@jilliancyork I believe obscenity law is problematic fr women / also that fighting words, imminent harm, Brandenburg are implicitly gendered
-
@jilliancyork And it's funny, b/c A LOT of seminal jurisprudence pre-Brandenburg is dudes threatening to punch each other over speech
@jilliancyork and that's the line that gets drawn: if it's speech that inevitably provokes a punchout, it's not protected
-
-
@jilliancyork harassing women online is effectively silencing while remaining protected speech-- -
@jilliancyork (as long as it skirts against direct threat) & I believe it's protected b/c those who invented FIrst Am in 20th century ... -
@jilliancyork ... not only never experienced that, they couldn't conceive of that being a thing. [becoming less eloquent as I get hungry] -
@jilliancyork Anyways, there's a rash of other issues there as well: other int'l standards, third party platforms as markets of speech, etc -
@jilliancyork It's complicated and that's why I have been writing a response for like three months & I'm still not sure how it's coming out -
@sarahjeong You're more than welcome to run the draft by me privately if you feel like it. -
@jilliancyork that would be like the best thing ever -
@sarahjeong by all means! you know where to find me i assume. - 8 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.