Monday 6th October 2025
Blog Page 791

A slow descent to hell

Becky Cook
-
0
A slow descent to hell

Flying has undoubtedly made our lives a lot simpler. You can pack your bags, book a flight and be there in a day. While it has made the world seem smaller and more accessible, it has also introduced a swathe of potential annoyances to our travelling experience. There is not only the disturbing possibility that you could be making Richard Branson or Michael O’Leary even richer, but the whole experience is an obstacle course of lengthy lines, sullen adults, blubbering babies and cramped seating which will combine to test your resilience, character and sense of humour. Taking this into account, I was surprised to find that customer satisfaction is somehow on the rise for the fifth consecutive year, according to the J.D Power 2017 North America Airline Satisfaction Study. It measured the satisfaction of travellers at a high of 756 points out of 1000. Yet when the topic of international air travel arises, it only ever seems to elicit grumbles and horror stories. It was only last summer that a United Airlines passenger was violently dragged off a plane after refusing to give up his seat, sparking a media firestorm for the airline. The passenger, Dr. David Dao, sustained a concussion, broke his nose and lost teeth in the process of being flung out.

It is a far cry from the time when air travel was a privilege and a luxury. The current exercise in discomfort feels akin to conveying cattle; this is only being made worse by the increase in air passenger misbehaviour. Perhaps, in-flight inebriation is becoming a somewhat understandable way to ease the affliction of flying. I can’t help but dread walking through the airport’s sliding doors, longing for the comparable tranquillity of a train ride. The cinematic wonders of Brief Encounter and Before Sunrise would hardly have worked on a Ryanair flight to Ibiza. If there are two things that airlines are expertly capable of, they are getting you where to need to go and making you miserable on the way.

I distinctly remember the unabated joy with which I used to look forward to going home to England for the summer holidays. It wasn’t the destination that I anticipated, but the journey itself. Flying, now widely considered a slow descent to hell, was something myself and my younger siblings all relished. Hours of lounging with newish films and food brought to you by saccharine sweet flight attendants. Suffice to say I have since morphed into the embittered archetypal flyer than makes up the majority of the populace. The destination is now the only reason I can endure the chronic discomfort of the journey: enjoyment became inurement. What was the source of my epiphany? One long and arduous journey home to Shanghai for Christmas.

My sister Katie and I were travelling with Scandinavian Airlines for what was
our inaugural and conclusive flight with the commercial airline. Our Mum had left booking the flight too late and had to scrape the proverbial barrel. At check-in, we saw the SAS logo and felt reassured: we were in good hands. However, it turned out that, in this case, those who dare do not win. We went through the obligatory dehumanising security check. You should only have to wait in such mammoth queues for a rollercoaster ride or film tickets, not for an order to take off your watch and a once over from a burly woman with a truncheon in her belt. At this point you are forced to accept the fact that the airport will fleece you as you wind through a maze of duty-free shops, complete with various shop assistants spraying you unsolicited with some tween popstar’s new fragrance. In this case it was having to pay an astronomical sum for a bottle of water which, considering the price, should have been water distilled from the fountain of youth, filtered through sheets of gold and infused with Densuke watermelon.

We made it onto the plane; a dystopian place where all people are large and all seats are small. Airlines are increasingly enthusiastic to shovel as many passengers into their aluminium tubes as possible, a move which has to account for the astonishing shrinking act the plane seat has performed in recent years, shifting from nine abreast to ten. Once the clamouring for locker space had died down, we were left to our own devices for two hours while the ineffably useless pilot acted contrite over the fact that Air Traffic Control was facing a cataclysmic crash of their systems. At one stage, the air hostesses considered a mass disembark. Sense boarded and that was abandoned. We eventually pulled away from our gate and lethargically made our way to the runway for a take-off that was three hours overdue. The short flight was spent in a cloud of heavily salted savouries and a good book. By the time we were drawing close to Copenhagen Airport our giddiness at having finished another stressful term at Wellington had dulled and irritation was leaking into its place. We were pretty sure we had missed our connection.

Our first visit to Scandinavia got off to a literal shaky start. The aforementioned pilot of questionable ability announced this cracker over the intercom: “Ladies and gentlemen, the storm on the ground is very bad but I will try my best to land the plane”. I shall omit the expletives which were the sole words that could express our utter disbelief at the situation. I comforted myself with the knowledge that when a plane is about to crash the crew turn down the cabin pressure, so everyone is unconscious when it makes its final touchdown. Incredulity abounded, but despite the fierce turbulence, which was probably exacerbated by the pilot’s sweaty grip on the ludicrously named joystick, we touched the tarmac with all engines functioning and a consistent life count.

