I wrote the article. Thanks for the response, I expected sports people to be pretty offended by this, though that was not my intention. You’re point seems to me measured and well argued response, so thanks. I do understand the rivalry, and see it as an important part of how the two universities relate to one another. Confronting some of the preconceptions each may have about the other in this way may be cathartic and you make a good point when you say that afterwards was a different story- I didn’t sense any real hostility in the bar after. I’d also like to make it clear that I was not accusing sports teams of being any worse than the rest of the university population, but that the banter culture provides an opportunity for airing these views. Irrespective of the offense it may or may not cause I felt that the comments themselves carried dark connotations.

‘A’ has completely missed the point, if at all possible, even more than the original article. IT IS BANTER! Banter requires differences between the two opposing teams to be highlighted and, hopefully with a comical element, chanted across a playing field at each other. It has got nothing to do with Sussex arrogance.

Fact, Brighton is an ex poly. Fact, Sussex is not; two stark contrasts between the two universities which provide a clear topic for banter to be based upon. A chant based on the fact that Brighton plays in purple and Sussex in navy does not quite reach the calibre of banter expected from a varsity match. From being present at the match, and having friends playing sport at both universities, I have to say that league rankings very rarely crops up in conversation, nor does it in chants.

It is no different from making stupid comments with friends; you pick a difference and make a joke out of it. Granted its not the highest form of wit, neither are the chants, but that is all it is and to make it out to be anything else shows a complete lack of understanding of the sports mentality, and more generally how men interact.

Can I just say as the “kite-flying” quoter, that this has been taken completely out of context…. the “kite flying” was directed at the entire team and was not intended to be at all based on anyone’s race of either team. How you quite made this jump I’m not sure (the kite-runner?! who knows, or cares) but as RAM has said, there have been tall blonde brightonian players tagged as kite flyers which indicates that others have taken the comment as intended, simply as banter. now shush, and go fly a kite.

Yet again I feel A has missed the point. It is not about degrading Brighton students for going to an ex-poly, it is about chanting. It goes hand in hand with sports. Let me use an example, does A think that people who chant “the ref is a w****r at football matches have a personal issue with him or know for a fact that those close to him have a low opinion of him, no, because it is not personal.

When you have two universities so close banter has to be based on how the two universities are different, as that is the very nature of the comments.

What would A suggest would be a more palatable subject to chant about? If anything it is a type of camaraderie specific to sports that brings the teams closer. It has absolutely nothing to do with academic rankings or how well each university does.

Seeing as A has such a high opinion of Oxford and Cambridge, what does she think they chant about during sports games? How well the two universities do academically? Or how Oxfords Law department is better than Cambridge’s? No, because that is not the nature of the circumstances in which these chants come out. As I said, A, point missed.

Personally, both as a member of a Sussex sports team and as a student at the univserity, I’m shocked that the Badger has printed this article.

Although I can apprehiate that banter is not to everyone’s taste, it is a humerous side to the sporting community and Brighton give as good as they get.

There are no divisions on a sports team. When walking out to compete it doesnt matter who you are pitted against- you are against them only as an oppisition.

The whole irrelevence of this article, I think, highlights the authors own prejudices more so than the crudeness of Sussex sporting banter. When it comes to sport why would it matter how smart you are, where you’re from or how much money you earn. Your politics are not important as a sports player. The only rivalry between Sussex and Brighton come varsity falls down to who is going to win.

The majority of students at Sussex, like many students across the country, find the cost of University a constant struggle; having to fit the working hours of a job into their schedule of University work and a social life. Grades do affect the courses available to students at both universities, however this does not take away from the acedemic acheivements of the students that attend them.

