Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Essay Available:
Pages:
6 pages/≈1650 words
Sources:
2 Sources
Level:
APA
Subject:
Law
Type:
Reaction Paper
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 28.51
Topic:

The Contemporary Society: Speech Wars Among Women (Reaction Paper Sample)

Instructions:

Reaction Paper: Select ONE CHAPTER in Nat Hentoff's book, Free Speech for Me -- But Not for Thee, and write a reaction/response paper about it. This book recounts modern cases of censorship from all political factions. Don’t just recount the cases from the chapter, react to and apply cases from class or personal experiences in your essay. This paper should be at least 1500 words.

source..
Content:

Speech Wars among Women
Name:
Institutional Affiliation:
Professor:
Course:
Date
Introduction
The freedom of academic thought as bound by the element of speech remains one of the greatest cultural ideologies that we live in this contemporary society. These ideologies and world views therefore, prove to be stronger, a factor that points out to the reason why people are willing to die and fight for this. Nat Hentoff in his pieces tries to protect free speech and alleges that censorship and opposing views are the strongest drives in the nature of humanity (Sandefur, 2015). In respect of this, men and women who are segregated by color are viewed as brothers and sisters as determined by the color of their skins. This depicts the element of racial segregation between the blacks and whites. The lusts that push individuals to interfere with the thoughts and speeches of others are one of the elements that come from different directions. This paper therefore, intends to carry out an analysis of Nat’s thoughts in his book, "Speech Wars among Women”.
Speech Wars among Women
Nat’s central idea in his literature dubbed, "Speech Wars among Women" revolves around the demonstration of the element of free expression which is considered as the freedom that underlies other forms of freedom that is under attack. According to Sandefur (2015), the attacks on the freedom of speech emanate from people across the society (pp. 48).
Considering the fact that the author comes from a socialist’s background in which the First Amendment was defended, Nat depicts the manner in which the Americans put their beliefs on this Amendment (Sandefur, 2015). He portrays the manner in which individuals are intolerant by not understanding the intent of free speech. According to my view, the author opposes the element of censorship by attacking the intolerance of the people who constantly elevate hate speech (Sandefur, 2015). It is necessary to note that the elites are alleged by this author as the individuals offering theoretical justifications for assaults as depicted in the First Amendment. These elites in my view twist the provisions of this amendment in their favor, thus leading to biasness. However, sensitive and compassionate professors argue against those who hold different views on free speech by stating that free speech remains a factor that is unjustly privileged over other rights that include the right not to be offended.
Hentoff in this book depicts the manner in which individuals censor the speeches of others. In this, he gives a depiction of the levels of hate speech codes within universities in America. In the case of Arizona University, the author mentions women who had allegedly faced harassment of speech and were seeking justice on this. In my view, I consider the fact that Arizona University is a public university with the first amendment applying within the school’s principles that protect even the offensive speech. Just like any learning institution, the universities rule allows the students living within its environs to post whatever they would like on their doors.
According to one of the professors in the institution, the First Amendment does not therefore prevent the offended parties from mentioning to the students or others on how they felt about the posters that were pinned on these women’s doors (Sandefur, 2015). I tend to view this as a sensitive approach of censorship that works for no good since it allows the opponents to use the privilege of free speech in covering their sexism and racism. In this case, I support the views of Hentoff that speech and harassment codes have the capacity to hurt some people that they intend to protect.
I herein argue that in as much as the central purpose of these codes remains in protecting and making blacks ...
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

Other Topics:

Need a Plagiarism Free Essay?
Submit your instructions!