Thursday 9th October 2025
Blog Page 741

Travels with a Cross-Dressing friend: A Personal Biography of China

0

BBC Foreign Correspondent Michael Bristow, based in Beijing, was reaching the end of his stay and wanted to write a book about the country in which he had lived and worked for eight years. He was not alone in this; journalists often write memoirs of their times spent in foreign countries, and China was not short of its biographies. He needed a way to make his book memorable. So, he set out to write a popular history of modern China, told through the stories of the people he met; this history is the book, China in Drag: Travels with a Cross-Dresser.

Having taken Chinese language lessons for some time, he developed a close friendship with his elderly language teacher. “I came to realise through my friendship with him,” he said, speaking over the phone, “that he was really the embodiment of modern China.” His teacher was born shortly after the Communist Party came to power in 1949, was then sent out into the countryside as a child and then, when China opened itself up in the late 1970s, took the opportunity to go to university and become a journalist and later a teacher. “I realised that by telling his story I was telling the story of China”, Michael told me.

He decided to travel around China to various places of significance to his teacher, who agreed to travel with him. On the very first night of their journey, his male teacher came down to dinner in their hotel dressed as a woman.

“It was a complete shock and surprise to me”, Michael said. After five years of friendship he was blown away. However, he emphasised the importance of this realisation in the direction the book would take. “I could write about Chinese history through the prism of my language teacher, a cross-dresser”, he told me, an insight which would give a unique focus to his book.

“There’s been a lot written about high politics and economics in Chinese history”, he said, “but it is difficult for people in the West to understand China, what it’s like, what its people are like. The book gives people an idea of Chinese character, and although my teacher’s is an unusual character, that gives it an extra dimension about how people react to gender and gender expression.” At its core, Bristow argues, his book is really about “how an individual navigates Chinese history”.

The personal sense of the book’s approach to writing about Chinese history really struck me during my conversation with Michael. Having written about China for five years as a journalist for the BBC, the approach was very different. “The things I wrote about in the book were things I didn’t put in the news”, he told me. “News covers big things going on in a country, like a leadership battle or a big sporting event like the Olympics. A conversation with friends over dinner, that’s not news and it’s going on all over the world, but from those conversations you get much more of a sense of what Chinese people are interested in talking about.”

Michael’s fascination with personal stories and peoples’ lives is clear. His book, he says, is filled with things that are “not news-worthy, but valuable for people outside China as an insight into how people live their lives, what their hopes are for themselves and their children.”

He is quick to dismiss any idea that his book is a comprehensive history. “In no way does this book pretend to tell you everything you need to know about China”, he warns. It is written very much from an individual’s perspective – his. “I’m a British person, I grew up in Britain”, he tells me, “it’s a narrow look at China in that respect.”

Personally, I think Bristow’s unashamed bias is the book’s major strength; it is a story of China, seen through his eyes, accompanied by his cross-dressing teacher. Too often we read stories, particularly in the news, which claim to present an authoritative and unbiased account of an event or an issue. This book takes the opposite approach and its sincerity gives it a definite personal touch.

I asked Bristow to leave me with what he wanted people who read his book to know about China. “Foreign journalists do their best to help people understand China”, he told me, “but the Chinese government tries to mask itself. It’s quite a mean, authoritarian regime that robs people of proper legal process. There’s no such thing as an opposition politician, there are no free NGOs, no pressure groups, nothing like that. The Chinese government tries to convince people that it’s Western journalists who talk too much about human rights, but we probably don’t talk enough about it.

“Hopefully through my book you can see China for its good and bad, and particularly the government for its bad.”

Post Malone Review – ‘Sticking to the Script’

0

Post Malone is the epitome of the modern rapper – essentially because he rarely actually raps. If stripped of the numerous effects lathered onto his husky timbre in the
production process, Malone’s vocals would not be out of place in folk or country music, and his beloved acoustic guitar belies a sweet spot for authenticity in songwriting. So why has he narrowed himself down to Hip Hop?

I think the answer is that he hasn’t. It’s us, the critics and listeners, who restrict him to that category. He blends aspects from numerous genres, even though his lyrics never stray far from the rap sector. It is this past unpredictability which makes Beerbongs & Bentleys
somewhat disappointing. Swathes of dreamy, downcast synths permeate the record, causing each track to bleed into the next, almost as if the project could be one hour-long
song.

The vocals are uninventive, with each track sounding derivative of the two lead singles, ‘Psycho’ (ft. Ty Dolla $ign) and ‘rockstar’ (ft. 21 Savage). To an extent the album suffers at the expense of the latter’s immense popularity. Is Post Malone playing it safe by sticking to his proven formula, or simply honing his sound? Either way, there is definitely more room for risk-taking.

