Sunday 10th May 2026
Blog Page 3

‘It happens here and it’s our responsibility to stop it’: Oxford’s anti-sexual violence campaign

Beatrix Arnold
-
0
‘It happens here and it’s our responsibility to stop it’: Oxford’s anti-sexual violence campaign

CW: Rape, sexual violence, sexual harassment.

With each headline, the world becomes increasingly desensitised to sexual violence. 62 million men go unnoticed, swept up by the information overload of the online sphere; the reality becomes ineffable, obfuscated by over-saturation. Memes about Epstein, jokes about Clavicular, and discourse on the manosphere have seeped into our digital vernacular, such as to become ubiquitous, and, consequently, normalised. Nor, in the University of Oxford, is abuse of power, on the level of both students and staff, an alien concept. The result of this over-abundance is not to destigmatise a sensitive topic, but to train us out of outrage and into critical stultification. For the co-presidents of It Happens Here, Aparna Shankar and Maddie Gillett, and the two policy officers, Isobel Cammish and Abby Smith, literacy about consent and sexual violence is needed now more than ever.

It Happens Here, established in 2013, is an anti-sexual violence campaign led by Oxford students, which advocates for policy change at the University, as well as running events and offering support services for students. They were instrumental in the 2021 launch of the Safe Lodge Scheme, providing a point of refuge for students in distress. Likewise, their campaigning played a major role in effecting the University’s ban on intimate relationships between academics and their students in 2023. 

The very structure of the campaign’s team – including a BAME rep, a Class rep, a Disability rep, and an LGBTQ+ rep – is shaped by their recognition that an individual’s experience of sexual violence is influenced by the confluence of all aspects of their identity; reprising an ossified approach in each unique case risks forfeiting nuance and sensitivity. By embedding their values into their team’s set-up, the society has committed itself to an intersectional approach. 

Aparna, who began working on It Happens Here as BAME rep, is keen to emphasise that “people of colour face intersectional barriers when it comes to reporting sexual violence”. Not only do people, and particularly women, of colour experience higher levels of sexual violence, but, furthermore, issues of self-blame “can be compounded by racial differences”.

Nor is race the only factor which can aggravate such cases. For Maddie, who started out as LGBTQ+ rep, the work of It Happens Here would be incomplete without nuanced consideration of how queerness can influence how a person experiences sexual violence. “You can’t talk about sexual violence without talking about the practice of safe sex”, she notes. This becomes a problem when, as is all too often the case, “safe sex is taught from a very heterosexual lens”, generating additional hurdles in the process of coming to terms with, or even recognising, instances of sexual violation. 

It Happens Here, along with numerous other student societies, including Class Act and OULGBTQ+ society, was disaffiliated from the SU a few years ago, as part of a broader transformation of SU structure. The change had profound ramifications for the campaign: having lost their funding, “for a while we just weren’t really up and running”. Without this stable source of income, Aparna explains, “we rely a lot on college JCRs which can be unreliable. And so when we’re putting on events, it’s a bit more difficult.

“We are managing it, and that’s why it helps to have such a large network, because it’s not just committee members who can apply, anyone could apply to help us get funding from their college.”

The challenges induced by the dearth of funding as a fallout from the SU disaffiliation are only compounded by concomitant struggles to ensure engagement. It Happens Here is, Maddie admits, “not a very well-known society”, and losing the network that came with the support of a centralised administrative body meant that “we went a bit underground, because it’s a big structural change to navigate.”

Yet the problem has its roots in something beyond the practical. It is, perhaps, an inevitable corollary of the nature of the campaign itself. Sexual violence is necessarily an uncomfortable topic, but just as commonly a misunderstood one as well. The new presidents are intent on addressing “the many intricate and complex ways that sexual violence goes unreported and not talked about in society”

As a result of the myriad misconceptions that surround the issue, the campaign suffers from a lack of consistent engagement. “I’ve had a lot of people come up to me and go, oh, I haven’t, you know, I haven’t been a victim of sexual violence, so can I still come to the events? And absolutely you can.” Aparna explains. “It’s a collective effort. So, I want people to feel comfortable coming to our events, even if they’re not a survivor of sexual violence.”

Yet the problem with engagement is not limited to those who have no experience with sexual harassment. Even survivors often face difficulties, whether external or internal, when seeking help from the community. “There’s another barrier to sexual violence. It’s not an obvious thing that happens to people, as in sometimes it takes people a long time to realise if they have been sexually assaulted or raped, or if they’ve survived some sort of sexual violence.” 

It’s difficult to keep the thread of the narrative taut within the chaos of university life, of events large and small, of conflicting emotions. After all, everything blurs when held too near. The realisation can take months for some – for others, it takes even longer.

“I always think of it as, you know, if someone walks past you on the street and just slaps you in the face, you know, you’ve been slapped in the face, you know?” Yet sexual violence is rarely so clear-cut, particularly since, as Aparna notes, “you’re made to feel like what happened to you doesn’t matter.” The tendency to complicate the issue with introspection is dangerously prevalent, in large part attributable to “that inherent self-blame reaction towards it”, and the “challenges of invalidating yourself”.

Often, this is exacerbated by semantic difficulties, as Aparna explains: “I think that even the term sexual violence can be unhelpful sometimes, because people tend to have an idea of what they think sexual violence looks like, I don’t know, a stranger in an alley who uses a weapon, for example.” The harsh picture that the term conjures up belies the reality. It is an inherently violent experience to have one’s boundaries crossed, regardless of whether there was physical injury involved, regardless of who the perpetrator might have been. A hazy conception of what falls within a certain definition “can stop people from accessing these forms of support. They might see something like the Sexual Harassment and Violence Support Service and think, oh, that’s not for me, because my experience wasn’t inherently violent, there’s probably someone else who might need it more than me.”

Reporting sexual violence is inevitably a harrowing process. Pain requires proof, consent becomes a negotiation, and the burden falls on the survivor to explain a story they never asked to tell. Yet for every psychological barrier to seeking help overcome, an institutional complication arises. Safeguarding provision at the University, as well as the process of dealing with a case of sexual violence, all too often becomes mired in bureaucratic reticulation, an oppressive complexity that is, on the whole, exacerbated by Oxford’s collegiate system. When responsibility for student welfare is divided between individual colleges and the central University, a transparent procedure to follow when seeking help is elusive. 

“The college system means there’s a lot of inconsistency in policy,” Maddie points out. “Whereas in some universities there’s a centralised policy on spiking, for example, each college is different here.” 

When students are immersed in the microcosm of a particular college, they are less likely to be familiar with wider university resources. “I don’t think many people know about the Sexual Harassment and Violence Support Service. I don’t think people know about centralised welfare, things other than uni counselling.”

The tendency towards insularity inherent within the collegiate system, as Isobel notes, carries the potential to help or harm: a close-knit community can provide a crucial support network in a time of crisis, or, conversely, entrap a survivor in oppressive proximity to the circumstances, or even to the perpetrator, of what they’ve experienced. Oxford’s landscape narrows with the ever-hovering possibility of confrontation, or familiar places become corroded by association. 

Yet this is only part of the picture. For Oxford’s postgraduates, who make up just over 50% of the student body, the structure of the University generates additional problems. “At least in my experience, postgrad students feel really disconnected from central university bodies,” Abby explains. In her fresher’s week, the topic of sexual violence “wasn’t even covered.”

“There’s an assumption that because we’re all older, there are just things that you don’t have to lecture people about and you just assume that they know, which I think can be really harmful… everyone’s coming from a different background, a different system, a different structure, you can’t assume that we are all on the same understanding.”

Beyond the college system, antiquarianism, inevitably, characterises much of the University’s make-up. Apart from inculcating an intimidating atmosphere of grandiose severity, which, rooted as it is in patriarchal tradition, can act as a deterrent in reporting cases of sexual violence, Oxford’s long-standing prestige and distinctive practices give rise to additional problems.

“Oxford’s structure is more likely to allow members of staff to keep their positions, like we’ve heard a lot about this in the news,” Maddie points out. “And it’s very hard to get fired as a fellow. And you’re someone who’s interacting often one-on-one with your students, whereas you wouldn’t be at another uni. So I think the employment structure of Oxford is something that is problematic.” The status of Oxford’s colleges as individual legal entities often works to fragment accountability. Many academics have employment contracts with both their college and their faculty, adding a further layer of complication to the handling of allegations. 

Isobel notes the atypical dynamics engendered by the relationships between students and tutors at Oxford: “You have drinks with your tutors, your tutors will buy you alcohol, you’ll have dinner with them, you’ll maybe be in these like one-on-one situations with them a lot more, which is a bit weird.”

A spokesperson for the University told Cherwell: “Sexual misconduct, violence and harassment have no place at Oxford. We strive to ensure that Oxford is always a safe space for all students and staff and take concerns seriously, applying clear, robust procedures. Support for those affected is a priority, and we take precautionary and/or disciplinary action where justified.”

A survey published in 2023 by the ongoing project OUR SPACE found that half of Oxford students report having experienced sexual harassment. Within the University support system, the 2024-25 academic year saw an increase in student referrals to the Sexual Harassment and Violence Support Service. It is easy to resort to despondency in the face of such a seemingly unassailable challenge. When the personal is reduced to the numerical, tangible impact becomes difficult to discern. But Aparna notes that the metric of their success has different aspects: “I think a lot of it can be quite individual sometimes, in terms of individual people reaching out to kind of tell you, hey, this, this helped, you know?

“It’s hard to see the long-term impact of what you’re doing when you’re doing it. But it’s reminders like these of people, because if there are a few people who are being vocal about it, chances are the vast majority of the rest of them think it, but don’t say it.” To live as a survivor of sexual violence, especially when faced with an impression of institutional inaction, is “an isolating thing, but to have a campaign in Oxford and people that care about this very deeply, so that they give up their own time. It’s a validating connection.”

As the presidents begin the new term, they are not overwhelmed into inaction, but focused on the tangible next steps they can take. “Right now, we want to get our name out. We want people to know that we exist. If you’re a survivor of sexual violence, it’s an isolating feeling, because you don’t feel like the world is on your side. It feels like you’re the only person that’s going through this. So to have a network available to you, to have other people that are willing to go to events and make time to support you – it’s a feeling that’s unmatched for a survivor.”

“A lot of it’s so slow going in policy work, and we’d rather have a campaign that is very useful and well thought-out,” Isobel adds, “but I do really love the idea that it’ll be having an impact on each generation of students. It’s a slow-moving process, and we’d rather do it right.”

Protecting students against all forms of sexual violence, and providing support for those who have survived it, is a duty that falls not only on the University as an institution, but on the individuals who make up its body, both staff and students. “This is an ongoing issue that requires everyone to pitch in”, Aparna emphasises. “It’s everyone’s problem. It affects everyone in your life.”

“I always like the phrase, it happens here, and it’s our responsibility to stop it. Because it is the responsibility of each and every one of us.”

It Happens Here: https://www.ithappenshere.co.uk 

It Happens Here is not a support service, but a student-led campaign.

University Sexual Harassment and Violence Support Service (SHVSS): https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/welfare/supportservice 

University Independent Sexual Violence Advisor (ISVA): https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/welfare/supportservice/university-independent-sexual-violence-advisor-isva 

Harassment Advisor Network: https://edu.admin.ox.ac.uk/harassment-advisor-network-0 

‘What we need is action’: Dr Lakasing on maternity care, misinformation, and the NHS crisis

Hattie Simpson
-
0
‘What we need is action’: Dr Lakasing on maternity care, misinformation, and the NHS crisis

Maternity care in the NHS has become a site of crisis. A series of high-profile reviews into unsafe care, rising maternal mortality rates, and persistent staff shortages has exposed a system under strain, one that disproportionately harms women from minority ethnic backgrounds and deprived areas. Most recently, the government has commissioned a national investigation into maternity care to be led by Oxford’s own Baroness Amos, Master of University College. Reports accumulate, inquiries are launched, failures are identified, recommendations follow – and yet the pattern repeats. The question is no longer whether there is a problem, but why it has proven so resistant to change. 

For Dr Lorin Lakasing, a consultant obstetrician who has spent more than three decades working in NHS maternity care, the answer is not especially mysterious. “This is not a system that’s working for anyone at the moment”, she says, describing a service that is failing both patients and the staff tasked with caring for them. Speaking to me from her clinic whilst still in her scrubs, it is clear that Lakasing’s life revolves around her profession. What is equally clear, however, is that she finds the job she loves increasingly untenable. 

What is striking, when speaking to Lakasing, is the sheer difference between the current system and the one she entered. Obstetrics was not a long-held ambition: she had initially been drawn to renal medicine, working with young patients on a dialysis unit, but found herself pulled in a different direction during a placement on a labour ward. It was, she recalls, “pandemonium”, with every room full – but also energising. “I just like this buzz. I like the adrenaline. I like all of this.” The appeal wasn’t just in the pace, but also the immediacy of the work – that decisions had to be made quickly but that their consequences were visible. It was possible, as she puts it, to “shift the dial”. The work was hard, but it was also clear in its purpose and grounded in shared responsibility.

That clarity, Lakasing argues, has eroded over time, not through a single reform but what she describes as a “perfect storm” of smaller changes. These shifts have accumulated slowly, reshaping both the structure of care and the experience for patients. “The minute-to-minute care [has become] less rewarding”, she reflects, describing a system that has become “less human, more process driven”. Care delivered by a team from a wide range of specialities, now central to how maternity services are organised, often manifests as a fragmented model in practice, with decisions made in meetings or on screens by clinicians who may never actually meet the patient. At the same time, the demands placed on doctors’ time have also changed significantly. Junior staff, she notes, are increasingly preoccupied with documentation and compliance, to the point that “they’re not actually interacting with the woman and explaining to her what’s going on”. What was once a patient-focused environment has become layered with bureaucracy.

The consequences of this shift have been profound for clinicians. Where Lakasing once remembers camaraderie and a shared sense of purpose, she now describes “a culture of fear and worry and blame”. The pressures of the job haven’t diminished but they have been redirected, demanding a  “constant sort of firefighting… just being able to survive to the next shift.” In this context, rising levels of burnout are understandably inevitable. This is compounded by the changes to the broader experience of  those entering the profession: “I think now you guys are all qualifying with debt, with all sorts of uncertainties about job prospects… I see how the mentality changes.” The result is a workforce navigating not only the demands of clinical care, but also a far more precarious professional landscape.

For patients, these changes have made a significant difference in terms of how they experience maternity care and care across the NHS. Consultations become shorter and interactions more impersonal. It is in this context that Lakasing understands the growing turn towards online sources of information: “If you get some five minutes of very bland midwifery interaction where they’re looking at the screen more than they are at you and you have a list of questions and you don’t feel like they’re answered, then you will look elsewhere.” 

What concerns her isn’t this instinct to seek the information, but the nature of what is found. She describes the rise of “harmful birthing narratives” – belief systems that present particular approaches to pregnancy and childbirth as inherently superior, often tied to moralised ideas of what it means to be a “good” mother. These narratives can often be difficult to challenge, particularly since they resonate with patients who already feel unheard or ignored by the system.

In extreme cases, the consequences can be devastating. Lakasing points to a recent case involving the deaths of both mother and baby, shaped in part by decisions influenced by online advice following a traumatic first birth. But her emphasis isn’t on the advice itself, but what preceded it: a failure of care that left the patient unwilling to return to the system. The problem, in other words, isn’t simply the misinformation available online, but the absence of relationships within healthcare that feel trustworthy enough to counter it. “The biggest victims are of course the patients”, she says, though she is equally clear that staff are also caught within the same failing structures.

A significant part of the issue, in Lakasing’s view, lies in how success is defined and measured within the NHS. Targets and regulatory frameworks have come to dominate the assessment of maternity services, often in ways that distort rather than support good care. “They are the crux of the problem.” The emphasis on measuring the service, she argues, has led to a system in which “we’re so process driven that we’re pretty much treating patient outcomes as an incidental byproduct of a great process we have”. 

The problem is not inherently the metrics, but that they frequently fail to capture what actually matters. The widely cited case of the Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust clearly illustrates this. The trust was praised for its low caesarean rate yet, just months later, became the focus of an inquiry that exposed significant failures in care, which may have led to the deaths of more than 200 infants and 9 mothers, and left other babies with life-changing injuries. “When we have metrics that don’t make sense, we get really bad behaviours”, she notes.

Attempts to address these problems through public inquiries have consistently fallen short. “They’ve all failed”, she says, arguing that earlier investigations have been too shaped by management perspectives that fail to reflect the realities of delivering care “on the shop floor”. More recent inquiries, focused on amplifying the voices of ‘harmed patients’, risk creating a different kind of distortion by implying that all adverse outcomes are preventable. “That’s clearly not true”, she says, explaining how “there are people who have very good outcomes whose care has been pretty ropey”, just as there have equally been “people where all the right things were done, but unfortunately, things didn’t work out as we had hoped”. The danger she suggests is that these approaches also feed a culture of blame without offering meaningful solutions. “What we need is action… proper, sensible, focused action.”

Digital reform, often framed as a solution to many of these challenges, sits uneasily within this picture. Lakasing acknowledges it as an “inevitable consequence of the modern age” but questions its implementation and impact. NHS systems remain inconsistent and under-resourced, with different trusts using incompatible software and “trying to run those ever more sophisticated software programs on pretty archaic hardware”. More fundamentally, digital tools don’t always translate into better care. She describes the example of patients accessing blood test results online, only to have them flagged on the NHS App as abnormal despite being perfectly typical in pregnancy. At the same time, digital innovation also risks exacerbating existing inequalities. “We do have refugees, asylum seekers… women who are homeless, women who are trafficked… I just worry that anything that might add to that would be a problem.” Access to digital healthcare assumes resources and confidence that just aren’t as evenly distributed as the policies imagine.

None of this, Lakasing is clear, lends itself to quick fixes. “This is my problem with politicians”, she says, “they’re always looking for a quick fix”. But the issues she describes are cumulative, and so too must be the solutions. “If you’re playing the long game, you need long-term strategies”. What she returns to, therefore, is something more fundamental: the need for a “unified set of aims” centred on safe outcomes rather than the processes used to demonstrate them. Without that maternity units become “very good at ticking the boxes that we’re being assessed on… that doesn’t mean that our outcomes are good”.

For those entering the profession, her assessment is both candid and cautiously hopeful. “Truthfully, we are in a particularly bad place at the moment, but it’s got to get better. It can’t not get better.” There is, in that, a sense of inevitability: “People are always going to want to have babies”. The future of maternity care, she suggests, will depend less on top-down reform and more on those moving through the system: the next generation of doctors – the medical students that will one day be our obstetricians and gynaecologists – who may be more willing to question its assumptions and reshape its priorities. “I tell the world to be hopeful and to come and see the wards and get stuck in”, she says, emphasising the enduring appeal of the work itself.

Lakasing, for her part, remains deeply committed to that work. And despite everything, her final reflection is unequivocal: “I have not regretted being an obstetrician, not for a singular minute of any day of my life.” It is a striking statement – a reminder that, even within a system under strain, the value of the work itself remains clear.

Student societies condemn reports of Oxford Union invite to Tommy Robinson

Ned Remington and Hattie Simpson
-
0
Student societies condemn reports of Oxford Union invite to Tommy Robinson

Several student societies have condemned reports that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, also known as Tommy Robinson, has been invited to speak at the Oxford Union. Yaxley-Lennon is alleged to have been invited to speak at the Week 5 debate on the motion “This House believes the West is right to be suspicious of Islam”.

In a joint statement posted on Instagram by Oxford Students Against Discrimination and Stand Up To Racism UK, they condemned the invitation “in the strongest possible terms”. They also called on Oxford Union President Arwa Elrayess to confirm that the invitation has been rescinded; “issue a public statement apologising for extending the invitation and promising full transparency with speakers’ events”; and “acknowledge the harm” caused to students by the decision. 

It Happens Here (IHH) raised concerns about the rhetoric used by Yaxley-Lennon, which they described as racialising sexual violence. IHH told Cherwell: “When cases of sexual violence are used to advance anti-Muslim sentiment, the focus is shifted from survivors onto a political agenda…. His presence signals to survivors that their experiences are being instrumentalised, instead of taken seriously.”

In a statement published on Instagram, IHH also joined Oxford Feminist Society, Cuntry Living Zine, Intersectional Uprising Oxford, and Oxford University Women of Colour Society in calling for an immediate withdrawal of the invitation of Yaxley-Lennon. They have demanded “a formal apology and accountable action through new published policy”, and called for “the Union to be transparent about all future speakers”.

A spokesperson for the Oxford African and Caribbean Society (ACS) also criticised the reported invitation. They told Cherwell: “We reject the notion that ‘debate’ requires the inclusion of [such] viewpoints…. Granting Robinson an academic stage at a time of increased far-right activity confers a degree of respectability to ideologies that have historically marginalised our communities.”

In addition, a spokesperson for Oxford Students Amnesty International told Cherwell: “Amnesty International believes in supporting all democratic rights, including freedom of speech and expression. However, Yaxley-Lennon’s history of [criticism] towards Muslims, immigrants and other groups has endangered, and continues to endanger, students at the University of Oxford and Oxford Brookes University…His presence at the Oxford Union infringes upon the [opportunity] of all students to live and study in an atmosphere of safety and respect.”

The reported invitation comes within the context of longstanding accusations against Yaxley-Lennon of Islamophobia and intimidation. He was a co-founder of the English Defence League in 2009, whose supporters have repeatedly targeted Muslim communities and mosques across the UK. He has also been convicted on multiple occasions, including for contempt of court in 2018 after livestreaming defendants accused of sexual exploitation outside a trial in Leeds, in breach of reporting restrictions. He was jailed for 18 months after admitting to the charge.

Yaxley-Lennon has faced further convictions for assault and harassment, and has been widely criticised for his rhetoric, accused of fuelling anti-Muslim sentiment. His public statements have included describing Muslim refugees to the UK as “fake refugees”, a 2011 threat to “every single Muslim watching….the Islamic community would feel the full force of the English Defence League” if another Islamist terror attack were to take place, and a 2018 admission that he “doesn’t care” if he “incites fear” of the UK’s Muslim community. 

He previously warned members of the press: “If you’re a journalist and you think your office or your home is a safe space…it’s not”, and referred to a female BBC journalist as a “slag” after Yaxley-Lennon was questioned by police over an alleged assault of a man at London St Pancras Station in 2025. Yaxley-Lennon was not charged over the incident.

The Oxford Student Greens told Cherwell that while “a diversity of opinion can be conducive to intellectual debate, there is no space for the kind of inflammatory, hateful rhetoric that these figures promote”. They added that “fearmongering through the persecution of minority groups is a coward’s tactic used by people like Stephen Yaxley-Lennon… to push a political agenda”.

In a statement published on Instagram, the Oxford Labour Club also criticised the invitation, saying it was “disgusted” by the decision, writing that while “free speech is important… that does not mean that Tommy Robinson, a far-right extremist convicted of assault and harassment, should be platformed by the Union”. The statement further accused the Union of choosing publicity instead of taking a stand against the far-right, adding that Yaxley-Lennon “has stirred up racism, xenophobia, and hate”.

Turning Point Oxford defended the Union’s decision on free speech grounds. The President of Turning Point Oxford told Cherwell: “The Oxford Union is well within its right to platform whomever it wants… this would be the perfect opportunity for those who vehemently disagree with Tommy Robinson to put his ideas to the test”. They added that Yaxley-Lennon is “a culturally relevant figure in British politics” and that “the debate is of incredible importance”.

When approached, the Union did not confirm whether Stephen Yaxley-Lennon had been invited. A spokesperson told Cherwell that the committee “works tirelessly to curate a termly programme…[giving] members the opportunity to challenge…a broad range of speakers”, adding that “speakers for this term are still being confirmed”. They added that the Union “only host[s] speakers who agree to be challenged”, and that details of high-profile events are often released later “to mitigate any potential security risks…[which] is not a departure from normal practice”.

The response from across the spectrum of student societies represents extraordinary action, and the spokesperson from Amnesty told Cherwell that they were in touch with other student societies to discuss further action. Oxford Stand Up To Racism have organised a protest to take place outside the Oxford Union on Thursday, 28th May, which has been promoted online by multiple other student societies.

Greening the Met Gala through Oxford fashion

Cerys Bennison
-
0
Greening the Met Gala through Oxford fashion

With Anna Wintour trotting around New York and cosying up with Lauren Sanchez Bezos, it is no surprise that the 2026 Met Gala is hitting highly controversial seas. The gala itself needs no introduction: as the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s fundraiser, it is undoubtedly the world’s highest profile fashion event, with the red (or pink, or blue) carpet rolled out every first Monday in May to a galaxy of camera flashbulbs. Instantly dubbed the party of the year, it was founded in 1948 by publicist Eleanor Lambert to establish the self-funded Costume Institute. High-flying dictators of fashion – like Diana Vreeland and Anna Wintour today – have turned the Met Gala from a New York high-society dinner into a global phenomenon pumped with star power.

Wintour has co-chaired almost every gala since 1995, icily manning high fashion’s gates. Even the Kardashians – having become a fixture at the Met – were barred until they had seemingly ‘proved’ their fashion force in 2013. However, Wintour’s endorsement of Sanchez Bezos as co-chair and lead sponsor has led many to question the Met Gala’s stance on Trump’s tech-tycoon administration, enabling the purchasing of cultural capital alongside political power. Their combination of sunglasses and cinched Galliano is a poor formulation for this year’s glamour. The price of a ticket is $75,000; a table, $350,000. Seeming increasingly in the pockets of America’s billionaires, the Met Gala is no longer the escapism it used to be.

All that said, this year’s theme of Costume Art posits an interesting stance on fashion. The newly released catalogue cover speaks volumes about the complicated stance of the body as an artistic and biological symbol: Jacques Fabien Gautier Dagoty’s flayed image of a woman’s back (with her coyly – and very oddly – looking over her shoulder at the viewer) draws on corsetry fashions rather than actual anatomy, evoking fashion’s aestheticising power on art – even in the slightly gory case of a woman’s ribs. Robert Wun and Thomas Browne Couture have since offered their own interpretations, with muscular, dressed embodiment implied through sequins and tissue-thin leaves of fabric.

However, bodily shapes also resurface in art, with Niki de Saint Phalle’s exuberantly coloured, full-figured woman in her sculpture Nana and Serpent, adversely conjuring the extraordinary corsetry of Michaela Stark. Stark’s garments redefine beauty ideals through reshaping the body in an unconventional way, maintaining a respect for the individual wearer’s physique by emphasising curves in a technique combining custom-made lingerie and references to the Shibari rope-tying method. The theme essentially conveys a deeply embodied artistic and sensual relationship with the body, at a time when getting back in touch with our own humanity is no bad thing.

Of course, such themes often get lost in the Met Gala’s media whirlwind. Craftsmanship falls secondary to the celebrity, completing the paradox that the stars provide an unmissable platform for a brand’s garments, often footing the bill for celebrity attendance. Yet costume art (when taken more literally) also implies the painstaking haute couture process used to create the gowns: a slow, personally tailored technique antithetical to fast fashion’s constant churn. Unfortunately, not the paradigm of sustainability either, the slower ethos of high fashion is nonetheless applicable to student wardrobes. Elevating her second-hand shopping to Gucci for the 2022 Met Gala, Billie Eilish’s pale green and peach gown used deadstock fabric to create an ensemble from entirely pre-existing elements. This evokes recent online trends for garment embellishment, using simple and quick sewing techniques to upgrade an item that owners had fallen out of love with. It proves a cheaper way of updating personal style, as well as a welcome revision break. Following a viral recreation of a cardigan worn by Harry Styles in lockdown, JW Anderson released the original crochet pattern with a tutorial. Sustainability in fashion is collaborative, as healthy for our wellbeing as for our wardrobes.

The prime example of sustainable, collaborative costume art in Oxford comes from an unexpected tradition. Oxford’s month of May is heralded by an altogether different celebration than the Met Gala, marking the start of summer through pagan and Celtic origins. For many students, the early morning at Magdalen Tower is addled with hangovers and sleep deprivation, but it is still often possible to spot the Green Man in the crowds and various Morris dancing troupes. With feathers, flowers, and leaves in hair, the materials used to indicate summer’s return are naturally tied to the season. Furthermore, the costumes worn by such celebratory groups are often collaboratively handmade or embellished, passed down and adjusted through generations.

Social media slow fashion trends reflect what has long been embedded in folk and May Day traditions. This is most evident with the Jack in the Green figure, a more modern spectacle in Oxford tradition that involves someone donning a huge wicker frame, which is covered in greenery and ribbons. Of course, this is linked to a more spiritual vision of costume art, posing a locally-grounded perspective on clothing sustainability. The Met’s own take on the theme will inevitably come outfitted with billionaires and celebrities vying for coverage at an event that feels notably detached from the current economically divided world. Yet, as Oxford students, we can take a theme already embedded in city traditions and use it as a sustainable fashion impetus for rewearing.

‘I’m not campaigning for any particular point of view’: Sam Freedman on government, the Conservatives, and writing with his father

Melissa Eddon
-
0
‘I’m not campaigning for any particular point of view’: Sam Freedman on government, the Conservatives, and writing with his father

Sam Freedman is one of Britain’s foremost political analysts. I spoke with him after his appearance on a panel at St Antony’s College, Oxford, where he discussed the flaws of contemporary British politics. As co-author of Britain’s most popular political Substack ‘Comment is Freed’, Senior Fellow at the Institute for Government, and a contributor to a number of respected British publications, Freedman has the opinions of a journalist and the knowledge of a policy maker. 

