Selwyn Duke
When feminists criminalize "sexist" speech
By Selwyn Duke
If you want to know what Barack Obama and his fellow travelers have planned for us, you need look only at what their cutting-edge cousins have already implemented overseas. For example, hate-speech laws have long been used in Europe and other parts of the "Western" world to punish people for criticizing Islam and homosexuality. Now feminists are tightening the noose on freedom further with laws prohibiting "sexist" speech. Writes Phyllis Schlafly at The Moral Liberal:
Such laws give government the latitude to punish people selectively based on whether they or their words are in political favor. After all, women are the more talkative sex, with studies showing that they speak an average of 7000 words a day to men's 2000, and they certainly are at least men's equals in cutting with the tongue. Yet, in the same way that hate-speech laws are used as a hammer against Christians but not Muslims, how many "sexism" charges do you think will be brought against women? Will these laws be used to suppress sentiments such as "Boys are stupid. Throw rocks at them" or products such as the "All Men are Bastards" knife block? It's more likely that they'll be trotted out to, among other things, suppress criticism of abortion under the pretext that it impairs the "psychological integrity" of women who have had or are contemplating abortions.
These laws prohibiting "sexist" speech serve further notice that the nanny state has devolved into the Harridan State, as it has now issued a loud "Quiet, dear!" to all who dare utter words — in the home, the halls of government, and the wider society — that displease the feminists. The only bright side is that once you're convicted of "sexist" speech, the government harridan will at least let you finish your sentence.
© Selwyn Duke
November 2, 2012
If you want to know what Barack Obama and his fellow travelers have planned for us, you need look only at what their cutting-edge cousins have already implemented overseas. For example, hate-speech laws have long been used in Europe and other parts of the "Western" world to punish people for criticizing Islam and homosexuality. Now feminists are tightening the noose on freedom further with laws prohibiting "sexist" speech. Writes Phyllis Schlafly at The Moral Liberal:
-
England, [and] 18 other nations including Germany and France signed an absurd United Nations treaty about Women that requires them to pass new laws making sexist comments a crime and outlawing "psychological violence," which they define broadly to include statements "seriously impairing a person's psychological integrity through coercion or threats." This is sold to the public as part of a phony campaign against domestic violence....
Such laws give government the latitude to punish people selectively based on whether they or their words are in political favor. After all, women are the more talkative sex, with studies showing that they speak an average of 7000 words a day to men's 2000, and they certainly are at least men's equals in cutting with the tongue. Yet, in the same way that hate-speech laws are used as a hammer against Christians but not Muslims, how many "sexism" charges do you think will be brought against women? Will these laws be used to suppress sentiments such as "Boys are stupid. Throw rocks at them" or products such as the "All Men are Bastards" knife block? It's more likely that they'll be trotted out to, among other things, suppress criticism of abortion under the pretext that it impairs the "psychological integrity" of women who have had or are contemplating abortions.
These laws prohibiting "sexist" speech serve further notice that the nanny state has devolved into the Harridan State, as it has now issued a loud "Quiet, dear!" to all who dare utter words — in the home, the halls of government, and the wider society — that displease the feminists. The only bright side is that once you're convicted of "sexist" speech, the government harridan will at least let you finish your sentence.
© Selwyn Duke
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)