Calum Humphreys argues that the whole student reaction has spiralled out of control and he is left with no choice but to vote for no change.
The current vote regarding the student body’s reaction to Robin Thicke’s magnus odious is a storm in a teacup, which has damaged the process of tackling sexism on campus. Now that we find ourselves in this horrendous mess, the only option is to vote no change. I appreciate this may seem a controversial stance to take, but a vote for no change is valid for two reasons.
Photo Credit: MC =) via Compfight cc
The first is theoretical. The debate surrounding the vote has succeeded in conflating huge issues including artistic expression, freedom of speech, ‘rape culture’, feminism, and responsible censorship much to the weariness of the majority of students. Flapping about in the muddied puddle of the debate, it is easy to forget what it is actually about; sexism, censorship, or whether or not you like Blurred Lines.
By framing the issue as a ban, a blacklisting and condemnation of a single flash in the pan pop song has stoked up conflict where there fundamentally is none as all camps think that the song displays misogynistic elements which must be challenged. The way in the which the debate has been presented has been detrimental to our confrontation of sexism and is the product of adversarial, petty student politics which disenchant the masses. And it is these masses that we must engage if we have any hope of challenging sexism and misogyny both on campus and in the wider society.
It is not those who vote this week that we need to reach, it is those who do not even know it is taking place. How have we allowed an ageing Californian pop star to dictate our discourse on gender, sexuality and equality within the University of Exeter? It illustrates the reactive, short-term nature of the campaigns’ and the Guild’s outlook instead of kick starting a long term, proactive stance to tackle sexism on campus.
The second is practical, concerning the limited scope of the vote. We must put this vote in context, look beyond this week and ask ourselves where do we go from here? If the ‘Condemn and Remove’ campaign wins what does that mean? What if ‘Don’t Censor Exeter’ prevails? What are the next steps? I’m not about to dive down the slippery censorship slope, instead I will remain on the level plane.
Both campaigns pride themselves on democratic legitimacy, therefore subsequent debates surrounding yet-to-be-released misogynistic mashups will have to be voted upon. Likewise, the debate will also need to take retrospective turn, analysing, voting upon and condemning the whole back catalogue of popular music in order to remain consistent. This would potentially mean hundreds of votes taking place to condemn (and/or remove) popular songs.
Does the Exeter student body really have the appetite to do this? We already seem weary after one and a half votes, what will we be like after ten, twenty, thirty more? “Disengaged, disillusioned and disheartened” is the answer. Attacking individual songs in this way is an exercise in perpetual pointlessness, that only serves to numb students to the problem of sexism in our community. It will only increase the exasperated cries of “What’s all the fuss about?”, “Why does this matter?”, and, “typical busy-bodies” already commonplace throughout campus.
Votes should only be considered in extreme circumstances when gridlock has been reached on a student specific issue, so that their power and legitimacy are not diluted or trivialised. There is no deadlock on this issue, there is actually consensus. It is easy to disagree, to argue, to criticise as the respective campaigns have proved, what is difficult is to move beyond the and grandstanding to tangible, inclusive action.
A vote for no change (when validated in this way), is not a vote to do nothing, nor is it rejecting the importance of the issues at hand. It is vote to stop this ridiculous process of framing an issue in terms of ban. This vote will be worthless, regardless of the outcome, if the protagonists involved on all sides do not come together to promote a broad-based, awareness driven campaign to tackle sexism. Enough with the point scoring, vote counting and banner-waving. This approach does not stop sexual abuse, the sexualisation of society, or objectification of women.
Just look at The Tab Exeter’s Finest Fresher 2013 competition, which has run parallel to the Robin Thicke motion, and in which a tenth of the university voted in. Students were judged like vegetables at a country fair, and the Thicke campaigns, who have been too caught up in the minutia of their own vote, have failed to comment or condemn. It is shocking that these two events can occur in such exclusive terms.
Calum Humphreys
[poll id=”51″]
Do you agree with Calum? Are we having too many student votes? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.
exeposedev 