Spare me the campus ayatollahs 廃虚ing my student life: An undergraduate's fearless broadside against the joyless PC 引き継ぎ／買収 of our universities

• e-mail

Jacob Furedi, a 新聞記者／雑誌記者 and student at University College London thinks students are 存在 nannied?

The drunken travails of Kingsley Amis’s Lucky Jim ― a shambolic junior academic ― have long become a byword for the 超過s of university life.

Flirting, seduction and seeing how many pints you could fit in between lectures were once 比較して 害のない pastimes on campuses across Britain.

Yet today, too many universities seem 決定するd to nanny students who are みなすd too 壊れやすい to be exposed to the rough and 宙返り／暴落する of the real world.

Consider the fact that, this week, it 現れるd that all new students arriving at Oxford and Cambridge are 存在 asked to …に出席する ‘同意 classes’ 目的（とする）d at 妨げるing 強姦 and 性の いやがらせ at the universities.

At Oxford, the courses ar e compulsory as part of freshers’ week, while the student union is 勧めるing rugby players to …に出席する anti-sexism workshops to fight ‘lad culture’.

At Cambridge, 同意 classes are also 存在 held for freshers, with students of some colleges having to 選ぶ out if they don’t wish to …に出席する.

Not everyone is happy to 受託する 指示／教授／教育 in how to 避ける 強姦ing somebody or becoming a 強姦 犠牲者, however.

At York University, a number of students on campus recently 抗議するd against their own ‘性の 同意 class’ by walking out.

によれば union 公式の／役人s, the lessons were necessary to 保護する students’ ‘井戸／弁護士席-存在’, 示唆するing they had rather forgotten that the students they were 試みる／企てるing to 教える were 現実に adults.

Innocent fun: Students enjoy themselves in the 伝統的な way, but for how much longer?

Unfortunately, barmy student unions are all the 激怒（する） these days. Take my own, University College London Union (UCLU), which （人命などを）奪う，主張するs to 代表する me, a 20-year-old final year undergraduate and one of the thousands belonging to the student 団体／死体.

It has 無法者d, under the guise of its ‘無 寛容 to 性の いやがらせ’ 政策, ‘不快な／攻撃 性の noises’ in union 妨げる／法廷，弁護士業s because students 恐らく aren’t able to 対処する with 審理，公聴会 a few grunts in a public space.

So far, so laughable. But the 権利-on political correctness of modern student unions and their campus ayatollahs has a far more 悪意のある 面, as we shall see.

By any 手段, Isis would seem a bad bunch, what with their penchant for beheading innocent 非軍事のs and 新聞記者／雑誌記者s. 正当化するing their 活動／戦闘s isn’t 平易な ― which is why I was so struck when an 公式の／役人 at UCLU 試みる／企てるd to do just that.

Yes, when the university’s Kurdish Society decided to 招待する former student Macer Gifford, a Briton who heroically chose to fight with the Kurds against Isis, a student union officer 主張するd he be ‘no 壇・綱領・公約d’ ― banned from speaking.

によれば the union 公式の／役人, the fight against Isis ‘is a very contentious topic’ and ‘far too コンビナート／複合体 [for students] to understand in 黒人／ボイコット and white’. He went on to 持続する that ‘one man’s freedom 闘士，戦闘機 is another man’s テロリスト’.

This week, it 現れるd that all new students arriving at Oxford and Cambridge are 存在 asked to …に出席する ‘同意 classes’ 目的（とする）d at 妨げるing 強姦 and 性の いやがらせ at the universities

Now, 倫理的な relativism ― that 権利 or wrong depends on an individual’s point of 見解（をとる） ― is not always without 長所.

But I 設立する myself instinctively appalled by the 決定／判定勝ち（する）. In some 状況／情勢s, morality is a 事柄 of 黒人／ボイコット and white.

And the 失敗 of a student union 公式の／役人 to 非難する Isis, an intrinsically evil organisation, pointed to something 深く，強烈に amiss with the 現在の 明言する／公表する of universities.

Not only was the 公式の／役人’s 不本意 to 公然と非難する Isis worrying, but his 主張 that an 外部の （衆議院の）議長 with 異なるing 見解（をとる）s be silenced 論証するd how universities are no longer the tolerant, open-minded 会・原則s they were.

