compl3x Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 Universities can segregate students during debates as long as the women are not forced to sit behind the men, university leaders have said. Segregation at the behest of a controversial speaker is an issue which arises "all the time? and banning men and women from sitting next to each during debates is a "big issue" facing universities, Universities UK has said. As a result they have issued guidance which suggests that segregation is likely to be acceptable as long as men and women are seated side by side and one party is not at a disadvantage. In a new guidance on external speakers, vice-chancellors' group Universities UK says that universities face a complex balance of promoting freedom of speech without breaking equality and discrimination laws. When considering a request for segregation, they warn, planners must think about whether a seating plan could be discriminatory to one gender - for example if women were forced to sit at the back of the room it could prove harder for them to participate in the debate. The report adds: "Assuming the side-by-side segregated seating arrangement is adopted, there does not appear to be any discrimination on gender grounds merely by imposing segregated seating. Both men and women are being treated equally, as they are both being segregated in the same way." Earlier this year, a student equality group claimed that preaching by extremists and discrimination through segregation at student events has become a "widespread" trend at many UK universities. Student Rights, which carried out the research, found that radical preachers spoke at 180 events at universities including Cardiff and University College London (UCL) between March 2012 and March 2013. Segregated seating for men and women was promoted or implied at more than a quarter of the events, at 21 separate institutions. Among the events highlighted in the Student Rights report was a gender-segregated event at UCL on March 9. The lecture, Islam vs Atheism, was organised by the Islamic Education and Research Academy (IERA), and pitted writer Hamza Tzortzis against Prof Laurence Krauss in a debate. Apart from the controversies surrounding segregation, Universities UK say that academic institutions are facing a legal minefield when organising external speakers and their guidance aims to help them find the balance. An example of the fine balance is illustrated when the report goes on to say that if side-by-side seating was enforced without offering an alternative non-segregated seating area, it could be deemed as discriminatory against men or women who hold feminist beliefs. It adds: "Concerns to accommodate the wishes or beliefs of those opposed to segregation should not result in a religious group being prevented from having a debate in accordance with its belief system." The report presents some hypothetical case studies which come up on campuses, including whether a speaker from an ultraorthodox religious group requests an audience is segregated by gender. "These are issues that are arising all the time and these are really difficult issues," said Universities UK chief executive Nicola Dandridge. "What emerged from our work on this particular issue is that there is no clearly defined right or wrong here as to whether to allow or outlaw segregation. It is going to very much depend on the facts of the case." She added: "External speakers play an important role in university life, not least in terms of encouraging students to think for themselves, challenge other people's views and develop their own opinions. "Although most speakers are uncontroversial, some will express contentious, even inflammatory or offensive views. Universities have to balance their obligation to encourage free speech with their duties to ensure that the law is observed, the safety and security of staff, students and visitors secured, and good campus relations promoted. In practice, achieving this balance is not always easy. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/10468115/Universities-can-segregate-men-and-women-for-debates.html The UK being slowly but surely dragged backwards. Controversial speaker seems to be the new, cowardly PC euphemism for radical, hate spewing religious nut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlintyV Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 The UK being slowly but surely dragged backwards. Controversial speaker seems to be the new, cowardly PC euphemism for radical, hate spewing religious nut. By posting guidance on it? Nice dollop of hyperbole there, compl3x. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compl3x Posted November 27, 2013 Author Share Posted November 27, 2013 There should be no guidance because there should be no support of segregation. It is as simple as that. Segregating based on gender is as bad as doing it on race or anything else. Surely they wouldn't support or offer guidance on that, so why accept this? A fear of being branded Islamophobic? :rolleyes: Anibal P and Shiranui 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MightyJordan Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 Saw this a few days ago, and immediately after, someone set up a petition to try and reverse the decision, which I signed... https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Universities_UK_Rescind_endorsement_of_sex_segregation_at_UK_Universities/?tqxengb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Praetor Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 Saw this a few days ago, and immediately after, someone set up a petition to try and reverse the decision, which I signed... https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Universities_UK_Rescind_endorsement_of_sex_segregation_at_UK_Universities/?tqxengb Dude, go play Shenmue! :laugh: now seriously, this is nuts: if people are tolerant to the intolerants, they get screwed, but if others are intolerants to the tolerant then it's OK? :huh: MightyJordan 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Red King Subscriber² Posted November 28, 2013 Subscriber² Share Posted November 28, 2013 So freedom to discriminate based on religious grounds is significantly more important than freedom to live in a modern life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlintyV Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 So freedom to discriminate based on religious grounds is significantly more important than freedom to live in a modern life. I take it you didn't read the article then? K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomastmc Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 1) It makes perfect sense... Everybody knows that women can't pay attention when they're sitting next to man. 2) They let women into debates on religious matters? Why? (j/k) :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spenser.d Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 Only in the U...K? ;) See how that works? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compl3x Posted November 28, 2013 Author Share Posted November 28, 2013 I take it you didn't read the article then? K. Did you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts