In a tweet directed to the university, she said: “This speaker is part of the anti-trans platform. Free speech is one thing, but trans rights are human rights and we shouldn’t be debating human rights.

We’re told these days that health care is a right, housing is a right, food is a right. We cannot discuss these things?

Freedom of religion is a human right yet we cannot discuss Israel, Judaism?

Tracey Loughran, a historian and dean in the Essex University humanities department,

She really want to insist that universities cannot discuss human rights?

Well, no, of course not, the argument is in fact that what I declare to be rights isn’t discussable only what we might add to that roster in the future…..

25 thoughts on “Rilly?”

  1. Don’t trans people have the same human rights as me? Or more? Or less? Either option requires explanation at least, and that implies discussion.

  2. The right to free speech, to express your views however unpopular they may be is a basic human right that all civilised people support unequivocally.

  3. “Free speech is one thing, but trans rights are human rights and we shouldn’t be debating human rights.”

    Let’s try that the other way round:

    Trans rights are one thing, but free speech is a human right and we shouldn’t be debating human rights.

    Still wrong, of course, but does illustrate this fool’s foolishness.

  4. When ideological fanaticism trumps academic discourse we have what we’d used to call “religious oppression”.

    Welcome to the new world, same as the Old world….
    And there was me thinking that especially a historian would be aware of the effect centuries of wars, inquisition and pogroms in the name of [ideology] have had on this world, especially the bit of Europe we’re inhabiting…

  5. dearieme


    I enjoy saying to Leftards that people are too obsessed with their human rights, all of which can be taken away from you, and that we should instead concentrate on our human responsibilities and that the world would be better if we did.

    When they splutter about me being a baby killing Nazi I point out it was Gandhi who said that.

  6. I’ve used that one as well Andrew, it’s actually very useful with the otherwise sensible people caught up in the hysteria

  7. Andrew – but the sainted Gandhi was a bit of a racist – he certainly regarded Indians as superior to the ‘Kaffirs’.

  8. @dearieme December 7, 2019 at 4:10 pm
    @john77 December 7, 2019 at 4:21 pm

    The very idea of “human rights” is bollocks.


  9. Dearieme: What’s the betting that Jeremy Bentham’s publisher bowdlerized him and the original really was “Bollocks on stilts”?

  10. Weekend Humour

    A revised history of Britain (Labour version)
    1066 The Norman invasion establishes the principle of unrestricted immigration. Our European partners from Normandy come over to introduce a new age of multiculturalism by killing the white nationalist King Harold and, together with the Labour movement, giving his racist Anglo-Saxons a good hiding at the Battle of….

  11. A bit OT but here’s a human rights dilemma I’ve just found myself the centre of:

    I’ve done lots of first aid courses and we always work on the assumption that the subject wants to be saved when it comes to CPR. Recently those included using defibrillators (AEDs).

    Our village has just bought an AED and, although I’m a 1st aider I still had to do the course, no problem you can’t practice CPR too many times. That was this morning.

    So far so boring, until someone raised the issue of people who have Do Not Resuscitate orders. The advice was that unless they are carrying the approved letter then ignore it and give CPR/AED. (Apparently some people have it tattooed or carry notices on necklaces but they don’t count)

    So here’s the dilemma. We’ve got son and fiance staying with us for a while and fiance’s grandmother is coming for Christmas, along with fiance’s dad and mum. Grandma recently had a minor stroke and also had a heart attack a few years ago.

    I mentioned this evening that I’ve just done the course so grandma should be OK (the AED is about 100m away) only to be told that this afternoon grandma signed a DNR and not only that but her son and my son were witnesses. I pointed out that I need the letter/form before I can take that in to account.

    So, without said letter, what should I do if the worst happens while she’s here? Of course without proof I’ll do my best to keep her alive if the worst happens, but I’m sure I’ll feel bad either way.

  12. Anon

    This is a twisty thing. So I looked it up. The USA Red Cross says this:

    They say its to be used to re-establish proper heart functioning. They don’t say “Wait till they’re dead and try to resuscitate them”

    So it may well be that the DNR is not relevant – more intended for the unfortunate situation like they’ve opened you up, and there’s indeed a massive cancer throughout your body and its in your (list of everything). No point waking you up.

    My preferred DNR says, in effect – “if there’s a good chance that this’ll work and I’ll be in fairly good nick after – go for it; but if it’s vegetable land, don’t bother”.

    Having an AED to hand and using it within a minute or two should be the former case.

    Might be worth just talking about it all with those concerned to get a good picture of what was intended.

    Hope this helps

  13. One of the things my wife preferred in the Canadian system was that failed suicides could be restrained in ICU before they regained consciousness, in the NHS they had to come round and be violent first (very common for them to thrash out being disoriented etc.) before they could be restrained, apparently human rights etc. NHS system resulted in her coming home with bruises and apparently staff safety didn’t override the patients rights.

  14. @Anon
    You have been officially informed by the subject of the DNR and both witnesses that the person in question does not wish to receive resuscitation in the event.. etc.

    What more do you need? Sticking to your paperwork is a cop-out, and you probably know this very well….

  15. @Anon

    Apparently some people have it tattooed or carry notices on necklaces but they don’t count

    imo Ignoring a tattooed on chest DNR or necklace/bracelet should result in a non-consent prosecution of “First Aider”

    Excuse of need to see letter is flimsy as dead person can’t produce and wave letter



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *