User:VeryChristophe/sandbox

Art censorship: According to (https://ncac.org/news/blog/ncac-joins-fire-and-aclu-in-urging-university-of-kansas-to-restore-american-flag-artwork) ""National Coalition Against Censorship joined Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Kansas in writing a letter to University of Kansas to restore a public art installation by Josephine Meckseper called "Untitled (Flag 2)" removed after pressure from Kansas Governor Jeff Colyer and Secretary of State Kris Kobach who said they found it offensive. According to NCAC website the flag is part of a nationwide public art program, “Pledges of Allegiance,” organized by Creative Time and featuring 16 artworks that incorporate flags that address a variety of themes and topics by artists around the world."" According to (http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2018/jul/11/congressional-candidate-criticizes-public-art-display-on-ku-campus-as-defaced-american-flag/) ""University of Kansas removed the art installation citing "safety concerns" after the installation drew several complaints from congressional candidate Steve Watkins, Gov. Jeff Colyer and others around the state. KU Chancellor Douglas Girod announced the removal just hours after the initial Journal-World story containing Watkins' criticism. In statement Girod said the yearlong series was “intended to foster difficult conversations.” But over the course of the day, “the conversation around this display has generated public safety concerns for our campus community,” he said. “While we want to foster difficult dialogue, we cannot allow that dialogue to put our people or property in harm’s way,” Girod said. Girod’s statement did not mention specific threats. In an artist’s statement on the Creative Time website, Meckseper described her work as a collage of the American flag “and one of my dripped paintings which resembles the contours of the United States.” “I divided the shape of the country in two for the flag design to reflect a deeply polarized country in which a president has openly bragged about harassing women and is withdrawing from the Kyoto protocol and UN Human Rights Council,” her statement read. The black and white sock in the bottom left-hand corner of the piece “takes on a new symbolic meaning in light of the recent imprisonment of immigrant children at the border,” Meckseper said, continuing, “Let’s not forget that we all came from somewhere and are only recent occupants of this country — native cultures knew to took care of this continent much better for thousands of years before us. It’s about time for our differences to unite us rather than divide us.” The article goes on to state that Gov. Jeff Colyer "demanded" it be removed."" According to (Gund A. Introduction: Reflections on Art Censorship and Banning. Social Research. 2016;83(1):35-38. http://ezproxy.pvc.maricopa.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=116749288&site=ehost-live&scope=site . Accessed November 23, 2018.) ____ (According to Freedberg D. The Fear of Art: How Censorship Becomes Iconoclasm. Social Research. 2016;83(1):67-99. http://ezproxy.pvc.maricopa.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=116749290&site=ehost-live&scope=site . Accessed November 23, 2018.) "" "Every act of censorship is also an act of iconoclasm."

Copied from Hate speech

Hate speech as text[edit source] A significant difficulty in understanding the concept of hate speech stems from the fact that hate speech, a term coined in the late 1980s by legal scholars in the United States, has thus far only been defined as a legal concept as it pertains to specific cases and regulations. These regulations can vary widely, not only from county to country, but from city to city within many larger countries. Confusion stems not only from the variability of laws regulating hate speech, but from the focus on the term as only being a legal concept because the term is also an ordinary concept used by the general public with implications in many aspects of society. Professor Alexander Brown argues that by focusing on the specific legal definitions of hate speech we risk prejudicing what the right societal response to hate speech might be if we have defined hate speech in purely legal terms, which therefore would only have a legal remedy (i.e., a lawsuit) when a nonlegal solution might be better. The problem is confounded by the fact that hate speech laws provoke strong emotions by supporters and detractors, and many people have their own definition of hate speech.

I would delete the following text from the article:

Although hate speech can be uttered and published "just under the radar" in some countries, this does not mean it is undetected or condoned. In addition to being studied in civil and criminal law, engagement in hate speech or text is evidence of psychological and social disorder and ill-being such that the field is of importance to the study of medicine, social anthropology and religion also .[citation needed]

While hate speech could be countered under obscenity law (on par with sexual obscenity, for example), as distinct from freedom of speech laws and censorship, little has been done to effectively pursue that direction of justice. Nonetheless, in terms of the adverse health effects hate speech is a matter that concerns Public Health for hate - as a social disease - has the characteristics of a contagious disease where the medical model is used. Hate speech affects the first victim who is the perpetrator and then the second victim upon whom the perpetrator imposes his or her own self hate (Provost, 2013)[full citation needed]. Habitual hate speech is a form of verbal menacing of which there are two types: actual or vrais menacing and posturing or faux menacing and gesture. Vrais menacing constitutes intent to enact not just psychological harm but also bodily, psychological, metaphysical, spiritual and social harm. Faux menacing enacts all but bodily attacks to control and intimidate, being a form posturing and verbal gesture, as in the world of non-sentient animals, and is tolerated - even valorized - in some societies as "honour crimes" not so much against the primary victim who suffers the bodily, psychological, metaphysical, spiritual and social harm and attack but in actuality against a relative or member of the victim's family, organization, or community (Provost, 2017)[full citation needed]. Computer programming software - new machine learning models - are now used to analyze speech and text for evidence of hate speech as overt and covert violence, including cyber-bullying. For example, the Hate Speech Detection Library for Python. The main challenge with detecting hate whether in speech or in text depends on distinguishing profane speech from hate speech (Malmasi and Zampier, 2017)[full citation needed]. There are more incidents of misogyny (hate of girls and women) which masquerades as pornography, prostitution and trafficking, for example, while incidents of misandry are rare (Dana Daniels, 2016 )[full citation needed].