst considerably cutting the HE Budget.

This will not only hit price of the education available, it is also bound to negatively impact on subsidies, with many Oxford Colleges heavily subsidising food, rent and accommodation amongst other things.

There are worries that wealthier colleges will be better able to subsidise their students in while students at poorer colleges will be hit harder by the government’s decision.

Spotify enters talks

By
James Gibson
-

Last month Cherwell reported on the University’s decision to ban the popular music-sharing website Spotify across college networks.

The company behind Spotify have since said that they will be making efforts to have the ban on the music sharing website lifted.

Spotify commented on the ban, saying, “It’s sad to think of our student friends at Oxford University unable to listen to Spotify whilst on campus.”

“We’ve spoken with the university and are currently discussing how we might reconnect the students with their music. We’re keeping everything crossed!”

The website was initially blocked because of concerns about the amount of bandwidth it took up. Spotify reacted quickly to the news, contacting Dr. Stuart Lee, Director of OUCS, to request a meeting last Monday.

Dr. Lee said that he hoped the situation could be resolved. “If we could do something as we did with Skype then that would be in everyone’s best interest, it would be win-win.”

He maintained that, “…the reason we try to restrict peer-to-peer is that it really does swallow up bandwidth.”

The issue has sparked debate at other universities. A Cambridge College has moved quickly to reassure students that the service will not be banned.

A spokesperson for Newham College said, “Why would anyone ban it? Our policy is to provide an internet service that is closest to students have at home. Of course we monitor for abuse, but we have no plans to ban programs like Spotify which are harmless.”

Oxford University’s ban of Spotify has attracted international interest, with the news being published on SkyNews and The Washington Post.

KA crossing lethal

By
Anastassia Beliakova
-

Oxford City Council has still not reviewed the junction outside the Kings Arms, despite the death of a student there in 2007.

As a result, a motion for road safety outside the Kings Arms has been passed without opposition at this week’s OUSU council. It proposed an urgent review into the safety of the junction, and suggested a pedestrian crossing be installed, as well as road markings for cyclists.

There is currently an online petition for the improvement of road user safety outside the Kings Arms, which has been signed by more than 680 people.
The petition states that “Hundreds of road users every day have to double-guess each others actions and this can be fatal once again if someone is in a rush. The council must drop its excuses and act now.”

The petition proposes an immediate installation of cyclist and pedestrian lights on the junction, as well as a new configuration of traffic lights sequence, which will ensure safety and peace of mind for all road users.

The OUSU motion suggested that the petition should be promoted through local media in order to elicit action from the Council.

It is also stated in the petition that the council spent time discussing with the university representatives ways of improving safety at the junction and decided on creating a space similar to the one in front of the Clarendon Centre, which would be incorporated into a major re-design of Broad Street.

Leah Jesnick, a first-year at St Hugh’s student commented: “My friend almost got run over on that junction. It is very irresponsible of the Council to not have done anything about it.”

Another student said “I always jump the lights in that junction. I know that it is dangerous but otherwise you have to wait for ages to be able to cross.”
Oxford City Council released a statement which read, “Work to look at possible alterations for this junction is ongoing and the council is planning to go to a stakeholder consultation soon on an outline scheme, which includes removing traffic signals.”

“The council has had to take into account Oxford University’s plans for major alterations to the Bodleian New Library on the north side of Broad Street to see how their plans will interact with ours.”

There are also no provisions at the junction to assist people with disabilities.

Students ‘overdose’ on Boots drugs

By
Natalya Segrove
-

On Saturday, Oxford played host to one of the 10:23 “mass overdose” protests which took place across the country.

Around 35 people attended the protest in Oxford which was organised to put pressure on Boots pharmacy to withdraw homeopathic products from their shelves. Nationwide, more than 400 people took part in various protests.

At 10:23 exactly, participants “overdosed” by consuming entire bottles of homeopathic medicines. They stated beforehand that they would come to no harm because homeopathic tinctures are simply water, while the pills are just sugar.

A spokesman from the campaign, Martin Robbins, confirmed on February 1st that nobody had been harmed.

He stated that the only damage had been “to their wallets – using homeopathy is a very expensive way of buying sugar.”

Rosie Olliver, a pupil at Oxford High School, organised the Oxford campaign. She commented, “We all hope that Boots will withdraw homeopathy from their shelves, or put up signs saying this is a placebo treatment.”

She continued, “They know it doesn’t work, we know it doesn’t work, they need to stop lying to their customers.”

Boots have been targeted due to the fact that they have admitted that they sell homeopathic remedies because they sell, rather than because they believe they work.

Paul Bennett, professional standards director for Boots, stated to a committee of MPs last Novemeber, “I have no evidence to suggest they are efficacious. It is about consumer choice for us and a large number of our customers believe they are efficacious.”

In an open letter to Boots, the 10:23 campaign asks the store to “do the right thing, and remove this bogus therapy from your shelves.”

As the campaign was aimed at Boots, all the protestors took Boots own-brand homeopathic remedies.

Paula Ross, chief executive of the Society of Homeopaths, took a very negative view of the protest, commenting, “This is an ill-advised publicity stunt in very poor taste, which does nothing to advance the scientific debate about how homeopathy actually works.”

1...1,9841,9851,986...2,453Page 1,985 of 2,453

Explore

Follow us

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2024 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy