Oxford set to make 800-year-old Latin ceremony non-binary
Oxford is set to make an 800-year-old Latin ceremony gender-neutral for the benefit of non-binary students.
The university has conferred its degrees in Latin since the 12th century, but the wording used could be changed to make it more inclusive.
Dons will vote on a proposal to change the Latin ceremonial text to cater to those 'who identify as non-binary'.
In a gazette issued to alert faculties to the planned changes, the introduction of the first gender-neutral degree ceremony in Oxford's almost 1,000-year history is deemed 'necessary'.
The changes involve stripping a Latin message of congratulations of words that are grammatically gendered masculine or feminine.
Instead of referring to masters students as 'magistri' (masters) – a masculine word – the proposed text uses the term 'vos', which is neutral terms for 'you'. The word 'doctores' (doctors), which is also masculine, could be changed.
For undergraduates, the word for 'who', which has a masculine and feminine form, will be replaced with a neutral word.
Similar changes have been proposed for the specific wording used in degree ceremonies for awards in arts, music, medicine, law, philosophy and other specialisms.
The push for gender-neutral language will not only apply in degree ceremonies, but other formal occasions at Oxford.
In a ceremony for the admission of a new Vice-Chancellor, the retiring Vice-Chancellor will say a few words in English not about 'his/her' tenure, but about 'their' time at the helm.
Gender pronouns will also be stripped for other formal occasions including for the admissions of staff, if plans are voted through by Oxford's Congregation, which acts like a parliament for the university.
A vote will be held on April 29 and will affect all ceremonies from October this year.
The linguistic changes have been approved by Dr Jonathan Katz, a Latin expert who serves as the university's Public Orator.
The proposals come amid a general push by public bodies to become more inclusive of varying gender identities, which has seen universities introduce gender-neutral toilets and inclusive language guides.
Oxford's own Equality and Diversity Unit has urged staff and students to be mindful about discussing certain issues, stating 'all members of the University should be sensitive when discussing transgender topics'.
The proposals also come after a modern reckoning with Latin.
The Labour government cut the £4 million Latin Excellence Programme which supported the teaching of language in state schools, raising concerns about an attack on subjects often deemed 'elitist'.
This led to accusations that Sir Keir Starmer was 'pulling up the drawbridge behind him' by axing Latin, despite himself studying the subject.
In 2022, the textbooks of the Cambridge Latin Course books, which had been used in classrooms for five decades, were earmarked for revision because of their depictions of slaves.
In the wake of Black Lives Matter protests, the didactic character of Caecilius used in the course was flagged, as he was shown to own several slaves. In one educational vignette, he was shown buying a young girl.
Some scholars have raised concerns in the past that these domestic slaves were shown living 'happy' and carefree lives. One 2019 academic article in the US argued this was a 'sanitation and normalisation of slavery'.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
25 minutes ago
- New York Times
NATO Chief Urges Members to Spend Far More on Military
The chief of NATO on Monday called on the alliance to make a 'quantum leap in our collective defense,' committing to increases in military spending that far outstrip what Britain and most other members have yet pledged. Speaking in London, Mark Rutte, NATO's secretary-general, laid bare the budget pressures that will face Britain and its European neighbors as they confront the aggression of Russia and the retrenchment of the United States. Mr. Rutte, a former prime minister of the Netherlands, is pushing for members to commit to spending 5 percent of their gross domestic product on military and defense-related activities, a target promoted by President Trump, who complains that the alliance has long unfairly burdened the United States. Mr. Rutte hopes to enshrine the new benchmark at a NATO summit meeting in The Hague on June 24 and 25. But he has yet to set a timeline for when members would be required to meet it — and the goal still seems elusive. Britain has pledged to increase military spending to 2.5 percent of gross domestic product by 2027, paid for by diverting funds from overseas aid. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has set a goal of 3 percent within a decade, though he has refused to give a more specific date without knowing where the money will come from. Ramping up to 5 percent, analysts say, would necessitate politically painful trade-offs for Britain, which is already dealing with straitened public finances. Britain currently spends 2.3 percent of its economic output on defense, more than France or Germany but less than the United States, at about 3.4 percent. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Paraguay president's X account likely hacked in Bitcoin scheme
ASUNCION (Reuters) -Paraguay's government on Monday said that President Santiago Pena's X account had likely been hacked after the leader appeared to promote trading of cryptocurrency Bitcoin. "The president's official X account has presented irregular activity which suggests possible unauthorized entry," the government said in a statement. A post on Pena's account in English, with a Spanish-language statement purporting to be from the government, had declared that the Latin American country had made Bitcoin legal tender and that it would roll out a $5 million Bitcoin-backed reserve fund. The government asked citizens to ignore posts from the account until official confirmation was made available. Paraguay's national cybersecurity team was working with X to investigate the situation, the government added. X did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump Has Long Floated Using Force Against His Own People — Now He Has the Pretext to Do So
