̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - equality

Opinion: We must balance the risks and benefits of AI

lw355 — Fri, 04 Apr 2025 15:31:31 +0000

AI will only be as good – or as bad – as the information fed into it, so we need to fix any bias that perpetuates inequality and marginalisation, says Michael Barrett.

Sight and sound

sc604 — Tue, 06 Aug 2024 14:13:35 +0000

How photoacoustics could transform cancer detection and monitoring

Mind Over Chatter: What would a more just future look like?

ns480 — Thu, 27 May 2021 12:57:12 +0000

Season 2, episode 4

Our society is more unequal than ever, as the top 1% control over 44% of the world’s wealth while 689 million people are living on less than $1.90 per day, according to the World Bank.

In this episode of Mind Over Chatter, we asked our guests what the future of fairness, justice, and equality should look like, and how their research can help to bring about a fairer society.

We cover topics ranging from distributive justice, the virtues and vices of empathy, and the role AI will play in shaping equality in the years to come.

Subscribe to Mind Over Chatter

Dr Alexa Hagerty, whose research looks at the global societal impacts of emerging technologies and Dr Natalie Jones, who focuses on global injustice and the rights of (indigenous) peoples, shared how injustice can be thought of as an existential risk to humanity.

Anthropologist, Professor Esra Ozyurek, who seeks to understand the tension between politics and religion in Turkey and in Europe, introduced us to the importance of understanding that different people have different needs, making equality insufficient to bring about justice.

Key points

[02.07]- what do we mean by fair when it comes to societies?

[06:45]- the difference between fairness, justice, and equality

13:13]- cognitive empathy and emotional empathy distinction

[13:50]- Time for recap 1: summary so far

[20:21]- how to link global injustice and different voices to existential risk

[20:44]- participatory futures intro

[21:21]-global justice causing existential risk

Mind Over Chatter: ̽��ֱ��Cambridge ̽��ֱ�� Podcast

Cambridge ̽��ֱ�� Library unveils the rich histories, struggles and hidden labours of Women at Cambridge

sjr81 — Thu, 05 Sep 2019 10:27:39 +0000

Opening to the public on Monday 14 October, and curated by Dr Lucy Delap and Dr Ben Griffin, the exhibition will focus on the lived experiences of women at the ̽��ֱ��, the ongoing fight for equal educational rights, recognition, and inclusion in university activities, and the careers of some of the women who shaped the institution – from leading academics to extraordinary domestic staff and influential fellows’ wives.

̽��ֱ��exhibition will showcase the history of women at the ̽��ֱ��, the persistent marginalisation they were subject to, and the ongoing campaigns for gender justice and change since the establishment of Girton College in Cambridge in 1869, the first residential university establishment for women in the UK. Visitors will have the opportunity to explore rarely seen collections from across the ̽��ֱ�� and colleges. Through a mix of costume, letters and audio-visual material, the fascinating and little-known stories of individual women will be illustrated.

Dr Lucy Delap, exhibition co-curator and Fellow of Murray Edwards College, said: “From the founding of the first women’s college to the present day, the experience of women at Cambridge has differed greatly from their male counterparts.

"Though Girton College was established especially to give women the opportunity to study at the ̽��ֱ��, there were still many barriers that women faced – the first female students were required to ask permission to attend lectures, were not allowed to take exams without special permission, and usually had to be accompanied by chaperones in public until after the First World War. It was still not until 1948 that Cambridge began to offer degrees to women – the last of the big institutions in the UK to do so.

“Through ̽��ֱ��Rising Tide we hope to illustrate an all-encompassing picture of the incredible fight for gender equality within the ̽��ֱ��, while portraying the fascinating journeys of some of the militant, cussed and determined women of our institution too.”

Visitors to the exhibition will learn of the deep opposition and oppression women faced, including the efforts made to keep women out of student societies, the organised campaigns to stop women getting degrees, and the hostility faced by women trying to establish careers as academics. Surviving fragments of eggshells and fireworks illustrate the violent opposition to giving women degrees during the vote on the subject in 1897, as does the note written by undergraduates apologising for the damage that had been done to Newnham College during the riot of 1921.