The subject matter is equally as limited, with Malone adopting the lonely king persona as he boasts hollowly about his hedonistic lifestyle, before dispelling this shroud of glitz, and revealing the despair that his fame has brought in the form of broken relationships and paranoia about losing it all. Although these glimpses into the artist’s mind are undoubtedly intriguing to the listener, the concept has been exhausted over the past few years. When rappers first started utilising the shadows to complement the sheen of their glamorous lifestyles, an art which the likes of Kanye West, Drake and Kid Cudi all mastered, it was novel and moving.

Post Malone is halfway there, but Beerbongs & Bentleys lacks the sparks of excitement it needs to be considered a great album. Don’t get me wrong, odes to the good life are packed in aplenty, but they are all delivered through the same murky haze as the laments, so it cannot help but sink into monotony. Individually, ‘Otherside’ is a production highlight, while Nicki Minaj wins the battle of the features with her fiery contribution to ‘Ball on Me’. ‘Stay’ is a psychedelic, guitar-driven ballad in the mould of Malone’s 2016 hit ‘I Fall Apart’. The track is expertly stripped back, leaving in the spotlight the singer’s talent for stringing vocal pirouettes together to form soaring hooks and and glittering, raw verses. ‘Candy Paint’, which was used on the Fast and Furious 6 soundtrack, is a feel good anthem that’s been given delicate treatment in terms of accompaniment, and it flourishes as a result. Unfortunately, it ends up serving as an exception, rather than a common feature.

This album is easy to listen to, and contains numerous examples of attractive melodies, atmospheric production and soul-baring lyrics. The hooks are undoubtedly awesome and dynamic, and are enjoyable in isolation. It is a solid, well-constructed piece, but with few surprises. As a whole the project suffers from a lack of diversity both in the vocals and the production, leaving you with little motivation to maintain your stamina until the 18th and final track.

Lets Talk About: Procrastination

1

I am sat at my desk, all the books that I need are by my side, my laptop on full power and a new Microsoft Word tab is opened. My room is clean, my corridor is pindrop silent. The conditions for productivity are perfect. This will be the best essay ever to grace this prestigious university.

I launch into my introduction the same way a world-class athlete launches into their race. Proud of my succinct and engaging start, I decide to reward myself with a biscuit. And so begins my fall.

As I open my kitchen cupboard of culinary wonders, my eyes are bombarded with a colourful assortment of snacks. Suddenly that one, pathetic custard cream looks like it’s not enough to keep a sparrow alive. I proceed to tear open a packet of Doritos like a toddler with its presents on Christmas morning.

It is at this point I forget my essay question and begin to ponder the real questions: Should I be vegan? Why can some people wiggle their ears and others can’t? What time is it in the Philippines right now? The Philippines! That reminds me, I have a friend from there who I haven’t spoken to in a long time, I wonder how she’s doing? Let’s check her Facebook. Is that a boyfriend? The rest is history.

Sadly, far too many of us can relate to such an episode. We reserve multiple hours for carrying out a task and prepare the perfect conditions to go about it. Yet this is not enough—we are missing that all important drive. Frustrated at our own lack of productivity, we deprive ourselves of proper breaks, under the impression we don’t deserve them. And so we remain at our desks, with all the time in the world, though with nothing we’d rather do less than the task we set out to complete.

Psychologists state that our irrational desire to favour pointless tasks over necessary ones stems from the fact that we subconsciously place a low value on the task at hand. We run away from our work because we doubt our ability to do it well. Conversely, we know very well that it is much easier to succeed in eating multiple snacks or completing Buzzfeed’s Which RuPaul Drag Race Queen are you? quiz. Procrastination is a comfort that lets us forget out doubts.

We can only reduce our tendency to procrastinate if we understand why we do it. We should avoid plunging into the miserable state of unproductive guilt; the ball and chain that prevents us from looking after ourselves. Taking a real, well-deserved break will freshen our minds and boost productivity once we return to our work. I would even argue that having too much time to do a task is detrimental. We have a false sense of security if we have an entire free day to complete a task that does not actually require so much time.

We need to take a step back from our unrealistic expectations of ourselves and maintain a healthier work-life balance. This way the task at hand will become a more organic part of our day. Just how we wouldn’t miss eating a meal, we can learn to view our work as nothing more than an element of daily routine, reducing the pressure that we feel to achieve the unattainable: perfection.

Underrated Spaces: Jesus College Hall

Think of a theatre, and the image that will pop into your head will most likely be that of a proscenium arch. This standard theatre space has become ingrained in our imagination. Oxford has its standard theatre spaces, too: the Playhouse, the Pilch, the BT, the Keble O’Reilly. Using less conventional environments often creates unique dramatic effects and plays with that all-too impenetrable distance between actors and audience.

The college hall: the stage of many an overpriced meal, of lavish formal dinners, the backdrop to dreaded collections. Like the traditional theatre, the college hall has become so familiar to us that it has somewhat lost its power to shock and astound. Lucy Clarke’s rendition of John Webster’s The White Devil, which is being performed this Saturday, recreates the intimacy and claustrophobia of the Early Modern theatre through the vessel of Jesus College hall – Jesus being the only Oxford college to date from the Elizabethan period. For authenticity, the choice of stage could not be better.

I talked to Lucy, who wrote her Masters thesis on the similarities between the performance of law and drama in the 17th century, about directing in this piece of history. “This place is amazing. It looks like an indoor theatre which was built upon the principle of a Tudor theatre,” Lucy said. She believes that there could have been a production of The White Devil in this very hall in 1612/13, “I saw it and I just thought, I have to do this”.

When asked what the college hall offered that a more conventional space could not, Lucy told me, “Definitely intimacy. “This play is all about watching people; it’s about claustrophobia; it’s about seeing desire you shouldn’t see.” This translated extraordinarily well into the preview of the central trial scene I got to see. The cardinal’s (Noah Vickers) imperious taunting booms impressively in the echoing hall. Vittoria (Sophie Claypole) defends herself with the utmost sass, and the close proximity of the actors gives every smirk, grin, and wink, immeasurable potency. “You’re always on somebody’s toes in that theatre,” chuckled Lucy, half-jokingly. As grim figures marched, not across a raised stage, but right beside me, holding candles barely two feet away from my face, I understood what she meant. “Revenge tragedy is disquieting,” Lucy told me, “it’s meant to make you feel something you shouldn’t be able to feel […] This is like going to watch a horror film in so many ways and I think that’s what you’re going to get from seeing it like this.”

The actors have an audience on three sides of them, with two groups sitting on either side and another sat behind them on the balcony. This arrangement strengthens the link between theatre and legal court. They are “surrounded by an audience that can see you, and you can see them”. The atmosphere of anxiety is so palpable in an imposing building such as this. I will not spoil some of the other discomforting elements of the play but be warned that Lucy wants to create the “sense of being put at risk by theatre that is politically challenging, but also physically challenging”.

One aspect of the Early Modern theatre we might want to leave in the past is fire hazards. Not only are there candles strewn across the tables, but every character carries one. Luckily, this doesn’t cause movement to look stilted at all. “They’ve had a lit candle in their hands for three weeks. I’m not worried about them dropping it,” Lucy reassured me.

One might expect obtaining permission to perform in such a historical space to be impossible, but, as a Jesus student, the college gave Lucy the space for free. That said, she “had to send a lot of emails […] talk to the domestic bursar, the hall staff [….] it took probably a good six weeks of negotiations to get”. Fortunately, Lucy “believe[s] Jesus are quite keen to do it again”, and a free theatre space as authentic as this is not something to scoff at.

It is amazing how much excitement an original venue can bring to an already accomplished-looking production. As a final word, Lucy told me that she thinks “it’s so important to try using space in different ways […] I really hope this does continue. I think it’s such an opportunity that is just not used by so many students”.

No rest for the wicked

1

Ask someone how they’re feeling and you are most likely to be met with a response along the lines of ‘tired’, ‘shattered, ‘exhausted’ or knackered’. Whatever the variation of the feeling, the root cause is the same lack of sleep . Ask anyone how many hours shut eye they got last night and the number is most certainly less than the eight and a half recommended for young adults.

It’s quite alarming for young people to feel this way. University students should not be feeling weary as if they are eighty as opposed to eighteen. We are chronically tired, though in a twisted sort way we feel like we revel in it. We freely admit our exhaustion to those who will listen in a way we wouldn’t do with any other ailment . We relish in telling our friends about our sleep deprivation like it’s a badge of honour.

If there’s one thing we shouldn’t be bragging about, it actively impairing our judgment and cognitive ability. It is as if the work we do when stressed and mentally drained is somehow more respected or of better quality. Spoiler alert: it’s not

Whether its inanely scrolling through your phone till 3am, dancing at the club till 4 am, essay crisis till 5 am or best of all, ‘the all-nighter’ the realities of student life mean we just aren’t getting enough sleep. The sight of sitting next to someone in a lecture, still jittering from their last espresso, is all too familiar to most of us.

As much as we may convince ourselves this is an “Oxford problem”, sadly it is everywhere and will unfortunately follow us long after we graduate. Many of the careers and internships we aspire to will similarly steal us away from the well needed rest we want and deserve. We will be surrounded by people who leave the office after midnight, and return the next morning for eight, and casually act like it is what a sensible modern workplace demands of us.

