Wednesday 20th May 2026
Blog Page 3

St Catz reopens dining hall following RAAC renovations

Anisha Mohammed
-
0
St Catz reopens dining hall following RAAC renovations

St Catherine’s College has reopened its dining hall, following more than two years of disruption caused by the discovery of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) in parts of its estate.

The issue, which forms part of a wider national concern over RAAC in public buildings, led to the closure of key facilities, including the original dining hall. RAAC, a lightweight material commonly used in mid-20th century construction, has been identified as structurally vulnerable, prompting precautionary closures across schools, hospitals, and universities.

In response, St Catz introduced temporary arrangements to maintain dining provision, installing a temporary tent structure. 

The reopening of the dining hall represents a major step in the College’s recovery, with St Catz describing the moment to Cherwell as “an exciting day”. In a statement, the College told Cherwell they had taken “a careful and precautionary approach throughout”, prioritising the safety and wellbeing of students, staff, and visitors while maintaining day-to-day College life. They added that its focus had been on restoring core facilities “as quickly and safely as possible”, while minimising disruption.

Alongside the dining hall, other parts of the estate, including the JCR, have now returned to use. The College confirmed that further areas are expected to reopen in the coming months as remediation work continues. St Catz told Cherwell that the reopening of key facilities represents “strong progress” in its programme of works addressing RAAC on site.

While the College continues to navigate the long-term impact of the material, the return of the dining hall restores a central hub of student life, marking a step toward normality following a prolonged period of disruption.

Who gets to speak? The rise of the male podcast epidemic

Amy Lawson
-
0
Who gets to speak? The rise of the male podcast epidemic

With Trinity in full swing, and the mornings finally getting light enough to justify a pre-8am wakeup, I’ve started running earlier in the day (in spite of the pollen count’s mission to decimate anyone brave enough to stray into Oxford’s green spaces). And, as those runs have grown longer, so has my need for something to fill them, particularly since my carefully curated Y2K playlist is wearing thin. No stranger to the world of podcasts, but definitely someone who has largely remained firmly on the fringes of that particular corner of the internet, I decided it might be time to swap my beloved playlists for something different. 

As a staunch fan of Dish – a food podcast hosted by Angela Hartnett and Nick Grimshaw, which interviews celebrity guests on their favourite dishes and relationship with food – and very much a creature of habit, I found it hard to branch out. Perhaps it’s because of sheer saturation: on their website, the Podcast Index reports a total of 4,671,900 podcasts ‘registered’ with them (each one required to have at least three episodes, and at least one of those to be over three minutes long), and such high numbers make innovation within the genre challenging. It’s hard to make your mark in the podcast scene when it is, format-wise, literally just people talking, making reliance on the entertainment value of a particular topic imperative. Or maybe it was simply my fried attention span, which struggled when confronted with 50 minutes of chatting.  

I couldn’t help but notice, however, that one of the reasons for my disillusionment with the genre was likely the glaring gender imbalance, often when it came to the most successful, well-known podcasts. A quick glance at the top ten in Spotify’s UK Podcasts Charts is telling, with the chart dominated by podcasts written and produced by men, with the exception of The Rest is Entertainment, co-hosted by Marina Hyde and Richard Osman, The Rest is Politics US with Katty Kay and Anthony Scaramucci, and The News Agents, featuring top journalist Emily Maitlis. It is interesting, though, that when women’s voices do appear in this top ten, they are often present as part of an ensemble. This is not to downplay the importance of their voices, or what they have to say; however, the lack of representation of standalone female voices in this high-profile list should ring alarm bells. 

Similar numbers can be seen beyond Spotify. A 2025 study from Sounds Profitable suggests that twice as many men create podcasts as women. This is not to say that women don’t produce or host successful podcasts – and in fact, the same study informs us that female creators show better retention once they’re established – but when we consider, for example, the average UK listener on a homeward commute, their exposure to female-produced content is considerably less than it ought to be. 

There is also the fact that male-produced podcasts have increasingly become assimilated with the voices of the far right. Andrew Tate gained fame partly through his official channel, Tate Speech on the platform Rumble, where his ‘Emergency Meeting’ episodes provide discussions on legal situations and media debates. Right-wing public figures such as Ben Shapiro dominate top charts for conservative shows, and Infowars with Alex Jones has served as a long-standing platform for conspiracy theories and anti-globalist narratives since 1991, before its closure earlier this year (and, in an ironic twist of fate, it is set to be taken over by satirical newspaper The Onion).

This is the dark side of podcasting. Requiring little more than decent recording equipment and access to the internet, it becomes a platform for anyone willing to talk for over three minutes, where personal opinions are laid down as fact and dangerous narratives are bounced around in an echo-chamber soundproofed by male voices. It is easy to write off some of these ‘manosphere’ podcasts as meaningless prattle, and they have certainly been subject to parody – even four years ago, SNL’s ‘Podcast Set’ sketch, centring on a fired employee who is gifted a Fisher-Price ‘Podcast set for white guys’ at his leaving party, was right on the money – but the rhetoric used by many of these men gains currency outside of the podcast sphere. Indeed, the business model of many podcasts is such that, in order to avoid one-dimensionality, brand deals, spin-offs, live shows, and Patreon subscriptions, promoted on social media, build an ecosystem that reaches far beyond the recording studio. 

There is, I hasten to add, no shortage of high-quality, creative female-and-queer-produced podcasts around. And they are often highly successful – My Therapist Ghosted Me has sold out multiple nights at Dublin’s 3Arena for its live shows, whilst The Log Books, a podcast on LGBTQ+ history, won Best New Podcast at the British Podcast Awards in 2020. But it is not simply the presence of women’s voices in the podcast industry which is important – it’s the sense of intimacy which is often created. Listening to the same voices each week, often in the same, strangely personal settings – like my runs around Oxford, or washing dishes after making dinner – establishes a kind of companionship, which is part of what makes the medium so persuasive.

But not all forms of conversational intimacy are made equal. Podcasts such as Dish, with its rotating guests and easy cohost dynamic, feel balanced and genuinely dialogic, where conversation serves to exchange perspectives rather than consolidate authority. Other podcasts, however – not only those in the ‘manosphere’, but also those in its orbit, or those who parody it so closely that the distinction begins to collapse – rely on a different dynamic entirely. In these cases, the performed casualness of the medium can conceal something more ominous. When a lone voice speaks, at length and unchecked, confidence soon begins to resemble expertise, and this is the hallmark of many of these popular male-produced podcasts.

The issue, then, is not that men occupy these intimate listening spaces, but that the podcasting industry seems to reward the performance of masculine certainty within them. And in a medium built on this relationship between listener and speaker, the voices we spend hours listening to will inevitably come to shape the way we understand the world. As such, it may be time to listen a little more closely.  

Violent clash outside Oxford Union during visit of Sudanese prime minister

Beatrix Arnold and Stanley Smith
-
0
Violent clash outside Oxford Union during visit of Sudanese prime minister

A violent altercation broke out between the entourage of Prime Minister Kamil Idris of Sudan and protesters during Idris’ visit to the Oxford Union on Wednesday, 13th May. The incident occurred as Idris was exiting the Union after participating in a speaker event.

In a video seen by Cherwell, a crowd can be seen gathered around Idris’ car outside the Oxford Union, to protest the Sudanese prime minister’s visit to the debating society. Chants in Arabic of “Hurriya, salaam, wa ‘adaala” [“Freedom, peace, and justice”] and “madaniyya khiyar al-sha’b” [“civilian rule is the people’s choice”] can be heard from the protesters. 

The video shows a violent clash wherein a member of Idris’ entourage can be seen punching and pushing a man who was standing with the protesters. It is unclear from the video what provoked the altercation. The confrontation continues until Idris’ car drives off.

Idris was appointed prime minister of Sudan last year amidst the country’s ongoing civil war between the military-controlled government and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces. Opposition to the Union’s invitation of Idris voiced online cites the authoritarian nature of his government as well as accusations of war crimes committed by the Sudanese Armed Forces, particularly the killing of civilians and perpetration of sexual violence. 

The Rapid Support Forces have also been accused of war crimes, notably the mass-killing of civilians in the city of El Fasher in October, 2025. Amnesty International has reported the widespread use of sexual violence as a weapon of war by the paramilitary group.

In a statement posted on Instagram on Thursday, Oxford University Sudanese Society “unequivocally” condemned the violence, asserting that “the right to dissent is one of the bedrock conditions of life in this country, in this city, and at this institution”. They further stated that “the respect owed to Sudan’s valued diaspora is not optional, and it does not pause for a motorcade. Yesterday, that line was crossed”. The society extended its “solidarity to those affected”, and promised to “support them in whatever they choose to do next”. 

During the event at the Union, Idris was interviewed by Yousif Yahya, the son of a Sudanese career diplomat. 

Yousif Yahya told Cherwell: “I understand that some members of the Sudanese community at Oxford disagreed with the invitation and with my role in moderating the discussion.” However, he emphasised that “the purpose of the event was not endorsement, but scrutiny and engagement through public questioning. The interview addressed difficult and contested issues directly, including questions relating to the current political process and the future of civilian participation in Sudan.”

A spokesperson for the Oxford Union told Cherwell: “It is not unusual for the Society to invite current and former heads of state to be challenged by members. Our events are organised and moderated by students. It is established practice that those students who have a direct interest in the relevant speaker event will assist in running the event. In this instance, Idris was interviewed by a Sudanese student who also assisted with the organisation of the event.

“Further, Sudanese students were given priority to question Idris live. One asked ‘What would it take for you to resign?’, and another asked ‘What are you doing to end the war?’, for example. It would be deeply misleading to suggest that questions were unfairly controlled or censored. The Society cannot control the answers given by speakers, but it can certainly give a platform for exposure, challenge and debate.”

Idris’ invitation and the consequent protest come amid wider controversy about the individuals invited to speak at the Oxford Union. Earlier this term, the far-right anti-feminist YouTuber Carl Benjamin was disinvited from a debate shortly before it took place, following opposition from student groups. The Union has also invited Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, who identifies as Tommy Robinson, to speak at a debate in Week 5, a decision which has generated widespread backlash from both student organisations and within the Union itself. 

Kamil Idris was approached for comment. 

Translations of Arabic provided by Sofia O’Casey.

Why Minimalist Jewellery Keeps Winning on Campus

External Contributor
-
0
Why Minimalist Jewellery Keeps Winning on Campus

Campus style reflects a balance between practicality and personal expression, and jewellery plays a subtle but important role in that equation. Today, women’s jewellery on campus tends to favour clean, understated designs that can move easily between different parts of the day. From lectures to social events, students increasingly choose pieces that are easy to wear, adaptable, and quietly expressive.

Brands such as Edblad have become increasingly relevant within this shift toward minimalist campus fashion. Students are drawn to jewellery that combines simplicity with durability, allowing pieces to work across busy schedules and changing social settings. Scandinavian-inspired designs, known for their clean lines and understated elegance, fit naturally into modern student wardrobes where versatility and long-term wear matter more than overly trend-driven accessories.

Why Small Details Matter

Minimalist jewellery works well in student environments because it supports rather than dominates an outfit. With busy schedules and varied activities, accessories need to be reliable and versatile. Pieces that are comfortable and durable quickly become everyday essentials.

Quiet Pieces Fit Real Schedules

Student life rarely allows time for constant outfit changes. Jewellery that can transition easily from day to evening becomes more valuable.

  • Slim chains that layer or stand alone
  • Small hoops or studs that suit multiple settings
  • Simple rings that can be worn daily without discomfort
  • Lightweight bracelets that do not interfere with movement

These pieces integrate easily into different styles, whether paired with casual clothing or more formal outfits. Many students are drawn to brands like Edblad, where Scandinavian design principles focus on simplicity and function. Edblad creates nickel-safe jewellery in stainless steel, combining durability with a refined aesthetic. This makes the pieces suitable for frequent wear while maintaining a sense of understated sophistication.

Repeat Wear Signals Confidence

Fashion trends on campus have shifted away from constant novelty. According to insights highlighted in the State of Fashion, repeating the same accessories is no longer seen as a limitation but as a sign of consistency and personal style.

This shift aligns with practical considerations. Students often prefer fewer, higher-quality pieces that can be worn repeatedly across different outfits. Jewellery that maintains its appearance over time becomes part of a recognisable personal identity, rather than a temporary trend.

Subtle Style Still Feels Personal

Minimalist jewellery does not remove individuality; it reframes it. Small variations in layering, metal choice, or proportion allow students to express their style without relying on bold statement pieces.

This approach is also influenced by social media, where styling often focuses on detail rather than excess. A simple necklace or a set of rings can carry meaning through repetition and context. Over time, these pieces become associated with the wearer, adding depth to an otherwise minimal look.

Why This Style Continues To Last

Minimalist jewellery remains popular because it fits the realities of student life. It is affordable, durable, and easy to incorporate into daily routines. More importantly, it aligns with a broader shift toward thoughtful consumption and long-term use.

While bold accessories still have their place, everyday campus style favours pieces that are practical and adaptable. Jewellery that can be worn often, across different situations, offers lasting value. This combination of function and quiet expression ensures that minimalist designs continue to resonate with students.

Oxford and UN launch peace and security fellowship

Gavriella Epstein-Lightman
-
0
Oxford and UN launch peace and security fellowship

The University of Oxford and the United Nations have launched a new Peace and Security Fellowship.

The fellowship was established by Oxford’s Department of Politics and International Relations in partnership with the UN Department of Peace Operations. It brings serving UN practitioners to Oxford to undertake research on peacekeeping and conflict prevention.

The programme, which began on Monday, 27th April, lasts eight weeks. It sees ten fellows from diverse professional backgrounds working on individual research projects and presenting their findings in a closing seminar and final paper.

Professor Richard Caplan, the director of the Fellowship, and Professor of International Relations, told Cherwell the topics the fellows are focusing on are “very varied but they all speak to critically important issues for the United Nations today”. Focuses vary from strengthening the rule of law and accountability mechanisms in conflict and post-conflict environments, to exploring how UN peace operations can adapt to the evolving geopolitical order.

Professor David Doyle, Head of the Department of Politics and International Relations, told Cherwell: “All of the Fellows [sic] work on the frontline of peace and security for the UN in some of the most challenging contexts in the world.” Doyle explained that “this is an opportunity for them to take a step back and to conduct research, in an academic context… yet informed by their extensive practical experience”.

The Fellowship launches at a time of undeniable geopolitical volatility. Caplan highlighted to Cherwell that it is “precisely because the geopolitical situation is in flux, [that] it is imperative to think beyond traditional UN approaches to international peace and security”. He added, in this context, that “it is a fitting time to be re-examining how UN peace operations and related tools can better address today’s challenges”. He also emphasised that the University of Oxford will benefit from “the insights the fellows can offer into the work of the United Nations and multilateral organisations more broadly”.

The Fellowship is funded through a contribution from Sai Prakash Leo Muthu and Sairam Institutions, in memory of the late Leo Muthu, Founder Chairman of the Sairam Institutions, a group of over twenty educational institutions. Although the programme is not yet endowed, Caplan told Cherwell that he hopes to secure “further funding to be able to offer the fellowship on a regular basis”.The programme will culminate in a public lecture on Thursday, 18th June by Under-Secretary General of the UN, Jean-Pierre Lacroix, reflecting on the future of UN peace operations. Lacroix said that the fellowship offers UN practitioners the chance to “help shape a more effective and forward-looking United Nations”.

I became more at home when I left home

Neville Lai
-
0
I became more at home when I left home

I never felt more at home than when I was living thousands of miles away from home. It is indeed a paradox that many Chinese people living abroad know too well. Distance does not dilute identity – it sharpens it. What once felt ordinary at home suddenly becomes important, deliberate, and worth defending when you surround yourself with a different culture, language, and rhythm of life. 

It started with something as simple as food. Back home in Hong Kong, I took good Chinese food (to be precise, “yum cha”) for granted. Pu-erh tea was just what we were used to. Sauces were just sauces. But abroad, I began to hunt for authentic flavours with an almost religious fervour. I developed a true appreciation for well-aged Pu-erh – the deep, earthy taste that reveals itself gradually, layer by layer. The first boil, of course, is just a gentle rinse to awaken the tea leaves. I, too, craved the exact balance of spiciness found in specific Hong Kong-style sauces, like the difference between “spicy oil and spicy sauce”. The way of eating “Siu Mai” has to be balanced with sesame oil, the specific chilli oil and the right amount of soya sauce. I wasn’t just eating – I was preserving a piece of home.

Even the tableware started to matter. I became genuinely disappointed when a waiter handed me a fork and knife instead of chopsticks and a spoon. It wasn’t snobbery – it was the small daily reminder that the most natural way I interact with food was being replaced by something foreign and inappropriate. I also found myself paying attention to the blue and white porcelain plates and bowls in Chinese restaurants – quietly assessing whether they were cheap modern replicas or carried the elegant simplicity of Yuan or Ming dynasty aesthetics.

Food became my daily act of cultural resistance and reconnection.

The same shift happened with language and communication. At home, we used Chinese proverbs casually, without much thought. Abroad, I started researching their origins and backstories so I could explain them properly to my international friends. I wanted them to understand not just the words, but the centuries of wisdom and humour packed inside. At times, my Chinese friends and I would banter in Cantonese, playfully roasting Chinese stereotypes in that affectionate, insider way that we could. These gatherings felt like warm, familiar bubbles in an otherwise chilly, misunderstood setting.

Living abroad made me acutely aware of how much I missed the cultural shorthand – the jokes, the references, the unspoken understandings that don’t need explanation among fellow Chinese. We sought each other out not out of exclusion, but out of a deep need for that “safe haven” where we could relax, be ourselves, and speak freely without translating our souls, as though we want a hot meal for lunch, not a Tesco meal deal.