I speak for others on our team that this article has completely ignored the fact that both sides showed great respect and compassion for the tragic death of a Sussex student who represented BOTH universities. If the author knew more about the Varsity games they would know that the Women’s rugby game has been played as a memorial for six years, after the death of another sussex student. It is a very special and important game for Sussex rugby players, as we play for her honour and her family, who come to support our side and present the winning team with a trophy. what has been written in this article has been based on badly observed assumptions from a hazy touchline. No one but sussex and brighton SPORTS people were there for the presentation of our trophy, which just shows how much we do care for not only other students but for our universities. Show some respect next time for our efforts, like we have done so for the last six years.

There’s a huge dose of irony in “The Man”’s reply. For someone who’s harping on about missing the point, it’s bizarre that my points would be so distorted and misinterpreted.

First, I didn’t express any ‘high opinion’ of a particular institution. Nor was I praising any particular university. It’s merely stating a fact that Oxbridge is known for its excellence in teaching and research. If you don’t believe me, consult any encyclopaedia, dictionary or academic reference guide. My point is that the renowned universities are not known for their sporting achievements. This was my reply to the weak argument that another comment made. It is simply not true that sporting achievements make a big impact in raising the reputation of a university.

So please do not twist my words to suit an agenda, it’s very poor form in a discussion. If you can’t grasp a simple analogy, then any further discussion might be pointless.

The chants were just a bit naff. How can I make this any clearer? They made me cringe. By all means, jeer all you like. But can you at least aim for a little originality? I was embarrassed to hear them – Sussex doesn’t have the image of a university which would look down upon an ex-polytechnic. It has a vibrant, socially-aware atmosphere. It’s disappointing to hear Sussex students shout things like “your dad works for my dad” – what happened to the liberal spirit?

To the other commentator, sports-people aren’t heroes. You don’t deserve respect for kicking a ball around. Other people represent the university and raise its public image, they don’t expect a parade.

The chants are stupid and they are silly and they are not in the best taste but A does not seem to be making the points as I was referring to in the original article. I am certainly not defending the chants for originality but Charles said that the chants represented Sussex responding with chants about intellectual edge which is completely rubbish. This article sets to portray the rugby team as a self appointed ‘bougasie’ which is absolutely rubbish. That is not how they are meant at all, as I have said each time, banter: you pick up on differences and make jokes out of them. Would anyone like to suggest other viable topics for chants? Sussex does not have a great sporting record so we cannot chant about that, so where does that leave us? Remaining silent whilst we are being chanted at is not an option.

Also, Charles is clearly in complete ignorance of the fact that the chant was STARTED by Brighton, ‘I’d rather be a Poly than a C**t’, showing they are clearly not concerned with using then topic as grounds for banter

As a sub-point A has clearly never heard of Loughborough University which is renowned for sporting excellence and is what its reputation is based upon.

Also, simply because Sussex has a Liberal tradition does not mean that anyone with a politics A level should impose a test of Liberalism to every action conducted by its students. The Liberalist sector of the university is by no means representative of the entire population, merely representative of the fact that at Sussex the left wing shouts the loudest. If anything Sussex IS representative of Champagne liberalism. There is something fundamentally wrong for an institution of higher learning to paint all of its students with the same brush.

Alas, this is off topic somewhat, Charles needs to address this issue starting from the basis that Brighton in fact initiated the chants. “The team is a breeding ground for repressed attitudes”, this statement is completely unfounded and utterly pathetic given the context in which most right minded people have tried desperately to explain the chants are exchanged in. A, I think you should recommend other topics for chanting which are more suited to your palate which you can honestly see men shouting at a sporting match of any kind and in doing so you may grasp the concept of what the chants are about. When you have got a few ideas be sure to shout loudly from the top of your high horse, most of us will have trouble hearing you.

At no point did I suggest that the Badger was biased in anyway, I was responding specifically to ‘A’s comment about the chant being against this so called liberal spirit so is specific to this article, which seeing as I did not make reference to the Badger generally, nor any other article I hoped would have been abundantly clear.