In our discussion, Freedman’s answers are measured and carry a certain nuance, a habit from a life “half in that world” of Westminster and Whitehall, but stabilised by one foot firmly planted in academia and research.

His passion for politics was clear even from childhood. Freedman was twelve at the time of Norman Lamont’s resignation as Chancellor in 1993: “I remember running through my school trying to tell everyone in excitement, and everyone was like ‘what the hell are you doing’”. He laughs fondly at his childhood enthusiasm, reflecting: “I was an unusual child, always very obsessed with politics.”

Freedman is an Oxford alumnus, having completed an undergraduate degree and a subsequent MPhil in History at Magdalen College. He looks back at his time in Oxford with great fondness: “Probably like quite a few students, I look back and think: why did I wake up at one o’clock in the afternoon every day, and not take the opportunity to have the time to think and read in the way you never get when you’re actually working.” For Freedman, university was packed with amateur dramatics – directing and producing – as well as meeting his wife. 

His transition from academia to employment was driven by a desire for change. After a stint at the Independent Schools Council, he continued to focus on education and moved to a research role at Policy Exchange in 2007. He describes it as “luck” that this coincided with Michael Gove, one of the think tank’s founding chairmen, being promoted to Shadow Secretary of State for Education. “I was in a very odd position, being a policy person in a political world”, Freedman says. “Gove knew that, and hired me anyway.” 

Though much of his time was spent developing ideas that would find themselves in the Conservative Party’s 2010 manifesto, he takes care to distance himself from a particular affiliation. “I was never actually a Conservative, and I was never a member of the Conservative Party”, Freedman explains. “I had been a member of the Labour Party, and I liked what New Labour had done on education policy.” For Freedman, his work with the Conservative Party was an attempt to “create some continuity between what I thought New Labour would have wanted to continue doing on education policy, and what a new government would do”. 

I try to pin him down somewhere on the political spectrum, but he seems disillusioned with the very act of political categorisation. “Lots of people would describe me as a centrist dad”, he says, but this label doesn’t sit right: “It doesn’t mean anything.” Socially, Freedman describes himself as “very liberal…more liberal than the average person in the country by quite a distance on subjects like immigration”. In terms of economics? “I’m never quite sure what I think”, he says. “Sometimes I feel very left-wing, and sometimes I feel quite liberal.” 

Upon the Conservative victory in 2010, Freedman became a policy advisor, spending three years working on the new Conservative Government’s policy agenda. His colleagues from this time have become well-known, and highly controversial characters in British politics, but Freedman’s insight cuts through their facades. “Some people present in public exactly as they are in person”, he notes. Here he points to former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who in Freedman’s eyes is “performing constantly, even in private”. 

He sees more nuance in the character of those like Dominic Cummings, former chief adviser to Johnson, whose “cunning genius” facade falls in private. Often getting into fights with people online, Cummings would “have these manic episodes, where he would…get very hysterical”. 

Freedman’s time in Westminster taught him that politics is less about the individuals and more about the institutions. “A lot of them were designed in the 19th century for a completely different kind of politics.” Freedman jokingly adds that wanting to be a politician in this system makes one “slightly crazy…a sociopath”. From what he’s seen, the job is exceedingly tough: it is not particularly well paid in comparison to other jobs based in London, one must endure an “astonishing” level of abuse, and the entry-level position as a backbencher is “pretty thankless”. “Either you have to be obsessed with attention and status…or you have to really, really care about changing the world in a positive way.” 

I ask him how the deep-seated public hatred of Keir Starmer sits with him in this context. “I don’t quite know where it comes from… but I don’t think he’s been a particularly effective prime minister.” He attributes part of the uproar to a hostile media set-up. The “clickbait” culture has drawn on our more pessimistic instincts. “It’s shifted everything towards a much more aggressive and negative posture, which then makes politicians more defensive”. Ultimately, it’s a vicious cycle, and one he tries to avoid with his Substack. “I just try to be accurate…I’m not campaigning for any particular point of view.”

In terms of his go-tos for news consumption, he lists The Economist, the Financial Times, Bloomberg, and the New York Times. If you’re looking for a trustworthy news source, Freedman recommends “ones that are read by people in finance, because they want accurate information…money doesn’t lie to money”. Reading news sources from both ends of the spectrum seems to be a key way for Freedman to get a feel of the political climate: “I have subscriptions to basically everything”. 

His own role in the UK media ecosystem is shared with his father, co-writer at ‘Comment is Freed’. So how does that dynamic work? “We read each other’s pieces, but we cover quite different areas, and we have quite different styles.” Any reader of ‘Comment is Freed’ will know that Sam Freedman focuses on domestic politics, whereas his father takes an international focus. “Dad is a military historian…and he has a proper historian’s way of writing about these conflicts…whereas I’m more of a kind of journalist, so I tend to be more opinionated in my pieces.” 

I ask him what Substack offers in journalism in comparison to the average newspaper column. Not only is there more freedom when choosing what to write about, but Freedman finds he can write “at a length that no newspaper would ever allow”, with most of his pieces averaging around 3,000 words. “I prefer the freedom and the space to go into depth.” 

In the world of 24/7 media, public memory is much weaker than it once was, and scandals quickly recede from memory. For Freedman, a key example of this is the 2008 Financial Crash. “We have this way of talking about economic policy, as if Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves should just be fixing the economy, without ever really talking about the underlying structural problems…that the financial crisis threw up. Since it happened, we have just gone back to a fairly similar financial system to what we had before, which feels very vulnerable…We had the crisis, it passed, and now we are sort of pretending it didn’t happen.” This wilful ignorance, on the part of both politicians and the public, is the root of many political problems. 

I point to one of the changes often lauded as the solution to the plague of short-termism and political polarisation in Westminster: a change in the electoral system. Whilst Freedman is in favour, he argues it has been misjudged by left-wingers. “A lot of people overestimate the value of changing the electoral system in terms of how it would fit their politics.” He points to the progressive left, some of whom hold the belief that the change would see them dominate come election time. Yet, as Freedman makes clear, European countries with more proportional electoral systems still see right-wing parties flourish. For Freedman, a desire to change the electoral system should not be rooted in the perceived benefit to one’s personal political leanings, but rather “because of the underlying unfairness of the system”. 

Freedman argues that the peak of First Past the Post’s effectiveness has come and gone. With the recent insurgence of Reform and the Green Party into core Conservative and Labour Party territory, the two-party system seems increasingly obsolete. “It’s become impossible to justify, because you have five parties within 10-15 points of each other.” Freedman believes it will be a long, drawn-out and uncomfortable journey to change. “Right now, a lot of Labour MPs would acknowledge in private that the system doesn’t work, but they are not going to change it because it would hurt them. It might be that you need to have one or two elections with a very messy hung parliament before things change.” 

Whilst Freedman predicts change within his lifetime, by the end of the conversation, I’m left with the feeling that the flaws of contemporary British politics won’t be “fixed” anytime soon. Freedman, however, seems to be the kind of voice we need in the current political climate: one of nuance, pragmatism, and integrity. 

The Oxford donors in the Epstein files

Beatrix Arnold and Stanley Smith
-
0
The Oxford donors in the Epstein files

CW: Rape, sexual violence, paedophilia, sex trafficking.

Stephen Schwarzman, Reid Hoffman, Len Blavatnik, David Reuben. These four billionaires have collectively donated over £340 million to the University of Oxford. They are the faces of the University’s financial strategy, which readily accepts the philanthropy of the rich and powerful, notwithstanding the controversy this can sometimes generate. In return, their names have been plastered across the city: from the Schwarzman Centre for the Humanities to the Blavatnik School of Government to Reuben College. 

