Archive This article is from our archive and might not display correctly. Download PDF
Images This article has had its images hidden due to a legal challenge. Learn more about images in the Nouse Archive
Thursday 7th February - Men's Committee? Probably not a good idea
In light of the recent controversy over whether women's meetings should be open to male students, I believe this is a terrific opportunity to get a Men's Committee going under the radar.
Think of the possibilities - men could gather exclusively and do manly things, like reading FHM whilst doing push ups with one arm and drinking a pint with the other. Men would have a place where women would not be allowed. They'd be able to counter today's metrosexual, gender-equality based society. They'd be able to reclaim some pride after losing out to women everywhere else.
The gymnasium, once a festival of testosterone - has lost it's status as a manly place since the recent takeover by girls looking to shed that extra pound by dossing around on a cross trainer for twenty minutes. Even the mens' toilets in Ziggy's are overrun by the lady types on a typical Wednesday night.
Give the men a place on campus where they can have phone conversations that last less than three minutes. Give them a Men's Committee.
If on reading this you think that the whole idea is ridiculous - you'd be right. Any hint of a formation of a significant mens only committee on campus would be under fire immediately. It would be shunned for being sexist, misogynist and backward thinking.
In which case, why was there such a fracas over the Women's Committee vote this year? Those campaigning for a women only committee had circulated frankly offensive notes around campus suggesting that all men are rapists - a claim that is both ridiculous and irrelevant to the motion in question. Much like the posters condemning the male populous of YUSU presidents in fact. I very much doubt that in her early years, Margaret Thatcher threw a tantrum and told her colleagues that she didn't want any men in her meetings.
Women aren't the introverted, weak characters that they once were perceived as being back in the 1800's. For those against the motion to attempt to block men from entering Women's Committee meetings is simply reactionary and unacceptable in today's society, and this has been seconded by the student population on campus.
Tuesday 23rd January - IAAF run from the amputee crisis
The world of sport took a pedantic and unnecessary turn recently when Oscar Pistorius was disallowed entry into the Beijing Olympic Games because, according to a scientific study - he had an advantage over able bodied competitors.
Somehow I don't think that Pistorius sees having no limbs below the knee as an advantage. If instead of carbon prosthetics he was wearing rocket powered hover legs, or perhaps tied himself to a small hyena then I would freely admit that he had quite the leg up (excuse the pun), after all the IAAF (International Association of Athletics Federations) have banned the use of any outside interference from wheels, springs and wild animals. That's fair enough, but the South Africans' "blades" are designed to replicate the power transfer of an actual leg without the use of springs or wheels. They are designed to level the playing field for athletes like Pistorius who are less able bodied.
The reasoning given in the scientific study into whether the "blade runner" gained an advantage was that when sprinting, he used up less energy and produced less lactic acid. I'm not sure about you, but surely common sense should kick in a little here. The man burns 25% less energy and produces 20% less lactic acid because he's got no legs. He's 25% less person than able bodied athletes. It's not even as though he's actually gaining wild advantages over the able bodied field - his 46.34s Paralympic World Record in the 400m is still slower than many of the able bodied athletes competing in Beijing.
It seems to me as though the IAAF are trying to save themselves the apparent embarrassment of having an amputee compete at the able bodied Olympic games, given that he has a realistic chance of beating some of the other athletes. A man with blades for feet should be the last thing on the minds of the IAAF in light of the recent Marion Jones scandal. Let the man compete.
On a side note, for anyone wondering about preposterone and what in the blue hell it actually means - check out Powerthirst on Youtube. Good times.