Advertisement

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 573–587 | Cite as

Cis-Hetero-Misogyny Online

  • Louise Richardson-SelfEmail author
Article

Abstract

This article identifies five genres of anti-queer hate speech found in The Australian’s Facebook comments sections, exposing and analyzing the ways in which such comments are used to derogate cisgender and (often) heterosexual women. One may be tempted to think of cis-het women as third-party victims of queerphobia; however, this article argues that these genres of anti-queer speech are, in fact, misogynistic. Specifically, it argues that these are instances of cis-hetero-misogynistic hate speech. Cis-hetero-misogyny functions as the “law enforcement branch” of a cis-hetero-patriarchal gender order. Given the existence of such an order, it is clear that cis-het women’s liberation is inextricable from queer liberation (and vice versa). This article argues that to facilitate allyship and challenge this gender order—the order that elicits such hate speech acts—we need an epistemological revolution in the way we recognize and re-cognize human difference.

Keywords

Online Misogyny Hate Speech Heterosexism Cisgenderism Feminism 

Notes

References

  1. Baltzly D (2003) Peripatetic perversions: a neo-Aristotelian account of the nature of sexual perversion. Monist 86:3–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bannister J (2008) It’s not what you say but the way that you say it: Australian hate speech laws and the exemption of ‘reasonable’ expression. Fla State Univ Law Rev 36:23–40Google Scholar
  3. Beauvoir S de (1949 [2009]). The second sex. Trans: Borde C, Malovany-Chevallier S. London: Vintage BooksGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown A (2017a) What is hate speech? Part I: the myth of hate. Law Philos 36:419–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown A (2017b) What is so special about online (as compared to offline) hate speech? Ethnicities 18:297–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Calhoun C (2000) Feminism, the family, and the politics of the closet: lesbian and gay displacement. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  7. Currah P, Stryker S, Galarte FJ (eds) (2014) Postposttranssexual: key concepts for a 21st century transgender studies. TSQ 1–2:19–272Google Scholar
  8. Facebook Community Standards (2018) 12. Hate Speech. Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/hate_speech/. Accessed 7 December 2018
  9. Facebook Newsroom (2017) Stats. Facebook. https://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/. Accessed 1 March 2018
  10. Gatens M (1991) Feminism and philosophy: perspectives on difference and equality. Contemp Political Theory. Polity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Gatens M (2004) Can human rights accommodate women’s rights? Towards an embodied account of social norms, social meaning, and cultural change. Contemporary Political Theory 3:275–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gelber K (2019) Differentiating hate speech: a systemic discrimination approach. Crit Rev Int Soc Pol Phil:1–22.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2019.1576006
  13. Grosz E (1989) Sexual subversions: three French feminists. Allen & Unwin, St LeonardsGoogle Scholar
  14. Hooks B (2015) Feminist theory: from margin to center. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Hunt S (2018) Inside the war memorial. In: Eades Q, Vivienne S (eds) Going postal: more than ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Brow Books, Australia, pp 134–143Google Scholar
  16. Jay N (1981) Gender and dichotomy. Fem Stud 7:38–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Langton R (2012) Beyond belief: pragmatics in hate speech and pornography. In: Maitra I, McGowan MK (eds) Speech and harm: controversies over free speech. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 72–93Google Scholar
  18. Manne K (2018) Down girl: the logic of misogyny. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Mantilla K (2013) Gendertrolling: misogyny adapts to new media. Fem Stud 39:563–570Google Scholar
  20. Moraga C (1998) La Güera. In: Anderson M, Collins PH (eds) Race, class, and gender: an anthology. Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont, pp 26–33Google Scholar
  21. Rich A (1980) Compulsory heterosexuality and lesbian existence. Signs 5:631–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Richardson-Self L (2015) Justifying same-sex marriage: a philosophical investigation. Rowman & Littlefield International, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Richardson-Self L (2018a) Same-sex marriage and the ‘no’ campaign. Humanities Australia 9:32–39Google Scholar
  24. Richardson-Self L (2018b) Woman-hating: on misogyny, sexism, and hate speech. Hypatia: a journal of feminist philosophy 33:256–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Roy Morgan Research Institute (2017) Sydney Morning Herald is still Australia’s most widely read masthead and Australians continue to embrace the shift to digital news. Finding No. 7306. http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7306-roy-morgan-australian-newspaperreadership-june-2017-201708101543. Accessed 1 March 2018
  26. Scharff C (2012) Repudiating feminism: young women in a neoliberal world. Ashgate Publishing Limited, SurreyGoogle Scholar
  27. Valdes F (1996) Unpacking hetero-patriarchy: tracing the conflation of sex, gender & sexual orientation to its origins. Yale J Law Humanit 8:161–211Google Scholar
  28. Waldron J (2012) The harm in hate speech. Harvard University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TasmaniaHobartAustralia

Personalised recommendations