Then the fun and games really began: we were told to go to the Transit Help desk as we had missed our connection to Shanghai. We disembarked and had only made it off the gangway when Katie turned to me with a face resembling Edvard Munch’s masterpiece. At the best of times my sister is a haphazard, chaotic mess of disorganisation and always
picks opportune moments to express this muddled side of her character. She dropped her bags and, in a deadpan voice, told me she had left her passport on the plane before plunging back into the streaming multitudes getting off the plane. It was only when she returned empty handed that I could fully appreciate her imbecility. Her passport was in the bag she had left with me.

The atmosphere became strained as we sprinted to the Transit desk, and it was intensified by the circuitous queue of the fellow passengers we were confronted with once there. At this stage Katie and I were not on speaking terms, and so stood and silently waited as the line crept forward. Finally at the front, we were told that there were no flights to Shanghai until the following evening, so we would instead be put on one to Beijing in a couple of hours, with a subsequent connection to Shanghai. Too weary to object, we took it lying down and walked to our gate, eventually boarding in abject silence. The incompetence of SAS knew no bounds: our seats were not next to each other. We sat and waited for the vacant space in between us to be filled, hoping it wouldn’t. Luckily one woman walked past us; unluckily a six foot man indicated the seat was his. He was a curious creature, as every time the seatbelt sign lit up he would either not make any move to buckle his or he would actually undo it. This led to the tiring process of the flight attendant having to constantly come back and tell him to fasten his seatbelt.

I spent the nine hour flight intermittently sleeping and considering how the clichéd screaming child at the front of the cabin was the best birth control out there. A new obstacle was presented by the culinary journey we were subjected to. It is commonly accepted that plane food is largely unappetising; if confronted with the task of choosing your last meal, you’re hardly going to request the miscellaneous rectangle of beige matter you were served 30,000 feet above the Atlantic that one time. It has been found that at high altitudes our nasal passages dry out and the air pressure desensitises our taste buds, accounting for the prolific use of spicy and salty inflight dishes. Gordon Ramsay recently commented to Refinery29 that “There’s no fucking way I eat on planes. I worked for airlines for ten years, so I know where this food’s been and where it goes, and
how long it took before it got on board.” When presented with our gelatinous stew I had many questions. What were the yellow bits? Why was it emanating that smell?
What had a done to deserve it?

We landed on a typical smoggy morning in Beijing and as soon as we rejoined the ground our compulsive seatbelt companion whipped out his phone to obsessively check how many likes he had on his latest inane Instagram post. Katie and I were not particularly sad to part with him. We emerged, in the wrong Chinese city, resembling something that had been dragged through thorny undergrowth; and we still had another flight to go. We went through our domestic security check in a hazy delirium of fatigue, trudging our belongings to yet another gate. “When you fly Scandinavian” Katie monotonously repeated. It seemed they called for everyone but us to board the plane first: First Class, Business Class, families with small children, the elderly, people with pets, people with an arthritic knee, and people with neck rolls. Our fellow forsaken simply hovered, waiting to charge through. We were finally allowed on by the surly attendants only to find that, in typical Chinese flying etiquette, a couple of nonplussed passengers had taken our seats. The onerous process of getting them to move ensued, and we now had the language barrier to reckon with.

The flight was mercifully the shortest, especially considering it was the one most lacking the basic amenities of personal space and clean air. We finally landed in Shanghai – the odyssey was over. We began to look forward to seeing the family, showering and being able to stretch as far as our limbs permitted on a horizontal piece of furniture. When we landed for the third time in two days all the other passengers began clapping furiously. Such an irritating habit should only be permissible in a situation reminiscent of Airplane!, where a passenger has to land the aircraft. Once the round of applause had ceased, everybody was instantly on their feet, searching for space for themselves and their luggage to assume in the aisles. The flight attendants tried in vain to seat everyone again, but the majority of the passengers insisted on standing in the aisles for fifteen minutes while we taxied and waited for the plane door to open. Katie and I sat staring at the mayhem.

You would think, like we did, that this must be the end of our strife. However, just as we had missed a connection, so had our luggage; we left Baggage Claim with no clothes other than the ones on our backs. Katie and I emerged into Pudong Arrivals a shadow of the people who had walked into Heathrow Departures. It seemed we had reverted back to a primal state, consumed with hunger, fatigue and chronic irritation. We found no waiting family members at the arrival gate, so took a seat and waited once more.

Let’s Talk About: PDA

Becky Cook
-
0
Let’s Talk About: PDA

As someone who takes perverse pleasure in walking directly through the interlocked hands of a couple, I am not an advocate of public displays of affection (PDA).

In fact, I consider myself strongly opposed to the saccharine and at times nauseating ritual whereby unassuming onlookers can be subjected to the public exchange of saliva. Frankly, it’s something which should be confined to the privacy of four walls and a closed door, an airport arrivals gate or, at least, the shadowy corners of a crowded club.

Except, to the latter I will add the addendum that if you are a couple aggressively getting off in Bridge, try to avoid doing it in front of the narrow walkway to the toilets. You’re just in the way.

Perhaps it’s down to the four years I lived in Dubai, part of the United Arab Emirates, where public displays of affection are seen as insulting and offensive to the local customs and culture. In fact, they’re illegal.

I was told under no circumstances should I be overly affectionate in public. As teenagers, this seemed an irritating encumbrance to us all. Yet it was reinforced whenever I overheard my parents discussing the unsuspecting Western tourists that had been caught kissing on the beach or heavy petting at the mall, and who were thus met with severe penalties – from imprisonment to deportation.

I remember one flight back to the UK, looking across the aisle and seeing what I can only describe as a woman sporadically trying to fit her entire head into her partner’s mouth. I’d definitely become hyperaware of PDAs. While I understand that falling in love, or even in lust, is something special, I do think there should be a line. And, in my opinion, this etiquette boundary lies somewhere in between a subtle romantic touch and aggressive snog sessions. I have to ask why all this is necessary.

Why does every Tom, Dick and Harry need to be involved in your relationship, if only for a few moments of their day? These overt displays of affection just seem more performative than anything else; I can’t help but suspect there’s some overcompensation going on. My suspicion is reinforced by a study carried out by the University of Kansas in 2016, entitled ‘Wanting to Be Seen: Young People’s Experi- ences of Performative Making Out’. This found that one big motivation for PDA is image, with 32 per cent of female participants and 37 per cent of male participants admitting they’ve used PDA as a tool to show off their relationship to others. Obviously, I know this is not the only motivation, but whatever the incentive, thrusting private acts into the public sphere feels like a bizarre intru- sion of privacy for the onlooker. In short, it makes most people uncomfortable. But it is an inadvertent intrusion – it has become an unavoidable display, leaving the passerby feeling awkward and embarrassed.

Social media adds to the problem by providing a further outlet to the overt display of this soft porn. PDA becomes PDDA: public displays of digital affection. Again, I think this has a spectrum. Changing your relationship status is to be expected, but a barrage of sickly sweet statuses or snogging selfies are too much.

It is simply the same thing on a different public platform. These regular, gushing expressions of love are just too intimate. In an ‘Instagram age’, people have the task of discerning the reality from the fiction in what appears on their feed. The cin- ematised relationship adds another potential dimension of artifice. Scrolling through the endless posts all about how Chris owns Gemma’s heart, or how lucky Sophie is to have Ben in her life, gets old. Fast.

Ultimately, I really don’t feel I should be forced to bear witness to PDAs, or anyone else for that matter. It’s none of our busiiness, yet we can’t help getting involved, especially when it’s forcefully flouted in our faces. Exaggerated and overblown PDA simply feels constructed for appearances, even if in actuality it isn’t, and therefore utterly unnecessary.

Frankly, PDAs should be confined to weddings and similar special occasions. It might sound bitter, but beyond that, get a room.

Oxford’s obsession with public ‘wokeness’

Meha Razdan
-
0
Oxford’s obsession with public ‘wokeness’

Chances are, if you’re at Oxford, you have at some stage dealt in that most valuable of currencies: ‘wokeness’. When your university is constantly scrutinised for issues of access to BME or working class students, it often becomes a natural response from us, the young and revolutionary, to try transform the privilege of our education into a weapon with which to stick it to the man. These intentions are all very noble, but our obsession with constantly being socially aware, and more to the point, letting everyone know you’re socially aware, has turned activism into a performance more than anything else – ‘wokeness’ has become a commodity.

That’s not to say a sense of social justice is unnecessary – quite the contrary. In an environment as entrenched in colonial history as Oxford, where there is still a lingering association of privilege and exclusivity, individual social awareness is arguably an obligation. But it may be prudent to reevaluate what the motivation behind that social awareness, those activist impulses, actually is.

It doesn’t take a long or deep investigation to stumble upon examples of racism, homophobia, or classism at either institutional or localised levels in the University. Typically, these discoveries are met either with indifference or outrage, and those finding themselves indifferent are ultimately irrelevant to the question of any kind of activism, performative or otherwise.

It is that outrage that ought to be carefully unpicked – for some, this outrage emerges because they themselves have struggled against or find themselves affected by these instances of inequality or disparity. This is a straightforward, entirely justifiable outrage, the one that should be the major motivating factor behind anyone’s outcry.

The response to be wary of is the outrage – usually of those not directly affected by the issues at hand – fuelled by guilt, ego, or some cocktail of the two, an outrage that causes the bearer to look at injustice and disparity and see an opportunity: not to right wrongs or help others, but to play the hero, to demonstrate to the world how just and good you are.

I’m aware that sounds a somewhat harsh judgement. “After all,” you might ask, “isn’t it enough that these people are outraged at all? Shouldn’t you be glad they care enough to do something?” And to this I’d say: let go of the notion that doing ‘anything’ is helpful, that any and every little contribution (regardless of thought behind it) helps. It’s a social movement, and we need to hold ourselves to higher standard if we’re going to try to affect real change. When you’re dealing with an enemy as nebulous and pervasive as the issue of class, race, or otherwise identity-based inequality, you have to employ tactics, and think sensitively and critically about the effect you’re actually having.

The fact is, there are strategies people employ in their quest for ‘wokeness’ that are at best ineffectual, and at worst damaging to the causes they profess to help. Take call-out culture, for one. This is always a delicate one, because like many elements of performative activism, it probably started with good intentions. One of the primary rules of activism is never to remain passive or silent in the face of injustice – if you hear someone using an offensive slur, call them on it.

The problem with call-out culture arises when it descends from being educational into being pedantic, when its purpose shifts from correcting someone to humiliating them. It’s one thing to hear someone say something problematic and pull them aside during a quiet moment to explain to them the implication of their statement and why it ought not to be repeated. It’s quite another thing, however, to stop a group conversation and announce to someone how ignorant they are in front of the whole room.

Unfortunately, the latter seems to be infinitely more common. And the problem with this is that it is, above everything else, usually just unhelpful. It’s very easy, if you’re not directly affected by any of theisms, to forget that for better or for worse, the struggle to change societal norms is as much a political and tactical one as anything else. It may be arduous and unglamorous, but the reality is that for BME people or other minority groups, activism must often take the shape of working carefully to tackle far-spanning issues one facet at a time, incrementally and slowly.

As tempting as it may be, ‘dragging’ someone publicly isn’t going to make them magically more aware and sensitive, it’s not going to spark a sudden breakthrough wherein they suddenly begin to consider the overarching implications of the words they use as they connect to identity politics. More often than not, that kind of public calling out is just going to make them clam up and, to be honest, they’ll just think you’re a bit rude.

If we examine call-out culture further, I think it’s often true that people who jump to public call-outs are more often than not driven by their own desire to show the world how ‘woke’ and switched on they are. In being an activist, your main focus has to be the movement as a whole – you have to see the forest even if it means missing the trees.

Activism is a job, and sometimes it has to be a behind-the-scenes affair. You can’t (and often won’t) receive credit for the true and effective activism you take part in, but credit shouldn’t be your motivation in any case. If you can commit yourself to dedicated and thoughtful work helping to dismantle societally-ingrained structures of discrimination, then you’re exactly the kind of person the world needs.

If, however, your interest in activism revolves around the glory that comes from everyone around you knowing just how woke you are, then frankly you’re better off purchasing a ‘this is what a feminist looks like’ t-shirt and posting the selfies to your Tumblr followers while the hard work happens elsewhere.

@merascribbles

Final day of voting in Oxford SU president election

Alice Bruce
-
0
Final day of voting in Oxford SU president election

Today, the polls will close and the Oxford SU president and their team for the coming year will be announced.

This year sees a three-way race for the presidency, with Ellie Dibben, Hannah Taylor, and Joe Inwood all standing.

Hannah Taylor, an Economics and Management student from St Hugh’s College, was the co-chair of OULC last Trinity term, and has also been the charities representative for St Hugh’s JCR.

Taylor’s policies include the replacement of at least one of the termly Student Council meetings with a general assembly, which will allow non-delegates to attend. She also wishes to restart a partnership with the Brookes Union to have a safety bus to help students return from nights out safely.

Taylor also wants to coordinate action through JCR presidents on the Oxford Living Wage, the Preventing Prevent campaign, and prescription reimbursement.

She used her manifesto to emphasise the need for “solidarity” with University staff pushing for better working conditions.

Taylor told Cherwell: “The student union represents a student body of over 23 thousand students. This makes us potentially very powerful, if we can find a way to organise, come together and get things done.

“Organising like this is what I have spent a lot of my time at university doing. If any member of our union has an issue, we should cut away from the buzzwords and back them, by taking loud, visible action.”

Ellie Dibben, a history student at St Hilda’s, has previously been involved in the organisation of societies and campaigns in Oxford, including the SU’s LGBTQ+ campaign.

Dibben highlights “representation” as a key manifesto goal to act upon through further ‘implicit bias training’ for VPs and a general aim of improving the SU’s actions against hate crime.

Dibben also wishes to make the SU more inclusive for graduate students and to re-establish SU run social events, such as a club night.

They put particular emphasis on access, calling for further resistance to fee rises and the NSS survey, as well as easier access to hardship funds. Their approach to improving mental health-related issues is to undertake a student welfare survey and to create a better quality services for students.

Dibben told Cherwell: “Oxford SU faces a crisis of disengagement despite its amazing work behind the scenes. I’ll change this by offering real support in finding student housing, integrating graduate students’ needs and starting an Oxford SU club night.

“I also want to build on Oxford SU’s extensive work into improving mental health through implementing an annual welfare survey, improve the accessibility of hardship funds, fight fee rises and funding cuts, and seek to make the union more diverse through implicit bias and liberation training.”

Joe Inwood, a history student at Mansfield College, served as the college’s JCR president in 2017. He is also the current chair of the Oxford SU council.

Inwood’s manifesto emphasises making the publicity for mental health support better, and ‘improving the discussion’ about workload and stress in Oxford.

Inwood has emphasised a desire to protect the rights of European Union students as the Brexit process continues, as well as claiming that he would lead the SU in resisting tuition fee rises.

As president of his JCR, Inwood led a student resistance to his college’s approach to Prevent and has championed Mansfield’s access initiative through his time in Oxford.

He told Cherwell: “I’m running to open the SU and make it relevant and accessible to all. My priorities are student mental health, EU students’ rights, and resisting damaging higher education policies.

“I also want to promote student-led access efforts and support new students in their crucial first weeks here. I’m delighted to have received the endorsement of the Class Act campaign, and my aim is to lead an open SU that puts student interests at its heart.”

Online polls close on Friday 9th February at 6pm. The results will be announced during an event held on Friday evening at the Oxford Foundry.

The SU is also running an intercollege voting competition. The college with the highest weighted voter turnout will receive £300.

Bully takes on ticket touts

Cherwell News
-
0
Bully takes on ticket touts

Cowley music venue The Bullingdon have decided to match IDs against the names on event tickets to prevent ‘ticket touts’ reselling them for profit.

Those who are caught re-selling tickets will be banned from the venue permanently.
The Bullingdon said in a statement: “Ticket touts are ruining music for the people who love it.

“The sellers often do not sell all the tickets that they have purchased this means that music lovers are being prevented from getting their hands on a ticket in the first place.”

The Bullingdon have also said that they will make midnight the last guaranteed entry for ticket holders.

After this time, they will sell up to capacity and operate a ‘one in one out policy’ for “those people who stand in the cold and rain for the music.”

Paul Williams, the general manager of the Bullingdon, told Cherwell: “I would like to add that this is not to prevent resales. As we know this happens where you want to go to an event, buy a ticket, then cannot go.

“Platforms such as OxTickets are great for this. What we are doing is purely to stop people buying up tickets then reselling at extortionate prices or sell the same ticket multiple
times. It becomes safe and fair.

“We are not here to stop real fans coming to shows or make it difficult for anyone except the touts.”

Students have expressed their concern at being unable to re-sell tickets if they find that they can’t make an event.

One music lover said: “It’s understandable why the Bully is doing what it is doing but it seems very punitive to suddenly de-legitimise certain platforms.”

Al Wakelin, the Somerville College student who founded Oxtickets, said: “Oxtickets’ only response to the statement by [the] Bullingdon is to encourage people to send their tickets to each other through the official means and to keep prices fair.

“This group was created, first and foremost, to give students and party-goers without tickets a chance to find one. This group was not created to encourage organised ticket touts.”

The Bullingdon have said that if fans are unable to change the name on their ticket, they can contact [email protected] and make an emergency arrangement.

Night Out: Drunk on funk at Cellar

Priya Vempali
-
0
Night Out: Drunk on funk at Cellar

ACS, The Isis and Cellar – what more could an Oxford student want to liven up their dismal third week of Hilary?

Having started early at the college bar, my friends and I were already anticipating a good night. We were a few shots down, and the sheer volume of people around us was a clear sign that the evening was going to be a good one.

Unfortunately, we soon realised that half of the drunken crowd populating the JCR were ditching us in favour of the illustrious Park End, because apparently the Oxford clubbing scene favours synthesised pop hits from the noughties to a night of funk and hip-hop. Go figure.

Regardless, we made our way to the club early, despite having already bought tickets, because we knew that the queue would be monumental, and weren’t really up for spending an hour the cold whilst dressed in appropriately edgy (read: skimpy) clothes.

However, having made our way down to the dingy alleyway just off of Cornmarket, we realised that our attempts had been futile. We’d been beaten to the club by at least thirty other Cellar fanatics, as eager for ‘tha funk’ as we were. We waited patiently for our turn, revelling in the body heat of random strangers pressed against us with their scratchy clothes, and definitely did not get shitty with the bouncers who, as I’m sure you know, are the most polite and courteous gentlemen in all of Oxford. Once we got in, however, it was well worth the wait. For some reason or another, the crowd was filled with people I knew, and I wandered from group to group experiencing (and recording) some of my friends’ greatest dance moves.

The dingy setting of the club was lit up by the sheer vivacity of the music, and the crowd were enjoy- ing themselves so much that they seemed to have almost forgotten that they were literally dancing in little more than a dirty base- ment with a bar (no hate – I love the claustrophobic vibes as much as the next person). My personal favourite moment of the night was when I was re-entering the club after a stint in the smoking area, and walked past a girl leaving the club while eating a banana.

Since then, I have decided to bring fresh produce with me to every club night, as a means of sustaining my drunken antics with the nourishment of delicious and nutritious snacks. All in all, it was certainly a night to remember.