The ‘Epstein files’ – the documents held by the United States Department of Justice regarding the criminal investigations into the paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein – feature the names of these donors amongst the various emails, schedules, and guest lists. All of these are dated after 2008, when Epstein was publicly accused and prosecuted for soliciting prostitution from a minor. While there is no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of any of these wealthy benefactors, the release of the files in the winter of 2025/2026 has undoubtedly added a new dimension to the perennial debate about the role of billionaire benefactors at Oxford University.  

The release of the ‘Epstein files’ 

The process which eventually resulted in the release of the ‘Epstein files’ began more than 20 years ago. Investigation into the financier’s crimes was initiated in 2005, after a parent reported to police in Palm Beach, Florida, that Epstein had paid her 14-year-old stepdaughter to remove items of clothing and massage him. They soon identified more than 30 girls between the ages of 14 and 18 who had similar accounts of sexual abuse. This proved sufficient for a Palm Beach County grand jury to indict Epstein in 2006 on a state felony charge of soliciting prostitution. 

The case was referred to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), raising the possibility that Epstein could be convicted on a federal charge, which could have landed him with a life imprisonment sentence. However, the US Attorney’s office for the Southern District of Florida instead offered Epstein a plea deal, promising to end its investigation if Epstein pleaded guilty to two state charges, agreed to accept a prison term, and was registered as a sex offender. 

Crucially, the deal included a now-notorious non-prosecution agreement, in which the federal prosecutors’ office granted immunity against federal charges to Epstein and “any other co-conspirators”. Epstein’s victims were not informed of the non-prosecution agreement, which was filed under seal, and only became public knowledge in 2009 after a judge ordered its publication. Taking this deal, Epstein pleaded guilty to state charges of solicitation of prostitution and solicitation of prostitution of a minor under the age of 18 and was sentenced to 18 months in jail. During his imprisonment, he was granted leave for twelve hours a day to work at one of his foundations. In July 2009, he was released from jail, having served fewer than 13 months.

In the following years, more accusations emerged alleging an organised sex trafficking operation run by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, his partner. The latter is now serving a 20-year prison term for conspiring with Epstein to sexually abuse minors. In July 2019, Epstein was arrested again and charged by federal prosecutors in New York with having sex trafficked minors, to which he pleaded not guilty. Before his trial could begin, however, Epstein was found dead in the Manhattan detention centre in which he was held; his death was ruled a suicide by New York authorities. 

Since 2019, Epstein’s crimes have become the centre of a political maelstrom, partly on account of the litany of famous figures with whom he was frequently associated. In the United States, calls came from both sides of the political divide between Republicans and Democrats for the information held by the Department of Justice to be made publicly available.

This culminated in both houses of the US Congress voting in 2025 to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which ordered the Justice Department to release all the material it had pertaining to the criminal investigation into Epstein by 19th December that year. The bill was signed by President Trump, whose position on it had been unclear; something many attributed to his own personal connections to the deceased financier. 

The release of these ‘Epstein files’ has already unleashed significant political fallout on both sides of the Atlantic. In the UK, it resulted in the dismissal of Peter Mandelson – an Oxford University alumnus, former honorary fellow of St Catherine’s College, and, in 2024, candidate for Oxford University Chancellor – from his position as British Ambassador to the US, raising questions about the process of his appointment, which now threatens to destabilise Keir Starmer’s premiership. 

Reid Hoffman

While Mandelson’s links to Epstein have generated headlines across the UK, and the University has sought to distance itself from association with him, another high-profile figure associated with the University of Oxford, and mentioned in the ‘Epstein files’, has received comparatively muted attention, namely Reid Hoffman. After graduating from Wolfson College with an MA in Philosophy in 1993, Hoffman accumulated his estimated net worth of $2.6 billion by founding LinkedIn, the career networking service. In 2016, he shared a portion of these profits with his alma mater, donating $1 million to establish The Oxford Foundry, an initiative to support entrepreneurship at the Saïd Business School. 

The publication of the ‘Epstein files’ revealed that Hoffman’s ties with the convicted sex offender were more extensive than Hoffman had previously stated. Initially meeting through Hoffman’s efforts to fundraise for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), the LinkedIn founder’s relationship with Epstein included exchanging gifts – among them dumbbells and a metal surfer statue – as well as staying at Epstein’s island in the Caribbean. 

Not only was Hoffman aware of Epstein’s criminal offences, but he actively sought to help protect the convicted paedophile from reputational damage. In 2014, Epstein was accused by a court filing in Florida of trafficking an underage girl to Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and forcing her to engage in sexual acts with him. Virginia Guiffre later revealed herself to be the girl in question. Mountbatten Windsor has repeatedly denied that he was involved in any wrongdoing. The Department of Justice files show that Hoffman not only did not disassociate himself from the financier but also offered to help with the media attention that had concentrated around him. In January 2015, Hoffman emailed Epstein saying, “been giving a bit of thought to how I can help with recent press fu…. Mostly looking for help on the on-line front [sic]”.  “Nothing to do during a storm, but hunker down, and wait until it blows over”, came Epstein’s response. 

Hoffman has issued several public statements about his “regret” over his relationship with Epstein. After the publication of the ‘Epstein files’ by the Department of Justice, Hoffman said on X: “I only knew Jeffrey Epstein because of a fundraising relationship with MIT which I very much regret.” Reid Hoffman has not been accused of any wrongdoing by the alleged victims of Epstein. 

Hoffman did not respond to Cherwell’s request for comment. 

EFTA00867052, US Department of Justice. Image credit: PDM via the US Department of Justice.

Stephen Schwarzman

Another influential businessman who appears in the ‘Epstein Files’ is Stephen Schwarzman, co-founder of Blackstone and the principal donor behind the Schwarzman Centre for the Humanities. His £150 million gift to Oxford, announced in 2019 (later increased to £185 million), was celebrated as transformative. However, his political and social entanglements have long provoked controversy. His connections to Republican politicians have drawn criticism from parts of the University community, notably leading to the formation of the campaign Oxford Against Schwarzman, uneasy about the optics of accepting funds from figures associated with polarising administrations.  

According to the released documents, Epstein’s interest in Schwarzman dates back to at least 2010. In one email exchange, the redacted correspondent suggests approaching the billionaire for a business venture: “I think attaching to Blackstone might be good idea. What do you think ? [sic]”. Epstein appears to agree, though not without some reservations: “at the right level , yes. , however the egos their are rampant [sic].” Concerning Schwarzman himself, however, Epstein’s assessment seems to be rather more positive, calling him “terrific”. The cache of emails does not contain evidence of direct correspondence or interaction, either prior to or following this email exchange, between the two men. 

The Department of Justice files show that, in February 2013, Epstein received an email from an external Public Relations (PR) agency purportedly inviting Epstein on behalf of Schwarzman, Jared Kushner, Donald Trump, Harvey Weinstein, and 24 others, to “cocktails and light supper” to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the New York Observer. It is not known whether Epstein ended up attending the small gathering.

Nor was this the last invitation the convicted paedophile would receive. In January 2015, Epstein received another email from the same PR agency inviting him, on behalf of Christine and Stephen Schwarzman, among eight others, to “attend our gathering at Christine and Stephen Schwarzman’s home” to celebrate the “incredible success” of the film The Imitation Game, which was produced by Schwarzman’s son. It is not known whether Epstein accepted this invitation. There is no evidence in either case that Schwarzman himself personally sought or knew of the invitation to Epstein. 