Charles, if you accept that the chants are simply banter and to be expected, what is your justification for stating “it’s completely out of order and pretty pathetic to try to wield hierarchical notions of class over people who go to a lower ranked uni, especially when it doesn’t even refer to their own achievements” as I can see no quantifiable link. Is there going to be any acceptance that your article was predominately misplaced and at best, a substantial exaggeration?

I completely agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and if you think the chants are unacceptable that is rightfully your entitlement. I am not questioning your opinion nor asking you to change it. However, contained within this responsibility to question is equally a responsibility to substantiate.

The point I’m attempting to make, I believe, is a relatively lucid one. Saying you do not like the chants is a question of preference, however, there is a distinct contrast with making a statement, especially when the statement indicates that those getting involved in the spirit of the sport are elitist and “wield hierarchical notions of class over people who go to a lower ranked uni”. As I have stated the chants do not stem from any such notions, which is why, I believe a claim such as this merits justification as it is a bold one, and quite accusatory. The people for whom you have casually labelled ‘elitist’ and indicated they are smearing the proud liberalist traditions of this University, deserve an explanation. Is support for an opinion not also in the spirit of a ‘productive debate’?

It’s surprising that people above the age of 18 still think that it’s okay to “pick out differences and make jokes out of them.” It really makes me doubt their maturity. No doubt you’ll hate this analogy, but do you think it would be okay to pick out the racial differences in another team? And if not, what differences are ‘okay’ and which aren’t? What standard are you using to decide this?

Personally I’m not very fond of chants. I’ve always found them a bit crass. But some are obviously worse than others. You’ve heard my reasons for disliking the ones used already . So I won’t be suggesting any, but thank you very much for the offer.

What makes me doubt maturity even more is when people use the old playground line “but they started it.” Congratulations, I haven’t heard this reason used for anything since I played with Lego bricks.

Now you’ve gone way off-topic with the mud-slinging of champagne liberalism. It’s a known fact that Sussex has always been regarded as a place of counter-culture and liberalism. If you ask alumni of the reputation of Sussex in the 1960s and 1970s (Greig, et al.), it was a lovely place where people could get away from the snobbery and elitism classically tied-in to the university formula. It’s discouraging to hear someone speak badly of a heritage.

In two sentences you have managed to contradict yourself. “If anything Sussex IS representative of Champagne liberalism. There is something fundamentally wrong for an institution of higher learning to paint all of its students with the same brush.” So there is something ‘fundamentally wrong’ with painting all students with the same brush, but it’s not ‘fundamentally wrong’ to say Sussex (which I presume means its student-body) is representative of champagne liberalism? Does this mean it’s okay if I say the male rugby teams are representative of collar-up wannabe preppy boys who look like they belong in a Next catalogue?

God knows why you’ve only focussed on “male shouting” as well. It seems to be one of the other many holes in your sloppy argument. I didn’t know that there was a gender apartheid in football crowds.

As a sub-point, since when is Loughborough a top-ranking university because of its sports enthusiasm? The two are just a coincidence. It’s as naive as saying Stirling is a good univeristy because it’s next to a lake. I’d love for you to point out the “rugby” score section in the Times/Guardian university rankings. I must’ve missed that one. Is it next to the teaching quality?

Why do you feel the need to misquote me? I at no point in my article have I used the word elitist, nor did I say that ‘the team’ is a breeding ground for anything. I was making a claim about sport culture (the word you left out of your quote).

does ‘hierarchical notions of class’ not clearly indicate a belief that those in question are elitist in nature???

So does A believe that the only substance which contributes to a Universities reputation is its league rankings which she keeps harping on about. If they are so dear to you for what reason is a University as humble as Sussex graced with her presence?

