DOCSLIB.ORG

Combating Hate Speech Online

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Combating Hate Speech Online STARTING POINTS FOR COMBATING HATE SPEECH ONLINE Young People Combating Hate Speech Online is a project of the Speech Online Hate Combating for Starting Points Council of Europe’s youth sector running between 2012 and 2015. The project aims to combat racism and discrimination in their online expression of hate speech by equipping young people and youth organisations with the competences necessary to recognize and act against such human rights violations. Central to the project is a European youth media campaign which will be designed and implemented with the agency of young people and youth organisations. As a preparation for the project, the Council of Europe’s Youth Department commissioned three “mapping” studies about the realities of hate speech and young people and projects and campaigns about it. These studies are published here as a resource for the activists, youth leaders, researchers, partners and decision makers associated to the project and the online campaign. They are truly a starting points: more research is needed, both on the legal and policy implications of hate speech online as on its impact and relation with young people. Three studies about online hate speech and ways Prems 81714 Prems to address it www.nohatespeechmovement.org ENG The Council of Europe is the continent’s leading Dr Gavan Titley human rights organisation. It comprises 47 member states, Ellie Keen 28 of which are members of the European Union. László Földi All Council of Europe member states have signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights, a treaty designed to protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The European Court of Human Rights oversees the implementation of the Convention in the member states. STARTING POINTS FOR COMBATING HATE SPEECH ONLINE Three studies about online hate speech and ways to address it By Dr Gavan Titley, Ellie Keen and László Földi Council of Europe,Youth Department The opinions expressed in this work are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Council of Europe. All requests concerning the reproduction or translation of all or part of this document should be addressed to the Directorate of Communication (F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex or [email protected]). All other correspondence concerning this document should be addressed to the European Youth Centre). Cover photo: © Cristina Mancigotti Cover and layout: Documents and publications production Department (SPDP), Council of Europe © Council of Europe, October 2014 Printed at the Council of Europe Contents INTRODUCTION 5 HATE SPEECH ONLINE: CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED CAMPAIGN 7 Introduction 7 Hate speech: a contested concept 9 Hate speech online 17 Case study: NoRa – No Racism campaign of the Pelastakaa Lapset ry 20 MAPPING STUDY ON PROJECTS AGAINST HATE SPEECH ONLINE 23 Executive summary 23 Definitions 25 Cyberhate and freedom of expression 27 The extent of the problem 28 Forms and methods 33 Confronting cyberhate: key strategies 37 MAPPING STUDY ON CAMPAIGNS AGAINST HATE SPEECH ONLINE 55 Hate speech in general 55 Overview of the latest studies on hate speech online 57 Analysis of on-going campaigns against hate speech online 63 Recommendations for the project Young People Combating Hate Speech Online 79 Technical considerations for online campaigns 82 Recommendations for the online campaign 84 Timeline 89 References 90 ► Page 3 Introduction oung People Combating Hate Speech Online is a Council of Europe youth sector project designed Y to combat racism and discrimination by tackling the online expression of hate speech. The project, to The campaign message is positive and pro-active; run from 2012 to 2014, is equipping young people it is a campaign for freedom of expression online. It and youth organisations with the competences they also takes a clear stance against all forms of racism need to identify and challenge online hate speech and discrimination online. Young people from groups whenever and wherever they come across it. including victims of online hate speech – such as refugees and asylum-seekers, Muslims, LGBT and It was devised by youth leaders on the Council of Roma – will play an important role in the campaign. Europe’s Advisory Council on Youth and endorsed by the Organisation’s Joint Council on Youth – a unique While it is relatively common in mainstream society to structure where youth leaders and government rep- condemn hate speech, including online hate speech, resentatives make decisions side by side on youth closer study suggests that this mainstream consensus policy, programmes and priorities. is not well implemented. Starting with the definition of hate speech itself and the issue of striking a balance The project was conceived in response to and as a between freedom of speech, freedom from hatred or bulwark against the worrying rise of hate speech fear and the protection of children and young people, online. Central to the project’s philosophy is the idea there is currently a lack of clarity on how mainstream that online public space should be subject to the same opposition to hate speech can be put into practice. expectations regarding human rights as physical public space; human rights apply online just as they In preparation for the project, the Council of Europe’s apply to the rest of society. Youth Department commissioned three “mapping” studies about the realities of hate speech in relation The project is mobilising those involved at European to young people and the existing projects and cam- and national level through a variety of activities, paigns on the subject. They are published in this book including: training courses, the development of edu- as resources for the activists, youth leaders, research- cational materials, national seminars and conferences. ers, partners and decision-makers associated with the Central to the project is the European online youth project and for the online campaign at national and campaign – the No Hate Speech Movement (www. European level. nohatespeechmovement.org) – which young people However, these studies are only a starting point. and youth organisations have both set up and imple- Experts agree that more research is needed, both on mented through national campaigns and initiatives the legal and policy implications of hate speech online which aim to be as close to young people as possible. and on its impact and relation to young people. We Activities at national level are bringing together inter- expect that more research will be carried out through ested organisations and individuals to make national the project and that the online youth campaign will authorities and others aware of the need to take action. also contribute to it. ► Page 5 The three sections cover the following topics: ■ Dr Gavan Titley reflects on ■ Ellie Keen’s mapping ■ László Földi’s study on online the realities of hate speech today, study on projects against hate campaigns against hate speech how it is being “normalised” and speech online (for the British investigates existing online cam- defended through recourse to free- Institute of Human Rights) looks paigns against online hate speech, dom of expression. He goes further at a number of existing initiatives identifying valuable experiences for to analyse hate speech online and to address the problem of hate the European and national partners concludes with an example of anti- speech online and, drawing from of the Council of Europe’s online hate speech activists fighting rac- these, offers suggestions for the media campaign. Despite the fact ism online through youth work. By implementation of the Council of that the Council of Europe’s youth questioning hate speech from the Europe’s project. The study pro- sector and its governmental and perspective of racist discourses, he vides a comprehensive overview non-governmental partners have invites us to see hate speech at part of the different forms of online considerable campaigning experi- of a continuum of racist ideologies hate speech and existing initia- ence – especially through the All and shows us how they are perme- tives. The recommendations are Different – All Equal campaigns – the ating our societies. geared towards defining strate- organisation has very little experi- gies and approaches to address ence of running online campaigns. different forms of hate speech This study makes interesting pro- through a variety of means. posals regarding what the Council of Europe can learn from others to help ensure its project succeeds. Starting Points for Combating Hate Speech Online ► Page 6 Hate speech Online: considerations for the proposed campaign Dr Gavan Titley Introduction n an exchange with the philosophers Talal Asad and Writing about young people is a field frequently beset Mahmood Saba, considering the issues raised by by polarizing stereotypes; angels or devils, ‘change I what has become known as the Danish Cartoons agents’ or layabouts, in need of protection and/or Controversy, Judith Butler asks: ‘Is the freedom in discipline. Considerations