Monday 6th October 2025
Blog Page 873

OUSU to fight university over “ridiculous” scholars gowns

Fred Dimbleby
-
0
OUSU to fight university over “ridiculous” scholars gowns

The future of scholars’ gowns hangs in the balance after Wednesday night’s OUSU Council meeting saw a narrow vote in favour of mandating the sabbatical officers to consult students on lobbying the University to change its sub fusc policy.

A consultation will be held, in the form of a non-binding poll sent to all students regarding the wearing of scholars’ gowns in examinations for top-achieving students. The motion will be presented again after the poll has taken place in the next council meeting, where a decision will be made as to OUSU’s formal position.

The motion passed with 21 voting in favour, 18 against and three abstaining.

The motion was proposed by Matilda Agace and Isobel Cockburn, both from Wadham College. Cockburn argued that the use of differential gowns can “cause quite a lot of stress” to candidates and that they “create an academically hierarchical environment”.

The motion further noted that prelims, following which a minority of students are awarded the more prestigious gowns for outstanding results, “are not an adequate measure of potential”.

The proposers cited evidence that points towards an observed negative impact that differential gown usage can have on the wider student population. This was particularly noted among women, BAME and disabled people who, in an OUSU Welfare survey, were found to be more likely to be “stressed” or “overwhelmed” at Oxford.

The motion noted that “the gender attainment gap at Oxford is the worst in the country”, which along with meant that OUSU and the University should be doing all they can to decrease stress around exams.

Speaking to Cherwell, Isobel Cockburn said: “The idea came about from discussions with friends before finals. Everyone (tutors included) seemed to agree that the notion of scholars’ gowns is ridiculous in 2017, as it promotes a visual display of superiority which is simply unnecessary.”

In 2014, while men made up 54 per cent of the undergraduate student body, they received 60 per cent of the firsts, whilst women made up 46 per cent of the student body and received only 40 per cent of the firsts.

Others at the meeting, however, suggested that although there may be a correlation between scholars gowns and anxiety, the gowns themselves were not the cause.

It was pointed out that during a similar referendum held on the future of sub fusc in 2014 it was argued that the formal dress acted as a “leveller” during examinations, and a starkly different gown seemed to make this submission less credible. Oxford is currently the only university in the country to have such a differentiated system of gowns for exams.

Scholars’ gowns are also awarded to students who receive organ or choral scholarships to attend the University.

The motion was not against the wearing of scholars’ gowns by eligible students at other occasions, such as at formal hall.

Speaking to Cherwell, Harrison Edmonds, a high-profile campaigner in the ‘Save Sub Fusc’ campaign of 2014, said: “A move to abolish scholars’ gowns, or subfusc and gowns more generally, from exams, risks abandoning some of the traditions that help make Oxford University what it is.

“Exams are a very stressful period of time, and [it is] entirely possible to opt out of wearing subfusc if you believe it will impact on your performance.”

University regulations already state that only the commoners’ gown should be worn for oral or viva exams. This followed a petition in 2016 which gained 553 signatures, warning that the wearing of scholars’ gowns during this type of examination could cause biased results.

A university spokesperson said it had not yet been notified by OUSU of the motion. “Academic dress for students is determined by the Vice- Chancellor in consultation with the Proctors,” they said.

The scout system at Oxford must be scrapped

Michael Shao
-
1
The scout system at Oxford must be scrapped

The Fay School is an independent, coeducational boarding school located near Boston, Massachusetts. It enrols students between grades seven to nine in a boarding program, that is, the British equivalent of years eight to ten. Among other things, Fay students are expected at that age (eleven through 14 years old) to take care of their own laundry, clean their own rooms, and dispose of their own trash, as they board year long as the school.

Who knew, that expecting a 12 year old to be able to manage a cordless handheld vacuum cleaner to suck up spilt ramen powder could be such an easy request? Apparently, Oxford’s colleges thinks much less of us, and that its students, the supposed best and brightest in all of Britain, if not the world, are less competent at cleaning up their crisp crumbs and bread dust than prepubescent children.

As we know, each college has their own system of housekeepers, known colloquially as scouts. Scouts perform a variety of housekeeping duties for each individual student’s room typically during morning hours. Scouts also clean and maintain a number of communal living areas, such as kitchens, bathrooms, and showers. The system has existed nearly as long as Oxford has, and well into the 60s and 70s, scouts were still openly referred to as “servants,” bringing bottles of milk to the doors of students.

