The Beaver - #904

The Beaver Making Sense of LSE Since 1949

Newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union

-

beaveronline.co.uk

-

Issue 904

-

Tuesday 15 October

Lack of Support for Male Victims of Sexual Harassment

Inside Today News

Taiwan Controversy

Photography by Sebastian Mullen

LSE confirms Tsai IngWen PhD

4

Comment

Brexit at LSE

A rundown of the Debate Society’s Fabian series starter

Morgan Fairless Executive Editor

A

ccording to LSE’s website, support available for students who have faced sexual harassment includes a team of academics who volunteer to be safe contacts and a sexual violence support worker from Rape Crisis South London, who is independent from the school.

However, the sexual violence support worker can only accept female students.

Sexual Violence Support Workers come to LSE once a month and can meet students up to three times either face-to-face or by phone.

This is a way for the LSE to facilitate independent support. Rape Crisis South London only works with female victims, which means that male students who have faced sexual violence are left with few other options for support, and no options for independent support. An LSE spokesperson told The Beaver that the university “has coordinated and funded the service from Rape Crisis

on a trial basis for 6 months.”

Other universities employ the services of similar organisations.

UCL, for instance, offers an Independent Sexual Violence Adviser from Survivors UK. Other avenues for help within LSE, such as the safe contacts, also seem to offer little support for male victims: out of the 7 safe contacts, only one is male.

LSE told The Beaver that “the School has proactively approached Survivors UK to discuss the possibility of providing a similar service to Rape Crisis and we have recently advertised that we are recruiting more safe contacts. We want to encourage greater diversity amongst these safe contacts including men, people from ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals and people with disabilities.”

Additionally, whilst the website outlining how to contact safe contacts details “Some of the Safe Contacts have received enhanced sexual violence training and can support those who have experienced sexual misconduct or sexual violence,” and

LSE states all members of staff have received “relevant training”, only two – Jennie Stayner and Dr. Bingchun Meng – explicitly mention they have “received training for sexual violence and harassment support.”

After The Beaver reached LSE for a comment on this story, a spokesperson for the university added: “Survivors UK will now run a training session with LSE’s newly-recruited and existing safe contacts in December 2019. The EDI team are also working with different parts of the School for key staff to attend Survivors UK training, including Wardens, SWS, the Counselling service, and HR.” Independent Sexual Violence Advisor (ISVA) & Operations Manager Alan Robertson, of Survivors UK, said to The Beaver: “many male victims come to us telling us that they don’t feel like they have spaces welcoming to them,” adding that “there aren’t enough services for men, but in fact there’s not enough services for anyone.”

LSE’s website reads: “At present, we are only able to offer this service

to students who identify as female, but we hope to be in position to expand this service in the near future to include staff and those that identify as male,” signposting male students to LSE’s sources of support site, which provides details of safe contacts and links back to the sexual violence support worker from Rape Crisis South London, and external organisations.

The President of the Women in Politics Society Ella Holmes said to The Beaver: “the issue of sexual harassment and violence against men should not be overlooked. LSE cannot continue to provide minimal services that barely accommodate female needs and exclude male victims.”

She added that “a permanent sexual violence support worker needs to be implemented who can support everyone who needs help.”

Other internal sources of support for LSE students include SU advisors, who can signpost to information on internal and external support and are trained in receiving disclosures of sexual harassment.

DON’T FORGET TO FLIP OVER FOR

FLIPSIDE

REVIEW: The Beaver went to LFF

8

Features

LSE Short Course Surge An analysis of LSE’s increasing reliance on non-credit courses

12

The Beaver

2|

Tuesday 15 October 2019 | The Beaver www.beaveronline.co.uk

Established 1949 | Issue 904 | Newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union

Meet the team Executive Editor Morgan Fairless editor@beaveronline.co.uk Managing Editor Isabella Pojuner managing@beaveronline.co.uk Flipside Editor Christina Ivey flipside@beaveronline.co.uk

Design Editor Colette Fogarty Editorial Assistants Ross Lloyd Jamie Boucher Illustrators Rebekah Paredes-Larson Raphaelle Carmarcat Emma Duper Amelia Jabry Sebastian Mullen News Editors Laura Zampini Jeffrey Wang Elena Christaki-Hedrick news@beaveronline.co.uk Comment Editors Lucy Knight

Samuel M. Caveen Michael Shapland comment@beaveronline.co.uk Features Editors Emmanuel Molding Nielsen Marianne Hii Colin Vanelli Annabelle Jarrett features@beaveronline.co.uk Part B Editor Maya Kokerov partb@beaveronline.co.uk Review Editors Amber Iglesia Zehra Jafree partb@beaveronline.co.uk Sport Editors Seth Rice Gabby Sing sport@beaveronline.co.uk Social Editor Analía Ferreyra Sherry union@beaveronline.co.uk

Collective Chair Andreas Redd collective@beaveronline.co.uk Collective members have contributed content three or more times for The Beaver.

Room 2.02 Saw Swee Hock Student Centre LSE Students’ Union London WC2A 2AE 020 7955 6705 Any opinions expressed herein are those of their respective authors and not necessarily those of the LSE Students’ Union or Beaver Editorial Staff.

The Beaver is issued under a Creative Commons license.

Attribution necessary.

The Beaver...and the beaver.

Highlights from this week’s issue

With his first editorial of the year, Morgan is giddy over our new team.

Morgan Fairless Executive Editor editor@beaveronline.co.uk

T

he past two weeks have been a humbling experience for me.

In Week 0, meeting dozens of new and old students eager to join the paper. In Week 1, hustings and staff applications where we saw people with incredible qualities and experience join both the editorial board and the newly established staff teams.

The Beaver is now a family of about 70 to 80 people: from staff writers for every section, to the largest design team we’ve seen in a while, to an editorial board any student editor would be jealous of.

I hope that this growth in our numbers and quality is reflected in our most recent issue. Before publishing, two of our pieces have already solicited responses from LSE and LSESU. Our reporting of a lack of support for male victims of sexual harassment seems to have pushed LSE to increase their efforts by reaching out to Survivors UK; our reporting on the lack of sanitary products in Saw Swee Hock, in turn, triggered

the SU into stocking up the recently empty bins.

We have started the year strong, but don’t plan on easing our efforts just now.

In this issue, enjoy a full examination of the offering at the London Film Festival – which follows on in the tradition of hosting wellaccomplished reviewers at The Beaver. The content in Comment, neatly (and mostly) focused on LSE issues, is worthy of a read. Features hosts an in-depth analysis by LSE alumni Scott Dylan Carpenter, who deepdives into LSE’s increasing use of short courses as a source of income.

We also really enjoyed Luke Jeffries’ piece on his shambolic interview with Peter Hitchens. A great reflection on lessons learned, which most of us could relate to as budding journalists.

Ross Lloyd’s piece on being the beaver (Felix, not the paper) was particularly funny to me, who had to endure his complaints – and run away from him when in costume, as I discovered a phobia to mascots – throughout the week.

A warm welcome to our new editors, who I look forward to getting to know better throughout the year.

Power, Light, Truth and Doing Good

What does it mean to be part of a community, an organisation, a cause? And what about as an individual?

Isabella Pojuner Managing Editor

managing@beaveronline.co.uk

A

s anyone who knows me on any level might expect, I’ve been thinking a lot about the Extinction Rebellion Autumn demonstrations, the set of investigations into fossil fuel companies and investments the Guardian released last week, and the climate emergency campaign that is currently taking shape at LSE. The climate crisis is just one example of those topics that bridges individual responsibilities with the collective responsibility we have to do good.

But as individuals, how do we reconcile with the fact that while we’re not the singular entities of the organisations we belong to, we do make them up? That we can err on an individual level, but also as part of a structure?

We should all ask ourselves that question, especially in light of the information and environmental crises we must grapple with. They are existential, so we must ask how we exist: within, in relation to, and abstract from the institutions we benefit from or are exploited by. My current answer, subject to greater deliberation, is collective education, debate and demanding accountabil-

ity: of ourselves and those who are gatekeepers to information.

This issue in particular offers its own responses. How much power does the Women’s Officer have in ensuring the policies of her predecessor: within an institution to which she belongs? How can environmentalists within the LSE community suggest innovative policies that the Directorate, Grantham Institute and Sustainability team can accept? When the victims of Grenfell campaigned against the cladding of their building for years prior to the fire, how do they move forward in light of structural, deliberate ignorance?

In asking these types of questions, we investigate how power is transferred through us and through our surrounding organisations: like electricity. There’s a ‘right’ kind of energy versus the ‘wrong’ kind, or perhaps: moral gradients of light that we’re still adjusting to. Different people have the power to turn different lightbulbs on and off, and beyond that, someone has the power to allow them, join them or prevent them. How are we connected? What does this mean for the information we are presented with?

The many publications at LSE form a nexus of this information.

But what are they missing? Which lightbulbs are hidden in the darkness? I think it’s your duty, if you are able, to turn on the light.

News

Tuesday 15 October 2019 | The Beaver News Editors Laura Zampini Elena Christaki-Hedrick Jeffrey Wang

Email us: news@beaveronline.co.uk

Raising Mental Health Awareness: The Freedom Of Mind Festival LSE Festival puts mentalhealth front and centre

Raphaelle Camarcat StaffWriter

L

SE’s first edition of the Freedom of Mind Festival took place during the second week of Michaelmas term, from 7 to 11 October. Ella Marshall, a secondyear IR and History student, founded the Freedom of Mind festival in 2015 in Bristol and has brought it to LSE, introducing discussions about mental health and well-being across campus.

Students discovered an ambitious program - yoga classes, a karaoke night, and panels on several mental health topics were organized for the week ahead. Designed to provide students "with the chance to explore mental wellbeing through personal, political, and creative lenses," the festival managed to raise awareness and stimulate discussions across the student body.

"After different panels, peers from classes and societies started to open up. The festival somehow gave people the tools to express themselves in spaces where the subject isn’t always brought up,” explained Will Banks, third-year Economic History student and one of the festival organisers.

The first panel discussion dealt with body image and mental health.

Panelist Stephanie Yeboah, a plussize fashion blogger, kickstarted the event by voicing her opinions on body positivity, fat acceptance, and her own personal history with body image. What made this first panel so special, according to Jacqueline Sands, a second-year History stu-

dent, was that it “focused on individual stories whilst speaking of a topic that affects us all.''

A second key panel discussion, held on 10 October, focused on the intricate relationship between culture and mental health. Four panelists shared contrasting stories. However, they all had one common characteristic - their journeys through mental health had been strongly influenced by their cultural identities, coming from black and ethnic minority backgrounds.

Derek Owusu, author and podcaster on themes of identity and race, voiced his difficulties as an African immigrant in a majority-Caribbean community and in finding his place while growing up in a British society. When dealing with severe mental health issues and self harm, cultural barriers prevented him from opening up to his relatives. “I am from Ghana, my mom just couldn't get it, there is no word for self-harm or mental health in the language that my mother speaks,” he explained to

www.beaveronline.co.uk

the audience.

Through most of the session, the audience stayed silent, concentrated on the sincerity and openness of the panelists as they told their stories about the intersections of their mental health with race, religion, and class. “The conversations were friendly and eye-opening for me as a white British person. This event has stripped the universality of mental health issues and made me see the person behind the label,” commented George Allison, a third-year Government and History student.

On Wednesday, October 9th, another important panel was organized, discussing a critical issue at LSE: success. In a university where students attend career fairs as often as they go to the pub, this topic appeared to be more than relevant.

The questions brought up during the event were: being part of an ambitious student body, what does this notion of success mean to us today?

How do we frame success? Is it defined by obtaining spring weeks, in-

@beaveronline

ternships, and high salaries after graduation?

John Binns, a Mental Health and Personal Resilience Advisor, shared his views on the definition of success. After working as an Equity Partner at Deloitte for 12 years, he said he realized that he perceived success as a one-dimensional concept, based solely on how fast he could climb the career ladder. He added that he lost perspective on what mattered and no longer felt like himself, which is why he now seeks to create awareness of mental health in work spaces. When asked about career pathways, he insisted that the routes to success are multiple and varied.

On a similar note LSE Careers Director, Lizzie Darlington, shared her own opinions and advice on the topic. She stressed that career fairs are not the most suitable place to have meaningful conversations with employers, and suggested attending smaller themed events or meeting LSE alumni to hear about different experiences instead.

She emphasized the idea that spring weeks only represent "a tiny tiny proportion of how successful a graduate can be,” and went on to explain that with a constantly evolving job market, the size and name of a firm in a students’ first job doesn’t carry much weight. What really matters are the projects an individual takes on, and the roles taken on within the firm. Finally, she warmly reminded students that no one really has it all figured out. As Zofia Wilk, a second year Anthropology student, told The Beaver, “my biggest take away from this is that everyone is struggling with this concept of success, and it’s okay.”

www.facebook.com/thebeaveronline/

SU Delay Causes Sanitary Product Shortage LSESU delays distribution of menstrual products

Thomas Chau Deputy Editor

S

ince the beginning of Michaelmas term there has been an absence of menstrual products throughout the Saw Swee Hock Building.

SU Women’s Officer Maria Golub told The Beaver in a statement: “It was extremely disappointing for me to observe that Student Union’s bathrooms now lack hygienic products. I hope that it is due to not finalising the budget. However, I find that unacceptable.”

“Sanitary products must be present at all times: the budget must be finalised and the sanitary products should be in stock all the time. Unfortunately, it does not always depend on me,” the Womens’ Officer added in her statement.

Students have observed that menstrual products in bathrooms inside the Saw Swee Hock Building were missing even before the 2019/20 academic year began, despite it being SU policy that women’s sanitary

3

products would be provided.

Jocelyn Tsang, a first year PPE student said: “I was aware of the absence of menstrual products in SU bathrooms because I would see the empty baskets there which were intended to store them.”

She went on to say, “I have been to those bathrooms for at least five times and at most, only once were there actually something inside the baskets!”

The LSESU website states that “[n] ot being able to access menstrual products can seriously hinder a person’s daily life, which includes adversely affecting their education opportunities.”

The availability of menstrual products in the SU building was made possible by Katie Tesseyman, who was last year’s Women’s Officer.

Her campaign for free menstrual products was backed by a successful UGM motion in Summer Term.

When asked about the issue, she told The Beaver: “I know there was an issue with people just completely emptying the basket but I had hoped that was resolved.” She also warned that the policy would be easily forgotten without passionate people actively pushing for it.

While the SU’s response to the problem was convincing to some, Sainka Shah, a third-year Government and Economics student claimed that the issue has tarnished her faith in the SU. “I am definitely very disappointed.

The fact that they haven’t even communicated the problem shows that they know that there would be student backlash,” She said.

When asked about her next steps, Shah argued that the student body may need to divert greater efforts to pressure the SU to follow through on its promises.

The president of Women in Politics Soc, Ella Holmes, wrote in a Com-

ment piece last year after the UGM motion was passed that “whilst we can celebrate these victories it is also important to critique how much credit the SU as an institution deserves, and consider whether this credit should go instead to the few SU officers who take their roles seriously.” She told The Beaver this week: " If the SU neglects the results of UGMs the already dwindling faith in student democracy will be extinguished."

Following a request for comment from the SU by The Beaver, sanitary products, after at least a month of not being available, can now be found throughout the SU building.

The News Team Thomas Chau Deputy Editor

Raphaelle Camarcat Staff Writer

Noreen Premji Staff Writer

Meher Pandey Staff Writer

Florit Shoihet Staff Writer

Sophie Neyra Staff Writer

Charlotte Samady Staff Writer

Thahmina Begum Thaniya Staff Writer

Benjamin Crozier Staff Writer

Nora Lorenz Staff Writer

Angbeen Abbas Staff Writer

Join the News Team!

Join our News Team as a staff writer and help us report and investigate LSE news.

For more information, visit beaveronline.co.uk/vacancies

Send us any tips to: news@beaveronline.co.uk

4

News

Tuesday 15 October 2019 | The Beaver

Minouche Among the Main Faces of the #MeTooPay Campaign Focus on gender-pay gap in the UK

Laura Zampini News Editor

L

SE Director Minouche Shafik is among a group of 100 women who, on 1 October 2019, started a campaign to close the gender pay gap. The ‘#MeTooPay’ movement is backed by women who have held leadership roles in some of the UK’s most influential corporations.

“We’re frustrated to still read stories about women not getting the pay they deserve,” reads the cam-

paign description in the #MeTooPay website, where Minouche’s name is listed among other well known business women.

The campaign was motivated by a recent gender bias case involving the BNP Paribas bank. Employee Stacey Macken won her claim for sexual discrimination against the bank after an employment tribunal revealed that despite equal evaluation for workplace performance, Macken’s salary was 25% lower than that of her male colleague, and after working for the bank for three years, her bonus was 85% lower than his.

Ioana Vitan, Head of Events for LSE's Women Leaders of Tomorrow (WLT), told The Beaver that cases like that of Stacey Macken show

that women continue to be held back by prejudice. Hence, "the #MeTooPay initiative to publicise court cases and stories of discrimination in order to raise awareness and spur action is laudable," said Iona.

The campaign, led by Dame Moya Greene, former chief executive of Royal Mail, adopts the name of the #MeToo movement against sexual harassment and sexual assault, which began to gain traction following sexual abuse allegations against Hollywood film producer Harvey Weinstein in October 2017.

When asked about #MeTooPay, Christiana Ajai, Intersectional Feminist Society Media and Publicity Representative, expressed her dissapproval of the campaign's name

and approach. "Whilst I would never reject any attempts to close the gender pay gap I do believe there is a fundamental issue with the coopting of #MeToo for a campaign interested in financial gains," she told The Beaver.

"A group of highly accomplished, well off women have appropriated a hashtag created by a black women's activist who has worked closely with the most vulnerable in society so as to essentially dismiss the discussion around sexual violence against women and the influence of patriarchy on how this is dealt with, and instead focus on people like themselves.”

The WLT Head of Events offered a different perspective on the issue.

"Although the choice of name has been called into question by some, this campaign too belongs to the quest for women’s empowerment, and so it can hardly be regarded as speculative or inappropriate," she told The Beaver.

Greene, Shafik and Macken

Former LSESU Gen Sec Joins The Circle on Channel 4 Busayo Twins impersonates white man on TV

Elena Christaki-Hedrick and Laura Zampini News Editors

F

ormer LSESU Gen Sec Busayo Twins joined Channel 4's reality television game show The Circle on 9 October, presenting as a middle class white man named Josh.

Contestants on The Circle live in the same house but never actually meet, see or hear one another. Instead, they communicate through a specially designed social media app, which is voice activated. The crux of the show is that each contestant can be anyone they choose or fictionalise.

"I want to highlight how a middle-class white male might be more popular in the game," said Twins explaining her choice to impersonate Josh in the show. "Being a confident and articulate black woman, sometimes it can intimidate people.

If a white male is confident, it's natural and they're born leaders.

But if I was to be the same, I would come across as radical or aggressive,". Social media users have expressed mixed reactions to Twins’ reasons for taking on the persona

of a young white male. Some users have criticised Twins for politicising a light-hearted game. One user commented on Facebook, “She puts a downer on everything. This is meant to be a light hearted and fun game show. She wants to turn it into some sort of crusade.”

Other users have expressed that she would have been just as popular as a black woman. A Facebook user wrote on The Circle’s page, “She's gonna get a shock when she meets the other players then, such a diverse bunch in there and all lovely people doing well.”

Esohe Uwadiae, Twins' friend and former LSESU Education Officer, told The Beaver that the debate on social media sparked by Busayo's choice of character on The Circle "really shows how far this country still has to go when it comes to understanding race and racism."

"If anyone was ever going to do something like this, it would be Busayo, she’s never been one to sit idly by when it comes to issues of importance," added Uwadiae, recalling Twins' leadership in the campaign for the introduction of a social mobility officer at LSESU, which made it one of the first unions in the country to have such a position.

Busayo Twins was ACS President at LSE while pursuing a degree in Economic History and then went on to become LSE's first black General

Secretary in the 2016-17 academic year. Her work as Gen Sec was centred around bursaries and closing the attainment gap for low-income and BAME students at the university. As Gen Sec, Twins also voiced her support for the Justice for Cleaners campaign when it was launched in 2016.

She is currently a Strategic Policy Advisor in the Office for Students and an officer in the Access Project, a charity that supports high potential students from disadvantaged backgrounds to secure places in the UK's top universities. All of these roles have been put on hold for at least three and a half weeks while she is on The Circle, but her activism on issues that affect the black British community will continue to underpin her participation in the program.

For those who want to watch Busayo on The Circle, the show airs nightly at 10pm on Channel 4. "I strongly urge people to support the work she’s doing by joining the debate online and downloading The Circle app and voting for her when possible," voiced Uwadiae.

www.beaveronline.co.uk | @beaveronline

Email us: news@beaveronline.co.uk

LSE Recognises Tsai Ing-wen’s PhD After long controversy, Tsai Ing-wen’s PhD recognised

Thahmina Begum Thaniya Staff Writer

O

n receiving numerous queries regarding Tsai Ingwen’s academic merit, LSE released a formal statement on Tuesday 8th October, verifying the legitimacy of Dr. Tsai’s PhD. “We can be clear the records of LSE and of the University of London - the degree awarding body at the time - confirm that Dr. Tsai was correctly awarded a PhD in Law in 1984,” the statement reads.

The statement went on to reveal that “the Senate House Library records confirm that a [PhD] copy was received and sent by them to the Institute for Advanced Legal Studies. There is a listing of Dr. Tsai’s thesis ‘Unfair trade practices and safeguard actions’ in the IALS index document ‘Legal Research in the United Kingdom 1905-1984’, which was published in 1985”.

In September, Alex Huang, the Presidential Office spokesman, announced during a press conference

at the Presidential Office that the public will be able to view an original copy of Dr. Tsai’s dissertation.

The leader of Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party made a digital version of her thesis available for download at the National Central Library of Taiwan.

“This proves the president went through the rigorous doctoral process,” Huang told Channel News Asia,“as this process has been carefully attested by institutions such as National Chengchi University, the Ministry of Education, and the Central Election Commission, there is absolutely no question about the authenticity of her doctorate”.

Doubts about the leader’s academic accomplishments came into light after long-running accusations that her doctoral thesis did not exist and was fabricated. Peng Wen-cheng, a former political talk show host, was one of the individuals to question the existence of Dr Tsai’s dissertation in a Facebook post in June.

When asked about his thoughts on the issue, LSE student and Taiwanese Society President Samuel Huang said, “I think people need to understand that bipartisanship

in Taiwanese politics permeates into all levels of Taiwanese society.”

He went on to say, “while I can't say for sure if this specific talk show had a political motivation in ‘exposing’ Dr. Tsai, other reports made by Taiwanese news outlets (be they in support of or in opposition to Dr. Tsai) certainly did.”

Mr Huang, who is in his second year of studying BSc Politics, added that, “since presidential elections are coming up, some probably think that demeriting Dr. Tsai will ruin her chances at getting re-elected.”

Paul Yu, a PhD candidate at LSE, agreed that “the motivation for this primarily stems from the fact that it is an election year as she is running for reelection in January 2020.”

He concurred that “questioning the president’s academic credentials is one of the many ways her political opponents are trying to lessen the chances she wins reelection.”

One thing is for sure: Dr Tsai Ingwen has been confirmed as an LSE alumna, and you can read her thesis on ‘Unfair trade practices and safeguard actions’ in LSE’s Library Reading Room.

UGM Keeps With LSE’s Low Attendance Tradition UGM fails to attract students once again

Nora Lorenz Staff Writer

of 17, of which eight were paid officers. The meeting took place in an LSE-wide environment of low student satisfaction rates and alleged democracy issues within the SU. The officers, clearly frustrated by the low attendance, pushed for more student participation.

L

SESU held its first Union General Meeting (UGM) of Michaelmas Term on the evening of 10 October in the Saw Swee Hock Centre. The meeting consisted of reports from officers as well as a call for student participation in the upcoming elections.

The UGM Chair emphasised that accountability and democracy are SU priorities. The Chair encouraged students to come along to the UGM, quiz officers, and submit motions. Despite outspoken commitments toward better democracy, student turnout was low.

The SU Sabbatical and Part-time Officers reported on past achievements and ongoing projects. Among others, the SU Officers spoke of the refurbishment and reopening of the Three Tuns student bar, securing funding for the currently ongoing Black History Month, the creation of an LSE support map to help students better orient themselves, and improve access to mental health support with the establishment of a mental health action plan.

The UGM only attracted a crowd

LSE Press to Launch Houghton Street Press New opportunities for LSE student journals

Morgan Fairless Executive Editor

I

n a bid to help student academic journals, LSE Press, the university’s publishing division, is set to launch Houghton Street Press (HSP). HSP will launch with 6 student journals: Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics; Rerum Causae; LSE Undergraduate Political Review; The Public Sphere: Journal of Public Policy; LSE Law Review; and ISChannel.

The platform aims to reduce the barriers student journals face when it comes to the reviewing process and publication of their work.

HSP will eventually be governed by a committee, in which students are expected to participate.

Lucy Lambe, who is Scholarly

Communications Officer for the LSE Library, added that the journal could introduce new forms of assessment, similar to the work of the journal Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, which publishes work from PPE course students is then reviewed by peers and selected by a faculty board.

The editor of Rerum Causae – the journal of the Philosophy Society and Department– Harry Ward, told The Beaver, “Houghton Street Press has been incredibly helpful for Rerum Causae. The Journal had some issues with editing and publishing before we decided to restructure how we did things – once we had an idea of what we wanted, HSP approached us with the platform we’re on now, which fitted practically every plan we had for the Journal.

So far, all the support we’ve had has been great.”

LSE Press is an open-access university press. It has recently published the open-access textbook Open De-

mocracy, and the Journal of Illicit Economies and Development.

The launch event for Houghton Street Press, on 28 October, will showcase the current student journals and the broader work of LSE Press. HSP aims to recruit new student journals, student reviewers, and editors.

Send us your thoughts on

the new student journal at: news@beaveronline.co.uk

5

Register online to contribute beaveronline.co.uk

Tuesday 15 October 2019 |The Beaver

6

Comment

Comment Editors Samuel Caveen Lucy Knight Michael Shapland

Email us: comment@beaveronline.co.uk

Rory Stewart and the North-South Divide Illustration by Colette Fogarty

Comment Editor

C

ast your minds back to May 2019. Most of us were swarmed with exams, the weather was warming, and Theresa May announced her resignation - this was also the time where the nation was introduced to Conservative MP and Pret a Manger brand ambassador, Rory Stewart.

Stewart, a failed 2019 Conservative leadership hopeful, quit the Party on the 3rd October to run as an independent candidate for mayor of London. Prior to this new-found fame, Stewart was an MP for Penrith and the Border, a northern constituency on the border with Scotland. His forthcoming attempt at a London mayoral campaign stems from a larger epidemic of north-south division within politics and the wider English culture.