of racism are often content free speech the same as the freedom to be protected to locate it at the political extremes, or in the igno- from violence, or are these two difference valences rance of pathological individuals. Thinking about the of freedom? Under what conditions does freedom of internet remains overly-structured by either/or ideas of speech become freedom to hate?’1 While the first ques- romantic transformation or dystopian collapse. When tion is of integral importance to these reflections, the you combine these three fields of inquiry, there is obvi- second question is one that is perhaps immediately ous potential for analysis to regard the issues at hand recognizable to youth workers across Europe. The as located at the margins of European democracy. conditions Butler references have many aspects and However hate speech online is not marginal, and the dimensions, prime among them the resurgent and edges of this political map are not immediately obvi- multivalent racisms that have achieved new forms ous.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Science of Diversity and the Impact of Implicit Bias
    The Science of Diversity and the Impact of Implicit Bias Hannah Valantine, MD NIH Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity ~ National Institutes of Health ~ / Office of the Director Scientific Workforce Diversity Use of This Module • This presentation presents information about scientific workforce diversity and factors that contribute to limiting diversity, including implicit bias • Viewing this presentation is not a substitute for broader efforts to reduce implicit bias and its negative outcomes on scientific career advancement • Please contact us with questions: [email protected] Presentation Outline • Why diversity? – Diverse is a driving force for excellence and innovation – Defining diversity – Lack of diversity in science: the evidence • Hurdles to diversity: Implicit bias – Pervasiveness of implicit bias – Evidence – Strategies for overcoming bias Why Diversity Matters Capitalizing on the Opportunity • Excellence, creativity, innovation • Broadening scope of inquiry - solutions to complex problems of health and disease • Impact of workforce diversity on health disparities • Ensuring fairness – Changing demographics – Leveraging the entire U.S. intellectual capital Capturing the Benefits of Diversity Identity is a Proxy for Cognitive Diversity *Underrepresented Thinking Populations in U.S. Language Ethnicity*Ethnicity Religion Style Biomedical, Clinical, Behavioral and Social Science Research Perspectives ExperiencesNationality* Nationality GeographyGender* Physical RaceRace* Culture Skills SocioeconomicGender Status*
    [Show full text]
  • Cyber Bullying and Victimization: Psychosocial Characteristics of Bullies, Victims, and Bully/ Victims Delia Carroll Campfield the University of Montana
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers Graduate School 2008 Cyber Bullying and Victimization: Psychosocial Characteristics of Bullies, Victims, and Bully/ Victims Delia Carroll Campfield The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Recommended Citation Campfield, Delia Carroll, "Cyber Bullying and Victimization: Psychosocial Characteristics of Bullies, Victims, and Bully/Victims" (2008). Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers. Paper 288. This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CYBER BULLYING AND VICTIMIZATION: PSYCHOSOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BULLIES, VICTIMS, AND BULLY/VICTIMS By Delia Carroll Campfield Master of Arts, The University of Montana, Missoula, Montana, 2006 Dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Psychology, Clinical The University of Montana Missoula, MT Official Graduation: Summer, 2008 Approved by: Dr. David A. Strobel, Dean Graduate School Dr. Christine Fiore, Chair Department of Psychology Dr. Greg Machek Department of Psychology Dr. Margaret Beebe-Frakenberger Department of Psychology Dr. Darrell Stolle Department of Curriculum and Instruction Dr. Danette Wollersheim Licensed Clinical Psychologist Campfield, Delia, Ph.D. Summer 2008 Clinical Psychology Cyber Bullying and Victimization: Psychosocial Characteristics of Bullies, Victims, and Bully/Victims Chairperson: Dr. Christine Fiore This study explored cyber bullying and victimization. The use of technology as a vehicle for peer victimization is increasing and is associated with a risk of psychosocial maladjustment (Finkelhor, et al., 2000; Wolak, et al., 2006; Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004a, 2004b).