̽��ֱ��exhibition will also reveal the creativity and courage of the women who defiantly resisted such opposition to establish lives and careers within the ̽��ֱ��. Resistance included: the signing of the 400 page petition demanding women’s degrees in 1880, which will be displayed over the walls of the exhibition; setting up new student societies for women; and finding opportunities for women to lecture.

Sometimes, resistance meant finding ways of avoiding the rules that discriminated against women – between 1904 and 1907, Trinity College Dublin offered women from Newnham and Girton the opportunity to travel to Dublin to graduate officially and receive a full degree. ̽��ֱ��robes of one of the graduates, which have been stored for many decades, will be displayed in the Women at Cambridge exhibition.

Dr Ben Griffin, exhibition co-curator and Lecturer in Modern British History at Girton College, added: “By telling the story of women at Cambridge, this exhibition also tells the story of how a nineteenth-century institution, which served mainly to educate young men for careers in the church, transformed itself into a recognisably modern university devoted to teaching and research.”

̽��ֱ��Rising Tide is a culmination of exhibitions, events and displays exploring the past, present and future of women at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge. Curated by Cambridge ̽��ֱ�� Library in collaboration with students and staff, the events programme, pop-up exhibitions and displays will run at the Library and across the city. Women at Cambridge is the centre-piece of the programme and will launch on Monday 14 October, and run until March 2020. Entry is free.

One hundred and fifty years since the first women were allowed to study at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, Cambridge ̽��ֱ�� Library will be sharing the unique stories of women who have studied, taught, worked and lived at the ̽��ֱ��, in its new exhibition ̽��ֱ��Rising Tide: Women at Cambridge.

From the founding of the first women’s college to the present day, the experience of women at Cambridge has differed greatly from their male counterparts.

Lucy Delap

Girton College

Domestic staff of Girton College, 1908

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike

Gender inequality is ‘drowning out’ the voices of women scientists

ed515 — Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:00:00 +0000

Dr Heather Ford and her colleagues analysed data from the American Geophysical Union (AGU) Fall Meeting and found that, overall; female scientists are offered fewer opportunities than men to present their research.

̽��ֱ��team examined the gender, career stage and type of presentation delivered by each participant from 2014 to 2016. They found that female members are at a disadvantage because the majority of them are students or in the early stages of their careers, groups whose members are typically given fewer chances to present their research. ̽��ֱ��results are reported in the journal Nature Communications.

Conference speakers are often at more senior stages of their careers, where there are usually fewer women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) fields. A further problem is that men are more likely to provide speaking opportunities to other men, potentially limiting women’s career prospects.

“ ̽��ֱ��burden of representation often falls on under-represented groups. We need the majority groups to think about representation, otherwise minority voices will continue to be drowned out,” said Ford, who is a NERC Independent Research Fellow in Cambridge’s Department of Earth Sciences.

However, the research showed some positive signs, as women were invited at a much higher rate than men in the early and mid- career stages.

̽��ֱ��researchers are calling for more students and early career researchers to have opportunities to speak at future conferences, in a bid to help some of the many female members who are at the beginning of their careers. They also want to see more women selecting the conference speakers, and suggest that all members may benefit from diversity training before they can invite speakers and assign conference presentations.

Attending and presenting at conferences helps academics at every stage of their careers to build their network, meet potential collaborators and share their research. Conferences are important for career progression, and can be key in helping researchers to find funding and receive job offers. Presenting at academic conferences can also help researchers to gain recognition and awards for their work.

Ford says she and her co-author Petra Dekens from San Francisco State ̽��ֱ�� were motivated to look into this topic after sitting in “too many conference sessions” with either no female speakers, or a single female speaker.

̽��ֱ��global context is also an important issue for Ford, particular the ongoing campaign for gender equality. She said; “A lot of women have been motivated to speak out about gender inequality in the past year – people are much more vocal about how they’ve been treated. I wanted to find a productive way to channel my frustrations.”

̽��ֱ��AGU Fall Meeting is the world’s largest geoscience conference, with more than 22,000 presentation proposals each year. ̽��ֱ��AGU has more than 60,000 members in 137 countries, and around a third of its members are women. Geoscience is one of the least diverse STEM fields.

Reference:
Heather L. Ford et al. ‘'Gender inequity in speaking opportunities at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting.’ Nature Communications (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-03809-5

A ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge researcher is calling for the voices of women to be given a fairer platform at a leading scientific conference.

