It is hard to imagine university authorities – or fellow students – at Queen Mary, SOAS or London Met tolerating the vandalism, drunkenness, immaturity, elitism and misogyny of the Bullingdon Club
A number of my male friends have admitted to inserting their genitalia in unusual places. One of them went on to have a distinguished career in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Egged on by their peers, most of these incidents took place at school, when the adolescents in question were about 14 years old and usually under the influence of alcohol.
By the time they got to university, my mostly state-educated friends had matured and no longer engaged in such conduct. On reaching adulthood, our peer groups were less tolerant of boorish behaviour, which acted as a check on such actions.
The Lord Ashcroft allegations raise some serious issues, including Cameron’s awareness of his non-dom tax status. But I think ‘Piggate’ also raises issues of social class and social segregation within the UK’s higher education system, as well as university discipline.
The Bullingdon Club and Piers Gaveston Society still exist and still engage in such antics, sustained by an accepting peer group of former public schoolboys. It is hard to imagine university authorities – or fellow students – at Queen Mary, SOAS or London Met tolerating the vandalism, drunkenness, immaturity, elitism and misogyny from the likes of the Bullingdon Club.
It has been interesting to talk to my teenage sons about the Piggate allegations. We were all amused by the jokes that circulated on Twitter. Surprisingly to me, my sons and their friends seem to accept the allegations as an example of the behaviour of the UK’s elite. ‘That’s just the kind of thing they do at Oxford, isn’t it?’ said one of them, sighing.
Although my state-educated children consider themselves to be middle class, my oldest son decided not to apply to Oxford, feeling that the university was for ‘toffs’ and that he would not fit in. Among his friends that applied, all of them chose colleges that had a high intake of state school students, a decision that I also made in 1977, when I decided to apply to Oxford.
One of my concerns is that Piggate damages the image of Oxford University and undoes its attempts to increase its intake of state-educated students, particularly those from low income families. Here the university has far to go. Just under 7 per cent of UK-educated children attend independent schools. This figure has been fairly constant since the 1960s. Yet in 1978, when I took up my place at St Anne’s College, Oxford, 53 per cent of Oxford University’s UK undergraduates came from independent schools.
Skip forward to 2014, 46 per cent of Oxford’s UK undergraduates came from independent schools, with the ex-pupils of Eton, Westminster and St Paul’s snapping up 260 places between them. At the same time, two in three state schools sent no pupils to Oxbridge.
Although the state-educated now make up the majority of Oxford’s UK-domiciled undergraduates, those from comprehensive schools are under-represented, compared to those from academically selective schools. Undergraduates who were once entitled to free school meals are even more likely to be under-represented, with just 50 such undergraduates admitted in 2011.
Despite greater access to university education and many widening participation initiatives, little progress has been made to increase Oxford’s intake of students from low income families over nearly 40 years. This is an issue for all Russell Group universities; it’s just that this trend is most marked at Oxford and Cambridge.
There are many reasons for this, which include A-Level grades, choice of A-Level subjects and the confidence of prospective students at interview. Risk adverse college tutors who interview and admit students in small often take more polished and articulate public school product. (There are strong arguments for taking the responsibility for admissions away from Oxbridge colleges and handing them to university departments).
Research also suggests that any bright state-educated students are also put off by their perceptions about Oxbridge or their teachers’ perceptions. A Sutton Trust poll in 2014 claimed that 40 per cent of state school teachers “rarely or never” suggest that academically gifted pupils apply to either Oxford or Cambridge, because they believe their pupils have stand little chance of success, or simply will not fit in. In the latter respect, the Piggate affair will not have improved perceptions about Oxbridge.
All English universities now sign an annual agreement with the Office for Fair Access (OFFA). These set out targets to improve university access among under-represented groups, including those from low income families. Set up ten years ago, OFFA’s access agreements have led to progress, although this needs to be seen in context of increased access to university by students from all sectors of society. But efforts to get more state-school students into Oxford are remarkably slow, and even slower from those from low income families.
For me, the Piggate allegations highlight the social segregation in the higher education sector. The University of Oxford should look long and hard at its image and the behaviour of some of its students. It also needs to overhaul its admissions system and push harder on widening participation. In 2015 the continued grip of a few public schools on my old university is a barrier to social mobility.
Jill Rutter is a contributing editor to Left Foot Forward
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
27 Responses to “The ‘Piggate’ allegations highlight the social segregation in higher education”
Patrick Nelson
“RESPONDING to allegations about oral sex with a dead pig would be ‘undignified’, according to a man who once had oral sex with a dead pig.
The man said it would be ‘beneath him’ to comment on the disgusting thing that he did with a dead pig while being cheered on by some other equally vile men.
The man, who is now known by everyone as ‘the dead pig oral sex guy’, added: “I’m better than that.”
It is understood the man is now focused on ‘getting on with the job’ and is determined to put the oral sex with a dead pig behind him.
But experts stressed the man’s job was one of those positions where it is important not to be known as ‘the dead pig oral sex guy’.
Professor Henry Brubaker, from the Institute for Studies, said: “A few years ago a man in a similar line of work became known as ‘the cigar up the vagina guy’. And he still is.
“That was very bad. But I think we can all agree it’s not quite as bad as being ‘the dead pig oral sex guy’.”
I don’t think people either in the UK or abroad (indeed more so abroad) will ever see David Cameron the same again.
In fact there are now millions of people across the globe who know two things about David Cameron 1. He is the British Prime Minister 2. his former friend says that he molested a dead pig.
Two words sum up this situation – national embarrassment. Cameron has become an international joke figure and by extension Britain has become the butt of jokes. He should go.
stevep
The media has delighted in airing the various misdemeanors of the Prime Minister and now, mostly, they will seek to keep it as quiet as possible, passing the incidents off as student pranks and high jinks, just as they do when a Royal or a Toff gets found out with their trousers down or dressing up in Nazi regalia.
It would be interesting to see the media reaction and the reaction of some of the far-right trolls on this page if it was Jeremy Corbyn that had been found out and reported on. There would be an endless barrage of outrage, real and fake, lasting months and years. The clamour would be deafening.
The stench of hypocrisy would be overwhelming.
If nothing else, this incident will serve as a barometer of the state of the UK media and where their affections lie.
Lamia
It is hard to imagine university authorities – or fellow students – at
Queen Mary, SOAS or London Met tolerating the vandalism, drunkenness, immaturity, elitism and misogyny from the likes of the Bullingdon Club.
Queen Mary, SOAS, London Met and other London universities have for many years tolerated the frequent hosting of preachers who don’t merely mock other groups in society, they advocate far worse: the oppression, segregation and covering up of women, and making their legal status only half that of a man. They advocate the rape of young girls, and the persecution and murder of Jews and homosexuals.
Personally I think that’s by some way a far more serious matter, but I accept that for some people those may appear to be plus points about those London universities. In any case, clearly you seem to think that rich Tories being berks behind closed doors is worse than preachers advocating harm against mere Jews, gay people et al, or you wouldn’t be citing QM, SOAS and London Met’s supposed moral superiority in this matter, would you?
You could hardly have chosen nastier ‘superior’ candidates, Jill. And you are a senior person at a public think tank, the Institute for Public Policy and Research. Don’t you think you should know about these things?
GhostofJimMorisson
Bollocks. It’s already today’s chip paper. The Corbyn pantomime, however just keeps on getting better and better. Today’s farce: appointing a vegan as farming minister. You couldn’t script it! Can’t wait to see what he’s gonna do next, the silly old sod.
Lamia
That’s weak.
1. There is no supporting evidence for this but the word of a self-admittedly bitter tax exile.
2. Even if true, this was the idiocy of undergrad. It does not compare to an MP in his 40s/50s/60s associating with terrorists and extremists.
You are correct on one thing: the press would have made much more of this if it were Corbyn in the frame. But
1. Corbyn’s done enough that’s repellent as an MP that even then this would not rate as one of the worst things he had done.
2. You and the other true believers would yourselves be passing such behaviour off as the actions of a silly young man and pointing out that his accuser had a self-admitted grudge.