Of course, we are all guilty of the occasional late night. Sometimes things need to be done for a deadline, or we want to stay till Mr. Brightside comes on. Sometimes you have 4-month-old crying infant to feed, in which case you truly do have a good reason to feel tired— nourishing human life is of course exhausting. What I do object to is the relentless lack of sleep we subject ourselves to for no good reason. We leave ourselves feeling nauseated the next day, anxious, and almost certainly less capable of doing work. As much as we may want it to, four hours sleep does not make us better versions of ourselves.

The first signs of sleep deprivation are being grumpy, irritable and impatient. Most people feel on edge or emotional after an all- nighter. This tiredness builds up week after week, all the while you are unknowingly damaging your immune system. Granted that most won’t be facing life threatening illness, but this is just one of the reasons, colds, fevers and flus take longer to go away at Oxford than at home.

This culture of ‘sleep deprivation one upmanship’ has been recognised by Arianna Huffington in her book ‘The Sleep Revolution’. After collapsing from exhaustion and waking up in a pool of her own blood, Huffington began to extoll the benefits of shut eye. She questions the long accepted belief that we must burn ourselves out in order to achieve something. This greatly differs from the listicles we read about where successful people are supposed to wake up at 4:30 am, hit the gym, drink a smoothie, do some reading whilst also checking the stock market. Holding ourselves to the standards to Tim Cook, Jeff Bezos or Warren Buffet will only ever end in disappointment.

Another part of our lives which prevents us from unwinding is technology. Electronic devices emit blue light which supresses melatonin levels, making it much harder to fall asleep. Late night Instagram stalking is not conducive to a restful night. When we have so much connectivity in our hands, it also creates a sense that there is more to do and see. Checking the news, emails and messages compulsively can become a never-ending habit.

People often defend their choices by saying “there’s only 24 hours in a day- I want to make the most of it by doing everything I can”. If we are getting those solid eight hours however, we stand to make the other 16 so much better. Unsurprisingly, life has a better quality when you aren’t miserable and sick

A busy lifestyle especially the kind we have in these short eight-week terms, leaves us trying to micromanage our lives- scheduling and allotting time for everything and everyone. FOMO dogs our experience at Oxford. There’s always a feeling that we are not making the most of our privileged position and the opportunities presented to us. There’s so much to do from rowing, music, sport, drama, student politics, clubbing, *cough* student journalism, dating, volunteering, all while we are apparently meant to be applying for internships. You can’t conceivably juggle all these things- no one can. So by giving some of them a miss you aren’t committing a cardinal sin, you’re just admitting that you are a human.

So why not put your phone on airplane mode or at least ignore some of those swollen group chats and make some time for yourself. Even if its mere twenty minutes, it’ll leave you feeling less frazzled. Also learn how to say no to the commitments you just aren’t feeling up to.

In short, most of our exhaustion comes from guilt. A guilt that we are not doing enough for others, for our work and social life. But in truth, most people are not doing enough for their wellbeing. If we are to change this cycle, we need to remember to put our health first. So go ahead, close your laptop, then your eyes, and get the rest your body needs.

It’s our generation’s responsibility

In the weeks running up to the referendum, copies of the Good Friday/ Belfast Agreement were sent to every home in Northern Ireland, each branded with the words: “It’s Your Decision”. On Friday, 22 over two million people across the north of Ireland made that decision to endorse the Agreement. Years of negotiation – involving the political parties of Northern Ireland and the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland – had finally resulted in an international peace agreement. From 1968 until 1998, Northern Ireland had suffered from conflict over issues of civil rights, identity and, the constitutional position: in one corner of the British Isles, over 3,600 were killed in what is commonly known as ‘the Troubles’. The Agreement was not a perfect settlement, but many believed that it was the best means to achieve a peaceful society.

We had not yet reached our first birthday when the Agreement was endorsed by the people of Ireland. Two decades later, young people like us are frustrated: frustrated with the absence of devolved government for almost 500 days; frustrated with the increasingly balkanised nature of politics and rhetoric; frustrated with the failure to deliver a truly peaceful society. It is not only young people who are frustrated – polling from LucidTalk (published in the Belfast Telegraph in June 2017) revealed that over 60% of the local community in Northern Ireland wanted to see reform to the system of government.

With this context in mind, we sat down with Sir Jonathan Phillips to reflect on Northern Ireland’s journey in the last twenty years – where have we come from, where are we now, and where is it that we are going?

Drawing from his wealth of experience, Phillips empathises that the current team of negotiators tasked with restoring devolved government are stuck “between a rock and a hard place”. His arrival in the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) as Permanent Secretary in 2002 had been a baptism of fire. Within weeks the Assembly collapsed, fundamentally because IRA weapons had not been decommissioned. Over the next eight years, he worked with all stakeholders to restore devolved government and create more sustainable structures. We ask how such experiences compare to the prevailing situation.