We need the majority groups to think about representation, otherwise minority voices will continue to be drowned out.

Heather L. Ford

International Council for Science

Margaret Leinen at the 2012 AGU Fall Meeting

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommerical

Opinion: Translation: a bridge between languages that can foster cultural equality

Anonymous — Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:23:31 +0000

Back in the 1990s, the football manager Dennis Wise was unfazed that some of his new players were foreigners. They would soon be able to communicate, he reassured everyone, since he intended to “learn them a bit of English”.

Earlier this year, David Cameron had the same bright idea. Writing in ̽��ֱ��Times in January, the prime minister lamented that 22% of British Muslim women speak “little or no English”. He argued that it was prohibiting their social integration and holding them back economically. These problems would be solved, he suggested, if these women acquired fluency in English.

̽��ֱ��very fact that this fatuous idea can be solemnly propounded by prominent politicians reveals the extent to which linguistic diversity has become a conundrum in our vast, sprawling, multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, multi-cultural, post-industrial societies.

̽��ֱ��ongoing migration crisis is unparalleled in living memory, and it painfully illustrates how large-scale population displacements can rapidly create social situations in which linguistic differences become flashpoints. ̽��ֱ��inability of migrants to speak the first language of a country to which they have travelled can arouse suspicion and alienation. These differences create divisions that can only be bridged by translating from one language to another, and from one culture to another.

Oddly, we hear little in the media about how translation operates in societies where there are class-based divisions or displaced communities. Some recent research has explored the role of translation in war zones, but this has mainly emphasised the rhetoric of the political elite, rather than the day-to-day linguistic difficulties encountered by civilians caught up in the conflict.

This is disturbing since the power imbalances in any society are manifest in its languages. For instance, Lin Kenan has written at length about how translation could potentially help to trigger social change in China.

Social justice

In this age of relentless globalisation, certain groups of people are routinely disenfranchised due to gender, ethnicity, nationality and social class. In this context, it’s helpful to consider the role translation plays in all of this, and whether it can ever help to empower the disenfranchised – or only serve to increase their vulnerability.

̽��ֱ��controversial translation theorist Lawrence Venuti has argued insistently that fluent translations frequently perpetuate socio-political inequalities. In his view, translation is not an innocuous activity that facilitates communication – it can entrench inequality by bolstering the supremacy of dominant cultures.

Recent research has started to explore these complex issues. ̽��ֱ��translation scholar Israel Hephzibah focuses on English translations of Tamil literature produced by members of the so-called “untouchable” Dalit communities in India. These translations inevitably destabilise the traditional caste system by conferring literary credibility on the writings of a severely marginalised group. Such cases suggest that translation can become aligned with social justice.

Becoming extinct

But the fraught issue of endangered languages and cultures complicates the picture. UNESCO has estimated that 50-90% of the world’s languages will have become extinct by the year 2100.

It has been recognised for some time now that translations of indigenous texts (whether oral or written) can hasten language erosion in communities where there are few surviving native speakers. In contrast, translations into the endangered tongues can help to strengthen those languages.

On the whole, we seem to care less about vanishing languages than we do about endangered species – especially cuddly ones. When the last giant panda finally goes to the great bamboo grove in the sky, there will undoubtedly be prolonged global lamentation. But the Native American Klallam language expired on February 4 2014, when Hazel Sampson (its last speaker) died. Few news organisations felt its passing merited more than a cursory mention.

And even some translation theorists are sceptical. Emily Apter declared bluntly that she has “real reservations” about mingling translation studies and linguistic ecology – the study of how languages interact with their environment. Apter is concerned that the exoticising of expressions by native-speakers and other distinctive characteristics of a language risks imposing a fixed grammar where a natural variation should instead be allowed to prevail.

There are many different kinds of periphery in the modern world, and life close to them can be difficult, even precarious. But languages are spoken there too. They may not be the same languages as those uttered closer to the “centre” of things, but that does not invalidate them.

If we can understand more fully how translation both strengthens and weakens these often disregarded tongues and cultures, then we might be forced to reconsider some of our rather simplistic presuppositions about language and society. And, fortunately, if all else fails, we can always make the world a better place by “learning” everyone a bit of English.

Marcus Tomalin, Research Associate in the Machine Intelligence Laboratory, Department of Engineering, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge

This article was originally published on ̽��ֱ��Conversation. Read the original article.

