Home

TheSinner.net

Champagning

This message board is for discussing anything in any way remotely connected with St Andrews, the University or just anything you want. Welcome!

Champagning

Postby threekings on Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:13 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-e ... e-20712971

Amazed no one has commented on this yet.

I think that the unions response to this has been a shambles. Fforde has been so quick to jump on the moral high ground, hope he's taken some oxygen up there.

To me his comments make little sense - he's so busy saying how st andrews wants to attract students from "all backgrounds", which presumably really means 'deprived' backgrounds as the uni/bbc puts it, that he seems to have forgotten one thing:

StA has been milking Will/Kate to the nth degree - and having had a member of the royal family attending is naturally going to attract a load of toffs and wannabe toffs. some of whom will probably like pouring champagne on their heads, joining all male clubs and drinking lots of port. pretty much impossible to have one without the other. deal with it.

The natural conclusion from Fforde's comments is that having some toffs at the uni will put off people from 'deprived areas' from applying to StA; yet he fails to elaborate any further and actually specify how this would put them off.

As the figures in this article point out http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/2 ... university it's the, very sad, fact that very few students from deprived areas get the AAA you now need to get in, and actually StA isnt far behind Aberdeen in % terms and no one seems to be making this into a big issue there. Oh and what is one of the major reasons behind people now needing AAA to get in? because applications are massively higher than they used to be - and what is a major reason for this? that's right, the unis 2 fav toffs, Will & Kate.

Rant over.
threekings
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:41 pm

Re: Champagning

Postby wild_quinine on Wed Dec 19, 2012 2:32 pm

more links:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/201 ... university
http://www.thesaint-online.com/2012/12/ ... e-apology/

Even assuming that it actually was champagne, and that it was all wasted, the reactions are silly political hoop shots, which are at least as supererogatary as the original video.

Also, I think the logic is back to front. Why is milking OK, but champagning not OK? Because people can afford milk? Milk is a staple. Wasting milk, bread, basic groceries, that's what disgusts me. Taking real food for granted because we live in the kind of society where it's almost throwaway cheap is really kind of sickening.

On the other hand, Champagne is a luxury item. Most people buy it because it's champagne, not to supplement a healthy diet, or because they have to, or even because they like the taste. So in some ways, it's not such a great loss if someone pours it over their head. It was there to be enjoyed, not to sustain, and if it was enjoyed then it served its purpose. If you've ever bought and drunk champagne, I don't think you have much high ground. You spent money you didn't need to spend for your own personal enjoyment. End of. One man's pate is another man's palate. Anyone who has bought champagne never, ever spray a little bit like they sometimes do on TV? Never even consider it?

But throwing away milk because you simply don't value it? Yeuch. It's not just posh people who can be gratuitous, you know. Nobody is desperate for champagne. Nobody begs for champagne on the street. Nobody is starving in a way that champagne is what would help them get through another night.

Well, there's no point crying over spilt milk.
wild_quinine
User avatar
 
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 11:57 pm

Re: Champagning

Postby Frank on Wed Dec 19, 2012 9:54 pm

wild_quinine wrote:Well, there's no point crying over spilt milk.

Image
Frank
User avatar
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:39 pm


Return to The Sinner's Main Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests

cron