LGBTQ+ Soc slams red free speech ranking

Matthew Roller
-
2
LGBTQ+ Soc slams red free speech ranking

Oxford’s LGBTQ+ Society has condemned Spiked magazine’s Free Speech University Rankings, after the University received a ‘red’ ranking for a fourth year in a row.

The ‘anti-Stalinist left’ magazine highlighted the University’s inclusion of misgendering in its harassment and bullying procedure as an example of how free speech is restricted at Oxford.

Oxford and Newcastle were named the most “ban-happy” universities in the rankings.

55 per cent of the 115 universities ranked received a ‘red’ rating, which implies an institution has “banned and actively censored ideas on campus”.

The LGBTQ+ Society told Cherwell it would “continue to both encourage the use of the correct pronouns, and to defend our university’s policies on both free speech and on hate speech to ensure an environment that allows all students to succeed.”

“The term ‘free speech’ is frequently misused by the privileged to protect their right to spread hatred,” it said. “The university must uphold a ban on hate speech to abide by national laws.

“If the authors of the piece are referring to the, thankfully false, rumour that the Student Union insisted that all students must use pronouns such as ‘ze’ then they have been misinformed.

“Asking that students use the correct pronouns upon the request of the individual, is an entirely different matter and we fail to see how this is an infringement on free speech.

“Free speech and safe spaces are not mutually exclusive. Using incorrect pronouns is simply incorrect.

“Doing so with malicious intent is of course another issue entirely.”

Spiked also highlighted Oxford SU’s banning of pro-life groups and the decision to stop student publication No Offence being handed out at the 2015 freshers’ fair.

The report also included the introduction of mandatory consent classes, Balliol JCR’s banning of the Christian Union from its internal freshers’ fair, and Queen’s JCR banning students from joining secret dining clubs.

Spiked’s deputy editor, Tom Slater, who coordinates the rankings, told Cherwell: “This is the university that produced the likes of Locke and Hobbes. That its students’ union today spends its time investigating ‘bad-taste bops’ is deeply embarrassing.

“[The University’s harassment and bullying policy] stated that ‘deliberately using the wrong name or pronoun in relation to a transgender person’ was an example of harassment, which might lead to disciplinary procedures.

“Compelling someone to say something, even out of politeness, is deeply corrosive to free speech.

“This policy implies that disagreeing with trans identity, or refusing to pay lip service to it, is a disciplinary offence.

“Whatever your stance on the issue, that’s bad news for students’ freedom of speech and freedom of conscience.”

Spiked uses a traffic-light system to assess and rank each university and students’ union based on policies and actions, and takes an average to determine the overall ranking. Both Oxford University and Oxford SU were ranked ‘red’.

The Student Union told Cherwell: “Oxford SU encourages students to use whichever pronouns they so choose.

“We would agree that any suggestion that use of gender-neutral pronouns restricts free speech is quite ridiculous – and only contributes to creating a more welcoming atmosphere.

“In terms of Oxford’s result on Spiked being red, Oxford SU is proud to be working towards a University space, where all students can fully participate.

“We continue to work closely with Liberation campaigns and other student groups.”

Jewish Soc condemns ‘anti-semitic’ Union speaker

Oscar Baker
-
0
Jewish Soc condemns ‘anti-semitic’ Union speaker

The Oxford University Jewish Society (JSoc) has condemned a controversial speaker, accused of anti-semitism.

JSoc said that Yvonne Ridley’s past comments “cause Jewish students to feel targeted and unsafe on campus.”

Ridley, a prominent critic of Israel and former chair of the now defunct Respect Party, has called for “an end to the criticism of those who draw comparisons and parallels between Zionism and Nazism.”

The Oxford Union refused JSoc’s request to rescind her invitation for last night’s debate.
Ridley said that the accusations were “hurtful and unfair” and that “legitimate criticism of Israel” was not anti-semitic.

In a statement on Wednesday, a spokesperson for JSoc said: “Her statements go beyond criticism of Israeli government policy or reasoned debate, instead veering into targeted offensive speech.

“Many of her comments can be reasonably construed as anti-semitic.”

While noting that “free speech is important on campus”, they said the debate format meant that “there was no guarantee of any opportunity to call Ms. Ridley out on her hateful views.”

The JSoc statement continued: “We are thus concerned that, if permitted to speak at the Union, she and her views would be legitimised, and our concerns in turn swept under the carpet.

“The Union should not be hosting those espousing racist views.

“We are thus dismayed that the Union has not rescinded the invitation.”

During Thursday night’s panel event at the Union, a member of JSoc spoke in condemnation of Ridley’s alleged anti-semitism.

Ridley has attracted controversy for her comments on Zionism.

She said in 2009: “the Zionists have tentacles everywhere.”

She has also showed support for Hamas and said in a 2006 Imperial College lecture that “Israel is a vile little state” speaking of its leaders in 2009 as “war criminals”.

