Thursday 7th May 2026
Blog Page 708

Ex-cricketer leaves students outraged with ‘sexist’ speech at Brasenose Sports Dinner

Amelia Horn
-
0
Ex-cricketer leaves students outraged with ‘sexist’ speech at Brasenose Sports Dinner

Students have expressed outrage following Brasenose’s annual Sports Dinner, held on Thursday 28 February, after the speaker, ex-cricketer Don Topley, allegedly read out a “inappropriate and misogynistic” poem.

The poem that Topley is reported to have read is titled ‘Never Trust a Cricketer’. The entire poem can be found here. (The website requires that visitors be 18+.)

One couplet reads: “Then there’s the real stonewaller, girls, he knows what he’s about; and if you let him settle in, its hard to get him out!”

One Brasenose student in attendance, Sophie Brookes, told Cherwell: “[Topley] asked the audience if we knew what sport is currently the fastest growing in popularity – ‘girl’s cricket.’ Then, without any further comment, he goes on to read the poem.

 “A few girls walked out halfway through because they felt so uncomfortable. The whole experience was worsened by his rambunctious way of speaking and the unashamed expressiveness and pride with which he read his poem.”

Another student said: “I walked out with a few friends and we only came back when he was finished. As we all left, there seemed a general consensus that the poem had been in very poor taste. Lots of the women there felt their achievements undermined, and lots of the men felt very embarrassed that [Topley] was representing sports.”

Topley was reportedly invited to speak by a Brasenose JCR member who was an alumnus of the same secondary school as the sportsman. The JCR Sports Representative told Cherwell: “The speech was meant to be on his sporting experiences and career, I didn’t know about the poem until it happened.

“I apologise if anyone was offended by the content of the speech, it was never my intention and at Brasenose we would never support misogynistic behaviour under any circumstance.”

It is believed that no college members were aware of the contents of the speech. Cherwell has contacted Brasenose for comment.

On this matter, Sophie Brookes stated: “It does worry me that the speech wasn’t read by someone before. That said, clearly no one anticipated this and the speaker is in no way a reflection of attitudes within the college.”

Another Brasenose student present at the dinner, Maya Misra, told Cherwell: “It’s not an issue in the sense that Brasenose condoned it but that there wasn’t a vetting process and it speaks to the laddish sports culture that still exists.”

She described the Principal of the college, John Bowers, who was at the dinner, as looking “so uncomfortable”.

Dan Topley told Cherwell that he is unaware of any allegations that have been made against him.

Wadham student suspended over work for radical Islamist group

Sam Millward
-
0
Wadham student suspended over work for radical Islamist group

A student at Wadham College was suspended by the university after revealing he tried to recruit Oxford students for Hizb ut-Tahrir, an Islamist extremist organisation. The suspension has since been lifted.

The third year engineer, described his wish to “rebuild” the organisation in Oxford to an undercover Daily Mail reporter, stating that he was “close” to getting other students involved in the group. According to the reporter in question, he has been investigated for the views expressed on Islamist terrorism and ‘Jihad’.

Following this enquiry, his suspension was lifted, an Oxford University Spokesperson has told Cherwell: “Oxford has worked in close consultation with local police Prevent leads over these allegations and the student in question was suspended immediately.

“This matter first came to light so that a thorough investigation could take place. We can now confirm that, following the investigation, the suspension has been lifted.

At the University of Oxford we take our responsibilities under Prevent extremely seriously and will always act to safeguard all our students.”

Cherwell understands that the student’s identity was verified by another member of the Hizb ut-Tahrir group.

In the short video, published online on the 8th March, the student outlines the past presence of ‘a few brothers’ at Oxford, who have subsequently left, leading to his attempts to ‘rebuild’ the organisation within the university. He also expresses support for Hizb ut-Tahrir (a group banned from campuses for their support of radical Islamism), as well as for the possibility of influencing “the whole [Muslim] community” with just “2-3 brothers.”

Hizb ut-Tahrir is a political organisation, which seeks to establish an Islamic caliphate and Sharia Law across the countries in which it operates. In 2004, it was banned from university campuses by the National Union of Students, as it was deemed to “threaten, demonise and attack the lives of students” and was considered to be “responsible for supporting terrorism and publishing material that incites racial hatred.”

