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
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Oxford Union president rape allegations - alumni open letter

385 replies

FairPhyllis · 21/05/2014 13:31

The president of the Oxford Union (which is a debating society at Oxford), Ben Sullivan, is currently being investigated over allegations of rape and attempted rape of two undergraduates at the university. He is refusing to resign or suspend his presidency. Speakers are beginning to pull out of events.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10845979/Oxford-Union-boycott-after-president-returns-despite-police-investigation-into-rape-allegations.html

If you are a member of the university or an Oxford alumna/us, and feel strongly about the minimisation of rape and sexual assault "on campus" there is an open letter you can sign here calling for Sullivan to step aside while under investigation. It is organised by the OUSU VP (Women) and other students.

OP posts:
ppplease · 22/06/2014 19:40

What % chance do you think that the man was guilty CaptChaos?

CatKisser · 22/06/2014 19:49

I was raped when I was 15 and it shaped my entire approach to sex and sexuality throughout my teens and early twenties. He was a man in his 30's and I was flattered at the attention, having never had a boyfriend before.
I'm now 29 and know I will never report what happened because there's not the slightest chance this man would be prosecuted. I would be the "lying bitch" in this situation. I feel so sorry for the women in this case and cannot bring myself to read the rape myth-filled articles surrounding this story. He absolutely should have stood aside.

ppplease · 22/06/2014 19:58

But I do think that that is what happens. It changes a person, understandably. But that shouldnt mean that a person's altered state means that men and women[I am thinking about Annabel something, children's cook] who get accused of anything sexual, should be made to step aside until something is proved or until someone is charged.

larrygrylls · 22/06/2014 20:03

'So, the 2 women who reported the crime were both lying and are now being charged with perverting the course of justice? Wasting Police time? Anything?

No?

Funny that.'

And, if they were, would you feel better or would you merely take it as another example of the patriarchal society? Do you feel that if he is innocent, he should be suing them?

I do not know the facts of this case but read his story in the Sunday Times today. Of course, it cast him in a sympathetic light. On the other hand, if what he says is true, he has been terribly smeared.

Do any of us know one way or the other? And, if not, why would people presume guilt if there was not even enough evidence to press charges?

CaptChaos · 22/06/2014 20:05

I have no idea ppplease. I wasn't there, and nor were you, I assume. Why do you ask? Trying to put words in my mouth?

I have stated, quite clearly I though, but obviously not that anyone (so male or female) who is accused of a serious crime (so armed robbery, rape, assault, and on and on) should step aside from a position either of power or in the public eye until exonerated or the police decide to prosecute. They should do so on full pay and without prejudice.

I don't really care how sad that makes the accused person. If they are not guilty, then they have nothing to fear, do they.

CaptChaos · 22/06/2014 20:14

Anyway, thinking about it. I'm out. Too close to home, too likely to be used as a reason to give accused people anonymity.

JaneParker · 22/06/2014 21:00

I would hope most mumsnetters feel utterly sorry for the falsely accused man who hasn't even been charged and that he can exercise the new rights to be forgotten and have all references removed on Google to it.

ppplease · 22/06/2014 21:05

So it makes no difference to you if he is 0% guilty or 100% guilty

ppplease · 22/06/2014 21:05

Statement to CaptChaos.

StewiesBack · 22/06/2014 21:09

JaneParker He;s not "falsely accused". He wasn't charged. They are two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT legal concepts. One is crime and the other is not.

ppplease · 22/06/2014 21:09

I dont really care how sad that makes the accused person

and you have no empathy. None whatsoever. How very sad for you and anyone else around you.

I hope that you are never on any jury. That could be catastrophic.

larrygrylls · 22/06/2014 21:17

Stewie,

He is not necessarily falsely accused but what is a fact is that there is insufficient evidence behind the accusation to overcome the first legal hurdle and proceed to trial.

Anyone can accuse anyone of anything. To the refrain of 'why would they'', it seems in this case there were a lot of political macho nations around the Oxford Union, most of which I don't begin to understand. However (and all I have read is a little coverage and Subday Times article) there is potential motive for a false accusation.

larrygrylls · 22/06/2014 21:17

Machinations

lemonmuffin1 · 22/06/2014 21:49

leave the poor bloke alone.

He's had a terrible time and he doesnt need a load of feminist vigilantes casting aspersions on the court verdict.

There was not enough evidence, deal with it.

LoveSardines · 22/06/2014 21:56

It wasn't a court verdict was it? I thought that no charges had been brought. Or have I misread the thread.

For the umpteenth time, it is standard practice for people accused of serious crimes to step aside if they are in a position of power influence etc while the process is ongoing. It happens all the time. It is quite normal and usual. What was not normal and usual about this was that he refused to step aside while investigations into a serious crime were ongoing.

I personally think that it is correct for people to do so. Which is why it is what normally happens.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 22/06/2014 22:09

Oh, FFS.

Why does there always have to be this slew of speculation about 'court verdicts' (non-extant in this case anyway)?

Can't we just accept it is totally irrelevant what anyone except he, the people who might have charged him, and the police think about his innocence or guilt?

What is relevant is his shitty attitude towards rape survivors. He could have stepped aside. He didn't bother because a few weeks of his hobby seemed more important - even if that meant trying to steal money from the Union and spoiling things for everyone else. He sounds a right charmer.

He's only young, but he should know better.

ppplease · 22/06/2014 22:15

There was not enough evidence, deal with it.

lemonmuffin1 · 22/06/2014 22:16

Leave the poor bloke alone.

He's innocent ffs!

LoveSardines · 22/06/2014 22:22

I am confused by some of these posts. He's not been to court, has he? Is there are reason that some people are posting that he has?

I am also interested that some people want to do away with the current situation where it is standard practice for people accused of serious crimes to step aside from their job/role while investigations are ongoing. Can any of you expand on those thoughts at all?

LRDtheFeministDragon · 22/06/2014 22:23

Oh, FFS.

Are you actually incapable of reading?

It's got nothing to do with guilt or innocence. Does being a 'poor bloke' mean you get free rein to be a total tosser? No.

For most adults, fun things like being president of a debate Union come with a little responsibility. He shouldn't have been allowed to throw his hands in the air and say 'ooh, not for me, I'm so special and different!'

LRDtheFeministDragon · 22/06/2014 22:24

love - they're posting because they're jumping on the bandwagon of handwringing 'poor man his life is ruined innit' bollocks.

They don't actually care about the situation, they just want to shout down anyone who suggests it may be a tiny bit less simple than evil feminists picking on some poor, under-privileged lad.

LoveSardines · 22/06/2014 22:25

I'm confused about this. When MPs / police officers / teachers / MDs / charity heads etc etc etc step aside while investigations into serious crimes are ongoing no-one bats an eyelid.

In this case though apparently an exception should be made. Is it because he was accused of rape or adults? Rather than say child sexual abuse or murder?

LoveSardines · 22/06/2014 22:26

Or even something like misappropriation of funds. I think there would be understanding that his position was untenable while investigations were ongoing.

It is standard practice.

This thread has me a bit baffled.

ppplease · 22/06/2014 22:34

They are pushed by their employers.
Different thing all together if you have a choice.

There is a thread that could be started about whether public servants and a few others should be pushed.
I would have to take a think about that as the thread progressed.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 22/06/2014 22:36

They shouldn't need pushing.

If it were standard to step aside in rape cases, the 'false accusations ruin lives' trope would have far less power. By pushing people to see rape accusations as something to be treated differently from anything else, you reinforce the idea this is something you expect to damage a man's life, and you add to that problem.