- https://sites.google.com/site/louiserichardsonself/
Louise Richardson-Self
University of Tasmania, School of Humanities, Faculty Member
- University of Tasmania, School of Philosophy, AlumnusThe University of Sydney, Philosophy, AlumnusUniversiteit Utrecht, Gender Studies, Graduate Studentadd
- Feminist Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, Ethics, Social and Political Philosophy, Feminist Theory, Social imaginary, and 47 moreContinental Philosophy, Applied Ethics, Political Philosophy, Contemporary French Philosophy, Phenomenology, Luce Irigaray, Elizabeth Grosz, Moira Gatens, Political rhetoric, metaphors, social imaginary, Gender Studies, Cultural Studies, Philosophy, Debate over Same-Sex Marriage, Women's Studies, Sexuality, Gender, Marxism, Theories of Socialism, LGBT Issues, Contemporary Literature, Feminisms, Critical Theory, Gender and Sexuality, Michel Foucault, Latin American feminisms, Antiglobalization Social Movements, Sigmund Freud, Philosophy of Psychology, Philosophy of Psychoanalysis, Moral Psychology, Philosophy Of Law, Philosophy Of Language, History of Philosophy, Feminism, Feminist Literary Theory and Gender Studies, Feminist epistemology (Philosophy), Metaphysics, Muslim feminism, Hate Speech, Solidarity Economy, Multiculturalism, Democratic Theory, Freedom Of Expression, Social Epistemology, Miranda Fricker, Digital Media, and Brazilian Studiesedit
- Louise joined the University of Tasmania as a Lecturer in Philosophy and Gender Studies in July 2015, and teaches int... moreLouise joined the University of Tasmania as a Lecturer in Philosophy and Gender Studies in July 2015, and teaches into both the Philosophy and Gender Studies majors. She is an Australian Research Council DECRA Fellow (2019-2021) researching hate speech, and is part of an Australian Research Council Discovery Project team (2020-2022) researching queer non-discrimination and religious freedom.
In 2016 she was awarded the prestigious R. M. Crawford Medal for her research and public outreach by the Australian Academy of the Humanities, and in 2017 she was a Residential Fellow of the Humility and Conviction in Public Life project, hosted by the University of Connecticut. In 2019 she was awarded the Australasian Association of Philosophy's Annette Baier prize for her article 'Offending White Men,' and was recognised with a UTAS College of Arts, Law and Education early career researcher award.
Prior to accepting her position at UTAS, Louise was a Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Wollongong (2014-2015). She graduated with her PhD in Philosophy from the University of Sydney in 2014, and was a Research Affiliate with the University of Sydney for one year (2014-2015). Her undergraduate and Honours studies were undertaken at the University of Tasmania (2006-2009).edit
https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781538147795/Hate-Speech-Against-Women-Online-Concepts-and-Countermeasures Why are women so frequently targeted with hate speech online and what can we do about it? Psychological explanations for the problem of... more
https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781538147795/Hate-Speech-Against-Women-Online-Concepts-and-Countermeasures
Why are women so frequently targeted with hate speech online and what can we do about it? Psychological explanations for the problem of woman-hating overlook important features of our social world that encourage latent feelings of hostility toward women, even despite our consciously-held ideals of equality. Louise Richardson-Self investigates the woman-hostile norms of the English-speaking internet, the ‘rules’ of engagement in these social spaces, and the narratives we tell ourselves about who gets to inhabit such spaces. It examines the dominant imaginings (images, impressions, stereotypes, and ideas) of women that are shared in acts of hate speech, highlighting their ‘emotional stickiness’. But offering strategies through which we may reimagine our norms of online engagement, the stories that justify those norms, and the logic that makes sense of it all, this book shows how we can create alternative visions of what it means to take up online space as a woman and to ensure that women are seen as entitled to be there. By exploring aspects of ‘social imaginaries’ theory and applying it to the problem of hate speech against women online, this book illuminates why woman-hating has become such a prominent feature of this environment and how we can make these spaces safer for women.
Why are women so frequently targeted with hate speech online and what can we do about it? Psychological explanations for the problem of woman-hating overlook important features of our social world that encourage latent feelings of hostility toward women, even despite our consciously-held ideals of equality. Louise Richardson-Self investigates the woman-hostile norms of the English-speaking internet, the ‘rules’ of engagement in these social spaces, and the narratives we tell ourselves about who gets to inhabit such spaces. It examines the dominant imaginings (images, impressions, stereotypes, and ideas) of women that are shared in acts of hate speech, highlighting their ‘emotional stickiness’. But offering strategies through which we may reimagine our norms of online engagement, the stories that justify those norms, and the logic that makes sense of it all, this book shows how we can create alternative visions of what it means to take up online space as a woman and to ensure that women are seen as entitled to be there. By exploring aspects of ‘social imaginaries’ theory and applying it to the problem of hate speech against women online, this book illuminates why woman-hating has become such a prominent feature of this environment and how we can make these spaces safer for women.
Research Interests:
http://www.rowmaninternational.com/books/justifying-same-sex-marriage There is massive public interest in same-sex marriage, a controversial topic that is rarely out of the media. This book investigates the extent to which legalizing... more
http://www.rowmaninternational.com/books/justifying-same-sex-marriage
There is massive public interest in same-sex marriage, a controversial topic that is rarely out of the media. This book investigates the extent to which legalizing same-sex marriage can contribute to ending the discrimination and social stigma faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender men and women (LGBT) in the Western world. This issue breaks down into several further questions: can marriage equality be defended without reinforcing the idea that marriage is the most/only valuable form of intimate relationship? Can marriage equality be defended without further marginalizing non-conforming LGBT people? What kind of equality should LGBT people strive for? What critical agency might they lose when this equality is achieved? What institutional legacies should we embrace? The book focuses on human rights arguments supporting same-sex marriage and questions whether they are likely to both justify legal change and encourage shifts in the sociopolitical reception of LGBT people. After critically analyzing various arguments in favor of same-sex marriage, the author puts forward a justification that allows for marriage equality and does not result in the assimilation of queer identities into heteronormative identity.
There is massive public interest in same-sex marriage, a controversial topic that is rarely out of the media. This book investigates the extent to which legalizing same-sex marriage can contribute to ending the discrimination and social stigma faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender men and women (LGBT) in the Western world. This issue breaks down into several further questions: can marriage equality be defended without reinforcing the idea that marriage is the most/only valuable form of intimate relationship? Can marriage equality be defended without further marginalizing non-conforming LGBT people? What kind of equality should LGBT people strive for? What critical agency might they lose when this equality is achieved? What institutional legacies should we embrace? The book focuses on human rights arguments supporting same-sex marriage and questions whether they are likely to both justify legal change and encourage shifts in the sociopolitical reception of LGBT people. After critically analyzing various arguments in favor of same-sex marriage, the author puts forward a justification that allows for marriage equality and does not result in the assimilation of queer identities into heteronormative identity.
Research Interests:
Political debates over religious freedom in Australia became prominent in the context of marriage equality, achieved in 2017. The Australian Christian Right (ACR) has driven these debates, but there is little research focusing on its... more
Political debates over religious freedom in Australia became prominent in the context of marriage equality, achieved in 2017. The Australian Christian Right (ACR) has driven these debates, but there is little research focusing on its discourse of religious freedom. This article examines a range of texts from ACR actors. Using discourse and theoretical analyses, we identify three key turns in the religious freedom rhetoric of the ACR: "ontological security," "existential stress," and "meaning vertigo." We also explore how mimetic ACR discourse is compared to the United States' Christian Right (USCR). As with the USCR, this research demonstrates how the ACR-suffering meaning vertigo and aiming to re-secure its previously taken-for-granted worldview-has successfully reframed the discourse of religious freedom by positioning itself as a besieged minority.