Stephen Schwarzman has not been accused of any wrongdoing by alleged victims of Jeffrey Epstein. There is no evidence of direct correspondence or association between Schwarzman and Jeffrey Epstein in the released files. A spokesperson for Schwarzman said: “It would be categorically false and grossly irresponsible to claim or imply that Steve had any relationship with this despicable individual… Blackstone is one of the world’s largest financial institutions and it is hardly surprising that someone working in finance would be aware of our firm. But that does not in any way suggest a relationship between Blackstone and this individual.”

EFTA00355074, US Department of Justice. Image credit: PDM via the US Department of Justice.

David Reuben

David Reuben is another influential Oxford donor whose name makes an appearance in the files released by the Department of Justice. Making his billions with his brother Simon in the metals business, David Reuben now focuses his efforts on venture capital, private equity, and the real estate business. 

The University of Oxford has benefited substantially from the philanthropy of the Reuben brothers. In 2012, the Reuben Foundation established the Reuben Scholarship programme for undergraduates from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds. In 2020, the University received an £80 million donation from the foundation, which they marked by renaming Parks College, the first new Oxford college since 1990, to Reuben College. In 2022, the University awarded the Reuben brothers the Sheldon Medal, the highest honour the University can bestow upon donors.

David Reuben seems to have appeared on Epstein’s radar in 2010, less than a year after the paedophile’s release from jail. Peggy Siegal, an American media and entertainment publicist and regular correspondent of Epstein, described Reuben as “a major nice guy”, and told Epstein “you need to meet him… you would like him.” This appears to have piqued Epstein’s curiosity, as he tells Siegal to “bring him over tomorrow for tea”. 

On the same day, prior to their proposed meeting, Epstein can be seen attempting to find out more about Reuben; in one email, the redacted correspondent mentions his “very murky past”, as well as his “huge assets”. In addition to this, Epstein contacted Peter Mandelson in an effort to dig up more information on Reuben: “david reuben, wants to come see me today„ do you know him [sic]”. 

David Reuben has not been accused of wrongdoing by any alleged victims of Jeffrey Epstein. There is no evidence of direct correspondence between David Reuben and Jeffrey Epstein.

 David Reuben did not respond to Cherwell’s request for comment. 

EFTA01826629, US Department of Justice. Image credit: PDM via US Department of Justice.

Len Blavatnik

The billionaire business magnate, Len Blavatnik, currently the third richest man in Britain, is one of the most recognisable names among the University’s primary beneficiaries. In 2010, he donated £75 million to the University to fund the Blavatnik School of Government, which offers a number of postgraduate courses in public policy. The University’s acceptance of the donation was met with controversy at the time, largely on account of the billionaire’s alleged links to sanctioned Russian oligarchs. 

As far as can be ascertained from the email exchanges found in the released files, Epstein sought to foster an association with Blavatnik over the course of several years. On 16th September 2010, Epstein’s executive assistant, Lesley Groff, extended an invitation to the billionaire to his New York townhouse for dinner with Epstein and Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister. The meeting was described as “very private , no agenda [sic]”. On the same day, Blavatnik responded, confirming receipt of the invitation. A few days later, he emailed again: “it seems like i will not be able to be there. many thansk and say hello to Jeffrey [sic]”. 

In 2012, the former US Secretary of the Treasury Larry Summers, in an email exchange with Epstein, informed him that he “visited Len Blavatnik he is your neighbor”. In the same year, an email from Allison Reddington details Epstein’s schedule for his visit to Cannes. The itinerary for the 20th May includes “Harvey Weinstein and Len Blavatnik lunch on boat”. There is no indication of whether this lunch took place.

The chain of correspondence seems to indicate that Blavatnik remained in Epstein’s social sphere. An email from Groff to Epstein on the 12th May 2014 titled ‘Reminder: Possible Dinner Party Mon. May 19th?’ lists “Len Blavatnik” under the heading “Guests”. Other invitees included Woody Allen, Larry Summers, and “Schwartman [sic]”. Epstein’s regard for Blavatnik appears to have continued well into the 2010s. In an email exchange dated to the 24th September 2017, the redacted correspondent asks Epstein: “btw, do you know any adequate Russian oligarchs?” Epstein replied: “adequate? len blavatnik”. 

Len Blavatnik has not been accused of any wrongdoing by alleged victims of Epstein. Blavatnik declined to comment.  

EFTA02421173, US Department of Justice. Image credit: PDM via US Department of Justice.

The University of Oxford was approached for comment.

Peacocks

Rory Maguire
-
0
Peacocks

Their grounds abut a large colonial on Staten Island:

Five or six of them

Swaggering along verdant lawns,

Brick walkways, man-made ponds –

Such bravado. What pretty boys!

Pets of somebody, clearly.

They preen each other,

The astonishing blue of their feathers,

Slashed with generous reams of gold and emerald.

They make spectacles of themselves – oh the notions!

Little quivers ripple through them, like air in a desert.

No peahens, no audience but us.

Limbo full of pick-up artists.

It is indeed their mating season, I am told

By the woman with the long nails and Red Bull

Who owns the house.

“Who’s this all for, then?” I ask.

Oxford University to make changes to consent training modules

Anisha Mohammed
-
0
Oxford University to make changes to consent training modules

The University of Oxford has reported that 38% of new students completed its online consent training in the 2024-25 academic year, according to the latest Student Welfare and Support Services (SWSS) report. The figure represents an increase from 33% the previous year and an almost 80% increase in the number of college staff accessing the training, showing clear improvement in the development of the training scheme. The report also outlines plans for mandatory training for all students to start in the next academic year. 

The University has strongly encouraged students to complete the ‘Consent for Students’ module developed by the charity Brook, which covers issues such as harassment, boundaries, and bystander intervention. While some colleges require completion, approaches have varied, contributing to uneven uptake.

The Sexual Harassment and Violence Support Service (SHVSS) told Cherwell of their plans to further change the module to “a bespoke, in-house online training programme to strengthen how Oxford prevents and responds to harassment and sexual misconduct” that has been “co-designed with Oxford students and is grounded in the context of Oxford’s collegiate community, signposting to collegiate as well as central University support”. 

This includes plans to make consent training mandatory for all incoming students for the 2026-27 academic year as part of the registration process and strongly recommended for returning students, in line with new regulatory expectations under the Office for Students’ Condition E6. The regulation, which came into full effect last August, requires universities to take stronger action to prevent and respond to harassment and sexual misconduct, including through training, clear reporting processes, and student support.

Alongside the online module, the University has expanded in-person provision with ‘Healthy Relationships and Consent’ workshops. The SHVSS team told Cherwell they have been “delivering the programme across 18 colleges this academic year (up from 15 colleges in 2024/25), with 118 student facilitators, and trained around 2,000 students”, with this being “in addition to any local arrangements that colleges may make.” The SWSS report describes this as part of a “significant expansion” of preventative activity, intended to complement support services and promote cultural change. The University has framed the expansion of training as part of a broader strategy to strengthen awareness, reporting confidence, and institutional response to harassment and sexual misconduct.

The annual report of the SHVSS further highlights rising demand for support. The service received 201 new referrals in 2024-25, continuing an upward trend in recent years. The report notes increasing complexity in cases and emphasises the importance of prevention and early intervention alongside reactive support.

With continuous improvement on the content, enforcement and monitoring of the new requirement and consent module, the completion rates are on an upward trajectory. The SWSS report notes that evaluation and monitoring will be a priority going forward, particularly as the University seeks to ensure that provision remains “evidence-based, effective and inclusive”.