According to Phillips, the process leading up to the Good Friday Agreement and its subsequent implementation involved the British and Irish governments moving “pretty much in lockstep”. Considering the various factors at play, it was ultimately this “enormously strong co-operation…[which] carried the process to the devolution of justice and policing powers in 2010″. In contrast, recent rounds of negotiation have left the impression that both governments were “not on precisely the same page”.

Despite the small but significant differences remaining between the DUP and Sinn Féin on provision for the Irish language, Prime Minister Theresa May and Taoiseach Leo Varadkar arrived in Belfast in February, hoping to close the deal. Far from strengthening the image of both governments’ commitment to make Northern Ireland work, the leaders were placed in an embarrassing position when the deal failed to materialise.

Relations have undoubtedly been affected by the exogenous shock of Brexit. Phillips adds that the rhetoric exchanged between the Dublin and London governments is “of a kind [he] cannot remember” in recent times, perhaps not since the 1980s. If Phillips is right to emphasise the crucial role of the British and Irish governments in forging agreements in Northern Ireland – and many commentators would agree – then another breakthrough soon looks improbable.

Brexit was the surprise 18th birthday present for our generation, the Good Friday Agreement generation. At the time of the referendum, Northern Ireland seemed to be heading in the right direction. Assembly elections in May 2016 had returned the DUP and Sinn Fein as the largest parties. In a surprise move, the three smaller parties decided to enter into Official Opposition rather than share power in the Executive. It was hoped that this Opposition could hold the Executive to account and offer a real alternative for the voters. The inclusivity of the peace process culminating in the Good Friday Agreement, had been exchanged for the exclusivity of a political process. The DUP and Sinn Fein responded by promising to “get on with the work”, a supposed symbol of how far the two parties had travelled together in the past ten years. A draft programme for Government was agreed and released for consultation.

By January 2017, however, the Executive had collapsed over the botched Renewable Heat Initiative (RHI). There were naturally a range of factors which made the breakdown of government more likely but one can certainly put forward the case that Brexit made politics more complicated. When asked about his thoughts on Brexit and the efforts to restore devolved government, Phillips states that it is hard to offer certain judgements from outside the current discussions.

Nevertheless, he surmises that it will be enormously dif cult to restore the Executive before the Brexit framework has been decided. The current uncertainty and disagreement over the future status of the Irish border makes progress unlikely.

Aside from its implications for the constitutional future of Northern Ireland, several politicians from across the British Isles have raised concerns about civil disorder in the event of a hard border post-Brexit. At a recent event in London, former Prime Minister John Major suggested that a hard border would “divide communities that are now united” and provide “a focus for protests from fringe groups – either unionists or nationalists”.

Admittedly several leading Brexiteers, Jacob Rees-Mogg among them, have dismissed such speculation outright and are committed to maintaining a frictionless border, whatever the outcome of the EU negotiations. It is nevertheless a scenario that should be considered seriously.

One of the most innovative provisions of the Good Friday Agreement – and a critical issue underpinning ‘the Troubles’ needing resolution in the agreement – was the question of citizenship. The Agreement guaranteed individuals in Northern Ireland the right to both Irish and British citizenship. Nationalists could imagine themselves as part of the wider community on the island of Ireland, while Unionists continued to feel secure in their membership of the United Kingdom. The success of this arrangement – certainly in the eyes of the Nationalist community – depended on the existence of a frictionless border between Northern Ireland and the Republic. While no one yet has been able to describe the shape of a hard border, many fear that the existence of any physical infrastructure will divide communities and weaken the Agreement.

For Nationalists in Northern Ireland, citizenship means much more than a passport – it means the right to freely and easily commute, travel and trade across the island. It must be stated that violent republicans represent a tiny proportion of the Nationalist community and young people are overwhelmingly committed to achieving their political ambitions through democratic means.

But even a cursory glance at Irish history will reveal that violent political organisations have been fuelled by the use of symbols and propaganda – the hard border may provide ammunition to such groups, in more ways than one.

In the run up to the centenary of the Northern Ireland state in 2021, the constitutional position of the six counties has never been more precarious. Republicans feel emboldened by the prospect of an Irish unity vote in the wake of Brexit. While unionists feel confident that they can carry the day in any future border poll, they are worried that the British government will undermine the strength of the Union by negotiating regulatory alignment between Northern Ireland and the EU or moving the border with bloc into the Irish Sea. Ultimately for devolved government in Northern Ireland, as well as most other matters in British and Irish politics today, it “all comes back to Europe”, Phillips says.

When working in the NIO, Phillips helped the British government maintain a position of benign neutrality as a guarantor of the Agreement. We ask him how the parliamentary arithmetic at Westminster, given the Tory-DUP confidence and supply arrangement, impacts on the British Government’s ability to continue acting in this manner. He believes that while the British Government “could well be behaving with absolute impartiality”, it is exceedingly difficult for them to “escape the perception that they may not be.”