Research Interests:
This article considers and evaluates some of the elastic applications of the term 'violence'. Some of the most well-known applications are structural, symbolic, epistemic, psychosocial, and linguistic violence. Should these phenomena be... more
This article considers and evaluates some of the elastic applications of the term 'violence'. Some of the most well-known applications are structural, symbolic, epistemic, psychosocial, and linguistic violence. Should these phenomena be understood as violence-proper or are these merely provocative hyperbole? Some scholars are openly resistant to these elastic applications, arguing that calling these phenomena 'violence' is no more than conceptual carelessness. The question we are interested in is why people continue to be drawn to the image of violence to typify certain phenomena that cause suffering. We identify that it is the temporal extension (i.e. the experiential duration) of the experience of stuckedness in suffering that unifies these conditions. In close, we offer some reflections on the relationship of law to (what is called) violence and where it can mitigate stuckedness.
Research Interests:
In this commentary I evaluate what McGowan's project would conclude with respect to the treatment of professional Australian Football League player Adam Goodes, who was incessantly 'booed' by crowds for the final two years of his career.... more
In this commentary I evaluate what McGowan's project would conclude with respect to the treatment of professional Australian Football League player Adam Goodes, who was incessantly 'booed' by crowds for the final two years of his career. Analysing Goodes' case in light of McGowan's argument leads me to two observations. First, McGowan's norm-enactment approach is incredibly useful because it explains how words like 'boo' (with unstable meaning) can constitute actionable discrimination. Second, however, I wonder if a narrow focus on whether such speech is legally actionable might encourage an overestimation of the power of laws to shepherd new g-norms into social practices.
Research Interests:
Abstract: The metaphysics of sex and gender is of significant philosophical, social, and cultural interest at present. Terms like transgender and cisgender have come into wider circulation in the fight for gender justice. While many are... more
Abstract: The metaphysics of sex and gender is of significant philosophical, social, and cultural interest at present. Terms like transgender and cisgender have come into wider circulation in the fight for gender justice. While many are familiar with ‘transgender’, fewer know ‘cisgender’, the term that captures AFAB-women (assigned ‘female’ at birth-women) and AMAB-men. But ‘cisgender’ is controversial to some, which I find surprising. In this article, I reflect on my process of recognising my self as cisgender. During, I highlight the ethico-political consequences of refusing the onto-epistemic category ‘cisgender’. I shall argue that uptake of ‘cisgender’ and apprenticeship to trans texts uncovers how we maintain, and might purposefully disturb, queer/cis-hetero, man/woman/other hierarchies of social identity power. I argue this self-recognition is a crucial tool for challenging ‘cisgender commonsense’ and may be a means toward dislodging ciscentrism in my (western, Anglophone) milieu.
Note: This article has is part of a special issue on "Recognising Recognition: Interdisciplinary Insights into Self-Other Dynamics in Everyday Encounters and Experiences". Guest Editors are Sandra Obradovic (Open University) and Amena Amer (University of Greenwich).
Note: This article has is part of a special issue on "Recognising Recognition: Interdisciplinary Insights into Self-Other Dynamics in Everyday Encounters and Experiences". Guest Editors are Sandra Obradovic (Open University) and Amena Amer (University of Greenwich).
Research Interests: Queer Studies, Feminist Theory, Transgender Studies, Feminist Philosophy, Sexuality, and 12 moreGender and Sexuality, Social Justice, Gender, Gender Equality, Equality and Diversity, Feminism, Social Epistemology, LGBT Studies, Oppression, Ignorance, Privilege and Oppression, and Cisgenderness Studies
https://ethics.org.au/survivors-are-talking-but-whats-changing/ If we are to take anything away from Brittany Higgins' and Grace Tame's National Press Club addresses – and we should – it is this: institutional change must be tackled... more
https://ethics.org.au/survivors-are-talking-but-whats-changing/
If we are to take anything away from Brittany Higgins' and Grace Tame's National Press Club addresses – and we should – it is this: institutional change must be tackled actively – though not all institutions are formal; we must challenge abuse of power – though not all power is formally bestowed; and those who are in formal positions with considerable power must act effectively.