To be fair, while Fay might not get parents rolling in to complain of the dreadful living conditions that their students might have to live in, it’s not entirely unimaginable to picture Oxford mothers railing one out at a college principal for daring to ask their child, god forbid, unclogs their own sink, is it? That being said, this comparison is wholly unnecessary. If we have reduced ourselves to asking each other to perform basic duties such as taking care of ourselves, the same way children half our size and age do, which apparently we have, we should actively recognise that there is something seriously wrong with the way the university is shaping our behaviour and expectations.

The claim, furthermore, that scouts fill a “necessary” role, is ludicrous. Imagine any other world-renowned institution telling its students that they need to hire cohorts upon cohorts of cleaners to vacuum their floors them and scrub their windows to a shine. They would be laughed at, as Oxford is. A concept straight out of Downtown Abbey, it is, and should be, considered an ancient practice. The practice continues, regrettably so, at Cambridge University, and Durham University, where they are otherwise known as “bedders.” Outside of these three universities, there is no equivalent at any other major educational institution in the entire world.

Why that is not concerning to the main body of administrators and students at Oxford, I will never understand. The former equivalent system at Trinity College Dublin, where scouts were known as “skips,” was abandoned in the 70s, when British civilisation also typically abandoned other archaic practices such as restricting university admission to men only. Apparently this idea of progress has been lost on Oxford. The idea that adults, or anyone over a reasonable age, cannot be expected to clean after themselves, and instead, require other grown adults to clean after them, in spaces as small as college rooms, is utterly absurd.

The system of scouts also removes any sense of privacy, and automatically places students and scouts on a hostile ground over this effect. As if the smattering of CCTV cameras that spy on every nook and cranny of your college were not enough, the scout system is the icing on the cake that reminds you that the college you live in will never truly be your home. We are forced to give daily access to our rooms. The positive spin is typically presented as the requirement for scouts and students to develop a “trusting” relationship. I suppose that is the best way of phrasing the concept of being forced to agree to a system in which the posessions of students, both valuable and not valuable, are constantly accessible. This, along with the fact that many days of the week, scouts often have nothing to do, combine to create a naturally toxic relationship between scouts and students.

This occurs especially potently when scouts have to deal with the vibrant community of the spoilt—they face mockery and judgment from students who are faced with the existential conundrum of wanting everything done for them, but at the same time, naturally desiring privacy over their baubles, and so the cooking pot of rage boils. Reports of students unleashing verbal tirades on scouts, who sometimes do not speak English as a first language and thus don’t even understand what is being said, are not unheard of. Fortunately, we can see colleges such as Jesus addressing the issue at hand properly, which have been reported in the past to force scouts to adopt ‘Anglicised’ names, and colleges such as Christ Church who have been reported to force their scouts to learn English. In this manner, these two wonderful colleges have ensured that the scouts can receive a good scolding from entitled students and understand it too!

If all of the above were not concerning enough, what we should be most shocked at is that many scouts are not even paid a living wage. The Oxford Living Wage, separated from the national living wage costs because of the ridiculously high costs of living in Oxford, is £8.93 per hour, below the London living wage of £9.75 per hour. Despite this having been made clear by the Oxford City Council numerous times over the past and visibly declared on their online platforms, Oxford continues to pay its scouts below the Oxford Living Wage. More than 2,000 employers in Oxfordshire have signed up to the living wage scheme, and yet, according to vacancies advertised online, most colleges continue to pay their scouts below said wage. Hertford, which I regret to mention, because I suspect that they pay their scouts above the par in comparison to most other colleges, pay their scouts £8.45 an hour. It is reported that numerous other colleges continue to pay their scouts £7.85 an hour.

Harvard students famously campaigned for living wages for their own staff between 1998 and 2002. This past autumn, 750 workers went on strike, with the support of numerous student groups, to protest minimum wages that were not considered enough to afford a decent living, i.e. below the living wage. As a result, numerous dining halls closed all over Harvard, with the majority of the students on campus standing in solidarity with the workers, until the protest ended all dining halls return to normal operation. Unfortunately, I have the disappointment in believing that the same protest could never happen at Oxford, understandably so, as students study in one of the shortest year long undergraduate programmes ever, with tiny eight week terms.

The existence of terrible treatment outside of already terrible wages is no conspiracy. In a Cherwell investigation two years ago, incidents reported from scouts all over Oxford including instances of being forced to work from nine to 11 overtime with no compensation or apology, contracts that prevent scouts from having a lunch break, scouts forced to wear makeup and skirts, and persistent harassment from managers. Scouts themselves also lack the capacity to bargain or even remotely protest. The scouts at Oxford certainly have not unionised, and I suspect that they fully lack the ability to do so.

Reports at Jesus College of the harassment of scouts and the complete denial and gaslighting of scout concerns goes towards this belief. It is also well understood that scouts often refrain from discussing their wages or their working conditions in fear of losing their job, a state that no person should have to experience.

Finally, it is listed as a final resort, often by college principals themselves who relish in receiving housekeeping in their own college accommodations to free up time for their exhausting duties as revered heads of colleges of Oxford, that the colleges need tending to over the holidays. It is heavily ironic that college principals deliver platitudinous sermon after sermon about how learning takes precedence above all at that their colleges are first and foremost institutions of learning. If I were a wanderer with no prior knowledge of the colleges, I would not be able to tell the difference between most colleges at Oxford, and vaguely colonial hotels.

Then again, when colleges become displayed on TripAdvisor and get five star ratings for services, I begin to question myself if I am in a college that I am supposed to call my home, or a Hilton stuffed with tutors and an only somewhat meaningful history. How different really, are term stays from eight-week bookings at the Marriot?

The system of scouts makes a laughing stock out of the University of Oxford and each of its individual colleges. I would say that it contributes to the outsider picture of Oxford students as posh and spoilt that puts so many off even bothering to apply, but how far would that picture really be from reality? How the system remains to the present day confuses me because I thought that the university had moved past inflting the egos of the talcum-powdered brats that genuinely believe that less time spent scrubbing the mirror clean of last night’s spilt Dom Perignon means more time reading Isaiah Berlin and Sartre. Apparently, this is not the case. Get a grip, Oxford.

Editor: An earlier version of this article made unsubstantiated allegations of trafficking which have now been removed.

Blind Date: “I was on a date with one of the roguest guys in Oxford”

Lucy Frost and Nicky Halterman
-
0
Blind Date: “I was on a date with one of the roguest guys in Oxford”

Lucy Frost, First Year, Classics, Worcester

Arriving at Turf armed only with the name of my date inevitably led to some awkward staring at strangers until I was saved by the tentative question: “You wouldn’t happen to be Lucy, would you?” Thankfully, this was definitely the low-point of the date as we soon bought drinks and got to talking. On finding out that Nicky was from Oklahoma, I decided to ignore any initial thoughts of stereotypes drilled into me by Oklahoma! only to realise that he fit the bill almost entirely. It turned out I was on a date with one of the roguest guys in Oxford who spends his time playing ultimate frisbee, making cocktails, and spinning (as in full-on Rumpelstiltskin spinning wheel spinning). Despite the clash of his very rogue and my very mainstream interests, the conversation took off. With mutual appreciation of doggos, The West Wing, dabbling while rowing, and P!NK, we took our date to the Balliol bar.

First impression? His name’s Nicky.

Chat? Love it.

Personality? Sam Seaborn, is that you?

Second date? He’d have to get in line.

Nicky Halterman, Second Year, PPE, Balliol

My blind date got off to a somewhat worrying start when I was sent to the Turf at 8pm having failed to find out anything except that I was meeting someone named Lucy. Fortunately I ran into someone else dressed for a summer date and looking equally lost. We got a drink and somehow found a table on a Friday night, so things were already looking up as we set about the standard Oxford checklist of college/degree/part of London/societies. The conversation was enjoyable, if occasionally job-interview-ish, and eventually we managed to push through the opening to questions to showing each other pictures of our dogs, at which point I knew things were going well. We ended up retreating to my College bar for cheaper drinks and a pool table, calling it a night after another pint and some games of questionable quality. In the end the evening was good fun, though we never particularly found a great deal in common or a strong connection.

First impression? Positive, slightly awkward.

Chat? Enjoyable.

Personality? Kind, polite.

Second date? Probably not.

Laali Vadlamani wins Union Presidency for Hilary 2018

Emma Leech
-
0
Laali Vadlamani wins Union Presidency for Hilary 2018

Laali Vadlamani is the Oxford Union’s new President-elect for Michaelmas 2017 following her uncontested election on Friday 9 June. She will become President in Hilary term.

