Sunday 14th September 2025
Blog Page 2147

Can Oxford handle porn?

0

Let’s begin with the facts. Larry Flint came to speak at the Oxford Union last term – past speakers have included Jenna Jameson and Ron Jeremy. Is it just me, or is that pretty much a who’s who of the pornworld? No, it’s not just me. But there’s more. It is also possible to find back issues of Playboy in the Bodelian. Check on OLIS if you don’t believe me. I’ll go on A couple of terms ago Rock Oxford organized that infamous naked KY jelly wrestling travesty at Kukui, and showcased a topless woman carrying an albino python. But despite an alleged police investigation and some pedestrian statements of outrage from feminist groups, they all seem to have gotten away with it. What I’m trying to say is that Oxford seems to be down with porn in the mainstream. Or at any rate that it is tolerated, just like everywhere else. Because it is legal, of course, provided you are 18. So unless you’re some kind of prepubescent child prodigy with pushy parents, chances are that if you’ve matriculated, you are allowed to look at porn. And why not? Even take part in some. There, I said it.

But hold your horses, what about looking at porn online? Now we’re entering Oxford’s twilight zone of IT regulations, college bylaws and Proctorial disciplinary procedures. I asked the Proctors what they thought about this and they pointed me to the statutes and regulations- although they did say “obviously if students are living in private housing with their own internet connection and accessing porn there, that’s up to them and it wouldn’t be a disciplinary matter”. The University’s Policy on Offensive Electronic Material reads as follows: “The University provides computing equipment and access to networks for the furtherance of the academic work of staff and students. It is a misuse of those facilities, and may in certain cases be illegal, for a user to receive, transmit, display or store offensive or pornographic material using University equipment for other than bona fide academic purposes, and such misuse may result in action being taken against those responsible” (this policy was adopted by the IT Committee in November 1995). So the simple answer is that no, Oxford University isn’t down with the porn.

But let’s get to the bottom of this. But what do they mean by “misuse”? Isn’t looking through someone’s 1300 pictures on facey-b equally a misuse of network resources? And isn’t using Twitter a general “misuse” of everyone’s time? I believe it is. So my feeling is that this is not really what is at issue.

What actually happens when you look at porn online? I decided to investigate. So I went on the interwebs and looked at some porn. And nothing happened. What do these regulations actually mean in real terms? I was interested to know whether anyone had ever got done for this kind of stuff. Does anyone actually care what students get up to in the privacy of their bedrooms?
I talked to the IT officer at my college. He said “there are no grey hidden agendas, we are obliged by law to take an interest in what you do. When it comes to porn, there are two things that concern us: a) whether it is legal and b) whether it is copyrighted”. Yes my friends, the law is the law, and apparently there were once some copyright issues concerning a film called “Cockpit Cowboys” starring one Alex Stevens. Then I asked him whether he knew how much porn people look at on the college network. It transpires that last month Redtube was ninth most visited website in college, accounting for just under 2% of all internet traffic at St Anne’s, dwarfed by Facebook at 12% and Googlevideo at 24%. The figure for all pornsites combined was estimated to be below 4%. This struck me as rather tame, considering 37% of the intertubes are choked with porn. What emerged from our conversation is that as far as the IT department is concerned, bandwidth (how much internet you’re using up) trumps content. “What I’m interested in is volume” he said. They are clearly more bothered about students streaming endless seasons of Sex and the City then about them watching two randomers having Sex on the Settee.

The freedom to surf isn’t enjoyed everywhere in Oxford, however. At Wycliffe Hall, for example, you are only allowed to go on godtube.com. Ok, this may not be true. In Somerville there is a traffic monitoring device called WebSense which prevents users from accessing certain websites. What do students make of this? I asked the obvious candidate, OUSU’s VP for Women Rachel Cummings who replied rather sensibly that “colleges have a right to prevent networks from viruses, but not to be our moral guardians. They shouldn’t be deciding what students are allowed to view; attempts to do so in the past have clumsily prevented people doing legitimate research”.

Of course, some content is downright depraved and probably shouldn’t be looked at by anyone. Videos involving a 2:1 ratio of girls and cups come to mind, for example. Moreover, some porn isn’t legal here or anywhere else. In the UK, as of 26 January 2009, it is illegal to possess extreme pornography (roughly defined as that which is grossly offensive, involving corpses, animals, serious violence and/or genital mutilation) carrying up to a three year prison sentence.

