An excellent essay here (via Ginny) on why Freedom of Speech is more important than Freedom from (Offensive) Speech.
On a surprisingly regular basis, one hears accounts of “parents” or “family” groups trying to get books banned from libraries on the grounds that they are not appropriate for young people. Or of schools adopting speech codes that restrict speech of an “offensive or harmful nature.” In the interest of rhetorical honesty, I’m willing to grant that in both types of cases the motives are laudable – protecting people from harm. I’ve said it before and I’ll no doubt say it again but the perils of protecting people from “harmful” speech are probably greater than the perils of the speech itself.
The author, Glenden Brown notes that, for their part, no matter how many conservatives seem to back protection against speech they find offensive (to be sure, plenty of liberals do the same), conservative commentators are increasingly well-known for saying the most offensive things — then laughing it off as “just a joke” and poking fun at the “whining” liberals.
Despite this, the answer isn’t (as if it could really be done) banning speech, but being fearless in pointing out what’s wrong with it and getting at the real issues underneath.
The larger conversation isn’t, “Stop using term X – it hurts people’s feelings.” The larger conversation it, “Term X is offensive because of its history. It has been used as an insult, as a dehumanizing term. It It cannot be used separate from that history.” We also have a right to ask – for what reasons are you choosing to use Term X?
In the case of Ann Coulter’s slur of John Edwards: The term faggot was cleary inappropriate. Edwards is heterosexual, demonstrably and publicly so. Coulter wasn’t calling his actual sexual orientation into question, she was trying to question his manhood, much as was done four years ago when he was dubbed the “Breck Girl.” Such language is targeted at the lizard brain – it’s job is to portray the target as weak, as “other”, as womanly in a bad way. When Coulter got the pushback, she retreated into the usual conservative shtick of “hysterical womanly liberals can’t take a joke.” The use of slurs in discourse is intended to do one thing – get in the way of discourse. That doesn’t mean we should ban them, it means we need to confront them strongly and identify them for what they are – then move on to the real issue of the debate.
Good stuff, and worth reading as the slurs and innuendo from (mostly) the GOP escalates in this election year.