Even something as simple as colour took on new meaning. Back home, wearing red during the Lunar New Year was mostly about tradition. Abroad, it became an act of joyful compliance. I started wearing red more often – not just during Spring Festival, but whenever I felt the need to inject some vibrancy and cultural warmth into grey, British winters, a good way to remind myself, and perhaps others, that we ought to look beyond and celebrate colour, luck, and renewal.

But it wasn’t merely about preserving tradition. Living abroad also made me appreciate my home city in a way I never had when I was immersed in it.

I am writing this piece after landing at Heathrow Airport, waiting at Paddington Station for a train that has already been delayed by 20 minutes. The contrast is almost comical. In Hong Kong, I had grown used to the seamless efficiency of the metro and rail networks, good public services, and perhaps, the general sense that things simply “work”. The punctuality, the convenience, the speed – I didn’t fully value them until I stood on a cold platform watching yet another departure board flicker with delays.

From afar, China’s rapid development no longer feels like background noise. It becomes something that any country can be proud of. The high-speed trains, the digital infrastructure, the sheer ambition and execution – these things look even more impressive when you experience the frustrations of less efficient systems elsewhere.

While writing this piece might risk me being told to either “go back to my country” or questioned about my motivations to be in Oxford pursuing my studies, I would urge those people to reconsider. It is indeed a great privilege and opportunity to go abroad, but this feeling is the unexpected underbelly that comes with just that. It forces you to see your own culture with fresh eyes – both its deep historical roots and its modern dynamism. You stop taking things for granted. The small rituals (the right tea, the right sauce, the right chopsticks) become acts of identity. The proverbs and banter become bridges rather than assumptions. The frustrations abroad become quiet reminders of how proud one ought to be about human progress and connections.

I became more Chinese while abroad because distance stripped away the complacency that familiarity breeds. It turned passive belonging into active appreciation. What used to be “normal” became “mine” – something worth comprehending more deeply, preserving more consciously, and promulgating more proudly.

And perhaps that is the hidden strength of living abroad. We don’t just carry our culture with us. In many ways, we rediscover it, refine it, and sometimes even love it more fiercely than we ever did at home.

Oxford’s Career Connect is failing northern students

Esther Bird
-
0
Oxford’s Career Connect is failing northern students

The north-south divide is alive and well at Oxford’s railway station at the end of term. While students heading south crowd the opposite platform, those of us heading north have enough room on the other side of the tracks for a quick kick-about.

The University of Oxford suffers from a severe lack of representation of Northern students, with almost 50% of UK-domiciled undergraduate students coming from London and the South East, while students from the North-West, North-East, and Yorkshire and the Humber made up just 7.6%, 2.5%, and 5% of admissions, respectively, from 2022-2024. There appears to be an inbuilt bias, however unconscious, against the North, the implications of which can be felt in a plethora of ways. 

Accent prejudice in Oxford, for instance, has been well-documented in recent articles from Cherwell and other student newspapers. Bias can start even before the first day – a friend of mine was asked if all the mines were closed yet in the North-East during our offer-holder day. Not exactly a great first impression. These attitudes reflect an ingrained social prejudice that just won’t come unstuck. Nor are they confined to the University. When doing my research for this article, it didn’t take long before I was hit with blatant assumptions about people from the North in the byline of a 2021 Daily Telegraph article, synonymising “bright young things from the North” with “students from poorer backgrounds”.

So you can imagine the pleasant surprise that I felt when the recent careers emails were sent round proudly advertising the “over 50 exciting summer opportunities available across the UK” that were about to drop. A quick browse on Career Connect, though, brought me back down to the (southern) earth, as the claims of placements “across the UK” didn’t come into fruition.

Of the 60-odd opportunities advertised in the first round of domestic summer internships, only one was an in-person placement in the North (an opportunity in Newcastle seems to have slipped through the net – otherwise, the map seems to have been erased north of Watford).

We’re undeniably very lucky at the University of Oxford to have so many internships organised and shared by the careers service. It is heartening to see that many of the placements available are remote, widening opportunities and improving accessibility. It’s also good to see that three regional alumni groups (The Oxford University Society of Cornwall, East Kent, and East Sussex – all, unfortunately, in the south) are offering bursaries to support students from these areas to access internships, while there are also routes within colleges and the broader University to apply for financial support and travel grants. But the implication that I would have to commute to the south in order to conduct a worthwhile in-person internship seems to ignore the many interesting and insightful organisations doing important and varied work in the North. 

While an online placement is certainly better than nothing, the idea that just because I’m from the North, I can’t access the same in-person insights into a workplace as my Southern counterparts seems pretty unfair. Because even if commuting into London, or forking out for a place to stay, was an option (it certainly isn’t for me), at the end of the day, it is the careers office that is missing a trick here. Through failing to advertise placements in many of the hundreds of fantastic organisations that are doing wonderful things in the North, it is the University’s students who are missing out.

Given that Oxford is a southern university, it is both reasonable and to be expected that the domestic internships are therefore weighted towards the South. It would be fantastic, though, if there were even proportional representation, offering a similar percentage of placements in the North as there are northern students. 

In recent years, the University and individual colleges have been making a concerted and commendable effort to improve Northern representation in the student body, with programmes such as Oxford for North East, Oxford for North West, and Oxford for Yorkshire and the Humber offering “workshops, application support, mentoring, and residential visits” in order to boost intake. Through making connections with organisations based in the North, for instance, through linking up with the Northern Powerhouse Partnership, the University could go one step further, cementing relationships with the regions and, in doing so, taking a more holistic approach to boosting northern admissions. Offering internships in the North would demonstrate long-term support for northern students that goes beyond the application process, ensuring equal provision once students are in the door.

For now, though, I had best get back to my search for a placement in those seemingly little-known, off-the-map backwaters like Manchester, Liverpool, and Leeds. 

The Devil is Sponsored by Dior: ‘The Devil Wears Prada 2’ in review

Ruya Oral
-
0
The Devil is Sponsored by Dior: ‘The Devil Wears Prada 2’ in review

Anyone who has been to the cinema at all in the last couple of years will have found themselves asking the question: “Why does everything look like that?” This feeling is especially palpable when you’re watching the exact same scene from 20 years ago, desaturated. The Devil Wears Prada 2 opens with Andy (Anne Hathaway) brushing her teeth in the mirror, a perfectly unsubtle reflection of the first seconds of the original film. The only marked difference is the colour grading and the quiet hum of Andy’s electric toothbrush, signalling the decades that have passed, given that Hathaway’s poreless face certainly tries to deny it. 