Ridley said in 2008 that then Foreign Secretary David Miliband was “a gutless little weasel who lost more than his foreskin when he was circumcised.”

Ms Ridley told Cherwell: “I am both surprised and dismayed at the reaction of the OUJS (sic). I have nothing but huge and profound respect for the great faith of Judaism.

“Legitimate criticism of Israel, including its human rights record and the fact it has ignored and violated more UN Resolutions than any other country in the world today, cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.

“I find the comments hurtful and unfair. Only recently I have been called both a Zionist and a Nazi; terms which I now try and avoid as they’ve become largely meaningless and are bandied around as general insults.

“I am deeply hooured to be speaking in Oxford on Thursday and while I recognise the right of this group to free speech including criticism of me, it would be more helpful if they based their criticism on facts and stop reading hateful blogs which only serve to try and divide instead of unite.

“I wish this vicious witch hunt would stop. I am sorry if they have been targeted and feel unsafe on campus; everyone has a right to express their views… even me.”

The Chaplain at the University Jewish Chaplaincy, Rabbi Michael Rosenfeld-Schueler, told Cherwell: “Yvonne Ridley’s well documented statements are inflammatory and encourage hatred and violence.

“Understandably, many Jewish students feel deeply uncomfortable, angry and frustrated that she has been invited.

“An invitiation to a prestigious society like the Oxford Union confers a legitimacy on her views that are so clearly at odds with British and Jewish values.

“We stand with the Jewish society in its statement”.

Richard Swinburne, Emeritus Professor of Philsophy at Oxford, also spoke at the event.

Swinburne told Cherwell: “I had not heard about Ms Ridley’s views and the way in which she expresses them.

“It is very important to uphold the right of universities and their student societies to host controversial speakers, and only in a totally exceptional case would a society be justified in withdrawing an invitation to a speaker in a debate on one subject because of the way she express her views on another subject.

“I’d need to know a lot more about Ms Ridley’s views…before concluding that this is such a ‘totally exceptional case’.

“Needless to say, I do not agree with Ms Ridley’s views; and I think that if she were to express such views in the debate, it would turn students against her and those views.”

Speaking for the opposition against Ms Ridley was David Silverman, President of the American Athiests.

In a statement, the organisation told Cherwell: “Those views must be vigorously condemned and combated at every opportunity.”

JSoc also took issue with the Union’s advertising of Ridley’s appearance, where there was no reference to her past comments.

Ridley’s appearance at the Union comes in the week of the Oxford SU Annual Elections. All three presidential candidates, Hannah Taylor, Joe Inwood and Ellie Dibben, issued a joint statement.

They said: “Yvonne Ridley has clearly abhorrent views and we support JSoc in challenging her invitation to the Oxford Union. Anti-Semitism can never be allowed to go unchallenged or be legitimised on campus.

“We stand together in opposition to Yvonne Ridley and anything that makes Jewish students feel targeted and unsafe at our university.”

Speakers at the Union debate considered the motion ‘This House Believes We Cannot Thrive Without Religion.’

President of the Union, Laali Vadlamani, said: “The Union does appreciate JSoc’s concerns, and view of some of Ms Ridley’s past comments. It is certainly not the Union’s intent to make Jewish students on campus feel unsafe.

“Her invitation to speak on Thursday’s motion, are not a platform for Ms Ridley to talk about Zionism or the topic of Israel – we do think that her views on these topics are less relevant.

Higher suspension rates for state students revealed

Emily Lawford
-
2
Higher suspension rates for state students revealed

More than twice as many state-educated undergraduates than private schooled students have suspended their studies since 2006, Cherwell can reveal.

Students from the state sector have made up on average 56 per cent of undergraduates since 2006, but 69 per cent of all suspended students, according to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request sent by Cherwell.

The course with the most suspensions has been Oriental studies. Since 2006, 30 per cent of undergraduates in the department have suspended.

Archaeology and Anthropology is the second highest, with a 16 per cent suspension rate, and Physics and Philosophy is third with 14 per cent of students taking a year out – either voluntarily or involuntarily.

Human Sciences, Philosophy and Theology, Law, and Material Science also had high rates of suspensions, which were all over 12 per cent.

The course with lowest number of suspensions was Earth Science, with only one student out of the 349 undergraduates since 2006 having put their education on hold for a year.

Psychology, Philosophy and Linguistics (PPL), Geography, Medicine, History, Computer Science and Maths were the other subjects with low suspension rates, which were all under seven per cent.

Over 2200 undergraduates from the public sector and 1010 undergraduates from the private sector suspended their course since 2006.

Kir West-Hunter, St Anne’s equality representative, told Cherwell: “Let’s be honest – Oxford at times seems like a continuation of private school. The buildings effectively look the same, if you were a boarding student you’ve already experienced time away from home and the type of education a private school student received has, more often than not, prepared them for a degree at Oxbridge.”

