The Lion - Issue 4

Kensington MP

We interview Rt Hon Malcolm Rifkind MP on the HE cuts

Heythrop Students’ Union Volume 1 Issue 4 Wednesday 17th November theheythroplion.co.uk

4

Protesting

9

Ryan and Joe debate how far protests can go

The

Poseidon Adventure

10

Wilf Horsfall on student life

Lion

DEMO-LISHED! The Lion reports on the National Demonstration.

From Heythrop’s march to the Millbank riot.

Advertisement

KENSINGTON CARS LTD

Fast, reliable service at competitive prices.

info@kensington-cars.co.uk

+44(0)20 7603 1000 HEYTHROP MARCH: Photo by James Barber, Lion Photographer

Fax: +44(0)20 7603 2232

kensington-cars.co.uk

2

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

DEMO DON’T CUT OUR FUNDING: Lion readers show off their placards made from the back page of Issue 3

“The fight is by no means over, there is a long road ahead of us” HSU President James Johnston thanks everyone who protested peacefully at the Demo.

theheythroplion.co.uk twitter.com/theheythroplion facebook.com/theheythroplion youtube.com/theheythroplion flickr.com/photos/theheythroplion

James Johnston President

Please recycle your Lion at one of the many recycle bins around College

I want to start by saying how proud last Wednesday made me. I was proud to be one of over 52,000 students marching peacefully in the biggest student demonstration in a decade, and more than anything I was proud to be marching behind our beautiful new HSU banner.

Those of you who were watching the events unfold on the news or online will no doubt have a different picture of

MARCHING ON PARLIAMENT: James Johnston on the March

events to those who marched with us. I can assure you that our contingent had no part in the violence, and our Union will not condone the actions of that minority as long as I am President.

I implore you all to remember the National Demonstration for the right reasons. Wednesday the 10th of November was the day when Heythrop, our small, specialist and magnificent institution began to fight back against those who seek to oppress its future and the future of education in this country.

The fight is by no means over, and

The Co-Creator and Editor-in-Chief Alex Hackett alex@theheythroplion.co.uk

News Editor Alex Hackett news@theheythroplion.co.uk

Co-Creator and Editor Gala Jackson-Coombs gala@theheythroplion.co.uk

Features Editor Alex Hackett features@theheythroplion.co.uk

Editor Katie Plumb katie@theheythroplion.co.uk

Comment Editor Gala Jackson-Coombs comment@theheythroplion.co.uk

The Lion is the independent student newspaper of Heythrop College, University of London. We distribute at least 1000 free copies during term time around campus and to popular student venues in and around Kensington.

The Lion is published by HackJack Ltd. and printed by Mortons Print Ltd. All Copyright is the exclusive property of HackJack Ltd. No part of this publication is to be reproduced, stored on a retrieval system or submitted in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Culture Editor John Arthur Craven Ord culture@theheythroplion.co.uk Sport and Societies Editor Katie Plumb & Gala Jackson-Coombs sportsoc@theheythroplion.co.uk

there is a long road ahead of us, but I know now that the HSU is more than equipped to punch above its weight. Being part of our contingent on Wednesday has been the greatest honour of my year so far, and I thank all of those who were with us or supporting us.

For exclusive videos and photos from the demo visit theheythroplion.co.uk For more information about future protests, visit the union website

Editorial Team

NEXT DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSIONS

25.10.10

Please send your submissions to: submit@theheythroplion.co.uk The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Editors or of the Heythrop Students’ Union. Every effort has been made to contact the holders of copyright for any material used in this issue, and to ensure the accuracy of this fortnight’s stories. © HackJack Ltd. 2010, 639 Nell Gwynn House, Sloane Ave, Kensington, London SW3 3BE Pages 1 -8 - Designed by Alex Hackett Pages 9 -16 - Designed by Gala Jackson-Coombs

3

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

DEMO

FOLLOWING THE PROTEST Editor Gala Jackson-Coombs give an overview of the Heythrop Contingent at the National Demonstration.

Heythrop Students’ Union marched in the national demonstration “Demolition 2010” which took place last Wednesday. Heythrop was one of many colleges and universities taking part, with an estimated 52,000 people coming to protest cuts in Higher Education. The march was organised

by NUS (National Union of Students) and UCU (Universities and Colleges Union) to protest against the planned tripling of tuition fees, and many arts and humanities institutions, such as Heythrop, losing 100% of their government funding.

Heythrop students held a banner making party the night before, making their own placards with slogans such as “I Regret Voting Lib Dem” and “In Soviet Russia, Arts Cut You”. Some students used the back page of the last issue of The Lion. The Heythrop protesters congregated the next morning at 10am in the lounge

where they applied blue war paint and kitted up with placards, air horns and cameras. The group then travelled by tube to temple to convene with another small and specialist college, Courtauld Institute of Art at Somerset House.

From here, we marched united to the site of the start of the protest, screaming “Courtauld and Heythrop, unite against the cuts!”

We stood together, chanting and dancing, next to other small colleges from London. Next to us were the Central School of Speech and Drama, who had a massive puppet vulture and a placard read “Now is the winter of our discontent”, and Italia Conti, who were holding a banner that said “Don’t fill drama school full of rich snobs”. It took about an hour for the various universities and colleges to congregate, before we set off, taking up the road behind with protesters and placards, to the surprise of motorists. The march paraded through the streets of Westminster, the crowd booing and jeering as we passed Downing Street.

“

MARCHIGN ON LONDON: Photos by James Barber, Joe Walsh, Quddous Ahmed and Annie Sykes - Lion Photographers

We stand proud We stand together We stand united!

“

Gala Jackson-Coombs Comment Editor

Aaron Porter President National Union of Students

As we passed the Houses of Parliament, confidence swelled and the crowd sung “Nick Clegg, Shame on You, Shame on You for Turning Blue.” After jeering at

the building for 10 minutes and gleaning no reaction, the crowd continued on towards Millbank Tower, which houses Tory Headquarters. There was much booing and hissing as we passed, until we reached Tate Britain and stood with our banners, placards, facepaint and cameras. Speeches were made by the officials who organised the march, rallying the crowd and thanking the students for such an overwhelming turnout. Aaron Porter, President of the NUS, gave a rousing speech, telling the people below “We stand proud. We stand together. And we stand united”.

After Aaron spoke, the Heythrop protesters headed back to campus to enjoy a well deserved drink at the pub.

Half an hour later, riot vans started to circle the straggling groups of students, trying to get them to disperse. By this time, the tension outside Millbank had begun to mount. A small group of protesters were peacefully occupying the lobby, and some had managed to get on to the roof of the building. A group of riot police pulled up and readied themselves next to Pizza Express. As a flare was lit near the entrance, around fifteen

riot police made their way through the crowd to the front, to the tune of the empire in Star Wars sung by a student over a megaphone. The mood was still upbeat, the police still smiling. A bonfire was formed, and students burnt their messages to the government.

It was then that things started to get more out of hand. The large glass walls of the building were kicked through, allowing more students in. Sticks and abuse were thrown at the police, and a fire extinguisher was dropped from the roof, which had it hit someone, could have been fatal. There were 50 arrests made with 7 people treated for minor injuries. Some protesters stayed way into the evening, and were “kettled” by the polce, as authorities feared more violence.

It is uncertain how the Millbank incident has affected the success of the protests, however it is clear that the unifing affect of a shared purpose has given Heythrop, and the student movement at large, an unparrelled moralle boost.

We can only wait and see how the government react.

See exclusive videos of the Demo, shot by Lion Reporters

youtube.com/theheythroplion

4

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

EXCLUSIVE

“Education has a value in itself, regardless of any practical benefits that may flow from it” MP for Kensington and Chelsea Rt Hon Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP talks exclusively to The Lion about the cuts to university education and the use student protests.

IN THE COMMONS: Benches Picture - Flickr.com

Katie Plumb Features Editor Katieffbvb

Rt Hon Sir Malcolm Leslie Rifkind MP was born in Edinburgh in 1946. He studied Law and then a postgraduate degree in political science at Edinburgh University. Today, he is the President of the Edinburgh University development trust. He was a member of the Cabinet under Margaret Thatcher and has served as Secretary of State for Scotland, Secretary of State for Transport, Secretary of State for Defence and Foreign Secretary.

He was one of only four ministers to serve throughout the whole Prime Ministerships of both Margaret Thatcher and John Major. In 1997 he was knighted in recognition of his public service.

He is now the Member of Parliament for Kensington.

What do you see as the purpose of Higher Education?

The purpose is twofold, firstly because education has a value in itself, regardless of any practical benefits that may flow from it. In a civilised society we want everyone to have the maximum opportunity for education. But combined with that, it is also a passport to the likelihood of a much more stimulating, interesting and well-remunerated career.

What do you think qualifies a person to benefit from Higher Education?

I think all people can benefit from further or higher education but different people are born with different capabilities. Everyone has more capabilities than they realise they have but the extent to which they’ll benefit from a

University education will vary from individual to individual. I think one has to ensure that these judgements are made in a flexible way and people are not deemed to be unsuitable for Higher Education when in fact they are just having some learning difficulties at an earlier stage.

To what extent should students pay for their education?

That’s a very important point. It has always been part of our system that primary and secondary education should be free at the point of delivery. That is paid for by general taxation. That used to be true for universities but what we have seen is that university education is available to a very high percentage of the population, half of the public are eligible, and the costs of that are not sustainable through the general tax system. Universities themselves have found in recent years that without sources of additional income they are in very deep trouble.

Do you think there should be a cap on tuition fees?

I think you need to have a cap, yes, but it obviously will be a much higher one than in the past. The size of sum that you expect students to fund should be influenced by several things. First of all, is there a system for insuring that any repayment of sums that have been advanced is administered flexibly so that the burden only falls when they are already earning a significant income? Secondly, we should continue to have and hopefully expand endowment funds which can be used to help those on lower incomes. And thirdly, if a student is unemployed or only employed on a low income, despite their educational qualifications, that should be reflected in the repayments they must make both in timing and in scale.

How can the government discern what is a priority subject?

It’s difficult. I can understand the principle that Lord Browne was trying to apply and in theory it makes some sense but one person’s priority is another’s indifference. It is not unreasonable for the government to decide what qualifications the country best needs to achieve greater prosperity and advance.

Science is important for our government to develop but shouldn’t ethics be developed at the same rate?

I was not a science graduate but an Arts graduate with Law and Political Science so I am sensitive to the argument that education should not be just about technical qualifications for a particular career, there is an intellectual and cultural dimension also for a civilised society. At a time of limited funds, politics is about priorities, we cannot have everything. Quite often there is not a perfect solution only a bad or less bad solution.

Heythrop is a centre of JewishChristian relations and we put a high value on interfaith and being a group of people who hold a value on truth. Why is that not a priority for our Government?

I think that is not the right conclusion to draw, in any walk of life if you can’t fund everything you have to decide the most important priority. In a sense anything that a University does is a priority, if it wasn’t doing anything of value there wouldn’t be students turning up to study the courses. Every student covering every discipline could claim that their subject is a priority and that would be counterproductive because if everything is a priority, nothing is. I

know that because that’s the benefit of having a University Education!

Our government wants to be associated with what is just and right, so why are those who did not cause this economic mess having to pay for it?

Those who caused this mess? We don’t know who caused it, of course the banks and the financial institutions made some very serious mistakes and that has been reflected in the very heavy tax penalties they have been given. But you have to ask why the UK, Ireland and Greece have a massive public deficit while other western countries who face the same global problems do not. You have to go back to the Old Testament, what you do in the seven fat years to prepare for the seven lean years. In my view the governmental spending in the last decade in this country went through the roof in an unsustainable way. That is why we have such a huge deficit; it is not just because of the banks. Not all countries have that problem, we all caused the problem, we have all been living beyond our means.

But I definitely did not cause the problem, I was at school at the time.

If the object is to seriously reduce the deficit, you can only do that in one of two ways, or a mix of the two. Increase taxes or decrease spending. We are doing both, what you can argue is about the balance. VAT has gone up as well as the high earners bracket going up to 50% again after 15 years. If you are cutting spending then inevitably those who are most benefiting from the spending will be effected, that’s inevitable. One of the debates is whether we need to move away from universal child benefit that might be more sensible because they may be less of need of it.

What do you think could be the possible implications of the cut in funding for the Arts?

It depend whether the reductions can be met by increased funding from other sources. Most of the universities in Britain now are doing what universities in the United States have been doing for generations, which is raising very large amounts of money from alumni or foundations. It gives universities more autonomy. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

Do you think student marches, such as those endorsed by the National Union of Students, will have any affect on Government policy?

I think it is all part of a public debate; it is legitimate for people feel strongly about something. The affect it has depends of the strength of the argument and those in other direction. At the end of the day governments have to take decisions and they will never be able to take a decision that is popular with everyone. Edmund Burke, one of our great philosophers said ‘To tax and to please is a power not given to man’ That is not just true of tax but public spending generally. So yes, if students want to demonstrate, absolutely.

Sometimes it is part of the action that leads to change of policy, sometimes it isn’t but that doesn’t mean that it’s not a demonstration worth having because it very important that the government of the day and members of parliament of all parties should be aware of the strength of opinion. You shouldn’t see any march in isolation; they are part of general public debate, including heated exchanges on Newsnight. You can’t measure the impact of one particular event like a march, a letter to the press or a debate in Parliament

5

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

Where we go from here...

DEMO

Vice President of Campaigns Philip Woods explains where the Union’s protest goes after the Demolition.

Philip Woods Campaigns Officer

HEYTHROP ROAR: Heythrop Students Shout at the Demo - Photo by James Barber

Katieffbvb

Last autumn, Mandy called for the “marketization” of education, and New Labour commissioned the infamous Browne Review; the National Union of Students (NUS) rightly predicted that this review would call for increasing tuition fees and savage cuts to Higher and Further education. On 11th November that autumn, NUS responded with the Vote For Students pledge (signed by 1500 parliamentary candidates) and the first national demo against cuts and increasing fees; I, not even an HSU officer at the time, was the only person from Heythrop to attend. I am immensely proud to say that this was by no means the case for the Demolition.

On the morning of the 10th, I found the Lounge packed with students adding the finishing touches to their placards and the amazing HSU banner. My placard read: “Cable, Go Cut Yourself!”; I had ironically sustained my first war-wound on the serrated edge of a tape dispenser, while making it. My colleague, James Johnston, the HSU Sabbatical President, raised our nice new megaphone to his lips: “Let’s go!” Off we went to battle! Heythrop formed a contingent of at least 30 students and a lecturer (Fr. Martin Poulsom SDB, course convenor for BA Theology and MA Christian Theology) who wanted to let the Con Dems know that we won’t stand for increasing fees which many of us can’t afford; and that the subjects we study at Heythrop are important because education should be about a process of intellectual and spiritual growth, not “the market”. We joined a peaceful march of over 50,000 supporters (students, lecturers and others); the largest of its kind in a generation. We literally told the government just where they could stick their Browne Review, although we regretted not bringing diagrams. The demo ended with a thoroughly inspirational rally with speakers ranging from NUS President Aaron Porter, to TUC representatives, to the new Leader of the Opposition, Ed Milliband.

The Heythrop contingent left once the Demolition had officially ended.

A minority of demonstrators, including the ULU President Clare Solomon, remained and went about occupying the Conservative Party HQ. In my own personal opinion, this act was not, in itself, illegitimate. I, nonetheless, deplore the actions of a minority within this minority who attacked police officers. As James quite rightly pointed out in his Facebook status the next day, “The police who were attacked yesterday are also facing cuts, and many of them will have children and grandchildren who will be going to university in the next few years. Exactly what point is throwing things at them attempting to prove?” Moreover, while I agree that Browne and the Con Dems are themselves vandals, it demeans the student movement when we stoop to their level. I would also like to point out that, again, it is the poor who suffer most from such wanton destruction, because

they are the ones left sweeping up the shards of glass. It is also unfair to those Conservative MPs who signed the pledge and still support us. Meanwhile, the millionaires and billionaires wielding the axe now have the perfect excuse to give students a hard time.

In spite of this minority’s counterproductive actions, the aftermath of the demonstration is much more positive than one may have assumed. Pick up a paper, switch on the news; each time the demo is mentioned, while the focus often tends toward the negative aspects, you will see that it is rarely, if at all, mentioned without reference to the issues of HE and FE cuts and increasing fees that it was intended to highlight. Indeed, the exposure of the Lib Dem leadership’s secret plans to ditch the pledge to vote against increasing tuition fees made the front page of yesterday’s Guardian. The Demolition was, indeed, a success, but it would have been all the more successful had it not been for the violence and wanton destruction of a small minority.

Furthermore, the lively Newsnight debate involving, NUS President, Aaron Porter and, University of London Union (ULU) President, Clare Solomon can too easily be seen to represent divisions within the student movement.

Nevertheless, it also revealed that, while Aaron and Clare responded very

differently to what happened on Millbank, they remained united against increasing fees, HE and FE cuts and the “marketization of education”. The student movement remains united and, with Aaron’s diplomacy and Clare’s uncompromising passion, we are a force to be reckoned with.

As Winston Churchill said at such a crucial point in another great war this country faced, “Now this is not the end.

It is not even the beginning of the end.

But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.” The Demolition has undoubtedly been a wake-up call for the government, but, if we abandon the campaign now, Osborne will go ahead with the cuts as if it never happened; Clegg and Cable will rally behind Cameron as if nobody had ever exposed their deception and betrayal of Britain’s students and prospective students. Therefore, the Demolition was or, to speak philosophically, should be the end of the beginning of the fight for education (a fight with far greater weapons than concrete and fireextinguishers) that is the NUS Funding Our Future campaign; it should by no means be the end. So, where do we go from here?

Firstly, just because the Demolition’s over does not mean that we should stop writing to and lobbying our MPs; just because it’s over does not mean that the HSU should abandon our resolve

to put particular pressure on Lib Dem MPs. Indeed, NUS has called upon students in Lib Dem constituencies, where their MP is not prepared to honour the Vote For Students pledge, to present their MP with a petition of no confidence. If the coalition’s proposed “right to recall” legislation is passed, this will mean that only 10% of constituents will need to sign such a petition to cause a bi-election; in marginal constituencies this would be particularly catastrophic for the party. Even if “the right to recall” legislation is not passed, such petitions would be very embarrassing for the coalition. Therefore, if you live in a Lib Dem constituency, contact your MP now (by letter or email) and ask them whether they plan to vote against increasing tuition fees; if they don’t reply, get down to their surgery and ask them in person; if they do not answer “Yes”, get at least 10% of their constituents (it’s likely that students make at least 10% of their constituents, anyway) to sign a petition of no confidence. (Additionally, the HSU are planning to mobilise residents to lobby the Conservative MP for Kensington, Rt. Hon. Malcolm Rifkind.)

Secondly, student union leaders have been discussing plans for a national day of direct action on WEDNESDAY 24 NOVEMBER. Put your thinking caps on now! I have already heard some very imaginative ideas for non-violent

resistance.

Thirdly, don’t think this will be over

by Christmas. On 29th January next year, there will be a public debate in London on The Independent Review of Higher Education Funding and Student Finance. The larger institutions are likely to dominate; so it is crucial that we gather a contingent of students and hopefully staff together to ensure that Heythrop, as a small and specialist Arts college, has a voice.

I’d like to finish with an inspiring story my mother told me as I crawled out of bed on the morning of the 9th. Earlier that morning she had been in a taxi, got chatting with her Iranian taxi-driver, and told him that I was a student union officer who would be attending the demo. The driver responded “Oh yes, the students! They are very angry with Nick Clegg! Britain is a great country for student uprisings!” Indeed, what I saw on Wednesday made it very clear that whatever the Con Dems cut, they cannot cut the spirit of Britain’s student movement; they can only defeat us if we abandon the fight for education that is the Funding Our Future campaign.

Watch this space!

For more information about campaigns, visit heythropstudentsunion.co.uk

6

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

DEMO

“Why I was on the roof at Millbank” Alex Hackett interviews an Anonymous Heythrop student about why he was on the roof of Tory HQ and why he would do it again.

ON THE ROOF: Picture by James Barber, Photoshopped by Alex Hackett

Alex Hackett News Editor Why were you up there?

We arrived late so we tried to find the Heythrop contingent. We had no idea what was going on at Millbank but we saw there was a mass of people congregating outside so we went over to investigate. The atmosphere seemed really good and really positive. I looked up and saw the first group of people on the roof. I found it inspirational; it felt like now was the time to truly make a stand about all this. I felt like I wanted to be a part of it. When I saw a crack in the window, I was in two minds about what to do. In the end sheer curiosity drew me into the place. Inside the building it was like a party, unlike what the news coverage says there were still many students chanting and dancing.

Someone shouted get up the stairs so we wrenched open the doors and there were three more police officers standing in front of us. They stepped aside when they saw the cheer number of us.

I guess I wanted to be up there because I wanted to be a beacon of hope like the first wave were to me, it felt like something momentous was happening and I just wanted to be a part of it.

Do you think the message of the demonstration has been damaged by the Millbank incident I think this is where the big argument resides. I think the worst thing that can happen is the protestors split into two camps, those who are for the Millbank occupation and those who are against. All this will do is divide us at a time when we need to stand untied.

The government are going to see the weaknesses in our position are going to pounce on them – it’s simple divide and conquer. We need to forget this issue and concentrate on what we can do as a united entity How many would you say were up there?

I’d guess about 50. No where near as many as you would think.

Do you think what you did was illegal Yes it was, what we did was trespassing do doubt about it, but it was the right thing to do and it was for the right reasons.

Do you think the police reaction was justified?

From what we saw it got a quite bad.

Once the fire extinguisher was thrown that’s when I thought the protesting had crossed that line. When it happened the people on the roof were disgusted, at the end of the day that could have killed someone and we weren’t up there to be dangerous. That’s when the riot police started to get brutal.

What would you propose instead of the increases in tuition fees?

I think there should be cuts in other sectors. I think the problem is many people, like myself, from a working class background will be most affected.

As philosophers we know knowledge is the highest pursuit, but to put a price barrier of £9000 worth of debt makes it just unfeasible.

Would you say the demo coverage was accurate?

NO! I saw police officers beating 16 year old girls in the head, her face dripping with blood. I saw protestors hitting

placement with sticks from placards.

Some police reacted well, using their shield and hands to simply stop the students. But then some just didn’t care, some just went ballistic. The news never showed how brutal the police were being, there were so many cameras and there is so much footage on YouTube and yet no network bar ITV showed anything close to the reality How far would you go to protest?

Would you stop at destruction of property or would you go further?

I wouldn’t attack people. I’d rather people used words to get their points across. People were doing this, many students weren’t throwing things at the police they were saying to them ‘what are you going to do with your children’ and ‘are you not here to protect and serve’. I’d prefer that people rallied then destroyed property but in my mind when it’s necessarily as it was at Millbank, it becomes more acceptable.

Do you disagree with NUS President Aaron Porter denouncing the riot as “despicable?”

I do, if he’s supposed to be the president of a union that encompasses all these students why wasn’t he down there, at least to see it happening and get a clear picture of it? He can’t pick and choose which students he represents, if he speaks for us all and he should stand up for us all.

What do you think you achieved by being at Millbank?

I think we gave people hope that things can change and that people will stand up for their rights. I’m proud of the march, 52,000 people protesting on London is an unbelievable achievement, but I think Millbank in particular showed that we wouldn’t take this lightly, that if in the most dire of circumstances, we will use force to make ourselves heard.

If you could do it again would you?

Yes, undoubtedly, I have no regrets.

Something’s doing on this week, and I’ll be there.

7

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

“Why James has got it wrong” Kensy Joseph explains why he disagrees with the HSU President’s assessment of the Browne Review.

TUESDAY 19TH

In the latest issue of The Lion (19th Oct.), HSU President James Johnston severely criticises the Browne Review for being “fundamentally out of touch” and making “ridiculous proposals” (“Why Lord Browne’s got it wrong”, p.7). In doing so, however, James severely misreads aspects of the report and overreaches with his counter arguments.

First of all, the report does not argue that lifting fee caps and charging higher fees leads to better HEI service, as James claims. Indeed, the report affirms what he writes about the increase in fees four years ago not leading to better student satisfaction. What the report does argue is that the current block grant system through HEFCE is not an adequate incentive for HEIs to radically improve quality (Browne report, p.23). What the report argues will increase higher education quality is greater student choice, increased competition between HEIs for students and a dynamic system of funding that “follows the student” (passim). In other words, the more students an HEI can attract, the more government funding it gets.

James finds the report’s proposal for an aptitude-based minimum entry standard “ridiculous and downright chilling”. He lampoons Lord Browne for thinking it rational that Higher Education funding should be restricted to students who can benefit from it. The problem with James’s point – it actually is rational and fair (or at least not prima facie unreasonable or unfair) for a society to direct scarce resources towards members best able to use them (a point well made in Amartya Sen’s ‘Three Children and a Flute’ parable in The Idea of Justice, pp.12-15). Why should the country commit itself to forking out upwards of £9,000 a year for someone to receive a higher education if (s)he cannot show that (s)he will put it to good use and is a better candidate than other funding applicants to do so?

What seems to horrify James is the prospect that “intelligent, brilliant, interested students without the pieces of paper to prove they are” may have to pay for themselves or raise funds through other means than the Government to obtain a university education (which raises the question of why any university would admit a candidate it cannot identify as having the relevant aptitudes in the first place). He is concerned that older students returning to education without A-levels will be left behind. In fact, the Browne report makes explicit provision for such cases: in addition to

Policing a Protest Michael Feazey interviews Clare Mackintosh of Thames Valley Police about policing a student demo

7

FEATURE Michael Feazey 1st year Undergraduate

Photo by James Barber

cause. Some students are law-abiding and others violent. Sometimes the atmosphere and adrenalin engendered in a protest situation causes normally lawWith the week’s excitement and drama abiding people to cause criminal damsurrounding the Demolition March, I age or assault police officers. I always took it upon myself to talk to someone try to remind students to think about whose job is the planning of the police the impact on their own education response to demonstrations. Inspec- th and e future career choices if they gain a on ed swerValley criminal d an tor Clare Mackintosh Thames anof d record as a result of their part ke as ns io st Que Police is responsible forrm in an otherwise peaceful protest. ring Fo thespmanaget’s en id es Pr ment of police resources for protests in the city of Oxford and she welcomed What influences the decisions e be nice...

Greec the opportunity to speak to or The Lion. you make regarding the route to Israel, Rome it vis ge lle Co n’t a Would Hopefully this. interview will help to that the protest/march is allowed e us some money Yes. Giv answer some questions thatn my fellow ine? tors..follow?

Do you try to allow the rtant tha Doctr . po im cto re Do mo to es ant students about lly what ple’s liv might have importgoes Are peo route to go as close to any “tarple’s lives are rea peo d, he tan y ers und wh ’t donbehind the scenes in advance of proBut Ion explains get” premises as possible without mes Johnston ne Review testsonlike Demolition 2010. ly be ow HSU President Ja Br e causing damage or do you try to should definite murder? th lls of Wi rti t k os abo Jac m Is to ps ’re aborting. Tri disagrees with aim for a more isolated area so as Depends what you .

In a protest, what are your aims aborted is the that to minimise members of the pubwhat in my view silly arts degrees Soc? This leads me to tutions teaching chilltheir a Catholic andthiwhat are the criteria that deed for and downright y should have lic being exposed to the march? nk there’s a ne most ridiculous On hurt the econom to ort. you d rep use Do ’s ney wne mo Bro the James ing proposal in funding cut, and business.fine an event as having been well“Entitlement to t for No tha ools tes sch wri n e he uag page 28 Johnsto t? ned build lang arts handled? will be determi in the basemen After all, the silly Most decisions about route are made by Student Finance out of our men-in-training.

HSU shop open based President kdays. We run it bably spend their entry standard What time is the to 5/6pm on wee itutions would pro by a minimum m sysinst 10a ting the the organisers of a protest, often with ut pain ure abo re for ens m the ts silly pain erally fro way first; e. This will on the g Gen itud of din apt out fun on this silly from you Let’s get ’s t and n LOOK like The strategic intentions for each event ing to demand advice from the police or the landownd things in Browne gs that don’t eve office, so if it’s shu tem is respond are a couple of goo t- silly thin t ask! itutions... I lified to benefit from mber, way. Silly arts inst als for funding par bemeset byjusthe “Gold Commander” a union those who are qua seewill ers.

This g advice is based on the potent was a diview of report. His propos t things any tha his , t tha anizin Yes wha ues k org on.” arg thin be cati He to U good. y hate Higher Edu ing nts will the HSfor time students are [the officer ultimately responsible r honestl he is actually say tial disruption to the wider community be. over what eve ing 21,000 a yea rect quote. Yes, Heythrop would w Freshers’ is No you should be earn e the chance he hav ? n and p ng k, eve kee goi bac to you policing ofntu anmevent], usually an Asr fees that before iety events or the safety of protesters. Sometimes ut s ivid p oual n uni s ivers b iity, l i tyou y tothe before you pay you keep the mome e for and loads of soc rying thing abo this month, who a system in plac The deeply wor to apply to an ind Halloween sistant Chief Constable, may also d to benefit that he re’s seems to have m is lifie the ll it might be necessary to use legislation who qua ent ly for We um s cial doc ent offi to pay for it.

Why should it?

I would e stud d to be Browne’s nee d the Lor ! and with it erst ting helping prospectiv was the minigs interesa series of possible outcomes ely misund identify thin experience and OK the whole report to identify an area where the protest from theand seems to complet love boss Rome; Browne, to visit itllwould surely money is tight. If er BP done Lord you? wne would m for cation. The form posals, Bro government. We proble standard (based on Higher Edu for ythe event. will highlight three proentry 18 ashe that rough unicus or these mum will be held, or to apply conditions in r thoworld, LevitHe you impression my of on the s rt enhance knowledge of the er pa tion und tula be an ng. gra to Is s con seem ks. It to somethi be on tariff UCAS points), a separate allocawhich of these possible outcomes is how education wor relation to the numbers of protesters standing of Yes. Italian(s) and der myself –rati yet I do not Edua lot Andrecommended onal that Higher re. mo lly is tota e s tionUnfofortu student places is ther seem ‘preferred’. Often we will share these se nately allowed, or the duration of the event. be available by tho claim reasonably that the only government l? . Here are a couple should fee on piss of cati you it, pile a do is from w it Ho of made directly to institutions for to be identified outcomes with the organisto benefit lly privilegedtoeno ugh the This would only be done with justificatota . e ’r has a responsibility foot bill. like a woman. ou l a huge Y y fee I den of my favourite bits n, to t Ma righ rd? even where a designated proaward to admitted students who fail to haand ers and try to find middle ground if ifthe and you’re totally g tion times get ge fud chance of fundin y ck rd somethe pa hea ple en r, I d peo s. eve of istic group e stat point cut-off. chance or will you contrast greatly e somtariff meet right to Havthe of eve ther,organisers s are Further, test area is identified, the aim would have even got theirk- at aims Have you re they % of all statistic befo 34.5 t What James finds particularly Wh tha re whe strongly discourages quite the tariff year. of the police. In most casNo. Shut up. in a aims it also Ask methe k these ones are apply anywhere. le thisethat theto Browne be to use a location sufficiently in the eopsome A-Levels with p bullshit but I thin hasn’t ents without wne seems to r studreport Brobeing olde all, ut of t abo ?

Firs wne . point entry system implemented es, both organisers U police are seekreliable HSand on Lord Bro public eye to fulfil demonstrator’s obcap on fees d-artsretuinrninhis g to edu listcati of priority in- Critically Assess the of funthe that by lifting the argue r ance included chitself lligent, brilliant, by the Government before UCAS re for thei acclaim us.peaceful event. ing a well-managed, ents mo jectives.

What about inte es of I would critically the piec and charging stud ice out subjects.

These priority subjects are serv with er s ent bett a ey stud get terested completes its will ongoing review into thebefore th degrees, they Go and talk to g in they are? ve be forgets that k? pro may dic to listed by the report as areas of addih He er I. pap suc HE r you you thei Who gave Why are tarifffrom system; for instance, to include d?. and we are yet n so gooagree Does the Police Force with e ACTUAL people. tripled, got som Do you believe that individual ask questio en targeted injecting tional investment ine they prom4 years ago fees lity and t wer Why you are not have ev e in qua BTECs and Level 3lt. qualifications this job and wha real increas any other the legal requirements regarding to see , Also officers should be allowed to be s? resu ball a eye ising HEIs because of as r their potential to Gandhi? into thei as ce nd i-realist pern ha ant a student satisfaction s Mo or (pp.33-34).

Art realist or false, the e pre-announcement of the chfor the national interestpick(p.ed up47). from aproestimated that identified and video recorded in (Arts ple of the Tru king at the matter on average it is re a cou loo mo on are 00 we 34,0 if s roughly Depend Do the advantages of dohave just e. I urge tests? any-would Imostill graduates earn their policing activity to ensure as a proposals herfor students financed apply culous of their lifetime re ridibe spective. course for over the report, which I ing One key reason finding the so outweigh the spontaneity this ? policing, despite the majority degree. For Phi all to read the full do I do fair their James’s w you Ho the cost of their education through . ils. o. les ema N du direct result of ege re mo ... figu r coll re e of mythe he w tes I believe the Browne report is his miswill send round you change on which drive protest’s graduadisagreeable nt tohelps of American police forces considwa I losophy ity vers the Student Finance Plan.)

But what uni p! a 00. So if Services asa 45,0what is around of . The Browne aims? conception the report me, thinks Shut up Contact Student ering ittitu to- be a security risk? remember athis year (and believe h’s ins James fails to doPLEisASEpresent coherChurc an ex BP lic of charged 7,000 a a tho ice of Ca adv hell n a the ma rge aboutman student for higher s will cha n? ut the Ro Review is just parliay institutionmotivation ent argument the importance of ay discriminatio do you feel abo earnings gone through w ti-g an for ime not an as Ho l lifet has ree a ica It deg f. extr eth e ity chie un and p thingsThe ‘police m with homoeducation.

Itthes clearly acknowledges lot more), phobia is ents see a univers moforce’ studthe not a person, e no proble YOUR job to kee er the cost of year it iscontributing e 3 education There are very few circumstances in holics havand higher arts ment andin - tional ho ent, a tiresom barely (if at all) cov wouldand wereasons that millions of Cat y you are simply NUS National Dem arbitrary docum ing thinks i-ga the ime not ant wne plurality complexity of lifet Join rth . are Bro a wo as way t and you Its tha in contemporary agreewor disagree with t if is tha which police officers should not be the degree. And tothem themocommon of November,therefore cannot t to earn barrier between into the good My personal vie e we wan ion on the 10th ney ity. trat ... ual ons g e you sex pin dat for (both alleconomic and non-economic) t to pum do degrees becaus pec p up a point of law. Providing advance notice of gleefully Britain you MP and readily identified, or be filmed. If oflose a lot of res faulty. tokeewhat report, hence by your(and Lobwhy hout the and , his logic seems wrong and I will it to our econom behindmoaney student’s decision to pursue ay. Throug wne going on. We owe that Bro of a protest has a number ofe?benefits for with what is the sense the ficers are behaving within the law and extent) government should our grandchilsee tosubsinot fail to get sn’t it can cid doe why owe no he e Ge we with n, aus ss ch Ma childre orenables particular (p.31).

The non-ecoout of tou s this is bec y who has Perhapcourse all involved. the organisers to NecrophiliaIt is fundamentally have justification for their actions, dise it. we owe it to anybod y! go to unisubjects. to and ght real n ose as nau dre s cho ts her ject ple Tha Hig sub s ther, silly! with the police, the landnomic Art reasons James mentions (love the benefits of many young peo ity get Nei together had and will have there are no issues with being filmed some go to univers hope you’re p ofversity. Granted, lly? for me in this country. I Wa on r but degrees Hey cati the cts, of the Now subject; desire to thro learn more Edu spe bro off. r pro ed I class the er you owner (often Authority) and y find Local ULD be piss or named. If they are not behaving apeverthe to boost careAt SHOwelfare arts based. The cation isthepiss aHigtime when Police and ed off, you her Edu re. go Did you the arts broadly ers and did oth up you y fers asworld, get at about the others and oneself) , who man wh this and h I see anyWe other interested parties such as the y attract people and a wis ll done, stop reading propriately, those issues must be adNow of a subject, have been slashed and milmay not be, but the a love budgets the ut in ce. abo rest ut eren abo inte diff a ld, e an are not hav denied; butandthe report disa does find and mak media, to better facilitate the protest. about the wor e a love for dressed. ergraduate to learn more r Und lions face domestic and workplace If we k, if you yea thin ple.

I 3rd t peo ee? s er wha Ros oth agr it’s C ut . And John of those a lacunaartsin the economic information n Agree or Dis yourself and abo It’s important thees by rights ing of Jam our fuDrawnthat ry letter or complai p to boostany insecurity, case for the continued thro Hey to gree write an ang e blic cam es at that “Pu available to applicants and decidesall to infers e of paper, nion of the demonstrating are balanced the Jam tions to and get a piec to the BBC. Browne Send us your opi When dealing with students do ture earningsfunding of artsby programmes cannot eted on the your quesagainst st Po uld’ve suggested wne Review to ent [should] be targ sho Bro e make some recommendations.

In fact, eon investm se t som rights of members of the community topres surely iden subjects”. The textbooks you change your “code of force”? simply be “you have to pay for it bs@ bekthe learn from hing of priority e and .me/as now that we all the callteac for greater ring science, medicin sp are information go about their lawful business; protestrm Comsanspu than those pricey fo er rath ers priority subjects put uk allove it and it’s good for ge.ac. and com cause Iand based, logy olleme.” ogy cho nol opc psy thr tech hey and ) clarity on prospectsis give after a course enough theology (fairjob ers risk actually harming their cause if philosophy,One n to ‘stracan give James the benefit of the mention Use of force by police officers has to be ugh special comes tho from students courses’. scholars. public sympathy drops due to the level nt language themselves tegically importa doubt and assume that concern for the iinst justified. It is of no consequence whetht tha n (p.30). This will undoubtedly mea of disruption or damage caused. common good informed his critique of er the individual concerned is a student the Browne report. The report is notaor not, the level of force used depends The Browne report presents a far In your experience, do students ble for the wide variety of perspectives on the circumstances presented at that more balanced, complex and nuanced tend to be sympathetic towards it brings to bear on the issue – personparticular time. framework than James gives it credit the police in marches or do they al benefits, social good and inclusivfor and, indeed, what he presents in tend to be a more violent/aggresity, employment, student preferences, I hope this short interview will help response (granting that he wasn’t consive group relative to others you fiscal constraints and more. The chalclarify the legal and procedural framecerned with a systematic presentation dealt with? lenge here is for bodies like the HSU work within which the police work of a counterview on higher education). to present a sober, sensitive and inwhen planning their response to stuHe seems to make a leap of logic from You can’t place all protesters in the formed response to the Browne review dent demonstrations. I’d like to thank saying that students go to university same bracket – there are different lev– a challenge I hope James will take up Inspector Clare Mackintosh for giving out of love for a subject to implying that els of behaviour from individuals in any in his next column. up her time to provide such a useful society (via the government) has a regroup, campaigning in relation to any insight.

“Why Lord Browne’s got it wrong”

“

“

Kensy Joseph Postgraduate Student

E LION

OCTOBER | TH

DEMO

Ask James

8

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

“COMMENT.” Edited by Gala Jackson-Coombs

“I love you like a ball and chain”...?

Francesca Gosling 2nd year Undergraduate

© scholesyfynn

“Home-made yoghurt is more digestible than someone else’s curdled milk”.

This old Turkish saying, supposedly justifying inter-family marriage doesn’t really add much to the image most of us modern westerners already get of the idea of arranged marriages. Our most common reaction tends to be some sort of recoil in horror. All we can picture are antiquated scenes of families forcing underage girls and boys into matrimony with relatives or people they don’t like at all with nothing but a future of misery to look forward to.

But what a lot of us fail to realise is that some of these marriage traditions have evolved alongside the modernization of women’s rights and general individual freedom. Fair enough, in its most extreme and old-fashioned forms, the concept of arranged marriage (or rather, forced marriage) deprives both men and women of their freedom to choose and devalues the voluntary commitment of two persons’ love for each other. But this depends on what we mean when we talk about freedom, choice and, most importantly, love. Besides, there are varying levels of what we might today call “arranged marriage” that don’t involve being frogmarched down the aisle with a bag over your head. Instead it can even be seen as a blessing with many advantages!

A young doctor friend of mine, Al, from a large Muslim family explained to me that the point of arranged marriage in the modern world (in his culture) is to preserve the Islamic community in a country where it is an ethnic minority.

I sat in his car contemplating the idea as he added that the tradition is usually for the parents to organise a chaperoned meeting – much like a blind date – with someone they have picked out from another family of similar background after having taken into account their own child’s preferences and interests in a partner. If the meeting goes well the couple usually exchange numbers and arrange another meeting et cetera. If it doesn’t, well, bring on the next one! But the meetings and arrangements always take place with the intention of marriage in mind from the start.

Often, people criticise that the fact that the parents kick-start everything is wrong in itself because it restricts the child’s independence by not even allowing them the chance to find their own partner. But this complaint ignores the fact that the institution of marriage has been around for thousands of years and the idea of love and choice being the most important factors is actually fairly modern! Google any articles on the origin and definition of marriage and rarely will you find anything about “love”. A particular favourite of mine, on oldandsold.com merely states that the bond of matrimony “implies the right of sexual intercourse” and even goes as far as to suggest that partners become so intimate as to “generally speaking, regard

it as their duty to gratify in some measure the other partner’s desire”. How romantic.

During the ancient Mesopotamian period, for example, marriage was more like a business transaction. The purpose was essentially for a man to hand over his daughter as property to another man in order to ensure legitimate heirs. Religion kicked in later but love had nothing to do with it until only about several hundred years ago. Of course we’ve all read fairy stories and Ancient Greek myths that show gooey, besotted couples finding love in each other...but have you noticed that this tends to be when both parties are materialistically compatible? There are very few stories where the prince or princess is permitted to actually marry the slave they have the affair with!

This particular road-trip with Al was on the day before his own date with a girl organised for him by his mother and sister. “The whole concept of marriage in Islam is different,” he told me, “we use it to begin a relationship between two people rather than to sanctify one that has already been established”. But in this case does one not risk getting into a relationship with someone they won’t, in fact, fall in love with? After all, let’s not forget, divorce in these situations is virtually impossible and leaves both parties (women especially) in a much undesired position of disgrace. And is the pressure to not end up in such a state a form of female oppression that we cannot accept in this day and age?

Yet in most modern scenarios the idea that a woman’s right to choose is being undervalued doesn’t have to be the case. Today women do not only have more rights, but they are also aware of them. In most of these arrangements a woman has the freedom to turn down a man she really doesn’t like. Furthermore, she is legally able to leave a family that intends to force her – even though it would be by no means easy!

On the other hand, agreeing to take part in arranged marriage has the added bonus of removing from a woman’s life the dreaded drama of dating – a

nerve-testing phenomenon that a lot of women would happily sacrifice! And when that emotional drain is removed from the equation a woman at last has the untapped freedom and background stability to pursue her own identity whether through a career or just anything that doesn’t involve male interference! But isn’t the plight of the singleton a necessary stage in developing into such modern and savvy women?

Perhaps. But the lessons one can learn from an early marriage must not be undervalued. Imagine you agree to marry someone with whom you are perhaps not one hundred per cent compatible with – maybe he never wants to go out with you or he plays terrible music too loudly or perhaps he’s just sexually... awkward. If you already commit yourself before these little horrors start to surface you are probably more likely to find yourself learning how to look past these things and find a stronger and more deeper bond. Hopefully.

Al explained to me his similar opinion that “the most important thing in a marriage relationship is for two people to learn about each others’ differences and really reach an understanding of one another – real love comes naturally after this. Of course, even then it is hard to distinguish between what is love and what has just become routine, but this is a risk anyone takes with marriage. My grandmother was forced to marry and my grandparents were the happiest and most loving couple I know. I think this is because they had the time to really get to know and grow to love each other.” So, if this is the case, does such a marriage really sound more miserable than the life of the single woman still battling with her insecurities and impossible standards to find the perfect man?

I think not. Partly due to the fact that there is an actual reason for your marriage in the first place that goes beyond a romantic whim makes it statistically more likely not to end in divorce.

Whether it is for the financial or social benefit of your family this is, arguably, still more morally acceptable than marriage for the sake of, say, an accidental pregnancy or just to be rebellious. As

a result, you are much less likely to wake up one day and realise you have made completely the wrong choice. And let’s not forget, of course, that the man of the match is an individual too! Arranged marriage ties him down young!

But the task of dating isn’t always an easy ride for the guys, as much as a lot of women protest that it is.

Another male friend of mine, who I have to admit is a genuine gentleman, described the dating process for men as “long, arduous and costly” and it “takes to time to break down a girl’s walls” (by which he means getting to know her and gain her trust). So maybe going through with an arranged marriage is a way to successfully skip these nasty bits for men just as well as women!Another benefit of arranged marriage, as cruel as it may sound on the surface, is that it can provide with certainty a partner for the more unfortunate among us who, quite frankly, wouldn’t stand a chance on their own.

I went to school with a person who was rumoured to have an arranged marriage and I always thought this was probably more of a blessing than a curse. This particular person was extremely awkward and had been kept so sheltered by her very religious parents that she was just not comfortable in social situations. And she wasn’t quite intelligent enough to know how to deal with them regardless. Maybe I exaggerate, but had that person not had an arranged marriage in process she would probably have struggled considerably to find a partner she really had something in common with on her own!

But does any of this justify the institution of consanguineous (inter-family) marriage? Again there are many gruesome tales of this happening in other modern European countries, as well as our own, where young people are pressured by their family into marrying relatives as close as first cousins who they have been brought up with. In a Spiegel Online article, Katrin Elger reports how in countries like Germany, young men or women are imported from places such as Turkey to make suitable husbands and wives, often for

family members. She quotes one particular boy forced to marry at the age of 16 in September 2005: “it’s really bad, when you have to force yourself to have sex with a relative...it’s sick”. In these scenarios, being so far from friends and family there is very little one can do to get out of it. Sometimes these people are tricked into the union by being sent on holiday by their parents only to have their passports taken and be manacled into marriage with a stranger on arrival. This is all because of the belief that such marriages will strengthen close-knit families as social cohesion is hugely important to the Turkish community in Germany. Even in these cases the “victims” have no legal obligation to go through with the union.

However, they are often blackmailed or beaten and the pressure from an overbearing family can be virtually, though not explicitly, inescapable. The main argument against this concept is the risk of restricting gene pools: we worry that couples like this will end up breeding babies with six toes or four noses.

Again, Al gave me his, more westernised, family experiences.

“If you are brought up in a different country from a cousin you are to marry it’s not really the same. I know a pair of first cousins who were encouraged to marry by their families; maybe it’s because they are related that they have so much in common but they get on amazingly and are another one of the happiest and most heart-warming couples I have ever seen.” Even this notion of consanguineous matrimony, which can seem primitive and cruel in some cases, doesn’t necessarily have to be quite so sickening.

In his opinion, “the only problem with any arranged marriage is that it is still very family orientated as it is traditional in Islam to have large close-knit families. This means that if a couple have a problem it can be really hard to keep it private from the rest of the family and to just sort it out themselves.

It also means that I would be under a lot of pressure and criticism from my own family if I chose to marry a woman from a different culture to ours, even if they do accept that it is my choice to make.” Then again, most of us who have close families will admit that the complication of over-bearing and nosey relatives isn’t specific to arranged marriages. Perhaps, in a way it presents a positive obstacle, encouraging couples that when they really do have a disagreement of some kind, it’s only up to them to face the music and dance.

So when we consider all of these factors, arranged marriage becomes at least a slightly less vomit-inducing concept. Of course we cannot ignore the more extreme and inhumane cases, but when the pain of dating or the single life outweighs the pleasure, such a tradition seems to provide a pragmatic and reasonable solution...particularly in cultures and situations where the freedom to explore our romantic and idyllic image of love is an unaffordable – and, much less, desirable – “luxury”.

9

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

COMMENT

Violent Demonstration Is it Ever Justified?

Ryan Boyd argues that violence may be necessary to be heard by the “deaf” ears of our MPs. Ryan Boyd 2nd year P.R.E. As I write, highly educated human beings are besieging the Conservative Party Headquarters. They are doing this because they think that their actions will bring about a change they wish to see happen. Meanwhile, the National Union of Students roundly condemns this as ‘the actions of a despicable few’, wishing as they do to head off any dismissals of the protest as just an unruly, unthinking mob, and promote the ‘peaceful protest’ as the legitimate form their anger has taken.

The media has, of course, taken this quite automatically as a standard ‘protest story’. The G8 and G20 riots were labelled the actions of a few delinquents, too. In doing so, knowingly or unknowingly, it relegates whatever the protest might be to that of a divided, contradictory group. I heard one ITV ‘political correspondent’ claim that, when asked what difference the protests will make, ‘well, it might have made some difference but [sic] – up until the violence, I don’t think that ever helps anything’. This helps to draw a line under the whole thing, to take the sting out of it all. Things were going so well, and we would have given them what they wanted – but, ah, they let themselves down with that thuggery and violence. The news by its nature doesn’t want an inexplicable story. It understands events through a few narrow channels of comprehension – anything which doesn’t fit through those channels simply goes unreported, or, it gets moulded into a palatable, easy to present story. A peaceful protest is fine, a peaceful protest with a condemned violent element is fine – but what of the violent protest? There is good reason why this would be too much for the news to report.

Perhaps this is just a sensible human aversion to violence, you might think.

Well, perhaps. Or perhaps not. Let us examine the claim made by that ITV reporter – that the protest would have more chance of changing things in any way for the better if it had stayed organised and peaceful. If he is right, we should be able to find instances where a peaceful protest had this desired effect of getting what it wants in the modern era, in the United Kingdom, under whose aegis we all live and have political desires we try to fulfil in whatever way we can. The Iraq War protest is the largest example of this in recent history. Around 400,000 people are said to have marched through London, as a single, unified body demanding one thing – not to go to war. This had followed a march of equal proportions by the Countryside Alliance just days before. The marches were noted for their size, but not for their violence. Again, abroad, 3 million people gathered in Rome to protest the same thing. Nothing was achieved, beyond some Labour MPs rebelling, to no effect. The war

Joe Walsh “Shafts” Clare Solomon for condoneing the violence at Millbank.

went ahead just as it would have done had everyone stayed indoors and given their consent. We are beginning to see that the political correspondent has a short memory, and a dim understanding of how protest and indeed democracy works in the United Kingdom currently. We need only look at recent successful protests to realise just how misguided peaceful protests are.

This week, I was going to write a tongue-in-cheek article about a certain object that is often the topic of college conversation, but in light of recent events I felt another issue deserved a shaft of light.

The Poll Tax riots saw mass riots and pitched battles between protesters and police in the heart of London. Largescale damage was caused; shops and restaurants were set on fire, as were cars and cafes. A wide range of business including banks, fast food chains and clothes shops were targeted seemingly at random. The 250,000 strong crowd perhaps did not have violent intentions as it amassed early in the morning, but poor policing tactics seemingly brought it out in them. What they weren’t to know was that the ill-judged arrests (including, it is alleged, of a protestor who was wheelchair-bound) and subsequent rioting was probably the only reason why they managed to succeed.

Talk of the riots dominated the next Conservative Party conference; an alienated Thatcher continued to defend the tax, and with that - her fate, and the tax’s - was sealed. One of the first things John Major did upon succeeding Thatcher was to get rid of it.

The main march was a brilliant event, the sun was shining, we all had a great time and the feeling was one solidarity and calm. Very few police were scattered around and there was no trouble at all. Brass bands played, samba drums banged and the mood was one of optimism. The student movement had begun again after many nonstarting years and was going to take action against those politicians who had directly lied to the electorate. The speech by Aaron Porter was excellent and the Heythrop contingent proudly marched with our brilliant homemade banner against the cuts. The first hint of trouble was when we marched past the Millbank centre, and saw a large crowd chanting ‘scum, scum, scum.’ We pushed on to the end of the march and personally, I thought nothing more of it and assumed the march would make the news, but only for the record numbers that had turned up (58,000 by BBC and NUS estimates).

The Fuel riots: enraged at the government’s increased taxation of the cost of fuel (by 2000, 80% of the cost of fuel was because of taxation), lorry drivers sought to cause mass disruption. Blockades were set up outside oil refineries and fuel terminals across the country, leading to a mass panic buying of petrol. The blockades were so effective that only 3% of the entire daily fuel supply usually delivered to Britain reached the pumps (that’s 5 million litres compared to the usual 131 million litres). Although condemned for its inconveniencing of vital services (by, one assumes, those quite spectacularly missing the point), in the next budget the fuel escalator tax which had in essence caused the increase in fuel prices had been abolished – along with it came legislation that reduced the cost of motoring in Britain still further.

What had in fact occurred ended up scarring the entire protest, was the undeserved centre of news reports and the subject of a Newsnight special. In

So, when the NUS condemns the violence of a despicable few, alarmed at their chances of real change slipping away with every news story of the fire extinguisher flung off Milbank Tower roofs shown, they condemn their most effective contingent and damn themselves to ineffectiveness. If they knew their history, they would realise that if they truly wanted to change things, they would have perhaps deferred to their violent brothers and asked to help, planned a route to Westminster and marched, leaving destruction in their wake. What, I wonder, would the effect have been on a certain Nick Clegg have been (incidentally, the politicians merely discussed amongst themselves whose fault tuition fees per se were, as all this went on) had the students

Joe Walsh 3rd year P.R.E.

marched to the very cosy heart of power and knocked, very impolitely on the doors of the House of Commons? I think he may have had cause to remember that pledge he made much more than he did so after seeing a few glass windows smashed – that is de rigueur in protests now, and when a protest becomes de rigueur it becomes useless.

The NUS went wrong because, in essence, it naively believed the law was the rules of the game. The law says that peaceful protests are all well and good, so for our cause to succeed, the law must be abided, otherwise things will go badly. Well, yes, I agree - in theory. It would be much easier if a mass demonstration had its desired effect, wouldn’t it? If one million people in Britain and three million in Rome had caused Britain and the European allies of America to not go to war, I would be condemning the violence of the student protests, too. But I have less confidence in the government’s ability to listen. They are a deaf government. They are blind, arrogant and dismiss protest as the actions of a ‘vocal minority’. I say anyone silent should be disregarded.

As it is, these protests will be written off as immature, misguided and the product of spoilt schoolchildren. The country, nor the government, will listen to us students unless we grab them by the collar and shout in their ear.

Paxman’s words, it turned what should have been a debate over the Liberal Democrats breaking their promises to the electorate and the cuts into a debate over legitimate protest. I initially believed that the incident at the Millbank centre was not a pre-planned event, but a spontaneous attack by a few irresponsible individuals. It has surfaced, however, that this was not the case. Whilst a large group of the crowd (about 2000 people) eventually joined the occurrence at Tory HQ, it was initially a small number of individuals who had a motive to sidetrack the protest. By setting off fireworks, burning placards and using flares they successfully diverted the crowd, then broke into the building. Both the police and NUS were completely unaware of this underground activity as neither was prepared for what followed. The vandalism of the building was total, with the place being more or less wrecked.

What is clear is that the actions of these few will not go without consequences. The BBC stated that, “police would learn lessons after a “hard core” minority stormed the Conservatives’ London HQ. Dozens were injured and 50 arrested. One protester who threw a fire extinguisher from the roof could face an attempted murder charge. The Met Police has announced an inquiry into the handling of the student march.

Those arrested - mostly for criminal damage and aggravated trespass - have been released on police bail until February. Chairman of the Police Federation, Paul McKeever, told the BBC: “The person who threw the canister off the roof and into the crowd of people needs to be aware that such potentially lethal actions have consequences.”The penalty for this type of incident is the charge of attempted murder.” It is easy to dismiss this sort of thing as the work of a tiny minority of violent individuals, but the truth is that a large number of those who broke in were not the masked anarchists out to cause trouble.

Looking at the pictures, you can clearly see that a large number of the people in the building were ordinary students who simply took events too far. I refer you to Vice Magazine’s photos of the event (search VICE UK and find it yourself). This wasn’t the typical group of idiots who always ruin events like this.

This was planned to turn the hyped, but optimistic, mood of the demonstration into the destructive event that managed to sideline (to an extent) the main event.

Now to the main individual who needs to be shafted, hard. Clare Solomon, the president of ULU. As if it wasn’t bad enough that the main event was defined in the news by a horrific violent display that diverted attention from the real issues of the day, the president of the Federal University of which we are a part not only failed to condemn the violence but actually took part. Yes Claire Solomon, who represents us, actually broke into the building. Brilliant, nice one Claire, good representation of the student movement. At least she regrets

it? Actually Claire actually thinks the break in was a good idea. Let’s take a snippet of her conversation with Jeremy Paxman.

First Solomon avoids her involvement: Paxman: But why did you have to go into the building to do that?

Solomon: I think you’re asking the wrong questions, Jeremy.

P: Listen, I’ll tell you exactly what we were going to do on this program tonight, we were going to discuss what higher fees were going to do education, we had booked two university lecturers and students to discuss that very thing.

Instead of which everyone is talking about the limits of protest and that is because of the actions taken by you and your friends S: That is because students had not been listened to for years and years.

P: Ah, so you thought it was an action of last retort?

S: I’m not surprised students have been very angry.

P: Why did you feel it was necessary to go into the building to make your point?

S: Why did I feel it necessary to go on the demonstration in the first place?

P: No, you were part of a very small minority which the NUS have said ruined the demonstration by going into the building; I’m just interested to know why you thought it was necessary.

S: I’m not here to speak on behalf of people who were inside the building or smashed windows...

P: You were one of them, speak on behalf of yourself!

S: There were some reasons why people did go inside the building. Some were pushed inside, some pushed their way inside.

P: Were you pushed?

S: That is not the question here.

P: Why can’t you answer the question.

Then Solomon goes on to suggest that this will continue: S: Actually, we should condemn the government, not the students and this is only the beginning of what’s going to happen.

This is someone who firstly, refuses to explicitly condemn the actions of the day, secondly, does not explain her own involvement and thirdly, suggests that such actions will continue. Claire Solomon represents over 120,000 students and I’d like to suggest, seeing as a tiny minority actually took part in the violence that most of them disagree with her suggestion that such action will continue. This is not Athens and actually, considering that in nearly any other European country (the recent riots in Athens and Paris show this) the tear gas and water cannons would have been brought out, I thought the police acted with remarkable restraint under the circumstances. Frankly, Solomon is a disgrace. Well and truly shafted.

10

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

COMMENT

Warm Beer, Cold Women and a Man Fired for not Saying ‘Hello’ Cheerfully Enough A particularly stressful week in the life of Wilf

Wilf Horsfall rd 3 year Philosophy Dear Heythropian, Imagine, if you will, your writer gentle, mild mannered, dashingly good looking and breathtakingly articulate - standing one week ago today outside his ex-place of work, sharing a cigarette with a forty-four year old woman from New Zealand, who the next day was to be turned away from her friend’s sofa and into the harsh world of the homeless. We were two of twelve people who had just been marched into a cold and empty briefing room to be shot in the head fired for a “lack of natural warmth”. The two members of gestapo human resources that had carried out the axe act had been kind enough to let individuals get some “personal feedback” after the “human resources meeting”. The woman who gave me the cigarette and I were the first two to get out of our debriefing, and after she explained to me that she was evicted three months ago and had only managed to get hold of one job interview since, I let her know that the personal feedback I had been bestowed with was that I “hadn’t said hello cheerfully enough”. Oh, sweet Heythropian, don’t think I didn’t try to keep that job – I countered hard, letting the two soulless crones sitting on the other side of the desk know that just prior to that shift I had been given a brief call from my girlfriend letting me know that the workload at Oxford was too much for her to cope with, and she didn’t trust herself not to hurt me, and so we were going to end it now – this being the reason my hello wasn’t perhaps as pert and bouncy as they’d like.

But as earnestly as I put it to them, I could see the disbelief in their hollow, sunken eyes – yes, I can imagine that they’ve seen people kick and scream harder than I, and they weren’t to be taken in by this cock and bull story of a young man and his heart-break. But what perhaps made my comiseratory cigarette so bitter was that everything I told them had been true. As I stood with my sombre kiwi friend, I was facing the start of a new life as a jobless, girlfriendless twenty-one year old on the brink of a cold winter, who didn’t have enough money for December’s rent.

Now reader, being what you are – the distinguished, thinking type of person who reads The Lion, you might be wondering what kind of job is this?

Which company could so heinously shun their social responsibility and fire so many people at once, one of them quite possibly facing life on the streets as a direct result, and another being sent home for something as petty as saying hello without an oleaginous bounce in his voice? It’s the dark and sordid world of charity fundraising that I’m telling you about, friends. And the grandest insult? Still inside the warm office,

amongst the buzz of the computers and the phones and the ringing voices of middle-management was Poseidon.

Birth name Charles. A man phoning people on behalf of charities like Unicef and Cancer Research UK saying “Hello, I’m Poseidon” is considered more of an asset to the charity image than me – because I wasn’t quite perky enough with my hello. I would have expected that not claiming to be the God of the Sea would have been enough, given the context of who I was working with. But no, apparently rebranding yourself as an omnipotent, immortal being is fair game when it comes to coaxing people’s bank details out of them. But lo, I didn’t walk promptly into the nearest tube station and throw myself under the wheels of the oncoming Central Line train – I’d only been in the job for two days and had only been seeing the girl for a few weeks. But I don’t mind telling you, dear reader, that Monday morning’s breakfast whisky was dashed to hell by the salty taste of my own tears.

And I have more to tell you about Monday, my handsome friend, but first, let me tell you about the day of my interview – the Thursday before that cold and bitter night. Rising (for reasons unknown) at the entirely unwelcome hour of six o’clock, I had a big day in front of me – morning Ethics lecture with Terry Walsh, three o’clock interview with Pell and Bales and a train to Oxford at seven to see my romantic other. As I sat at the breakfast table of my new flat, I mulled things over with a coffee in the grey light coming through my windows, basking in the grandeur that is Uxbridge Road and gently anticipating the challenge ahead – when I realised that my coffee wasn’t just going down, it was also coming back up – spinning round I managed to land most of my

vomit in the sink, but collateral damage was high – I was going to be cleaning a spattered wall or two this morning. But my time to reflect was kept brief – my diaphragm is a busy man, and was eager to get on – he made his point with another kick to my stomach, and I found yet more hot coffee and mouthfuls of food that had their chances of digestion robbed from them far too early in life filling my sink and disenfranchisenly staring back at me from the plughole. Taking a rasping breath I audibly begged for it to end – but no, my stomach was to ejaculate one last time, sending sour and painful gasps through my nasal passages as my lungs fought for air. Having just baptised my new kitchenette (as my landlady so charmingly refers to my sink and mini-oven) it was time to look for something to clean with in the cupboards – having moved in the day before I hadn’t yet had a chance to fill them with nice things like Dettol, Flash and Jif (which is now called Cif, for those in the know) – but I managed to find some Tesco Value bleach. Spraying a highly toxic and very strong irritant all over my food preparation area I latch my door open and scamper down the hall to the communal showers to try and get the filth off my body.

Whilst getting it all off, I’m treated to the sound of my door slamming shut in the distance. I return to find that the door had managed to unlatch and lock itself – I was now locked out of my flat with no keys, shoes, money or phone on the day of an interview I desperately needed to pass. I did what anyone would do, and pretended it hadn’t happened. Stubbornly shouting “no!” (sorry, neighbours) I ignored the situation and tried to pass through the door – I know, the door and I are both tangible objects, but I had nothing else. And on my second attempt at defying physics (or trying to take advantage of a possible but highly unlikely physical anomaly, if you’re that way inclined) the door swung open. A merciful occurrence, certainly, but one with dark implications – my door can be opened by anyone if they hit it hard enough.

Since t h e n I ’ v e taken

my keys out with me for symbolic purposes only.

Fast forward to quarter to two that afternoon. A broken man sits on the steps outside the Kensington High Street branch of Boots, wearing a nice shirt and nicer tie, putting Alka-Seltzer tablets into a bottle of store-brand mineral water while real people walk back to work from power-lunching at Giraffe. Imagine the next three hours as a blur of anxiety and false charm and fear – some of us aren’t allowed into the interview because they made the mistake of going to the toilet first – questions are asked, a form is sent around because they want us to opt out of the human right to not be made to work more than forty hours a week and someone manages to reveal that they don’t realise that Thailand and India are different countries. After being swallowed by a tube train and spat out the other end back at Heythrop I get a voicemail saying I’ve been given the job – and I feel strangely joyless. Again, imagine a blur involving the purchase of a £9 bottle of Presecco, a carton of apple juice (why?) and the drinking of a canned gin and tonic on a train to Oxford. Here, dear reader, I want to keep the details private – but let’s just say that if it was a broken man that sat on the steps outside Boots trying to make the churning in his stomach end that afternoon, it was a woman beyond repair that met him at the train station that evening. The next day a man who knows that’s probably the last time he visits this particular girlfriend at Oxford walks back to the very same station through the inappropriately pleasant Autumn air having lost a carton of apple juice, bottle of Presecco and a night of sleep.

Now, reader, you gorgeous, sexy bastard – I’m not sure if I should leave you with a political comment or not. Should I just wrap things up by telling you about how on Monday I left a hurried, punch-drunk letter begging for a job hanging on Fr John McDade’s door or should I deliver a sanctimonious sermon about how those sadists in human resources should never have been put in a position of such power – unemployment being so high that you can fire twelve people without breaking a sweat shouldn’t happen.

Maybe I should do a bit of both – but the danger is, as anyone who’s ever looked me in the eye and talked to me face to face will probably know, is that I can connect the dots in any situation to the old mantra that those who run the mills should own the mills. Third years might remember some posters that were put up around the College in the first year that were then defaced with articulate and well-measured slogans like “Anarchist scum!!” and perhaps more poignantly, “Fuck you!” Ah, yes – The Thursday Society was a wonderful thing that fizzled out all too early when I lost the will to do anything extracurricular after my personal life went down the silly-express late in my firstyear. And the chap who wanted it to continue the most was none other than our now president, the dashing James Johnston. And I’ll try not to slip into my mantra, and keep things current (honestly, if I start talking about the mills and those that run them, I’ll just take myself away from the keyboard

and pour myself a whisky), but not wanting to anger those who relish the chance to raise their pens and cover the Lord Browne posters in Thatcherite objectivism (actually, I hope they defecate with rage when they read what’s coming next), I think it perhaps might be worth mentioning that David Cameron has been a real arsehole about the whole situation that under-25s are facing nation-wide, and particularly in London.

A while ago I heard the filthy charlatan make a speech that was then broadcast on Radio 4, where he firmly denied that the country’s ruling class are to blame for the fact that the situation is so dear that 1.2 million Londoners are unemployed and that budget cuts are so harsh that people who one year ago would have been given adequate healthcare are now projected to start dying in their hospital beds - “they [the government] weren’t the ones smashing up our town centres on a Friday night or sitting on their sofas waiting for their benefits to arrive.” No! Mind bogglingly, it’s the unemployed who are to blame for their situation, simply because they are unemployed. And strangely enough, vandals somehow had a hand in provoking the world recession – and those who claim benefits appear to share the same moral status as these nefarious thugs. Something else I’m finding confusing is the distinction that Cameron’s somehow made between the government and those who were “sitting on their sofas waiting for their benefits to arrive.”, as if the two were any different - surely the MP’s expenses scandal hasn’t been forgotten that quickly? Why on earth would old DC try to claim that his Tory henchmen and Labour haven’t been taking all the benefits they could pry from the hands of the state for decades, when so freshly in our minds lies the fact that we paid for some decadent slug’s hand-fashioned duckhouse and Jacqui Smith’s husband’s porn habit while Labour were telling us that they were going to crush benefit cheats in the iron vice of the state prison system and making single mothers pay dearly for governmental administrative errors by having them give back the tax credits they thought they had been entitled to. Bizarrely, he seems keen to shun responsibility for the powerful’s crimes and blame the most powerless in society for our predicament.

Indeed, instead of accepting that there’s an incredible flavour of injustice to a system where a tax-payer is expected to fork out £500 billion for banker’s bonuses but is then sombrely told that the “pain has to come sooner rather than later” and that all of the best bits of our country’s infrastructure are going to be subjected to blunt amputations, which of course will then raise unemployment further and give more strength to the international power structure that can’t be held accountable to the electorate – the private sector.

This isn’t decentralisation, this is privatisation. And why has it been deemed necessary?

We can go back further then the current flavour of the month, I’m sure – ignoring the expenses scandal and the greed of the bankers and the callousness

11

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

COMMENT

of the Tory government, we can look at the right arm of government that was hacked off by Mrs. Thatcher herself.

Indeed, it seems that the Baroness was determined to remove all lucrative departments of government – over 40 government owned organisations had been privatised by the time she was ousted – and more followed. Now instead of paying money into a system that we’d actually see benefits from when we use public transport, we’re giving it to companies like Southern Railway (which was actually John Major’s doing, but definitely the ice queen’s legacy), who are so awful that the atrocious nature of their services makes headline news – and you can’t even provoke such right wing icons as Adam Smith (who, incidentally, wasn’t nearly as right wing as many would like you to think) to justify such an action – there is no invisible hand when it comes to taking the train, there’s a very visible hand in the form of there being only one option and no competitors in each of Britain’s regions – meaning there’s just as much a monopoly as there was when the rails were public, but now that monopoly doesn’t subsidise the tax payer. Again, I’m no expert, and I don’t know what was going through Major’s head at the time, but I can’t see how we could benefit from the train system being run for profit by someone other than the government (as by the simple nature of privatisation, an organisation has to be profitable, at least in potential, for anyone to want to buy it – meaning that privatisation leaves tax payers lumbered with costly projects but left without profitable ones) – and perhaps that’s now the reason that, as John McDade says, “There is no way that the British [university] system will go back to a high degree of [public] funding, you ask why, because the money is not there” (The Lion, Issue 3). But the money always seems to be there when the MPs and bankers need it – indeed, as is so often the way, it’s capitalism for the poor and socialism for the rich, and the semi-privatisation of our university system marks a further regress – while those who can afford to pay off the loan quickly will find their loans the cheapest, the poorest students will rack up a good few decades of interest before the debt collectors have been satisfied – meaning the poor have to pay a higher price for the privilege of education, when just a few years ago we were talking about making education class-neutral.

And yes, while the people responsible for ruining so many lives are still employed, and still getting their bonuses, I can’t help but bring in the sanctimony when I mention again that I was fired for not saying hello cheerfully enough on the day I broke up with my girlfriend. But reader, don’t think I’m partisan – in no way am I pledging support to the massmurdering Tony Blair, or the spineless Lib Dems who so earnestly promised that they would vote against a rise in university fees during their campaign, but who now are desperate to stay in power at all costs – and yes, I realise that if you say this to a Lib Dem they’ll go red in the ears and tell you that from the get-go of the coalition they said they’d do everything they could to keep it together – but I voted for them before they revealed that particular piece of policy, and although I’m glad that it’s a Con-Dem government rather than a straight up 20 year Tory hegemony, I won’t see them as having much integrity at all if they back out of the pledge they signed. At the end of the day, it seems obvious to me that those who run the mills should - ...

Christian Demonstrators James Barber 2nd year Theology Popular movements draw particular attention to Christians because of the radical transformation in charity and love Jesus called his disciples to. Often we think of “love thy neighbour” as a personal commandment against personal immorality, however when the system of government becomes the barrier to justice or righteousness and institutes moral wrongs itself, the Christian moves towards action on a wider scope, called “social action”. During the 19th Century society was taking a radically different character from preindustrial times, so local charity grew into national movements. Industrialisation predestined the number of workers that were treated unjustly to soar, meaning though they were numerous enough to advocate their own interests in the form of unions. Trade unions took recognisable form during the late 19th Century and were welcomed by Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical Rerum Novarum which spoke against atrocities that workers faced and demanded they be given rights and safety regulations.

As industrialisation took hold throughout Europe, trade unions constantly kept vigil for abuses by money-grabbing CEO’s, unions have been the forefront of Christian social action for the poorest workers since their establishment, though these movements

have not been exclusively Christian.

Unions have two tools at their disposal; strikes, which trade unions use to force individual changes within their respective workplaces; and demonstrations, which student unions have used to force political change within their respective nations. Student unions’ political nature has made them reserved over the years, calmly advocating their rights with their reputation of dignity and respect backed up by waves of popular support. Where trade unions have individual agendas and often strike, causing public support to wane, student unions rarely cause public inconvenience by their actions, hence students unions have a great deal of strength. During the 1960’s, student

unions brought their strength to bear in a number of countries across the world, Europe particularly feeling the brunt, which caused widespread political upheaval. In view of this history and the force of peaceful demonstration, what is the Christian place in student protests?

Dignity and unity is what gives student unions their strength, strength which is overturned by violent outbreaks and civil disorder. Hence, Christians (and indeed all men of good will) must exercise their capacity for peace in combustible situations such as what we saw at Millbank. I was there and plentiful were the anarchist and socialist banners, however if students

Legitimate Bisexuality Ms Mollie Puttock 2nd year Undergraduate Mr X - “I think gays are disgusting!”

Ms Y - “ But surely it is fine as long as everyone is consenting … anyway I’m bisexual” Mr X - “Oh that is SO hot!”

What is it about young men today that allows them to be quite homophobic towards gay men but not women? There is of course the psychological fact that when a heterosexual male watches porn they do not want to see anything involving an actual man, as it causes them to feel emasculated by the size of the actors genitalia; thus lesbian sex becomes a rare and sought after thing.

Now I myself have had a little dabble (or two) in the gay scene, and one of the things that annoys me the most is the way in which lesbian sex is disregarded. Technically in medical terms, if a woman has not had a penis enter the vagina she is a virgin and this totally disrespects lesbian sex and lesbian sexuality. This also leads me to the understanding that if a woman attempts to rape another woman surely it will only be seen as sexual harassment/abuse and thus the law will be kinder upon the perpetrator. It is shown through the law in the way that there is no definitive lowest age in the U.K. for lesbian sex which again draws a line between lesbian, bisexual women and heterosexual women which is broadening the band of inequality.

In the past few years, I have noticed how incredibly vogue and chic it has

become to appear to be a bisexual woman (sorry boys but it just hasn’t kicked off for your gender)! Even when a woman has no real interest in other women, she will pretend to in order to attract men, this behaviour is seen all up and down the country in pubs, bars and clubs throughout the weekend with young women (that are friends) kissing each other in order to provoke a reaction. I think that this works as a pulling technique for several different reasons, one of which being that the females are showing themselves off as sexually adventurous, and this provokes the man’s mind into thoughts of one night stands or threesomes. The other reason that I can see is that surely the most ego massaging, masculinising act would be to turn a lesbian straight, as the man who does it must be “really special, attractive and fit” to have managed such a thing.

This wave of flexi-sexuality, I feel, is actually setting back the work of gay rights activists/promoters, as this kind of drunken behaviour can give actual lesbians/bisexuals a bad name and also not be taken seriously when they refuse advances from men. It also takes away their right to display small signs of affection (as heterosexual people do) in public, such as holding hands or a quick kiss on the cheek, as the attention that is sparked is too great.

In my view, as long as there is attraction between two people, and both are above the age of consent, both are single and their personalities click, it simply does not matter what ethnic background, religion or indeed gender these people are.

march under them then it becomes a violent, neo-soviet, uprising the likes of which Clare Solomon hopes for. It seems to me the place of the Christian (and all men of good will) in these demonstrations is to maintain peace, prudence, and dignity, in equal measure to the anarchists and neo-socialists that hijacked our protest on Wednesday. It seems Leo XIII was right to say “the danger lies in this, that crafty agitators are intent on making use of these differences of opinion to pervert men’s judgements and to stir up the people to revolt.” If we give over to the socialist call for revolution then our unions will have to call themselves something else, because they would not be the students unions any more.

r Picture Show.

For those of you unfamiliar with spectacle that inclu the Warp and Swee des the songs Time t Transvestite, I suggest you make it a necessary part of this Halloween, but for the moment here’ sweet summary. s Rocky Horror can a best described as be a cult horror come It is extravagant, dy. brilliant and completely rock and roll. It centres arou these two loved up newlyweds – nd Brad Majors and Jane t Weiss - who find themselves knoc king crazy mansion filled on the door of a nets, science expe with corsets, fishriments and a trans vestite, Dr Frank N Furter. Tim Curr fills this role with y gusto, and make s the

12

COMMENT

Should I Become A Prostitute: A Rebuttal Jesus Foghorn In Response Having read the article entitled “Should I Become A Prostitute?” in the last edition of The Lion, I was struck by a series of thoughts regarding the idea of prostitution in this country, and the inherent debate in such a thorny issue. It’s an interesting idea, the idea of legalised prostitution, if one can say that without leering. However, rather than just expound on the idea of state-sanctioned whoredom in the United Kingdom, I thought I instead would use this precious space to rebut some of the points that were made in the article, hopefully making my own stance clear.

1.

The claim made in the last paragraph that letting a stranger violate you in potentially horrific and perverted ways is somehow more “natural and fulfilling” than making food is a little brazen. It’s also not very well thoughtthrough. The idea of being an “escort” (to use a quaint euphemism) is one that has become more glamorous of late, thanks in no small part to such media as the “Secret Diary Of A Call Girl” drama, which painted a ludicrously flatter-

2.

I’m going to quote the article directly here, so I don’t get anything wrong or get accused of libel: “It is a well-known fact that between 10-20 percent of all female students in London work, or have worked, in the sex industry”. Taking the term “sex industry” to mean working as a prostitute, I set about doing my own research. After about 3 hours of digging, I had found that there are, in fact, no official figures for how many female students (or male students, for that matter) in London had worked as prostitutes, and that only roughly 6% of total British women and 4.3% of British men have worked as prostitutes. So at the very least, I will say that the claim that the stated fact was “well-known” was false, stopping short of saying that the author clearly pulled it out of her arse.

3.

It is stated in the article that one of the dangers of legalised prostitution is the fact that Britain could become a haven for sex tourists, in the same way as Amsterdam. A response to this claim could point out that the Amsterdam council are currently in the process of shutting down the famous Red

Taking all this into hope you can begin consideration, I fled anger I felt whento fathom the bafI heard that some cheesy, American kids would attem to rival the great pt ness of the origi nal.

Not only that, but last night I mana ged to find (perfectly legal) copies of Time Warp and the Sweet Transvest ite by the cast of Glee on Youtube and as an accompaniment to gest you listen to this article, I sugboth these versi ons and the originals.

Let’s concentrate the latter. Swee on t Transvestite come after the first appe arance of Dr. Fran s k.

Should I Become Ms Mollie Putto ck 2nd year Undergra duate

Smoking a cigarette street by Victoria on the corner of the station, wearing usual attire of a my short black dress , Doc

ing picture of sex work.

tfits Herculean young and sequins and a man dressed only a pair of golden in boxers. Oh, and Meat Loaf on a moto rbike. There’s some thing for everyone in this asylum.

Light District (De Walla) and that the main problem that the city has is more with drug tourism (also being combated by the council, who are taxing the “coffee shops” more highly and closing down those that can’t pay).

On the subject of Britain, I fail to see how legalised prostitution would cause London to become a Mecca for kerbcrawlers of all nations, because available brothels are as close to England as Belgium (where prostitution is tolerated, if not sanctioned), and there really isn’t much of a problem there. The tourism (no matter its motivations) stimulates the economy of Belgium, and frankly Britain could use a similar boost.

4.

Prostitution, in my opinion, is not a bold step forward for feminism (and even though feminism wasn’t mentioned in the article, I know the clattering hooves of a personal hobbyhorse being ridden when I hear them) and it’s degrading. Try as I might, I personally cannot see whoredom as a mere “business transaction”, possibly because it’s quite a bit messier than, say, buying cigarettes at the Swami

kind of Rock I feel that the essen y-purist here but not be carried off ce of this film canby something as, well, normal as Glee.

They voices, but you woul all have brilliant dn’t expect Pava otti to sing Britn ey Spears. It’s just rright. not Maybe when the episo it won’t be an abso de airs in the UK, lute, all-encomp assing catastrophe.

Ther voted fans (or “Glee e are hordes of deknown) out there ks” as they like to be who s chance to see the might use this as something I (and movie and get into many others) really love. I could possi bly go around with some pin badges saying “I liked Rock Horror before it y was people did when Glee” like I assume their cover of Don’ Stop Believin’ was released. Perhaps t a good way to celeb it’s rate Rocky Horr or.

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION Oh, and Meat Loaf will be © Rocky Music

in it. Unfortunately, the whol e idea of a B Movi legend like this being churned up e the mainstream by mach covered in American ine, and spat out chee se, makes me want to throw up a little.

Let’s do the time warp again.

tion is simply a busin long as those invol ess transaction, as ved are not coerc into the trade. In ed fact, I have been looking for a job for a long time and after repeatedly being knocked back by retail and food outlets for fied, I started think being overqualiindustry is for me! ing perhaps the sex fact that between It is a well-known 10-20 percent of female students all in London work , have worked, in the sex industry. or Now as you all know I am therefore not actua taken and I would lly do it, but beca of my very open use views towards sex, nudity, and one night I could. These wom stands I believe streets of Soho and en and men on the Kings Cross are just making money and oldest trades in the using one of the world to do this.

If Prostitution was ain, it would help made legal in Britsex ing trade fairer and workers by makhelping to contr more safe as well as ol human sex traffi ing. This is a trade ckas it is thriving here that will never end, although it is illega and things like l prostitution and drug use do not seem to be cession, as the less affected by the rethe more people money people have will “fun“. It would also spend on having make it much safer for the clients of the trade as they would be further assur ed ers involved woul that the sex workd health record, whic have a clean sexual h would in turn save the N.H.S. a lot of money. The only downside would be that England could become a haven for sex tourists akin places like Amsterdam to .

a Prostitute?

Martens and a leather jacket, slow running my finge ly rs through my long, blonde hair just watching the peop go by as I wait for le my other half to rive. A man of arabout 30 sidles next to me and lights his roll up, he has short back and a sides haircut, a tatto on his chest visib le through his whiteo

shirt and a camo uflage back pack (blatant squaddie).

He takes a long deep toke, then turns to much?”. Now, had me and asks “how this been the first time in my life I had been mistaken a prostitute I woul for d have been shoc ked, surprised and confu I simply said “you sed but instead could never af-

Store. Anyone who can look at it in such clinical terms clearly hasn’t been buggered over a wheelie-bin behind a bar in Bermondsey and left breathless, ashamed and covered in unmentionable substances, with nothing but a handful of tattered fivers to show for it.

5.

This last point is possibly the most serious one, and it’s a point that was completely omitted in the article. The problem with prostitution, wherever you look, is the ascendant crisis of human trafficking. Women, men and children are already trafficked to England, all of Europe and America.

Prostitution isn’t so pretty when you look at it from this end. When you consider that a country girl from Belarus is, at this very moment, being held at gunpoint in an upstairs room in Soho, with a sign saying “MODEL” pointing the way for punters to come up and violate the desperate girl at their leisure, it seems a very, very long way away from Billie Piper arsing on about “escort work” in a Channel 5 show, or be-

The Rocky Hor ror aired on 26th OctoGlee show was ber on FOX. The Rocky Hor ror Stage Show is being perform ed at the Richmond Thea tre between 22-2 7 November.

ford this”. I threw stomped on it with down my cigarette, my boot and walk away into the night ed .

I later wondered why being labelled a prostitute in no as way offended me, guess it is because I in my eyes prost itu-

When I think abou from my own secul t the sex industry ar perspective, I just see women and men living wage by takin trying to earn a malistic event that g place in an anithe human psych has always been e wired to want in order for the human race it is a much more to continue. Surely natural and fulfil ling thing to do than work in McDonald s!

ing mistaken for a hooker at Victoria Station and dropping a simply fabulous one-liner.

So, conclusion. Despite having spent the last few paragraphs bleakly prophesying doom, I think that sanctioned prostitution in the UK, if implemented carefully, and with due regard to the risks, could work. I might even go so far as to say that there could be great benefits to the country and the human rights of sex workers. But let’s be careful with that one. There are just as many, if not more, downsides as there are benefits if prostitution is legalised in this country without due care and thought, and the issue needs a Hell of a lot more thought than it has been given so far. Snap judgements lead to bad decisions, which lead to potentially terrible results for all involved. So maybe we should all put off our careers in prostitution for a while, at least until we know what we’re getting into.

Not All Neo-Cons are Stupid.

JT White and Josh Ferguson Undergraduates George W Bush took office in January of 2001, the administration he presided over began with a decision point not just for the 43rd President, but for the Great United States and would end in another decision, showing fully how Bush was a true representative of the average American. Bush was anointed by the US Supreme Court after a heated moment in which many confused African Americans didn’t seem to recognise this latter-day Lincoln. As a result, Bush became the first American President to take office with only the grace of God on his side, and triumphed in the face of greatly undeserved acrimony.

The terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001 shocked the world, as no one could have imagined that such an attack could have taken place on American soil. These atrocities showed the American government the need for future generations to sacrifice liberty for security, as we deserve both and will surely end up with them. After this attack, Bush showed his decisiveness and strong, unbreakable will, and rammed the Patriot act through the herd of quiche eating Freedom Haters in Congress. The bill gave the state the much

needed power to defend the heartland, not just the East and West coasts of the North but what the liberals think of as “fly-over country” as well. It gave the state the power to hunt down any terrorist phone-calls, devil-worshipping emails, homosexual medical records, communist credit card bills, stoner bank records and even child molester library records (they tend to take out Lolita a lot). The NSA is currently building a national database the size of a city to house all of the necessary data raked in to triumph in this crusade against international terrorism.

It’s often said that Dick Cheney was the most powerful Vice President in American history, and it must be a sign of God’s enduring love of America that we were blessed with Cheney’s tenure as Vice President – the time in which heroes were made and true Americans stepped up to the plate. Some secular progressive pinheads claim that Dick Cheney was running the government for the first 4 or 5 years of the Bush administration for his own personal gain and that of Halliburton. What they forget is you should not think what the rich minority can do for you, rather what you can do for the rich minority. It was in 2006 that Bush went soft and forced Donald Rumsfeld out of the administration. The second term was comparatively much more “moderate” (only a hop and a skip away from socialist in our book) than the first term. It was in these last two years of

his Presidency that Bush showed signs that the previous six years of visionary leadership were an action that he could never keep up, and he was worn down by the hippies in Congress and the Liberal media douchebags. Alas the culture war against New Deal socialism, political correctness, affirmative action and ipso facto secular humanism goes on.

Decision Points will join Ronald Reagan’s Diaries, the Nixon Tapes and the Bible on the shelf of every God-fearing and freedom loving American. This timely release happens just as Barack HUSSEIN Obama has been exposed as the charlatan and fraud that we always knew him to be. Nevertheless Obamanomics has us sliding further and further away from the Constitution the Land of the Free was founded upon. The Founding Fathers may have stipulated that no foreigner could ever be President just to stop Alexander Hamilton from getting elected, and who are we to say that we should deviate from that course now! To Decision Points we can give it a hearty recommendation with our only complaint being that no book can fully sum up the genius visionary we all know George W Bush to be. So we here, at the Elephant, can award this book 23 states out of 35.

God Bless America.

By JD Whiteline and Johnny Walker Continued on P13>

© glasgowguardian

13

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

COMMENT

The Yellow Tory JT White st 1 year Undergraduate There was a massive demonstration by students from across the UK on Wednesday. 52,000 people turned out to express their opposition to the education cuts and the trebling of tuition fees. A great deal of rage was aimed at Nick Clegg, the man who has led the Liberal Democrats since 2007. The reason being that the smorgasbord of progressive policies presented to the public by Nick Clegg turned out to be a buffet of lies constructed for cynical ends. The Liberals’ facade of a progressive alternative to the old Lab-Con establishment finally slipped when the Liberals found themselves in bed with the Conservatives. Students are particularly enraged as it was the promise of abolishing tuition fees that marked the Lib Dems out for students as the Party to vote for, whilst the Labourites and the Tories had little to offer. But the treachery of Clegg has hit Lib Dem voters everywhere and it looks like the rightly reviled Liberals will be decimated in 2015.

utopian vision held by free-market fundamentalists in the Conservative Party.

The speech Vince Cable gave in which he “attacked” capitalism was merely a critical whinge about the financialisation of the economy, the aggressive rhetoric was merely window-dressing.

Similarly, the opposition to the Iraq War and the past opposition to tuition

fees were token window-dressing for a shadow platform.

This shadow platform excluded scrapping tuition fees, as we now know from leaked documents that the Liberals dumped the idea in 2 months before the election. Clegg was well aware that the election could result in a hung Par-

© The Prime Minister’s Office

During negotiations with the Conservative Party, no effort was made to defend the Liberal economic platform, the opposition to austerity measures, as well as raising VAT. Instead the shadow platform, with planks of regressive taxes and savage cuts, was consolidated. To say that this platform became a saddle for Clegg to wear while David Cameron takes mount and rides him through the next 5 years would be too “soft”, though it should never be forgotten that the Orange Book leadership of the Lib Dems have not been led astray by the Tories.

These people made calculated decisions for selfish goals and are responsible for the nature of the government as a result. The progressive image of the Lib Dems was a facade crafted by a leadership of “Yellow Tories”, the cuts are being made for ideological reasons and not out of necessity. The government spends less than 1% of GDP on higher education and government debt as a proportion of GDP is almost 200% lower than it was after WW2.

This should not be a surprise really. The Lib Dems are dominated by the market liberals who penned the Orange Book and the Liberals, under many different guises, have been a centre-right political party since the 1970s. It was under Kennedy, Campbell and Clegg that the Party has been “escorted” away from Keynesian economics and towards neo-liberalism. In the General Election campaign of this year, the Liberals were only slightly less right-wing than the Labour Party on economic policy. At best the Liberals favour a greater regulated variety of capitalism and not the

...but most stupid people are Neo-Cons >Continued from P12 Hunter S Thompson hit the nail on the head when he said of Richard Nixon “You had to get subjective to see Nixon clearly, he was so crooked that he needed servants to screw on his pants every morning.” A similar principle applies to George Walker (Well I’ll be damned, where have I heard that surname before) Bush. No one is indifferent to this so-called “compassionate conservative” (there’s an oxymoron if ever I heard one) and the reactionary cabal who ran the state under him. The extreme policies of the Bush administration will reverberate for a long time, putting one in mind of a death knell for liberty. Bush has resurfaced to push his memoirs which he assembled using his Ivy League education (discounting the parts that have been swabbed from his brain with whiskey and cocaine) and published using his many connections.

The title of this Republican neo-con jizz rag is Decision Points (a far snappier name than its working title, Points Where I F**ked Up) and it was written in an unorthodox way. Bush has not provided us with an “exhaustive chronological account” of his life, which is a small mercy, because ol’ Dubya’s college years could be faithfully recreated in writing by reading the recently released autobiography of Keith Richards, taking regular breaks to cry incontinently. Instead, Bush presents to us a set of twelve decisions which were important steps from the silver

liament, so he decided not to put all of his eggs in one basket. A secret team led by Danny Alexander was quickly formed to prepare proposals for a coalition deal with either of the two main parties. Alexander advised that the idea of abolishing fees should be dumped to avoid putting political capital at risk.

On Alexander’s advice the Party leadership were soon prepped to raise tuition fees if they were to be part of a coalition.

Even after making these decisions the Liberals carried on with the pretence of opposing tuition fees. On election day the Party bled the student vote dry out of a cold self-interest. But that is the tip of the iceberg.

spoon in his mouth in Connecticut to the cowboy boot in his mouth in the Oval Office. Notably these twelve decisions seem to make no mention of the 152 death warrants Bush signed with a sinister smirk as the Governor of Texas.

152. That’s two busloads of people, or everyone living on campus of Heythrop. Or the number of people needed to proof-read Decision Points.

The twelve decisions which the book highlights include such gruelling choices as choosing the family over Johnny Walker, the events of September 11th 2001 and the decision to keep on reading My Pet Goat, the 2003 invasion of Iraq, as decided by Cheney and Rumsfeld, the unremitting series of fuck-ups that was the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, his Supreme Court Nominations, and a spicy undercurrent of Republican homoeroticism with a sprinkling of justified torture for good measure. There are also moments of tender emotion between Bush and Blair, and Bush’s decision that the opinion of the British people on the eve of the war in Afghanistan was, then as now, not worth a tinkers cuss.

To say that these decisions have been “cherry-picked” for public consumption is just too euphemistic; it’s like saying that Charlie Manson is “a little unhinged”. These decisions were picked to de-vilify Bush, to make the reader forget about the countless deaths, the ruined countries, the rivers of blood and the stolen elections, and to festoon

the Bush legacy with something other than a tragic series of monkey-brained mistakes and radical evil. Perhaps kind of family secrets an “exhaustive chronological account” of his life might reveal to the world wouldn’t have this kind of effect. Never mind the personal secrets which might not end at shoving half of Columbia up his nose, flying under the radar of Vietnam conscription and driving with Johnny Walker riding shotgun, there is the teeny fact that his grandfather Prescott Bush funnelled money into the Third Reich, and was a fascist before it was cool.

Decision Points will rank along with the Nixon Tapes as damning evidence of a misguided and thoughtless President acting in his own interest rather than that of the country. The recent midterm elections have shown us that the GOP playbook is still at work in America, but it is a somewhat sobering thought that perhaps Obama’s image as saviour of America was a double-edged sword; if he didn’t descend from heaven in a fiery chariot and lead us to the Promised Land it would send the American populace screaming back into the arms of the Republicans. To Decision Points we can say “Read it if you must, but mind where your money is going and that your questions probably won’t be answered.” We’re not going to give it a rating because we’re intelligent enough to know that a complex diatribe of bile and hate speech cannot be represented numerically.

The national demonstration against tuition fees and education cuts was an expression of the outrage of the students in the face of such treacherous usury, the rage of the masses spilled over into the occupation of the Tory Party HQ and culminated in rooftop flagwaving. The atmosphere was uplifting with students singing slogans such as “You can stick your Browne review up your arse!” and making placards like “If it’s Browne flush it down!” The media leaped on the violence of demonstrators to try and ignore the real issues and focus on injured police officers. A fire extinguisher was dropped from the rooftops giving the reactionary press just what it wanted and such irresponsibility is indefensible. However, the demonstration and the occupation of Tory Party HQ were based on the legitimate grievances of students. Students have not been fobbed off onto tabloid populism that targets immigrants and the unemployed for society’s woes.

David Cameron has condemned the protests for the violence and has stated defiantly that the trebling of tuition fees will not be abandoned. Even though the kind of violence perpetrated against property and police officers is subjective; the economic programme which Cameron is implementing over Britain is violent in an objective sense. Subjective violence is the violence as experienced as an inexplicable act of destruction and chaos which disrupts life as we know it (terrorism being a befitting example). Objective violence being the systemic violence which is invisible to the naked eye and acts as a precondition for subjective violence. In relation to terrorism it would be the sewer of poverty, oppression, injustice and disillusionment with politics that presuppose radicalisation. This is how some people experienced the demonstration:

one minute you’re reading a review of Decision Points; the next minute students are dropping fire extinguishers on coppers. The objective violence of Con-Dem policy which presupposes such actions is ignored and left blameless.

The objective violence of slashing spending on education and raising tuition fees is not at first obvious. Systemic violence is not immediately visible and easily understood subjectively, but look at what students face closely, and it is there underlying the events at Millbank Tower. The welfare state is withering away before our eyes, everything from benefits to health-care are being hit either by massive cuts or market reforms. Even if you believe the nonsense that these cuts are necessary, the end of the welfare state is no less unsettling. Especially as lobbyists from the fast-food industry are allowed to have a say in health-policy, there is talk of food stamps and welfare-to-work schemes. As unemployment is about to rise and students looking for work will face greater competition for jobs, it looks like a degree will not automatically equal a decent job and a better life for many students, nor even a comfortable life for those seeking education for its own sake. The availability of housing in central London could be decreased by over 40%. These changes will affect generations to come.

The demonstration is a premonition of what we should expect to see under the Con-Dem Coalition. We might see riots just as bad, if not worse, than those seen in the 1980’s (which culminated in the 1990 Poll Tax riots that contributed to the collapse of the Thatcher ministry).

It is a shame that a legitimate cause often has to engage in vandalism and even violence to get the establishment to listen. It is also a testament to the unscrupulous, bloodthirsty and generally parasitic qualities of the media.

Though the vandalism that took place at Tory Party HQ is far less destructive than the economic vandalism that the Coalition is indulging in, we the people have to keep the government in line and the government ought to learn its place in our society. But as John Dewey once pointed out, the government is the shadow of business cast over society, thus, we need to alter the substance not just the shadow if we’re serious about change.

14

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

CuLTUrE

Gaming: Call of Duty: Black Ops Toby Fairclough Student First Person Shooter Released 09/11/10 DS/PS3/PC/Wii/Xbox 360 Players Offline 1-4 Players Online 2-18 Rated 18 Unless you’ve been tied up in a secret underground facility for the past 7 years, chances are you’ve heard of Call of Duty. It’s November again, and you’ve guessed it, just in time for the parents to get their underage kids a copy for Christmas, another Call of Duty game is here! But the one question on everybody’s lips is: what’s new about this one?

The campaign puts you straight in the shoes of a suffering Captain Mason having been bound and being tortured.

The story follows Mason’s recalling of past missions in appeasing his captors’ requests, which see Mason relive implausibly heroic action sequence after implausibly heroic action sequence. Whilst initially I thought that the underlying torture sequence was unnecessary (it being reminiscent of Assassin Creed’s real life events filler), and a little confusing (this guy is a top secret Spec Op, yet he is obliging to his captives’ demands), these scenes did grow on me, and do a lot for making sense of the overarching story.

In terms of gameplay, Black Ops does play well for what it is (a blockbusting, linear shooter). The production is high, the graphics are great and the

Theatre: Onassis John Ord Culture Editor Aristotle Socrates Onassis: a name that seems to necessitate great things and a life that never failed to deliver them.

One of the richest men in the world he stood against countries and seduced the most desirable women. Nothing seemed to be beyond the Greek shipping magnate, his life unfolding like the Homeric stories he obsessed over.

Living like the great god of the sea, Poseidon, his story of money, women and amorality finally comes to the West End in what is a brilliant example of storytelling at the Novello Theatre.

The difficulties in telling a story that is as historical as this lie in choosing the right parts of the story to tell and doing so in the right way. This is by no means an easy choice to make, especially with a life so rich (in every sense) as that of Aristotle Onassis. The biographical work done by Peter Evans in Nemesis and Ari has paved the way for a precise and masterful script from Martin Sherman, lifting out his remarkable

sound is decent. Its story-driven campaign is played out through lots of cutscenes and relatively short chapters in which we learn more about Mason and the Cold War operations he has been involved in. Once given back the reign of the controls, Black Ops follows Modern Warfare’s lead of wanting to be in Hollywood with lots of high paced action sequences, many of which seem lifted and ever so slightly tweaked straight from Modern Warfare 2 (*cough* final rappel scene anyone?). Whilst the linear style does have a very strong brainless appeal to it, (and is certainly not unfamiliar within the COD franchise), it can be a little frustrating at times; for example, there is one particularly atmospheric level in Vietnam where you are crawling cautiously through pitch black tunnels with only a flashlight and a six-shot revolver. Mason comments to his A.I. partner about not knowing which way to go, but in reality there is a giant yellow marker on your map (and usually in the middle of the screen too!) which shows you exactly which path to take.

Clocking in at about 5-6 hours for a speed run – this is not a long game.

However, neither was its record breaking younger brother last year. Whilst there are collectables, achievements and several difficulty options in the campaign it is the multiplayer that gives Black Ops (along with any recent Call Of Duty) its longevity. This is split into 3 main styles of play – offline split-screen, online play and Nazi zombie mode. Offline is pretty much no different from last year’s instalment, other than the omission of levelling up

 marriage to Jacqueline Kennedy and his tempestuous relationship with the rest of the Kennedy clan as the focus of a story so remarkable it’s a wonder it’s not fantasy.

The erudite cruise through the life of Onassis takes us into a life that thrashes between light frivolity and dark seriousness. The statement of Onassis’ role in the assassination of Bobby Kennedy is one that carries major consequences, and has provoked criticism from the Onassis Foundation, yet the picture we are given of Onassis is of someone to whom danger and conflict is no obstacle. His early life in Smyrna and his motto of ‘there is no right or wrong: there is only what is possible’ certainly made him a talented and unscrupulous businessman. The play captures this brilliantly, giving him a depth of character with his passion for his Greek heritage; the love of Greek mythology and the music of his people, and offsetting this with the coldness that he takes to his business.

Given fantastical material to work with and an equally dynamic script it would have taken a poor actor indeed to screw



and the change in maps and weapons.

Black Ops offers the standard COD online-multiplayer options: team death match, free-for-all, capture the flag, demolition... but it is in the new wager matches that Black Ops does come in to its own. These comprise of 4 unique modes: ‘One in the Chamber’, ‘Sticks and Stones’, ‘Gun Game’ and ‘Sharpshooter’ – with the first two involving precision aiming with limited bullets, and the latter two involving constantly varying weapons. The levelling system in Black Ops has changed, with the introduction of currency with which upgrades and weapons can be bought for use in the online multiplayer and the currency wagered on yourself to win. By far my favourite mode is ‘One in the Chamber’ in which you are given an insta-kill pistol with one bullet and a knife. Each player has three lives, and if you get a kill you get an extra bullet.

This makes for a very tense game and on first playing my heart was racing as more and more people were taken out of the game. The added threat of losing some of your hard-earned skill points also adds to the need to survive.

Treyarch (the developers behind Black Ops) have also included new customization to your online character, including face-paints and sight designs, though these add little to the overall experience.

Before playing Black Ops I was very excited about the Zombie Mode. It had its first appearance in World at War, a Second World War game in which one of the bonus missions was a fortified house that was under wave upon wave of vandalizing Nazi zombies. As

it up. Robert Lindsay is not a poor actor and he is nothing short of sublime in the role. His character permeates the whole show, from the energetic dancing to his recording of the announcement at the beginning, asking people to turn off their mobile phones and save themselves ‘public humiliation’. He takes to the role like Poseidon to the sea, the character of Onassis being utterly indistinguishable from Lindsay the actor.

The accent, the mannerisms, the small ticks and his grasp of the fundamental flashes in Onassis’ character makes it feel as if Aristotle Onassis himself is marching powerfully around the stage like the old school God of War. The supporting cast are also all great in their roles, notably Lydia Leonard as Jacqueline Kennedy paints a picture of a woman attracted to excitement and paradox; ‘Captain Hook on a yacht with both hands’. She is both meek and powerful at the same time, giving an insight into the dangerous triangle that existed between her, Onassis and Bobby Kennedy.

Making sense of the absurdly inter-connected mess of lovers that these people were involved in, and of which Onassis was at the centre, is a difficult task and is one that is bravely and adeptly undertaken by Gawn Grainger, whose character ‘Costa’ takes on both roles as Onassis’ chief confidant and narra-

Treyarch (also the developers of World at War) were back again to develop Black Ops they have included an updated version of those meddling monsters.

Though the same concept (stay alive for as long as you can), they have added one key ingredient that was missing from the first zombie mode... Nazi zombie dogs! Despite being a good laugh with a friend, competing to see how long you can last for, its novelty is short-lived and the regular online multiplayer stands as being much more varied.

So, is Black Ops any different to Modern Warfare 2? Yes and no. Yes: it is a different story, set in the intriguing and wildly varied set pieces of espionage in the Cold War, with a different emphasis on storytelling over memorable action sequences and a few new multiplayer modes. But, no: in that it is still a Call of Duty, most of the online modes are the same and despite being

different from Modern Warfare 2 in most other aspects, it doesn’t seem to be doing much new for itself. It is not that Black Ops is a bad game, far from it. In fact it is a very enjoyable game, taking the best bits from World at War (flamethrowers, zombies and gore) and combining them with Modern Warfare 2’s (immense action sequences, gameplay mechanics and multiplayer).

Its only downfall is that there are so many FPS games around that other than a few extra game modes and a genuinely interesting storyline, it does little to separate itself from the crowd.

So if you loved Modern Warfare 2 for the single player and cannot wait for another Call of Duty experience this is perhaps the yearly fix that you need. But if you only play games to play Modern Warfare 2 online (I know you’re out there), then it is probably not worth the money.

tor for the audience. His performance is worthy of merit as he gives Lindsay’s masterful Onassis a solid and more human counterpart as well as filling in all the historical facts that are required but difficult to assimilate.

The other cast members also take on this difficult duality of roles with surprising ease, making the distinction between history and narration so fine that it ceases to exist at all. This is the result of good direction. Their characters are well characterised and develop the Greek heritage and passions in such a way that gives Onassis a context that can be understood in a communal sense, as if he is the god of the group that surrounds him.

The play darts between opposites all the time; from cool lovemaking to fiery anger, from cold business to heated passion and the cast keep up with the rapid fluctuations perfectly, most notably Lindsay, who is the one changing the scene most of the time. As he says in the first scene, he doesn’t approve of subject changes unless he’s making them and throughout the play it is him who is utterly dominant to the point of near-omnipotence. He said in real life that the lives of the super-rich were akin to those of the ‘heroes’ of Ancient Greece and he was certainly among this category, likely worshipping Hermes, God of both theft and trade and to Ona-

ssis the two often went together.

On the stage, this dynamism and passion is brought to vigorous life by Robert Lindsay and his supporting cast, who balance the contradictions and controversies surrounding this powerful figure in a performance that is so full of skill it would make the gods themselves both envy and adore what they saw.

A truly brilliant show.

15

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

CULTURE

Film: Monsters John Underwood Alumnus The hype around micro-budget alien flick Monsters has been frankly unfathomable. Rumours have abounded that the entire production cost only $15,000 (the actual budget was just shy of half a million; the oft-quoted figure refers only to equipment costs), and rabidly excited write-ups in several major movie magazines have led it to be cited as, amongst other things, the new District 9. It may be that my adolescent exposure to potentially hazardous quantities of H.P. Lovecraft have rendered me immune to big stupid octopus things, but I really don’t see what all the fuss is about.

A space probe is dispatched by NASA to investigate the possibility of alien life within the solar system. However, upon re-entry it breaks up over Mexico, scattering the samples it collected – samples which give rise to a plague of huge, aggressive aliens which destroy all in their path. Pretty standard sci-fi setup, it’s true – but Monsters, which ran with the taglines “They’re not aliens.

They’re residents” and “Now it’s our turn to adapt”, is set six years after first contact, with half of Mexico designated an ‘Infected Zone’ and life continuing more or less as normal around the massive squid bastards.

Cue the film’s only two actual characters, cynical photojournalist Kaulder (McNairy) and elfin newspaper heiress Sam (Able). Sam’s father – and Kaulder’s boss – commands the lackadaisical freelancer to get his daughter safely back to the States, but things start to unravel when his ill-advised jaunt with a local hooker permanently separates them from their passports.

Devoid of money or ID, the pair are forced to enter the Infected Zone in the hope of trekking to the US border without encountering any tentacular

The Student Hob:



Francesca Gosling 2nd year Undergraduate

menaces. But wait, what’s this? Sam’s got a fiancé and Kaulder’s a twat, but it seems the apparently ill-matched couple are finding unexpected common ground and bonding as a result of their incredible shared experience! Golly gosh.

Have you ever gone out, with every good intention in the world, to buy fresh food to cook something nutritious from scratch without wasting any of it? I know I have plenty of times. The problem is, that kind of resolution is just not very compatible with student life. You make a healthy meal one night but the next night you might be out and then, of course, the following day you’ll be far too hungover to even get out of bed let alone hit the kitchen! So before you know it, all those fruits and veggies and fresh food that you spent your money on have gone bad. But it doesn’t have to be wasted. In fact, there are all sorts of sweet tasty treats you can cook up that work even better with food just past its best.

Call me a purist, but I think that if you call a film Monsters the audience is within its rights to expect a reasonable proportion of monster-based screentime. This flick simply doesn’t deliver. It is a sci-fi film with almost no sci-fi components and a thriller which spectacularly fails to thrill; in real terms, Monsters is an insipid love story taking place over the course of a road movie. Director Gareth Edwards chose to vaguely storyboard each scene and let the dialogue develop organically rather than actually write it, which is fine if you’re Mike Leigh and have some real actors at your disposal but doesn’t work so well with a cast composed of Mexican bystanders and two ex-CSI morons who, one suspects, couldn’t have read a script even if one existed.

It’s not fair to beat up the aliens for looking crap – microbudget films do get some leeway on that front – and with the exception of their bizarre cameo Monsters is visually rewarding.

The cinematography would be superbly atmospheric if there was any sort of atmosphere for it to capture, so it settles for being evocative and engrossing, capturing the lush Lost Worldesque landscapes of the Infected Zone with style. And it’s inarguable that the central premise of the film is a superb idea which does indeed carry overtones of District 9 in its attempt to imagine how humanity would deal with the eventual banality of alien life on Earth.

I was so looking forward to Monsters and I desperately don’t want to condemn it – it’s just SO BORING. The cast is talentless, the dialogue is flat, the plot is broadly non-existent and the ending is the worst I have ever seen in my life. A crushing disappointment.

Get a Cheapskates Card for Huge Discounts on Union Events £25 for a three year membership (available to 1st year undergraduate students) £20 for a two year membership (available to 2nd year undergraduate students) £15 for a one year membership (available to 3rd year undergraduate students) £10 for a one year membership (available to erasmus students and post-graduate students)

Available at the Union Office

Just a Spoonful of Sugar...

Caramelised fruit On a very low heat, melt a good chunk of butter in a frying pan. Then add in a couple of teaspoons of golden sugar and mix it in until all the sugar is melted.

As the mixture starts to thicken, add in slices of leftover fruit (works well with oranges, pears, apples, bananas etc) so they soften in the mixture. Make sure you take this off the heat before the sugar burns and allow to cool so it thickens a little more! This goes great with custard or vanilla ice-cream.

Sexy French toast Soak slices of (any kind of) slightly stale bread in milk mixed with a teaspoon of vanilla essence, dip it in some beaten egg and then fry in butter just enough so that little gold patches appear. Put on a plate with kitchen paper (to soak up excess grease) and sprinkle on some sugar and ground cinnamon once they have cooled a little.

Left-over birthday cake? throw it away just yet...

I’m a Cheapskate!

Don’t

Boozey Bonbons – (works best with chocolate cake) scoop up all the leftover crumbs and chunks into a bowl stir in a mixture of black coffee and your favourite spirit to form a thick paste. Add a spoonful of honey or golden syrup if necessary to thicken and then squidge it into little balls and leave in the fridge to firm. Next, simply sprinkle over some cocoa powder, cinnamon, melted chocolate or even a little chilli.

Cheeky “bread” pudding - a slight variation on the classic: slice and lightly toast your leftover cake under the grill and arrange in an ovenproof dish.

Then pour over a mixture of 250ml milk, 2 egg yolks and 50g sugar. Bake for about half an hour in an oven preheated at 200C. If you’re only making a mini one then only use half the amount of liquid.

So there is no reason to let good food go to waste, especially when it tends to be a little more costly than a tin of Tesco value beans! Hopefully this will help you sort out your leftovers and give you a few tips and ideas of your own.

Enjoy a munchy night in!

15

WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER | THE LION

Sport & Societies Bike Polo Update Joe Walsh Head of Bike Polo It’s been nearly four weeks since our first practice and, as those who regularly attend will know, things have moved on a lot for the Bike Polo Society. After three weeks of practices, several last minute bike maintenance sessions with the help of Luke, things are starting ‘roll’. The bikes have been stripped of all non-essential elements, the mallets are made and the team has had a degree of practice. Brilliant Heythrop artist Hannah Nichol has designed a logo and after a lot of messaging of various people we are now officially in the London Bike Polo League! Welcome to the glorious, the magnificent and the slightly silly, Heythrop Lions.

We have our first game against Los Conos on the Thursday after Reading Week (subject to change) and we’d really love if any/all of you could come along to watch and give us support! We have a professional photographer turning up to take photos of us play, so who knows, you might even get in the next issue of The Lion in the crowd supporting the team. If a certain individual, well known for his love of brown and wearing novelty underwear turns up in a lion costume, I will be well impressed!

Our fixtures in the next few weeks will look like this...

(With our moving up the right-handside, e.g. next game is rusty rims)

Sour Pussys v Cosmic Spring Break v Dinosaurs Rusty Rims v Josh/Aidan/Haz Los Conos v Heythrop Lions Nice Touch v Bye

So, before we embark on our first game, I will give you a brief history of the sport and why, basically, it’s awesome. First thing to know is that there are essentially two types of polo played.

Traditional Polo is the first, which was invented in 1891 by retired cyclist, Richard J. Mecredy. It is Traditional Polo, but with bikes instead of horses. It featured in the 1908 Olympics with a tester game between Ireland (led by Mecredy) and Germany (I believe Germany won).

It continues in a few, exceptionally old, leagues in America, Ireland and England. Featuring a very complex set of rules about right of way and attacking directions, it is a very honourable and ancient game, full of noble gestures and polo shirts. If you like, it is the poor man’s horse polo.

All very interesting you’ll agree. How ever, the sport we play is none of the above adjectives. Hardcourt Polo began in Seattle in about 2004, by a group of lunatics; from there it has effectively spread over the globe. From 2004 – 2007, The North American league drew in over 36 teams, the European tournament over 40 and in 2009, bike polo had its first world tournament with the 2010 tournament in Berlin. You’ll be interested to know the team we are replacing in the league, the Rotten Apples, came fourth in the 2010 European championships.

It’s a sport that has a DIY ethic at its heart. You cannot buy a polo bike (although such a thing is promised later this year) and only one commercial mallet exists. To play polo is much more than the simple act of turning up

Islam Awareness Week Joe Walsh VP Islamic Soc Between the 22nd and 26th of November, something rather brilliant will be occurring at Heythrop College. For the first time, the Islamic Society will be giving you, the Heythrop student, the chance to discover more about Islam through the ‘Islam Awareness Week.’

You do not have to be religious or of any particular faith to come along to the events and everyone is welcome.

We are having a meeting on Monday 15th November at 1:30pm, anyone who wants to help with the events, offer suggestions or fundraising ideas, please come along!

If you can’t make it, contact us at HeythropIslamicsoc@heythropcollege. ac.uk.

The program of events for the week: Monday 2:30pm, TV room.

We are having a film festival! Crisps and juice will be provided. This will be running from 2:30 till late in the evening, so come along whenever you want to get a view of a few brilliant films!

Tuesday 1:30pm, Quiet Room.

There will be poetry event. Tolu and myself will be reading a selection of Sufi poetry and John Ord will read some of his own poetry.

Wednesday Afternoon Mr Ahmad Achtar, Islam lecturer of the Theology department, will be delivering a lecture for us on Islam and hosting a question and answer session for any of those interested.

Thursday Leaving Heythrop at 1.30pm.

We will be visiting Regents Park Mosque, to give non-muslims the chance to see what a mosque is like.

Friday We are having a huge fundraising event! All funds made will be going to charity and it’ll give you a unique chance to enjoy the experience of a Middle Eastern bazaar. Come along for samosas, henna tattoos and more...

We want everyone to come to these events so look out for more posters and Facebook events coming soon, because Islamic Awareness Week is coming to a college near you...

with pre-brought kit from an expensive store. For example, our mallets? Exhire ski poles, with draining pipe ‘borrowed’ from a building site. Our bikes?

Leftover wrecks, from the bike shed at Heythrop, repaired by a series of minor adjustments. Our tools? Begged, borrowed and stolen from cycle surgery (down the road) and the wonderful Heythrop maintenance team. Our wheelcovers come from a large piece of plastic I found next to the Common Room. We don’t have a purpose built court, like horse polo, and we play wherever we can find a flat urban space. A typical polo bike is essentially a bastardised mountain or track bike, stripped down to its bare essentials, with one gear and built to enjoy an absurd amount of damage! Although any bike is acceptable for the game, eventually most players customised their bike especially for bike polo and their playing needs. Most riders use tall riser bars to give their bike a more upright position. They frequently shorten their handlebars to make clearance for swinging their mallets. So here you have it, a short summary of what it means to play polo; a tendency for insanity, imagination and ingenuity.

I’d like to say thank you to following people for helping so much with getting our Bike Polo off the ground, seeing as we are about to embark on our first league entry, it simply wouldn’t have been possible without them: Hannah Walker, thank you for turning up to the second session after a lot of badgering from me and then proving to be really good at polo! Like a possessed harpy, she took our games by storm and somewhat destroyed the opposition with warlike ‘whoops!’

Luke Nichols (RA Luke) has turned up to every single session without fail and is, despite me giving him the sh*t bike with only a rear brake for most of the sessions and then destroying his bike on the latest session in a crash, is an absurdly good player and is one of bike polo’s veterans!

Annie Sykes is excellent. Helping with initial mallet construction, helping clean the bikes in pouring rain, leading the pack through the London streets, I

simply could not have managed to get the Bike Polo Society off the ground without a ridiculously, helpful vicepresident. Despite having not ridden a bike for a number of years, Annie did just launch in! Suggesting games, ideas and for those in the know, a certain upcoming event, involving alleys. All I can say is cheers!

Luke Milborn (Fixie Luke) has basically been bike mechanic for the society. Whilst I can change a tire or fix a brake, I’m bloody hopeless with some of the repairs that Luke managed! It’s a well known fact that Luke is basically the best player we have at the moment and I dread to think what will happen when he builds his ‘dedicated polo bike’ next summer...the Lions are out! I’ll just leave a 24 pack of beers by the bike shed in thanks...

Lewis Walters has come to at least half the sessions to play on a bike he affectionately calls, ‘Bastard’. Bastard has the following faults: He effectively has no front brake, frequently gets punctures (in fact, I have never known a game where the rear tire didn’t puncture), has a back wheel that has a broken spoke and runs as straight as the LGBT society. Additionally, Bastard’s chain always falls off at vital moments, he has a saddle that only a 6ft 1 individual could use and that is stuck in that position and he makes…noises. The fact that Lewis still comes is something of an amazement to me. Fear not Lewis, Bastard will be getting a very big refit, very soon, just as soon as I get paid.

Finally, I must thank Hannah Nichol, firstly for coming to the first few sessions, then, despite finding it wasn’t her thing, doing me a brilliant logo and offering to help with events and organisation! Thanks also to all the people like Tom Wood, Marianne Levi, Natalia Glaszczka, Sam English and

Sophie Nichol: I know you can rarely make it due to work concerns, but coming along to that first session, or at least offering support (or in Sophie and Tom’s case, the first ever session) made Bike Polo a viable prospect.

So if you fancy coming along, don’t feel that you need any experience or that people will be too advanced to catch up, all you need is a devil-may-care attitude and literally no concern for your health. To quote the New York Times, “You do not have to be a king to play polo. You do not need a 300-yard grass field, a long-handled mallet or a helmet. In fact, you do not even need a horse.”

I’ll see you on court; I’ll be the one on the bike called ‘crudwhacker’”.

Heythrop Ceilidh Hazel Dixon 1st year Undergraduate On Monday 1st November, the Heythrop Folk Society ran its first Ceilidh. For those unfamiliar with folk practises of the British Isles, a Ceilidh can be best described as an evening of fairly straight-forward, energetic dancing – best fuelled by cider. The evening was priced at a very reasonable £2, as we were kept welllubricated and entertained all night.

Being a Ceilidh virgin and having the hand eye co-ordination of a dead hamster, I felt slightly apprehensive as I sidled into the Loyola Hall, collected my cider and sat watching the SOAS Ceilidh band set up. A mixture of guitars, flutes, violins, pipes, an accordion and even a hammered dulcimer, the SOAS Ceilidh band played

energetically and relentlessly, keeping us going all night. Great praise must also be given to the caller they provided who really engineered the night into something fun and easy to follow.

I’m not going to detail every dance for you here as that would have involved keeping some kind of record, which is quite hard when you’re being flung around Loyola Hall. Most of the dances included swinging, jumping, skipping, stamping and giggling when you crashed into one another. My personal favourite was an odd practise known as the “Basket” which involved two “men” each putting their arms around the waists of two women and spinning them around in a circle, the aim being to lift the ladies as far off the ground as possible. There would always be a short set dance and this would usually be repeated several times to one bit of music, sometimes with the opportunity

to swap partners as you went along.

The night was punctuated by performances from three fine Heythrop folky musicians: Emily Perkins played guitar and sang beautifully, Joe Jordan played guitar masterfully and Joey Draycott played piano and sang in such a marvellous, entrancing way that we were all ready for another bout of furious jigging.

When the Folk Society next organises a Ceilidh, I urge you all to come. It’s not about enjoying the music or liking the scene, it’s about having a bloody good laugh. I had a fantastic time.

Keep your eyes peeled for future Ceilidhs in the pages of The Lion and on Facebook. Heythrop Folk Society also hosts fortnightly Singarounds on Tuesdays at 8pm in The Quiet Room. For more details of Folk Society events and to join the HFS mailing list, email ben. lund-conlon@heythropcollege.ac.uk or find us on Facebook!