Phillips makes the interesting point that sometime soon we could see Sinn Fein entering into a confidence and supply arrangement of some kind with one of the biggest parties in the Irish Republic. Unionists would then question the neutrality of the Irish government with equal temerity.

When asked about the most successful aspect of the Agreement, Phillips lauds it as overall a “model of ambiguity”. It enabled entrenched opponents to compromise. On the principle of consent for the future constitutional status of Northern Ireland, the timing of a border poll and questions of identity, the Good Friday Agreement provided a framework which could embrace almost all points of view. By contrast recent rounds of talks demonstrated the limits of ambiguity.

Since the collapse of devolved government in January 2017, the issue of Irish language provision has come to the top of the political agenda and is currently a stumbling block in finding a solution. Sinn Féin demand a stand-alone Irish Language Act, modelled on similar cultural legislation in Scotland and Wales, while the DUP has been staunchly opposed.

It would be unfair to say that most in the DUP are anti-Irish language, the majority feel that it has become politicised as a result of Sinn Féin’s influence and believe that other minority languages deserve equal protection. Earlier this year, a solution seemed possible when both parties – although this is disputed by sources within the DUP – provisionally agreed to an all-encompassing Culture Act.

This is a prime example of constructive ambiguity at work, an agreement that both sides can claim as a victory. Despite this, the deal fell through at the last minute when the DUP realised it could not carry its base on the issue.

Could this constructive ambiguity have worked in previous years? Since the Agreement, Northern Ireland has lost some of its most influential and effective leaders. The principle architects of the Agreement from the Northern Ireland side, John Hume of the SDLP and David Trimble of the UUP, were sidelined by the electorate within ten years.

In their place emerged the DUP and Sinn Féin. We ask Phillips about his experiences of working with former DUP leader Peter Robinson and the late Martin McGuinness. Both were very effective in carrying their bases with them, Phillips comments, demonstrating great ability to sell compromise and ambiguity as a win for their side.

The current generation of political leaders in Northern Ireland had yet to demonstrate that capability.

Phillips points out that the real tragedy of the last 20 years is the fact that politics has become more ‘tribal’, not less. Two decades on and there are still more than one hundred peace walls separating communities across Northern Ireland. When it comes to education, 80% of Catholic and Protestant children attend different denominational schools. Almost all social housing is segregated. These examples testify to the failure to create a shared and integrated society and demonstrate that the tribal nature of our political leaders ultimately trickles down to tribalism in our communities.

After the process of devolution was completed in 2010, it could be said that the stabilisers were taken off the Northern Ireland political bicycle too soon.

Everyone felt that it was time to let Northern Ireland forge its own way.

We can find many people to blame for the collapse of the Assembly. The British and Irish Governments backed away too soon, perhaps. Equally, parties and politicians in Northern Ireland could be said to have lost their focus, lost their balance and not advanced fast or hard enough towards lasting settlement.

We can blame a whole variety of people, factors or circumstances. On the 22nd May 1998, the people of Northern Ireland and Ireland took the giant step, and voted three-to-one for the fresh start promised in the Good Friday Agreement.

The Good Friday Agreement Generation – the young people of Northern Ireland today – have a responsibility over the coming years and months, two decades after that Agreement was endorsed by their parents and grandparents, to rediscover the hope; to drive forward with ambition and optimism; in spite of and because of our current stalemate.

A vote on the Brexit deal is only democratic

1

The current approach to Brexit is mired in chaos and confusion. After 40 years of Eurosceptic rhetoric, the government is still unable to agree with itself, let alone the EU, the kind of Brexit it wants. While Tory MPs and journalists scramble to evade responsibility – Fraser Nelson, editor of the Eurosceptic Spectator magazine, recently blamed these troubles on the fact that Tory Eurosceptics were “reformers not leavers” who had “never really gameplanned” actually leaving – Britain’s future prospects are under grave threat. This amateurish and chaotic approach to Brexit makes the case for a people’s vote quite by itself.

It doesn’t have to be like this. We are not doomed to roll over and accept whatever halfbaked deal David Davis brings back from Brussels.

In April, the People’s Vote campaign was launched to ensure that the people can have the final say on Brexit. It seems a little strange that political figures who have spent their careers campaigning in the name of democracy to allow the public a say on European matters have found themselves rebuffing calls for the electorate to confirm or reject Brexit.

Yet in the increasingly surreal world of Brexit Britain, the angry rejection of the idea of another vote has taken on precisely this tone. Those campaigning for the people to have the final word have become saboteurs to be crushed. The people have become the enemies of themselves. Yet, I believe, a vote to confirm or reject the deal eventually negotiated is a democratic imperative.

