A moment of antifeminist backlash
We’re in a moment of antifeminist backlash, and, increasingly, that backlash seems aimed at silencing women, or punishing the women who won’t shut up. It’s a perilous time for women’s speech – or at least, it’s a perilous time for women who speak out against sexism. Over the course of this spring and summer, threats to feminist activists and abuse survivors have multiplied and become more serious, with women who speak out against men’s violence or in favor of women’s rights increasingly targeted by abusers, vigilantes, antifeminist activists and lawmakers, and the courts.
And people who consider themselves trans-rights activists.
Defamation suits are becoming a routine tool of retaliation and revenge for men accused of sexual and domestic abuse – and a growing threat to women’s ability to safely and freely speak about their own lives. The advocacy group Know Your IX, which lobbies on behalf of student survivors of sexual violence, says that 23% of students who make Title IX complaints are threatened with defamation suits by their alleged abusers.
That stinks, as does the campaign of intimidation against gender-critical feminists.
Now the activist group National Right to Life, an anti-choice organization that has been influential in pushing state legislatures to the right on women’s rights, is proposing bans on speech about abortion. In reporting for the non-profit news outlet Prism, Ashton Lattimore writes that the model bill, which National Right to Life hopes will be adopted by state legislatures, seeks to impose both criminal and civil penalties for actions such as “aiding and abetting” abortion, terms defined so broadly as to include “hosting or maintaining a website, or providing an internet service, that encourages or facilitates efforts to obtain an illegal abortion”.
That’s horrific, but our ability to fight back against such things has been kneecapped by the insistence on silencing women who know that men are not women. Moira Donegan doesn’t mention that particular form of silencing.
I’d be interested to see the SCOTUS opinion on why a bill like that doesn’t infringe on freedom of speech… maybe they wouldn’t come to that conclusion (Thomas obviously would, but he’s incorrigible).
Popehat recently tweeted about the issue of defamation threats against sexual abuse/assault complainants. He said it had became a large percentage of the pro bono defence referrals he arranges – the single largest category. He noted a sharp rise in such chilling threats in recent times.
It’s despicable behaviour. All the more reason for those US states without anti-SLAPP laws to get them, and/or Congress could pass a federal law.
BKiSA, I wouldn’t be that surprised to see the current court roll back free speech rights. Their only hesitation I’m sure is in trying to figure out how to do it in a way that affects only liberals.
It’d be tough to do… Maybe in some limited capacity unless they’re fine with restricting *everyone’s* free speech rights under certain circumstances.
Not that I want to give these arseholes ideas but it shouldn’t be that difficult. Just specify hefty fines. Doesn’t anyone who’s anyone have a few spare million lying around.