首页 > 最新文献

First Amendment Studies最新文献

英文 中文
Multimodal rhetorics in the gun debate: Encouraging youth agency in March for Our Lives’ “The Most Vicious Cycle” 枪支辩论中的多模态修辞:鼓励青年机构在3月份为我们的生活“最恶性循环”
Q2 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2023-11-17 DOI: 10.1080/27671127.2023.2279216
Gabriela Tscholl
In October 2018, March For Our Lives (MFOL) released “The Most Vicious Cycle,” a music video designed to mobilize collective agency among youth voters in the midterm election. The video, which feat...
2018年10月,“为我们的生命游行”(MFOL)推出了旨在动员中期选举青年选民集体力量的mv《最恶性的循环》(The Most Vicious Cycle)。视频,哪个壮举…
{"title":"Multimodal rhetorics in the gun debate: Encouraging youth agency in March for Our Lives’ “The Most Vicious Cycle”","authors":"Gabriela Tscholl","doi":"10.1080/27671127.2023.2279216","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/27671127.2023.2279216","url":null,"abstract":"In October 2018, March For Our Lives (MFOL) released “The Most Vicious Cycle,” a music video designed to mobilize collective agency among youth voters in the midterm election. The video, which feat...","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138513669","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Nudges, emojis, and memes: Mapping interpassivity theory onto digital civic culture 轻推、表情符号和模因:将互动性理论映射到数字公民文化
Q2 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2023-09-13 DOI: 10.1080/27671127.2023.2252494
Lukas Mozdeika
Once lauded for liberating audiences from their passive state by granting voice, the digital public sphere today increasingly resembles a cacophony of disjointed voices datafied for the gain of gia...
数字公共领域曾因赋予话语权而将受众从被动状态中解放出来而受到称赞,如今,它越来越像一种不连贯的声音的杂音,这些声音被数据化,以获取信息……
{"title":"Nudges, emojis, and memes: Mapping interpassivity theory onto digital civic culture","authors":"Lukas Mozdeika","doi":"10.1080/27671127.2023.2252494","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/27671127.2023.2252494","url":null,"abstract":"Once lauded for liberating audiences from their passive state by granting voice, the digital public sphere today increasingly resembles a cacophony of disjointed voices datafied for the gain of gia...","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138513671","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Varieties of censorship: Hate speech, pornography, and the First Amendment 各种审查制度:仇恨言论、色情和第一修正案
Q2 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/21689725.2021.1971101
Cary Federman
ABSTRACT Until the 1960s, governmental limits on speech and expression, particularly around issues of pornography and obscenity, were common. These restrictions were enacted to reinforce a set of standards that had broad support among the American people. Since the 1960s, we have seen a great expansion of the right to free speech and expression. Today, however, the libertarian consensus has fractured. The new censorship that favors regulating hate speech confronts the underlying premises of the old censorship. Rather than comparing and contrasting the libertarian position with the censorship of hate speech position, as is so often done, in this article, I will compare and contrast two pro-censorship positions, one group favoring the censorship of hate speech, the other favoring the censorship of pornography and obscenity. My purpose is not to advocate for censorship. Rather, my idea is to examine and explain the different rationales that exist in the two opposing approaches to censorship, to better judge the merits of censorship and free speech.
摘要直到20世纪60年代,政府对言论和表达的限制,特别是在色情和淫秽问题上,一直很普遍。制定这些限制是为了加强一套在美国人民中得到广泛支持的标准。自20世纪60年代以来,我们看到言论和表达自由权的大幅扩大。然而,今天,自由意志主义的共识已经破裂。有利于规范仇恨言论的新审查制度与旧审查制度的基本前提背道而驰。在这篇文章中,我将比较和对比两种支持审查的立场,一种支持仇恨言论审查,另一种支持色情和淫秽内容审查。我的目的不是提倡审查制度。相反,我的想法是审查和解释两种相反的审查方法中存在的不同理由,以更好地判断审查和言论自由的优点。
{"title":"Varieties of censorship: Hate speech, pornography, and the First Amendment","authors":"Cary Federman","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2021.1971101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2021.1971101","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Until the 1960s, governmental limits on speech and expression, particularly around issues of pornography and obscenity, were common. These restrictions were enacted to reinforce a set of standards that had broad support among the American people. Since the 1960s, we have seen a great expansion of the right to free speech and expression. Today, however, the libertarian consensus has fractured. The new censorship that favors regulating hate speech confronts the underlying premises of the old censorship. Rather than comparing and contrasting the libertarian position with the censorship of hate speech position, as is so often done, in this article, I will compare and contrast two pro-censorship positions, one group favoring the censorship of hate speech, the other favoring the censorship of pornography and obscenity. My purpose is not to advocate for censorship. Rather, my idea is to examine and explain the different rationales that exist in the two opposing approaches to censorship, to better judge the merits of censorship and free speech.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45762258","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Navigating a doctrinal grey area: Free speech, the right to read, and schools 在教义灰色地带导航:言论自由、阅读权和学校
Q2 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/21689725.2021.1979419
Richard S. Price
ABSTRACT Every year thousands of people challenge the contents of libraries and school curriculum. The exact number of these complaints is impossible to measure and most are likely verbal in nature and handled informally. Some, however, explode into public view. This article explores two battles in New Jersey over Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic by Alison Bechdel. In a dispute that began via email, emerged publicly through several local board of education hearings, spread to a neighboring school, and then traveled to the courts, the Fun Home dispute illustrates the conflict at play in the joints between free speech, parental rights, and public authority.