Rory Stewart has been an MP for a northern constituency since 2010.

Despite the fact that his mayoral campaign has only just begun, it seems difficult to correlate the struggles of rural northern England with the struggles of the capital city. Not only is there no correlation in terms of geography, but in population, ethnic diversity, and the types of jobs available.

Rory isn't alone in this. Former chancellor George Osborne, after serving as an MP for Tatton (a constituency near Manchester) between 2001-2016, stepped down to pursue a career as the editor of the London Evening Standard. Whilst I can't judge an individual for pursuing their own career prospects, it demonstrates how members of northern constituencies may feel left behind. It appears these politicians will pretend to be all for advocating the issues of the north, however will forget the people who gave them this power as soon as a tempting offer for a metropolitan job is placed before them.

Osborne's career at the London newspaper seems especially ironic considering his push for a Northern

“

Powerhouse since the coalition government began in 2010. This policy aims to boost economic growth in

It appears these politicians will pretend to be all for advocating the issues of the north, however will forget the people who gave them this power as soon as a tempting offer for a metropolitan job is placed before them.

“

Lucy Knight

industrious cities such as Leeds, Newcastle, and Manchester, by investing in better transport links akin to those in the south, and the implementation of devolved political powers.

The policy that he pushed as Chancellor would have had direct positive effects for his constituents, for international business, and for his popularity, but has fallen off the policy bandwagon since he left Westminster in 2016.

Of course, other issues now have more national and international salience , but the imminence of Brexit hasn't swept every other policy proposal off the table, so why has the Northern Powerhouse all but vanished?

At first glance, this hardly feels like an issue we should care about LSE has no real ties to the north of England, and our university culture is targeted towards opportunities right on our doorstep. However, that's exactly the point - investing in a Northern Powerhouse would not only increase the scope of opportunities in

the UK (especially in a post-Brexit world), but would also increase LSE's reputation beyond the capital.

As a student from Yorkshire, I can count the number of LSE students I know who live further north than me on one hand. Futile as it seems to some, it adds to the ways in which students can feel alienated here.

As anyone who has taken pretty much any course at LSE will know, correlation is not causation: I don't want to argue that Stewart and Osborne were just using northern politics for individual gain. However, these cases are textbook symptoms of the north-south divide. This goes further than policy, with countless examples from media representations and statistical evidence of disparity within government spending.

This did not start with George Osborne, nor will it end with Rory Stewart: it is intrinsic to the psyche of both areas that there is a regional divide that affects us all.

www.beaveronline.co.uk | @thebeaveronline

Email us: comment@beaveronline.co.uk

Out with the New, In with the Old: Saving Print Journalism

7

Comment Writers Christiana Ajai-Thomas Deputy Editor

Illustration by Amelia Jabry

Oliver Harrison Staff Writer

P

in the last 10 years.

Furthermore, if the decline of print journalism were the result of the migration of audiences online, would books not suffer the same fate? When

82%

of 16-24 year olds get their news from the internet

Amazon first released the Kindle in 2007, many predicted the death of physical books at the hands of the

e-book - this proved to be nonsense.

2018 saw the fourth consecutive year of growth in UK print book sales, and this growth shows no signs of stopping.

The fact of the matter is that the failure of the print news industry cannot be so easily attributed to changing consumer preferences. The performance of The Spectator, Private Eye

“ The industry should stop trying. Instead, print should become a more literary experience.

“

rint journalism is dying. Newspaper circulation is plummeting across the board. The Sun, the best-selling newspaper in the UK, recorded a 12% year-on-year decline in circulation in August 2019. The Guardian’s circulation is down 5% from last year, and The Telegraph’s readership has crashed by 15% in the same period.

The free papers aren’t faring any better. The Evening Standard and City AM saw readership fall by 5% and 9% respectively over the last year. Regardless of cost, the public are clearly dissatisfied with print journalism.

Some would say that this is a natural consequence of the digitisation of the media. With a 24-hour news stream at our fingertips, it’s no wonder we’re not waiting for the first editions to hit the streets every morning. What’s more, with so many news websites removing online paywalls in recent years, the idea of paying for a newspaper seems anachronisticwhen one can access live news for free at the touch of a button.

However, this analysis fails to tell the full story. Private Eye, a printonly monthly publication, has held its readership relatively firmly compared to the major publications. It recorded a modest 1% decline in circulation between June 2018 and June 2019 after recording a record readership in 2016.

The Spectator has also avoided the fate of many of its competitors. Its circulation reached an all-time high in the latter half of 2018, with 7% readership growth from the first half of the year. The Spectator’s online service, which sits behind a subscription fee, has flourished too, growing 50%

and physical books demonstrate that the British public are not exclusively wedded to digital media.

It’s certainly true that the news landscape has changed, with online news sources beating print at every turn and threatening to overthrow television as the UK’s predominant source of news. A 2018 Ofcom study found that the Internet accounts for 64% of our news intake; for those aged between 16 and 24 this figure rises to 82%.

It’s not difficult to understand this trend. Online news and social media sites can disseminate breaking news within seconds. Live sports reporting and news updates increase the quality of the online offering, not to mention the convenience of being able to access all of this at the press of a button. Physical newspapers, on the other hand, are cumbersome and slow ways to stay informed - waiting for the morning press to stay abreast of the latest news has become incomprehensible.

However, news executives can’t just sit on their hands bemoaning changing consumer preferences in the digital age if they want to survive. Inaction will kill the newspaper. Instead, they need to cast aside their commitment to news altogether.

The Spectator and Private Eye are flourishing because of their slow-roll approach to current affairs. Instead of publishing a daily dross, The Spectator focuses on quality. Each edition is a curated collection of articles which provide nuanced and informed commentary on current affairs. The editors at The Spectator know that you’ve read the news already. You’re buying their paper because you want to enjoy journalism, and they reward this.

Private Eye takes this to a whole other level. Published fortnightly, Pri-

Divestment Won’t Stop Climate Change Eóin McCorkindale Comment Contributor

G

rowing awareness of the human contribution to climate change has precipitated a new wave of climate activism – most notably Greta Thunberg and Extinction Rebellion – both of which have successfully led protests that would have been unimaginable a decade ago.

What is striking about these protests however is the sheer lack of ideas about how to reverse climate change.

One might be forgiven for thinking that if we all simultaneously announced there's a climate emergency, the problem might solve itself.

One prominent demand, especially among university students, is known as ‘divestment’. This was one of the few demands made in the public letter recently sent by LSE’s Climate Emergency Collective to the Director’s office. Divestment is the process by which institutions cease all holdings of securities that derive some or all of their value from companies that contribute to climate change— think oil company stocks, and funds that contain those stocks. That definition might seem obtuse, but as we’ll

see, it’s important to spell out exactly what we’re talking about here. Divestment is generally thought of as ‘starving fossil fuel companies of money’, and analogised to historical boycotts like that of apartheid South Africa.

The problem is it’s hard to understand what, if anything, divestment actually accomplishes on the surface.

How might divestment lower carbon dioxide production? Maybe it takes away capital companies would use to expand extraction. This is unlikely, since due to industry concentration, fossil fuel companies are large and established, so can generally finance expansion with profits. If they did need to raise money, for various tax reasons they would probably do so by issuing bonds rather than stocks (which aren’t in index funds).

The more fundamental problem however is that this argument misses how selling securities works in the first place. For example, if LSE divested from ExxonMobil, they would sell their stocks in ExxonMobil to someone else, who would then hold those stocks. No one at ExxonMobil would notice this happening, because they aren’t involved in any step of this process. The way that this might work is by lowering the stock prices of ExxonMobil. The question then becomes:

@beaveronline

how do stocks get their value? As any finance textbook will explain, stock prices come from the present value of expected future profits of the company, which have nothing to do with who’s holding their stock.

If ExxonMobil stock was worth £10, and then lots of people sold their ExxonMobil stock and the price fell to £8, then the fundamental value of the stock would still be £10. This would be a massive bargain to those nonplussed with ExxonMobil business practices. So rather than changing the price of the stock, this would simply change the composition of those who held ExxonMobil stock from those who care about ethical

www.beaveronline.co.uk

investing, to those who don’t. It’s like trying to boycott a £10 note by having everyone agree to sell their £10 notes for £9—the value of the note doesn’t change like the fundamental value of a stock doesn’t change.

As well as being true in theory, this is well borne out empirically. Research has found that financial boycotts don’t affect share prices, and in fact, ‘sin stocks’, those which people often boycott (cigarettes, guns, etc) have above average returns, showing that people do indeed profit from these arbitrage opportunities.

As long as enough unethical investors exist, divesting won’t make a dent in fossil fuel companies’ share

Oliver Harrison Staff Writer

Jacob van de Beeten Staff Writer

Sagal Mohamed Staff Writer

Jesser Horowitz Staff Writer

vate Eye is a razor-sharp take on the month’s news. Each paper is oozing with satire and packed with a variety of carefully constructed articles and cartoons. The approaches taken

by The Spectator and Private Eye represent the only way forward for print journalism. This current model is doomed to failure. Print can never keep pace with the Internet’s ability to give the public minute-by-minute news updates. The industry should stop trying. Instead, print should become a more literary experience.

Articles should be longer, more lovingly crafted and more carefully selected to give the audience a taste of true journalistic quality in each and every edition. Breaking news should be an online game and print should be reserved for comments on current affairs for an already-informed audience. For print journalism to survive, it has to kick out the new and embrace the old.

prices. If a large majority of investors become ethical, then there would almost certainly be enough support for government policies to stop the fossil fuel companies polluting so much in the first place.

None of this is to say that we should do nothing, or that Climate Emergency-centred protests are a bad idea – in fact, I signed the aforementioned climate emergency letter.

Moral outrage however is not a substitute for serious thinking about policy solutions. Divestment is attractive for obvious reasons, people want to feel like the institutions that they’re a part of are doing something to help, and, at the risk of cynicism, while switching to green index funds does basically nothing, it costs very little to institutions who do it.

There is one coherent argument for divestment however: it gets headlines. People value symbolism and institutional stances may help rally people. But at some point, you need to get beyond rallying people and towards doing something concrete other than setting increasingly optimistic targets for carbon neutrality. So, sign public letters, write to your legislators, go on protests, but don’t think that public concern alone will stop droughts and rising sea levels.

www.facebook.com/thebeaveronline/

8

Comment

Tuesday 15 October 2019 | The Beaver

Take Two: the Art of Debate

Thursday the 10th's debate on the second referendum not only provided a microcsm to judge the UK's sentiment regarding Brexit, but a laboratory with which to study the power of language...

Britain being “a big bear with big claws”.

Who after all desires to argue against their own nation’s strength?

A proper analysis of the frame can only arise in conditions amenable for such a debate. If Braine and Cole had utilized the sword instead of the scathing remark, the battleaxe instead of the barrage, there would be no analysis to make, and no interesting things to learn. We live in a blessed age, where disagreement does not lead to a duel, or the guillotine, and in times like these, it would be remiss of us not to thank the political gods for placing us in an age that does not persecute or imprison dissenting voices.

Photography by Matthew Bradbury

Michael Shapland Comment Editor

I received my call to write this article, covering a debate on the second referendum in collaboration with LSE’s own Debate Society, under intriguing circumstances.

Initially hesitant to write about an issue so polarizing as Brexit, one day, scuffling out of the library as it began to close, I came across Debate Soc’s Hamza Chaudhry. Realising the main doors were shut, we sat down and deliberated. The debate, which Hamza would be chairing, was Thursday the 10th’s political contest between Richard Braine, UKIP leader and Thomas Cole, the Head of Policy for the People’s Vote and the European Movement.

I will analyse this debate around three pivotal frames that were put forward within the contest. The first example covers the highly controversial debate around Tommy Robinson.

Register online to contribute beaveronline.co.uk

Frame 1: Richard Braine is a racist

“[This] brief victory for

Braine highlights not only the power of the frame, but the power one can hold within a debate when utilizing it correctly.

“

Cole, Head of Policy for the People’s Vote and the European Movement, is a staunch supporter of the EU, alongside being (obviously) a strong proponent of a second referendum.

Cole is also an LSE alumnus, having completed his masters’ degree at the LSE, in Global Politics in 2006 to 2007. He is returning to an institution that shaped his political outlook, and opened him up to the possibilities of global political interaction.

Cole: You said online that Tommy Robinson was a political prisoner.

You click on Tommy Robinson’s site, and on his site it states that Muslim gangs go around the country raping underage children. Do you think that Tommy Robinson is a racist?

Braine: I don’t (crowd gasps). What particular example of Tommy Robinson being racist can you give me?

Cole: What particular example of Tommy Robinson not being racist can you give me?

Braine: That’s a ridiculous state-

ment. How about ‘when Tommy Robinson puts on his underwear in the morning he is not being racist’. (laughter) Cole’s response to Braine is where he fails. Likely rattled by previous brittle interactions between the pair, Cole is too reactive to Braine’s frame and is subsequently overcome within this interaction.

There is no need for Cole here to seek to create a new frame against Braine.

Cole’s resulting frame can easily be taken reductio ad absurdum: a technique often used in debate to highlight the fallacy within one’s argument by taking it to its extremes. By highlighting that there are some actions Robinson undertakes that are clearly not racist, such as “put[ting] on his underwear in the morning”, Braine highlights the absurdity of Cole’s frame, even soliciting laughter. This moment of levity, and brief victory for Braine highlights not only the power of the frame, but the power one can hold within a debate when utilizing it correctly.

Frame 2: A Second Referendum is pro-democracy The second frame I wish to analyse is more fascinating however than the ‘racist’ frame, which often proves toxic for all involved.

The argument surrounding a second referendum is fascinating due to its ambiguity. On the one hand, the ‘Remain’ side argues that as a second referendum poses a clear example of letting the people decide once more upon Brexit, to not undertake it would be far less democratic than to have the vote. On the other hand, ‘Leave’ argues that a referendum on the UK’s membership has already occurred, and its result was decisive: to go against it would be to go against democracy.

Braine: After the 2017 both the Tories and Labour stated that they

would honour the referendum. 85% of the population voted for MPs that stated that the vote should be honoured.

concept as democracy.

Cole argues against this by using the competing frame that A. The UK public now prefers remaining in the EU to leaving it and B: A referendum is vital to solve the current impasse within parliament, and the current volatility and conflict around Brexit.

Interestingly, the most concrete economic arguments made by both Braine and Cole, were put forward when I questioned them as to how Britain would come together after Brexit. To paraphrase Braine and Cole, from a hypothetical Brexit scenario, each saw the vindication of their own arguments: for Braine, the elevation of Britain to a global economic powerhouse, for Cole, the destruction of the British economy as we know it.

Herein lies the problem: if an issue as supposedly mathematical and facts-based as economics can be so emotionally driven, what chance does one stand of making any sense from the current Brexit debate?

Cole: People change their minds all the time, we are seeing more and more MPs who are seeing reluctantly that a referendum will the best way of solving this problem. I think regarding Parliamentary de-

“If an issue as suppos-

edly mathematical and facts-based as economics can be so emotionally driven, what chance does one stand of making any sense from the current Brexit debate?

“

To understand Thursday’s debate we must first understand its competitors. Richard Braine, representing the side of ‘Leave’ in the second referendum debate, is the current leader of UKIP. Educated at Eton College, Mr Braine has been politically active since the 1990s, always maintaining a strong, anti-EU stance. UKIP’s centrality towards the overall Brexit debate need not be overstated.

On the other hand, Thomas

mocracy, Bercow…is trying to hold up the sovereignty of parliament. If you want a North Korean version of sovereignty then you are not engaging with anybody.

This argument for a second referendum’s legitimacy will never be reconciled. Due to the nature of these competing frames, no matter how many facts or arguments Leave or Remain throw at each other regarding parliamentary process, the outcome of the first referendum or parties’ manifesto’s, the truth remains that no clear result can come from arguing over such an abstract

Frame 3: Brexit will cripple Britain economically

Above: a crowd full of questions

Cole: Already Liz Truss is complaining about the US overreaching power. Sure if Brexit goes through you will have to accept rules where you will have no say.

We used to be one of the largest growing economies around the world and now we are not…The people from around the UK who will be affected around the country will be working class, middle class.

This argument is subsequently rebuffed by Braine, who argues that just like predictions of doom around Brexit have not been actualized, the same turmoil predicted for a postBrexit Britain will also not be seen.

Debate Soc president in action

Braine: Our country is a big bear with big claws and our political class are denigrating our situation. We’ve got the best universities, we’ve got the world’s top financial centres… we don’t have to cower and suck up.

Regardless of political persuasion, one must agree that it is hard to break the Brexiteer frame of

Hamza Chaudry steering debate

SHOW UP. SPEAK UP. SWITCH LSE Up. Represent - Postgraduates, LGBT+, Disabled, Mature and Part-Time, General Course Students and more.

Nominations close: Thursday 17 October Voting opens: Monday 28 October

LSESU.COM/ELECTIONS

Tuesday 15 October 2019 |The Beaver

10

Features

Features Editors Annabelle Jarrett Colin Vanelli Marianne Hii

Email us: features@beaveronline.co.uk

Grenfell: Two Years On

Grenfell Tower today (c) Wikimedia

Staff Writer

J

une 14th marked 2 years since the Grenfell Tower fire - one of the UK’s worst modern disasters. 72 residents of the West London residential block perished, and over 100 families were displaced and left emotionally distressed. But what is the legacy of this tragedy? What has been done so far by authorities to retribute the loss and grief of an entire community?

Besides the humanitarian efforts of charities such as the Red Cross, and the establishment of Grenfell United - an effective mouthpiece for grieving locals – now former PM Theresa May launched a public inquiry was launched in September, 3 months after the fire. In a written statement by May she promised to leave "no stone unturned" and "take necessary action to prevent a similar tragedy from happening again".

From the beginning, survivors and activists were unhappy with the narrow agenda put forward by the government. Initially, it was suggested that the inquiry would be limited to highlighting the cause of the fire, how it spread, and how similar incidents could be prevented in the future.

By August 2018, the goal of the inquiry had shifted to appease its critics: the Grenfell Inquiry was now tasked with examining "circumstances surrounding the fire", including the adequacy of the regulations and safety measures in place. Admittedly, this was still a vague agenda that could be construed narrowly if necessary, but perhaps it would have been overly optimistic to expect an in-depth moral undertaking by the inquest in the first place.

Nevertheless, critics had much to say about Sir Martin Moore-Bick, chairman of the Grenfell inquiry.

diversity of skills and experience" to the inquiry. However, Grenfell United and affected families are concerned their voices are still not being heard, after having spent initially months, and now years, living in limbo.

The charity Inquest documented the increasing frustrations of 55 grieving families through a report entitled Family Reflections on Grenfell: No Voice Left Unheard, in which concerns were raised regarding the lack of transparency and clear procedure implemented by the panel and investigation. There was also notably a lack of resources and safety nets for the aggrieved families and survivors, and a further reported detachment from the site of the fire through the inquiry’s choice of venue in Holborn.

However, this isn’t to say that all aspects of the inquiry have been less than satisfactory. To his credit, Sir Moore-Bick directly addressed issues with the venue, and proposed a move to a larger premises in west London.

Inquest also praised the "biographical pen portraits" incorporated to commemorate those who lost their lives and break down barriers of suspicion between the families and various inquiry branches.

Much of the inquiry has been spent considering evidence, approximately 476,000 pieces of it. This has become synonymously known as ‘Phase One', and has racked up more than £10 million in expenses.

‘Phase Two’, aiming to examine "critical circumstances and decisions" that "enabled the devastating fire to spread", is set to begin sometime after 2020. To the utter frustration of those affected by the fire, however, no charges are likely to be handed out until 2021 once the inquiry has been completed, and its findings incorporated into evidence for potential manslaughter or corporate homicide convictions.

The lack of any criminal charges so far is especially problematic when one considers the accusations already circulating between alleged preparators. Arconic, the manufacturer of the combustible panels that encased the tower, argued that other materials and individuals were responsible for spreading the fire: in particular, those who had orchestrated the refurbishment of Grenfell and provided plastic uPVC windows. Arconic also claims that the fire itself could have been put out by a handheld fire extinguisher.

Contrary to the account provided

by Arconic, The Fire Brigades Union blame the Council and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea for failing to make an adequate evacuation plan. As the recriminations of the parties alleged to be responsible rumble on, these conflicts are unlikely to provide closure for the victims or grieving families who are still none

“

[T]he tragedy provides a once-in-a-generation oppurtunity to fix the country's failing social fabric, through changes to democracy, welfare, and housing policy.

“

Heba Khalid

Though he was initially praised by some, like Owen Bowcott, for his extensive knowledge of contract law which could potentially disentangle the complex layers of responsibility surrounding the cladding and controversial refurbishment of Grenfell Tower from 2015-16, his record of previous rulings was picked apart to highlight his outsider status to the community.

In 2014, for instance, Moore-Bick and two other judges were accused of ‘social cleansing’ by allowing a London council to rehouse a tenant 50 miles away, after the Government's benefits cap made the rent on her London flat unaffordable. Though this decision was eventually overturned by the Supreme Court, it remains the elephant in the room, considering the ongoing contentious re-housing process of Grenfell residents 18 months after the fire, 100 families were still homeless, or living in temporary accommodation. The delay in the permanent re-housing process is thought to be dueto residents being forced to reject ‘totally unsuitable properties’ that were either too far from their local community, or were in high tower blocks which exacerbated mental strains or episodes of PTSD that have surfaced since the tragedy.

It cannot be said whether Sir Moore-Bick will adopt the same attitude towards Grenfell residents that he had in his 2014 ruling, but the government has already been accused of adopting a ‘take it or leave it’ stance with the survivors by Diane Abbott and fellow members of the shadow cabinet.

It was only recently that significant changes were incorporated into the inquiry’s panel. In early June of this year, it was confirmed that architect Thouria Istephan and housing expert Professor Nabeel Hamdi would join and offer "greater

the wiser on the definitive cause of the untamed blaze.

To worsen matters for the surrounding community, independent research from the University of Central Lancashire shows heightened levels of cancer-causing chemicals in the area around Grenfell Tower. As such, residents and families that have already been devastated are at risk of contamination and high levels of toxicity.

This is despite the fact that the local authority gave no definitive answers to residents asking about the possibility of contamination days after the fire.

This kind of ‘institutional indifference’ - a phrase adopted by Edward Daffarn, a survivor of the blaze - has been reiterated in both historic and current complacency by ministers, the local council and perhaps even our representatives in parliament.

Even now, suspect cladding in high-rise establishments persists. Government reports suggest that 40,000 people are currently at risk, but ministers have insisted that £200 million will be allocated to eradicate high-risk cladding, although it still remains unclear whether this is enough.

Furthermore, in a recent report authored by Graham Tomlin and summarized by Harriet Sherwood in The Social Legacy of Grenfell: An Agenda for Change,it is argued that the tragedy provides a once-in-a-generation opportunity to fix the country’s failing social fabric, through changes to democracy, welfare, and housing policies. There is still a long way to go.

www.beaveronline.co.uk | @thebeaveronline

Email us: features@beaveronline.co.uk

The Best Interview Ever: Peter Hitchens Contributing Writer

T

his is a summary of an interview I had with Peter Hitchens, the Conservative author and The Mail journalist, at the start of the year. It was something of a car crash, which is why I chose to shelve it and pretend it never happened.

The interview was empty, providing little to no new information, and left me with grappling with a feeling of failure. Self-pity is never a good look, especially when there’s no one else at fault. After sitting on the transcript for a while, I thought this failure might be of some interest to other students. I also felt I owed it to Peter to publish something, though I’m

The man, the myth...

sure the final product will not please him. You can treat this as something of a guide on how not to conduct an interview, especially if you find yourself in dialogue with someone as cantankerous as Peter. So, rather than the professional, well-crafted article I had anticipated, here is what actually happened.

The interview, if I can even call it that, lasted a little over thirty minutes.

I had hoped, in my naivety, that the conversation would provoke a compelling debate. After all, Peter is many things, but boring certainly isn’t one of them. Being a student of public policy, I thought it would be interesting to discuss some of his views on education and policing. I had read through his most famous book The Abolition of Britain, followed by The War We Never Fought. I had also been following his Twitter feed and had watched a dozen or so of his interviews. I had made my notes. I was prepared. Or so I thought.

The tone was set almost immediately. I began by introducing myself, telling him a little about what I wanted from the conversation and how I thought his views would perhaps be of interest to other students of public policy at the LSE, if not the wider student body. He cut me off halfway through this preamble, stating that I already had his attention and that he’d rather just get on with it. If he was unhappy with where the conversation was going, he’d let me know. Fine.

Following this, in a misguided attempt to get Peter to like me, I mentioned the incessant hate he receives on social media and his unyielding re-

silience in the face of such attacks. I thought by complimenting his character I could at least get him on my side.

At the time of the interview he had found himself at the heart of a Twitter storm, the result of a controversial article he had published in his weekly column for The Mail on Sunday. Peter seemed surprisingly untroubled.

Business as usual, I suppose. I realised quickly that he has no use for flattery.

Picking up on this misstep, I lead the conversation to education more broadly. We discussed the current state of education, something which he believes is in decline. We then discussed his rescinded invitation to speak at Southampton University.

Again, I gravitated towards a topic that ostensibly aggrandised his position as an honourable contrarian.

There is a natural reaction one has when dealing with someone as combative and earnest as Peter, and that is to offer an olive branch. I became more interested in keeping the dialogue civil when I should have been challenging his views.

After a tirade against Southampton University, bemoaning his cancelled invitation, Peter makes it clear that these subjects bore him. He has argued his case for too long. He admits that people aren’t buying his books and that with the exception of one hefty advance, he’s never made all that much from his publications.

This shouldn’t surprise anyone, as it is hard to imagine Peter doing anything merely for money or approval. In some ways he has given up on chang-

ing anyone’s mind. And yet, he keeps swinging.

He proclaimed: “I’ve “never seen a country more finished.” Peter, it would seem, is Britain’s obituarist.

“

Luke Jeffries

After lingering on education for a while, I broached the subject of drugs.

This is a topic on which Peter has very strong views, arguing that the war on drugs has never been attempted, addiction is a fantasy, and drug use should result in a prison sentence. I attempted to push him on these points, although he swatted them away as though it was a mild irritation.

I mentioned that I overheard two students talking in the LSE Library about smoking weed, to which he replied that he would be much happier hearing two students discussing a friend of theirs who had just been arrested for such a crime. I was hoping to use this anecdotal story to illustrate how common the use of cannabis is, and how pursuing the law to its fullest extent and locking up students may not be the best course of action. His conviction was astonishing. He assured me that if society starts enforcing its drug laws, fewer people will

11

use cannabis. Perhaps a few students locked up is acceptable collateral in the pursuit of a drugless society.

He concluded by telling me that he is done writing books. He then rails against Britain, delivering what anyone who is familiar with his work is the usual put down. He proclaimed: “I’ve never seen a country more finished.” Peter, it would seem, is Britain’s obituarist.

There was so much I wanted to say, and yet I failed to push back.

However you feel about Peter, there is no denying he is a fantastic communicator. He is completely at home in debate, and his biggest annoyance was probably my inability to adequately challenge him. This left him bored.

Shortly after the conversation I sent Peter an email. I thanked him for his honesty. His abrasive attitude and complete dismissal of my ill-formed and uninspired questions was exactly what I needed. Having spent so much of my time in a university environment, receiving a reality check, a reminder of what it’s like out there in the real world, was a lesson I won’t soon forget. For that, I am very grateful for the experience. Those thirty minutes have proven to be very important for me.

LSE Offers Guidance Amidst Continued Brexit Uncertainty

Eleanor Chapman Contributing Writer

T

he LSE has issued a statement regarding the future of EU and EEA nationals at the university, reassuring students of continued guidance throughout this uncertain Brexit period. The statement highlights resources available to international students seeking further information regarding their status, including the International Student Visa Advice Team (ISVAT), which can provide assistance through the settlement application process if necessary. The announcement also reinforces LSE’s credentials as a global university, promoting a campus atmosphere of inclusion and diversity — a welcome message in light of Britain’s increasingly insular and intolerant politics.

From 21 January 2019, the Home Office has begun implementing the EU settlement scheme in order to process applications for EU nationals who wish to remain in the UK after Britain's EU departure. The Home Office generally awards settled status to those who have lived in the UK continuously for five years (there are exceptions), which preserves their rights to live and work in the country, as well as access public services like education and healthcare. A more precarious pre-settled status will be granted to those who have been here for less than five years, which prevents them from leaving the country for more

than six months a year if they wish to gain settled status after five years.

If Britain exits the EU without a deal, then all EU nationals must have applied for settlement status by the 31 December 2020 in order to retain the right to live and work in the UK. If a deal is negotiated, the deadline is extended to the end of June 2021. This transition period is in place to allow the Home Office time to process applications to remain from EU nationals, regardless of how recently they arrived in the UK before the Brexit deadline.

Yet for those who struggle with the application process and fail to apply before the deadlines, the consequences could be monumental, although there is much uncertainty over what exactly will happen if individuals fail to apply. Under the ‘hostile environment’ promoted by Theresa May during her time at the Home Office, they could be stripped of their freedoms to work, live or travel in the UK and could face the threat of detention and deportation.

The application process has also proved problematic for many. The mobile application through which one can apply for settlement status is only available on Android operating systems, isolating people who are unfamiliar with technology or unable to access it — in particular, the elderly and the less financially able. Despite Home Office data assuring citizens that the process is relatively quick and easy– 75% of applicants reportedly

completed an identity check in under eight minutes-the application system is strikingly shoddy for a process with such life-changing consequences.

Some EU nationals are dismayed at having to go through an application process instead of a registration process, which many have interpreted as an attack on their self-perceived sense of Britishness. For those who have made the UK their home, being forced to apply to stay or risk being demonised by the threat of deportation is a damning indictment of the UK’s new found attitude to EU nationals. . The settlement scheme provides little certainty for the long-term prospects of EU citizens in the country.

In August 2019, Home Secretary Priti Patel threatened to end freedom of movement overnight in the case of a ‘no deal Brexit’, despite Prime Minister Boris Johnson pledging three weeks earlier that EU citizens in the UK would retain their rights.

Although Patel’s statements were quickly retracted by officials, who explained that freedom of movement would not end due to the endurance of EU law until otherwise repealed, the Home Secretary’s comments demonstrates the precariousness of EU national status.Conservative ministers.

The Windrush scandal demonstrated how easily the legal status of a resident can be overturned because of politicians bowing to increasing rightwing populist pressure, clamouring for a hardline immigration policy. The same forces are still at play, embold-

ened and legitimised by xenophobic rhetoric from leading political figures in the UK, including the prime minister himself.

Although consoling, LSE’s statement was also notably ambiguous.

The outcome of the Brexit process still hangs in the balance, preventing the government and LSE from releasing clear outlines to guarantee the certainty of EU nationals in the UK. This has largely been due to the by now infamous issue of the Irish backstop.

It remains a challenge that has eluded both May’s and Johnson’s cabinets, since it appears almost impossible to leave the customs union and avoid a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, which risks disrupting the delicate balance of peace between the two communities.

Johnson’s inability to solve the problem of Irish backstop is rumoured to be a cause of the recent collapse of talks between the UK and the EU, increasing the chance of a nodeal Brexit. This scenario would add to increasing anxiety for EU nationals because they will almost certainly face more difficulty travelling home and reuniting with their families in the event of no-deal Brexit.

However, on Saturday 12th October, the Prime Minister hinted at the possibility of a U-turn on previous government policy by refusing to deny that Northern Ireland could stay in the EU customs union after Brexit.

This could make a Brexit deal palat-

able to the EU, thus perhaps reducing the threat of a no-deal Brexit although it is too early to say for sure.

Regardless of the outcome, the uncertainty of the negotiation period is undoubtedly causing much worry and tension amongst the international community in the UK, therefore LSE’s provision of much-needed advice and support is a welcome gesture to aid students and to promote a feeling of inclusion on campus.

Yet the irony of the situation is that the more the Brexit process stalls, the more the country polarises.

Remainers are given hope of a fresh referendum by delays at each stage of process, whilst Brexiteers cement their perceptions of an elitist government subverting the ‘will of the people’. This polarisation is toxifying our political environment, and has led to a rise in xenophobic hate crime, creating an unwelcoming climate for international students who may wish to continue their stay in the UK. Perhaps the question is not whether EU nationals will be able to stay in the UK after Brexit, but whether they will even want to.

12 Features

Tuesday 15 October 2019 | The Beaver

Exclusive: Minouche Rejects Climate Emergency New data and student interactions with Director Dame Minouche Shafik suggest hesitation to take bold action on the climate emergency.

Features Editor

I

f one issue has mobilized LSE’s student community like no other in recent memory, it has been the climate emergency. From impressive strike actions during last year’s Lent term to the Climate Emergency Collective’s (CEC) recent engagement with the highest levels of LSE leadership, the issue has drawn broad support from across the student body, faculty, and staff. LSE has taken polished steps to acknowledge and address the crisis, and the school’s Grantham Institute produces world-leading environmental policy research. Yet a letter to a group of students from LSE Director Dame Minouche Shafik indicates that the school is not planning to declare a climate and ecological emergency, review its divestment position, or fast-track its commitment towards carbon neutrality. Similarly, data reviewed by The Beaver reveals that LSE remains closely linked to the fossil fuel industry in its funding and investment activities.

Student demands for LSE to take more proactive climate action match broader trends in the academic world. SOAS and Goldsmiths, Universities of London have both declared climate emergencies. King’s College London has joined the two in setting ambitious 2025 targets for carbon neutrality, and promised in 2017 to divest from fossil fuels.

SOAS announced that it had successfully divested from fossil fuels in 2018, meaning that it no longer holds investments in companies engaged in the extraction or refining of fossil fuels.

On the surface, LSE isn’t too shabby either: student campaign network People and Planet ranked the school 13th in the UK for sustainability. Among London universities, only City (5th), UAL (19th), and King’s (21st) were given the same “first-class” ranking. In 2015, LSE announced a Socially Responsible Investment Policy (SRIP), divesting from, among other things, companies significantly engaged in extracting coal and thermal tar sands. The LSE '2030 Strategy' lists “ensuring a sustainable future” as one of its guiding concerns. Attending the World Economic Forum in Davos last year, Shafik announced the creation of a global ‘climate alliance’ with other leading universities, including Harvard, Cambridge, Tokyo, and the Australia National University, although this has not yet materialised. The Beaver reached out to an LSE spokesperson on the progress of this group. Any comment will be amended to the online edition of this article.

Director wavers on student demands for climate action The Beaver can reveal that in a letter to LSE’s Climate Emergency Collective dated 30 September, Shafik specifically declined to

declare a climate and ecological emergency, saying that the school would instead focus on formulating a ‘Sustainable LSE’ action plan over the coming year. Shafik did indicate that the school would leave open the possibility for such a declaration in the future. Shafik similarly declined to answer demands for divestment from more common fossil fuels such as oil, and reiterated LSE’s 2050 goal for net-zero emissions rather than committing to the 2030 timeframe sought by activists.

“

The Beaver can reveal that [...] Shafik specifically declined to declare a climate and ecological emergency

“

Colin Vanelli

Shafik was responding to an open letter signed by over 275 LSE students, faculty, and staff which called for the declaration of a climate and ecological emergency, and with it, appropriate action. The letter also called for complete fossil fuel divestment, a more ambitious plan for reaching net-zero emissions, and an independent climate monitoring group to oversee LSE’s climate-related efforts. According to the CEC’s letter, declaring an emergency would be an important first step in devoting “all available channels to communicate the scale of the destruction that lies ahead and the urgency of change required”. Shafik responded that LSE would only

make “meaningful” declarations.

The CEC's letter had signed off saying: "Where it drags its feet we will take action to return it to the centre of attention. This is an emergency."

Their response is expected in the coming weeks.

Aspects of Shafik’s response, including the formation of a Sustainability Advisory Group chaired by Professor Lord Nicholas Stern, were previously released in an LSE statement. It is unclear whether Professor Stern’s group will be independent from the school, as the CEC sought.

The Director also announced that LSE is on track for net-zero Scope 1 and 2 emissions, the emissions directly controlled by LSE such as oncampus fuel and electricity, by 2030.

Data reveals extent of LSE climate exposure Data released by People and Planet in July 2019 raises concerns about LSE’s continued exposure and links to climate-polluting industries.

Based on LSE investment documents obtained through Freedom of Information (FOI) requests, the network estimates that LSE currently invests £6,220,800 in fossil fuel-related holdings – about 6.4% of its total endowment. The SRIP does not preclude investments related to more common fossil fuels, like oil. LSE accepted £180,000 in research funding from the fossil fuel industry and has directed just £53,761 towards renewables research since 2001.

Between 2009 and 2014 alone, the

school also accepted £72,959 in donations from the fossil fuel industry.

LSE’s Investment Sub-Committee, which oversees investment allocations and SRIP, was Chaired from August 2016 until July 31 2019 by a former director and treasurer of oil giant Royal Dutch Shell.

Despite pledging in the 2015 SRIP to “henceforth, indicate clearly what percentage of the School’s endowment and long-term surplus is placed in fossil fuels, distinguishing thermal coal and tar sands,”. LSE has not included such data in any subsequent annual financial reports reviewed by The Beaver. Responding to an FOI request in January 2019, LSE disclosed that holdings in SRIP-divested areas, which includes but is not limited to coal and thermal tar sands, had fallen from 1.7% to 1.4% of total holdings during the year ending on July 31, 2018. In the same request, the school said that identifying LSE’s total fossil fuel exposure within its investment accounts would be too costly to calculate within the £450 FOI limit.

With Bank of England Governor Mark Carney questioning the future of assets tied to fossil fuel production, the question remains whether or not LSE will take further action.

Non-Credit Courses Surge at LSE As funding shrinks, LSE increasingly relies on revenue from non-credit bearing courses.

Scott Carpenter

Contributing Writer

L

SE is quickly building up revenues from non-certificated “short courses,” going further than its peers as it seeks to diversify sources of income in the face of declining public funding for UK universities.

There is no formal definition in the UK of short courses, a catchall for courses often lasting just a few weeks long, or less, and which often don’t result in academic credit.

Yet the term appears prominently in LSE’s financial statements. In 2017/18, LSE made £37.2 million from “short courses” – more than 10% of its overall income and around 18% of its income from tuition fees. These shares have roughly tripled in the last decade.

In an era of lower public funding for universities, deriving more income from non-core activities could be a prudent strategy. “In general, given the uncertainty over the future of higher education funding, diversifying income is probably a sensible strategy for any university at the moment,” said Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI).

There is no UK-wide data on short courses, because the body in charge of data for the education sector — the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) — doesn’t collect them. However, HESA does collect data for each university on “non-credit bearing courses,” which often overlap closely, sometimes nearly identically, with short courses at many universities. This data shows that, over the period 2003/04 to 2017/18, LSE’s income from non-credit bearing courses as a percentage of overall income grew from 2.28% to 10.44%, even as the total UK average actually fell from 1.69% to 1.51%.

Even in terms of absolute size, LSE is overtaking some of its largest competitors. Last year, Oxford University reported £36.8 million from “professional and non-matriculated course fees” in its financial statement, which was less than LSE’s £37.2m in short courses.

Despite this, LSE is still a laggard compared to at least one university. London Business School made £48m from executive education alone (excluding its executive MBA programmes) last year, nearly a third of its overall income.

LSE’s flourishing summer school — the largest in Europe, it says — has been a key driver of revenue

Source: House of Commons Briefing Paper 7393, July 2019

www.beaveronline.co.uk | @thebeaveronline

from short courses. In 2016, LSE increased the capacity of its summer school by upping the number of sessions from two to three, dispersed over a nine-week period between June and August. Additional growth has come from larger numbers of students from universities in China and Australia choosing to participate in short-term study abroad sessions.

Declining uni“versity funding has been an obstacle for universities for years.

“

LSE has added new programmes to its summer school, such as ‘‘Foundations of Psychological Science” which launched this year, as part of efforts to “ensure our course programme reflects the range of subjects taught at LSE”.

Whilst the challenge is finding enough space to run them all, LSE has said: “the development of the new Centre Building at the heart of LSE’s campus will help tackle this.”

