Thursday, May 22, 2025
Blog Page 307

Incoming Oxford freshers react to A Levels Results Day

Maurício Alencar
-
0
Incoming Oxford freshers react to A Levels Results Day

A number of students with confirmed places to study at Oxford spoke to Cherwell to share their thoughts on their successful results day. 

Image: Eva Bailey

Matt Robyns-Landricombe, who will read French at Wadham, told Cherwell that it felt like “such a weight off my shoulders” to have had his place confirmed, whereas Mukhtar Quraishi, who will read Chemistry at New College, said that it feels “very surreal”.

Tanzim Chowdhury, who will read Engineering at St Hugh’s, said: “I feel amazing”.

Eva Bailey, who is looking forward to reading English and French at Queen’s, said she was thankful that she will “no longer have to add ‘hopefully’ at the end of my sentence when I tell someone I’m going to Oxford”. 

The University stated that it was expecting to admit around 3,265 undergraduate students in October 2021, in line with average acceptance rates in normal years.

Axel Marinho, who will read Philosophy and Theology at Regent’s, is relieved “after a year of uncertainty and disappointments to finally have a concrete offer” which “almost seems too good to be true”.

Daniyal Hussain, who will be the first from his family to attend Oxford, will read Psychology and Philosophy at New College. He told Cherwell: “I’m definitely looking forward to living in Oxford. It’s such a beautiful city and, of course, the student experience at Oxford is something I’ve heard incredible things about. Would it be wrong for me to say I’m excited for everything?” 

Janey Little, who got 5 A*s and one A in her A Levels across two years and works as a Young Liberals Policy Officer, will read PPE at Lady Margaret Hall. She told Cherwell that she was “most looking forward to studying what I love and what I’m passionate about”.

Ash Silva, who will read Biology at the same college as Janey, said she is looking forward to living in Oxford and finally visiting the Natural History Museum. 

Image: Anas Dayeh

As standardised A Level and AS Level exams were cancelled this year due to COVID-19 disruption, the government allowed schools to determine students’ grades using mock results, coursework and other assessment grades.

In most cases, students sat important end of year exams. However, some students said that they were anxious going into results day as they were unsure how different assessments would be weighted against each other. Weronika Szpak, who will read Classics at Corpus Christi, told Cherwell: “The biggest uncertainty was not knowing how my grades would actually be determined. My grades had fluctuated over the two years so it was difficult to tell which grades would be used as evidence, but it all worked out for the best. Honestly I coped with the stress of results day by telling myself ‘it is what it is’.”

Following last year’s government U-turn due to the backlash against the use of postcode algorithms to decide students’ results, some students were anxious about their grades going into this year. Anas Dayeh, who will read PPE at St John’s, moved to the UK in 2018. Anas has lived by himself since the age of 16. He told Cherwell that he “was scared” his grades would be lowered as his college “has a historical average grade of D+”. Anas got 2 A*s and an A in his A Levels this year.

Leon Coyle, who will read History at Trinity, summarised: “I could never guarantee that everything would actually work out properly for me”. 

A* and A grades rose to record highs this year, making up 44.8% of grades awarded. But this year’s cohort have struggled immensely, having to work from home for much of the academic year. Admission interviews were all done online in late 2020.

Ash said she got through her year “by spending as much time as possible with my friends”. Hannah Fogg, who will read English at Worcester, told Cherwell she “coped with the stress of it all by having a good support system around me that uplifted me throughout the entire process”. 

After a long, difficult academic year of uncertainty, students will now be able to celebrate their achievements. Ciara Rushton, who will read History and Politics at Magdalen, is celebrating by “ironically going for a night out in Cambridge!”.

Daniyal will be able to go out for a double celebration as his birthday is the day after results day. Eva said that she was looking forward to getting her free Nandos for lunch, whereas Hannah said she received some gifts from her local tea shop.

Image: Hannah Fogg

Axel and Weronika said that, because the last 18 months have been so difficult, they will be celebrating by getting some sleep. 

This article was updated on August 12th 2020 to include Fiona’s story.

Featured Image credit: Anas Dayeh, Eva Bailey and Hannah Fogg. Collage by Charlie Hancock

Objectify me: Social media and the perils of the aesthetic

Lily Kershaw
-
0
Objectify me: Social media and the perils of the aesthetic

I admit it. I like using Instagram. My account is nothing groundbreaking, mainly consisting of pictures of my friends, me in cute outfits, and the pretty places I’ve seen. There is nothing special or unique about my posts. 