每年都有成千上万的人挑战图书馆和学校课程的内容。这些投诉的确切数量是无法衡量的,大多数可能是口头的,非正式的处理。然而,其中一些却突然进入了公众视野。这篇文章探讨了艾莉森·贝克德尔(Alison Bechdel)在《欢乐之家:一个家庭悲喜剧》(Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic)中发生在新泽西州的两场战斗。这场纠纷从电子邮件开始,通过几次当地教育委员会听证会公开出现,蔓延到邻近的一所学校,然后上诉到法院。趣味之家的纠纷说明了言论自由、父母权利和公共权力之间的冲突。
{"title":"Navigating a doctrinal grey area: Free speech, the right to read, and schools","authors":"Richard S. Price","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2021.1979419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2021.1979419","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Every year thousands of people challenge the contents of libraries and school curriculum. The exact number of these complaints is impossible to measure and most are likely verbal in nature and handled informally. Some, however, explode into public view. This article explores two battles in New Jersey over Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic by Alison Bechdel. In a dispute that began via email, emerged publicly through several local board of education hearings, spread to a neighboring school, and then traveled to the courts, the Fun Home dispute illustrates the conflict at play in the joints between free speech, parental rights, and public authority.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44176766","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Fighting back: Is defamation law a double-edged sword for #MeToo victims? 反击:诽谤法对#MeToo受害者来说是一把双刃剑吗?
Q2 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/21689725.2021.1977160
J. Dee
ABSTRACT During the past half-century, countless women have been victims of sexual harassment, groping, and rape. When the #MeToo Movement gained momentum in October 2017, women who had victimized began to speak out. If women who were victims of sexual predators had not originally reported being raped but came forward as part of the #MeToo movement two or three decades later and the perpetrators denied it (in essence, accusing the victims of lying), their only legal recourse has been to sue the sexual predators for defamation. The law of defamation is a double-edged sword, however, because if victims use social media platforms to “name and shame” the men who raped them, the perpetrators have also sued their alleged victims for libel. This discussion examines the effectiveness of turning to defamation law as a means of redressing grievances in #MeToo cases, and also applies critical legal theory to these cases. In other words, if there is pervasive structural inequity in the legal system, meaning that perpetrators are often wealthy and powerful men who can easily afford attorneys’ fees, can victims still prevail in court, or can wealthy and powerful perpetrators buy their victims’ silence with non-disclosure agreements?
在过去的半个世纪里,无数女性成为性骚扰、猥亵和强奸的受害者。2017年10月,#MeToo运动声势浩大,受害女性开始发声。如果遭受性侵犯的女性最初没有报告被强奸,而是在二三十年后作为#MeToo运动的一部分挺身而出,而施暴者否认了这一点(本质上是指责受害者撒谎),那么她们唯一的法律追索权就是起诉性侵犯者诽谤。然而,诽谤法是一把双刃剑,因为如果受害者利用社交媒体平台“点名羞辱”强奸她们的男性,施暴者也会以诽谤罪起诉所谓的受害者。本讨论探讨了将诽谤法作为#MeToo案件中纠正冤情的手段的有效性,并将批判性法律理论应用于这些案件。换句话说,如果法律体系中存在普遍的结构性不平等,即犯罪者通常是有钱有势的人,可以轻松支付律师费,那么受害者还能在法庭上获胜吗?或者有钱有势的犯罪者能通过保密协议让受害者保持沉默吗?
{"title":"Fighting back: Is defamation law a double-edged sword for #MeToo victims?","authors":"J. Dee","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2021.1977160","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2021.1977160","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT During the past half-century, countless women have been victims of sexual harassment, groping, and rape. When the #MeToo Movement gained momentum in October 2017, women who had victimized began to speak out. If women who were victims of sexual predators had not originally reported being raped but came forward as part of the #MeToo movement two or three decades later and the perpetrators denied it (in essence, accusing the victims of lying), their only legal recourse has been to sue the sexual predators for defamation. The law of defamation is a double-edged sword, however, because if victims use social media platforms to “name and shame” the men who raped them, the perpetrators have also sued their alleged victims for libel. This discussion examines the effectiveness of turning to defamation law as a means of redressing grievances in #MeToo cases, and also applies critical legal theory to these cases. In other words, if there is pervasive structural inequity in the legal system, meaning that perpetrators are often wealthy and powerful men who can easily afford attorneys’ fees, can victims still prevail in court, or can wealthy and powerful perpetrators buy their victims’ silence with non-disclosure agreements?","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47514024","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Protesting with guns and conflating the First and Second Amendments: The case of the Bundys 持枪抗议,并将第一和第二修正案混为一谈:邦迪一家的案例
Q2 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/21689725.2021.1970609
Amy Pason, P. File
ABSTRACT This article analyzes the legal discourse surrounding two armed anti-government confrontations – at Bunkerville, Nevada, in 2014, and the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon in 2016 – to understand how the public makes sense of the relationship between First and Second Amendment rights. Using the concept of non-judicial precedents and drawing on legal scholarship following District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), we find that public meaning-making mirrors concerns raised by legal scholars about using First Amendment logics to understand Second Amendment rights, conflating the two in meaning and practice. Discourse surrounding these armed confrontations focused on whether guns were needed to protect speech rights, the rhetoric of patriotism, and the contested constitutional primacy of speech versus guns. We argue that this case study demonstrates the need for communication scholars to problematize the logics that intertwine the First and Second Amendments, especially as the nation confronts the normalization of the use of guns in political protest, conflict, and insurrection.
摘要本文分析了2014年在内华达州邦克维尔和2016年在俄勒冈州马尔赫尔国家野生动物保护区发生的两起武装反政府对抗的法律话语,以了解公众如何理解第一修正案和第二修正案权利之间的关系。利用非司法判例的概念,并借鉴哥伦比亚特区诉海勒案(2008)之后的法律学术,我们发现公共意义的形成反映了法律学者对使用第一修正案逻辑来理解第二修正案权利的担忧,在意义和实践上将两者混为一谈。围绕这些武装对抗的讨论集中在是否需要枪支来保护言论权、爱国主义的言论,以及言论与枪支之间有争议的宪法首要地位。我们认为,这一案例研究表明,传播学者有必要对第一修正案和第二修正案之间的逻辑提出质疑,尤其是在国家面临政治抗议、冲突和暴动中使用枪支的正常化之际。
{"title":"Protesting with guns and conflating the First and Second Amendments: The case of the Bundys","authors":"Amy Pason, P. File","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2021.1970609","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2021.1970609","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyzes the legal discourse surrounding two armed anti-government confrontations – at Bunkerville, Nevada, in 2014, and the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon in 2016 – to understand how the public makes sense of the relationship between First and Second Amendment rights. Using the concept of non-judicial precedents and drawing on legal scholarship following District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), we find that public meaning-making mirrors concerns raised by legal scholars about using First Amendment logics to understand Second Amendment rights, conflating the two in meaning and practice. Discourse surrounding these armed confrontations focused on whether guns were needed to protect speech rights, the rhetoric of patriotism, and the contested constitutional primacy of speech versus guns. We argue that this case study demonstrates the need for communication scholars to problematize the logics that intertwine the First and Second Amendments, especially as the nation confronts the normalization of the use of guns in political protest, conflict, and insurrection.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47818959","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Libel laws and the non-institutional press Libel法律与非机构新闻
Q2 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI: 10.1080/21689725.2021.1986414
Sharon Docter
ABSTRACT This paper will argue that non-institutional media such as bloggers should be accorded the same First Amendment protection as institutional media under libel laws. Supreme Court precedent supports making no distinction between the institutional and non-institutional media. The status of the plaintiff is relevant in libel actions, not the status of the defendant. Moreover, when bloggers disseminate information that is a matter of public concern, they are functioning as journalists. Many federal courts have adopted this functional approach when determining whether bloggers can be protected by shield laws. This paper argues that the same standard should apply to libel laws.
本文认为,在诽谤法下,博客等非机构媒体应享有与机构媒体同等的第一修正案保护。最高法院的先例支持不区分机构媒体和非机构媒体。原告的地位在诽谤诉讼中是相关的,而不是被告的地位。此外,当博客传播公众关注的信息时,他们就扮演了记者的角色。许多联邦法院在决定博客是否可以受到隐私保护法的保护时,都采用了这种功能性的方法。本文认为,同样的标准也应适用于诽谤法。
{"title":"Libel laws and the non-institutional press","authors":"Sharon Docter","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2021.1986414","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2021.1986414","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper will argue that non-institutional media such as bloggers should be accorded the same First Amendment protection as institutional media under libel laws. Supreme Court precedent supports making no distinction between the institutional and non-institutional media. The status of the plaintiff is relevant in libel actions, not the status of the defendant. Moreover, when bloggers disseminate information that is a matter of public concern, they are functioning as journalists. Many federal courts have adopted this functional approach when determining whether bloggers can be protected by shield laws. This paper argues that the same standard should apply to libel laws.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44742399","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Opting in: Free expression statements at private universities and colleges in the US 选择加入:美国私立大学和学院的言论自由声明
Q2 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/21689725.2021.1886966
Erica R. Salkin, Colin Messke
ABSTRACT While all colleges and universities are challenged by questions about free expression in the current environment, private higher educational institutions do so without the constitutional mandate of their public counterparts. Some private colleges and universities have sought to independently affirm their commitment to free speech through statements of principle or purpose. This study explores those statements in an attempt to understand if – and how – free expression is presented as worth protecting in private higher education.
虽然在当前环境下,所有的学院和大学都面临着言论自由问题的挑战,但私立高等教育机构在没有宪法授权的情况下这样做。一些私立学院和大学试图通过原则或目的声明来独立地确认他们对言论自由的承诺。本研究探讨了这些言论,试图理解自由言论是否——以及如何——在私立高等教育中被视为值得保护的。
{"title":"Opting in: Free expression statements at private universities and colleges in the US","authors":"Erica R. Salkin, Colin Messke","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2021.1886966","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2021.1886966","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT While all colleges and universities are challenged by questions about free expression in the current environment, private higher educational institutions do so without the constitutional mandate of their public counterparts. Some private colleges and universities have sought to independently affirm their commitment to free speech through statements of principle or purpose. This study explores those statements in an attempt to understand if – and how – free expression is presented as worth protecting in private higher education.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2021.1886966","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46560275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
The free speech century 言论自由的世纪
Q2 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/21689725.2021.1929179
Joseph Sery
{"title":"The free speech century","authors":"Joseph Sery","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2021.1929179","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2021.1929179","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2021.1929179","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48562044","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Whiteness, repressive victimhood, and the foil of the intolerant left 白人、压抑的受害者和不宽容的左派的陪衬
Q2 Social Sciences Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/21689725.2021.1895863
C. Kelly
ABSTRACT This essay argues that recent controversies over conservative speakers on college campuses are an opaque vehicle for White supremacy. Revisiting Herbert Marcuse’s concept of repressive tolerance through the lens of Critical Race Theory, this essay sketches the features of repressive victimhood: the advancement of categorical minority status orchestrated to shield white people from charges of intolerance while reframing counterspeech as commensurate with overt bigotry.
本文认为,最近关于大学校园保守派演讲者的争议是白人至上主义的不透明载体。本文通过批判种族理论的视角重新审视了赫伯特·马尔库塞(Herbert Marcuse)的压迫性宽容概念,勾勒出压迫性受害者的特征:精心策划的少数民族地位的进步,以保护白人免受不宽容的指控,同时将反言论重新定义为与公开的偏见相称。
{"title":"Whiteness, repressive victimhood, and the foil of the intolerant left","authors":"C. Kelly","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2021.1895863","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2021.1895863","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay argues that recent controversies over conservative speakers on college campuses are an opaque vehicle for White supremacy. Revisiting Herbert Marcuse’s concept of repressive tolerance through the lens of Critical Race Theory, this essay sketches the features of repressive victimhood: the advancement of categorical minority status orchestrated to shield white people from charges of intolerance while reframing counterspeech as commensurate with overt bigotry.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2021.1895863","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44515794","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
期刊
First Amendment Studies
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1