Objecting To Human Rights

So firstly to say it is fantastic to have Chasmal back writing on the blog, especially for me as it means I can wander all round the ideas I have had but had put off. And this one has partly been fired up because the fact people are realising that Object are a hate group not a human rights group. I want to go through some of the ways that Object and especially their leadership counters the claim that they have anything to do with Human Rights.

So lets start at the very beginning of the declaration of human rights and article 1. "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.". Well yes shouting rapist or loser at people who have a different point of view is obviously in line. Abusing people who work in industries that Object disapprove of is definitely in Sisterhood and trying to deny people the right to work by campaigning to close clubs definitely sisterhood... oh wait I am being sarcastic and didn't realise it.

Now article 2 sets out that everyone is entitled to being covered by human rights, yes Object selective treatment of people is not in line with Human rights but everyone involved should know that because Anna moved to Object from Amnesty International. But well wild accusations being cast at protests doesn't really seem to sit with it. Yes protest about what you don't like that is a freedom that we all have and we can all exercise, I would like to protest, at an Object Protest, to Object. But attacking individuals simply because they choose to act differently and enjoy things that Object don't then that really is not in the spirit of the declaration.

I want to jump to article 5 as 3 and 4 don't apply. "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.". Now maybe I misunderstood what the implications of being called a wanker, a loser or a rapist  but personally I really, and I do mean really, think that those terms are degrading not just to me but to any and all the people those terms were being hurled at. If you want me to respect your opinion, even if I disagree with it, then please try to show me some respect in return. However judging by the vitriol come from Object at that protest at XbizEU we will never be able to see a like for like level of respect.

Article 6, "Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.". And by extension that should be as individuals we treat other individuals as a person, now at this point no doubt the Object supporters will cry out Objectification. Really that is the only argument that Object have left that even remotely works. But can anyone Objectify a person for any length of time once they have engaged with them conversationally. I have seen quite a few naked women over the years and yet I have never objectified any of them once I have started to talk to them. I can sit in a room of scantily clad women and it is nice but I don't see them as body parts. I recognise them as human beings something Object would do well to remember when they call other women losers!

I just want to pick up on two more articles because it is such a massive area of failure by Object you could write a chapter of a book about it. So article 12 "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.". Well having seen the attacks on my reputation and my honour just on Mumsnet before being banned you can work out what is wrong when dealing with Object. I mean really how can a group claim to be a human rights group when they attack people verbally the way they have done in the past. I am so fed up with seeing the hate pour out of them and they have the gall to call themselves anything other than a hate group.

Finally (for the time being) Article 17 which is in two parts (1) "Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others." (2) "No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.". Now this applies to businesses as well as physical property so when you see people wanting to deny legal businesses the right to operate then article 17 applies. I won't go on as anyone with half a brain cell could figure out what is wrong with Object and Article 17.

So I could go on, there is plenty more that Object do that raises the question why are Object an anti human rights group? I will leave people to mull over this as next time anyone says Object is a Human Rights group I want people to tear the arguments apart. I have no issues with people exercising the freedom of their beliefs but making claims about what you are does lead to the expectation that people will question the claims.

TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)