The morals of this tale are several fold. First off, it seems that IT officers have better ways to spend their afternoons than to sift through what you’ve been up to online. So chill, chances are you are not being watched by anyone – unless, of course, you are breaking copyright law or eating up all the bandwidth. Second, we are neither at school nor at home, so the university should take it easy with the whole loco parentis thing at least be consistent across colleges. Why am I allowed to surf porn when Somerville isn’t? And how come that kid down at Wycliffe has never even heard of porn? Third, if you’re going to look at porn, at least try to make sure you’re looking at something legal (underage (obviously), extreme or copyrighted stuff is off limits). Fourth, try getting laid a bit more and give that hand a rest.

Whistle Stop Tour – Wadstock

0

The Wadham College Entz Girls take Cherwell through the highs and lows of organising Wadham’s infamous live music event.

Review: HMS Pinafore

0

H.M.S. Pinafore was Gilbert and Sullivan’s first big success and tells a story of class distinction and thwarted love. It gently satirises class distinctions in Britain at the time, and is a humorous look at the customs of the Royal Navy.
The plot is centred on Ralph Rackstraw, a sailor who is hopelessly in love with his Captain’s daughter, Josephine Corcoran, whom he does not believe returns his feelings. Captain Corcoran is determined that Josephine will marry Sir Joseph Porter, the First Lord of the Admiralty. Josephine, however, is reluctant to marry Sir Joseph as she is secretly in love with Ralph. The plot develops through twists and turns of concealment and discovery towards a happy ending all round.
The chorus works well together, singing both in time and in tune (rarer than you might think!). They have a feel for the music and for each other. All those on stage remain focussed and in character even during the big solo numbers. The cast ranges from first to fourth years, and includes first-timers as well as die-hard regulars of the society.
Robert Hazle is strong as Captain Corcoran, competently handling the tonal changes and emotion involved in many of his pieces. He is also careful not to over-act, which can often hinder operettas.
Christopher Milton is excellent as Sir Joseph Porter, convincingly portraying the smarmy arrogance of the character and really making you believe Sir Joseph’s high opinion of himself.
Anna Sideris as Josephine does justice to the score and is clearly a very talented singer. Unfortunately, her acting hinders the expressive potential of the music – she too static, and the music sometimes overpowers the lyrics.
Whilst the concert performance style may make this production less accessible to those who aren’t already Gilbert and Sullivan fans, the church provides a perfect setting for the soaring music. Acoustically superb, the rafters ring with beautiful melodies. The chorus numbers are particularly effective.
Overall, this is another addition to the OUGSS’s tradition of strong productions. It is a must-see for any Gilbert and Sullivan fan and is an amusing and enjoyable evening for anyone else.

(3 stars)

The Oxford University Gilbert and Sullivan Society’s production of HMS Pinafore: Wed-Sat 2nd Week – 7.30 (and 2.30 Sat) – St Michael’s Church

 

 

Oxford welcomes spring in May Day celebrations

0

8,000 revellers participated in Oxford’s traditional May Day celebrations on Friday morning.

Students and locals alike gathered on Magdalen Bridge to listen to Magdalen College choir sing Latin hymn ‘Te Deum patrem colimus’ at 6am.

The event was accompanied by heightened safety measures in an attempt to discourage those attending from traditional jumping into the river. The bridge was closed to traffic for three hours and more than 30 police officers were drafted in to control the crowds.

Supt Andy Murray, Area Commander said, “We had 30 police officers who were on duty throughout the night and early morning. They worked closely with the ambulance service, fire service and stewards who were there to ensure the public’s safety. There were no injuries and only one person was arrested for a minor public order offence.”

However, around a dozen participants dived into the river Cherwell after traffic was resumed and police left the scene.

The peculiar atmosphere of the day was felt by those attending. Hugh Trimble, staff at the University careers service described the morning, “In the centre of Oxford we had the usual sweet-voiced choirboys and bedraggled all-night ball-goers, a man dressed as a tree, and more morris dancers than you could shake a stick at.”

For many students it was the first time they participated in May Day celebrations.

Jan Deeg, first year Arabic student commented, “At the time I was really annoyed because I stayed up all night. But when I went there it was the best atmosphere. It was good to see Oxford from another side…the romantic, the poetic one. The performance itself was a bit of disappointment as the audio quality wasn’t that good and I couldn’t see much. But because it was such an Oxford thing, I was happy to attend.”

Many appreciated the opportunity to celebrate with the locals. Kei Hamada, St John’s student said, “Although I hadn’t been planning on it the previous night, I’m glad I made it to Magdalen to hear the choir – seeing everyone flocking towards the tower was bizarre, and it was a rare moment where town and gown were really enjoying themselves together.”

For some, May Day was an unforgettable experience. One member of Magdalen’s choir said, “Singing on the tower was exciting. It was amazing to finish singing and hear all the cheers from so far below. Although it was slightly scary when the bells started ringing and the tower started to sway.”

Dr John Hood to head US charity

0

Vice-Chancellor John Hood has been appointed to lead a New York charity, the Robertson Foundation, after he leaves Oxford next year.

 The foundation states its belief that connecting people with a community of faith “reinforces ethical behaviour” and motivates a “concern for others”, and that these aims cut across all of the foundation’s areas of interest which include education, medical research and the environment.

We don’t have a right to be here

It is beginning to appear inevitable. A dark cloud is gathering on the horizon. Tuition fees are going up. A BBC survey conducted in march found that two-thirds of university Vice Chancellors across England and Wales are in favour of increases, with some suggesting that the upper limit be increased as high as £20,000 per year. The Daily Telegraph is now reporting that, pending a review of limits on tuition fees, Oxford is considering charging as much as £11,000 per year. John Hood has denied the reports, but it seems fairly clear which way the wind is blowing. Students in general are, obviously, unhappy about it – but is our discontent really anything more than self-interest? No doubt, there are many who decry increases in fees, indeed, the existence of fees at all, as an inegalitarian affront to an individual’s ‘right’ to education. This view is ill-founded.

Firstly, it is empirically ignorant. Going to University has never been more expensive than it is now, yet attendance numbers have never been higher. The fact of the matter is that money is not the only obstacle to gaining a University level education – a significant factor that seems to be widely ignored is the number of places. If we don’t charge, we will have to reduce places, and exclude people, presumably based on intelligence, as we have done historically. Whether you are born ill funded, or born dim witted, it’s still unfair. If we charge, at least the government can intervene to ensure that everyone is able to pay.

Students also have to accept that claims of a ‘right’ to higher education are largely fabrications. Many who object to fees are ignoring the ugly fact that their education is being financed by individuals who did not have the same opportunities they enjoy today. There is a clear justification for the partial subsidisation of education – the overall benefit of the nation. A builder who has never benefitted directly from a University education still has an obvious interest in contributing to the education of doctors, scientists, even politicians and, dare we say it, journalists. However, it seems somewhat of a stretch to demand that he or she fund our ‘right’ to the host of Media Studies-esque degrees that have proliferated in British universities. In fact, many of the degrees offered at Oxford are somewhat questionable in this respect. How much does our builder stand to gain from putting the average undergraduate through a degree in Classics? Anthropology? Even English? The obvious response is that these are subjects that are worth studying. Which they are. However, one struggles to see why anyone has a God given right to study them, let alone to demand that people who never had the same opportunities pay for it. If these things are so worthwhile, we should be prepared to pay for them. There is clearly a balance to be reached – one that reflects the benefit to all that higher education provides, but that also recognises that students, as individuals, stand to benefit personally from their education and should be willing to contribute within reason.

Evidently, a situation in which these experiences are only open to the rich is not acceptable, but we need to admit to ourselves that an increase in tuition fees is not necessarily a death knell for equality of opportunity. There are many ways of redressing inequalities, ranging from grants to the cancellation of students’ debts should they opt for a low income career. Many of these options are currently being considered by those advocating increases in tuition fees. Regardless of whether he intends to raise fees or not, Vice Chancellor Hood has himself reiterated his commitment to a “needs-blind” admission system. That is the first step – the next is ensuring that noone who really wants to is discouraged from applying for financial reasons. These are the battles we should be fighting: We should be pressing politicians and university officials to put appropriate measures in place to ensure that no one is excluded. If we stick our heads in the sand and object to increases carte blanche on the basis of some mythical ‘right’, we risk leaving the disadvantaged far more vulnerable when higher fees eventually arrive.

Grad interns to receive benefits

0

Graduates on unpaid internships will soon be able claim job seeker’s allowance under a new scheme from Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills.

Currently, after 6 months on benefits, job seeker’s allowance rules give a recruitment subsidy, volunteering or training to those who are unemployed. This will now be extended to graduates on internships of up to 13 weeks.

Recently, the NUS conducted a survey in which 8 out of 10 graduates described themselves as ‘concerned’ or ‘very concerned’ about graduate employment levels and their future career prospects.

 

Harassment claims taint nomination

0

A candidate for the position of Oxford University’s Professor of Poetry has been accused of sexual harassment at universities twice during his career.

Derek Walcott, the St Lucia-born poet, allegedly sexually harassed two female students whilst he held Professorial posts at Boston and Harvard Universities.

In 1992, an anonymous student in a creative writing class taught by Walcott at Harvard in 1982 claimed that the poet had propositioned her during a discussion of her work, and had given her a “C” grade when she refused his advances.

According to Harvard Crimson, the University’s newspaper, Walcott did not deny that the student’s testimony was correct. He is also alleged to have said that his teaching style was “deliberately personal and intense.”

The student wrote a letter that was published in the Crimson, which contained an account of the conversation.

It recounts how Walcott asked the student to “Imagine me making love to you”, before asking, “Would you make love with me if I asked you?”

The letter then claims that, after she refused, Walcott devised a code by which the student could let him know during classes if she had changed her mind.

According to the student, after she sent the letter, Walcott was “cold and distant”, showed “no concern for my education” and “did not fully evaluate my work as he did with other students of the class.”

She was given a “C” grade for the class. She later appealed to be given a pass grade after she made her complaint, which Harvard’s Administrative Board allowed. Harvard University has officially reprimanded Walcott.

In 1995, the poet was accused of sexually harassing a student in a class he taught at Boston University.
Nicole Niemi, a student of Walcott’s playwriting and creative writing class, pressed for half a million dollars in compensation and punitive damages after claiming that he had propositioned her before threatening to fail her and refusing to produce her play after she refused.

Professor Hermione Lee, a campaigner for Derek Walcott, said that these allegations should not interfere with Derek Walcott’s running for the post.

She said, “I ask myself how far this puritanism might go. Should students be forbidden to read Derek Walcott’s poetry, lest they be contaminated by his long past behaviour?”

“I am campaigning for a professor of poetry who will be a person giving public lectures to students and professors. I am not campaigning for someone who will be in pastoral relations to students.”

“This matter has arose in the past, when Derek Walcott was given a honorary D.Lit at Oxford and these issues were raised at the time as with the many awards and positions that Mr Walcott holds. These historic matters of previous bad behaviour were set aside.”

She added, “You might ask yourself as a student body whether you wanted Byron or Shelley as a professor of poetry neither of whom personal lives were free of criticism.”

Walcott won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1992 and he has also won the Queen’s Gold Medal for Poetry and the WH Smith Literary Award in recent years.

First female for the post?

0

Ruth Padel has claimed that she will be able to lead the position of Professor of Poetry for Oxford in a “new direction,” in an interview with Cherwell.

She suggested that, as the post has never to date been filled by a female poet, she might be able to bring something new to the position. “The post has been held so far by 43 men and no women,” she said. “My supporters think I might take the post in a new direction, make new links for it and for the university.”

However, she was quick to praise both of her male rivals for the post. Of Arvind Mehotra, she stated, “He is a good essayist and friends of mine admire his work.” Of Walcott’s work, she said, “I admire and have written about Walcott’s work, especially the early stuff. Oddly enough, when my daughter heard he was running too, she said my poetry reminds me of his!”

Nevertheless, she also took pains to explain where she felt she could offer more than other candidates. “My supporters are keen on my scholarly, scientific and classical background, my links with science and conservation, and the fact that I have promoted the close reading of poetry in a wider context than universities.”

Padel said she would reach out to other academic disciplines with poetry readings in botanic gardens and museums, and that she was enthusiastic about involving more students, especially graduates, in poetry.

“I’d love giving the lectures, but I also love making informal links for students. Especially, perhaps, those in other faculties who might feel they have no formal entrée to poetry.”

“I am particularly thinking of graduates. I was a graduate at Oxford-being a graduate can be a lonely business, the university is set up for undergraduates, graduates have to sink themselves into their own lone subject. Poetry can offer a mode and moment of reflection for new ideas and thought.”

Padel praised the uniqueness of the post and of the University, saying “One of Oxford’s great strengths is its resistance to quick change.” She added, “The beauty of this post is that it’s up to the individual. That does run the risk of someone who does not such a good job. But it also means anyone can do anything.”

 

New twist in Professor of Poetry contest

0

The battle for the coveted post of Oxford Professor of Poetry begins in earnest this week after nominations closed on Wednesday.

Ruth Padel, Derek Walcott and Arvind Mehrotra will compete on 16 May in an effort to win what is seen as the most prestigious position in poetry after that of Poet Laureate.

It is the first time in the post’s 300-year-history that a woman and a Caribbean have been campaigning for the position.

Arvind Krishna Mehrotra, a little-known Indian writer, livened up the race by joining less than a week before the nominations closed.

The race has been somewhat overshadowed, however, by opponents of Derek Walcott claiming he is an unsuitable candidate for the position as he has been reprimanded for sexual harassment.

Current Professor Christopher Ricks will step down from the position in September to make way for the new incumbent. In the past, the post has been held by such poets as Seamus Heaney, Robert Graves and W. H. Auden.

The position comes with a salary of £6,901 and a requirement to deliver three annual lectures. The Professor of Poetry is unique in Oxford as the only elected academic position.

Candidates must receive nominations from at least 12 Oxford graduates to be eligible to stand. The successful poet is then chosen by election, in which all Oxford degree holders are eligible to vote.

Prize-winning poet Ruth Padel was the first to be nominated this year. She is supported by the philosopher AC Grayling and the eminent scientist Jocelyn Bell Burnell. Padel, who has a particular interest in the links between poetry and science, has said she hopes to encourage connections across the arts and sciences within the university. Her latest volume, ‘Darwin: A Life in Verse’, was written to mark the bicentenary of her ancestor, the father of evolutionary study. She has been dubbed “a voice of great authority and integrity” and placed “among the most gifted poets of her generation” by literary critics. A vigorous campaign is behind her candidacy, with supporters having created a website to promote her cause.

She will face competition in the form of Nobel laureate Derek Walcott, the West-Indian poet and playwright. Walcott won the Nobel prize for literature in 1992, founded the Trinidad Theatre Workshop and has worked as a critic and lecturer. In a statement, Walcott’s nominators said that his appointment would be “a very significant and distinguished event for Oxford’s place in the literary world”. If chosen, Walcott would be the first African-American to take up the post.

Indian poet Arvind Krishna Mehrotra made a surprise third entry in the contest. Mehrotra, a poet and critic currently lecturing at the University of Allahabad, has held poetry posts around the world and been described as “one of the finest poets working in any language”. His poetry is described as “a rich, fraught world history of cosmopolitanism”. Supporters have said that his interests in multilingualism, translation and creative practice would make him a “timely” choice for the position.

May will also witness the announcement of Andrew Motion’s successor as poet laureate. Unlike the elected Oxford position, the poet laureate is appointed by Queen on the recommendation of the Culture Minister. Speculation that Motion might put himself forward for the Oxford position was ruled out in February when he announced his intention to take a break from “public poeting”. He criticised the professorship as being in “drastic need of an overhaul”, saying that it was “too vague” in its teaching requirements, and that the pay was “lousy”.

Dr Sally Mapstone, chair of the English Faculty Board said, “The high level of interest in the Professorship of Poetry in Oxford, in the UK, and across the world indicates how much poetry matters to people and how much relevance this chair still has. With three strong candidates, it looks like the election may be a close run thing on the day.”

She added, “We hope that as many members of Convocation (graduates of the University) will come to Oxford on the day to vote in the Examination Schools – where most of them will have sat their examinations in the past. There is a good chance too that the Proctors will be able to announce the result on the day, so we are in for an exciting 16th of May.”