Suchergebnisse

Hate speech on social media is a real problem with real consequences. Despite the constant efforts of social media platforms to moderate, flag, and ban hate posts, there is still a vast amount of hateful content flooding them. Hate speech, in general, and offensive material online, in particular, are not easy to define and may include a wide spectre of expression. To thoroughly account for the nature and intensity of the effects of hate speech in social media requires to distinguish between various shades of hate speech targeting different groups and their subsequent effects. This paper seeks to review the literature on the psychological effects of online hate speech on the LGBT community and to highlight the strong negative impact of this phenomenon. The paper aims to contribute to the field by examining the propagation and the effects of derogatory language and hate speech based on sexual orientation.

LAY SUMMARY Between 1955 and January 2000, the UK Armed Forces and Ministry of Defence enforced a ban on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and related (LGBT+) service, dismissing or forcing the immediate retirement of thousands of personnel because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. They fell on hard times and were left isolated and unsupported by the nation they had proudly stood to defend. Although more than 21 years has elapsed since the ban was lifted, little academic literature has explored the ban's impact on the mental health and well-being of the United Kingdom's LGBT+ Veteran community. Anecdotal evidence suggests many still endure consequential hardship and mental health struggles and remain isolated from the military family and traditional support services. Fighting With Pride, an LGBT+ military charity launched in January 2020, and Northumbria University's Veterans and Military Families Research Hub joined in partnership to remedy this by determining mental health and well-being impacts and consequences and identifying recovery pathways. Lived experience narratives must be used to help build support ahead of the publication of any formal findings. Research-based evidence is vital in helping to develop recovery and support policy and in further shaping support services to develop the best possible impact-related outcomes.

Recent world politics has witnessed the rise of a certain style of authoritarianism. It can be roughly characterized with a cult of masculine leadership, a popular rhetoric of foreign investment and development, and a phobia of the illegal immigrant made into an ethical obligation. These contradictory forms of politics – the paean to multinational corporations, free trade, and the 'bloc'-ing of power and the simultaneous mobilization of hyper-nationalism in the form of censoring books and throttling subversive aesthetic practices – characterize the conception and practice of what may be called "authoritarian democracy." Considering the democratically elected basis of this authoritarianism, it becomes all the more important to ask if democracy paves the way for it. In that case, where do we locate democracy today? Is it right to say that the real democratic space unfolds itself in people's movements and not in the electoral process? If this is the case, a radical conception of democracy would have to account for a shift of emphasis from the locus of governance to that of resistance and co-option. Historically speaking, democracy may not always be the means but it has been one of the ends for the various acts of resistance such as the working class, anti-colonial, nationalist, feminist, LGBT, or constitutional multiculturalism. In our sour and hungry times, when state aggression is overpowering the geographical marking (Russia's in Ukraine or Israel's in Palestine), or strangling the voice of internal resistance (North Eastern regions in India), not to mention religious fundamentalism, we need to rethink the old questions of democracy and resistance. With the ISIS, Boko Haram or the Taliban practice, we have seen how resistance itself can produce a dangerous authoritarianism which further complicates the relations between democracy, authoritarianism, and resistance. How do we historicize and ethically theorize resistance in relation to both democracy and an authoritarianism which borders on fascism?

Recent world politics has witnessed the rise of a certain style of authoritarianism. It can be roughly characterized with a cult of masculine leadership, a popular rhetoric of foreign investment and development, and a phobia of the illegal immigrant made into an ethical obligation. These contradictory forms of politics – the paean to multinational corporations, free trade, and the 'bloc'-ing of power and the simultaneous mobilization of hyper-nationalism in the form of censoring books and throttling subversive aesthetic practices – characterize the conception and practice of what may be called "authoritarian democracy." Considering the democratically elected basis of this authoritarianism, it becomes all the more important to ask if democracy paves the way for it. In that case, where do we locate democracy today? Is it right to say that the real democratic space unfolds itself in people's movements and not in the electoral process? If this is the case, a radical conception of democracy would have to account for a shift of emphasis from the locus of governance to that of resistance and co-option. Historically speaking, democracy may not always be the means but it has been one of the ends for the various acts of resistance such as the working class, anti-colonial, nationalist, feminist, LGBT, or constitutional multiculturalism. In our sour and hungry times, when state aggression is overpowering the geographical marking (Russia's in Ukraine or Israel's in Palestine), or strangling the voice of internal resistance (North Eastern regions in India), not to mention religious fundamentalism, we need to rethink the old questions of democracy and resistance. With the ISIS, Boko Haram or the Taliban practice, we have seen how resistance itself can produce a dangerous authoritarianism which further complicates the relations between democracy, authoritarianism, and resistance. How do we historicize and ethically theorize resistance in relation to both democracy and an authoritarianism which borders on fascism?

The relationship between qualitative data analysis software (QDAS) and the development of new methods remains underexplored. While scholars argue that software tactics are used only to implement analytic strategies, some strategies are made possible only with new software developments. Aligned with the Five-Level QDA method, we aim to address the gap in the literature by thoroughly presenting the methodological aspects of an existing narrative inquiry. To be systematic in our explanation of QDAS integration, we begin by offering background information about the original project, followed by an analytical plan, which was informed by our researcher's subjectivity and generativity theory. We then introduce our translational process that merges our subjective narrative strategy with objective ATLAS.ti tactics into a comprehensive framework for analysis. The findings, presented as a conceptual mapping of the data, informed deeper metaphorical exploration of generativity which is discussed as a life-long process of intergenerational connectedness.