The mandate from June 2016 is simply not strong enough to carry out this immensely harmful project. The variety of voices from the leave campaigns, from the MEP Daniel Hannan’s insistence on a globe-trotting free-trading Britain, to the nativist isolationism of the Faragebacked Leave.EU, means that the vote was not a majority for any one form of Brexit.

People voted for a spectrum of engagement with Europe and institutions, with models for a post-Brexit Britain resembling anything from Norway to North Korea. We need a vote where the facts of Brexit are on the table. In a general election, people not only can vote on the manifestos that parties can implement in government, but they can also punish leaders for reneging on them. No such democratic safeguard exists from the referendum — there was no one clear set of principles and policies that voting Leave signified. Vote Leave will not have to fight another campaign or defend the promises that they made to the electorate. Rather than being just a ‘re-run’ of the vote from June 2016, this will be the first referendum on the reality, rather than the fantasy, of Brexit.

Then there’s the new information that has come to light since the vote. There’s the fact that our economy has gone from the fastest to the slowest growing in the G7. The fact that EU-national NHS staff are leaving in droves. A divorce bill of £40 billion, not mentioned once in the campaign, will continue being paid off until 2064 – by our generation. The attempt to negotiate a solution to the Irish border shows how the Brexiters’ irresponsibily blithe dismissal of such difficulties before the vote has become exposed by the realities of geography and international law.

It’s simply wrong to say that Brexit is an “unstoppable express” as Boris Johnson has done. Lord Kerr, who wrote Article 50, has said that it can be unilaterally withdrawn, and the rest of the EU has made it clear that Britain would be welcomed back in. Attempts to sow doubt over this are yet another example of Leave-backers playing fast and loose with the facts. Brexit is more important than any one general election.

We won’t get another look at it in another four or five years. It is a hugely significant process that will have wide-reaching effects on the population for generations to come. 1.5 million young people – including most freshers at this university – have turned 18 since the vote, yet will be denied a say on this generation-defining issue.

The only way to settle our future is to return to the ballot box and let the country make a choice on the final deal: a people’s vote for our future.

Funny Friends Preview – ‘A roundup of all the best student talent in the country’

I’m not really sure what to expect when I sit down to preview the Oxford Revue’s new show, Funny Friends. Comedy, when done badly, can be the most cringe-worthy experience in the world – especially if you’re the only audience member. It is fortunate, then, that the sketches I saw left me completely blown away, and genuinely saddened when the preview had to end after half an hour.

The show features a range of sketches, catering to a range of humours. My personal favourite featured an overly cheery housewife arranging the flowers and cake for her husband’s funeral, but those with a more topical taste in comedy might enjoy the trailer the group have just released – which featured two incredibly sweary builders catcalling a range of feminist slogans.

Indeed, from what I have seen of the Revue this term, feminism is something that is integral to the group’s social motto. I am told by the director that half of their committee is female, that the show will be compered by a female comic, and that their last show, No Market For Old Men, featured an entirely female cast and female team of writers. Given that comedy is an industry that is notoriously gender imbalanced – from my basic research from Google, the comedy website Chortle lists around 1,300 male comedians, and only 300 female comics – this commitment to equality of opportunity seems all the more important. The sketches that reference toxic masculinity are also expertly handled and laugh-out-loud funny, inclusive and topical without being tokenised.

The Oxford Revue’s annual Playhouse show has been a part of the Oxford comedy scene for as long as anyone can remember. A roundup of all the best student talent in the country, it also features the Cambridge Footlights and the Durham Revue – and while I can’t attest to the quality of their sets, having only seen Oxford’s offering, the troupe that spawned Fry and Laurie and half the Inbetweeners can surely be trusted to produce something funny.

For two hours of laugh-out-loud comedy, you can’t go wrong with The Oxford Revue’s Funny Friends. With student discount still valid until Sunday, I would advise booking soon to grab the best seats – and who knows, you might even catch a rising star in action? This is the troupe that produced Monty Python, Rowan Atkinson and Sally Phillips after all. All I can say is I left with a smile on my face, feeling genuinely uplifted, and overwhelmingly impressed with the comedy talent I had witnessed. A definite must-see.

Life Divided: Dating App or Dating Crap?

Dating App: Anna Lewis

There was a time when the only way to meet single hopefuls was to physically place yourself in the same room as them. Whether it was a sweaty club, tea parlour, or chess society, the scenario was the same. You talked, you touched each others’ chests, a priest had to be there.

These days, you can get all the validation of a stranger finding your fleshy shell appealing without any of the vulnerability that comes with eye contact. Dating apps have caged that nervous first encounter safely behind a blue light-emitting screen.

For some, it’s the Deliveroo of people: a plethora of options available at your convenience. For naysayers, it’s also the Deliveroo of people: leaves you feeling greasy, with the product looking a lot different to how it did in the pictures.