Also I was stating that I do not think that they are offensive, the point being that people should be able to draw common sensical conclusions on what is likely to offend others, mainly the majority. I was simply trying to point out the pathetic nature of drawing any parallels to racism as they are completely different and A has taken this all completely out of context of my original point; there is no malice or intended jives Brighton’d academic capabilites, just picking up on an institutional difference. Not race, creed colour but institutional. The fact that A keeps coming back to the academics if anything signals her opinion that people who go to Brighton only do so because they are not good enough for Sussex, and her obsession with grades. Is it not possible that people choose Brighton for other reasons, perhaps that it may be better at certain things than Sussex?

You may wish to interpret and re-interpret anything I say from your own perspective but it is not mine. Again I suggest stepping down off you horse and reading the text with a degree of impartiality.

My original issue with what A said was that she spcifically stated that the chanting stemmed from Sussex arrogance which I fundamentally disagree with.
A repeatedley mentioned ‘league tables’ and drawing a comparison between Sussex and brighton, however when using Oxford as an example for high academic achievement, what critieria does she believe Universities use when deciding applications, as I would imagine ‘grades’ play a rather significant part I would suggest, hence the comment.

I was not making up things but demonstrating how you have come across in your responses. I have at no point said that I dont think anyone should find the chants offensive, I simply asked Charles to explain what I thought was a substantial leap from chanting at a rugby game to ‘weilding hierarchial notions of class’.

I truly believe that you believe you have made yourself quite clear. I at no point made up anything, from your posts it appears that you place significant weight on a Univerisities academic ability, hence the fairly uncontroversial link to grades. May I suggest you help yourself to a bit of afternoon whisky, it will make the whole process of removing your head from your own arse much less painful.

Anyway, back to the actual issue. The article is not written about a rugby match, I’m not sure who told you that. I think that ‘my dad works for your dad’ is in particularly bad taste to the point of being offensive given the link between higher ranked universities and public schools. I just don’t like the idea of the chanting, albeit not intending to cause offence, reinforcing this notion. Perhaps that wasn’t what was meant, perhaps it was either way it wasn’t appropriate. I don’t think that sports teams are knowingly or elitist in every aspect- I think the rivallry situation is one that brings negative preconceptions to light. I didn’t write this as an attack on sports culture even. I wrote this because I was surprised at the contrast between what people find acceptable to shout and the views they would feel comfortable expressing when asked. As we have seen here these are different. I don’t think they should be. Chanting shouldn’t be political, and some of the chants were.

Tom Wills: is ‘Hooray Henry’ an offensive term under your logic then? There seems to be an increasing perception that in liberal socieites everyone has a right NOT to be offended. It is an extremely difficult task not only to ascertain what terms are offensive, and in that sense I continually find it to be extremely patronising constantly being told what I can and cannot say. This is of course a fairly topical debate, note Satanic Verses et al. A healthy civil society should not include vast limitations on free speech, even if some terms and ideas can sometimes be offensive to others.

A: Ok as you have continually said sporting prowess does not necessarily lead to gains on physical league tables, however it would be naive of you to assume that sporting achievements don’t raise the profile of the university. Although you will probably disagree with this, sussex, as do almost all Anglo-American universities, currently offers sports bursaries to encourage strong sportsman and women to attend the university. Whether it is physical or not, sport is an important advert for universities. Regardless of whether you disagree with this however, I would think that the majority of the Sussex student population do.

More generally, ’student satisfaction’ is an important category on rankings, in particular in The Times’ rankings. The fact that our Union continues to be run by a cliche of radical left-wingers and alienates of a large portion of students cannot help this ranking. I top am proud of Sussex’s left-wing heritage and broadly agree with the goals of the majority of campaigns such as free education, the Green policies and the general goal of Palestine. What I am not proud of is that I am told not to make a ‘classist’ joke yet it is perfectly acceptable to allow a suicide-supporting, anti-semitic to talk at our university. This underlines my main point, offense is not only such a difficult term not to define objectively, but it is also immensely problematic for an individual or group to claim the right to decide on behalf of others.

N.B. A: I am perhaps mistakenly grouping you within something you would not profess to be associated with, however I think its fair to say your own views are broadly in line with these sorts of people.