'You just [expletive] shot the reporter!' Australian journalist Lauren Tomasi was in the middle of a live cross, covering the protests against the Trump administration's mass deportation policy in Los Angeles, California. As Tomasi spoke to the camera, microphone in hand, an LAPD officer in the background appeared to target her directly, hitting her in the leg with a rubber bullet. Earlier, reports emerged that British photojournalist Nick Stern was undergoing emergency surgery after also being hit by the same 'non-lethal' ammunition. The situation in Los Angeles is extremely volatile. After nonviolent protests against raids and arrests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents began in the suburb of Paramount, President Donald Trump issued a memo describing them as 'a form of rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States'. He then deployed the National Guard. As much of the coverage has noted, this is not the first time the National Guard has been deployed to quell protests in the U.S. In 1970, members of the National Guard shot and killed four students protesting the war in Vietnam at Kent State University. In 1992, the National Guard was deployed during protests in Los Angeles following the acquittal of four police officers (three of whom were white) in the severe beating of a Black man, Rodney King. Trump has long speculated about violently deploying the National Guard and even the military against his own people. During his first administration, at the height of the Black Lives Matter protests, former Secretary of Defence Mark Esper alleged that Trump asked him, 'Can't you just shoot them, just shoot them in the legs or something?' Trump has also long sought to other those opposed to his radical agenda to reshape the United States and its role in the world. He's classified them as 'un-American' and, therefore, deserving of contempt and, when he deems it necessary, violent oppression. During last year's election campaign, he promised to 'root out the communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country'. Even the Washington Post characterised this description of Trump's 'political enemies' as 'echoing Hitler, Mussolini'. In addition, Trump has long peddled baseless conspiracies about 'sanctuary cities', such as Los Angeles. He has characterised them as lawless havens for his political enemies and places that have been 'invaded' by immigrants. As anyone who has ever visited these places knows, that is not true. It is no surprise that in the same places Trump characterises as 'disgracing our country', there has been staunch opposition to his agenda and ideology. That opposition has coalesced in recent weeks around the activities of ICE agents, in particular. These agents, wearing masks to conceal their identities, have been arbitrarily detaining people, including US citizens and children, and disappearing people off the streets. They have also arrested caregivers, leaving children alone. As Adam Serwer wrote in The Atlantic during the first iteration of Trump in America, 'the cruelty is the point'. The Trump administration's mass deportation program is deliberately cruel and provocative. It was always only a matter of time before protests broke out. In a democracy, nonviolent protest by hundreds or perhaps a few thousand people in a city of ten million is not a crisis. But it has always suited Trump and the movement that supports him to manufacture crises. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, a key architect of the mass deportations program and a man described by a former adviser as 'Waffen SS', called the protests 'an insurrection against the laws and sovereignty of the United States'. Trump himself also described protesters as 'violent, insurrectionist mobs'. Nowhere does the presidential memo deploying the National Guard name the specific location of the protests. This, and the extreme language coming out of the administration, suggests it is laying the groundwork for further escalation. The administration could be leaving space to deploy the National Guard in other places and invoke the Insurrection Act. Incidents involving the deployment of the National Guard are rare, though politically cataclysmic. It is rarer still for the National Guard to be deployed against the wishes of a democratically elected leader of a state, as Trump has done in California. This deployment comes at a time of crisis for U.S. democracy more broadly. Trump's longstanding attacks against independent media — what he describes as 'fake news' — are escalating. There is a reason that during the current protests, a law enforcement officer appeared so comfortable targeting a journalist, on camera. The Trump administration is also actively targeting independent institutions such as Harvard and Columbia universities. It is also targeting and undermining judges and reducing the power of independent courts to enforce the rule of law. Under Trump, the federal government and its state-based allies are targeting and undermining the rights of minority groups — policing the bodies of trans people, targeting reproductive rights, and beginning the process of undoing the Civil Rights Act. Trump is, for the moment, unconstrained. Asked overnight what the bar is for deploying the Marines against protesters, Trump responded: 'The bar is what I think it is'. As New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie recently observed: 'We should treat Trump and his openly authoritarian administration as a failure, not just of our party system or our legal system, but of our Constitution and its ability to meaningfully constrain a destructive and system-threatening force in our political life.' While the situation in Los Angeles is unpredictable, it must be understood in the broader context of the active, violent threat the Trump administration poses to the U.S. As we watch, American democracy teeters on the brink. This article was updated on June 9, 2025 to correct information about Rodney King. Emma Shortis, Adjunct Senior Fellow, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The post Trump Has Long Floated Using Force Against His Own People — Now He Has the Pretext to Do So appeared first on Katie Couric Media.