Vulnerability is a broad concept widely addressed in recent scholarly literature. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people are among the vulnerable populations with significant disadvantages related to health and the social determinants of health. Medical ethics discourse tackles vulnerability from philosophical and political perspectives. LGBT people experience several disadvantages from both perspectives. This article aims to justify the right to health for LGBT people and their particular claims regarding healthcare because they belong to a vulnerable group. Rawls' theory of justice and Norman Daniels' normal functioning approach will be discussed in this context. Despite the fact that the right to health can be justified by Daniels' normal functioning approach, there is still a theoretical gap in justifying the right to health for particular vulnerable populations such as LGBT peopleand discussing society's duty to compensate for these disadvantages. In search of solid theoretical grounds for the justification of the right to health for LGBT people, the present author takes the opportunity to utilize Daniels' flexible definition of normal functioning to show that normal functioning not only varies by age but also by different states of human existence, including sexual orientation and gender identity, and to propose replacing the life span approach with normal states of human existence.

Equal protection analysis, as articulated by the United States Supreme Court1 and followed by most states in interpreting state constitutions, requires that a suspect class must historically have been subjected to discrimination. Every state and federal court that has substantively considered whether sexual orientation is a suspect class has held that LGBT people have faced a long history of discrimination. In addition, dozens of legal scholars have also concluded that LGBT people have suffered the requisite history of discrimination to qualify sexual orientation to be a suspect class. In making these determinations, many of these courts and scholars have explicitly considered employment and other forms of discrimination by public employers, including state, local, and federal government employers. These findings, unanimously agreed upon by state and federal courts, provide substantive evidence that LGBT people have experienced a widespread practice of unconstitutional discrimination by state governments. In at least one case, the court indicated that even the government party to the litigation did not dispute that this requirement is met. And in another, the court cited characterizations of LGBT people in the brief filed by the government as indicia of the history of discrimination suffered by LGBT people. This section describes the case law and scholarly literature that address the history of discrimination requirement of suspect class determination.

More than any other, the idea of normalisation has provoked deep divisions within queer activism both at a philosophical and also at a political level. At the root of these divisions lies the irreconcilable divergence between an agenda for social change, which advocates the need for society to accept all sexual behaviours and identities as normal, and an approach of radical resistance against some social structures that can only offer a bourgeois and conformist normalisation. Literary fiction and homo-gay-queer themed cinema have explored these and other sides of the idea of normalisation and have thus contributed to the taking of decisive steps: from the poetics of transgression towards the poetics of celebration and social transformation. In this paper we examine two of these literary normalisation strategies: the use of humour and the proliferation of discursive perspectives both in the cinema and in narrative fiction during the last decades. ; Más quizá que ninguna otra, la idea de normalización ha provocado profundas divisiones en el seno del activismo queer, tanto a nivel filosófico/conceptual como a nivel de estrategia política. En el origen de estas divisiones se encuentra la irreconciliable divergencia entre una agenda de cambio social, que propugna la necesidad de que la sociedad acepte como normales todas las conductas e identidades sexuales, y un planteamiento de resistencia radical ante unas estructuras sociales que sólo pueden ofrecer una normalización burguesa y acomodaticia. La literatura de ficción y el cine de temática homo-gay-queer han explorado éstas y otras facetas de la idea de normalización, contribuyendo así a dar pasos decisivos desde las poéticas de la transgresión hacia poéticas de la celebración y transformación social. En esta presentación se exploran dos de estas estrategias de normalización literaria: el uso del humor y la proliferación de perspectivas discursivas en el cine y la narrativa de ficción de las últimas décadas.

In this text, based on the analysis of Os serões do Convento (1862), the concept of literature for the hand is introduced to discuss the pornographic literature that circulated between Brazil and Portugal. For that, the language, the place of the work in the Brazilian and Portuguese literary historiographies and LGBT, its anticlericalism, its intertextualities, the resonances of the book in other literary texts and its problematic authorship are analyzed. Also, the anticlericalism, the intertextuality, its resonances in other literary texts are indicated and its questionable authorship. Finally, we discuss too, the role of literary criticism in the approach of texts whose characters escape the paradigms of heteronormativity and cisgenerity.

With Trans Futures Now, YouTuber and social justice activist Milo Stewart compiles stories of trans and nonbinary people to give readers insight into the fight for trans rights. Each chapter shares anecdotes from both Stewart and other creatives of all identities both within and outside the gender binary (Stewart themself being nonbinary), as well as narratives on transgender history, the varied trans liberation experience, and the effects of the gender binary on both cis and transgender communities.

This article considers the previously unexamined political uses of children's literature in the 1986–1988 British Parliamentary debates of the legislation that became Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988. This law, now repealed, prohibited the "promotion" of homosexuality and "pre-tended" same-sex family relationships by local authorities in the United Kingdom. The effect of the legislation was a widespread silencing of LGBT+ people in institutions across the nation. But while much has been written about those effects and on Section 28 generally over the past 30 years, there has been less sustained attention, within the context of the debates, given to those children's books and how they were used by politicians to justify the law. With a particular focus on two of the most prominent texts in the Parliamentary debates – David Rees' teen novel, The Milkman's on his Way (1982), and Susanne Bösche's picturebook, Mette bor hos Morten og Erik, published in English as Jenny Lives with Eric and Martin (1981/1983) – this article examines the political uses and constructions of children's texts and argues that silence and absence were a key discursive strategy deployed by supporters of the law.