The original Devil Wears Prada was a film that took a major Hollywood gamble. Being an adaptation of the roman à clef of the same name, the production team were backed into a corner in terms of how to finance and market the film, given the sharp and overt satire of the woman who owned the entire fashion industry. Anna Wintour was still, by and large, the most powerful person in fashion when director David Frankel was fighting to create an accurate representation of the fashion industry in his film. Patricia Field, the costume designer, sourced approximately $1 million worth of clothing on a $100,000 budget through her personal connections outside of the so-called ‘Wintour ecosystem’. Intuitive filming locations like the Met, MoMA, and Bryant Park all had board members associated with Wintour and thus could not be used as sets. The film implicitly argues that this is a story worth telling, even if the industry it claims to be intimate with is intent on boycotting it. For an almost tiringly self-aware sequel – yes, we know that a million girls would kill for this job, and an early scene warps the Meryl Streep cinematic universe by featuring an Instagram post that uses a screencap of Miranda from the original film – The Devil Wears Prada 2 doesn’t seem to recall the conditions of production in 2006 at all. 

From its earliest scenes through to the very end, The Devil Wears Prada 2 is functionally an unskippable ad. The sponsorships that the film took are displayed in a very obvious and sometimes tacky manner  – though I could see it coming from a million miles away, the shameless Starbucks promo made me wince and sink into my seat a little further. Whilst the coffee cups can be ignored to some degree, the brand partnerships are unfortunately also integral to the plot. 

We find out early on that Emily (Emily Blunt) now works in the advertising department of Dior. Andy, Miranda, and Nigel (Stanley Tucci) must appease her after it is revealed that a puff piece published by Runway praises a brand that uses sweatshop labour. Emily leverages this against the Runway executives in order to secure a five-page layout for the new Dior flagship, which Andy is assigned to write. In her interview with Andy, Emily speaks glowingly of how designer brands have essentially made themselves inaccessible for the average, middle-class consumer. According to Emily, the shoes you wear, the bag you carry, they speak to who you are and what you care about. Andy scoffs at this because she knows what the audience knows, too: your Dior purse only tells the world that you have too much money and not a clue what to do with it. The frustrating part is that she is functionally not at liberty to say anything else. The iron-clad partnership with Dior means that Andy, a character who we know to value principles over fancy dress, must change her tune. Patricia Field securing a Chanel wardrobe for the cast out of thin air is essentially what Nigel does for Andy in the first film – an important part about her transformation is that she has not actually risen in status, she has just made good friends in high places. In the second film, her new position as features editor at Runway earns Andy enough money to buy a luxury flat in central Manhattan. Maybe scoffing shows the true extent of her desire to retaliate. 

Though a big budget was undoubtedly necessary to secure the returning cast who are now all firmly on the A-list, I can’t help but partially blame the – pardon my French – late-stage capitalist slop on my screen on the rise of streaming services. This story, like all other scripts of the 2020s, has died a sad death; its eulogy will simply be the tudum sound. This is apparent even in the beigeness of the opening scene and Hathaway’s blemish-free face. Netflix has operated under a tiered subscription system for the last decade, wherein you can pay the difference to unlock ‘Ultra HD’ streaming. You can also, of course, pay to stream without ads. The luxury brand scheme that Emily describes is the same financial model that has taken hold of the film industry, causing the decline of cinema attendance and poisoning blockbuster-scale productions. Those who truly want it, the ever-growing roster of streaming services tells us, will pay for it. The rest of us must suffer.

It’s not all bad, though. I am definitely not high and mighty enough to claim myself indifferent to nostalgia bait, especially when it objectively makes a pretty good attempt at regenerating the buzz of its predecessor. Upon rewatching the first film with my friends to refresh our memories, one of them exclaimed: “There’s just so many scenes to queen out to!” This is what the sequel gets right – the focus is still largely on girls and gays, their fun, campy outfits, and of course, a musical number performed by Lady Gaga. Despite its glowering flaws, the film still makes for two hours spent smiling and bopping your head along to the soundtrack. 


However, the funniest part about the whole film is how it postures as self-conscious in a comically “maybe the real Prada was the devils we met along the way” manner, and still manages to be completely dense in other aspects. The 2003 novel The Devil Wears Prada was written by Lauren Weisberger after she spent a period working as Anna Wintour’s personal assistant. Andy is literally given the option to take a $350,000 book deal to write what would have probably been a “gooey” (as Emily accurately characterises her) depiction of the Prada-clad HR disaster that she works for, by Miranda herself, and she still turns it down. “This could hurt Miranda,” she whispers in a trembling voice when she refuses her publisher friend Talia’s (Rachel Bloom) offer for the book, to which Talia rightly responds, “Which is fine, because Miranda is atrocious!” To Andy, it’s more complicated than that, and maybe this is an acceptably humanist approach, but one thing is certain. In the world of The Devil Wears Prada 2, there is one thing that could have never existed: The Devil Wears Prada.

Raising refugee rights: Oxford STAR and Campsfield House

Mary Huan
-
0
Raising refugee rights: Oxford STAR and Campsfield House

CW: Death, suicide, racism.

“The Coalition and STAR are quite unique in the emphasis on trying to bridge the gap between students and the community”.

This is how Faye, a member of Oxford Student Action for Refugees (STAR), the university branch of an organisation that describes itself as “[t]he national network of students building a society where refugees are welcomed”, characterises the society’s support of the Coalition to Close Campsfield. Caught within the often insular Oxford bubble, where student concerns are easily geared towards their colleges, the existence of Campsfield House has seemingly been erased from the map. 

