Mahapatra Versus The Hildabeasts
IndraNeil Mahapatra was challenged at the Union last term by a Private Business Motion brought by Deputy Returning Officer Alex da Costa of St. Hilda's College. The President was accused of being both sexist and offensive in letters written in the Oxford Student, but eventually won the motion by 45 votes to 37.
Ms Da Costa, who was supported by a petition signed by many other members, including President-Elect Karen Price, was angered by the manner in which Mr Mahapatra replied to complaints about the "Women only want equal rights when it suits them" debate in 5th week of last term. Two members of St. Hilda's MCR, Ann Hoag and Suzanne Dow, said that they found the debate, which featured Peter Stringfellow and Anthony Worrel-Thompson very disturbing.
Ms Dow complained that women had been "demeaned, denigrated and insulted" by the debate and that "puerile personal comments" were made about the female speakers, about which the President could "barely conceal his amusement". Ms Hoag was offended by the way in which "heckling and whistling were allowed to enter the public sphere".
In his reply to these complaints, Mr Mahapatra defended the debate, saying that an equal number of men and women had attended, and yet the motion had been supported by an overwhelming majority, suggesting that most women did not share the view of Ms Dow and Ms Hoag. He also asked what was expected of "a debate featuring a night club owner and celebrity chef" and stated that the female editor of Bella made comments as offensive as both of them.
The comments which caused offence, however, related to Mr Mahaptras reference to St. Hilda's. He suggested that they should "cross the bridge more often" and then compared them to "beasts displayed purely to entertainment". The sentence which created the biggest outcry however, was the final injunction to "suck my debates".
The issue reappeared prior to the debate of 8th week. Ms Da Costa spoke in favour of her motion, stating that Mr Mahapatras remarks were "deeply offensive" and that his humour had crossed the limits of acceptability, and would allow the union to continue to be stereotyped as a male-dominated bastion of privilege.
The President took the floor to defend himself, but refused to apologise for his remarks, which he insisted were meant purely humorously. He stated that the debate was "the best of the term" and that nobody could see the union as male-dominated, pointing out that his officers were all female. He then accused Ms Da Costa and other members of St. Hilda's of wasting time prior to the 8th week debate.
Mr Mahapatra was narrowly saved by the members vote, which exonerated him, but by a majority of only 8.
10th Jan 2002