̽��ֱ��opinions expressed in this article are those of the individual author(s) and do not represent the views of the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

Marcus Tomalin (Department of Engineering) discusses the role of translation in social inequality and social justice.

Symphoney Symphoney

Ancient Tamil Script

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution

“Nudity does not liberate me and I do not need saving”

amb206 — Fri, 26 Jul 2013 07:00:00 +0000

Earlier this year the radical feminist group Femen turned its attentions away from Europe to North Africa, targeting vast swathes of the Arab and Muslim world with its uncompromising messages. Up until this point the protestors, who dub themselves as “sextremist”, had focused their activities on Europe and primarily on issues affecting white European women.

Emerging in the Ukraine around five years ago, Femen made its name with its own brand of attention-grabbing publicity. Images of its topless protests, nipples blurred, appeared in media throughout the world and, to some extent, conformed to passively-held assumptions of what “radical feminism” might look like. In other words, it knowingly plays up to feminist stereotypes in the quest for publicity.

Femen argues that the female body can re-assert itself, and the meaning attached to it, through anti-patriarchal messages scrawled on bare breasts. ̽��ֱ��group seeks to challenge norms by inverting the hyper-sexualised signal that exposed breasts typically send. Whether you believe in its value or not, this mode of protest plays out in the real world as a dangerous strategy. ̽��ֱ��political message is often lost, indeed undermined, by the same widespread salacious interest in the naked female body that garners Femen so much media coverage.

Given the flurry of sensationalised media surrounding Femen’s nude protests, it’s not surprising that many feminists have distanced themselves from the group, arguing that its tactics reinforces the notion that women can only get attention for (and by means of) their physicality, not on the strength of the inherent merit of the feminist cause.

̽��ֱ��catalyst for the shift in Femen’s focus was Amina Tyler, 19-year-old founder of the group’s Tunisian branch. In March this year Amina posted topless photos of herself on Femen’s Facebook page. One image, in the style that has become characteristic of Femen’s activism, depicts Amina with the slogan “My body belongs to me and is not the source of anyone’s honor” written in Arabic across her bare chest. Another shows her with “F**k your morals” in the same bold style.

These images triggered immediate reactions within Tunisia, with Amina reportedly receiving threats of death by stoning. Rumours circulated that she had been arrested by the local authorities; these turned out to be false. Femen’s rapid response was the organisation of “Topless Jihad Day” in support of Amina – and what began as feminist activism quickly slipped into what appeared to be anti-Muslim protest.

It became apparent that Femen is waging a campaign that shows little consideration for the vast majority of the community whose rights it claims to promote. ̽��ֱ��group that spoke up against Femen, Muslim Women Against Femen, sought to challenge the narrative that Muslim women are de facto oppressed by dressing a certain way or subscribing to a particular theology.

As many other commentators have noted, Femen have obvious representation issues outside Europe. White European women represent the vast majority of its supporters and, furthermore, they seem committed to advancing a particular brand of feminism as universal with little regard for local histories and efforts.

Many observers too baulked at the language of “Topless Jihad Day”. Jihad is not a word to be used lightly. One can only imagine how frustrating it must be for Muslims, who regularly insist that jihad is misunderstood by both terrorists and Western commentators, to have it thrown back at them in this effectively hollow sense. It seemed another instance of Femen prioritising attention-grabbing publicity over coherent message. But beyond this, seeking to “save” others implies superiority.

̽��ֱ��Femen protests are more than simply unnecessarily provocative and culturally insensitive: they also expose deeper truths. In response to Femen, Muslim Women Against Femen instituted “Muslimah Pride Day”. ̽��ֱ��group described Femen as perpetuating and promoting Islamaphobia and accused it of cultural imperialism. Many individual voice spoke about issues of freedom and choice. One post displayed the message: “My hijab is my pride. Islam is my freedom. This is my choice. I don’t need you to be my voice. I have mine.” Another one tackled feminism head-on: “Feminism comes in many forms! You bare up, I cover up.”

̽��ֱ��manager of Muslim Women Against Femen’s Facebook page regularly warns members against “slut shaming” Femen activists. Hundreds of responses illustrate complex, multi-faceted responses to Femen’s actions, not outright rejection. ̽��ֱ��message is clear: freedom has to involve choice, and respect for the choices of others. ̽��ֱ��posts engage with feminist debates, while exposing how such protests ultimately struggle to engage with multiple forms of oppression. Two of the many messages that illustrate this are: “Nudity does not liberate me and I do not need saving” and “Let me tell YOU how oppressive your culture is.”

̽��ֱ��issue with Femen’s representation is not just that white, European women are campaigning on ‘behalf of’ Muslim women. By its actions, Femen (perhaps unintentionally) deepened racial and religious divisions within the communities it sought to liberate. These tensions led to the alienation of many women who came to see themselves as having no place within the Western feminist movement, which they now associate with Femen’s radical protests.

Worse still, Femen, in the eyes of many Muslim and Arab women, has come to symbolise oppression. While attempting to liberate Muslim women, Femen has succeeded in oppressing them along religious and racial lines.

Femen misrepresents the complexity of both individuals and groups. A woman’s identity is shaped by an intricate web of influences – economic, cultural, sexual and religious, to name but a few. Many would argue that feminist movements do provide space for diversity among women. ̽��ֱ��problem, in Femen’s case, was that a woman could only be “in” – and by implication only be free – if she subscribed to a particular set of values that does not sit well with the lifestyles of many communities.

Across the political spectrum struggle, there is debate about what it means to be “free”. Whichever aspect is grasped, we commonly fail to see how we are simultaneously disadvantaging freedom in another respect. Femen is an archetypal example of this common occurrence. Its alienation of those it seeks to empower does not stem from uncharitability; indeed, often it comes from an overwhelming abundance of concern.

Femen activists mobilised in opposition of patriarchal control and the subjugation of women they perceived in North Africa. Many of these activists were horrified to find so many women speaking out against their campaign, and often insisted that there had been a misunderstanding.

Such a narrative ignores messy historical and political dynamics that make female empowerment different from place to place. People are products of different circumstances and choices. Can we honestly call the banning of the veil an advancement of freedom – or is it just the advancement of a particular view of what it means to be “free”? Similarly, does demonising women who choose (and also those who choose not) to wear a headscarf really liberate them? Or does it just place them in a category of “repressed”; a category that they have little power to escape without our consent.

Hardest for us to acknowledge is our own place in structures of injustice, and, at times, the place of a very particular concept of what it means to be free in those structures. While we seek to improve the lives of women by liberating them from dressing a particular way, we both willingly and unconsciously overlook that in other respects we play a role in their inequality.

A large part of this stems from our weakness at grasping multiple forms of oppression and inequality. Tunisian women are oppressed not just because they are female; this oppression intersects with poverty, religion, education, culture and other factors that may disadvantage them. It is naïve to target one aspect while refusing to see that you are simultaneously reinforcing another. Femen protests do just this; they seek to empower a group of women, and simultaneously worsen their oppression as Muslims.

When it comes to advocacy, protest and many kinds of charitable action, the start must be a long hard look in the mirror – honest self-reflection. This has to include understanding and admittance of the ways in which our position disadvantages those who we seek to help in other ways.

For the feminist movement, it is tempting to isolate sex as the crux of repression, which conveniently negates our role as wealthy (globally speaking), often white, often middle class, often Christo-agnostic, often well-educated individuals. We have to acknowledge the privilege and difference these factors endow to us, and that the women we are talking to, and often simply talking about, may also be affected by other factors, potentially to a greater degree.

We should start by working with people, with the awareness that they are as intricate, perhaps as contradictory, as we ourselves are, and that their situations are subject to personal and historical change as well. If you agree with a cause, support it – but rhetoric and ideology must flow from the repressed to the repressor. ̽��ֱ��other way around ultimately reinforces what we are seeking to overcome.

This is an edited version of an article by Raffaella Taylor-Seymour for the online magazine King’s Review. http://kingsreview.co.uk/magazine/

When radical feminists took their cause from Europe to North Africa, the outcome was a deepening of the divides they sought to break down. Social anthropology student Raffaella Taylor-Seymour argues for greater reflection about the meaning of freedom.

When it comes to advocacy, protest and many kinds of charitable action, the start must be a long hard look in the mirror.

Raffaella Taylor-Seymour

PLANETART (Flickr Creative Commons)

Inna Shevchenko of Femen

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution