CU Bans Women: Your Reaction

The recent revelation that female speakers are forbidden at certain CU meetings has provoked a wide range of comment and criticism.

The Tab has been made aware that the CU’s position on female speakers is actually not a recent development. Women have always been banned from being speakers at BUCU. Now, they are still banned at the events mentioned in our original article, but can speak in other environments.

Here are some of your reactions to the news.

“Ignoring the misogyny of this decision, banning women is an own goal on the CU’s part. The CU is a proselytizing organisation, as anyone who’s tried to walk down Woodland Road un-accosted during Mission Week can attest.

It seems unlikely that students curious about Christianity will be encouraged to join an organisation displaying such an outdated attitude towards women.

In the synod’s vote, only six more members of the laity were needed to approve the motion to introduce female bishops. If the majority of the upper echelons of the Church of England feel comfortable seeing women teach the gospels, why is this unacceptable for the CU, a purportedly moderate organisation?

The synod’s rejection of female bishops has resulted in many questioning the right of a discriminatory institution to remain the state religion. We should similarly question whether it is appropriate for a university organisation to be allowed to differentiate between men and women in this manner.

The CU would (presumably) never release a statement banning black speakers, so how can they defend this blatant sexism?

Alessandra Berti and Martha West (VPs for equality and activities) are due to meet with the CU president, Matt Oliver, to discuss this decision, and it is to be hoped that the issue will be resolved without discriminating against half the university population.

Whilst the CU’s wish to integrate members’ personal dogmas and provide a united front is understandable, the road to Hell is proverbially paved with good intentions. Equality cannot, and should not, be compromised.”

“Bristol University Christian Union has no formal position on the role of men and women in the church. We respect those of our members who hold strong Biblical convictions in this area and seek to find the most practical way of expressing this inclusivity.”

“If this is true, something needs to be done about this. I suppose the VP for Gender and Equality will have their work cut out.

Even if some members are against women priests or bishops, women speakers are prevalent in nearly all sects of Christianity. This is an incredibly stupid decision.”

“Women shouldn’t have the opportunity to speak at meetings due to their inferior relationship with God.

Eve was the first sinner and so all women are born with original sin. Therefore they should not try and tarnish the men with this sin and should not be able to teach at meetings.”

“Considering that no women speakers were allowed before this I think this decision represents a step forward by the CU not a step back!

Also an exec member stepped down because they felt they couldn’t be responsible for this decision. Bearing in mind that the status quo was no women speakers at all, this resignation supports the no women camp and the majority support women speakers.”

“I think it’s only fair. People don’t argue Islam women have less rights. You join the religion, you obey the rules. God would not like us to argue, we should be uniting.”

“The CU’s decision to ban female speakers at their events is simply another indicator of the deeply reactionary and archaic form of Christianity that the society has chosen to associate itself with – a Christianity that is deeply damaging to the progress made by feminists and secularists over the last 100 years.”

“And this is different from saying ‘Get back in the kitchen’ how? To think the feminists were having a go at me!”