The organisation has been banned in at least 13 countries worldwide, whilst multiple violent acts have been attributed to members of the group. On 2nd July 2015, Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain published a press release rejecting the creation of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

Hizb ut- Tahrir exists legally in the United Kingdom, and membership is not proscribed by the government.

The Counter Extremism Project describes the group as ‘Islamist’ and ‘Jihadist’, seeking to “unite Muslims under one Islamic Caliphate”, but the Home Office has previously ruled that the group does not advocate violence, but described it as “‘anti-Semitic, homophobic, and anti-Western”.

Speaking to The Daily Mail, a Fellow at the Henry Jackson Society (an anti-extremism think-tank) Emma Fox described the situation as “a grave threat to the safety of students at Oxford that should never have been allowed to fester”, going on to say ‘‘that such an insidious group has found its way into such a prestigious campus shows the depths of Britain’s extremism problem.”

The student, Wadham College and the university have been contacted for comment.

A correction was made to this article on the evening of the 9th March. It was brought to Cherwell’s attention that the suspension referred to in this article was no longer in effect, as implied by the previous version.

Cambridge joins UCAS ‘adjustment’ scheme

Ben van der Merwe
-
0
Cambridge joins UCAS ‘adjustment’ scheme

Disadvantaged A-level students who did not receive an offer off their predicted grades could still get a place at Cambridge if they outperform expectations, under a UCAS scheme.

UCAS’s ‘adjustment’ scheme allows universities to offer places to students whose final results exceed their predicted grades.

Oxford has not announced any decision to join Cambridge on the scheme, telling Cherwell: “We watch with interest the evaluation of Cambridge’s decision to partake in adjustment.”

The plan will see Cambridge offer up to 100 undergraduate places to disadvantaged A-level students who get unexpectedly good results.

Cambridge’s director of admissions Dr Sam Lucy said of the scheme: “Adjustment provides those students who go on to achieve highly with an opportunity to be reconsidered as soon as they have their final results, rather than having to make a reapplication the following year.”

Russell Group Head of Policy Sarah Stevens described the decision as “welcome” and “further proof that Cambridge is looking for different ways to promote greater diversity among its students.”

Oxford Students’ Union VP Access Lucas Bertholdi-Saad told Cherwell: “I certainly think this is a step to be welcomed. I think Oxford was under the impression that such a step would not work with UCAS; the University is committed to access and I hope we will look at this again.”

A spokesperson for Oxford University told Cherwell: “Oxford is fully committed to being more reflective of wider-society and supporting prospective students of all backgrounds to make competitive applications to Oxford.

“We watch with interest the evaluation of Cambridge’s decision to partake in adjustment, meanwhile we know we have more to do in attracting more under-represented students to apply to Oxford, and are working energetically on our own concerted, strategic approach to widening participation to Oxford, including bespoke collaboration with schools and prospective students.

“With this approach we hope to break down perceived barriers to entry, as we continue to encourage more talented applicants of all backgrounds that Oxford can be, and is for them.”

Formula One 2019: What to expect

Andrew Hallam
-
0
Formula One 2019: What to expect

As the first race in Melbourne draws closer the pecking order for the season is beginning to take shape, perhaps altered by new aerodynamic regulations for this year. It’s difficult to be sure where every team stands at the moment, as statements to the press have been predictably guarded, but it seems that testing in Barcelona has given some teams cause for optimism and others plenty to worry about.

Mercedes have won the Drivers’ and Constructors’ double in each of the last five seasons. Under the excellent leadership of Toto Wolff, they have produced the longest winning streak since Schumacher and Brawn’s Ferrari team of the early 2000s. Continuing with Hamilton and Bottas, the team has one of the most experienced driver partnerships on the grid and are a safe bet to continue competing for poles and victories this year.

A likely challenger to Mercedes’s dominance, Ferrari has withstood a winter of significant changes. Maurizio Arrivabene has been replaced as team principal by Mattia Binotto whilst Kimi Raikkonen lost his seat to Monegasque driver Charles Leclerc. These changes–alongside increased spending–have seen a racy-looking car arrive in Barcelona. The rhetoric accompanying this has been fierce, with Vettel stating that “Ferrari has everything it needs to win the title”.

The third team with hopes of the championship will be Red Bull, who hope that the switch from the unreliable Renault package to Honda engines will allow them to take the fight to Ferrari and Mercedes. They claimed to have the best chassis last year and arguably had the fastest driver in Max Verstappen. If Honda can compete with the Mercedes and Ferrari engines ahead, Red Bull will be a serious contender.

Renault are likely to continue being ‘best of the rest’ but they will hope to challenge at the front this year, high ambitions that led them to the signing of Daniel Ricciardo. However, there are few signs Renault will have the car to fight those ahead. Haas F1 will also aim to build on a strong 2018, their best-performing year since they entered the sport, and will be continuing with the same strong pairing of Romain Grosjean and the often-controversial Kevin Magnussen. The success of their new striking black and gold car may depend on Ferrari’s ability to continue winning the engine development battle against Mercedes.

Alfa Romeo will be the new name of the team which ran as Sauber last year. They made huge improvements throughout 2018 and they will aim to continue this progress in 2019. Kimi Raikkonen will be sure to push the car to its limits: don’t be surprised if he gets the team their first podium since 2012. New team Racing Point will take over Force India, buying them out after they had run into financial difficulties. Talk of increased investment under new ownership will be welcomed, and new driver Lance Stroll will be looking to shake off the ‘pay driver’ tag sometimes assigned to him, competing against established runner Sergio Perez.

Towards the back of the pack, Toro Rosso have praised their engine suppliers, Honda, in what should be good news for sister team Red Bull. The rookie Alex Albon and Daniil Kyvat form a slightly suspect driver partnership. Expect an unspectacular, if consistent, performance this year. Another team that is tipped to struggle this year is McLaren: after a poor finish of 2018 the Surrey-based team have little cause for optimism after losing a huge asset in Fernando Alonso and using weak Renault engines. This could be a year to forget for a team already gearing up for the big rule changes in 2021. Williams’ season is already off to a bad start after they arrived at pre-season without a car. This caused them to miss two days of running, and the car that then arrived looked unsophisticated and will be unlikely to pose any real challenge to the field.

Formula One 2019 may well be the most unpredictable season since hybrid engines were introduced, with three strong teams that each have a genuine chance of being champions come November. This level of competition hasn’t been seen since 2010 and I for one cannot wait.

JCR Presidents brand University’s mental health provisions “completely unsustainable”

Joanna Lonergan
-
0
JCR Presidents brand University’s mental health provisions “completely unsustainable”

30 JCR Presidents have signed a letter condemning Oxford University’s current mental health provisions.

Signatories of the letter include the JCR Presidents from Merton, Jesus, LMH, Oriel, Magdalen, Balliol, and St John’s. 

The letter, seen exclusively by Cherwell, reads: “The collegiate system tends toward ad-hoc welfare structures. While at some colleges the welfare team can give much needed emotional support, or referrals to the counselling service or NHS, elsewhere, suitable procedures might be completely lacking.

“This leaves students as the main point of contact for those struggling with mental health problems: the SU found that 85% of JCR welfare reps are called out to crisis situations. This very [sic] troubling, and completely unsustainable.”

Oxford University spends more on mental health services annually per student than any other university in the country, with £1,000,100 spent in 2016/17 according to statistics obtained by Cherwell last year.

Yet there is serious discrepancy between colleges. Only ten out of the 38 Oxford colleges and six PPHs offer an on-site counsellor. Colleges without an on-site counsellor rely on the University’s counselling service, which, according to their website, sees between 11% and 12% of the student population each academic year. 

The University is in the process of developing a ‘Mental Health and Wellbeing Strategy’ in order to address the problems surrounding the existing provisions, however there has been recent criticism over the way this has been managed.

In their letter, the Presidents claimed: “There has been a severe lack of public leadership on this issue from the University governance, the sort of leadership that has been demonstrated elsewhere’, referencing the proactive role of Graham Virgo, Cambridge University’s Pro-Vice Chancellor for Education.

They went on to say: “The students we represent have seen no comparable public statements from key University figures, and no recognition of mental health as an institutional priority.

“Furthermore, the lack of student consultation in the creation of this strategy is highly irresponsible at best, and deeply negligent at worst. Common room welfare teams cannot be on the frontlines of the battle, yet remain as peripheries to this conversation.”

All undergraduate colleges appoint Junior Deans, JCR Welfare Representatives, and trained Peer Supporters. In addition, all colleges have chaplains, who are often involved in pastoral care, especially as Welfare Co-ordinators. 

In the letter, the 30 JCR Presidents set out their demands, which included: “The senior leadership of the University, including the Vice Chancellor or Pro-Vice Chancellors, should declare their concern about student mental health. This should ensure that any efforts are transparent, so we can hold them accountable to these promises.”

Addressing their concern over the lack of student involvement in the development of any new mental health strategy, the Presidents called for: “extensive student consultation sessions regarding the implementation of the Mental Health and Wellbeing strategy”

They also requested: “The Vice Chancellor should release a written statement responding directly to the requests made by this letter, which outlines the actions that the University leadership will be undertaking.”

The end of their letter expressed concern for the impact the inadequacies of the current mental health provisions were having on other areas of student support.

“We must recognise that we are indebted to Student Welfare Services, including the Disability Advisory Service and the Counselling Service. We do not want their work to be eroded by overstretched budgets, and overdue by cases unsuited to their expertise.” 

Speaking to Cherwell, Mansfield’s JCR President Saba Shakil said: “The vast disparity in wealth between colleges means that whether or not students receive effective mental health support is a matter of pure chance.”

Shakil added: “The University is beginning to discuss the issue of wealth inequality on a meaningful level, but the impending mental health crisis will not wait for funds to gradually trickle into individual college welfare budgets. 

“What is needed is commitment from the central University to a comprehensive and universal approach to mental health provision across all colleges, ensuring that students who need help can get help, regardless of which college they happened to end up at.”

In a collective statement given to Cherwell, the signatories said: “This letter expresses the frustration of the entire student body about the lack of central university leadership on the issue of mental health. 

“We are committed to supporting the SU’s efforts to lobby the university to make mental health an institutional priority and have a constructive conversation with the Vice-Chancellor and Pro Vice-Chancellors.

“The student voice is an essential part of the dialogue, and together with the SU’s open letter, we hope that the university understands the gravity of the issue.”

Indian and Pakistani students unite for anti-war protest

Ben van der Merwe
-
0
Indian and Pakistani students unite for anti-war protest

An anti-war protest organised jointly by Indian and Pakistani students attracted more than 70 demonstrators on Saturday.

The protest was organised as a response to rising tensions between India and Pakistan, which saw both nations conduct aerial bombing missions.

One of the organisers, Rhodes Scholar Zehra Naqvi, told Cherwell: “It was powerful to experience the strong sense of community that exists amongst Indians and Pakistanis.

“I feel immensely grateful that we could reach across heart-breaking divides and come together like this in all our diversity and beautiful similarities.”

Staff, students and locals gathered outside the Radcliffe Camera to read out a joint statement signed by 81 Indian and Pakistani students and the Oxford University South Asian Society.

The statement read: “As students in a land that is foreign to our homes – India and Pakistan – we’ve always marvelled at how we seamlessly gravitate towards each other, and how we are able to come together in community in ways we can’t back home.

“We often talk about the similarities we share in our food, culture, histories and the challenges we face. The Indo-Pak community has emerged as a place of refuge and comfort for us.

“However, when we imagine visiting each other’s homes we realise all the ways in which visas and politics restrict us. As we sit together now, watching the increasingly violent direction the current discourse is taking, we are frightened.”

India and Pakistan both claim full sovereignty over the Himalayan region of Kashmir, though each control only a part of it. The heightened tensions began with a suicide bombing in Kashmir last month which claimed the lives of 44 Indian soldiers.

The joint statement strongly condemned the attack while warning that war would be in the interests of neither country, stating: “War only benefits a handful of influential profiteering interests who feed on hatred and fear.

“It is the people who never wish for war that face its repercussions. It is a luxury to be able to debate the possibility of war when the death, grief, and loss that accompany it are not part of your everyday.

“For some people, especially the already dispossessed, the human cost of war is no cliché. It is lived reality.

“We urge our fellow Pakistanis and Indians both within and outside the subcontinent to stand together in unity, focus on our commonalities, and reject divisive narratives.

“We call upon the leaders of our countries to develop de-escalation protocols, organise constructive peace talks and dialogue for the resolution of all bilateral issues, especially for Jammu and Kashmir. It has historically borne the brunt of power struggles between the two states. We call for an end to the violence being perpetuated on Kashmiris.

“War and warmongering are always unequivocally deplorable. At a time when India and Pakistan are lurching from crisis to crisis, we condemn the irresponsible rhetoric flooding the media in both countries in the strongest possible terms.

“We dare to imagine a future that is free of divisions and violence, and unshadowed by the politics of war. We refuse to succumb to this environment of fear and suspicion. We refuse to see our friends as enemies. We refuse to hate those we hold dear. This is not our war.”

Students recited poetry in Urdu, Punjabi, Bengali and English in what organisers described as “a bid to drive home the horrendous consequences of war and to help foster a sense of solidarity in the Indo-Pak community”. The demonstration concluded with the crowd singing ‘Hum Dekhenge’, a revolutionary poem by Pakistani intellectual Faiz Ahmed Faiz

Review: I punched a Nazi (((and i liked it))) – ‘Brechtian to the absolute T’

Robyn Allen
-
0
Review: I punched a Nazi (((and i liked it))) – ‘Brechtian to the absolute T’

Long walks down the beach, nights at the movies, punching Nazis – these are the things that really butter my biscuit. When I heard that there was a play running about punching Nazis, I simply could not have been more excited! Then I found out I wasn’t going to be allowed to punch a Nazi. I was distraught! What happened to good old-fashioned Brechtian audience interaction? Instead, all I was offered was the potential opportunity to blitz a goldfish in a blender, and a long story about Siamese twins by a woman in a fancy-dress rabbi hat. Somewhat less cathartic and satisfying than ramming one’s fist into the cheek of a bigot.

This was, however, exactly what was successful about mielspiel’s production. The level of grit required to get through the more philosophically complex sections could have paved Route 66. But, this managed to stop what would have made the production a failure; being conducive to the audience feeling morally superior and purified. Allowing the audience to feel good ‘cos they’ve gone to a play wot bashes Nazism.

The idea of an event inspiring personal release as opposed to inspiring change is something of particular relevance today when one looks at the manner in which the protests against Steve Bannon and Marion le Pen took place and is a phenomenon that is increasingly common. However, in this production it was clear the director had taken the words of Brecht to heart and did not intend I punched a Nazi to simply ‘satisfy the habits of its audience’. No main message was clearly presented to be accepted. The play was, in fact, unbelievably frustrating in the extent it forced you to engage. Brecht’s alienation effect was used to an absolute T, everything that was happening on stage was clearly presented as theatre and artifice, the smugness and passivity of the watching audience was banished.  

The play was also compelling in the way it subverted the expectations it had built for itself. It wasn’t really about Nazis, in particular, nor was it, in fact, a love story (despite the idea that it was both those things being conveyed to the audience at various intervals). Frankly, I would say it came closer to a lecture series than it did The Notebook.  This continual concept subversion did lead to a large amount of audience confusion, which was what truly made the production. Initial qualms such as why their representation of Brecht was played by a woman in white clout goggles and whether it was really okay to be taking about fatal surgery on infants using a toy baby with an Adolf Hitler moustache led to a querying mindset. With this audience mindset induced, deeper questioning was inspired through subtly posing ideas about whether violence is ever the correct response, and to what degree any action can be considered a response rather than an opening act. After seeing it one continually thought about the questions of the foggy lines between right and wrong which it raised.  By inspiring this questioning mindset, I punched a Nazi did exactly what it needed to do.

Fantastic Cities: unveiling the complex realities, and fantasies, of urban life

Franklin Nelson
-
0
Fantastic Cities: unveiling the complex realities, and fantasies, of urban life

“Peaceful change happens when we break out of the bubbles we inhabit, wake up, and connect with other realities.” observes the artist Penny Woolcock, whose first major solo exhibition is showing at Modern Art Oxford on Pembroke Street. Arranged across a number of rooms and comprising film and mixed media installations, the exhibition charts the course of Woolcock’s career, as she moved from Argentina to Spain and then to the UK, helping to establish the Oxford Printmakers Collective in 1976.

The exhibition opens with Utopia, a seven-minute film made in 2015 at The Roundhouse in London, which sees eight people read aloud extracts from Thomas More’s 1516 book of the same. Despite being half a millennium old, More’s considered and eloquent critique of society’s structures – he discusses capitalism, private property, and social relations – chimes with contemporary discussions about the 1%, ‘Generation Rent’ and what seem to be increasingly fractured social groupings: old and young, rich and poor, Remainers and Leavers.

Next is When the Same Road is a Different Road, made last year, which the gallery describes as ‘a dynamic new film installation presenting the startlingly different responses of two individual narratives […] on a short walk through the same city streets’. Those two individuals are a young gang member and the artist, and their thoughts and preoccupations go some way to underlining just how different it can feel to navigate London’s streets. Whilst the artist reflects on the similarities between a playground and the work of the artist Phyllida Barlow, the young man is busy watching out for rival gang members brandishing knives; both are, and are not, members of the same community. This is followed up by the intense, if more intimate, When I First Saw a Gun, where we see a separate group of eight recount their encounters with a gun. ‘The first time I saw a gun was’ and ‘that was the first time I saw a gun’, how they all begin and end their testimonies, despite the diversity of their individual stories, draws them together to emphasise that weapons do not discriminate according to race, gender or class.

Fantastic Cities, the last sound and film installation, is the highlight. Also made last year, it consists of two films which examine experiences of Oxford and Los Angeles from radically different perspectives. In Oxford, we see three white students dressed in sub-fusc strolling through the Bodleian against an unmistakably religious soundtrack, only for that image to be replaced by two rap artists critiquing the town/gown divide and Oxford’s appalling record on student diversity, the camera observing them as though in a music video. La La Land presents us with a Los Angeles where the number of tents on sidewalks outstrips the number of stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, its title throwing into relief the city’s crazily polarized nature (and a nod to the very apolitical 2016 Oscar winner). Woolcock calls it a ‘shitty, shitty, shitty city’, one where people go hungry whilst others can buy a beanie for $155. What makes these films is that their artistic aspects do not suffer for their political takes.  

Whilst the layout of the exhibition means that voices from individual sound and film installations occasionally clash, Modern Art Oxford is to be commended for this timely and engaging exhibition about community and multicultural cohesion, which is all the better for its exploration of the importance of Oxford to Woolcock’s artistic trajectory. Whilst pointing to the vibrant and diverse possibilities that the city has to offer, their fantastic nature, evoked in the exhibition’s title, signals also how remote from reality spaces and people in a city can be.

Hollywood’s lesser known gender gap

Cecilia Wang
-
0
Hollywood’s lesser known gender gap

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a male actor in Hollywood in the ripe stages of mid-life, is paid significantly better than his female colleagues.

This was vividly illustrated by the Wahlberg/Williams controversy last year. The entire cast of All The Money In The World had to participate in a reshoot following the urgent need to replace Kevin Spacey. Michelle Williams was paid $1000, whilst Mark Wahlberg was receiving an extra $1.5 million, a fact unknown to Williams. The backlash ensuing from the expose forced Wahlberg to donate his extra earnings but failed to get Williams better pay.

The story is only one example of the gender pay gap in Hollywood. Spectators tried to attribute many reasons to the mind-blowing disparity. Although both actors were represented by the same agency, they had different agents. Wahlberg’s agents were well-known for being tough negotiators that pushed for higher pay, whereas Williams’ agent seemed to have taken a much softer approach in anticipation of an awards show nomination.

There are wider trends that permeate the entire industry. Between 2016 and 2017, Wahlberg was the highest paid actor in the world, with earnings of $68 million. Whereas the top female earner, Emma Stone, only made less than half of that, $26 million. Nineteen male stars earned $15 million or more whereas only five women managed to do so. The pay gap can be attributed to the dominance of blockbusters and paucity of opportunities for older women. Wahlberg topped the list thanks to soaring fees for films including Daddy’s Home 2 and Transformers: The Last Knight, according to Forbes. Natalie Robehmed, Forbes associate editor, said: “This pay disparity comes down to roles: in release schedules dominated by superhero movies and brawny blockbusters, there are simply fewer parts for women that pay the sizeable backend profits that result in leading men’s large paydays, or the franchise sequels that permit aggressive negotiation for favourable deals”.

According to a 2016 study, women comprise just 28.7% of all speaking roles in movies and only a quarter of roles for characters are over the age of 40 – an example of ageism and lack of opportunity that Hollywood’s leading men simply do not face. “Until there are an equal number of high-paying roles, there will continue to be an inequality in the pay checks of Tinseltown’s very richest.”

A study by Time magazine revealed that earlier in their careers, women receive more roles than men. That trend reverses sharply after age 30 as men continue to receive an increasing number of roles while women receive fewer and fewer. It seems that women are rather like exotic sports cars which depreciate the moment they are first sold; whereas men are more like vintage cars whose value appreciates as time goes by.

However the situation is not so bleak. The push for gender pay equality gained momentum following the aforementioned Wahlberg/Williams scandal, and industry leaders are making increased efforts to treat actors fairly.

Most relevant to this article, there are an increased amount of complex roles available for older women as evident in recent films. The acclaimed film, The Favourite, which took home several BAFTAs, featured three women in its leading roles, two of them over 40, Rachel Weisz and Olivia Colman. Colman has just won Best Actress at the Oscars. She is an example of someone beating this trend as her career has only been on an upward trajectory since she entered her 30s. Glenn Close and Meryl Streep are further examples of female actors continuing to deliver stunning performances for very complex roles. However, the abundance of offers for roles has not necessarily translated into higher pay. This is mostly due to the fact these films often have mid-level budgets.

It is in the nature of blockbusters to have strong male leads. This in turn, means that these blockbusters are the same films that can afford to pay actors millions. The two issues are intertwined at their very foundations.

However, within these confines, female actors can still negotiate for more screen time and equal pay with their male colleagues. A push for transparency can also greatly aid this process as Hollywood is notorious for backdoor negotiations and actresses tend to find out about the scale of inequalities from the paper rather than from their producers.

Pushing for more dominant roles for women and roles in blockbuster franchises is vital if we seek to close the gender pay gap. It is only when women dominate the screen that they can tilt the balance of power.

On the Basis of Sex: battling through a man’s world

Jules Pars
-
0
On the Basis of Sex: battling through a man’s world

With the recent releases of The Favourite and Mary Queen of Scots, Hollywood appears to be taking an ever-increasing interest in the stories of strong female figures plucked from history. On the Basis of Sex arrives as part of this welcome influx of female-led films, its heroine the legal and gender parity icon, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Felicity Jones). The film is a biopic which begins with her first day at Harvard Law School and rushes to its the dramatic core: the landmark tax appeal for unmarried male carer Charles Moritz in 1970. This case saw the beginning of her role in overturning U.S. laws based on sex discrimination.

While the film takes its title from Bader Ginsburg’s work on legal gender bias, the theme of sex discrimination pervades its entire two-hour running time. This preoccupation is established in its beautiful opening frame: the bright blue of Bader Ginsburg’s dress as she walks up the Harvard stairs induces a stark colour contrast with the darkly-suited mass of men with her, highlighting the gender imbalance of a 1950s law school intake. Merely a few scenes later, Bader Ginsburg and her female peers will be asked by the dean why they have “taken a man’s place” at Harvard.

The education-based chapter of the film highlights Bader Ginsburg’s personal struggle against institutional discrimination (such as being almost farcically ignored in class), before jumping to law firms rejecting her for being female, then abruptly fast-forwarding to her stint as a law professor at Rutgers University in 1970. These time jumps preclude a more in-depth exploration of Bader Ginsburg’s struggles with sexism in her early career and the transition from the 1950s to the 1970s – an otherwise fascinating period for women’s rights. The few scenes in which these issues are expressed are evocative and effective vignettes, but the lack of more intense exploration renders this beginning somewhat superficial.

While director Mimi Leder does a good job in steering scenes fecund for schmaltz away from the saccharine, the implied relationship between Bader Ginsburg’s motivation and the opinions of her teenage daughter, Jane (played with passionate teenage aplomb by Cailee Spaeny), is overdone. It comes across as both oversentimental and patronising to Bader Ginsburg. Yet Leder cleverly suggests that the cresting of second-wave feminism catalysed Bader Ginsburg’s motivation to fight against sex-based discrimination.

Once the film reaches its primary storyline of the Moritz case, the pace slows down. It is a testament to Leder that despite knowing the outcome of the case, the dramatic tension as to its result remains. While the film retains its historical integrity in not over-dramatising or elongating the courtroom scene, it is an inspirational and thought-provoking twenty minutes that it is worth seeing this film for alone.

While perhaps not an obvious choice to play Bader Ginsburg, Felicity Jones deftly evokes her calm determination and intellectual ferocity. Although Bader-Ginsburg is clearly the protagonist of her own biopic, the film must also be applauded for its skilful handling of the relationship between Bader Ginsburg and her husband (Armie Hammer). Leder manages the difficult balance of presenting a mutually loving and respectful relationship in a prominent way, without making it a distracting element of the narrative. Ultimately, this film is a thoughtful tribute to Ruth Bader Ginsburg which deserves a careful viewing.

1...707708709...2,583Page 708 of 2,583

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