How places are made: A meditation in the City of Love

Rebecca Bushee
-
0
How places are made: A meditation in the City of Love

Springtime bloomed around me, pink and bright. Soft white petals were adrift on the warm afternoon breeze, slanted April sunlight glanced off my cheek. The city, too, was magnificent. Looming buildings decorated with artifice and care, streets paved with stone – the greenery only added to the majesty. The botanical gardens unfurled before me, rolling with colour and life. A man was humming quietly to himself on a nearby bench. It sounded romantic, sort of high and yellow like those sweet, bright tulips. I lost myself in the sprawl of Paris for a time, eyes permanently glued upwards. My latte was perfectly rich and sweet, the air was warm and clear. It was an idyllic day. 

Still, there was something missing. Even amidst all its splendorous sights, the city held no memory. The echoes of a previous trip came to me in moments: that distinctive intersection, a particular building, or the crêpe shop on Île Saint-Louis. But mostly the streets felt empty. They didn’t evoke much feeling at all. It took me time to understand the vacant feeling in my chest. I was awestruck, certainly. Yet the lack of memory felt striking. I began to think, how can I feel nothing for a city as beautiful as Paris? What is it that really makes a place? 

At some point, I wandered into a ceramics shop, packed with a zorn palette of creatures large and small: frogs with gazes turned towards the sky, cats in raincoats standing in terrified anticipation. Reds, yellows, whites, and greens; they clinked and rattled as my steps shook the floor. There was something warm and deep about this room – I felt their eyes upon me as I ran my hand across their glazed and sculpted forms. Cluttered and cramped, it felt a bit like home. The shopkeeper told me that they made the pieces just upstairs, and that it had been her passion project for the past decade. There was character to that room. The bright colours and careless arrangement; everything was exactly where it should have been. 

I think that places are made. Natural beauty, grand architecture – they’re all important, but they only go so far. Places are formed from memories etched into streets, from ghosts which dwell in between moments. They’re shaped by the dreams and aspirations which have been poured into quiet, hidden hollows, like that shop in Paris. I think of cities I’ve called home: Philadelphia, Providence, Oxford. Each holds a different version of myself. 

In Philadelphia, passing through the square by the fountain conjures our laughing voices in the dark – eyes straining towards the starry sky, trying to catch a glimpse of Jupiter. I remember lying down in the early dawn light, laughing at Perry’s blue van, and the telescope he could never seem to place just right. I feel full and warm, lingering in that park where I had my first date. For me, that was the essence of springtime: eating iced treats, just nervous enough to be unsure of where to put our hands. The eventual clasp of his fingers in mine, his shining brown eyes and the cherry blossoms which were just beginning to flower. 

In Providence, the walk to our café was always carefree; sunlit pilgrimages to warm pastries full of flashcards and gossip. The main green usually ripples in the autumn light – full of familiar faces, music, and games. I picture lying on a blanket among people I care for deeply, and watching the afternoon slip by. The pool holds my highest highs and the depths of my sadness: each emotion picked through relentlessly in between sets. His apartment – learning one esoteric ancient language or another, in between trips to the pizza shop next door. We must have talked until the store closed. Each building holds a different subject I studied in the early hours of the morning, a different coffee which carried me through the term. 

Even Oxford holds memories, now. Walks from Lincoln, Brasenose, or Balliol accommodation at 3 a.m. after a particularly spirited afters, tracing the well-worn path to my room down by the river. Drawing ridiculous caricatures on menus, somehow turning a Wetherspoons into a site of great sacredness. Debriefs in our coffee shop, sipping lavender-infused drinks and refusing to get any revision done. Then there’s the late nights in the Schwarzmann, spinning on stools underneath that unblinking eye, and telling secrets in the dark.

It hit me when I walked down Cornmarket for the first time since the vac: the weight of all of these memories. Oxford has always had grand architecture, peaceful paths down by the river, and whispering meadows. But in the beginning, it had not been made yet. Not for me, at least. It felt empty. Full of possibility, sure, but vacant. Now, going into Trinity, I feel the strength of each emotion, each recollection. To be made is to be remembered, filled with personhood and character. That shop in Paris was made, shaped from the weight of passion and care. Philadelphia and Providence were made by the people and places which matter to me. Oxford has been made by all of these things, good and bad. I feel every moment as if I am living it again. Perhaps that is what it means to make a place. 

Oxford MP takes Ultimate Picture Palace Campaign to Parliament

Gabriela Junqueira Goncalves
-
0
Oxford MP takes Ultimate Picture Palace Campaign to Parliament

The MP for Oxford East, Dame Anneliese Dodds, raised the ongoing campaign to save the Ultimate Picture Palace (UPP) on Jeune Street in parliament last Monday, urging the government to “go further” to protect “community assets like the UPP”.  

The independent cinema is struggling to go ahead with renovations to the premises on account of uncertainty over the length of its tenancy. Its landlord, Oriel College, has so far refused to extend its lease beyond 2037, citing plans to create a “Fifth Quad” to accommodate graduate students.

“Too often, as in the case of the UPP, we see a David and Goliath situation for communities that want to control local assets”, Dodds told the House of Commons in an adjournment debate last Monday. She argued that the challenges faced by the UPP reflect wider difficulties experienced by community-owned assets across the UK. The dispute has also raised broader concerns over the University’s gradual encroachment into the town of Oxford. 

The UPP’s management told Cherwell: “We very much welcome Anneliese Dodds raising the situation facing the Ultimate Picture Palace in Parliament, and we are hugely grateful for her support as her comments are an important recognition of the serious challenge we face. Without a longer lease … our community-owned cinema – recognised nationally as a leader in cultural cinema for its programme, access, and audience engagement – cannot unlock the investment it needs to survive.”

The lack of long-term security has already prevented the cinema from accessing major grant funding, raising concerns that it could become financially unviable before its current lease expires. Executive director of the UPP, Micaela Tuckwell, told Cherwell that she hopes both the College and Picturehouse can “collaborate” and incorporate the cinema “within their Fifth Quad plans”.

Dodds echoed this in Parliament: “There are some brilliant examples of higher education institutions working with arts organisations in the UK, and such co-operation could make the UPP an even more special place. So far, Oriel College appears not to have recognised the potential benefits of engaging with the Ultimate Picture Palace in this way. I urge it to reconsider, and to grant the UPP its long-term lease.”

In response to Dodds’ comments, Oriel College told Cherwell it had “no plans to extend the lease at this early stage in the tenancy.” The College added: “We are very proud of our heritage cinema and are in dialogue with the new managers about how to ensure it remains open to the wider public.”

Founded in 1911, the UPP is the oldest picture house in Oxford. It is currently owned by over 1,200 stakeholders in the local community and is a registered Asset of Community Value (ACV) by Oxford City Council, which recognises places of social or cultural significance to a local area. The petition to keep the cinema open surpassed 20,000 signatures this week. 

Dodd’s appeal comes amidst the government’s proposal for an English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, which aims to introduce stronger protections for ACVs such as the UPP. The bill would create a ‘Community Right to Buy’ provision, giving local groups the first opportunity to purchase such assets, alongside a fair market valuation and additional time to raise funds. However, as currently drafted, the policy would apply only if the asset were to be put up for sale by its owner, meaning the UPP, which is facing an unrenewed lease, would not be protected under the Bill. 

Speaking in support of the measures, Dodds told the House of Commons: “The community right to buy will mark a landmark shift”, but added, “we need to go further”. 

1234...2,584Page 3 of 2,584

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by Jamie Ashley