Besides its summer school, many short courses are intensive five-day experiences, part of LSE’s executive education offerings run by LSE faculty. This November 4-8, for example, students can take courses ranging from “Corporate Finance and Strategy” to “Regulation” to “Achieving Leadership Excellence,” aimed largely at executives and managers. Price tags range from £3,495 to £6,995.

Short courses long in the making LSE has long sought to increase its revenue from non-traditional

sources, including short courses, its joint TRIUM MBA programme with NYU Stern and HEC Paris.

In the 2009/10 annual accounts, then-Director of LSE, Howard Davies, celebrated the school’s financial surplus despite government funding cuts. “[T]he surplus is largely attributable to the success of what one might call ‘noncore’ activities,” he wrote, referring to activities ranging from the executive education programmes to joint University of London offerings. “It is very important for the School that these activities should remain healthy.”

Declining university funding has been an obstacle for universities for years.

In October 2010, in a bid to make the education sector more sustainable, the Browne Report ushered in years of sharp higher education spending cuts. Among other things, it recommended removing direct public funding for most undergraduate courses, and, to pay for it, eliminating the cap on tuition fees and allowing more student borrowing. The government acted on many of the recommendations. Within five years, universities’ core funding had shifted from government funding to student fees.

As a heavily research-oriented institution, LSE may have an additional incentive to grow its non-traditional sources of income. The UK faces a growing deficit in funding for research — more is spent on research at UK universities than is returned in income — and the current practice of cross-subsidising spending on research with income from teaching may not be sustainable, a report from HEPI warned in 2017.

“The LSE’s challenge is a shortfall in research – they get lots of tuition income, especially from international students, but their research grants have a big shortfall compared to the research they want to do,” said Hillman, the HEPI Director.

“This shortfall has to be made up from other sources.”

www.beaveronline.co.uk

Email us: features@beaveronline.co.uk

LSE continues to view its short courses programmes, in particular its growing summer school, as vital to its revenue diversification plans.

Increasingly, LSE also views the summer school and its short courses programs as intrinsic to the school’s identity, it hinted in last year’s annual financial statement.

Celebrating the enrolment of 7,247 students on LSE’s summer school programmes and an expanding range of executive masters programmes, LSE invoked its founding in the 1890s when it got its start through a programme of lectures.

LSE said: “Growth in these areas is consistent with our strategy to the School when education was offered through a range of lectures and parttime programmes.”

@beaveronline

to diversify income sources... [I] nterestingly this echoes the founding of the School when education was offered through a range of lectures and part-time programmes.” students on LSE’s summer school programmes and an expanding range of executive masters programmes, LSE invoked its founding in the 1890s when it got its start through a programme of lectures.

LSE said: “Growth in these areas is consistent with our strategy to diversify income sources... [I]nterestingly this echoes the founding of the School when education was offered through a range of lectures and parttime programmes.”

LSE said: “Growth in these areas is consistent with our strategy to diversify income sources... [I]nterest-

13

ingly this echoes the founding of the School when education was offered through a range of lectures and parttime programmes.”

Features is looking for staff writers: register online to contribute. beaveronline.co.uk

www.facebook.com/thebeaveronline/

FLIPSIDE VOL. 20 VOL. 20

OCT 15 FREE

New Black Mirror Special to be based on LSE

LSE Hockey heads off to a decent start

JACK WIPPELL

ICYMI: London Film Festival

I’m still waiting for LSE Alumni to put me in touch with Mick Jagger

JACK WIPPELL

I’m still waiting for LSE Alumni to put me in touch with Mick Jagger

You can find Jack on Spotify as Jack Risien.

Give him a listen!

I met Jack for our interview on the sixth-floor terrace of the shiny new Centre Building. It’s a peaceful bit of campus, with wildflower planters and plenty of sunshine. Jack, with his blond hair and guitar in hand, looked like the type of guy who would start playing Wonderwall without the slightest provocation at a house party. Thankfully, he has a bit more profundity to him than that.

Jack’s musical passion is a fresh perspective amidst the corporate, careerobsessed bubble of LSE. He told me: “I think if you find something you enjoy, why not try and pursue it?” He’s committed a lot of time and money to his music, slowly building himself a home studio over the course of five years. His past summer was spent recording his debut album, which still needs to be professionally mastered and produced. Nonetheless, some of the songs are already out on Spotify.

A classically trained pianist, Jack knows how to play double-bass, bass guitar, ukulele, and, naturally, classical guitar. In terms of sound, Jack transitioned from acoustic folk to indie as he’s matured. Yet his range remains versatile: his cover of Ariana Grande’s Dangerous Woman is heavenly. As someone who hates indie covers of pop songs, something about Jack’s voice resonates with me.

In the last year, Jack’s prospects seemed to be looking up. He’s re-

ceived interest from a record label and is content with whatever the outcome will be: “They haven’t promised anything but at least they’re going to listen and give some feedback.” In the meantime, he says: “I’m still waiting for LSE Alumni to put me in touch with Mick Jagger.”

Jack studies Philosophy, Politics, and Economics, one of LSE’s only fouryear degree programmes. He’s in third year, so he’ll graduate in 2021.

When I asked him what he’d do about school if his career took off in the next 6 months, he was adamant that is intent on definitely finishing his degree.

“I’m committed to PPE. I can’t leave PPE.” We agree that PPE is a cult. They have their own society, which is pretty well attended across all years, and the students seemingly all know each other. I met Jack in my first year when we both got invited to join the same secret society which was filled with mostly other PPE guys at the time.

In case you couldn’t tell from the fact that he does PPE, Jack hails from middle-class origins. “My parents aren’t super stuck up or anything… They’re not ultra-Conservative, never vote Labour types.” I prod him further and he admits, “they’re very Lib Dem-y.”

He finds his own politics harder to define. “I think I’m quite cliché, old school in describing myself as a pragmatist. If

someone makes a good point I’m going to try and not let any ideology ignore that point.” Naturally, we ended up on the political topic of the past four years of British politics: Brexit. He’s tidily summed it up; he thinks it’s good people are becoming more engaged in politics but that “everything else” is bad. He voted ‘Remain’ but, after the vote, felt that Brexit “should be done”.

However, given the absolute shambles that Brexit negotiations have turned out to be he’s now admitted to having quite a bit of doubt.

Jack’s very comfortable with changing his mind on things, a rare trait to find.

Other people might be die-hards for their opinions but he’s made a point of trying to base his opinion in some version of reality. It’s a far cry from the boy who went to Mass every Sunday, as well as devotion in school three times a week. He was even a churchwarden in the Church of England for a bit. When I asked how he fell out of the faith, he explains “I realised it was a delusion… to me, anyway. It just seemed a bit cultish.” He didn’t reflect on the experience with any profound emotion so I’d like to think he’s at peace with it.

People like me don’t tend to be friends with people like Jack. We’re very different, to say the least. But I’m glad I gave him a chance because his music’s bangin’ and he approaches all of our arguments with good faith.

quickfire questions Beer or cider?

Rum or gin?

Beer.

Rum, definitely. Havana Club, 7-year dark rum. But I would pick whiskey over both of those.

Rowing or cycling?

Rowing. I used to row. I did it at school and then I injured my knee so I don’t row anymore. It’s sad because I’m 6’4” so I’m good for rowing. The school was very sad.

SPORT

LSE HOCKEY ENJOY SOLID START TO 2019/20 BUCS SEASON GABRIELLE SNG Sport Editor

T

he night of Saturday 4th October saw vice-captain Amy Mackenzie, of the Women’s Hockey First team, scrambling to gather a full Women’s team for the London Universities Hockey Tournament to be held the next day. She exercised extreme persistence and determination in contacting everyone whom she knew to be part of or to have been a part of the Women’s hockey team via facebook messenger. Unfortunately, given that the tournament was a full day event and by extension a big commitment, she was unable to gather sufficient numbers to play the early morning matches.

When dawn broke, Lee Valley Hockey and Tennis Centre was brimming with sunshine and activity as university hockey teams arrived in excitement amidst sleepy yawns to hopefully claim the tournament trophies. The LSE Men’s team began the day eager to retain their winning title for the third year running. The Women’s team, conversely, had to mentally prepare themselves for anticipated annihilation, with only 9 players and no goalkeeper to play an 11-a-side game.

The final whistle blew for the

first games which saw the LSE Women’s Hockey team lose narrowly to Barts Ladies. Thankfully, the Men on the other hand, won without conceding any goals.

This continued in a similar fashion throughout the day, with fatigue and the fact that this was the first time the new squad had played together proving to be detrimental to the LSE Women’s Hockey Team.

But, the Men’s strength and positive spirits remained high throughout the day.

Ultimately, the Women’s team lost all their matches marginally despite slotting in a couple of goals in each game. Nevertheless, celebrations were still in order as the Men emerged as tournament champions for the third year in a row, with Kabir Mandair as the man of the match that day. Victory never felt so sweet for them as they never conceded a single goal throughout the whole tournament.

Well done boys!

The following week, the British Universities and Colleges Sport (BUCS) competition season began for both LSE Women’s and Men’s Hockey First and Second teams.

The tide took a positive turn for the Women’s teams as the first and second team each soared to

victory with comfortable wins of 6 -1 against Surrey and 4 - 2 against University of East London respectively. The Men’s 2s also smashed Barts 5 - 1. Despite having played tremendously well and fighting valiantly until the final whistle, Portsmouth triumphed as the stronger team over LSE’s Men’s 1s. Nonetheless, we are still proud of the effort the Men’s 1s put into the game and hope they rest up in time to make a comeback in their next one!

Special shout out to the Ladies teams for bouncing back with their respective BUCS wins in spite of the disappointing losses at the pre-season tournament. It just goes to show how we should never let our failures define our future. Let’s get it Girls! Once again, congratulations to the Men’s Preseason tournament team for retaining the Championship title and the Men’s 2s for beating Barts in season.

All the best for the upcoming matches LSE! Let’s hope our wins will be more consistent than our attendance at Zoo this year!

LSE Hockey Men’s Team claiming their winning pre-season trophy for the 3rd time on Sunday, 6th October 2019.

LSE Hockey Women’s 1s and 2s Teams photographed in early 2019.

Written a match report? Any AU news and views? Fancy a regular spot in the Sport section?

Add a post at www.beaveronline.co.uk under the Sport category and see how your name looks in print.

Easy like a Sonntag Morgen.

LSE MEN’S FC JOIN IN 24-HOUR CHARITY FOOTBALL MATCH Sam Taylor Staff writer

T

he Men’s Football Club (FC) are not always regarded as the most decorous club on the LSE campus; that could be saying more about other clubs than it does ourselves. On Friday we decided to do our bit for good. Despite 90 minutes on a Wednesday usually being enough for most, for a special cause we participated in a 24 hour football match all in aid of the fight against cancer. The match was organised by Joe.co.uk as part of ‘Stand Up 2 Cancer X Joe.co.uk’.

It was an earlier start than normal for the majority of us, with a 7:30AM meet. In spite of this, there was an impressive turnout from the LSE boys, so much so that they had to split us into two opposing teams. The cause alone was motivation for most. For the vain among us, the match

was live streamed and put up on Joe’s socials (this may have helped with the early start). We were given the last 2 hour slot of the 24 hours and the score stood at ‘Whites’ 119 - 117 ‘Oranges’ when we took to the pitch. The ‘Whites’ were full of LSE talent with the Club Captain, Social Sec and 4th & 5th team captains to name a few. Not to mention the new 6th team keeper, Quinn Kiernat, who would go on to win Man of the Match (MOTM).

The game kicked off at 8am sharp and with most of the ‘Oranges’ still in bed, the ‘Whites’ quickly extended their lead. There was some great football being played by both teams, with goals prevented only by some valiant defending and superb goalkeeping.

With fitness levels looking ridiculously dire, the game started to open up. It was pretty much end to end stuff from here

the scoop AU lout visits art museum by mistake, discovers fragility of self We all know pieces of art which stir us deeply. When we gaze upon the brushstrokes, we see something that corresponds with our inner lives, our woes, our loves, our mortality. But for AU drinking ‘legend’ Scott Johnson, no artwork had yet produced anything other than a scoff and a ‘lol gay.’ That was until he wandered into the Tate Modern, believing it was a massive gym. “I was standing there in the foyer, like, bro, where the flip is the treadmill?”

Johnson recounts. Rather than asking any of the “hipster cretins” where he might find the exercise machine, Johnson began walking around. Then he saw it.

“I was shocked bro. I looked at the sadness on this bird’s face and thought about every nerd I’d ever given a hard time. It was,

like, lowkey, an epiphany.” Far from being just an intellectual and emotional reaction, Johnson found the effect of art to be distinct physical transformation.

“I grew this scraggly beard and started wearing horn-rimmed spectacles. I switched my LSE trackies for corduroys and my skin tight workout gear for a button down and a cardigan.”

His new girlfriend, dubbed ‘Yoko’ by his ex-team mates, is seriously impressed by the transition. “Scott had never read a book besides SuperFreakeconomics and his favourite film was Stepbrothers. Now he doesn’t stop reading up on Dadaism and he hasn’t quoted a Will Ferrell film in weeks!” she noted. Johnson told BeaverSports, “I can hardly see off pints anymore, geez, I’d much rather settle down with a glass of wine and watch French cinema before getting an early night.”

on out with everyone (excluding JC and Alfie) sensing that there were goals to be scored. The ‘Oranges‘ then fought their way back level courtesy of wonder goals from Ed Laing (3rd Team) and Harry Barber (2nd Team) - fair play lads. After this, it was goals upon goals upon goals with some very weary legs and lacklustre defending.

So much so that it all blended into one large free-for-all with most players desperate to get on the scoresheet. The ‘Oranges’ were trying to do that extra bit for charity and let JC finally bag the win but he did his absolute best to stop that from happening. It was, however, nice to see his 6s teammate Miles McCollum on the scoresheet with a well taken bullet header from a corner.

As we moved towards the end of the 2 hours, the game grew tense with neither team willing to give in. ‘Oranges’ had a

narrow lead but the ‘White’ attacks were relentless. With seconds on the clock and the ‘White’ goalkeeper up for a corner, Ed once again took it upon himself to pull off the downright outrageous and put one away from the halfway line to truly kill the game. ‘Oranges’ ran out 131-129 as winners.

The idea behind the ‘24 hour match’ was to show just how relentless cancer is, a message that definitely came across at full time. A huge thank you to the boys who showed up; there was some fantastic football on show and the Men’s FC should definitely be proud of the performance they put in. It was a great event to be a part of - what better way to start your Friday morning than with two hours of football?

I just hope everyone’s legs recover in time for Saturday’s fixtures!

w/ seth rice

Management student tries, fails, to pull at Zoo “Girls just don’t wanna talk about costing and budgeting anymore,” complains Derbyshire-born management whiz Jeff Hogben. “For those of us who actually enjoy econometrics and don’t necessarily think LSE100 is a bad thing, finding someone to go home with is becoming impossible.”

Taking aim at London’s fast food culture of instant gratification, Hogben criticised the better sex for their lack of dedication to the flow of funds and the financial decisions of the household. “These things are important,” claimed Hogben, “when a woman is selecting a mate, why wouldn’t she want someone who can effectively combine management styles in a manner that stimulates profits and motivation?”

I’m sorry Jeff, but as the

films of Eric Rohmer and the novels of Françoise Sagan demonstrate, women inevitably find love with French anthropologists who smoke too much.

LSE Men’s Rugby team sing ‘Down It Zulu Warrior’ for 10,000th time The LSE Men’s Rugby team have impressed the community not only by raising the volume of their rendition of Down It Zulu Warrior, but also by reaching the remarkable milestone of chanting the classic 10,000 times. The 10,000th spirited performance came after fresher James Lawson missed a simple try conversion on the half-way point and was ordered to see off a pint of cider at the pub after the game.

“Getting to 10,000 is something I never thought I’d be a part of” claims an unnamed third year. “If you’d have told me when I was still

doing A-Levels that in a matter of years, I’d be singing the same song over and over every Wednesday whilst spilling pints on other people, I wouldn’t have believed it.”

When asked how they would celebrate, the rugger chaps replied unanimously that they would go to the curry mile, don ties from their private school days, and begin work on the next 10,000.

Congratulations boys, here’s to 10,000 more!

...yes, this is fiction

L F F

ONDON

ILM

The King – fails to surpass mere retelling Over the past three years we have seen the unprecedented rise of Timothée Chalamet in Lady Bird, Beautiful Boy and Call Me By Your Name - all critically acclaimed films.

This year, the Oscar-nominated actor blesses us with his interpretation of Henry V in David Michôd’s The King. The historical drama is based on a series of Shakespeare plays called ‘The Henriad’ that follow Henry V’s ascension to the throne as he grapples with betrayal and war - notably in the Battle of Agincourt. While England returns victorious, Michôd certainly does not as he fails to offer new insight and originality to an already exhausted plot line.

Though we can admire Michôd’s efforts to produce an inherently

ESTIVAL

Secondly, the film offered nothing innovative to other historical retellings. Michôd’s attempts to bring originality are limited to the comedic scenes of Joel Edgerton’s character (John Falstaff) The film fails in many ways. First, which along with Chalamet’s the only way The King would scenes are what provide true ever surpass Branagh’s or Ol- momentum to the plot. ivier’s adaptations of Henry V would be through a strong cast.

While we have already established Chalamet’s dazzling acting abilities, Robert Pattinson is hugely miscast as The Dauphin and his poor attempt at a French accent only triggers ridicule and mockery in the cinema. The major downfall here is that in want of a strong cast, Michôd has overlooked the fact that a less-known French-speaking actor would have executed the role with more finesse and integrity. In this way, Lily Rose Depp’s performance as Catherine de Valois offers an impressive and elegant contrast. violent ‘mud, blood, and guts’ film, it is Chalamet’s mesmerising performance which is - dare I say it flawless. His distinguished talent is far superior to this mediocre, underwhelming production.

Hope Gap – William Nicholson’s most soul-bearing albeit far from perfect production Having drawn inspiration from the emotional breakdown of his own parent’s marriage, Nicholson stressed his personal ties to the plot from the outset. Despite his past experience as the screenwriter for Les Misérables and Gladiator, Nicholson declared: “I am a words man, not a picture This witty film explores the destruc- man, but for this film, I had to betion of a 29-year long marriage come a picture man.” when Edward (Bill Nighy) announces his plans to imminently leave Unsurprisingly, Nicholson nails his wife Grace (Annette Benning), the script, cleverly interweaving having fallen in love with another comedy throughout the plot makwoman. The film progresses by ob- ing it marvellously witty. While serving the ruinous impact this has the comedic element demonon Grace and their son Jamie (Josh strates Nicholson’s ingenuity, the plot itself is unoriginal; it fails O’Connor). to offer a new take on a classic “Some people sympathise with divorce drama. Considering that Grace, and others with Edward. Eve- Nicholson regards himself as a ryone, however, loves the boy which “words man”, it is a surprise to see that some lines appear out of is great because he’s me.”

This month at the London Film Festival, William Nicholson released his autobiographical film “Hope Gap”. I had the wonderful fortune of being involved in discussion with the director himself to examine his personal inspiration behind its production.

touch with the characters themselves.

At one point we are inclined to interpret Grace as a narcissistic psychopath. At another, we are encouraged to sympathise with her.

There are undoubtedly failures throughout the film, and his attempts to get in touch with his artistic side have not been executed to the fullest extent.

The use of poetry throughout as a means of exploring the depth of human emotions adds flavour to the script. Nonetheless, this is overshadowed by the need for the plot itself to offer substance.

REVIEW covers food, film, television, and music.

If you want to share your thoughts on (or warn readers against) something you’ve seen, listened to or tasted, submit your reviews to beaveronline.co.uk We look forward to reading your hot takes.

(People with bad taste need not apply.)

- Amber Iglesia and Zehra Jafree, Review Editors

Marriage Story – Tender, raw and authentic I have been itching to write a 5-star review and this heartbreaking yet hilarious Kramervs-Kramer-style divorce drama has come along just in time.

Baumbach makes the divorce even harder for us as an audience by devoting equal measures of empathy to both characters, encouraging us to fall in love with each of them. We find ourselves sympathising with Nicole’s desire to explore the full range of her artistic capabilities and also with Charlie’s eagerness to relate to their son in a way that only Nicole manages to do.

Noah Baumbach’s Marriage Story explores the emotional disintegration of the relationship between actress Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) and theatre director Charlie (Adam Driver) as they grapple with the idea of leading artistic lives independent of one another.

Baumbach’s thoughtful, empathetic, and authentic approach is Marriage and divorce are com- perhaps what makes this one of mon themes at this year’s Lon- the most timeless films of this don Film Festival. Marriage year; his open-hearted honesty Story, with its reassuring relat- will surely be noticed. ability, easily surpasses other entries that share these themes, Johansson, Driver, and Baumlike Hope Gap. bach have never been so exquisite and spirited as they are here making Marriage Story an extremely good contender for the awards to come.

Le Mans ‘66 – forget Ford vs.

Ferrari, more like Damon vs.

Bale To win a race, all you need is “the right man behind the wheel”. James Mangold’s Le Mans ‘66 reminds us of this throughout as it recounts the story of car manufacturer Caroll Shelbey (Matt Damon) and race driver Ken Miles (Christan Bale), who made history building Ford’s revolutionary first race car.

Matt Damon and Christian Bale are phenomenal in this film, but the real man behind the wheel is James Mangold. He explores the two men’s friendship with such profundity that it becomes essential to the plot.

Le Mans ‘66 draws you in. You’re immersed in the drama and tension building up to the final race. However, what was most admirable was how the film was not the over-glorified Hollywood movie you might expect with two A-list Hollywood actors.

But let’s not forget the spotlight of the film. The race scenes are some of the most exhilarating sequences I’ve seen in a long time. Mangold’s immersive approach puts you in the passenger seat alongside Miles.

His vision takes you to the finish line, providing all the sensations you’d expect from watching a racing film.

Greed – Are you not entertained?

Michael Winterbottom’s Greed is a hilarious satire starring Steve Coogan as Sir Richard “Greedy” McCreadie, a multinational fashion tycoon. It’s Winterbottom’s most comical and impactful film, and it deals with the intoxication of consumerism.

The film is oriented around McCreadie’s exuberant 60th birthday party, where he brings Rome to the island of Mykonos. He embodies Maximus Decimus Meridius, the mighty gladiator himself and even asks, “Are you not entertained?”

It appears clear as the movie progresses that it is leading up to a certain climax as we learn of the growing hatred people have of McCreadie’s selfish personality.

His disgusting treatment of the

Syrian refugees on the island and his brutal exploitation of women working in the garment industry in Sri Lanka only serve to accentuate the audiences repulsion towards McCreadie’s obnoxiousness.

While the film tackles important issues surrounding consumerism, the refugee crisis, sweatshops, and illegal working conditions, this dour focus does not stop it from being hilariously funny, and comfortably so. While McCreadie encourages us to laugh with him, we end up laughing at his self-centred, egotistical, and narrow-minded perception of the world. It’s hard not to admire Winterbottom’s attempt to tackle sensitive political issues cleverly entangled with humour in a way that still has an impact. However,

I’m afraid the humour surrounding James Blunt, Eastenders, and Simon Cowell might fall flat outside of a British audience.

Bangladesh, but this didn’t make it into the final edit.

Regardless, his critique is received loud and clear.

Many aspects of the film were censored, which is of no surprise, given the strong ties to the owner of Topshop and Topman, Philip Green.

Originally, Winterbottom compared the net worth of Zara and H&M owners to the amount they pay their workers in Myanmar and

By Amber Iglesia Check out Amber’s full reviews of the London Film Festival online at beaveronline.co.uk

SOCIAL Cliteracy class 3. Flick your magic bean

If you’ve somehow misunderstood my overt innuendo, let me be totally clear: this week we are going to chat about one of my favourite things…MASTURBATION!

Internalised guilt and shame colour many people’s perceptions and explorations of masturbation. I remember as a young girl discovering the pulse of warmth and gratification that came from rubbing up on any soft surface. However, unlike my friend, I didn’t have the forethought to keep my findings a secret. Upon noticing my criminal activity, my mother took me aside and sternly told me that this was not to be done again. To say the least, I was terrified.

I couldn’t understand what might be wrong about this ‘thing’ – the outcomes seemed good. The only way I could rationalise my mother’s warning was that this activity had some perilous cosmic effect. I concluded somehow that rubbing my private area would lead to the most horrible thing I could fathom – my grandma’s death.

This guilt followed me throughout most of my teens and took years to unlearn, even after my grandmother had died of natural causes. Even as I matured and understood the irrationality of my logic, I still felt a pang of disgrace immediately after feeling the rush of pleasure. I was convinced there was something wrong with me, that I was an overly sexual weirdo.

This is a change of tone from Miss Pussy’s usual sultry spirit; it’s important. Sex and pleasure in all their forms are fantastic, but still complicated. For me, this column is an exercise in shedding self-judgement.

Now back to the alluring innuendos. Why masturbate? Said no one ever, but even so let me give you a couple of carnal cases in favour:

1. Orgasming and sexual stimulation have been shown to reduce stress, help you sleep better, and improve body image.

2. A study published in The Journals of Gerontology found that sexual activity, including masturbation, is correlated with better cognition in older age. So, to all of you hoping to run FTSE 100 companies into your 70s, get rubbing.

Illustration: Raphaëlle Camarcat

My week as Felix

3. Contrary to masturbation’s portrayal in films, it isn’t all about the orgasm. You can get some serious sexual pleasure with teasing and touching, exploring what makes you feel good.

4. Most importantly, masturbation helps you get to know yourself, to know what you like and what to ask for with a partner. And let me tell you, that is really fucking sexy.

As I draw this edition to a close, let me tell you about a moment of sexual confidence in my teens. I’m sixteen and at a music festival with friends, we are all a bit tipsy and inevitably the topic of sex comes up with a turn to masturbation. My female friends are expressing their curiosity about the activity. None of them have done it before. I pipe up to say, ‘I do it.’

After a couple of probing questions, which I clumsily answer, the topic is abandoned. Then a couple of weeks later, the girls find me to tell me that they’ve all tried it and couldn’t believe what they had been missing. ‘We’ve called it Discovering America,’ one girl said.

Don’t forget your homework for this week. Check out O School’s article on tips for masturbation: bit.ly/2VA6Rml and the How Cum podcast for hilarious guidance on how to get that big ‘O’: bit.ly/35toxEM

by Ross Lloyd

I talked to other beavers; they had the same experience. It’s like the case of phantom limbs – you know your face isn’t there, but something in you compels you to smile. That same irksome feeling binds your id to the beaver’s ego. I kid you not, I started responding to “Felix” or “Beaver”, or, from general course students, “weird fat bear”. Walking towards the library, as the sun was setting on my beaver-back, I saw my shadow projected before me. I For me, the strangest thing about dress- saw that recognisable silhouette – the two ing as a beaver for a week-and-a-day was little ears popping out from a round head. that being tired or uncomfortable in your I was the beaver. job makes you feel like you’re betraying the people you’re there to take pictures Identity crisis aside, I found the job, in with. It isn’t enough to wear the beaver some ways, wholesome. People love masmask, you feel the need to smile under- cots. They bring an incalculable amount neath. The smile isn’t even genuine: it’s of joy to students, parents, teachers, and pained and it tires your cheeks and turns children. People love taking pictures with your eyes into two orbs concealed under you. You are a celebrity on campus. You the dead eyes of a friendly campus mas- bring stifled smiles to more sceptical people, and summon childlike wonder in cot.

What is it like to be a sweaty and uncomfortable worker, but at the same time a strange looking beaver man (or woman) bobbing around campus extracting smiles from students and professors?

When Karl Marx called for workers of the world to unite or break chains or whatever, did he imagine the self-same workers clad in a sagging potato sack mildly resembling an angst-ridden beaver?

by Pussy Galore

others. I had at least four Canadian dads take selfies with me just to embarrass their children. I hugged grandparents in front of the globe.

Construction workers seemed to love me too. One guy came to me, having had a hard day, and asked for a hug. I gave it to him and he seemed genuinely happier.

That made me happier.

There is a fine balance between the cynicism of LSE in finding a mascot costume on Amazon (it’s from Amazon – you can buy Felix for £95) and the happiness brought to people on campus. I volunteered for the job, but then again, it is a job. I’m not just monetising a furry fetish. Some people have no idea why the beaver is a mascot at LSE, and it is utterly contrived. LSE has always struggled with finding ‘institutional personality’. The face of our school is literally three fuck-

ing letters. But I’m grumpy, and although the costume (never washed) stank by the end, I enjoyed my week as the beaver.

Tuesday 15 October editor: Analía Ferreyra

lifestyle/advice/satire New Black Mirror Special to be Based on LSE

by C. Hewson

Following the success of interactive adventure Bandersnatch in 2018, Netflix has announced plans for a brand new ‘choose your own adventure’ special inspired by LSE. Bandersnatch, under the umbrella of the Black Mirror anthology, follows programmer Stefan as he navigates the world of commercial video game development. The protagonist is guided by the decisions of the audience to one of five possible endings, all the while facing the tensions and cruelties of a harsh 80s setting depicted by screenwriter Charlie Brooker.

The upcoming film will, in contrast, have viewers take on the role of a first

year student at the LSE. There will again be multiple paths with the possibility for the main character to end up working in a variety of places such as a fintech start-up, an armsdealership consultancy, or a computational neurology policy think tank.

There are also reports that the piece will feature a secret hidden ending where it is actually possible to achieve a quiet, fulfilling happiness in oneself and one’s life’s work. It has not yet been confirmed if this is attainable, however. (Author’s note: if anyone does work it out, please let me know).

writers and researchers working on the show in order to help them craft an authentic LSE adventure. A spokesperson for the organisation that produces the twisted, dystopian, often depressingly bleak experiences said, “We are delighted to be working with Netflix”.

LSE will provide workshops to the

sexual-groundworks.definitions (ep. 2) It’s not news that sex makes for a great conversation topic. People love chatting, gossiping, and joking about it; every other sitcom is based on the premise that people love sex talk. Take LSELove, the Beaver’s Social Section, or the 20% of all internet traffic concerned with deciding on the MCU’s sexiest Chris as evidence.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean we’re all sexperts. In fact, despite our obsession with all things sexual, our ignorance starts with the very definitions.

A somewhat-dated biology textbook, for example, might define sex as “A penis penetrating a vagina until ejaculation.” Even looking past its clinical sound, this definition is pretty limited: 1. The penis-vagina requirment leaves out instances of same-sex, intersex, or trans sex.

2. The complete disregard for the female orgasm prioritises male pleasure over female and implies that sex is mainly about reproduction. This is not only sexist, it also ignores the obvious fact that both men and women can derive pleasure from sex.

3. Penetration might be important when a penis is involved, but it’s less crucial when there are no penises to hand. Should we only count lesbian encounters as sex if they involve penetration? What makes penetration so essential?

A case of “penis penetrating vagina until ejaculation” (#LoveMeTender) definitely sounds like an instance of sex, but it’s not a comprehensive definition; it’s too narrow.

But when we remove problematic limitations –- penis/ vagina, orgasm, penetration –- we’re left with a rather vague “involving genitals.” This isn’t very conclusive, and also goes against our intuition that some practices like oral, fingering, handjobs and so on may be sexual without qualifiying as full-blown sex.

We should care precisely because of bad definitions.

While it’s hard to find a good conception of sexuality, we are vulnerable to unconsciously accepting bad ones. Without ever thinking too hard about it, we come to believe that sex is what sitcoms and biology textbooks say it is.

This is particularly bad because our sexuality is inseparably linked to our understanding of it. How we view sex affects our practices; our definitions don’t simply reflect our sex life, they also shape it.

Take penis-penetrates-vagina. In effect, this definition does more than misportray sex: it prunes our sexuality to patriarchal and heteronormative standards.

This helps explain why sex is often bad, why many men are selfish in bed and many women take passive roles, why we get stuck at genitals and disregard other body

by Merlin Krzemien

parts. The supposed linear clarity of what ought to happen during sex leaves no room for experimentation The consequences of bad definitions can be more cruel, more manifest. Bad definitions end up informing in legal documents. Not long ago, democratic states had legal marital rape and criminalised homosexuality. Definitions can do harm.

That’s precisely the reason why shouldn’t give up on a serious sexual discourse: to debunk harmful misconceptions and be more critical of bias and prejudice.

PART B

Tuesday 15 October

editor: Maya Kokerov

arts & culture

The Freedom of the Nightclub: Art and Politics at DRAF’s Annual Evening of Performances

by Dylan Stevens

On 3 October 2019, Ministry of Sound played host to something well outside its usual fare.

While the pulsating thrum of techno and grime could be heard down the street, the London superclub became a gallery, the site for this year’s Annual Evening of Performances, a performance art event by the David Roberts Art Foundation (DRAF). Invited guest curator Louise O’Kelly – founder and curator of the London performance art festival Block Universe – had DRAF eschewing convention in multiple ways, celebrating the diversity and radical experimentation that is ongoing in London’s fascinating performance art scene.

The choice to host a performance art event in a nightclub is not new but, curatorially, O’Kelly has responded to the space in an engaged way, highlighting the important role nightclubs play as spaces for freedom of expression for women, working-class people, the LGBTQ+ community, and people of colour. It is no coincidence that in our modern conservative times there has been increased restriction of London’s nightlife and, in particular, the spaces that provide such freedom and opportunity for London’s many burgeoning artists that may fall into these categories.

O’Kelly, writing for thisistomorrow, discusses her choice of venue and explains that she “... felt it was important to highlight the necessity of these spaces as an important meeting ground and wellspring for creativity, radicalism, and uncensored self-expression.”

Having championed performance art like DRAF in London for years, O’Kelly is no stranger to this kind of curation. She has helped provide a platform for a number of queer artists and artists of colour that have previously operated in a nightclub context, including Victoria Sin, Nkisi, and Last Yearz Interesting Negro/Jamila Johnson-Small, all of whom have performed in iterations of O’Kelly’s festival Block Universe.

The line-up of artists presented by O’Kelly and DRAF is no different, featuring a diverse array of performers whose work is leant an engaging and fascinating edge in a nightclub context. Kai Isaiah Jamal, in a transfixing spoken word performance Snap My Legs and Ask Me

to Crip Walk – All of the Times I’m Dancing/I’m Dying For You, uses queer nightlife subculture as a thematic device for a personal exploration of the difficulties experienced by trans people of colour. He both reflects on and responds to a tendency for conversations in a club to focus on the behaviours and aesthetics of the club itself, but uses this language in a way that reaffirms the importance of the club as a place for free expression.

Returning to the main performance space, we are greeted with signs that read “NO TRAINERS, NO TRACKSUITS”, an all too familiar sight, a bit of subtle social engineering typical of bourgeois London nightspots. The signs stand in keen contrast to the shamelessly proletarian rhythms of The Streets playing above us. It’s all part of Hannah Perry’s Smoking Area, a scripted piece that combines a voiceover examining working-class British masculinity, smoke and installation elements, and a dance performance that tests the limits of performer Lewis Walker.

The class politics explored by Perry are an uncomfortable topic for many in nightlife: it’s an industry that is by nature an indulgence, and not traditionally friendly to those that do not fit the image of glamorous utopia that clubbers often seek. But in an age where boiler suits, New Balance trainers, and Fila tracksuits are stockstandard DnB-night clubwear, Perry and her

collaborators imagine a nightlife of inclusivity and liberation, where traditional class signifiers are worn with pride and free of judgement, not as costumes by wealthy punters.

The evening ends with a multimodal collaboration by artists Haroon Mirza and Jack Jelfs, DJ and grime pioneer Elijah, and rapper GAIKA, under the moniker The Wave Epoch. The group presented a new iteration of their piece Last Dance, an exploration of technology and spirituality devised during a residency at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider. It was previously shown at Brighton Festival, and takes on fascinating new dimensions in a club space. Last Dance’s vision of technological mysticism in a distant age is in many ways related to the themes in club music: an emphasis on the transcendental effects of the lights, beats, and freedoms a club provides. The ecstatic experience of raving takes physical shape as GAIKA performs like a kind of grime shaman. As the performance continues and audience members dance themselves away, we find our egos dissolving in the presence of the scientific rave gods. It is a vision of a club culture that is liberating and revelatory, and the perfect thematic end to the evening’s performances.

Heading out of Ministry, I don’t find myself feeling the typical calm and erudite sensation of having been in a gallery all evening, but instead the worn-out ecstasy of coming out of a sweaty club after four hours.

O’Kelly and the artists she has assembled have responded dynamically to their location. This year’s Annual Evening of Performances celebrates the club as a legitimate space both for performance and for the making of art, and presents a vision of young art in London that feels closely tied to its community. It acknowledges how nightclub aesthetics can allow for the sincere expression of self, and the art world’s performance and postulating erode as Kai Isaiah Jamal performing “Snap my legs and ask me to crip walk. All we embrace the hedonisof the times I’m dancing/dying for you”, 2019, Courtesy: DRAF Art/Twit- tic liberation of clubbing. ter

Femininity is not a weakness

by Maya Kokerov

In 2019, women are widely accepted in the Western world as equally valuable in potential, ability, and rights relative to men, in contrast to men’s history of privilege. But is this only a formality?

‘I am this’ and ‘I believe this’ are not the same thing. You cannot label yourself a feminist and at the same time deride those who choose to mentally or physically distance themswelves from stereotypically masculine traits. Femininity in all genders should not be spurned.

default, and women and nonbinary people have made vast amounts of progress, but masculinity is still seen as the norm.

What’s worse, this view is often perpetuated by women, breeding animosity between feminists.

Some will support women irrespective of the gendered traits they exhibit but others believe Gap recently launched a ‘gender neutral’ kids they must appear as ‘serious’ as possible to navicollection which actually set masculinity as the gate a world dominated by masculinity. standard of neutrality. It completely eradicated any vestige of ‘girly’ products. ‘Gender neutral’ Political figures are expected to dress smartly in apparently doesn’t include pink or dresses, but it order to hold a firm ground of respect against does include blue and trousers. their masculine counterparts. Female politiFemininity is simultaneously cherished and dismissed: it sells like sex but is rarely taken seriously. Exaggerated curves, pouty lips, and Rapunzel-esque hair are lavished plaudits by the media. Young girls are socially conditioned to mould their appearance into some version of the ‘feminine ideal’ which models, actresses, and now influencers drip-feed down their throats. Digital and traditional media representations condition us to associate the feminine with the beautiful.

cians are given the impossible task of hiding any traces of their physicality under the least ‘provocative’ (i.e. the driest and the baggiest) pantsuits known to tailors. The goal is to appear as masculine as possible whilst also managing to adhere to commonly accepted heteronormative standards of attractiveness.

Women need a sexless image in order to hold their own but they still have to be attractive: they need to be gender neutral without being too masculine looking. Let’s not forget the time when Angelina Jolie’s nipples got more attenIn post-Weinstein feminism, we’re pursuing the tion than her UN conference speech. dream of solidarity across intersections more successfully than ever before. We’re challeng- Yet, at award shows and charity galas, women ing the view that cis, straight, white men are the celebrities are encouraged to weaponize their

femininity to compete for media acceptance.

In pop culture, a physical display of traditional girliness remains a coveted tool to gain sexual attention and money, desired both by the mass media, and the powerful men who control it.

The line between appearing vulgar and possessing ‘acceptable’ feminine traits isn’t simply blurred, it has already been erased.

It’s why young women use the phrase “I’m not like other girls”: in order to derive some illusory power by moving closer to the realm of masculinity. The aim is to be taken seriously by separating themselves from the perceived weakness of feminine people. Those women don’t want to be ‘like other girls’ because femininity is associated with shallowness, narcissism, decadence, bitchiness, being ‘boy crazy’… the list drags on.

When we keep attributing such characteristics to femininity we contribute to its social devaluation.

Women can wear lipstick and read; cook and work in an office; be ‘down to earth’ and wear short skirts. There’s no mutually exclusive relationship between capability and ‘girly’ interests.

Femininity does not make you weaker. Masculinity does not make you stronger. The phrase ‘one of the boys’, tossed around by hipsters and bad feminists alike, needs to die.