A student campaign for the rights of refugees

“I think students at Oxford can be quite myopic at times”, said Faye. She wishes more would get involved with local causes, focusing on matters beyond student-related issues: “I think sometimes people can get caught up in trying to improve conditions in this kind of very narrow sense, for themselves and other people in their degree, rather than thinking about how we are in such a place of incredible privilege. Why do we get to benefit from that privilege, while those who face the disadvantages of that privilege?” Students face additional logistical barriers: the eight-week terms and academic workload mean missed meetings and protests. But members of Oxford STAR have put their books down in favour of active participation. With 39 groups across the country, Student Action for Refugees filed a joint petition with City of Sanctuary, VOICES Network & SolidariTee for university students, and staff in response to the Illegal Migration Bill. 

As a student society, Oxford STAR brings unique advantages to the refugee rights movement. The society has been unafraid to exert pressure on the institution’s actions. Recently, they released an open letter condemning the University of Oxford’s Centre on Migration, Policy & Society (COMPAS)’s invitation to Sean Donnelly, Editor in Chief of Frontext, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, and Eddy Montgomery, Senior Director of Enforcement, Compliance and Crime at the Home Office. These events are a part of the “Immigration Enforcement in Practice” seminars convened by Rob McNeil. Written by a group of “current Oxford students and alumni, migrants’ rights campaign groups and academics”, they highlight the “much-needed critical commentary on border enforcement in the EU and UK” that is missing in COMPAS’ series of events. The intervention reflects a broader willingness among student activists to challenge not only government policy, but also the university’s relationship to institutions involved in border enforcement.

Awarded the University of Sanctuary status in 2023, Oxford joined a group of 25 Universities of Sanctuary. Founded by the City of Sanctuary UK, “this network has been developed through the integration of Article 26 Project resources with City of Sanctuary UK, and collaboration with Student Action for Refugees, Refugee Education UK, and others”, with the aim to “develop a culture and a practice of welcome within institutions”. Oxford appears proud of its University of Sanctuary status and its City of Sanctuary Organisation Pledge. The University “is committed to being a place of welcome for people who have been forcibly displaced around the world, and supports students and academics who have been forced to flee conflict or persecution”. 

To satisfy the minimum criteria for a University of Sanctuary award, the institution must “support the establishment of a student-led awareness group on campus (such as a STAR group)”. On the University website, explicit support is indeed given to Oxford STAR: “We encourage our students to learn about sanctuary and to create an inclusive culture of welcome. As part of this, the University supports the Oxford branch of Student Action for Refugees in recruiting new members for the academic year.” In order to demonstrate sufficient support to “student-led awareness group[s]”, a member of the university must be in contact with the head office team at STAR. Examples listed on the application form include forms of logistical support, including the facilitation of meetings and financial assistance. This empowers Oxford STAR, Faye argues, with an “institutional leverage over the university where we are able to sit in on University of Sanctuary subcommittee meetings and talk to people in the university who are involved with the award.”

In the context of a growing far-right presence in the city, Oxford STAR has used their “pathway in the University” to focus on exerting their influence on the institution: “We do try to focus more on things that the University is doing that we can address, because we think that’s the advantage that we have as a student organisation, so that includes things like any kind of departmental talks that platform voices which we think are quite anti-immigration and contribute to this toxic environment.” St George’s and Union Jack flags erected by “Raise the Colours Oxfordshire” around St Aldates and the Headington roundabout, alongside protests by the Oxfordshire Patriots, speak to this “broader rhetoric and environment” that Oxford STAR resists.

Despite the society’s influence, there is a careful move to make space for the experience and three-decade-long history of the Coalition movement by the students: “I think by having this campaign that is led by local community members and having students kind of support them, rather than trying to lead the campaign themselves, I think that helps make a difference.” 

Bill, a founding member of the Coalition in 1993, extends the same appreciation to the students who he deems are “more integral to the coalition than they have been in the past”. One example of the “energy and new ideas” of students includes public, visual statements. He recalls, for instance, in 2009, “when the statues of emperors’ heads outside the Sheldonian were masked to show how people in detention were silenced”.

Protest safety is another area where students can bring fresh perspectives and contribute to the Coalition. Just a few years ago, Faye remembers feeling “fairly safe” when volunteering to support refugee rights, but a more antagonistic climate has spurred growing anxieties.

Protesters at Campsfield are now more frequently met with counter-protests by far-right organisations: “There’s more cases where there’s threats of far-right protests right outside the centre”, observes Faye. “I’m an international student myself and a lot of other international students are involved in the protests…it’s just a more precarious situation where we don’t want to lose our student visas through protesting”. For international students in particular, political participation can carry risks extending beyond arrest or disciplinary action, including apprehension around immigration status and visa security.

Even with these fears, she emphasises the significance of “individual participation and contribution” that “makes movements like this so powerful”. Faye recognises the strategic impact of introducing protest strategies – such as masking up and hosting protest safety workshops – to local campaign members: “I think there’s been one quite big contribution from the student side, bringing this kind of protest safety to the Campsfield movement as well.”

This is particularly relevant to the shifting dynamics with the police. A current obstacle, Bill explains,  facing the Coalition involves the location of their demonstrations: “There is an issue at the moment about our right to demonstrate at the gates of Campsfield as opposed to the road away from Campsfield, and we are trying to reestablish our right to demonstrate at the gate.” He stresses the non-violence of their action: “We’re quite happy without [the police] being there because we’re not actually cutting the fence…we’re just expressing an opinion.”

A spokesperson for Thames Valley Police told Cherwell: “We have a legal obligation to facilitate peaceful protest, but this must be balanced against the rights of others and the need to maintain access and safety. We will continue to work with partners and the local community to manage this appropriately.”

History of Campsfield House

As a former youth detention facility, Campsfield House was established in 1993 as an immigration detention centre. Campsfield was far from a ‘home’ despite its name. Here, asylum seekers and children have been held, immobilised within the secured walls, in a limbo of indefinite and uncertain detention. While immigration detention is often imagined through the imagery of U.S. border enforcement and ICE facilities, Campsfield represents a distinctly British system of confinement operating on Oxford’s doorstep.

Nearly 30,000 migrants were detained in Campsfield House before 2018. A history of resistance and abuse marked the centre’s 25 years before it closed. What was widely reported as riots and arson at Campsfield in 2007-08, alongside the escape of 26 detainees, exposed an internal history of revolt. 