I like posting pictures to document what I’ve done and the people I’ve seen. I also use these posts as a form of self-marketing: look at me, aren’t I cute? Aren’t I busy? That should reflect something more about me – perhaps, seeing these pictures affirms any positive assumptions you have while, hopefully, sweeping whatever negative sentiments against me under the rug. Look at me doing stuff! Look at me seeing people! Using a form of media that is primarily image-based leaves room for projection whilst dispelling the potential for controversy. When the idea one has of me is based purely on the pretty pictures that I post, there is very little room for outright disdain. 

If I am the one promoting myself, I get to control the narrative, sanitising it in such a way that renders me more consumable than I may be in reality. We are all different people to different people, and it is ridiculous to assume that any number of images can fully encapsulate who we are as individuals, at least not in an aesthetic way. We are a disjointed combination of random personality traits and actions, many of which clash with one another and seemingly don’t make sense. On Instagram, I sacrifice any attempt at truly presenting myself as I believe I am and instead turn myself into an aesthetic – easy to consume, easy to like, easy to accept. 

The space between who I am, who I want to be, and how I want to be seen is so vast that it is impossible to unify the three. Instead, it is far easier to reduce myself to an oversimplified idea and, by extension, objectify myself and demand others to do the same.

I have been feeling increasingly uncomfortable with my social media presence for a while now, a growing distance between this me, and that me, the person and the object. One of my greatest insecurities is this idea that my presence would let someone down: it’s not my looks, but my personality that would lead to rejection in some form or another. Initially, social media felt like a way of countering this to some degree, a way of directly controlling my own personal narrative. Yet, now, it increasingly feels like social media only feeds into this fear that the external, the aesthetic, is not the problem. My greatest flaw is an internal one, and the only people who would even hint at liking me in any capacity are those who don’t truly know me.

The woman who I present myself as and the woman that I am are not the same, and having her represent me makes me feel more and more uncomfortable. Equally, I am hesitant to change anything about my social media presence. It is difficult to make changes that may result in less acceptance, or else, outright rejection. 

Social media has garnered a lot of criticism, most of which is more than well-earned, but that is not to say that it is exclusively negative. For me, one of the greatest appeals of social media was the representation. I have always been a minority, yet social media allowed me to see people who looked like me being accepted and celebrated. The internet provides a space where diversity is not just limited to the token black friend; hearing voices like my own is affirming, as is seeing features like mine presented as beautiful as ultimately, I cannot compete with eurocentric beauty standards when I am not eurocentric. 

However, even these features can be negative in their own way.  Instagram demands objectification and while I can appreciate the humanity of these individuals, I fear many people can’t. Objectification left unmonitored can lead to fetishisation. These features are separated from the individual, becoming part of a catalogue of attributes to be fished out by white women when they want their next surgery: big bums, big lips, fox eyes… the list goes on. Minorities are discarded as their “aesthetics” are adopted to the profit of white, conventionally attractive influencers. In actively reducing myself to looks alone, am I not, then, contributing to this very problem? Through purposely stripping myself of anything that seems in the slightest bit disagreeable, am I not then doing an immense disservice, not only to myself, but to other women like me? 

Any form of media which encourages a one-dimensional perception of anyone does not provide true representation. Being an image is not being represented. Being seen as pretty is not being represented. Being objectified is not being represented.

The content that we consume matters, as does the content we create. Where once I could use my social media as a rock of consistency, a touchstone to return to as a kind of reminder of who I aim to be, I now find that I have created a standard that I myself cannot live up to. On an surfacel level, I know that nobody cares. On a day to day basis, very few people think of me, let alone consider my social media, yet, on an emotional level, the idea that I am the reason I won’t be understood by others, hurts. I want to be truly seen by those around me, but so long as I aim to escape my flaws, to present a better version of myself, all I will be is an image, not a person. 

Instagram necessitates such a reduction of character, and this forces us all to ask, when my life is reduced to just a few images, what do I want them to say? When we are controlling our image, can we ever show who we are, or will our own personal biases limit a truthful reflection? I doubt that this thought will mark any distinct change in my social media presence. In the question of whether I want to be liked or to be understood (for me, I doubt it can be both), I have chosen being liked. After all, isn’t that what social media is all about?

