Opinion

Letters - In response to 'Your union president speaks on RAG mag 'sexism'', Issue 1626

"I read your article last week and would like to reply to some of the accusations directed at us."

Letters - In response to 'Your union president speaks on RAG mag 'sexism'', Issue 1626

Dear Lucinda,

I read your article last week and would like to reply to some of the accusations directed at us.

The RAG mag is made to be accessible and funny. Thus, as the union president, an article about you was published as you would be known by a lot of students.

Having read the article I do not believe you are ‘singled out’ because you are a woman and in fact the article also includes commentary on other (male) sabbaticals.

Calling the piece sexist undermines genuine sexism. It is true that there is a very distorted ratio at Imperial and as a woman I am challenged by this as well. However, this does not mean you can use your gender to make yourself the victim in a case that has nothing to do with sexism; the article does not even mention your gender. Rather it is a satire about your opinions given at an interview with IC radio and on social platforms such as Twitter. It criticises your statements about Scottish Independence, the UK and the poor which many found offensive and racist.

Furthermore, I do not believe this article is justification for stopping women entering positions of power as I believe this article would have existed whether you were male or female. As a ‘woman in power’, I am aware that any position of power makes you a figurehead and open to criticisms and satire from other students. This is an important aspect of free speech.

This is as true for women as it is for men.

Freedom of speech, and indeed freedom of the press, are fundamental rights as important as the struggle for equal rights across genders. By 'banning' this article and threatening the RAG committee, the Union have trodden on these freedoms in a way that goes against the very principle of the college's legal obligation to promote free speech.

I hope you realise that because of this dispute, a lot of charity money was lost. We are working with three charities; GOSH, Porridge and Rice and British Refugee Councils. Finally, by condemning the RAG mag, we have lost valuable publicity on the largest fundraising week at Imperial. We cannot express our dismay at how much was lost because of this commotion.

I believe men and women are equal and just because you were the subject of an article, it does not mean your gender was.

Kind regards,

RAG Vice Chair of Activities,

Alicia Graham

More from this section

Hedging elections outcomes: market implications and historical trends

Hedging elections outcomes: market implications and historical trends

In just over a week, Americans will head to polls to elect their next president and Congress. Currently, polls show former President Trump and Vice President Harris in key swing states deadlocked with no more than a percentage point separating the candidates. The world will certainly be watching, which in

By Mitchell Erdle
2024 US Election: Celebrity endorsement impacts

2024 US Election: Celebrity endorsement impacts

Celebrity endorsements have long played an influential role in the US elections, and this year’s iteration is no exception. This year, many celebrities have taken to social media to proudly share their vote and encourage their followers to participate. A notable endorsement came from singer Taylor Swift on Instagram,

By Hima Fazeel