If we are to take anything away from Brittany Higgins' and Grace Tame's National Press Club addresses – and we should – it is this: institutional change must be tackled actively – though not all institutions are formal; we must challenge abuse of power – though not all power is formally bestowed; and those who are in formal positions with considerable power must act effectively.
Research Interests:
Why are some people resistant to affirmative action (AA) measures in Australia? On what grounds do people take a principled stance against AA? The article explores the resistance of online commentators to AA in a spread of domains,... more
Why are some people resistant to affirmative action (AA) measures in Australia? On what grounds do people take a principled stance against AA? The article explores the resistance of online commentators to AA in a spread of domains, including politics, employment, and awards. These data reveal that sexism, misogyny, and the values of liberal humanism work together to present opposition to AA as justified. To alter this perspective, it will be necessary to challenge the scope of 'prepackaged' liberal values in addition to addressing misogynistic hostility and fighting sexist tropes.
Research Interests:
This chapter considers the content of nine qualitative interviews with LGBTQ+ identifying Tasmanians who work in government funded religious organisations and schools in order to better understand their experiences of discrimination and... more
This chapter considers the content of nine qualitative interviews with LGBTQ+ identifying Tasmanians who work in government funded religious organisations and schools in order to better understand their experiences of discrimination and inclusion in the workplace in this time of anxiety about religious freedom.
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9780429021589/sex-relationships-law-social-change-frances-hamilton-guido-noto-la-diega?refId=65bf01e1-e83d-44d8-ae47-6855d57ff970
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9780429021589/sex-relationships-law-social-change-frances-hamilton-guido-noto-la-diega?refId=65bf01e1-e83d-44d8-ae47-6855d57ff970
Research Interests:
Forthcoming *Inaugural Issue: International Journal of Gender, Sexuality, and Law* This article details and analyses some of the public online response to the Tasmanian Government’s decision to make the recording of gender on birth... more
Forthcoming
*Inaugural Issue: International Journal of Gender, Sexuality, and Law*
This article details and analyses some of the public online response to the Tasmanian Government’s decision to make the recording of gender on birth certificates an opt-in process. Tasmania is the first jurisdiction in Australia to make such a change, which aims to simplify the legal processes involved in affirming a person’s gender identity (including agender and non-binary status). The data set is comprised of comments posted on Facebook in response to The Australian newspaper’s coverage of this event, which is Australia’s only truly national daily broadsheet. This article argues that the effect of this overwhelmingly negative ciscentric response, as revealed by the aesthetic of this digital social space, is the generation of an impression of Australians as trans- (and intersex-) averse. This risks undermining the basic good of assurance that transgender and intersex people ought to have: an assurance that they can inhabit public spaces and be treated with dignity and respect (cf. Waldron). To prevent this kind of hostile response in the future, we must find a way to communicate and make resonant to the general public what queer and feminist theorists have been arguing for quite some time: that sex and gender are not synonymous and that both gender and sex are social constructs.
*Inaugural Issue: International Journal of Gender, Sexuality, and Law*
This article details and analyses some of the public online response to the Tasmanian Government’s decision to make the recording of gender on birth certificates an opt-in process. Tasmania is the first jurisdiction in Australia to make such a change, which aims to simplify the legal processes involved in affirming a person’s gender identity (including agender and non-binary status). The data set is comprised of comments posted on Facebook in response to The Australian newspaper’s coverage of this event, which is Australia’s only truly national daily broadsheet. This article argues that the effect of this overwhelmingly negative ciscentric response, as revealed by the aesthetic of this digital social space, is the generation of an impression of Australians as trans- (and intersex-) averse. This risks undermining the basic good of assurance that transgender and intersex people ought to have: an assurance that they can inhabit public spaces and be treated with dignity and respect (cf. Waldron). To prevent this kind of hostile response in the future, we must find a way to communicate and make resonant to the general public what queer and feminist theorists have been arguing for quite some time: that sex and gender are not synonymous and that both gender and sex are social constructs.
Research Interests:
In a recent article, J. Angelo Corlett criticises what he takes to be the ‘offensiphobic’ practices characteristic of many universities. The ‘offensiphobe’, according to Corlett, believes that offensive speech ought to be censured... more
In a recent article, J. Angelo Corlett criticises what he takes to be the ‘offensiphobic’ practices characteristic of many universities. The ‘offensiphobe’, according to Corlett, believes that offensive speech ought to be censured precisely because it offends. We argue that there are three serious problems with Corlett’s discussion. First, his criticism of ‘offensiphobia’ misrepresents the kinds of censorship practiced by universities; many universities may in some way censure speech which they regard as offensive, but this is seldom if ever a manifestation of ‘offensiphobia’. Second, we attempt to reconstruct Corlett’s criticism of ‘offensiphobia’ as a criticism of the practice of censuring hate speech, and show that this argument is unsuccessful. Third, we offer some brief reflections on how labelling universities as ‘offensiphobic’ is especially problematic in light of the current climate of political interference in university research and teaching.
Research Interests:
This article identifies five genres of anti-queer hate speech found in The Australian’s Facebook comments sections, exposing and analyzing the ways in which such comments are used to derogate cisgender and (often) heterosexual women. One... more
This article identifies five genres of anti-queer hate speech found in The Australian’s Facebook comments sections, exposing and analyzing the ways in which such comments are used to derogate cisgender and (often) heterosexual women. One may be tempted to think of cis-het women as third-party victims of queerphobia; however, this article argues that these genres of anti-queer speech are, in fact, misogynistic. Specifically, it argues that these are instances of cis-hetero-misogynistic hate speech. Cis-hetero-misogyny functions as the “law enforcement branch” of a cis-hetero-patriarchal gender order. Given the existence of such an order, it is clear that cis-het women’s liberation is inextricable from queer liberation (and vice versa). This article argues that to facilitate allyship and challenge this gender order—the order that elicits such hate speech acts—we need an epistemological revolution in the way we recognize and re-cognize human difference.
Research Interests:
In this article, I discuss the recurring themes of ‘imaginaries’ and ‘embodiment’ in Moira Gatens’ scholarship over a 25-year period, starting with her first publication: ‘A Critique of the Sex/Gender Distinction’. I argue that not only... more
In this article, I discuss the recurring themes of ‘imaginaries’ and ‘embodiment’ in Moira Gatens’ scholarship over a 25-year period, starting with her first publication: ‘A Critique of the Sex/Gender Distinction’. I argue that not only do the insights articulated in Gatens’ ‘Critique’ endure throughout her work, but that these dual themes so constant in her oeuvre remain crucial for feminist theory and the political aim of empowerment and equality.
Research Interests:
This article provides an analysis of the arguments against same-sex marriage as they crystallised in the “No” campaign. The campaign tapped into 'six factors for change' in an attempt to hinder social equality and reverse shifts in the... more
This article provides an analysis of the arguments against same-sex marriage as they crystallised in the “No” campaign. The campaign tapped into 'six factors for change' in an attempt to hinder social equality and reverse shifts in the dominant social imaginary in a unique way: the “No” campaign hardly focused its arguments on the union of marriage, and instead focused on the (alleged) direct causal consequences of legal change, which marks a new trajectory in anti-queer advocacy. To some extent these tactics were successful, as reflected by a dip in support for same-sex marriage during the campaign period. This matters because arguments such as those produced by the Coalition for Marriage nonetheless inhibit the equal regard that the queer community are owed, even if these arguments convince only a minority of people.
Research Interests:
In this article I analyse two complaints of white vilification, which are increasingly occurring in Australia. I argue that, though the complainants (and white people generally) are not harmed by such racialized speech, the complainants... more
In this article I analyse two complaints of white vilification, which are increasingly occurring in Australia. I argue that, though the complainants (and white people generally) are not harmed by such racialized speech, the complainants in fact harm Australians of colour through these utterances. These complaints can both cause and constitute at least two forms of epistemic injustice (willful hermeneutical ignorance, and comparative credibility excess). Further, I argue that the complaints are grounded in a dual misrecognition: the complainants misrecognize themselves in their own privileged racial specificity, and they misrecognize others in their own marginal racial specificity. Such misrecognition preserves the cultural imperialism of Australia's dominant social imaginary—a means of oppression that perpetuates epistemic insensitivity. Bringing this dual misrecognition to light best captures the indignity that is suffered by the victims of the aforementioned epistemic injustices. I argue that it is only when we truly recognize difference in its own terms, shifting the dominant social imaginary, that 'mainstream Australians' can do their part in bringing about a just society.
Research Interests:
Hate speech is one of the most important conceptual categories in anti-oppression politics today; a great deal of energy and political will is devoted to identifying, characterizing, contesting, and (sometimes) penalizing hate speech.... more
Hate speech is one of the most important conceptual categories in anti-oppression politics today; a great deal of energy and political will is devoted to identifying, characterizing, contesting, and (sometimes) penalizing hate speech. However, despite the increasing inclusion of gender identity as a socially salient trait, antipatriarchal politics has largely been absent within this body of scholarship. Figuring out how to properly situate patriarchy-enforcing speech within the category of hate speech is therefore an important politico-philosophical project. My aim in this article is twofold: first, I argue that sexist speech, though oppressive, is not hate speech. Second, I argue that misogynistic speech is hate speech, even when it is intradivisional (that is, when it targets only subsets of women). This is important because recognizing that the concept hate speech applies to certain forms of patriarchy-enforcing speech is another step in clarifying what is wrong with the practice, and how bad it is in relation to other abuses. Consequently, this article provides a more nuanced account of the kinds of expressions that can and should count as instances of hate speech.
Research Interests:
This article considers the importance of intersectionality in reporting. In this article I claim that the characterisation of the same-sex marriage debate in Australian mainstream media prevents any serious, nuanced evaluation of the... more
This article considers the importance of intersectionality in reporting. In this article I claim that the characterisation of the same-sex marriage debate in Australian mainstream media prevents any serious, nuanced evaluation of the movement. Through an analysis of recent news reports and opinion pieces, I illustrate the way that implicit dichotomous assumptions and language use create a myopic understanding of the same-sex marriage debate.
Research Interests:
This article offers a feminist analysis of Rainer Forst’s position on same-sex marriage and tolerance. Moreover, it is an attempt to forge philosophical bridges between Forst and the work of Luce Irigaray. I am sympathetic to Forst’s... more
This article offers a feminist analysis of Rainer Forst’s position on same-sex marriage and tolerance. Moreover,
it is an attempt to forge philosophical bridges between Forst and the work of Luce Irigaray. I am sympathetic
to Forst’s argument that same-sex marriage is owed to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender men and women
(LGBT) as a matter of right. However, I take issue with Forst’s characterisation of same-sex marriage as
something to be tolerated by non-supporters. This is because tolerance does not require, let alone encourage,
a perspectival change in the agent; and yet, there is no rational basis on which to oppose same-sex marriage.
The maintenance of prejudicial attitudes is likely to contribute to the ongoing social discrimination that LGBT
people face, even if legal equality is achieved for LGBT people.
it is an attempt to forge philosophical bridges between Forst and the work of Luce Irigaray. I am sympathetic
to Forst’s argument that same-sex marriage is owed to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender men and women
(LGBT) as a matter of right. However, I take issue with Forst’s characterisation of same-sex marriage as
something to be tolerated by non-supporters. This is because tolerance does not require, let alone encourage,
a perspectival change in the agent; and yet, there is no rational basis on which to oppose same-sex marriage.
The maintenance of prejudicial attitudes is likely to contribute to the ongoing social discrimination that LGBT
people face, even if legal equality is achieved for LGBT people.
Research Interests:
The goal of marriage equality should be the social and legal non-discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. But how likely is same-sex marriage to lead to social justice? This article argues that, while... more
The goal of marriage equality should be the social and legal non-discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. But how likely is same-sex marriage to lead to social justice? This article argues that, while same-sex marriage is justified, social justice is best served when the normative importance of marriage is undercut.
Research Interests:
Same-sex marriage remains a controversial praxis. The Daily Mail reports that the first three months of 2013 have seen homophobic attacks triple in France when compared to the same period of 2012. The French response to the introduction... more
Same-sex marriage remains a controversial praxis. The Daily Mail reports that the first three months of 2013 have seen homophobic attacks triple in France when compared to the same period of 2012. The French response to the introduction of same-sex marriage and the correlative increase in homophobia gives us pause to explore a number of urgent questions about the same-sex marriage movement and its effects. Conservatives who postulate absurd slippery slope arguments are not the only ones exercising caution about the possible repercussions of same-sex marriage. There are other, more legitimate, potential repercussions that must be considered. Problematically, arguments for same-sex marriage predominantly position LGBTs as the same as (normative) heterosexuals. This chapter advances a position toward LGBT equality from the perspective of difference-feminism. Specifically, I propose that Irigaray’s insights on how to encounter difference can be useful to this end. My project facilitates a reimagining of the encounter with difference itself. Such a shift will ultimately allow Others, including LGBTs, to exit phallocentric modes of recognition and representation, and to be conceived of with the respect they deserve.
Research Interests:
This article argues in favour of same-sex marriage, but only under certain conditions. Same-sex marriage ought to be introduced in the Australian context in order to remedy the formal inequalities between lesbian, gay, bisexual and... more
This article argues in favour of same-sex marriage, but only under certain conditions. Same-sex marriage ought to be introduced in the Australian context in order to remedy the formal inequalities between lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) citizens and their heterosexual/cisgendered counterparts. One common method of justifying the introduction of formal same-sex relationship recognition has been via the promotion of LGBT “normalcy.” This article explores such a trend by analysing popular media and advertising, since media representations and coverage have been shown to affect the way the general public “learns, understands, and thinks about an issue”. This article finds that the promotion of normalcy can, in fact, perpetuate hetero-norms, and only offer LGBT people an imaginary social equality. Such normalisation, it is suggested, is detrimental to a wider goal of gaining respect for LGBT people regardless, not in spite of, their identity and relationships. Yet, this article maintains that such imaginary equality can be avoided, so long as a plurality of possibilities for one’s intimate and familial life are actively legitimated and promoted.
Research Interests: History, Cultural Studies, Gender Studies, Queer Studies, Ethics, and 34 moreMedia and Cultural Studies, Feminist Theory, Marxism, Literature, Narrative, Popular Culture, Queer Theory, Feminist Philosophy, Sexuality, Critical Psychology, Discourse, Politics, LGBT Issues, Gender, Sigmund Freud, Michel Foucault, Debate over Same-Sex Marriage, Media, Sexual Identity, Social and Political Philosophy, Solidarity Economy, Poststructuralist Theory, Film, Homosexuality, Queer, Gay, Lesbian, Script, Lgbtq, Bisexual, Theories of Socialism, Antiglobalization Social Movements, Latin American feminisms, and Public Policy
The prominent call to legalise same-sex marriage in Australia raises questions concerning whether its achievement will result in amplified societal acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, and on what grounds... more
The prominent call to legalise same-sex marriage in Australia raises questions concerning whether its achievement will result in amplified societal acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, and on what grounds this acceptance will take place. Same-sex marriage may not challenge heteronormative and patriarchal features typically associated with marriage, and may serve to reinforce a hierarchy that promotes traditional marriage as the ideal relationship structure. This may result in only assimilationist acceptance of LGBT people. However, the consequence of inclusion to marriage ought to reflect social acceptance of LGBTs as people worthy of equal treatment in dignity and in rights, regardless of perceived differences or similarities to a supposed majority standard. This article argues that justice would be best served by introducing and promoting a variety of State-sanctioned unions whilst simultaneously introducing same-sex marriage. This ‘pluralisation strategy’ would increase awareness and legitimacy of other relationship-recognition options, promoting respectful acceptance of LGBT and heterosexual people alike.