Review – Summer of Soul

Lily Kershaw
-
0
Review – Summer of Soul

In Harlem during the summer of 1969 something big was happening. Tens of thousands of people came together in Mount Morris Park to attend the first Harlem Cultural Festival, a festival that put Black art on full, proud display. The music played crossed genres, from the pop-y Stevie Wonder to the more soulful Nina Simone, and even transcended linguistic division, with musicians such as the South African Babatunde Olatunji. The purpose of the festival was to promote Black pride, providing a platform for Black artists to, for the first time, share their work with an impoverished and oppressed community. Despite 40 hours of this momentous occasion being recorded, this footage was left abandoned, unseen, to rot in a basement for over 50 years. Until now.

Summer of Soul, which seamlessly interweaves original festival footage with contemporary interviews and news footage from the time, is truly brilliant. To say that the film merely shows the absolute talent of many of these performers would be an incredible understatement – the film positively resurrects them. Of course, I am not implying that such talents as Gladys Knight or Sly and the Family Stone have been lost to time, but that this film drags them forward into the present. They are no longer relics of the past, but right there, performing to you today, with all the energy and heart that they could possibly give. It’s a truly beautiful sight to see. There is a reason why all of these musicians are called performers, they absolutely know how to put on a show with such joyous and energetic choreography that you too get swept into their music, their lyricism, their passion for a brighter future. You become just another audience member at one of the most powerful concerts of the 20th century, dancing with the furious excitement of any other member of the crowd.

Witnessing such eclectic performances makes for an unforgettable experience. While I am now absolutely obsessed with the Summer of Soul playlist on Spotify, it just can’t compare to the incredible nature of their live performances. A young Stevie Wonder, just 19, jumping around on stage and playing the keyboard with such immense dexterity and unobstructed passion, really clarifies his musical genius. Equally, Sly’s incredible stage presence and apparent sex appeal makes it clear that he walked so Prince could run. Our musical history is linked to our musical present. If Summer of Soul shows us anything, it’s that we truly are standing on the shoulders of giants.

It’s not just the music, though. The film works to regularly contextualise its very moment. It is a year after the assassination of Martin Luther King; four years after the assassination of Malcolm X. The police are regularly attacking and abusing Black citizens, particularly in impoverished areas like Harlem, areas which often seemed to be abandoned by a state which cared very little about its non-white citizens. It is a year after Nixon was elected; it is the month of the moon landing. It feels like America is moving forward, but trying to leave its Black citizens behind. To say that the cultural atmosphere was tense would be an understatement: this fact was even pretty plain at the festival itself where, despite having police at security, the festival organisers felt the need to call in the Black Panthers too – “just in case.”

While the film obviously intends to document a music festival, it also documents an immense turning point for Black America, when people no longer defined themselves as “negro” but “Black”. This period represents a desperate search for an identity independent of the country which seemed to actively reject them. This is not only reflected in the more Afrocentric fashion of the time or the changing politics in black spaces, but in the very music itself. The sound of the era, captured here so well, is both optimistic and demanding, religious and secular, songs that called for peace alongside those that called for war. They wanted more, as we do now.

The truth is, while a lot has changed since 1969, the sentiment remains the same, the cultural tension has persisted. African Americans want more, Black people globally want more, we all want more from a system that continues to regularly ignore or attack those who don’t have power. This film could not have come at a better moment. If anything, Summer of Soul only emphasises that this is the time for change. We have come too far to stop now.

There’s a world waiting for you, this is a quest that’s just begun.

This documentary, unlike many others which seem to fetishise Black suffering, places Black joy front and centre, celebrating talent and progress without ignoring the injustices that many also faced. I cannot recommend seeing Summer of Soul highly enough. The editing, the music, the performances, the message… it may have all been buried and ignored for half a century, but that doesn’t mean you should delay seeing it now.

Summer of Soul is in cinemas and available on Hulu now.

Oxford University accepts 92% of offer holders

Charlie Hancock
-
0
Oxford University accepts 92% of offer holders

After A-level grades were decided by teachers’ assessments for the second year running, the University of Oxford has announced that 92% of offer-holders have been accepted. This means the University’s intake is inline with average years.

Around 3,265 students have been admitted in the 2021 admissions cycle. In 2020, 3,695 students were admitted after a u-turn by the government meant that students who were downgraded by the algorithm would receive the grades their teachers submitted.

A statement from Oxford University confirms reports that fewer offers were made than usual, in anticipation that more students than usual would meet the grades required for their course. The 3,543 offers made is 8% lower than in an average year. This means that 92.15% of offer holders have been accepted.

The University said: “Oxford University is delighted to celebrate the success of our offer-holders, whose places have been confirmed today. Their achievement is all the more impressive this year, and we congratulate them and their teachers, schools and families, after a hugely challenging 18 months.