The ex-Treasurer from Trinity College received 496 first preference votes, with 136 votes going to RON.

This marks a particularly low turnout for the Union with only 770 members turning out to vote.

Members also voted for New College’s Stephen Horvath as their Treasurer-elect and St John’s Ed Evans as Secretary. The Librarian-elect is to be Sabriyah Saeed. All officer positions were uncontested as was the position for President.

The Standing Committee and Secretary’s Committee have also been elected with a particularly close result between Standing Committee candidates. 

Both sets of Committee positions were contested and saw James Lamming (Standing Committee) and Charles Wang (Secretary’s Committee) come out on top.

Michael Harkness is the Returning Officer.  

See the full results below:

OFFICERS

Treasurer-elect: Stephen Horvath – 499 (RON – 114)

Secretary: Ed Evans – 498

Librarian-elect: Sabriyah Saeed – 496 (RON – 119)

STANDING COMMITTEE (in order of number of first-preference votes)

James Lamming – 129

Brian Wong – 126

Shivani Ananth– 123

Julian Kirk – 122

Jan Bialas – 108

Runner up: Grace Joel – 88

SECRETARY’S COMMITTEE (in order of number of first-preference votes)

Charles Wang – 82

Shanuk Mediwaka – 77

Adam Watson – 66

Alex Yeandle – 63

Abigail Ridsdill-Smith – 58

Isabella Risino – 58

Charlie Cheesman – 58

Chris Garner – 51

Freya Dixon Van Dijk – 50

Genevieve Athis – 48

Mike Fuller – 42

Runner-up: Matthew Vautrey – 41

First Eliminated: Will Taylor – 25

Cherwell is recruiting for MT17!

Cherwell
-
0
Cherwell is recruiting for MT17!
Cherwell is now recruiting for editorial positions for next term. This is your chance to be part of one of the longest-running independent newspapers in the United Kingdom and to follow in the footsteps of past contributors such as Graham Greene, W.H. Auden, Hadley Freeman, and Evan Davis.

We are recruiting for section editors, deputy section editors, broadcasters, and contributors.

Apply to be a Cherwell section editor here or a deputy section editor here. Apply for a position on the Broadcasting team here. Copy and paste the text from the Google document into your own Google or Word document and email all application forms to [email protected].

Please email [email protected] by 8pm on Monday 12 June to give your intention of applying for a position. The deadline for application forms is 8pm the following day, Tuesday 13 June.

Cherwell is also looking for cartoonists, illustrators, and photographers—all interested contact [email protected] with details of any relevant experience.

Candidates will have a short, informal interview with the editors. Interviews will be held during 8th Week.

Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter for recruitment updates and news.

Our Business team is also always looking for new recruits. Cherwell provides some of the best business experience in Oxford and provides excellent preparation for any media, consulting or banking career. We’ll train you on all relevant parts of the business and teach you to raise £10,000 independently. Email [email protected] to express interest.

Editorial job descriptions:

News:

News is a big section to edit, but it’s the one that has our most exciting headlines and reporting opportunities. This term, Cherwell has held the University to account over its Eurocentric curriculum, reported on a ketamine scandal at Exeter College, and covered the election in Oxford.

Being a news editor means you work closely with the senior editorial team, designing the news coverage, front page and posting content online. We need tenacious student journalists who have a nose for news.

To apply for News Editor, fill out the Section Editor form. It’s very easy to become a News Reporter (and you can still contribute to other sections of the paper too): just send an email to [email protected], come along to our weekly meetings, and you can be at the forefront of student journalism (maybe even literally on the front page).

Comment:

The Comment section has a well-respected tradition of printing cutting-edge opinion pieces from students on a range of Oxford and national issues. Our best debates and opinion pieces are read around the University and online, frequently attracting several thousand hits.

Joining the Comment team also allows you to interview leading political figures and celebrities. In the last year, Cherwell has interviewed Michael Gove, Fiona Bruce, Mary Beard, Jeremy Paxman, Richard Dawkins, David Haye, Slavoj Žižek and Jess Phillips MP among many others.

If you’re passionate about a subject and want to share your views and spark debate, join us. You can be a Deputy Comment Editor even if you haven’t written for us before—Deputy Comment Editors are intended to form a permanent core of reliable writers who can called upon regularly to write for the section. If you just want to write on an ad hoc basis as a contributor there’s no need to fill out a form, just email [email protected].

Satire:

Satire has provided a cutting angle on this term’s General Election, leaving no politician safe from its brutal lens. Each week our Satire Editor writes and sources a number of articles and cartoons. Fancy yourself as the next Hislop? Then this is the position for you. Fill in the Section Editor form to apply for the role of Satire Editor.

Life:

The Life section hosts a number of Cherwell’s most popular features, including our the John Evelyn gossip column and the (in)famous Blind Date.

We also have a Food & Drink page, which you can additionally apply to edit, or to write for. It features a wide variety of reviews and recipes. If you want to review college meals, or Oxford’s extensive number of bars or restaurants, this is the place to look.

Deputy Life Editors are intended to form a permanent core of reliable writers which can called upon regularly to write for the section. If you just want to write on an ad hoc basis as a contributor there’s no need to fill out a form, just email [email protected].

Investigations:

We are extremely proud of our Investigations section, otherwise known as C+. This is where some of the most in-depth, investigative journalism is done, tackling some of the biggest issues in Oxford today. This term, C+ has polled students ahead of this term’s General Election, and has investigated going out culture, life for disabled students at Oxford, and freedom of speech. If you want to test the waters of investigative life before becoming completely in charge of it, apply for Deputy Investigations Editor.

Features:

Appearing in the paper every other week, this term’s we’ve run some brilliant pieces on class at Oxford, Oxford’s traditions and ageism in pop culture. If you’re a fan of the New York Times‘ long form articles, want to interrogate and explore subjects in more detail and fancy reading (or writing) an article longer than the standard comment piece, Features is the section for you. Fill out the Section Editor form to apply to become Features Editor.

Culture:

This term, we created Oxbow, an eight page culture pullout, with pages dedicated to Film & TV, Stage, Music, Books & Lit, and Photo and Art. We’re one of the first ports of call for reviews of all the student plays, as well as all the other cultural delights which Oxford offers.

If you’d like to edit the whole Oxbow supplement please fill in the Section Editor form. If you’d like to edit any of the Film & TV, Stage, Music, Books & Lit or Visuals pages, please fill in the Section Editor form. If you would just like to contribute to Culture occasionally, there’s no need to fill in a form—please just email [email protected] expressing your interest.

Fashion:

Our Fashion section has gone from strength to strength this term. If you want to organise weekly photoshoots, or you’ve got opinions on fashion and fancy being the next Sartorialist, this is the section for you.

Deputy Fashion Editors are intended to form a permanent core of reliable writers which can called upon regularly to write for the section and to help with the weekly fashion shoots. If you just want to write on an ad hoc basis as a contributor there’s no need to fill out a form, just email [email protected].

Science & Tech:

Science & Tech has only recently found a home in our weekly paper, but the section, which started in Michaelmas 2016, now publishes regular, focused and cutting-edge articles in Cherwell.

Covering Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Medical Sciences, Engineering, and everything in between, the section allows a thoughtful scientist to publish musings on any new research that has been dumbfounding them, or even interview their favourite scientist. Recent articles have included a piece investigating the power of the nuclear bomb, the continuing process of human evolution, and the influence of the internet on global politics. Fill out the Section Editor form to apply to edit our Science & Tech section.

Sport:

We report on many major sporting occasions in Oxford—whether your interest is rugby, swimming or lacrosse, there are opportunities for objective analysis of the big games, or not-so-objective match reports from those involved in college matches. Get involved with the Sport section to continue this trend and expand high quality coverage to other sporting fields.

Apply to be a Deputy Sport Editor if you would like to be part of a permanent team of reliable writers which can called upon regularly to write for the section. If you just want to write on an ad hoc basis as a contributor you don’t need to fill out a form, just email [email protected].

Broadcasting:

Our Broadcasting section has produced fantastic content over the last term, from our weekly news round up to interviewing Oxford’s many parliamentary hopefuls, via covering various sporting events. If you have experience in production and editing, or are just keen to learn about being either behind or in front of the camera, then apply to join the broadcasting team.

Playing God since 10,000 BCE

Calum Stephenson
-
0
Playing God since 10,000 BCE

Why are human beings so afraid of the power that they possess? The world is our sandbox, and we have become the masters at manipulating it. We mined the ground to make our cities, with skyscrapers towering far higher than the tallest of trees. By harnessing radioactivity we’ve been able to capture the power of nuclear energy, while our burning of fossil fuels changes the very nature of our planet’s climate.

But while these ideas are modern — with their invention and their effects occurring within the last few centuries — one method by which humans have shaped their environment dates back over ten thousand years. As we developed a greater understanding of the animals and plants around us, we became more and more effective at raising them in our company, and through the selective breeding of the best individuals, we have morphed them to suit our needs. This process is known as domestication.

Its power is highlighted by a man named Kirk Cameron is a New Zealander evangelist who, in 2006, quite hilariously recorded an episode of his television show The Way of the Master in which he argued that the very shape of a banana — with its curved, smooth body and a “tab” at the top that allows easy access to the contents — was an “atheists nightmare”, as it was direct evidence for creation. Cameron was onto something; the banana was designed for human consumption, but not by god. Rather, through the continuous breeding of the tastiest and most comfortable plants in each generation humans have produced the modern variety, which is apparently indistinguishable from creation at first sight. The wild variety of the banana is small bodied with relatively large seeds, whatever flesh it has being very bitter to taste. We have effectively altered this small, awkward little fruit to suit our own image. We’ve played god.

And it’s not just been the bananas. Man’s best friend, Canis lupus familiaris, is our oldest plaything, with remains of the ancestral dogs found in close proximity to humans nearly fifteen thousand years ago. We’ve produced innumerable forms of dogs over the years, for reasons from security to cosmetics, again shaping them by selecting those with the most desirable characteristics for the task at hand. The same can be said of the wild mustard, Brassica oleracea, which through selective breeding has led to modern varieties of kale, cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli, brussel sprouts and kohlrabi, all of which remain the same species of plant.

Artificial selection at the hands of humans has existed ever since we took that first wolf pup into our homes, and has persisted in that form continuing into the present day. However, the relatively recent advent of the field of molecular genetics, accompanied by the ability to physically alter an organisms genetic code, have dramatically increased the ease by which we can manipulate organisms. It is possible to simulate an amount of evolutionary change that would take hundreds, if not thousands of years by traditional methods, within a single generation. It is this speed that causes unrest among the public, as there is no real difference between the two techniques, but seeing such change on the timescales of weeks, months or years can be unsettling to the human psyche, as we fear we have gone too far.

Our tendency to reject our ability to dramatically change the world around us is, in a way, both a flaw and a virtue. It has likely prevented much tragedy in the form of mismanaged genetically modified organisms, which do indeed have the potential to ruin ecosystems. However, this benefit is dwarfed by the failings of the paranoia. Genetically modified crops are necessary should we ever hope to solve the impending world hunger crises. Sterilised mosquitoes have continuously been trialled for use on wild populations, and they outline the potential for biological control mechanisms for diseases such as malaria. We could modify the nutritional value of the meat we consume, making the industry both more efficient and better for the consumer. Shaping the world around is what we have always done, it is only as technology progresses that we become faster and more effective at doing it. We need to wake up to this reality and stop being afraid of our potential.

Labour hold Oxford East as Lib Dems take Oxford West from Conservatives

Jack Hunter
-
0
Labour hold Oxford East as Lib Dems take Oxford West from Conservatives

An enlarged turnout amongst students is being thanked for an increased vote for Labour in Oxford East, as Anneliese Dodds was elected the new Labour MP in yesterday’s general election

Anneliese Dodds won the Oxford East consituency, which contains the majority of Oxford colleges, with 35,118 votes – representing an increase of 15 points to 65 per cent of the vote share. She increased 30-year MP Andrew Smith’s majority by around 8,000 votes.

In Oxford West and Abingdon, which contains a minority of Oxford colleges including St Hugh’s and St Anne’s, the Liberal Democrat candidate Layla Moran snatched the seat from Tory MP Nicola Blackwood, with 26,256 votes to Blackwood’s 25,440.

The National Union of Students have said Oxford East was one of a number in which the Labour vote share had benefitted from an increased youth turnout. In Oxford East, turnout increased by 4.6 per cent, as the Labour vote share increased by by 15 points. Long queues were reported in many constituencies.

Speaking to Cherwell last night, Anneliese Dodds spoke of her encouragement as the results came in. “Here in Oxford it has felt very very encouraging, they have been very supportive of Labour,” she said.

The results in Oxford matched Cherwell‘s recent poll of students which suggested that almost half of students at the university were planning to vote Labour in the general election.

Full results below.

Oxford East

Anneliese Dodds – Labour – 35118

Suzanne Barlington – Conservative – 11834

Kirsten Johnson – Liberal Democrat – 4904

Larry Sanders – Green – 1785

Chaka Artwell – Independent – 255

Oxford West and Abingdon

Layla Moran – Liberal Democrat – 26256

Nicola Blackwood – Conservative – 25440

Marie Tibdall – Labour – 7573

Alan Harris – UKIP – 751

“Exploring what it means to be an intelligent modern woman”

Sîan Bayley
-
0
“Exploring what it means to be an intelligent modern woman”

Girls Will Be Girls is an exciting piece of new writing by student Ella Langley premiering at the Burton Taylor Studio before its run at the Edinburgh Fringe this summer.

Supported by an all-female production team, and directed by Hannah Chukwu and Ella Langley, it is an honest and touching account of the lives of seven girls on the verge of adulthood, but still constrained within the school bubble, as they await the results of their application to Oxford University. As Langley explains: “in this environment, in this school, and in that rare moment right before everything changes, girls will be girls.”

In many ways an updated female version of Alan Bennett’s The History Boys, Langley’s play centers on what it means to be a clever young woman about to enter the real world. Its account of what it is to be a 17-year-old girl is often achingly familiar, and the play’s explorations of difficult issues such as eating disorders, academic pressure, racism, and sexism should be highly commended.

The play is somewhat constrained, however, by its setting in what appears to be a private single sex school with a clear history of Oxbridge applications—not exactly a universal female experience—and its somewhat outdated Georgia Nicholson-esque humour, which does not always generate the laughs expected.

Nevertheless, many audience members noted the accuracy of the characters and situations presented at such a school, and the play’s heart and spirit more than outweigh any minor issues with its privileged context.

Langley’s girls are a delight to watch on stage, and even the more off-putting and abrasive character of Rose, brilliantly portrayed by Lara Marks, is revealed to be just as self-conscious and vulnerable as the other girls in a notable scene in every schoolgirl’s refuge, the toilet cubicle. It is the strange beauty of this scene, juxtaposing the troubled girls with the more lively and confident characters as they laugh at lunch about their old school days and Oxford interview experiences, that shows the different and opposing sides to being an intelligent teenage girl in modern Britain.

Aided by notable songs that celebrate femininity such as ‘Isn’t She Lovely’ and ‘Girls Just Wanna Have Fun’, but often with a slower rhythm and sadder tone, the play’s music likewise captures this tension between girlish freedom and existential crisis. This ultimately culminates in a powerful monologue by Natasha Sarna as Reece, attempting to explain her rash behaviour to her teacher as she meanders through her own thoughts and feelings about the school institution. Here she challenges whether her teachers “have any idea what girls are doing to get their grades”, which contribute to the reputation of the school more than to the girls’ own development. A beautifully written piece of prose by Langley, full of exciting and original imagery as well as powerful emotional content, performed with real feeling by Sarna, this is the highlight of an important and thought-provoking work.

As the lights go down when the girls begin to open their letters, the play ends, but the experience continues. Audience members are invited to go downstairs to share their own messages with their younger selves, and what they wished they could have known then. It is an odd experience to revisit such a turbulent and awkward stage in one’s life, but a necessarily important one. This play celebrates what it means to be an intelligent modern woman and embraces flaws with a sense of humour and sincerity that is often lacking in the media and mainstream culture.

Labour is dominating social media ahead of election, Oxford researchers find

Maxim Parr-Reid
-
0
Labour is dominating social media ahead of election, Oxford researchers find

The Labour party is winning the social media battle ahead of election day, research by Oxford’s Internet Institute has this week shown.

The study found that “hashtags such as #VoteLabour and #JezzWeCan are outperforming the likes of #VoteTory and #StrongAndStable”.

However, the study also pointed out that ‘fake news’ is believed to account for around 13% of social media traffic.

The University’s Internet Institute looked at over 1.3 million tweets posted between the 1 and 7 of May which used hashtags attached to the country’s main political parties as well as the election itself.

Specifically, the study found that Labour’s tweets made up 39.7 per cent of party-specific tweets, as opposed to 26 per cent for the Conservative Party, 9.6 per cent for UKIP and 5.7 per cent for the Liberal Democrats.

Twitter mentions for Nicola Sturgeon’s SNP, which is looking to replicate its 2-15 electoral success this week, made up 19 per cent of party-specific tweets.

The study also established that over 12 per cent of political tweets are posted by bots (automated accounts). 21,000 of these tweets were for Labour, compared to only 13,400 for the Tories.

Hannah Taylor, co-Chair of Oxford University Labour Club told Cherwell: “Labour’s dominance of social media is unsurprising given our huge popularity with young people. Whilst it is hard to tell from these studies whether the content is positive, I am optimistic that this shows how Corbyn has sparked conversation online by offering a real, positive alternative.”

Meanwhile, William Rees-Mogg, Oxford University Conservative Association President, was more skeptical of the findings, telling Cherwell: “Twitter is more of an echo chamber for the views of certain politically engaged people than it is representative of the views of the general public, as evidenced by the over-representation of the SNP. We should make predictions on the basis of data gathered on the doorstep, not hot air and hashtags.”

The Oxford Internet Institute (OII) have been contacted for comment.

“The biggest student comedy event of the year”: Oxford Revue and Friends

Miriam Nemmaoui
-
0
“The biggest student comedy event of the year”: Oxford Revue and Friends

Fresh out of a Classics exam and intermittently babbling about Ancient Rome, Olly Jackson met me to talk about the biggest student comedy event of the year, the Oxford Revue and Friends at the Playhouse. Hosted by TV comedian Naz Osmanoglu, the Oxford Revue will be joined by the Cambridge Footlights and the Durham Revue in what promises to be a night of fast-paced sketch comedy.

Olly tells me that the evening will be a culmination of the Revue’s best work from throughout the year, so if you haven’t had the chance to make their termly Audreys, this is the perfect chance to see Oxford’s best comedy talent. New performers have already been through what he calls the “proving grounds” of the Audreys, and the material is mostly tried and tested, so neither audience nor performer is at risk of the dreaded deathly silence which can happen with less experienced comedians.

Ever the sadist, I ask Olly to share his worst comedy show anecdote with me: “It was very tragic, but it wasn’t really my fault—ball gigs are always rubbish! At one minute to midnight, in the middle of our set, someone announced that the fireworks were about to start, and literally everyone left, including the bar staff. We just carried on talking though, because we hoped it would confuse everyone when they returned in the middle of a different sketch.”

Unless something explosive happens during election night, the Revue will certainly have all eyes trained upon them this time though, having secured the best venue in Oxford for their show, as well as their professional comedian host. Olly attributes this to their reputation, which certainly allows them to draw in large audiences and play at big venues like the Playhouse.

Looking at their alumni list from the last 70 years, it’s not surprising: Rowan Atkinson, Michael Palin, Al Murray and Richard Curtis are just a few highlights from the ranks. Indeed, it’s a list rivalled only by the Cambridge Footlights (Hugh Laurie, Richard Ayoade, David Mitchell) who will be sharing the stage on Thursday. Rather disappointingly for this article, Olly insists that the two troupes keep the rivalry friendly: “We went to Cambridge for their Easter gig and we all got on really well backstage. It’s really good and useful to see other people doing sketch stuff”.

One of the advantages of working with other universities is escaping what he calls “the Oxford echo chamber”. Olly says it can be easy to fall back on tired Oxford tropes in sketch-writing: “I hate Oxford sketches, and I always refuse to do them. Sketches about tutes can be funny, but I always think that you can’t show it to anyone other than an Oxford audience.” Olly makes a point of “writing about really weird stuff, which is hopefully universally entertaining”.

As Oxford jokes are out of bounds, I ask Olly to explain the process of coming up with sketch ideas. “Ideas come when I’m just walking around, doing my life…but I also send and receive messages saying ‘wouldn’t it be funny if…?’, and then we will write the other person’s stuff”. This collaborative approach has led to more exciting, fast-paced style of sketch compared to what has been seen in Oxford previously. “All of the sketches are very, very short and punchy. Which is what I think they should be. I think ‘let’s just do the idea!”

The Oxford Revue and Friends will play for one night only on 8 June at the Oxford Playhouse. Tickets are still available on the Playhouse website: http://www.oxfordplayhouse.com/whats-on/all-shows/the-oxford-revue/4775.

1...872873874...2,524Page 873 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