Module 3: Anger: Hate Speech and Fighting Words
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Rita Nowak Homo Kallipygos 03.10.19
Rita Nowak Homo Kallipygos 03.10.19 - 26.10.19 Mittwoch-Samstag, 12.00-18.00 Matthew Bown Gallery Pohlstrasse 48 10785 Berlin Rita Nowak's exhibition Homo Kallipygos is a series of photographs, of artists and not- artists, shot in Vienna, London and elsewhere. Fraternity, sorority; physical intimacy made compatible with the formality of spectacle; and the allure of the nude body are explored via the motif of the buttocks: the preferred, gender-neutral, erogenous zone of our age. The title of the show derives from the Aphrodite Kallipygos (aka Callipygian Venus), literally, Venus of the Beautiful Buttocks, a Roman copy in marble of an original Greek bronze [1]. Aphrodite's pose is an example of anasyrma: the act of lifting one's skirt to expose the nether parts for the pleasure of spectators [2]. Nowak's student diploma work, Ultravox (2004), referred to Henry Wallis's Death of Chatterton (1856), since when Nowak has regularly evoked the heritage of figurative painting. Centrefold cites an earlier pin-up, Boucher's Blonde Odalisque (1751-2), the image of a fourteen-year-old model, Marie-Louise O'Murphy [3]. Tobias Urban, a member of the Vienna-based artists' group Gelitin, sprawls not on a velvet divan in the boudoir but on that icon of contemporary consumerism, an abandoned faux-leather sofa, installed in a sea of mud. The title suggests that Urban, like O'Murphy, is intended as an object of our erotic fantasy; the pose is subtly altered from Boucher's original, the point- of-view is shifted a few degrees: we see a little less of the face, more of the buttocks and genitals [4]. -
Full Article
467 O'NEIL 2/28/2013 3:54 PM HATE SPEECH, FIGHTING WORDS, AND BEYOND—WHY AMERICAN LAW IS UNIQUE Robert M. O‘Neil* During the waning days of the turbulent presidential campaign of 2012, the issue of free speech was bound to emerge. President Barack Obama chose this moment to declare to the United Nations General Assembly his abiding commitment to the uniquely American value of unfettered expression.1 In a diverse society, he reaffirmed, ―efforts to restrict speech can become a tool to silence critics, or oppress minorities.‖2 The catalyst for this declaration was the appearance of ―a crude and disgusting video‖3 caricaturing the Prophet Muhammad which had triggered violent protests in more than twenty nations, mainly in the Middle East.4 President Obama made clear both his disdain for the video and his unswerving faith in the singularly American insistence on free expression.5 Curiously (or some would say paradoxically) the Obama Administration only weeks earlier had actively supported passage of a resolution in the United Nations Human Rights Council to create an international standard restricting some anti-religious speech; the Egyptian ambassador to the United Nations had lauded this measure by recognizing that ―‗freedom of expression has been sometimes misused‘ to insult religion.‖6 Secretary of State Hilary Clinton had added her view that speech or protest resulting in the destruction of religious sites was not, she noted, ―fair game.‖7 In a recent and expansive analysis of these contrasting events, * University of Virginia and Association of Governing Boards, Albany Law Review Symposium, September, 2012. -
Free Speech Or Hate Speech? a Conversation Regarding State V
Free Speech or Hate Speech? A Conversation Regarding State v. Liebenguth November 16, 2020 4:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. CT Bar Association Webinar CT Bar Institute, Inc. CT: 2.0 CLE Credits (1.0 General / 1.0 Ethics) NY:2.0 CLE Credits (1.0 AOP / 1.0 Ethics) No representation or warranty is made as to the accuracy of these materials. Readers should check primary sources where appropriate and use the traditional legal research techniques to make sure that the information has not been affected or changed by recent developments. Page 1 of 163 Table of Contents Lawyers’ Principles of Professionalism...................................................................................................................3 Agenda ....................................................................................................................................................................6 Faculty Biographies ................................................................................................................................................7 Hate Crime Laws ..................................................................................................................................................10 State v. Liebenguth ................................................................................................................................................26 State v. Liebenguth 181 Conn.App. 37 ..................................................................................................................49 State v. Baccala .....................................................................................................................................................67 -
Fighting Words in the Era of Texts, Ims and E-Mails: Can a Disparaged Doctrine Be Resuscitated to Punish Cyber-Bullies?
DePaul Journal of Art, Technology & Intellectual Property Law Volume 21 Issue 1 Fall 2010 Article 2 Fighting Words in the Era of Texts, IMs and E-Mails: Can a Disparaged Doctrine Be Resuscitated to Punish Cyber-Bullies? Clay Calvert Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/jatip Recommended Citation Clay Calvert, Fighting Words in the Era of Texts, IMs and E-Mails: Can a Disparaged Doctrine Be Resuscitated to Punish Cyber-Bullies?, 21 DePaul J. Art, Tech. & Intell. Prop. L. 1 (2010) Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/jatip/vol21/iss1/2 This Lead Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in DePaul Journal of Art, Technology & Intellectual Property Law by an authorized editor of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Calvert: Fighting Words in the Era of Texts, IMs and E-Mails: Can a Dispar FIGHTING WORDS IN THE ERA OF TEXTS, IMS AND E-MAILS: CAN A DISPARAGED DOCTRINE BE RESUSCITATED TO PUNISH CYBER-BULLIES? Clay Calvert' One of the few traditional categories of expression falling outside the ambit of First Amendment2 protection - one of the so- called "categorical carve-outs"' - is the much-maligned 4 class of 1. Professor & Brechner Eminent Scholar in Mass Communication and Director of the Marion B. Brechner First Amendment Project at the University of Florida, Gainesville, Fla. B.A., 1987, Communication, Stanford University; J.D. (Order of the Coif), 1991, McGeorge School of Law, University of the Pacific; Ph.D., 1996, Communication, Stanford University. -
MORSE V. FREDERICK
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2006 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus MORSE ET AL. v. FREDERICK CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 06–278. Argued March 19, 2007—Decided June 25, 2007 At a school-sanctioned and school-supervised event, petitioner Morse, the high school principal, saw students unfurl a banner stating “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS,” which she regarded as promoting illegal drug use. Consistent with established school policy prohibiting such messages at school events, Morse directed the students to take down the banner. When one of the students who had brought the banner to the event—respondent Frederick—refused, Morse confiscated the banner and later suspended him. The school superintendent upheld the suspension, explaining, inter alia, that Frederick was disciplined because his banner appeared to advocate illegal drug use in violation of school policy. Petitioner school board also upheld the suspension. Frederick filed suit under 42 U. S. C. §1983, alleging that the school board and Morse had violated his First Amendment rights. The Dis- trict Court granted petitioners summary judgment, ruling that they were entitled to qualified immunity and that they had not infringed Frederick’s speech rights. -
Language Change: Identity Management and the Boundaries of Acceptable Verbal Conduct in School Settings
LANGUAGE CHANGE: IDENTITY MANAGEMENT AND THE BOUNDARIES OF ACCEPTABLE VERBAL CONDUCT IN SCHOOL SETTINGS Lynn Downes BA primAry educAtion, BA pre-primary education, BTTC, Master of EducAtion, Inclusive EducAtion, QUT, Master of EducAtion, TESOL, QUT. CELTA, UQ Principal Supervisor: Associate Professor Margaret Kettle Associate Supervisor: Professor Gordon Tait Associate Supervisor: Dr Peter O’Brien Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Office of Education Research Faculty of Education Queensland University of Technology May 2019. This page has been intentionally left blank “Fuck is a sacred word?” you ask. Fucking A right it is. It is a word that one should not utter because it is such a terrible word of epic proportions, a word whose mere utterance is a sin. A fucking sin, can you imagine? That’s how fucking important fuck is. And because it’s a sin, using it is so enticing to the young that when they hear it for the first time they are spellbound. And when they use it for the first time, that F and the U bang so deliciously against the hard K, ripping through the lips, it’s as if a caged animal has been unleashed. They feel that they have taken that first mighty step toward adulthood. Some of them may even repeat it over and over, testing to see if God will strike them down for saying it. It’s a word you don’t use in polite conversation or in front of your parents, which makes it even more glorious when chewed up and spit out in the schoolyard or in the bowels of the basement. -
The New Profanity Steven R
® THE LANGUAGE QUARTERLY Vol. XXV, No. 4 Autumn 2000 VERBATIM Editor: Erin McKean Founding Editor: Laurence Urdang The New Profanity Steven R. Finz The Sea Ranch, California nly a few decades ago, no person of culture battle began in the corridors of a California Owould use the f-word in polite company. municipal court, although it was inspired by a dif- Now, although even our courts have stopped ferent kind of battle that was taking place in Viet shrinking from public pronunciation of the word Nam. On April 26, 1968, Paul Robert Cohen fuck, all America heard O. J. Simpson’s defense walked through a Los Angeles County court- lawyer ask witness Mark Fuhrman if he had used house, in the presence of women and children, “the n-word” any time in the past ten years. wearing a jacket bearing the words “Fuck the Ironically, Fuhrman’s answer was “No. Never.” Draft” plainly emblazoned on its back. When Have ethnically offensive terms become the only Cohen entered a courtroom, he removed the dirty words left to our society? jacket and draped it over his arm. A court officer America holds a traditional belief in the ben- asked the judge to hold Cohen in contempt, but efits of free expression. United States Supreme the judge refused, since no offense had been Court Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote that one of committed in his presence. So the police were the prerogatives of American citizenship is the called. Cohen was arrested and convicted of vio- freedom to speak “foolishly and without modera- lating a California law that prohibited disturbing tion.”1 Our courts have a long history of protect- the peace. -
CAT's CRADLE by Kurt Vonnegut
CAT'S CRADLE by Kurt Vonnegut Copyright 1963 by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. Published by DELL PUBLISHING CO., INC., 1 Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, New York, N.Y. 10017 All rights reserved. ISBN: 0-440-11149-8 For Kenneth Littauer, a man of gallantry and taste. Nothing in this book is true. "Live by the foma* that makes you brave and kind and healthy and happy." --The Books of Bokonon. 1:5 *Harmless untruths contents 1. The Day the World Ended 2. Nice, Nice, Very Nice 3. Folly 4. A Tentative Tangling of Tendrils 5. Letter from a Pie-med 6. Bug Fights 7. The Illustrious Hoenikkers 8. Newt's Thing with Zinka 9. Vice-president in Charge of Volcanoes 10. Secret Agent X-9 11. Protein 12. End of the World Delight 13. The Jumping-off Place 14. When Automobiles Had Cut-glass Vases 15. Merry Christmas 16. Back to Kindergarten 17. The Girl Pool 18. The Most Valuable Commodity on Earth 19. No More Mud 20. Ice-nine 21. The Marines March On 22. Member of the Yellow Press 23. The Last Batch of Brownies 24. What a Wampeter Is 25. The Main Thing About Dr. Hoenikker 26. What God Is 27. Men from Mars 28. Mayonnaise 29. Gone, but Not Forgotten 30. Only Sleeping 31. Another Breed 32. Dynamite Money 33. An Ungrateful Man 34. Vin-dit 35. Hobby Shop 36. Meow 37. A Modem Major General 38. Barracuda Capital of the World 39. Fata Morgana 40. House of Hope and Mercy 41. A Karass Built for Two 42. -
THE MOVING FINGER Agatha Christie
THE MOVING FINGER Agatha Christie Chapter 1 I have often recalled the morning when the first of the anonymous letters came. It arrived at breakfast and I turned it over in the idle way one does when time goes slowly and every event must be spun out to its full extent. It was, I saw, a local letter with a typewritten address. I opened it before the two with London postmarks, since one of them was clearly a bill, and on the other I recognised the handwriting of one of my more tiresome cousins. It seems odd, now, to remember that Joanna and I were more amused by the letter than anything else. We hadn't, then, the faintest inkling of what was to come - the trail of blood and violence and suspicion and fear. One simply didn't associate that sort of thing with Lymstock. I see that I have begun badly. I haven't explained Lymstock. When I took a bad crash flying, I was afraid for a long time, in spite of soothing words from doctors and nurses, that I was going to be condemned to lie on my back all my life. Then at last they took me out of the plaster and I learned cautiously to use my limbs, and finally Marcus Kent, my doctor, clapped me on my back and told me that everything was going to be all right, but that I'd got to go and live in the country and lead the life of a vegetable for at least six months. -
Fighting Words and the First Amendment Thomas F
Kentucky Law Journal Volume 63 | Issue 1 Article 2 1974 "Don't Bother to Smile When You Call Me That"-- Fighting Words and the First Amendment Thomas F. Shea St. John's University Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the First Amendment Commons Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Shea, Thomas F. (1974) ""Don't Bother to Smile When You Call Me That"--Fighting Words and the First Amendment," Kentucky Law Journal: Vol. 63 : Iss. 1 , Article 2. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj/vol63/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kentucky Law Journal by an authorized editor of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. "Don't Bother to Smile When You Call Me That" -Fighting Words and the First Amendment By THOMAS F. SHEA* According to Owen Wister, certain words, at least when spoken without a disarming smile, are likely to provoke swift physical retaliation.' Kipling put it with characteristic clarity: "[Y]ou must not call a man a bastard unless you are prepared '2 to prove it on his front teeth." In order to forestall such violence-prone confrontations, it would seem desirable for society to prevent the insulting utter- ances which precipitate them in the first instance. Presumably laws effecting that result would advance society's undeniable interest in preserving the peace in two ways: by initially deter- ring the employment of abusive language and, where the speaker has not been deterred, by encouraging the recipient to seek redress through the judicial process rather than to rely on more immediate and more primitive means of obtaining satis- faction. -
First Amendment in a Hostile Environment: a Primer on Free Speech and Sexual Harassment Jules B
Notre Dame Law Review Volume 68 Issue 5 The Civil Rights Act of 1991: Theory and Article 4 Practice 6-1-1999 First Amendment in a Hostile Environment: A Primer on Free Speech and Sexual Harassment Jules B. Gerard Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Jules B. Gerard, First Amendment in a Hostile Environment: A Primer on Free Speech and Sexual Harassment, 68 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1003 (1993). Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol68/iss5/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The First Amendment in a Hostile Environment: A Primer on Free Speech and Sexual Harassment Jules B. Gerard' Civil suits by women charging that sexual harassment in the workplace created such intolerably hostile environments that they were unable to perform effectively have multiplied in the past decade. In every case, incidents involving speech were alleged or found to have contributed to the hostile environment. Re- markably, however, defendants almost never claimed that the sin-' gled out speech was constitutionally protected. On those few occa- sions when they did raise that issue, their claims were rejected virtually out of hand.1 The United States Supreme Court might be partly to blame for this casual disregard of free speech interests. When the Court first interpreted and upheld the federal law that bans sexual dis- crimination in employment practices, it made no point of the fact that the law plainly implicates First Amendment values. -
Simulated Shooting Should Be Punished by NFL ______
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ + MISCELLANEOUS Simulated shooting should be punished by NFL ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I'm waiting to see what the behavior police at the National Football League will do in response to the display of unsportsmanlike conduct at last night's nationally televised Eagles-Giants game. I'm not talking about the sequence of post-whistle skirmishes between the two rivals of the gridiron or the fight that resulted in offsetting penalties on players from both teams. I'm also not referring to the stupid taunts from Eagles DeSean Jackson directed toward the entire Giants team after the receiver pulled in a 50-yard pass right in front of the opponent's bench -- a truly juvenile act that prompted a penalty flag negating the big gain. I'm much more concerned about a spontaneous celebration from Eagles linebacker Brian Rolle midway through the second quarter, a rookie mistake that warrants an NFL sanction. You may have missed it -- the refs apparently did. And the NBC announcers failed to take notice, even when the player's antics were shown on replay. Immediately after he and his defensive mates had cornered a Giants ball carrier several yards behind the line of scrimmage, Rolle jumped up and started mimicking machine-gun fire. With a deliberate back-and- forth sweeping motion, Rolle appeared as if he were aiming and shooting at the Giants home crowd. Had Rolle pointed his imaginary weapon at one of the Giants players, he likely would have been penalized 15 yards for taunting. According to a footnote int the NFL Rule Book, a "machine gun salute" also constitutes taunting, presuming that such a gesture directed at the crowd is included.