Amber Rudd and no-platformed at Oxford Uni

[mindtheclegs]

Did a quick search and couldn't find this as an own thread (added to Selina Todd's one but thought it worth a seperate one).

Her Tweet:
twitter.com/AmberRuddUK/status/1235838618221948928
"Badly judged & rude of some students last night at Oxford to decide to “no platform” me 30 mins before an event I had been invited to for #IWD2020 to encourage young women into politics. They should stop hiding and start engaging. #FreeSpeech"

The Oxford Uni article:
www.oxfordstudent.com/2020/03/05/unwomen-oxford-cancels-amber-rudd/
The group is called UNWomen. UnWomen?! And they apologised for hurtz and feels felt by non-binary and 'womxn'. Dressed up in dismay around her politics but they bloody knew her history before asking her to speak, yes?

That they cancelled the invite at the last minute shows this was premeditated to bother her. Utterly pathetic

they have cited Rudd's links with Windrush as their justification for cancelling

Yes, I agree they could have used this to frame a question but she was there to talk about women about a career in politics. Which I think would have been very interesting.

I do think this cancellation was another led by men MRAs/TRAs however. Perhaps what they may have not thought through, would be the fact that Amber Rudd is still likely to have the ears of many policy making Ministers.

So on IWD they think it appropriate to make a woman put aside any other arrangements for them, possibly arrange carers/babysitters, write a talk, and set off to travel to Oxford then when she is part way/all the way there cancel her using as an excuse something that was widely know months ago? I think that is a good parable of how badly women are treated in society.

I hope she sends them a bill for all her expenses.

Rudd fell on her sword over Windrush, as did a very senior female Civil Servant. Men appear to have survived unscathed. I equally have no idea what to make of current Home Office politics around Priti Patel, but I worked in the public sector long enough, including for a couple of high ranking misogynists, not to want to draw any quick conclusions.

Even if blame for Windrush can be laid at Rudds feet, no reason not to listen and question.

I was once on a disability FB group. There was a particular ‘individual’ who kept posting memes of pictures of MPs who had voted to reduce disability benefits. Each picture was accompanied by a plethora of comments about their weight, appearance and a list of ‘actions’ that should be performed on them. At least 3/4 of the pictures were of female MPs and all the vile comments were made towards them.

When I pointed this out, I was called ‘Thatcher’s daughter’ and ‘Moseley’s PA’. Apparently, being tory meant automatic justification for any vile comments. This was at the point of time that I was still a Labour voter.

I don’t know whether Priti Patel is a bully as I’ve never worked for her. The same goes for John Bercow. I think it is most unwise for Labour MPs to be very keen to assume guilt for one at the same time as innocence for the other.

I agree. At one point I worked for a real shooting star high flyer. He was a selfish pig. It took a while but I worked out that he was utterly incapable of saying anything positive about any women. Treasury high flyers, women ministers, whoever. And some stuff was astonishingly derogatory. Most of the time I was the only woman in the room, but once a week it was the whole department, which did include several younger women. I starting looking for the right moment to raise it - I half suspect he was completely unaware, but the moment never came. (He was also Clintonesque in his infidelity. Again I suspect it was about power.)

A few years later and he was Perm Sec in another Department and there was a blazing row between him and a female conservative Cabinet Minister which reached the papers. Stuff clearly had been leaked which undermined the Minster. I know who I believed. Hence my unwillingness to judge. My understanding is that the Home Office Perm Sec was not fully forgiven for allowing Rudd and the female civil servant responsible for immigration, take the fall, hence a reluctance to see a second female Minister go.

I think there is a real issue of misogyny towards senior women - some men really do not like taking orders from a female. Exactly why I think Rudd would have been interesting, on both her career in the City and her Career in politics.

(I equally can see that Patel is very focussed and determined and to the right of the party, so not an easy cultural fit for perhaps more urban liberal Civil Servants. But when the Country voted Boris they knew what they were getting.)

Amber Rudd's tweet is being shared by many journalists, think it is good publicity for the wider no platforming debate which is a good thing, more and more people are getting fed up with it.

The Tories won't stand for it. Nor will the Daily Mail.

Think back about five years when the world was "oh Jeremy Corbyn". A really bright interesting intelligent friend of DDs was struggling to be allowed a platform for his University Conservative Society.

Equally the DM was receiving all sorts of hate, including on here, and not appearing on Google searches.

The left are now eating themselves so alternate voices have proved important. We have all grown up a bit, so can apply the "they would say that wouldn't they" filters to the DM, the BBC and the Guardian. It is not really about women, GC or not, but the fact that the Tories will want to roll back the current no-platforming cultures for their own sake.

Its weird. I went to the LSE when students were proper left wing - although the Chicago school economists teaching us were Thatcherite right. The two from my year who became MPs were both Tory. The totalitarian left, as well as the right, can send ordinary students in the opposite direction.

Those students act like spoilt, bratty children not letting anyone speak unless they say what they want them to say. I certainly thought there was more than Windrush to it when I read about it earlier.

The people cancelling look like idiots.
This plays beautifully to show the stupidity, immaturity and rudeness at the heart of no-platforming. Which is actually really useful.
Amber Rudd deserves considerably more courtesy than this, as do all the intelligent opinionated women being shut up.

Agreed Beaumur.

From The Guardian article.

In response, Rudd’s daughter Florence Gill tweeted: “Can not believe mum was ‘no-platformed’ at my old Uni yesterday. Mum doesn’t need the platform and travelled to talk for FREE for International Womens Day-proceeds to FGM charity. I don’t care if you disagree with her. Its fucking rude This is NOT how women should treat each other.”

A number of former politicians also came to Rudd’s defence

Responding to Gill, the former chancellor of the exchequer George Osborne tweeted: “Don’t worry about your mum – ‘no platforming’ one of the most senior female politicians of our generation at an International Women’s Day event just makes the Oxford students involved look stupid & small-minded, the very opposite of what that great university stands for. Their loss.”

Having read the statement by UNWomen Oxford (written prior to the event and non-platforming), I'm struggling to understand why the decision was taken to cancel, at the last minute.

Here's the statement, for posterity, which was posted on March 2nd:

^For those interested in our event ‘In Conversation with Amber Rudd’:

The concerns we see happening now around this event are absolutely ones which we as a committee feel ourselves. We invited Ms Rudd on the understanding that this would be an honest and frank conversation about how her policies have impacted wom*n of all races, religions, classes et cetera. We will not run away from mentioning any of Ms Rudd’s past comments or policies, and we ask you to attend this event to help us campaign for a truly frank feminism which is not afraid of taking such opportunities to discuss these issues with high profile figures.

We are non-partisan, not apolitical and, thus, while in the first half of the event we may discuss Ms Rudd’s support for UNWomen’s Draw A Line campaign and her experience of being a woman in parliament alongside her policy choices while there, we will also open the floor to you in the second half of this event to question Ms Rudd yourself. The conversation will be open and direct, and will create a space to talk through any disagreements across those who identify as feminists.

Equally, we wish to remind all our members and event attendees that, whilst we foster open conversation and debate, we do not stand for any homphobic, transphobic, sexist, ableist or racist actions or speech. Individuals found to be violating our principles of inclusivity will be kindly asked to reconsider their actions and, if needed, leave this and any other events.

As with all events, all proceeds from this event will go towards UN Women’s international campaigns. Other projects we support include UNiTE Against Sexual Violence, and the 2020 Trailblazer’s Campaign.

We acknowledge that our perspective is biased by a certain amount of privilege and we want to hear concerns from more marginalised groups of women who feel under-represented. We also recognise that we are imperfect so would love to hear your thoughts on this and any other topics, even if you can’t attend our events in person.^

Source: www.facebook.com/unwomenoxford/posts/1069803176727725

No platforming is the biggest load of arrogant bullshit.

mobile.twitter.com/UniofOxford?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Oxford University

@UniofOxford

We strongly disapprove of the decision by the UNWomen Oxford UK Society to disinvite Amber Rudd after she had been asked to speak. Oxford is committed to freedom of speech & opposes no-platforming. We will be taking steps to ensure that this situation doesn't happen in future

What I don't understand is how they justify no platforming someone who was a democratically elected MP, in a democratically elected government, where the party has been democratically elected once again. I despise the Tories but they are not some kind of extreme hate or anti-democratic group according to the majority. There is no justification whatsoever.

Didolamenting and AsMuchUse, re Geoff Norcott, you’d probably find his views on gender issues more to your taste. He slipped a little rant in on The Mash Report once- think it was about being non-binary- and said much the same as you’d hear from any of us.

Hoping this link works

<a class="break-all" href="https://freespeechunion.org/wp-content/plugins/pdfjs-viewer-shortcode/pdfjs/web/viewer.php?file=freespeechunion.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Letter-of-Complaint-to-The-Oxford-University-Proctors-Office-about-the-No-Platforming-of-Amber-Rudd.pdf&download=true&print=true&openfile=false" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">freespeechunion.org/wp-content/plugins/pdfjs-viewer-shortcode/pdfjs/web/viewer.php?file=freespeechunion.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Letter-of-Complaint-to-The-Oxford-University-Proctors-Office-about-the-No-Platforming-of-Amber-Rudd.pdf&download=true&print=true&openfile=false

I'm so dismayed by this. I don't like Rudd and don't agree with her politics but surely the students attending are bright enough that they could have tackled her robustly on all sorts of meaty subjects. That is far better than denying her the right to speak. What absolute wallies. I'm embarrassed for them.

Not directly relevant but Oxford SU LBGT seem adept at pissing everyone off.
www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/18277060.plush-cuts-ties-oxford-su-lgbtq-campaign/
'Plush said: "Regrettably the working relationship we have long enjoyed with Oxford SU LGBTQ+ Campaign has more recently proved challenging."

The club said it had faced 'harassment' and threats to boycott the venue 'if their demands are not met' though did not go into detail over what issue.

It added its dealings with the current executive committee had been 'neither professional nor respectful'.'

@TherealMckenna.
I saw a Labour FB thread about Priti Patel with comments about her clothes, describing her as an ugly bitch, that she is an "Uncle Tom" and has a punchable face. Seems like racism and sexism against Tories is just fine.

I can’t remember who said it or what the exact phrasing was but the jist of it is;

You can tell who a person is by how they behave towards a woman they disagree with.

Feel free to enlighten me as to where this comes from.

Maajid Nawaz is covering this right now on LBC.

I saw a Labour FB thread about Priti Patel with comments about her clothes, describing her as an ugly bitch, that she is an "Uncle Tom" and has a punchable face. Seems like racism and sexism against Tories is just fine.

Imagine if that was a Tory thread and the MP concerned was Dawn Butler. That would automatically be seen as proof that all Tory voters are vile racists, as is the party itself.

The level of venom that Patel is receiving worries me. Whether the bullying allegations are correct or not, there is a real undertone of nastiness/anger/hate, at least some of which comes across as misogynistic.

Though Rudd fell on her sword, I understand that the subsequent inquiry suggested she had been misinformed by civil servants.

So, every reason to listen to her and question her about the reality of being a woman in politics, and plenty of reason why Boris won't want a second senior female Minster to be hounded out of the department.

I hope so at least. It feels as if open misogyny is more socially acceptable now than it has been for years. A bit like anti-semitism. What has happened to the left?

I've just read this in relation to the incident:

cherwell.org/2020/03/05/in-conversation-with-amber-rudd-how-oxfords-feminist-spaces-exclude-black-women/

Interestingly, I found it when searching for a different young woman's article about the de-platforming of Selina Todd. Which appears to have been taken down...