You think it’s fair to say my views are in line with Islamic extremists?! Associating my argument with emotive issues is low. If an association with Salman Rushdie’s situation is at all appropriate I would say it was the other way around. Dare to question the traditions of the sports teams and the whole comunity will rally against you calling for an apology.

I never told anybody to do anything, but the fact that people have reacted defensively, with the approach that attack is the best form of defense it really hypocritical. It’s a democratic process and the constant bashing the union gets about people feeling uninvolved is pretty old, the union does a broad range of things to get all different types of people involved, but it can’t force them, people have to want to be involved AND accept that they might have to make some effort. Represent our apathy is a pointless request.

This is a straighforward criticism of culture, it doesn’t impinge on anyone’s rights. A specific criticism has somehow resulted in general bashing of liberalism.

In response to Margaret, classist things are ok in context…. to make the comparison again, though merely to demonstrate THIS point, no other, would racism be alright in context? It’s never alright, and just not needed. People think that its pretty normal to shout classist things, regardless of normality it promotes backward ideas. It was once normal to shout racist things… now it’s not and I think we’re all pleased about that.

No Charlie, I don’t think its fair to equate your with Islamic extremists, my apologies. Unfortuanetly it is not your article per se that has sparked all this debate but rather 3 years of constant left-wing sanctimony being rammed down my ears everytime I walk accross library square. Inasmuch I’m sorry that your recieiving the brunt of this when your not entirely responsible for the outburst you have recieved.

In reality I’m not going to defend sports teams here, (as a third year rugby player myself) but I am simply pointing out that, rightly or wrongly, your views equate to the broad sussex left-wing elite constantly telling us whats right or wrong, yet the views of such people abound in contradictions and mis-understanding. Personally, I’m just not sure that censoring everything that offends is in line with liberal attitudes either?

A champagne Socialist from North London and a grammar school, home counties sportsman walk into a bar…they have a really boring conversation about class. The end.

Jess T does provide some very well thought through points. She clearly has strong yet substantiated views which despite their profundity have been very articulated, on no less that two occasions.

I look forward to Charles addressing my last point.

um, you dont need to be super pretentious to know that talking about palestine in a convo. about sports is moronic

Jess
xoxox

Anonymity is obviously a key feature of discussion on the internet, but it would be a shame if individuals with vested interests in any way were seeking to hide the motives behind their opinions through single-letter nicknames.

Quoting from Mr Lukas’s original article…”Yet despite this we still see our Sports teams dressing up as CHAVS. Some find CHAV a widely accepted social caricature, but in another light it can also be seen as distasteful for mostly middle class students to so actively advocate a negative class stereotype.”

By being working class you are not automatically a Chav. Being a chav is about standards of behaviour and manners more than anything. There were periods in my life where my parents grafted to put food on the table and no one ever forced me to wear Le Coq Sportif or knock-off Burberry. I’ve seen behaviour I would class as “chavvish” from Lyle & Scott wearing lads heading into Pitcher & Piano.

Secondly, as those who attended the Varsity games make out, there was nothing derogatory in the chanting. Attending sporting fixtures may encourage herd behaviour, but they do provide a concentrated outlet for it so it doesn’t spill out into wider society. It’s banter that is reciprocated between fans of both sides on an equal basis. I can’t say I know any of the rugby lads apart from Alistair but I’d doubt whether any of them saw themselves as an inherently better human being than any Brighton student because of their educational status.

My final point is that I’d like to see a source for A’s assertion that we are 38th in the league tables of UK unis. Guardian? Times? What year? How correct was the methodology? The consensus in academic debate seems to be that composing league tables for universities is a hugely inexact science anyway.

The views proposed by the author of the article (who ever he may be) are broadly representative of the radical left minority which has taken upon itself to represent the views of the majority, this is therefore not an attack on him, but rather a critique of the sentiment which has been forced down my throat over the last three years.

I agree that there is a problem of apathy within the student body, but the union hardly helps to alleviate the problem. A modest suggestion would involve spending less time and money investing in causes which are not supported by a significant minority (let alone a majority!) of the student populace, and more on attempting to tackle the parlous state of food/drink and entertainment on campus. The lamentable turnout at union elections and referenda is indicative of the fact that the majority of students simply don’t care which trendy cause has been adopted (with typically little understanding), and then forced to the centre of their political agenda, which we are then forced to listen to.

This problem has been typified by the debate on free speech, in which the same vocal minority attempted to paint all those who argued for rational debate as BNP supporting proto-fascists! These concerns, however, did not provoke the same reactions when a radical Islamic cleric with publicised links to an EU, UK and US classified terrorist group was invited to speak! I find it incredible that the same people who claim to root their beliefs in populist left wing ideology have lost touch with the real world so drastically. In the real world, and not the little Sussex bubble in which we live, to be offended is part of life unfortunately. Certainly there is a balance to be struck; i.e. quite rightly racism is considered to be an abhorrence. But the reality is we must be prepared from time to time to accept moderate offence, and at the same time we are permitted to give it back in return; this being what I expect happened at the varsity match.

Contrary to the article if anyone is guilty of adopting a patronising attitude it surely must be those who consistently feel it is there duty to inform us what they consider to be morally acceptable, and then mistake it for consensus. This once again demonstrates the gulf that exists between the self appointed moral minority at Sussex, and the overwhelming majority of students.

Last comment on my part as this seems to have got a little out of hand.

Jess T: In case you haven’t noticed this has since opened up to become, rightly or wrongly, a thread broadly based on mis-informed and contradictory liberalism at Sussex. I just followd that trend by illustrating, as Harry above me has done, that the Palestine issue at Sussex is a perfect example of such a contradiction.

X: There is quite simply no other word to describe your comment other than pathetic. You have responded to nothing in a constructive manner except my mistaken grammar, which is of little relevance to the debate. Unfortunately there is no edit function on this site so I can’t correct my spelling mistakes. However if you think grammar is enough to render my argument obsolete then you are a complete and utter tool.

Just wanted to make sure you all pick up a copy of the badger so you don’t miss my article this week on how top gun is sexist and racist. peace. x

I play rugby. and i was playing rugby in that rugby match.
The article is ridiculous it is full of contradicitng statements that people have quoted and used to serve their purpose, debate over the internet is pointless as anyone can pick off words and twist them.
A few facts-
Varsity day is upposed to be a bit of fun that unites one university against the other, unfortunately this has been forgotten.
I have had 3 years of having this liberal malarky forced down my neck – whilst the irony of campaigns for free speech is remarkable. I tolerate it and don’t say anything, I have left u to the liberals who have taken it upon themselves to be the voice of the university.
If you don’t like sports culture don’t come to a sporting event- great logic.
Always happens whenever liberals get together it always boils down to extremes- If “thats ok” surely then “this” is ok. no it is down to personal judgement which is based on nurture and previous experiences

A few more facts about the elitist comment;
I Play sport therefore i am better than you, it is a given, I know it, u know it, and unfortunately ur friends and family secretly know it as well.
I am fitter faster stronger and healthier than you.
I have a better social life than you.
I am better looking than you.
I am funnier than you.
I have more friends than you
When im looking for jobs and they ask what extracurricular activities I had, and the skills developed, I will say sport, leadership and teamwork, u will say I pranced around sussex university library square forcing your opinions on everybody else. whilst 5% listened the other 95% wondered why you didnt have something better to do
I can chat and enjoy a conversation with someone without becoming offended that someone somewhere somehow may have been offended by the comment.
Im also sh*it hot in bed.

Don’t concern yourself with it, i am just better than you. end…… and please none of the petty comebacks about grammar, social status etc because i don’t care. The wit on this article has been dire, humiliating even.