homework8

Frammolinl's first discusses is the libel insulting speech aimed is a group not an individual.they change the role make the role more perfect.That make more off-campus student like the American Civil Liberties Union that make they are protected.And they also have the punishment policy that make those accused have some offensive speech.

 

The fraternity used court to make university have this action to protected student.But the punishment about the role are not great.people don't love punishment that will make them think I'm wrong.This kind of thinking are negative.Possibly this role is really great for student but the punishment will give people a bed first impression.On that time people are excited they will stop thinking.

 

homework 8

Huijun yu

WRT 103

Professor Liz

November 6, 2013

Choose one of these cases and discuss whether or not you think the  case constitutes hate speech as Matsuda defines it.

From Matsuda's perspective, the definition of "the hate speech" is the sexist and raciest speeches which motivated by hate. We can learn the damage of the hate speech from the three main aspects: the equation of access to all aspects of the university; the liberty from the oppression on campus; the free speech to debate issues. Then I will apply the definition given by Matsuda to evaluate the first case.

The white students in first case affronted a small group of black women who really did something in public , regardless of others' feelings. However, is it really the hate speech? did he actually harm those women psychologically? did he limit the opportunities of those people of color to access to the campus? did he hamper the freedom debate? and what about the event that the black destroy all the newspaper just because of their emotion? I will cope with all of these questions one by one.

First of all, as we know, those women actually create an terrible influence in public that they disturbed other students to study, ignoring others' feelings and admonishment. From this white student's perspective, it is, to some extent, rational for him to alarm those self-centered black women, even if his method to handle the problem is a bit extreme. Also, an important point I have to mention is that he didn't actually use some discriminating expression. So we can say that the rude expression of this white student surely did psychological harm for those women , but we cannot classify the rude expression into the discrimination.

Secondly, this white student's behavior impede the freedom speech, whatever whether the discriminating expression or not. The verbal abuse, such as this white student's behavior, alleviate people's desire to express their opinions in rational ways but rather increase their desire to solve the problems in means of physical assault.

Conclusion from analysis above, we have to confess the verbal expression of the white student is the hate speech in fact. But what about another event which occurred at the same time----people of color expressed their dissent opinion also using the rudely method. So both of these two events has to be limited.

The university, as the special institution which stand for many meaningful things, such as the pursuit of knowledge, should shoulder the responsibility to educate students in the scientific ways but not just restrict and punish students' behaviors. This is what the university should do.