Even if you’d rather be playing Snake than matching with one, you have to admit gamifying your love life is efficient. You can have indiscriminate flirtations, quests for true love, then become disillusioned, abandon romance and commit to a life of celibacy, all while having a poo.

Sure, judging people entirely on their appearance is shallow, but at the end of the day you can’t drown in a paddling pool.

Not to mention the informative qualities of that fair fish-filled sea. Before breakup news has broken, the new singletons appear in my feed, sad and over-eager to get back at their true love. And gone are the days of Orange Is The New Black references; if she’s into women too, we’ll match sooner or later, no need to play sexuality battleships to determine if she’s interested.

As we all give up and let Charlie Brooker write the script, dating apps are becoming a cornerstone of modern life. When relationships are kindled on Twitter and Instagram, the question becomes – what isn’t a dating app? Essentially all we’re doing is making the same bad decisions as always, just faster, and with less mobile data remaining.

Dating Crap: Sam Juniper

The sheer scale of abuse levelled at women, ethnic minorities, and transgender individuals on dating apps is catastrophic. I’m not denying that this sort of behaviour doesn’t exist elsewhere in society – it’s omnipresent – but it’s undoubtedly magnified by the smokescreen of pseudo-anonymity afforded to the perpetrators of said abuse through dating apps. The chances of facing any genuine repercussions for making misogynist, racist, or transphobic remarks are minimal; only a tiny fraction are outed online. You can create a horrible atmosphere and ruin someone’s day with relative ease.

Despite having the profiles of hundreds, if not thousands, of singletons in your area literally at your fingertips, dating apps occasionally have the somewhat paradoxical effect of leaving its users feeling lonely or invalidated. If you’ve wasted a solid hour swiping left and right  but end up with little to show for it, save for a handful of matches and unanswered messages, it’s understandable that one would be overcome with a feeling of implicit rejection.

This feeds into a wider problem which has arisen with modern dating: everything you say and do is put under a microscope. If you were to chat up a cute stranger in a bar, would you open with a witty remark concerning something you’d observed about them from afar? Or worse, with an improvised poem? No, you wouldn’t; it’d come across as weird and overly familiar. On Tinder however, approaches such as these are commonly employed in the hopes of standing out from the crowd – this distorts conversation away from genuine human interaction.

Everybody’s profiles are curated to project the most flawless version of themselves they possibly can. It’s all reduced to a superficial environment where you’re judged chiefly on a few photos and perhaps a bio. Fuck an app. Why not get to know someone in person? The awkward way, the messy way, the normal way, but the authentic way. Ask that fit boy on your course if they want to go for a coffee. Invite that that pretty girl you kissed at Bridge to lunch. So, what if they say no? It makes zero difference to your world.

 

Recipe Corner: Nawamin’s curry

Ingredients:

For the chilli paste/oil:

10 dried red chillies
10 dried shrimps
8 cloves of garlic
6 shallots
3 tbs of palm sugar
1 tsp of sea salt flakes
3 tbs of vegetable oil

For the crab meat in curry sauce:

200g of white and brown crab meat
2 tbs of mild curry power
2 tbs of olive oil
2 cup of full fat milk
2 onions
1 green celery, including the leaves
3 stems of spring onions
3 green chillies
2 tbs of the chilli paste (above)
2 tbs of soy sauce

For the Thai Jasmine rice:
2 cups of Thai Jasmine Rice

For the garnishes:
2 spring onions
Green celery leaves

2 red chillies

Method:

Chilli paste/oil:

Start by soaking the dried chillies until they are soft and grill the garlic and shallots in the oven at grill mode 240 C for five to eight minutes until they are slightly burnt.

Also crush and grind the dried shrimps until they turn to coarse powder then remove them from the mortar.

Then mix the soaked chillies, grilled garlic and shallots in the food processor and add the dried shrimps.

Add the vegetable oil in the heated saucepan and stir fry the paste for five minutes before adding palm sugar. Keep stir-frying the paste for another ten minutes until it is caramelised. Finally, remove from heat and leave it to rest.

 

Crab meat in curry sauce:

Firstly, stir fry the curry powder with olive oil in a sauce pan until fragrant and keep adding milk to make the curry cream sauce. Add the chopped garlic, julienned onion, spring onion, green chillies, celery, and then the chilli paste and soy sauce.

Finally, throw in the crab meat and reduce the sauce to a low heat until serving

For the Thai rice:

Boil the rice on high heat until the water starts to run out and then continue to cook the rice on a low heat for another five minutes. Stir the rice and leave it in the pot covered with the lid.
For the garnishes:
Julienne the spring onions and the red chillies and then soak them in water together with the celery leaves. Serve the crab with the jasmine rice and top with extra curry sauce and garnished vegetables.