“Since the outbreak of the pandemic and resulting widespread disruption to education, the University and its colleges have worked closely with individuals and schools to minimise the impact on prospective students. We have worked to ensure they have all the information and guidance needed to make strong applications.

“Despite the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on school pupils from less advantaged backgrounds, last year’s new undergraduate intake to Oxford showed the first signs of this work paying off, as the University accelerated  the trend of an increasing number of places going to students from UK state schools. While admissions results under current circumstances cannot be compared meaningfully to previous years, our aim for 2021 has again been to secure an undergraduate intake that continues to reflect our priorities and builds on the progress of recent years. More detailed data will be available in due course, but the figures released today show a continuation of the positive trends of recent years.”

68% of the 2021 intake come from state schools, and 20% from the “least advantaged backgrounds”. 57 students from state schools who narrowly missed their offer who had experienced “significant extenuating circumstances” were admitted.

Exeter College has admitted all of its offer holders.

Oxford University’s statement continued: “Our work during the pandemic has included moving Open Days and our flagship outreach programmes online. More than 35,000 people have participated in our online Open Days, while last summer saw 1187 Year 12 students from less advantaged backgrounds attend our UNIQ Digital access programme, spanning 30 academic courses. 80 Oxford applicants participated in the Target Oxbridge digital scheme to support African and Caribbean heritage students and regional programmes such as Aim for Oxford for disadvantaged students in North East England also transferred to an online format.

“Preparations are now well underway for the 2022 admissions round with the deadline for submission of applications to Oxford being 15th October 2021. 

“We moved our interviews online in December 2020 and ensured that all shortlisted candidates had access to the technology needed to participate in their interviews. This included purchasing and distributing tablet computers where necessary. Interviews for the 2021–22 academic year will also take place online and the date of the last online Open Day this year is 17th September.

“The University, its colleges and departments consistently adjust access and outreach work to optimise the opportunities for the next generation of Oxford students. In the light of the pandemic, we are now working to help current offer-holders to prepare for their first year of University study. One aspect of this work has been to expand the online component of our Opportunity Oxford programme, so that 300 more offer-holders, whose education has been particularly affected by the pandemic, can feel more prepared for their studies and confident about starting at Oxford this autumn.

“We congratulate all incoming students on their success and thank their teachers for the professionalism and hard work.”

Exeter College first to announce all offer holders will be given a place for 2021 entry

Estelle Atkinson
-
0
Exeter College first to announce all offer holders will be given a place for 2021 entry

Exeter is the first college to declare that they will be admitting all offer-holders this year, a practice that was used by colleges for 2020 entry. This announcement comes before other colleges have released information on this year’s admissions guidelines. 

In 2020, Exeter had initially announced that it would admit nine more students than its 2019 figures before later confirming that it would admit all UK offer holders. Last year the college had received 667 applications and admitted 104 students.

Exeter shared that they “look forward to welcoming [offer holders] in Michaelmas Term,” with the University stating that it is “delighted to celebrate the success of our offer-holders, whose places gave been confirmed today. Their achievement is all the more impressive this year, and we congratulate them and their teachers, schools and families, after a hugely challenging 18 months.”

Image: David Iliff/CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 via flickr.com

The Folk Music Revival Must Go On!

Renee Reid
-
0
The Folk Music Revival Must Go On!

Folk music is one of the greatest and most diverse music genres of all time. With a presence that has hardly dwindled some hundred years after its genesis, this comes as no surprise.

Let me paint for you a dreamy picture of its humble beginnings. While the specificities of folk music’s origins remain ambiguous, we know that the story goes something like this: somewhere in a rural community in either England, Ireland or Scotland, someone picked up a fiddle and started making music. Eventually, these music makers crossed the pond and took their music to America; songs were passed down from generation to generation, old sounds delivered through new voices, each song adopting its own unique flavour.

Yet despite constant reinterpretation and rehandling by new artists, the features of folk music have always remained the same. We have never departed from those soft, hand-plucked strings, soothing monophonies (a fancy word for a single melody that is repeated throughout a song) and unembellished voices – and I don’t think we ever will. For folk music, a strong stage presence comes naturally.

This is how we have been blessed with several folk revivals over the past century and a half. The first, and perhaps the biggest, was that of the sixties and seventies. This period came with a rejection of boyish rock in favour of returning to dreamy American roots. Artists looked back to glean inspiration from musical ancestors, establishing for themselves a place in this over-crowded network of singers. Many did this by reinventing the classics in a not-so-obvious way. A perfect example of this eclectic life cycle is ‘Don’t Think Twice It’s All Right’ by Bob Dylan. His song has a rich—and somewhat convoluted—history. In true folk fashion, Dylan borrowed the melody from Paul Clayton’s ‘Who’s Gonna Buy You Ribbons (When I’m Gone)’, which acted as a renaissance of the 19th century plantation melody ‘Who’s Gon Buy You Chickens’.

But as the revival grew, people—including Bob Dylan—found the confidence to create their own sounds – staying true to the trade but not constrained by tradition. This saw the likes of Nick Drake, Joni Mitchell and John Martyn emerge from the darkness for their slice of the pie (if we’re speaking American folk, that pie would have probably been a pumpkin pie…). As for my favourite folk inventions from this great revival, I love the drunken-sounding concoction of folk and blues that John Martyn’s album Solid Air delivers so well (give it a listen; those twangy, elastic chords paired with soft strings are to die for).

This bravery to step out on their own paved the way for a re-introduction to folk music today. This time, however, there are some even greater players on the field. And by this, I am not saying that Joan Baez’s music is by any means secondary, but rather, that today’s artists take their predecessors’ progress one step further.

Today’s folk scene includes everything imaginable, from the very traditional to the newly invented subgenre. For some, folk today means honouring those songs that have existed in the folk world since the beginning of time. Consider Nora Brown – a secret star of the show. Only fifteen years old, young Nora Brown has taken the world of Appalachian folk on as her own and devoted herself to breathing new life into lost gems. During her Tiny Desk Concert, Nora does exactly this; she sings ‘Very Day I’m Gone’, a song originally written and recorded by Addie Graham but essentially non-existent on the internet – the only way to enjoy Addie Graham’s music is through the voice of a much younger artist (trust me, a few hours were spent trying to find the original but alas, as Nora promised, I found nothing).

Our Gen Z folkies have also proven that they are perfectly capable of creating their own music that still fits into the folk music rubric. Lots of artists have taken this opportunity to develop folk music into something that works for them, facing the genre with the same boldness we have harboured in this period of intense social and political change.

As a result, many subgenres have emerged and spaces have now been created for everyone – we have anti-folk for the people who don’t like folk, emo-folk for that inner 14-year-old that lives within all of us and, for all the indie girls and boys out there, I bring you indie folk.

There has been a surge in folk music’s popularity since artists like Phoebe Bridgers and Taylor Swift released albums devoted to the much-loved genre. They have proven that, while folk music is forever attached to its past, it is not incompatible with the now.

In the words of Bob Dylan, the times they are are a-changin’ and folk music hasn’t showed any signs of being left behind just yet.

So now let me do my part in passing on the folk-fired baton as I share a list of 7 songs to match every vibe:

1. ‘Very Day I’m Gone (Rambling Women)’ by Anna & Elizabeth for some great harmonies and yet another version of Addie Graham;

2. ‘Smoke Signals’ by Pheobe Bridgers for sleepy emo-folk;

3. ‘Orange Sky’ by Alexi Murdoch is an absolute must for that 00s throwback;

4. ‘Deep In Love’ by Bonny Light Horseman for something dreamy and emotional and amazing;

5. ‘I’m on Fire’ by The Staves, an oldie turned goldie from an incredibly cool trio of sisters from England;

6. ‘Carey’ by Joni Mitchell for some happy, party worthy folk music;

7. ‘Frankie and Albert’ by Nora Brown for a fun murder ballad with the banjos, American twang, and the whole shebang.

Image Credit:GPA Photo Archive/CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

“No plans” for compulsory vaccination, Oxford University says

Charlie Hancock
-
0
“No plans” for compulsory vaccination, Oxford University says

Currently, there are no plans for it to be compulsory for students to be fully vaccinated when they arrive at Oxford for the start of Michaelmas term, according to an Oxford University spokesperson.

The news comes after reports that Prime Minister Boris Johnson wanted students to be fully vaccinated in order to attend lectures or stay in university residences in the autumn. The Times reported that Mr Johnson was “raging” about the relatively low uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among younger age groups compared to older ones. As of July 31st, 61.3% of 18-24 year olds have had at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.

The proposals were condemned by the National Union of Students, who said the government was “lining students up as scapegoats for its own failings”. The Guardian also reported that universities had concerns about implementing these restrictions, such as how they would be enforced.

The Department of Education later confirmed that the government had no plans to introduce vaccine passports for students in England.