Oluwatobi Olaitan, equalities officer for Exeter College, told Cherwell: “This statistic highlights once again the disparities in our society with respects to how our education system simply doesn’t provide equal opportunities to those from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds in comparison to their counterparts.

“More work has to be done in terms of providing emotional and financial support to level the playing fields and to allow all to achieve their true potentials.”

The Equal Opportunities rep. at Hertford, Grace Davis, said: “The disproportionate number of state school students rusticating just goes to show how much of an impact schooling backgrounds can have on the difficulty of adjusting to life at Oxford.”

A spokesperson for Oxford SU told Cherwell: “We believe that access does not stop at the admissions process, and that the collegiate University needs to work harder to improve support for applicants from disadvantaged backgrounds and underrepresented groups while they are here.”

One Oriental studies first year student suggested that the difficulty of the course could be a factor in its very high number of suspensions: “It’s definitely a very high intensity course with many contact hours, because a lot of time is spent on language and learning, the time we have alone to finish essays like other students is much less.”

She added: “I would maybe wonder that those who have rusticated under Oriental Studies may have struggled with the breadth of the course?

“We are often having to finish many different types of tasks at once – and so you’re not just focusing on one job after the other.”

Undergraduates studying Archaeology and Anthropology and Physics and Philosophy said
the dual nature of the courses could have influenced students to suspend their studies.

A second-year arch and anth student told Cherwell: ”I think the course is notably disorganised.

“Unlike other courses that have all of their lectures filmed or at least the lecture slides online, in this course it’s at the lecturer’s discretion whether or not they want it up, so it’s incredibly easy to fall behind and feel like you can’t really get it back – and lectures are compulsory and you need the material for finals.

“The two departments also don’t really communicate that well and there’s very little support in general.”

A second-year student who switched in their first year from PhysPhil to Music told Cherwell last term: “One of the major things was that I found that not all, but a lot of my tutors were not supportive and made me feel really stupid.

“One of my tutors told me to ‘treat problem sheets as if it was a life or death situation’.

A University spokesperson told Cherwell: “This data really can’t be interpreted meaningfully in an aggregated form, at this scale. Every case is different, so Cherwell can’t really draw any useful conclusions.

“The range of reasons for suspension of study is extremely broad. Suspension can relate to academic progress, financial circumstances, personal health, developments within families, and proposals to break study for countless other situations.

“In all cases undergraduates at Oxford will have been be in very close liaison with their college and will have enjoyed high levels of support.

“Since we have significantly more students from non-fee-paying schools the different figures are to be expected.

“It should also be noted these numbers do not relate solely to ‘disciplinary’ cases, which are unusual and infrequent. Most of the cases captured in these numbers will have been voluntary, and mutually agreed, rather than disciplinary.”

Booze cruise: Corpus Christi Beer Cellar

George Taylor and Caleb Barron
-
0
Booze cruise: Corpus Christi Beer Cellar

Located under the grounds of the prestigious college, down a gloomy staircase, is the humble Corpus Christi Beer Cellar. With its low ceilings, well-stocked bar and lively regulars, the space feels like it has ancestry in prohibition America. From its comfortable purple booths situated in spacious alcoves perfect for social drinking to its iconic IKEA red stools in the welcoming bar area to its copious shelving to place a pint on whilst you throw a dart or pocket a pool ball, there are many ways to enjoy a drink in this fabled establishment. So let’s talk about those drinks.

The Pelican! Named after our college mascot, the majestic fish-eating bird is concocted from a shot of vodka, another of Bacardi rum, half a Hooch, Blue Curacao and a dash of grenadine. Traditionally served in a plastic pint cup, this drink comes to you in a vibrant blue-red blend which quickly becomes a disturbingly grey haze. In fact, it tastes as grey as it becomes, a worryingly unnatural colour. At £5 it is perfectly serviceable for pres, potentially too sweet but does incredible work as a mid-bop pick me up. A huge shout-out goes to the Classics fellow at Corpus who invented it during his undergraduate years here.

The Tortoise is much the same, but green. Produced with a dash of lime, 2 shots of vodka, Midori melon liqueur, topped up with lemonade and a dash of Aftershock, the greenish colour reminds one of the urine of a man that hasn’t had water for a week. The avor would best be described as indistinct apple – it tastes like a slushy that’s been left out in the sun. It’s safe to say, neither of these drinks is winning any awards for avour but the high alcohol content and verve with which they’re served makes them well worth the money you pay for them.

This brings us on to the main event: Lance the barman. Lance hails all the way from South Africa and he comes with the same accent, charm and hospitality. He truly is the highlight of any evening spent in the Beer Cellar. With a decent sound system, the background noise of profanity as another pot is missed in pool can be drowned out by the indie tunes curated by local DJ talent, Tom Hopper. In conclusion, the cheapest pints available are £2.10 each: what more could you ask for?

@caleblebster

1...790791792...2,524Page 791 of 2,524

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