Menswear - The Founder

More documents

Recommendations

Info

10 The Founder | Wednesday 23 February 2011 Comment & Debate The Damaging Effect of Pornography Let them eat cake, it didn’t work before, it won’t work now » continued from page 9 one another how to navigate life’s difficulties. These relationships are ‘ruler and subject’, ‘father and son’, ‘husband and wife’, ‘elder and younger sibling’ and ‘friend and friend’. ‘Social harmony’ is supposed to result from every individual knowing his or her place in the social order, and playing his or her part well. David Cameron has highlighted new research which showed that what matters most to a child’s life chances is not the wealth of their upbringing, but the warmth and input of their parenting. Pornography on the other hand is mostly an anti-social, selfish activity, which is hurting our generation’s ability to promote healthy and mutually rewarding relationships. Politicians have been trying to look into ways of regulating pornographic content on the web, such as the MP Claire Perry, who has called for the nine main Internet service providers [ISPs] to limit access to porn unless their customers specifically request it. There are problems with regulating the porn industry, such as where do you set the boundary of what can and cannot be regulated? What effect will this have on our ability to surf on what we want on the internet. Cyber-libertarians’, suggest that the Internet should be the ultimate domain to shape our lives free from the control of the government and suppressive forces. I think we need more debate and information in our society, especially about the negative effect that new technologies and websites can have on our wellbeing. The problem is that we are only just learning about the effects on ‘our generation’ and more needs to be done to combat the proliferation of porn on the Internet. My belief is that we need more self regulation, as we are ultimate in charge of our own actions. For those of you who have read A Picture of Dorian Gray, all of Dorian’s bad actions in his life show up on a portrait of himself. What I worry about is what effects of what we see and view on the Internet are having on our development and for lack of a better word our “soul”. I don’t know the answers, but I hope to see this debate develop. tf Comment and Debate Comment and Debate is always interested in the opinions of RHUL students Simply write an aritlce of 400 - 700 words and sent it to: comment@thefounder.co.uk Best before midday Monday 28th February Nicholas Coleridge-Watts responds to Sam Hancock’s Response... Before I begin let me nail my colours to the mast: I am not a member of Royal Holloway Anti-Cuts Alliance, and I’m not familiar with their programme aside from the obvious objection to the Coalition’s education policies. I am however of the opinion that university, being a service, should be free at the point of access like the NHS. It is with this in mind that I will critique Sam Hancock’s response. Firstly, Mr Hancock mentions that there are fundamental flaws in the procedures and actions of RHACA. I feel bound to point out that this organisation is not subject to a hierarchy, and represents an independent initiative of likeminded students. Consequently it doesn’t need to toe any kind of party line, and is free to set its own agenda. I wasn’t present during the specific incident, but it seems to me that if anything the antics of RHACA were restrained within the normal parameters of student protest. A sit-in, like all peaceful protests, is supposed to be disruptive. That the Choral Scholars were allowed through at all seems to me to be an indicator that student demos have gone soft. If nonviolent protesters had never made a nuisance of themselves we’d still have Apartheid, people would’ve just ignored Ghandi, and the Civil Rights Movement would have been left in the hands of white American liberals (and we all know how few of them there are). Later Mr Hancock says that RHACA’s (alleged) chanting of ‘fascist’ and ‘bourgeois’ justifies the (not necessarily pejorative) assertion that they are ‘left-wing radicals’. Well, that’s just mudslinging. You can’t condemn partisan activity one minute and then go on to participate in it the next. I’m sure RHACA, like all political organisations, sometimes resorts to emotion in the prosecution of their struggle, but the real question is: why is that so bad Sam? The SU are elected to serve, and it can’t have escaped your notice that when it comes to the cuts your electorate is divided into two distinct groups: those who don’t want them and those who don’t care. If you throw a rock out of any window on campus, chances are you’re not going to hit someone who thinks what’s going on is a good thing. So why is the SU so passive about the issue? Questions have been raised in General Meetings you say. Well, I’ve been to GMs; the turnout’s poor which reflects what the students think of their usefulness, and one gets the impression of admin for its own sake. The whirligig of town hall politics makes the occasions more about procedure than achievement. Maybe if you they had something to fear then they’d take a greater degree of interest. As for Mr Hancock’s comment about RHACA being a minority which claims to represent the majority: take a look in the mirror.
E X T R A Julia Armfield gets the inside scoop on Drama Society’s upcoming production of...
Page 1 and 2: Nicholas Blazenby Erection Special
Page 3 and 4: The Founder | Wednesday 23 February
Page 9: The Founder | Wednesday 23 February
Page 17 and 18: I took this photo on a rather rainy

Menswear - The Founder

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?