Hate speech against women online: concepts and countermeasures
In: Social imaginaries
11 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Social imaginaries
In: Hypatia: a journal of feminist philosophy, Band 38, Heft 2
ISSN: 1527-2001
In: Feminist media studies, Band 23, Heft 3, S. 766-782
ISSN: 1471-5902
This article details and analyses some of the public online response to the Tasmanian Government's decision to make the recording of gender on birth certificates an opt-in process. Tasmania is the first jurisdiction in Australia to make such a change, which aims to simplify the legal processes involved in affirming a person's gender identity (including agender and non-binary status). The data set is comprised of comments posted on Facebook in response to The Australian newspaper's coverage of this event; The Australian is Australia's only truly national daily broadsheet. This article argues that the effect of this overwhelmingly negative ciscentric response, as revealed by the aesthetic of this digital social space, is the generation of an impression of Australians as trans- (and intersex-) averse. This risks undermining the basic good of assurance that transgender and intersex people ought to have: an assurance that they can inhabit public spaces and be treated with dignity and respect (cf. Waldron). To prevent this kind of hostile response in the future, we must find a way to communicate and make resonant to the general public what queer and feminist theorists have been arguing for quite some time: that sex and gender are not synonymous and that both gender and sex are social constructs.
BASE
In: Hypatia: a journal of feminist philosophy, Band 33, Heft 2, S. 256-272
ISSN: 1527-2001
Hate speech is one of the most important conceptual categories in anti‐oppression politics today; a great deal of energy and political will is devoted to identifying, characterizing, contesting, and (sometimes) penalizing hate speech. However, despite the increasing inclusion of gender identity as a socially salient trait, antipatriarchal politics has largely been absent within this body of scholarship. Figuring out how to properly situate patriarchy‐enforcing speech within the category of hate speech is therefore an important politico‐philosophical project. My aim in this article is twofold: first, I argue that sexist speech, though oppressive, is not hate speech. Second, I argue that misogynistic speech is hate speech, even when it is intradivisional (that is, when it targets only subsets of women). This is important because recognizing that the concepthate speechapplies to certain forms of patriarchy‐enforcing speech is another step in clarifying what is wrong with the practice, and how bad it is in relation to other abuses. Consequently, this article provides a more nuanced account of the kinds of expressions that can and should count as instances of hate speech.
In: Emotion, space and society, Band 23, S. 54-55
ISSN: 1755-4586
In: Australian feminist studies, Band 27, Heft 72, S. 205-219
ISSN: 1465-3303
In: The Australian feminist law journal, Band 48, Heft 1, S. 113-136
ISSN: 2204-0064
In: Politics and religion: official journal of the APSA Organized Section on Religion and Politics, Band 16, Heft 2, S. 197-218
ISSN: 1755-0491
AbstractPolitical debates over religious freedom in Australia became prominent in the context of marriage equality, achieved in 2017. The Australian Christian Right (ACR) has driven these debates, but there is little research focusing on its discourse of religious freedom. This article examines a range of texts from ACR actors. Using discourse and theoretical analyses, we identify three key turns in the religious freedom rhetoric of the ACR: "ontological security," "existential stress," and "meaning vertigo." We also explore how mimetic ACR discourse is compared to the United States' Christian Right (USCR). As with the USCR, this research demonstrates how the ACR—suffering meaning vertigo and aiming to re-secure its previously taken-for-granted worldview—has successfully reframed the discourse of religious freedom by positioning itself as a besieged minority.
In: Australian journal of social issues: AJSI, Band 57, Heft 1, S. 185-201
ISSN: 1839-4655
AbstractReligiously affiliated schools employ a substantial portion of the Australian educational workforce. These religiously affiliated schools are exempt from Australian state‐based anti‐discrimination legislation in varying degrees. This can have a devastating effect on LGBT+ employees. While NSW has broad exemptions to anti‐discrimination legislation, in contrast Tasmanian anti‐discrimination legislation provides very limited exemptions. This paper examines and compares the experiences of ten LGBT+ teachers employed in religiously affiliated schools in Tasmania and New South Wales. The aim of this paper is to document the differing experiences of these LGBT+ teachers, examining whether the distinctive state‐based legislation has an impact on their lives. The small number of cases examined here suggests that the state difference in anti‐discrimination legislation has a significant impact on LGBT+ peoples' job security and career development.