    [Show full text]
  • Crime Prevention Guide
    CRIME PREVENTION GUIDE MURDER & ASSAULT Most murder and assault victims know their attackers. Many times, the people involved in the incident are drunk or on drugs. Murder or assault can also be the result of another crime such as burglary or robbery. The victim is killed when he or she resists. Other murders or assaults happen because of some seemingly trivial confrontation that turns violent because of anger, irrational thinking, alcohol or drugs. • If you think you are in danger, go to a safe place, then call police. • Do not touch anything. • While waiting for police, you should write down the license plate numbers of any vehicles leaving the crime scene. • Make a note of any suspicious people you see in the area. • When police arrive, they will search for evidence and ask you to provide any information you may have. • If you have additional information after the officers leave, call the Criminal Investigation Division at (972) 625-1887. Investigating officers will ask victims and witnesses for details of the incident. Correct information is extremely important because it can help in making a speedy arrest and determine what charges should be filed. When the initial investigation is completed, the officer will write a report and send it to the Criminal Investigation Division. The Division will review the case, contact the victim and witnesses, file charges if possible and do everything within reason to arrest the suspect. PREVENTION • Avoid high-crime areas when possible. • If you have to travel in dangerous areas, remain alert to your surroundings. Watch for strangers who may approach you without apparent reason.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement by Alice Wairimu Nderitu, United Nations Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, on the Continued Deterioration of the Situation in Ethiopia
    UNITED NATIONS PRESS RELEASE For immediate release Statement by Alice Wairimu Nderitu, United Nations Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, on the continued deterioration of the situation in Ethiopia (New York, 30 July 2021) The Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide, Alice Wairimu Nderitu, expressed alarm at the continued deterioration of ethnic violence in Ethiopia and at the strong allegations of serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law in the Tigray region as well as in other parts of the country, including in Afar, Somali, Oromo and Amhara regions. The Special Adviser also reiterated concerns expressed in her 5 February 2021 statement on the situation in the country. Since the beginning of the conflict in the Tigray region, the Special Adviser has continued to receive reports of serious human rights violations and abuses, including alleged sexual violence, recruitment of child soldiers, arbitrary arrests and ethnic based targeted killings committed by all parties, which have now escalated to other parts of the country. She also deplored the erosion of rule of law and echoed the recent call by the Human Rights Council for an immediate end to the violence and human rights violations in Tigray. The Special Adviser also condemned inflammatory statements used by top political leaders and associated armed groups. The use of pejorative and dehumanizing language like “cancer”, “devil”, “weed” and “bud” to refer to the Tigray conflict is of utmost concern. Hate speech, together with its propagation through social media is part of a worrisome trend that contributes to further fuel ethnic tensions in the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554
    Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 April 6, 2020 DA 20-385 Jessica J. González Gaurav Laroia Free Press 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 1110 Washington, D.C. 20036 Re: Free Press Emergency Petition for Inquiry Into Broadcast of False Information on COVID-19 Dear Counsel: Free Press has filed, under section 1.41 of the Federal Communications Commission’s rules,1 an emergency petition requesting an investigation into broadcasters that have aired the President of the United States’ statements and press conferences regarding the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and related commentary by other on-air personalities. The Petition claims that the President and various commentators have made false statements regarding COVID-19, which Commission licensees have broadcast to the public, and which allegedly have caused or will cause substantial public harm.2 Free Press asks the Commission, under its section 309 public interest authority3 and its rules prohibiting broadcast hoaxes,4 to investigate these broadcasts and adopt emergency enforcement guidance “recommending that broadcasters prominently disclose when information they air is false or scientifically suspect.”5 We deny Free Press’s petition. For the reasons explained below, the Petition misconstrues the Commission’s rules and seeks remedies that would dangerously curtail the freedom of the press embodied in the First Amendment. Free Press, an organization purportedly dedicated to empowering diverse journalistic voices, demands the Commission impose significant burdens on broadcasters that are attempting to cover a rapidly evolving international pandemic in real time and punish those that, in its view, have been insufficiently critical of statements made by the President and others.
    [Show full text]
  • Free, Hateful, and Posted: Rethinking First Amendment Protection of Hate Speech in a Social Media World
    Boston College Law Review Volume 60 Issue 7 Article 6 10-30-2019 Free, Hateful, and Posted: Rethinking First Amendment Protection of Hate Speech in a Social Media World Lauren E. Beausoleil Boston College Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr Part of the First Amendment Commons, and the Internet Law Commons Recommended Citation Lauren E. Beausoleil, Free, Hateful, and Posted: Rethinking First Amendment Protection of Hate Speech in a Social Media World, 60 B.C.L. Rev. 2100 (2019), https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr/vol60/iss7/6 This Notes is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FREE, HATEFUL, AND POSTED: RETHINKING FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION OF HATE SPEECH IN A SOCIAL MEDIA WORLD Abstract: Speech is meant to be heard, and social media allows for exaggeration of that fact by providing a powerful means of dissemination of speech while also dis- torting one’s perception of the reach and acceptance of that speech. Engagement in online “hate speech” can interact with the unique characteristics of the Internet to influence users’ psychological processing in ways that promote violence and rein- force hateful sentiments. Because hate speech does not squarely fall within any of the categories excluded from First Amendment protection, the United States’ stance on hate speech is unique in that it protects it.
    [Show full text]
  • Reporting Facts: Free from Fear Or Favour
    Reporting Facts: Free from Fear or Favour PREVIEW OF IN FOCUS REPORT ON WORLD TRENDS IN FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND MEDIA DEVELOPMENT INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLAY AN ESSENTIAL ROLE IN SOCIETIES. They make a vital contribution to achieving sustainable development – including, topically, Sustainable Development Goal 3 that calls for healthy lives and promoting well-being for all. In the context of COVID-19, this is more important than ever. Journalists need editorial independence in order to be professional, ethical and serve the public interest. But today, journalism is under increased threat as a result of public and private sector influence that endangers editorial independence. All over the world, journalists are struggling to stave off pressures and attacks from both external actors and decision-making systems or individuals in their own outlets. By far, the greatest menace to editorial independence in a growing number of countries across the world is media capture, a form of media control that is achieved through systematic steps by governments and powerful interest groups. This capture is through taking over and abusing: • regulatory mechanisms governing the media, • state-owned or state-controlled media operations, • public funds used to finance journalism, and • ownership of privately held news outlets. Such overpowering control of media leads to a shrinking of journalistic autonomy and contaminates the integrity of the news that is available to the public. However, there is push-back, and even more can be done to support editorial independence
    [Show full text]
  • The Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion Or Belief
    Level 1, 4 Campion St 594 St Kilda Rd DEAKIN ACT 2600 MELBOURNE VIC 3004 T 02 6259 0431 T 02 6171 7446 E [email protected] E [email protected] 14 February 2018 The Expert Panel on Religious Freedom C/o Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet By email: [email protected] RE: Submission to the Commonwealth Expert Panel on Religious Freedom 1. The Human Rights Law Alliance and the Australian Christian Lobby welcome this opportunity to make a submission to the Inquiry into the Status of the Human Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief. 2. The Human Rights Law Alliance implements legal strategies to protect and promote fundamental human rights. It does this by resourcing legal cases with funding and expertise to create rights-protecting legal precedents. The Alliance is especially concerned to protect and promote the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief. In the past 24 months, the Alliance has aided more than 30 legal cases, and allied lawyers appeared in State Tribunals and Magistrates, District and Supreme Courts as well as the Federal Court. 3. With more than 100,000 supporters, ACL facilitates professional engagement and dialogue between the Christian constituency and government, allowing the voice of Christians to be heard in the public square. ACL is neither party partisan or denominationally aligned. ACL representatives bring a Christian perspective to policy makers in Federal, State and Territory parliaments. 4. This submission focusses on the intersection between freedom of religion and other human rights first in international law, second in Australian law, and third in the lived experience of Australians.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Semitism?
    'p IsnlaWklmnicf" ,4MONS[ER CRthL T'HEHOLOCAUS r.rHE HOL ANTI..ZIONISM IN GREAT BRITAIN AND BEYOND A "Respectable" Anti-Semitism? ALVIN H. ROSENFELD THE AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE The American Jewish Committee protects the rights and freedoms of Jews the world over; combats bigotry and anti-Semitism and promotes human rights for all; works for the securityofIsraeland deepened understanding between Americans and Israelis; advocates public policy positions rooted in American democratic values and the perspectives of the Jewish heritage; and enhances the cre- ative vitality of the Jewish people. Founded in 1906, itis the pioneer human-relations agency in the United States. To learn more about how the American Jewish Committee fightshatred and anti-Semitism,visit our website at www.ajc.org and see related publications on the inside back cover. ANTI-ZIONISM IN GREAT BRITAIN AND BEYOND: A "Respectable" Anti-Semitism? ALVIN H. ROSENFELD THEAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A number of friends and colleagues read earlier versions of this essay and suggested ways to improve it. 'While they are not responsible for any shortcomings still present, I am certain the final version is better for their efforts. I would like to thank the following: Edward Alexan- der, Tamar Benjamin, Paul Bogdanor, Todd Endelman, Harry Geduld, Barbara Krawcowicz, Vivian Liska, Daniel Nichols, Gale Nichols, Aron Rodrigue, Erna Rosenfeld, Gavriel Rosenfeld, Natania Rosenfeld, Sidney Rosenfeld, Roger Temam, and Leona Toker. Alvin Rosenfeld Foiuwoiu Two popular national magazines have recently carried cover stories exploring "The New Face of Anti-Semitism" and "The New Anti- Semitism." One would think that a hatred as old and long-lasting as anti-Semitism could hardly be described as "new." Yet this protean virus has reared its head again, in its most recent incarnation, as a pattern of discourse that poses "merely" as criticism of Israel, but in reality propagates classic hatred and distrust of Jews.
