Turn on thread page Beta

Cambridge Uni Students Burn Money in Front of Homeless Person watch

Announcements
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    As compelling an analysis of Cambridge's social make-up as this very scientific survey of people who happened to be within your earshot yesterday provides, it sounds pretty likely to me that they weren't serious.
    The poster was simply sharing one of their experiences - there's nothing wrong with that, and that's why these threads exist! Clearly, it is not intended as a "very scientific survey of people" at Cambridge, and certainly did not make a generalisation of people there. Although, inevitably there will be a minority of people out there thinking the actions of the student were "sound", at Cambridge and elsewhere...
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by ThePricklyOne)
    It will put off disadvantaged students from going to Cambridge because they either conform and get kicked out doing the very things the rich do (and get away with), or refuse and spend 3 years of uni alone and ostracised by the rich kids.
    This is just completely untrue though. Are you at Oxbridge? The majority of students are state-educated. Of the privately educated, the majority are normal, nice people.

    In my college you'd get called out for being a conservative supporter. If there was any pressure, it was pressure to not reveal you were a rich tory.

    I'm also confused by why you're making excuses for this guy - is there evidence this was part of a 'hazing' or that he was pressured into it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    There's "people like that" everywhere - including other universities.

    That doesn't mean all, or anything like a significant minority, are like that.
    That word "sound" is one of their favourites. You're right they exist at several universities.

    But they don't support several political parties. I've never encountered this behaviour, or admiration for it, among supporters of any other political party than the Tories.

    Not all Tories are like it - think of all the small shopkeepers for example - but nobody in the Tory party has ever done anything to try to stamp this attitude out or chuck these types out on their ears. They are welcome in that party, so long as they don't do it too publicly - but they all know what their common good is and they try to look after it. They're "clubmen" basically. They feel the Tory party is their natural political home. And it is, because theirs is a deeply rooted culture inside the part of society that is represented by the Tory party.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    This bit is rubbish.

    Edit to add: the majority of Cambridge students are not "rich kids", and neither are they ostracised.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    PRSOM
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by glowinglight)
    It isn't. She is claiming that had she not been libelled she would have been able to make loads of money because of the publicity she'd get as FLOTUS.
    Noted. Thanks.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by glowinglight)
    Well make up your mind - are they non-existent or non-serious? They can't be both, What they are is disgusting types who should not hold places at a public university.
    They could be existent but unrepresentative, which was my point.

    (Original post by A Slice of Pi)
    Inevitably there will be a minority of people out there thinking the actions of the student were "sound", at Cambridge and elsewhere...
    I'm sure, but the likelihood is that such people wouldn't make a noise about it publicly. If you hear a group of people speaking publicly in the way the poster described, chances are they're either having a joke amongst themselves or your reaction is the joke.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by ThePricklyOne)
    Some offensive threads don't get removed for a long time. Like the numerous far right and women hating threads, for example..

    This is my response to so on post 258:

    " There's peer group pressure that makes people do dumb things just to fit in. The top unis can be a pressure cooker of conformity. If you didn't go to grammar /selective schl, or come from a rich family you don't fit in. And if you find a crew to hang out with, you're unlikely to say no to the stupid stuff everyone wants you to do.

    Peer group pressure, and hazing exerts a powerful influence. The top French unis have it -- its called le buzutage. Its easy to blame the victim of this, instead of going after the perpetrators.


    It will put off disadvantaged students from going to Cambridge because they either conform and get kicked out doing the very things the rich do (and get away with), or refuse and spend 3 years of uni alone and ostracised by the rich kids.

    I don't agree what the dude's done, but I feel sorry for him.

    I think it's easy to sit in judgement and demand the worst punishment on him like a baying mob, while the rich kids who set this up get away with it."
    If you see a thread which breaks the rules then the facility is there to report it. I am quite surprised at the levels of some of the consistent haters, but thats who posts on TSR.

    Its quite easy to condemn him. he should take responsibility for his own actions. maybe it was some initiation thing or maybe it was in his character, but he still did it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nexttime)
    This is just completely untrue though. Are you at Oxbridge? The majority of students are state-educated. Of the privately educated, the majority are normal, nice people.

    In my college you'd get called out for being a conservative supporter. If there was any pressure, it was pressure to not reveal you were a rich tory.
    It won't completely put off every disadvantaged person from applying to Cambridge, but I think the effect of this and similar events will discourage some to some extent. Not everyone knows that the majority of Cambridge students went to state schools.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nexttime)
    This is just completely untrue though. Are you at Oxbridge? The majority of students are state-educated. Of the privately educated, the majority are normal, nice people.

    In my college you'd get called out for being a conservative supporter. If there was any pressure, it was pressure to not reveal you were a rich tory.

    I'm also confused by why you're making excuses for this guy - is there evidence this was part of a 'hazing' or that he was pressured into it?
    I went to a school where there were a few tories, and lefties. No one had a problem. But bullying and older kids forcing weaker/younger kids to perform humiliating acts or challenges to fit in is rife.

    Why is evidence needed for the student's innocence but not his guilt? While everyone rushes to condemn the student, why shouldn't some people say 'hey, wait a minute?'

    The student couldn't have done it on his own. This is something you do with your buddies watching and cheering you on. The fact he was trying to film it - what for, if not to show someone he's done the dare? Seems like hazing to me.

    I think the other involved parties will escape punishment whether the students says anything or not. Mostly not. He's got to survive another 2 years of uni with these people (if he doesn't get kicked out first).
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by ThePricklyOne)
    I went to a school where there were a few tories, and lefties. No one had a problem. But bullying and older kids forcing weaker/younger kids to perform humiliating acts or challenges to fit in is rife.

    Why is evidence needed for the student's innocence but not his guilt? While everyone rushes to condemn the student, why shouldn't some people say 'hey, wait a minute?'

    The student couldn't have done it on his own. This is something you do with your buddies watching and cheering you on. The fact he was trying to film it - what for, if not to show someone he's done the dare? Seems like hazing to me.

    I think the other involved parties will escape punishment whether the students says anything or not. Mostly not. He's got to survive another 2 years of uni with these people (if he doesn't get kicked out first).
    Nobody else was implicated but any disciplinary hearing would look at all the evidence. There has been no denial he did it. Makes little difference if he was doing it for a dare and it doesnt make him any less culpable for his own actions. He brought it on himself. the college will give him a suitable sanction and then everyone will get on with things.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lopterton)
    They can expel him.

    Any university could do that. But you may be unaware that Cambridge University exercises a lot of power over its students within three miles of the tower of Great St Mary's church in Cambridge. For example, students are not allowed to drive cars in that area, unless they hold a licence from the University as well as an ordinary driving licence.

    There is currently a petition calling on the University to kick him out.

    His college, Pembroke College, could also kick him out, which would mean he was no longer a member of the university since it is the colleges that admit undergraduates.

    (A side note, which isn't really the point: most of central Cambridge is owned by the colleges.)
    I won't get into the legal issues here of what the university is and is not ABLE to do (I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not qualified to or knowledgeable enough without doing some extensive reading on the topic to debate or discuss that), but what I will bring up is whether the university SHOULD be able to do that.

    It seems to me to be a vast overreach for the university to have a say in a persons private life. It should not be any concern of the university if somebody is a **** in public. It would rightly be quite a different matter if say this person had been in their college, or a lecture or in the library etc. and had done something analogous to this.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    They could be existent but unrepresentative, which was my point.
    You spat sarcasm to make a point in response to me that I'd already made?


    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    I'm sure, but the likelihood is that such people wouldn't make a noise about it publicly. If you hear a group of people speaking publicly in the way the poster described, chances are they're either having a joke amongst themselves
    Rather than what? Rather than planning a support group or a repeat outing? Who was suggesting they might be doing that? They had simply heard about something that had happened, an action by one of their political party comrades in the Tory party, an action about which they thought "Yeah! Right on! Good egg!" That's obvious.

    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    or your reaction is the joke.
    For all your sarcasm and bile, you're not thinking straight. The concept of "joke" doesn't even apply. If a refugee centre has been petrol-bombed and a group of people watch a TV news report and say "Yeah! Sound!", then it's obvious what type of vile yobs they are. Same goes for the Churchill Tory "Coyne is sound" mob. They're a bunch of yobs who get off on a fellow Tory thicko's action of humiliating a beggar.

    Let me help you with your ideation. You say either it was a joke or my reaction is the joke. You are of course free to laugh at my reaction, although the usual definition of a joke is when someone intends to say something amusing, which clearly I did not. But I will allow you your egocentric usage for the moment. Now if it was "either" a joke or something else, then that something else is surely that it was serious. So you are saying that if it was serious, then my reporting it in this thread (which is the only reaction of mine that you know about) was a "joke", meaning in your mind "deserving of contempt". Thanks for your contribution.