A language of criminality tainted the reporting of Campsfield House; yet, most detainees have committed no criminal offences. Between 2023-24, there were 834 cases of unlawful detention, forcing the Home Office to pay nearly £12 million in compensation. Although immigration detention is an administrative process rather than a criminal justice procedure, the conditions behind the barbed-wire fence were uncannily similar to those of a prison. The contradiction remains central to criticisms of the detention system: people are confined in prison-like conditions without a criminal conviction or a fixed sentence.

Condemned for its treatment of detainees and deplorable conditions by human rights groups, the centre’s history is marred by hunger strikes and suicides. In 2005, more than 30 Zimbabwean detainees went on hunger strike. With no judicial oversight, a man who had been denied bail and detained for over four months died by suicide in the same year. Under the threat of deportation to Iraq, further hunger strikes were undertaken by 13 Kurdish asylum seekers in 2008, which escalated to 60 participants. The same pattern continued in 2010, where over half of the centre’s inmates went on hunger strike over the inhumane conditions. A second suicide occurred in 2011, a man was found dead in the shower. Between 2012 an 2013, a 16-year old-child was held in detention for 62 days.  Facing an unfixed sentence of detention, migrants in Campsfield Houseexisted in a prolonged state of uncertainty and suspension.

Campsfield House has been under the management of Mitie, a private-for-profit company, whose aim is “to treat those in our care with dignity, decency and respect, delivering a safe and healthy establishment which stands up to public scrutiny” since2011. Although 80% of the detainees found most staff were respectful, 41% of the detainees reported “feeling unsafe” in the centre in an inspection carried out in 2019. Further reports of use of excessive force and unsanitary conditions colour the centre’s history under the company.

The reopening of Campsfield House

“We thought it was a victory for us and the national movement against detention”, explains Bill, a founding member of the Coalition to Close Campsfield, when the centre was shut down following more than two decades of campaigning and monthly protests. 

But when Boris Johnson announced an expansion in the government’s use of immigration detention facilities in 2022, this triumph proved to be temporary. Under the Nationality and Borders Act 2022, which facilitated the Rwanda Plan, the Home Office increased its use of detention centres. On 28 June 2022, they announced their decision to reopen Campsfield House.

The Home Office’s plan was met with fierce opposition. In a statement by AVID, Keep Campsfield Closed and Border Criminologies addressed to the former Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, 50 organisations were represented with 82 signatures. Such condemnation has also been expressed on an international level: the UN Refugee Agency is a vocal critic of the widespread use of immigration detention facilities, echoed by the Council of Europe’s Human Rights Commissioner. Opponents of Campsfield’s reopening, therefore, situate the issue within a broader international debate over the legality, ethics, and effectiveness of immigration detention.

The upwards trend of the detention of migrants since 2021 reflects an increasingly expansionist and hostile policy, fuelled by the Illegal Migration Act passed in July 2023. In 2025,22,661 people were detained, a figure up by 17% when compared to the previous year. When Campsfield reopened, Mitie received a new six-year contract worth £140 million. With plans of expansion, adding up to 400 new beds in the centre, Campsfield symbolises the national shift in immigration policy. For campaigners, the reopening is not an isolated local development but part of a wider hardening of Britain’s border regime.

Phase 2 of the development of Campsfield will be facilitated by a Crown Development Order. “This is a huge issue with central government overriding democratic procedure”, Bill explains. By using this order, the government bypasses local opposition, preventing the decision to be made by the local planning authority, Cherwell District Council. Demanding a public inquiry, this application is more than just an expansion strategy but also serves as “a challenge to democracy”, according to Bill.

Over time, the Coalition has in many ways become a unifying force. Bill told Cherwell: “It’s become much more, in some ways, deep-rooted.” The collaboration between Oxford STAR and the Coalition appears to have brought town and gown together. “The stance of opposition to Campsfield has spread throughout the community” to the students behind the limestone walls and spires. 

Despite Oxford STAR’s work, Faye reminds us that “left-wing student organisations are vastly under-resourced in terms of just the kind of institutional capacity that [they] have”. Yet, “fruitful collaboration”, such as the creation of Oxford Student Social Action Coalition, uniting Turl Street Homeless Action (TSHA), Food Rescuers, and New College Curry Runners, can multiply the resources available. In spite of these barriers, Faye urges students to think beyond their colleges: “What I do hope for is that more students do try to engage with these kind of things, rather than staying limited within their colleges or their specific student societies, [so] that they do try to engage with these broader, local and potentially regional, national issues, and offer their efforts where they can.” It took 25 years of internal and external resistance and over three hundred demonstrations to close Campsfield House for the first time. All hope, however, has not been lost: “You’ve got to be hopeful, haven’t you? So I’m hopeful”, Bill told me. 

There were 82,100 applications for asylum in 2025. By the end of 2024, over 123 million people were forced to flee their homes. As global conflicts increase, the need for student organisations like Oxford STAR is indispensable.  “It is quite inspiring to see that there are still so many students every year who are willing to get involved”, Faye said. “I think that is something that keeps my spirits up.”

Change to Rowing Clubs’ Rules of Racing for transgender athletes sparks backlash

Sophi Hayes-Hoyle
-
0
Change to Rowing Clubs’ Rules of Racing for transgender athletes sparks backlash

A change to Oxford University Rowing Clubs’ (OURCs) Rules of Racing means that only athletes assigned female at birth may now row in a Women’s boat. This applies to boats entered in both inter-collegiate and university-level competitions. 

Several student boat club captains have condemned the new rule change, made on 26th April. OURC’s Captain’s Meeting minutes highlight that issues were raised about the process for verifying athletes’ gender identity, with students particularly raising privacy concerns: under the new rule, claims could be brought against athletes regarding gender verification. To bring a claim against an athlete, complainants would be required to submit evidence, likely involving private information about the complainee, to OURCs, where findings could be seen as ‘outing’ individuals. 

