The Harry Miller Judgement:
"'Right to be offended' does not exist"
"“We live in a pluralistic society where none of us have a right to be offended by something that they hear.
“Freedom of expression laws are not there to protect statements such as ‘kittens are cute’ - but they are there to protect unpleasant things.
“Its utility lies in exposing people to things that they do not want to hear.”
I am sounding very old, but there is a big tough world out there. Young people will need resilience and an ability to get on with things. Yes they should be willing to fight injustice. But fight, not just take offense.
My own instinct is that Rudds "side of the story" could have been interesting. I suspect there is more to a Minister being scapegoated, than we perhaps see. Essentially politics. I suspect women are more vulnerable than men. I suspect the Home Office, that great, unwieldy Department, is the most difficult of all. May was a champion in not making decisions, but also interesting that this job, in a very clubbable Cabinet, that was the one that went to an Unclubbable woman. Rudd, had problems. Javid in contrast seems to have had a bit of a love in with the Perm Sec, whilst Patel is under siege. I note that there seems to be some briefing from people, who were close to Rudd, essentially supporting Patel. For a student of politics, especially women interested in politics, there would be a wealth of interesting questions to ask.
Next time perhaps they should go with Layla Moran, or Jo Swinson or another woman who has fully drunk the Kool aid. (Lisa Nandy, R L-B). Why move beyond student politics.
And can we have Rudd for a MN web-chat on the challenges faced by women in politics?