    [Show full text]
  • The Issue of Diversity and Multiculturalism in Japan
    Jie Qi & Sheng Ping Zhang The Issue of Diversity and Multiculturalism in Japan THE ISSUE OF DIVERSITY AND MULTICULTURALISM IN JAPAN Jie Qi Utsunomiya University, Japan Sheng Ping Zhang Meijo University, Japan Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association March 24-29, 2008 New York In Session: Internationalization and Globalization in the Curriculum 1 Jie Qi & Sheng Ping Zhang The Issue of Diversity and Multiculturalism in Japan THE ISSUE OF DIVERSITY AND MULTICULTYRALISM IN JAPAN The purpose of this paper is to problematize that which has been taken for granted about the notion of multiculturalism in Japan. Multiculturalism is a novel issue in Japan. As the Japanese government started to promote “internationalization” since 1980’s, slogans such as “international exchange,” “cultural exchange,” “understanding of other cultures,” etc, have become the most popular hackneyed expressions among policy maker and educators. This paper demonstrates that the notion of multiculturalism in Japan is intricately and deeply embedded in Japanese society, Japanese culture and the Japanese educational system and that this type of multiculturalism excludes ethnic groups which have lived in Japan since old times. Firstly, the intention in this study is to interrupt the assumptions about homogeneous nation in Japanese educational discourse as have been accepted since the end of World War II. I assert that Japan is not homogeneous nation rather a society with diverse cultural groups. Secondly, this paper traces the path of the past notion of multiculturalism as embodied in the Japanese political, social and cultural conditions. In undertaking this I first look at the way cultural studies emerged in the 1980’s which created a new image of cultural studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Gender Bias in Sexual Assault Response And
    End Violence Against Women International (EVAWI) Gender Bias in Sexual Assault Response and Investigation Part 1: Implicit Gender Bias Heather Huhtanen Contributions by Kimberly A. Lonsway, PhD Sergeant Joanne Archambault (Ret.) November 2017 Updated October 2020 . This project is supported by Grant No. 2016-TA-AX-K010 awarded by the Office on Violence Against Women, US Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women. Gender Bias in Sexual Assault Response and Investigation October Part 1: Implicit Gender Bias Huhtanen 2020 Public Domain Notice Unless something is excerpted directly from a copyrighted source, all the material in this document is in the public domain and may be reproduced or copied without specifically requesting permission from End Violence Against Women International (EVAWI) or the authors. Any direct quotes or excerpts should be properly cited, however. No one may reproduce or distribute this material for a fee without the specific, written authorization of End Violence Against Women International (EVAWI). Electronic Access The publication may be downloaded from End Violence Against Women International’s Resource Library. Recommended Citation Huhtanen, H. (2020). Gender Bias in Sexual Assault Response and Investigation. Part 1: Implicit Gender Bias. End Violence Against Women International. End Violence Against Women International 2 www.evawintl.org Gender Bias in Sexual Assault Response and Investigation October Part 1: Implicit Gender Bias Huhtanen 2020 Authors Heather Huhtanen is currently based in Geneva, Switzerland where she works to promote gender equality in the context of international development, security and justice reform and peace and transition processes.
    [Show full text]