    So many people have come out of the woodwork in response to Coyne's action, both in this thread and in other comments threads elsewhere. Sure, they are a small minority. Nobody denies that.

    Personally I think those who express such views should be expelled from any publicly funded organisation they are receiving services from, whether that's a university, a local council, or one of the armed forces. If they express such views in public, well I am not in favour of birching, satisfying though it might be to watch one of these braying sneering rich fools get birched, but...well...prison, yes. I mean many of them were brought up in private boarding schools anyway.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by glowinglight)
    .
    I see concision isn't a skill you've picked up yet.

    They're a bunch of yobs who get off on a fellow Tory thicko's action of humiliating a beggar.
    This isn't obvious however many times you say it, because the likelihood remains that this wasn't the serious view of anyone there.

    So you are saying that if it was serious, then my reporting it in this thread (which is the only reaction of mine that you know about) was a "joke"
    No, silly, my suggestion was that part of the joke might have been to wind up anyone who happened to be listening, which on this occasion happened to include you. This is usually referred to online as 'trolling'. From the looks of it they succeeded in at least one case.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by limetang)
    I won't get into the legal issues here of what the university is and is not ABLE to do (I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not qualified to or knowledgeable enough without doing some extensive reading on the topic to debate or discuss that), but what I will bring up is whether the university SHOULD be able to do that.

    It seems to me to be a vast overreach for the university to have a say in a persons private life. It should not be any concern of the university if somebody is a **** in public. It would rightly be quite a different matter if say this person had been in their college, or a lecture or in the library etc. and had done something analogous to this.
    Unis are private charities. As part of enrolling you agree to abide by their rules and regs. Oxbridge have comprehensive rules and regs or rather the colleges do. If you behave in a manner which reflects badly on them, then they arent going to be pleased. They didnt ask to be dragged into it. Wait and see what action they take.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Unis are private charities.
    No - they are public charities. Their charitable purposes are required to be exclusively for the public good. Ref: sections 2-4 of the Charities Act 2011.

    The University and its colleges also recently became registered charities. The University's principal regulator is the HEFCE; the colleges' is the Charity Commission, although until recently they didn't have one.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    No, silly, my suggestion was that part of the joke might have been to wind up anyone who happened to be listening, which on this occasion happened to include you. This is usually referred to online as 'trolling'. From the looks of it they succeeded in at least one case.
    Is it actually possible for you to write without being sarcastic? "At least one case". Wow. Allusiveness. Thwack! I guess you think you've got poise too. But really you're just coming over as defending the indefensible.

    Give it up, please. Glowinglight simply reported what happened, and you didn't like it. You are the one who has got wound up. Why?

    Please don't tell us that the expression of obnoxious views became less bad when it was done partly to wind people up. Only someone who doesn't think the views are as obnoxious as most people do would believe that. Anyone can go around saying "kill the blacks" for a "joke", but all decent people know that only obnoxious scumbags would

    There are a handful of obnoxious Tory yobs at Churchill College who think Ronald Coyne is "sound". What's your problem with someone saying that? Absolutely no-one has said they are representative of Cambridge or Churchill students.

    Of course rich Tory yobs enjoy winding people up. Everyone knows that. They like to be viewed by the lower orders as obnoxious and cruel. They're dirt and they know they are.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lopterton)
    Please don't tell us that the expression of obnoxious views became less bad when it was done partly to wind people up.
    I don't need to take a position on whether they become 'less bad' or not. What they become is not necessarily a serious representation of the speaker's beliefs. Which means that this:

    There are a handful of obnoxious Tory yobs at Churchill College who think Ronald Coyne is "sound".
    Is not necessarily supported by the event described by the poster, even if it is true.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    my suggestion was that part of the joke might have been to wind up anyone who happened to be listening
    Coyne's action itself was a "wind-up": he was trying to upset the other fellow. Perhaps he even wasn't planning to destroy the £20. That doesn't make what he did any less disgusting.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by lopterton)
    No - they are public charities. Their charitable purposes are required to be exclusively for the public good. Ref: sections 2-4 of the Charities Act 2011.

    The University and its colleges also recently became registered charities. The University's principal regulator is the HEFCE; the colleges' is the Charity Commission, although until recently they didn't have one.
    Yes fine my error. Still doesnt change anything else. Doesnt look like the police have any interest in prosecuting and no complaint had been made the last i heard.
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    Given I didn't defend, and as far as I can recall have never defended, the Bullingdon Club, I'm not sure I see the relevance of this.
    Is there no connection between the Bullingdon Club and the Conservative Party.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.