Towards the close of the Captain’s Meeting, an informal vote was proposed to gauge support for the changes to the Rules of Racing. Forty-nine votes were cast against the new rules, whilst only one vote was cast in their favour. Five of those present abstained from voting. Another informal vote asked captains whether they were comfortable competing in an event under the newly imposed rules. Twenty-four votes were cast against this informal motion, with only eight votes in favour of competing under the new rules.

Multiple boat clubs have since released official statements opposing the rule change. In a statement on Instagram, Wadham College Boat Club described the changes as “disproportionate, discriminatory, and impossible to enforce”, adding that they will continue “to fight for the previous rules to be reinstated”. Somerville College Boat Club similarly wrote that they were “deeply saddened by the recent rule change… which threatens our long-standing values of inclusivity and friendship”. Multiple students also told Cherwell of plans that Somerville Boat Club has to encourage all colleges to wear LGBTQ+ wristbands at this term’s Summer VIIIs, the University’s four-day intercollegiate regatta.

The rule change has also faced strong backlash from Oxford’s broader student body. On Instagram, the President of Oxford University LGBTQ+ Society has released a statement on the topic: “I am personally investigating the matter, and it is my top priority to resolve it by whatever means necessary.” The President also told Cherwell that “no contact was made with OULGBTQ+ prior to the change” with all meetings held “after the change was decided”. The President, who also holds the part-time role of LGBTQ+ Officer at the Student Union (SU), was not contacted in their SU capacity either. 

However, a University spokesperson told Cherwell: “The University has met with and engaged with the LGBTQ reps several times throughout the process to facilitate boat clubs meeting their obligations in relation to law & governing body requirements.” They did not specify that these consultations occurred prior to the change. 

Ahead of Summer VIIIs, Oxford University Rowing Clubs have been required by the University to align their policy on competitive eligibility with British Rowing, after previously only being encouraged to do so: in an update to University policy in accordance with UK law, introduced on 16th March 2026, the Director of Sport informed OURCs via letter that University policy now required clubs to align with NGB policy and asked that OURCs comply as soon as was practically possible.

Whilst OURCs has been aware of its requirement to update the Rules of Racing to align with national guidance, following the letter from the Director of Sport, the Captain’s Meeting minutes state that there had been an internal understanding between OURCs and Sports Federation that, should any changes be made, they would be done at the end of the academic year, after the competitive season was over. However, on 24th March onwards, a deadline for the rule change of 31st March was communicated to OURCs by the OURCs Senior Member, on behalf of the Proctors. 

Given a number of OURCs’ constitutional clauses, holding that OURCs is bound to organise inter-college rowing competitions, conduct all activities in line with University equality policies, and conduct events within the bounds of conditions that the Proctors attach to the running of the event, OURCs has been required to make the rule change to fulfil its constitutional objectives. Summer VIIIs could not proceed without compliance with the rule change, given the club’s reliance upon the insurance provided by the University for the event. 

Subsequently, OURCs introduced a new power in the Constitution, authorised by the Proctors, permitting the Director of Sport to require changes to the Oxford University Rowing Clubs (OURCs) rules in compliance with the University of Oxford’s Diversity and Inclusion policy. OURCs is a student-run organisation which serves as a federation for the Oxford University Boat Club (OUBC) and all 36 Oxford college boat clubs.

Since September 2023, British Rowing policy has been that only people who are assigned female at birth will be eligible to compete in the Women’s category, whilst trans, non-binary, and all other individuals will be eligible to compete in the Open category.

Previously, OURCs’ Rules of Racing stated that, “trans people should be permitted to participate in their affirmed gender identity” at “less competitive levels”, including college-level rowing. Since January 2019, OURCs has allowed for self-identification in all divisions of Torpids and Summer VIIIs. 

On 8th October 2025, the Sports Federation updated its eligibility guidance, mirroring Cambridge University’s guidance update in September 2025, to advise sports clubs to align their Trans eligibility policies with their relevant National Governing Body. At this time, OURCs chose to delay alignment as British Rowing’s policies, which were (and remain) under review. This was possible as OURCs events are not run under the auspices of British Rowing. 

From this point on, Cambridge University Boat Club required oarspersons to self-declare their gender identification to their Captain before entering any Women’s Crew or Mixed Crew into a CUCBC event. If they did not meet British Rowing Women’s Category eligibility criteria from British Rowing’s “Trans and Non-Binary Competition Eligibility Policy and Procedures”, their captain must amend their entry to an event before its first heat (including the Getting on Race), removing and replacing any individuals who have declared that they are not eligible. This rule remains under review in accordance with British Rowing’s policy. According to minutes from the Oxford Captains’ Meeting, “it was made clear…that there was no choice but to comply with the request [made by the University to change the rule, in line with national guidance] and that failure to do so would result in OURCs’ deregistration as a University sports club and inability to run competitions, effective immediately”.

British Rowing’s policy claims that it is fully committed to “ensur[ing] Trans people can continue their participation in rowing whilst and after transitioning”. Their 2023 Competition Eligibility and Procedures policy, now being enforced by Oxford University Rowing Clubs, proposed two categories alongside the Women’s: an Open Category, where all individuals are eligible to compete, and a Mixed category, offered at any level of competition, providing 50% of the crew are eligible from the women’s category stated above. British Rowing encourages trans and non-binary participants to take part in “recreational activity” (non-competing) in the gender they identify as. 

Above college-level rowing, decisions regarding athlete qualification for Varsity competitions have previously been handled on a case-by-case basis, with joint input from both Oxford and Cambridge Directors of Sport. Registered University sports clubs and colleges’ sport organising committees are required to align their policies with the approach and criteria used by the relevant National Governing Body, including British Rowing, when considering the eligibility of transgender athletes.

The Student Union has stressed that it is essential that the University create an environment where all individuals “regardless of their gender identity, expression or sexual orientation, feel safe, welcome, and empowered to participate in sports and physical activities”.

A spokesperson for the University told Cherwell that it “remains committed to being an inclusive university”. The spokesperson also added that regarding competitive sports, “registered sports clubs and committees are required to follow the policies and eligibility criteria set by the relevant national governing body” as “this is necessary to ensure alignment with competition frameworks as well as compliance with the law”.

1234...2,589Page 3 of 2,589

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