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.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
The term ‘cisgender’ refers to those whose gender identity is ‘on the same side’ as the designation of sex/gender at birth (Aultman, in Currah et. al. 2014, 61).
This article adopts Richardson-Self’s (2018b) stance that all misogynistic speech is hate speech. Thus, derivatively, cis-hetero-misogynistic speech also constitutes hate speech. It also takes for granted that hate speech should be regulated.
Note that I capitalize ‘Man’ and ‘Woman’ to signal the concept as figured under cis-hetero-patriarchy.
Race likely plays a role in the missexing of Wong, Williams, and Obama. However, race is not a determining factor in such treatment, for the Liberal Senator for South Australia Lucy Gichuhi and Federal Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi both faced racism and classic misogyny in this period, but not cis-hetero-misogynistic comments.
Baltzly D (2003) Peripatetic perversions: a neo-Aristotelian account of the nature of sexual perversion. Monist 86:3–29
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 36:23–40
Beauvoir S de (1949 ). The second sex. Trans: Borde C, Malovany-Chevallier S. London: Vintage Books
Brown A (2017a) What is hate speech? Part I: the myth of hate. Law Philos 36:419–468
Brown A (2017b) What is so special about online (as compared to offline) hate speech? Ethnicities 18:297–326
Calhoun C (2000) Feminism, the family, and the politics of the closet: lesbian and gay displacement. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Currah P, Stryker S, Galarte FJ (eds) (2014) Postposttranssexual: key concepts for a 21st century transgender studies. TSQ 1–2:19–272
Facebook Community Standards (2018) 12. Hate Speech. Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/hate_speech/. Accessed 7 December 2018
Facebook Newsroom (2017) Stats. Facebook. https://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/. Accessed 1 March 2018
Gatens M (1991) Feminism and philosophy: perspectives on difference and equality. Contemp Political Theory. Polity Press, Cambridge
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 3:275–299
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
Grosz E (1989) Sexual subversions: three French feminists. Allen & Unwin, St Leonards
Hooks B (2015) Feminist theory: from margin to center. Routledge, New York
Hunt S (2018) Inside the war memorial. In: Eades Q, Vivienne S (eds) Going postal: more than ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Brow Books, Australia, pp 134–143
Jay N (1981) Gender and dichotomy. Fem Stud 7:38–56
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 72–93
Manne K (2018) Down girl: the logic of misogyny. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Mantilla K (2013) Gendertrolling: misogyny adapts to new media. Fem Stud 39:563–570
Moraga C (1998) La Güera. In: Anderson M, Collins PH (eds) Race, class, and gender: an anthology. Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont, pp 26–33
Rich A (1980) Compulsory heterosexuality and lesbian existence. Signs 5:631–660
Richardson-Self L (2015) Justifying same-sex marriage: a philosophical investigation. Rowman & Littlefield International, London
Richardson-Self L (2018a) Same-sex marriage and the ‘no’ campaign. Humanities Australia 9:32–39
Richardson-Self L (2018b) Woman-hating: on misogyny, sexism, and hate speech. Hypatia: a journal of feminist philosophy 33:256–272
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
Scharff C (2012) Repudiating feminism: young women in a neoliberal world. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Surrey
Valdes F (1996) Unpacking hetero-patriarchy: tracing the conflation of sex, gender & sexual orientation to its origins. Yale J Law Humanit 8:161–211
Waldron J (2012) The harm in hate speech. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Richardson-Self, L. Cis-Hetero-Misogyny Online. Ethic Theory Moral Prac 22, 573–587 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-019-10019-5
- Online Misogyny
- Hate Speech