Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think this is chilling?

349 replies

Gorgeouslilgirl · 09/06/2021 10:28

Students in an Oxford college did what students do - questioned the status quo and decided to replace a picture that is political, ie a head of state. A measured and inclusive message accompanied this.

And the education secretary has waded in to criticise a student body for actions within their own space? And DM is publishing the student’s photo and family home and much his dad earns! Wtf?!

It reminds me of the Middle East or North Korea or perhaps Thailand where people have a photo of their beloved unelected leader as a sign of patriotism or else they are viewed unfavourably.

I mean, really?!!!

OP posts:
PrimulaPrimrose · 09/06/2021 17:39

Calling him a child and kid is the most ridiculous thing here.

ohforarainyday · 09/06/2021 17:39

It’s fair game as long as the next generation of Oxbridge leaders don’t end up as snowflakes

Yes let's hope they don't turn into the kind of adults who are so precious about interior design they spend thousands of pounds of other people's money on gold wallpaper.

jasjas1973 · 09/06/2021 17:44

@mustlovegin

Removing that picture was utterly despicable
I would have thrown paint over it
Bollockstothat · 09/06/2021 17:48

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

WokeUpMyBaby · 09/06/2021 17:57

Cackled at this. Didn't expect to and thank goodness I'm at home! 🤣🤣🤣🤣

TheKeatingFive · 09/06/2021 17:58

Historically I suspect this would not be a viable option open to challenge in any case back in the day

Why wouldn’t it be ‘viable’ to change the artwork in a private residence?

What is this bizarre rule by which once artwork is up on a wall it can’t be touched? Do people apply this in their own homes? Confused

mustlovegin · 09/06/2021 18:03

What is this bizarre rule by which once artwork is up on a wall it can't be touched?

It's not merely 'artwork' though, it's a picture of the Head of State. It sends a message if someone is adamant that they want to take it down

Posieandpip · 09/06/2021 18:03

Your comparison of this, yes, annoying, but hardly life destroying and definitely not fatal/that big of a deal situation to something that might happen in North Korea/the Middle East/Thailand in a similar situation is the most offensive thing about this thread in my opinion.

Posieandpip · 09/06/2021 18:04

And isn't the child you're discussing a grown adult?!

TheKeatingFive · 09/06/2021 18:04

So once you put a picture of the head of state on a wall, it can’t be taken down?

Even if you didn’t put it up?

We must live by others interior design choices?

Why? Confused

Notonthestairs · 09/06/2021 18:05

@mustlovegin

What is this bizarre rule by which once artwork is up on a wall it can't be touched?

It's not merely 'artwork' though, it's a picture of the Head of State. It sends a message if someone is adamant that they want to take it down

What is the message?
junipertree2 · 09/06/2021 18:14

@TheKeatingFive

So once you put a picture of the head of state on a wall, it can’t be taken down?

Even if you didn’t put it up?

We must live by others interior design choices?

Why? Confused

The argument for taking it down was that it was insufficiently 'inclusive'.

It was removed for political/cultural reasons rather than aesthetic ones. Which sets a rather dodgy precedent, I think. Do students start demanding that institutions and colleges or the buildings within them are renamed, for instance? (Think this might already have occurred in Liverpool, with Gladstone.)

TheKeatingFive · 09/06/2021 18:17

Which sets a rather dodgy precedent, I think

It absolutely doesn’t.

An interior design choice in a private room has no relevance to an institution’s naming. God help us all that the tabloids are able to manipulate the clueless to think it does.

Streamside · 09/06/2021 18:19

He's hardly a kid and controversial opinions create controversial responses. I don't get that anything about it is chilling.

Bollockstothat · 09/06/2021 18:22

Which sets a rather dodgy precedent, I think
You think this is the first time students have made a decision about what to have on the common room walls on social or political grounds?

mustlovegin · 09/06/2021 18:24

Do students start demanding that institutions and colleges or the buildings within them are renamed?

What's the governance process within these institutions? Why should the students be allowed to 'demand' anything? Who exactly are these students?

Notonthestairs · 09/06/2021 18:28

Nobody is demanding anything. They voted on whether to retain a poster in a private room and decided to take it down.

Personally I think the Queen would be all in favour of democratic decisions.

ddl1 · 09/06/2021 18:35

It was removed for political/cultural reasons rather than aesthetic ones. Which sets a rather dodgy precedent, I think.

People might put up and take down pictures in their own homes for political/cultural reasons - which could be big P politics, or family politics (e.g. wanting more pictures of the wife's family and fewer of the husband's family). May be silly but they have the right to.

I actually think that this gesture by the students was a bit silly, as it's a way of convincing themselves that they're supporting former colonies without putting much real effort into it. Why not for example raise some funding for an education project in a struggling former colony - preferably one that's locally chosen and organized, rather than one that the students think would be a good idea?

But it's their right to put up whatever pictures they choose in their room; and whoever shopped them to 'Guido Fawkes' is vile.

Bollockstothat · 09/06/2021 18:39

I wouldn't assume too much about the students' backgrounds dd1 - grad students tend to be from all over the world, so much more likely than not that there are a significant number of MCR members who are from former UK colonies.

Bollockstothat · 09/06/2021 18:39

Sorry to mis-name you there!

ddl1 · 09/06/2021 18:41

I'm actually slightly baffled by why Oxford students (students!) decided to put a picture of the Queen up in the first place. In 2013. If it had been 1813 then okay.

These were graduate students, and almost certainly a majority were NOT British by origin. Either they were rather sweetly seeking to honour their hosts, or more likely indulging in a sentimental myth about Oxford, still popular overseas, whereby nothing has changed since, if not 1813, certainly 1913.

Livingtothefull · 09/06/2021 18:42

@Gorgeouslilgirl

It seems BJ has waded in... and no, its not to calm waters or defend freedoms
That is just so so pathetic. If it were possible for him to have gone down even further in my estimation he would have done so. Obviously the deadly pandemic, Brexit fallout and G7 presidency aren't keeping him so busy that it is beneath his notice to comment on this. And some people on here have complained that students don't have enough to do?

You know I initially felt that comparisons with North Korea were overblown. I am not so sure now, I feel very uneasy about all this. Just because we are not as bad as NK at the moment doesn't mean we are not on a slippery slope to something very sinister.

ddl1 · 09/06/2021 18:42

much more likely than not that there are a significant number of MCR members who are from former UK colonies.

Fair point.

mustlovegin · 09/06/2021 18:49

Either they were rather sweetly seeking to honour their hosts

You see, there's nothing innocent or 'trivial' about this gesture. And no one here is 'clueless', quite the opposite

Notonthestairs · 09/06/2021 19:01

It really is trivial.