Oxford University’s webpage for returning students and offer holders says they “encourage everyone to take up the offer of a COVID-19 vaccination when eligible, ideally before arriving in Oxford at the start of the autumn (Michaelmas) term.

“All adults in the UK currently have access to a vaccine though the National Health Service – and international students are eligible to access it for free, regardless of their nationality or immigration status.”

A spokesperson for the University told Cherwell: “There are no current plans for vaccination to be compulsory at the University.”

The UK government has confirmed that proof of vaccination status will be required to enter nightclubs and other venues where large crowds gather. It is hoped that this will improve the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among younger age groups.

The University says: “We are currently exploring options for students who have not yet been vaccinated at the start of the academic year – particularly those who live outside the UK, and further information about this will follow as soon as possible.”

Further information for offer holders and students returning to Oxford in Michaelmas term can be found here.

Image: Hello I’m Nik via unsplash.com

Dean of the Faculty of Law launches #RaceMeToo

Pieter Garicano
-
0
Dean of the Faculty of Law launches #RaceMeToo

CW: Racism

Mindy Chen-Wishart, Dean of the Law Faculty and Professor of Contract Law has launched the #RaceMeToo Twitter campaign. She aims to fight prejudice faced by BAME academics and students. 

Professor Chen-Wishart was born in Taiwan as one of four daughters of an Olympic gymnastics coach, and became an immigrant to New Zealand at the age of 10, before she was attracted to Oxford with a Rhodes Visiting Fellowship. But, nearly thirty years of experience at this institution and the prestigious deanship of a faculty have not prevented her from facing regular racial harassment.

Even in the last few weeks, a man subjected her and her three sons to a torrent of racist abuse in the street. Facilities management interrogated her before allowing entrance into her own office. In a reply to Cherwell, she noted an exchange with a member of facilities management who asked her “Who do you have an appointment with?”

Professor Chen-Wishart responded: “I am the Dean”. 

New to Twitter, she decided to use the platform to share some of her experiences as a BAME academic. What followed was an outpouring of support, recognition and solidarity.

Tweeting under ‘#RaceMeToo’ she and other BAME academics used the hashtag to illustrate the casual racism that they face in their everyday careers.

Similarly, a recent inquiry held by the Equality and Human Rights Commission found that a quarter of ethnic minority students had experienced racial harassment.

Responses to #RaceMeToo have ranged from shock at her experiences to solidarity from non-BAME people. But mostly, what followed was recognition. “Recognition of having experienced the same, relief that their extremely hurtful (“humiliating”) experiences were being aired and called out by someone who had ‘made it’.”   

Speaking to Cherwell,  Professor Chen-Wishart said: “We all have unconscious bias. To deny it is an oxymoron. We need to be capable of transcending our own subjectivity, to enter the world of others, and to care enough not to hurt or exclude them.” 

Beyond that, she detailed some expectations of the University:

“(i) Listen to POC. Invite them to share their experiences as students, as academics, researchers, and staff. Have a campaign.

“(ii) Signal from the top the importance of diversity and inclusion, and continue to do so. Allocate proper resources to it…

“(iii) Enhance training of support services (especially [Facilities Management] and porters) beyond the current unconscious bias and customer service, so that POC are not constantly challenged and made to feel they don’t belong. The impact can be devastating.

“(iv) Put E&D representation on the appointment panels. This is important not just for race, but for all protected characteristics.

“(v) Recognise the Cultural taxation on POC; i.e. extra work that Faculty of Colour do to serve the University’s needs for ethnic representation on committees, or to demonstrate knowledge and commitment to a cultural group, which, though it may bring accolades to the institution, is not usually rewarded by the institution on whose behalf the service was performed…

“(vi) Act: Do ask for more information, more data, more interpretation, more papers and reports. But, don’t delay acting until the never never when academics are fully satisfied they are doing the right thing.”

Professor Chen-Wishart added: “‘The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference’ – Elie Wiesel. This is the intangible but consequential stuff of unconscious bias. While it is no longer legal to discriminate against POC, women, disabled, and other minorities, we are often not admitted into the natural and easy social circle of belonging.”  

By using her platform to change that indifference, Professor Chen-Wishart hopes to ensure that marginalised groups will feel they belong too.

Image: Professor Chen-Wishart © Warden and Fellows of Merton College; portrait by Ander McIntyre 

Too Horny to Handle? Demonising sex on reality TV

Rosa Chalfen
-
0
Too Horny to Handle? Demonising sex on reality TV

Love Island has gripped the nation once more over the past month—the show that encourages hot, single and often relationship-allergic people to couple up and pretend they’re in love for a £50,000 prize. Sound like an original concept? If it does, you obviously haven’t heard of Too Hot to Handle, Netflix’s copycat reality series wherein horny contestants must abstain from sex in order to win (you guessed it) an enormous cash prize. Think of Too Hot to Handle as Love Island’s terrifying ex-girlfriend—the people are fitter, the accents are international and the dystopia is played up by the presence of ‘Lana’, a creepy Alexa-like entity that controls the contestants’ sex lives.

Central to both of these shows is the assumption that abstaining from sex leads to better relationships. Although this is more overt in Too Hot to Handle, with Lana enforcing celibacy more rigidly than a headteacher at a Year 11 prom, Love Island encourages couples to wait, with all couples sleeping in the same room and only one designated ‘Hideaway’, for which a couple must be selected by their friends to enter. Those who do have sex are often demonised, most famously in the case of Zara Holland, who, after having sex with Alex Bowen in the show’s second series, faced criticism from her fellow islanders and was controversially stripped of her Miss Great Britain title.

Although things have improved in recent years, there’s still an expectation for islanders to explain themselves once they’ve had sex in the villa (particularly those who don’t go on to end up with their partners). Despite having left the show three years ago, tabloid headlines often return to Megan Barton Hanson, who had sex with two different islanders during her stint. ‘Megan Barton-Hanson reveals she has no regrets about having sex on Love Island they exclaim with constant shock, or ‘Megan Barton Hanson hopes Love Island contestants have sex’. All power to Megan for sticking to her opinions, but the fact that her quotes are dug up every year is testament to how little the disapproval towards contestants who ‘give in’ to their sex drives has abated.

So why this return to the pre-sexual-revolution idea that abstinence equals happiness? Watching Too Hot to Handle, you would think that we were living in the Victorian era rather than the sexually liberated society that many of us recognise. To a modern audience, particularly to those integrated in British universities’ inevitable hook-up culture, this outdated idea of love is at best incompatible with our society’s values and at worst dangerously misogynistic.

According to YouGov, 18-19 year olds have sex 1.8 times a week—sex is a normal part of many casual and serious relationships, and I’m not convinced that TV shows which remove or even ban sex from the dating process are helpful or at all relatable. For one, championing celibacy doesn’t make these shows less superficial, with couples still initially selecting a partner based on physical attraction. Secondly, prohibiting something only means that you want what you can’t have, and there’s a desperate air to both programmes that heighten their tension but also undermines the idea of creating ‘meaningful’ relationships.

Notably, men and women have been seen to react differently to sex being taken off the table, creating painful situations year after year. In the latest series of Too Hot to Handle, contestant Cam’s solution to his sexual frustration was masturbation, whilst his partner Emily abstained, costing him and the rest of the cast $2,000. In Love Island, it’s the infamous ‘Casa Amor’—a secondary villa that separates the boys and girls in order to tempt them with a new cast of singles—that reveals couples’ fault lines. Each year a scorned woman watches as her long-term partner (long-term in Love Island can be defined as any duration between one to several weeks) returns to the villa with a girl that they’ve known for a matter of days. It makes for a depressing viewing. Indeed, banning sex doesn’t really seem to change male contestants’ actions, but merely puts women in a vulnerable position that often ends in heartbreak, like Amy from Love Island’s fifth series.

The outcome of both experiments is also disastrous, and demonstrates pretty effectively why we no longer live in a society where sex is taboo. Both shows’ success rates are unsurprisingly low, with 10 couples still together out of Love Island’s 187 contestants, and only two pairs still together from Too Hot to Handle’s latest season. Because you know what’s worse than sleeping with someone on the first date? Being forced to talk to someone you don’t really know for three weeks and convincing yourself that it’s love. Go figure.

Women have only recently been permitted to publicly enjoy sex, albeit only in progressive circles—so why are we returning to shows that take this already contentious liberty away? Although I love Love Island (and even more shamefully, Too Hot to Handle)as much as the next person, the social experiment that these shows implement should stay firmly on screen and be taken with a huge pinch of salt. An abstinence-obsessed past is something that neither TV or real life should return to.

Oxford University received £6.9m from ExxonMobil since 2015

Charlie Hancock
-
0
Oxford University received £6.9m from ExxonMobil since 2015

An investigation from the student-run Oxford Climate Justice Campaign (OCJC) has revealed that the University of Oxford received £6.9 million from the oil and gas giant ExxonMobil since 2015. This brings the total amount of money the University has received from fossil fuel companies since 2015 to £18.8 million.

OCJC say the information had not been shared previously because the University kept “certain fossil fuel donations secret” under Section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act. OCJC have expressed concern that “it is possible that further donations from fossil fuel companies have been kept secret” using the provision which allows institutions to refuse a freedom of information request if responding would cost too much or take too much staff time to deal with. In contrast, he University of Cambridge reports all grants worth more than £50,000 and information on trust funds established by donations every year.

ExxonMobil have been accused of denying the severity of climate change, and funding climate change denial. They have also been accused of perpetuating human rights abuses. Citizens from Aceh, Indonesia, have taken ExxonMobil to court, alleging they hired and supported military forces who killed and tortured local residents during the period at which ExxonMobil carried out operations in the area.

Carbon Tracker ranked ExxonMobil as having the least ambitious commitments to combat climate change out of all major fossil fuel companies.

Donations received by the University from ExxonMobil since 2015 include £4.4 million towards research into anti-malarial resistance at the University’s Centre for Vaccinology and Tropical Medicine. ExxonMobil also donated £231,869 to the Saïd Business School, which hosted the Oxford Citizen Climate Assembly.

The Saïd Business School confirmed to Cherwell that they had received donations from ExxonMobil between 2013 and 2015. The money was spent on “research into women’s global economic opportunities and effective methods of financial empowerment and autonomy”.

“Since it was a philanthropic donation, the research was conducted independently. ExxonMobil and the other funders had no influence whatsoever on the research or findings,” a spokesperson added.

OCJC said: “These further revelations are shocking and disappointing. They demonstrate just how entwined the fossil fuel industry is in Oxford’s institutions and establishment. We are concerned that the concealment around ExxonMobil may suggest that much more information regarding Oxford’s ties to the fossil fuel industry may still be hidden.

“By recklessly carrying out research on behalf of the fossil fuel industry, and by accepting donations from fossil fuel companies, Oxford continues to provide fossil fuel companies with a social licence to continue to destroy the planet and perpetuate injustice. Oxford must cut its ties to the fossil fuel industry immediately.”

OCJC are also demanding that the Committee to Review Donations and Research Funding develops a policy to ban donations and research funding from fossil fuel companies, incline with existing policies towards tobacco companies.

Associate Professor in Human Geography at the University of Oxford, Amber Murrey, said: “The Oxford Climate Justice Campaign has documented prolonged and alarming patterns of mutual support between the extractive industry and the University. It demands that we have open conversations about the ethics and socio-environmental consequences of fossil fuel extraction and should trigger action by University leadership.”

A spokesperson for ExxonMobil told Cherwell: “The ExxonMobil Foundation supported a range of highly regarded programmes at Oxford, from scholarships to help train future health leaders from developing countries, through a one-year Master of Science degree with a strong focus on global public health threats including malaria, HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis, to research devoted to encouraging the economic empowerment of women through entrepreneurship. These were longstanding, very public philanthropic programmes that provided and continue to provide considerable benefit in developing countries.”

Regarding accusations that the company had denied the severity of climate change, and had funded climate change denial, ExxonMobil told Cherwell: “Allegations about the company’s climate research are inaccurate and misleading.

“ExxonMobil supports the Paris Climate Agreement, and is playing a constructive role in developing solutions. Since 2000, we’ve invested more than $10 billion to research, develop and deploy lower-emission energy technologies. This includes pioneering research in advanced carbon capture and storage, cogeneration, methane emissions reduction and algae-based biofuels. We also advocate for sound public policy that can help facilitate advances in technology, such as putting a price on carbon.  More information is available on our website and on Energy Factor.”

An Oxford University spokesperson told Cherwell: “The University of Oxford safeguards the independence of its teaching and research programmes, regardless of the nature of their funding. Those donating money or sponsoring programmes at the University have no influence over how academics carry out their research or what conclusions they reach. Researchers publish the results of their work whether the results are seen to be critical or favourable by industry or governments.

“Our partnerships with industry allow the University to apply its knowledge to real challenges of pressing global concern, with funding often going directly into research into climate-related issues and renewables. None of the philanthropic funding highlighted by OCJC has gone into extraction and exploration research. Rather, it has been used to widen access to education and to fund scholarships, academic posts and capital costs. The proportion of research funding going into fossil fuel exploration and extraction has declined significantly over the last decade, whilst the percentage going into renewables projects has increased.”

Image: Roy Luck/CC BY 2.0 via flickr.com

1...306307308...2,499Page 307 of 2,499

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 James Ashley