Research Interests:
My submission in response to the Australian Government's request for feedback on an exposure draft Online Safety Bill.
Research Interests:
Speech delivered at UTAS Stanley Burbury Theatre to launch the book 'Going Postal'.
Research Interests:
https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/book-launch-hate-speech-against-women-online-dr-louise-richardson-self-tickets-385273592687 The Vice-Chancellor, Professor Rufus Black will be launching Dr Louise RichardsonSelf’s book, Hate Speech Against... more
https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/book-launch-hate-speech-against-women-online-dr-louise-richardson-self-tickets-385273592687
The Vice-Chancellor, Professor Rufus Black will be launching Dr Louise RichardsonSelf’s book, Hate Speech Against Women Online: Concepts and Countermeasures at the Salon, the Hedberg.
Louise Richardson-Self is an award winning philosopher, with an international reputation for cutting-edge research on some of the most urgent questions of our time. Her new book, Hate Speech Against Women Online: Concepts and Countermeasures, challenges us to understand the extend and impact of gendered slurs online and to ask what it will take for women’s cybersafety to be prioritised in meaningful and lasting ways.
The Vice-Chancellor, Professor Rufus Black will be launching Dr Louise RichardsonSelf’s book, Hate Speech Against Women Online: Concepts and Countermeasures at the Salon, the Hedberg.
Louise Richardson-Self is an award winning philosopher, with an international reputation for cutting-edge research on some of the most urgent questions of our time. Her new book, Hate Speech Against Women Online: Concepts and Countermeasures, challenges us to understand the extend and impact of gendered slurs online and to ask what it will take for women’s cybersafety to be prioritised in meaningful and lasting ways.
Research Interests:
A free online public panel event. 9 August 2021 Register: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/public-panel-resentment-guilt-and-shame-under-patriarchy-tickets-163133473611 Featuring a keynote address by Dr Kate Manne (Cornell University),... more
A free online public panel event.
9 August 2021
Register: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/public-panel-resentment-guilt-and-shame-under-patriarchy-tickets-163133473611
Featuring a keynote address by Dr Kate Manne (Cornell University), titled "What is Gaslighting?"
And a collection of short papers from:
- Dr Louise Richardson-Self (University of Tasmania), titled "Affirmative Action, Gender, and Merit"
- Dr Tracy Llanera (University of Connecticut/University of Notre Dame), titled "Misogyny, Feminism, and the Alt-Right"
- Dr Filipa Melo Lopes (University of Edinburgh), titled "What Do Incels Want?"
Times:
6am--10am EDT (UTC -4)
11am-3pm BST (UTC +1)
6pm-10pm PHT (UTC +8)
8pm-12am AEST (UTC +10)
9 August 2021
Register: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/public-panel-resentment-guilt-and-shame-under-patriarchy-tickets-163133473611
Featuring a keynote address by Dr Kate Manne (Cornell University), titled "What is Gaslighting?"
And a collection of short papers from:
- Dr Louise Richardson-Self (University of Tasmania), titled "Affirmative Action, Gender, and Merit"
- Dr Tracy Llanera (University of Connecticut/University of Notre Dame), titled "Misogyny, Feminism, and the Alt-Right"
- Dr Filipa Melo Lopes (University of Edinburgh), titled "What Do Incels Want?"
Times:
6am--10am EDT (UTC -4)
11am-3pm BST (UTC +1)
6pm-10pm PHT (UTC +8)
8pm-12am AEST (UTC +10)