簡単に, student leaders have lost the 陰謀（を企てる）. Rather than 扱う／治療するing students as young adults, our union officers 扱う／治療する us like oversized children. From their 仮定／引き受けること that students a re too 攻撃を受けやすい to be exposed to 確かな ideas, to the 課税 of what they みなす ‘許容できる’ moral values, their 影響（力） means that the university experience is now a far cry from the rigorous, mind-拡大するing education that one might 推定する／予想する.

From the very beginning of my time as a student at UCL, it was （疑いを）晴らす that the union had decided it knew what was best for us.

によれば union 公式の／役人s, the lessons were necessary to 保護する students’ ‘井戸／弁護士席-存在’, 示唆するing they had rather forgotten that the students they were 試みる／企てるing to 教える were 現実に adults

Its 使節団, 関わりなく its （人命などを）奪う，主張するs to be tolerant and inclusive, soon appeared to be nothing いっそう少なく than the moral policing of students’ personal lives.

Thus on Mondays, university caf?s were banned from serving meat on the grounds that a chicken 挟む was both unhealthy and bad for the 環境, because 後部ing animals 需要・要求するs more 資源s than growing an 同等（の） 量 of 刈るs.

The arrogant 仮定／引き受けること that a student union was する権利を与えるd to 課す a vegetarian lifestyle on me and my fellow students shows just how little value these people attach to personal choice.

This 無視（する） was seen again in UCLU’s call to 禁止（する） smoking in outdoor spaces on campus. Within the 決意／決議’s 指導基準s, the union laments the dangers of active and passive smoking.

Smoking is bad? Who knew?

While it would certainly be 不適切な if the union started 手渡すing out packs of Marlboros, its 公式の／役人s need to 尊敬（する）・点 the fact that students ― adults ― are 有能な of making 合理的な／理性的な 決定／判定勝ち（する）s. Smokers know it would be healthier to go on a juice 洗浄する and a jog rather than to light up again, but whether they 行為／法令／行動する on that should be their prerogative.

This 仮定／引き受けること that students need mollycoddling in every 面 of their lives is 直接／まっすぐに 害（を与える）ing education. For this 態度 is not just 限定するd to the student union, but is seeping into UCL’s faculties.

Rather than 扱う／治療するing students as young adults, our union officers 扱う／治療する us like oversized children

UCL’s archaeology department now 警告するs students that historical events ‘may be 乱すing, even traumatising’ and 許すs its students to ‘step outside’ class if they find 取引，協定ing with the past too difficult ― a move akin to 許すing 医療の students to bunk off because they’re afraid of the sight of 血.

Outside of the classroom, the university is doing its 最大の to stamp out all sources of fun on campus. Now alcohol, that 中心的要素 of student life, has come under 脅し from union 公式の／役人s. 含む／封じ込めるd within its ‘responsible drinking’ guide, UCLU 警告するs that ‘drinking doesn’t have to be a way of life’.

Although it’s certainly true that you don’t need alcohol to have a good time, the suggestion that students 要求する constant reminding to ‘補欠／交替の／交替する [booze] with some water’ makes a joke of the notion that we are 有能な of living 独立した・無所属 lives.

And while the union （人命などを）奪う，主張するs that ‘mocktails [非，不，無-アル中患者 cocktails] are a 広大な／多数の／重要な way to start the night’, its 危険-averse approach to alcohol signals, once again, its 願望（する） to infantilise students.

This is 反映するd, too, in the union’s 禁止（する）-happy approach to anything that might be considered 不快な／攻撃. It 無法者d the playing of pop 星／主役にする コマドリ 厚い’s song Blurred Lines because, with lyrics such as ‘I know you want it’, the song 恐らく 促進するs 強姦 and is ‘dangerous’.

It has also 禁じるd the 配当 of The Sun newspaper because, with its たびたび（訪れる） photos of scantily 覆う？ women ― thou gh no longer Page Three ― it is みなすd inherently ‘misogynistic’.

This flurry of blacklisting is driven by the belief that students need a bunch of jumped-up, 権利-on, soya-消費するing 行動主義者s to 保護物，者 them from the horrors of the world.

It’s not surprising, therefore, that UCLU 展示（する）s a shameless 無視（する） に向かって 解放する／自由な speech.

にもかかわらず the fact that the union 持続するs ‘freedom of 表現 is a 根底となる human 権利’, it does not 許容する 見解（をとる）s that 衝突／不一致 with its own. Within its 決意／決議 ‘to （選挙などの）運動をする for freedom of speech’, it also agrees to ‘continue to 支持する “No 壇・綱領・公約 for 国粋主義者／ファシスト党員s” ’.

Thus the union took it upon itself to 禁止（する） the UCL Nietzsche Club because some of the German philosopher’s ideas were 可決する・採択するd by the far-権利 １０年間s after his death.

Now alcohol, that 中心的要素 of student life, has come under 脅し from union 公式の／役人s

The 根底となる 仮定／引き受けること underlying all this activity ― that students are feeble creatures who cannot 対処する with any 構成要素 they may not like ― is absurd. Universities, by nature, are supposed to be places where ideas are challenged.

Indeed, by silencing 確かな ideas, the union 危険s leaving problematic beliefs 危険に unchallenged.

The 悲惨な 明言する／公表する of freedom of speech on campus is その上の 論証するd by the union’s 主張 that students should shut their mouths not just because of what they are 説, but because of who they are.

For instance, UCLU 問題／発行するd a letter of support to Goldsmith University’s BME (黒人／ボイコット or 少数，小数派 民族の) 網状組織, which 持続するd that white people shouldn’t be 許すd to …に出席する their 会合s because discussion couldn’t take place with ‘抑圧者s’ in the room.

So, under the guise of anti-人種差別主義, the union 法令s that students shouldn’t be able to say something because of the colour of their 肌 ― a 意見の不一致を生じる 仮定／引き受けること uncomfortably の近くに to what anti-人種差別主義者s have fought against in the past.

Such is the danger of the union’s obsession with いわゆる 身元 politics, which 焦点（を合わせる）s 大部分は on an individual’s race, class and gender.

Fortunately, however, the clique behind the student union doesn’t 代表する the student 団体／死体. This isn’t surprising, given that only 12 per cent of students bothered to 投票（する） in UCLU’s 選挙s. Some 地位，任命するs only had one 候補者.

Student outside UCL: 'UCLU 展示（する）s a shameless 無視（する） に向かって 解放する／自由な speech'

The schism between UCLU and its students was 明らかにする／漏らすd in the uproar that arose after the union 問題／発行するd a 声明 賞賛するing the BDS (ボイコット（する）, Divestment and 許可／制裁s) movement against イスラエル, an outside organisation which ロビーs 会社／団体s, artists and academic 会・原則s to 切断する 関係 with the ユダヤ人の 明言する／公表する ― without 協議するing the student 団体／死体.

However, while this 激しい抗議 was a refreshing 思い出の品 that the union doesn’t 支配する unquestioned, it wasn’t enough to cower its illiberal 傾向s.

Sadly, what I’ve experienced in London 単に 反映するs the rise of 検閲 and moral policing that has become endemic on university campuses across the UK.

More than a fifth of student unions in the UK 支持する ‘安全な spaces’, where students are only 許すd to profess a 定める／命ずるd point of 見解（をとる） at 確かな events ― often 保護するing the student union’s 正統派の 視野 from 存在 criticised.

Forty per cent of unions also have ‘no-壇・綱領・公約ing’ 政策s in p lace against 潜在的に 不快な／攻撃 （衆議院の）議長s. If this creeping intolerance is going to be 戦闘d, students cannot rely on their unions to help out.

Rather, the onus is on students to turn universities 支援する into places of rigorous education. This means 辞退するing to roll over meekly when unions nanny students, and instead 需要・要求するing to be 扱う／治療するd like 合理的な／理性的な adults.

And when unions 試みる／企てる to silence （衆議院の）議長s, students must 辞退する to 受託する the 決定／判定勝ち（する）.

It’s imperative that we 抗議する against intolerance.

As for 性の 同意 courses, Warwick University student George Lawlor was いじめ（る）d online and branded a ‘rapist’ and ‘misogynist’ by 行動主義者s last year after he dared to question 同意 workshops, and argued that most men ‘don’t have to be taught to not be a rapist’.

But now, other students, as we’ve seen at York, are showing what they think of such classes by walking out. So perhaps the fightback has finally begun.

?