Research on the Experiences of Being the Target of Hate Speech

Laura Beth Nielsen

Hate speech has many incarnations. It can be organized, political hate speech such as the Nazis marching through Skokie, activities that those untrained in law might not even consider speech, such as cross-burning, web sites that promote race-hatred and bigotry, as well as prejudiced-motivated remarks made by strangers to one another in public places.

Being the target of racism and sexism in general and of racist and sexist hate speech in particular only recently has begun to be documented, analyzed, and understood by social scientists, but the research that exists suggests various negative consequences that follow from being a target including a number of mental health risks, psychiatric symptoms, academic underperformance, and other complex coping strategies.

I study prejudice-motivated speech between strangers in public places to better understand being the target of such speech from the targets' perspective. Today I will address my remarks to the following questions.

What is the frequency and nature of racist and sexist hate speech between strangers in public places? How do targets react and respond to such comments in the moment? And finally, do members of non-target groups appreciate the frequency of hate speech for members of target groups, in my study, white women and people of color?

Women are made the target of sexist hate speech significantly more frequently than are men. 61% of women in my study reported hearing such remarks every day or often, compared to only 14% of men. These comments ranged from the "merely" vulgar and offensive to implied sexual threats and propositions for paid sex. All the women reported being targeted for such speech at one time or another.

Being the target of offensive public speech does not simply leave the target offended, however. Gender motivated hate speech instills deep fear that leads women to change the way they dress, talk, and interact in order to avoid being made a target. In order to safely be in public, women perform a variety of calculations that I call the "detailed calculus for being in public" and often choose to avoid being in public to avoid being made a target.

When women are targets of offensive sexually suggestive speech, they fear that the speech is a prelude to more serious violence such as rape or assault. A 35 year-old African-American woman interviewee said it better than I can, "The offensiveness is one thing, but it can also be very dangerous - it seems like the person's next move would be to do something dangerous to you - so it's very alarming."

This fear leads to silence. The vast majority of women I interviewed report that they are unable to combat hate speech for fear of escalating the situation, leaving women to blame themselves for being made a target, "I shouldn't have worn this skirt; I shouldn't have traveled to this part of town" and to plan their escape should the speaker's comments become more overtly threatening. Moreover, women internalize the blame for the interactions in part due to their understanding of the law's definition of the problem as one the law cannot or will not address. Thus, law has a powerful effect on targets.

To preserve their safety and based on their understanding that there is no legal remedy, women are left to accept the sexist characterization thrust upon them by the speaker which is how hate speech simultaneously creates, reinforces, and perpetuates gender hierarchy in public places. Racist Hate Speech Racist hate speech between strangers in public places also is alarmingly common. People of color I interviewed reported being called, names like "nigger," "boy," and "monkey." Respondents also reported racist jokes, hints that people of other races should "go back where they came from," shouting, and even physical altercations.

People of color are significantly more likely than whites to be made a target of racist hate speech from strangers in public places everyday or often than are whites. 46% of people of color vs. 5% of whites. And, racist hate speech is experienced even more often by African-Americans with almost two thirds (63%) of African-Americans reporting hearing racist comments "every day" or "often."

Although racist speech is more likely to lead to violence than sexist speech, most targets (49%) report simply walking away from perpetrators of racist speech in order to preserve their safety. Unlike sexually motivated hate speech, some, mostly male, targets of racist speech are willing to fight back.

One 32 year-old African-American man told me, "If you're going to call me that, you better know you are going to get hit. . . You dissed my father, you dissed my forefathers, and well, we're going to deal with this right here, right now."

Being the target of racist speech is a bitter reminder that racism can appear anywhere, anytime. Targets are compelled either to respond to the speech, often risking their own physical safety, or, out of fear, accept the characterization of them as racially inferior.

As with sexist hate speech, targets of racist hate speech understand this problem to be beyond the reach of law despite a rather sophisticated understanding of law's role in proscribing other forms of racial discrimination in employment, housing, and voting, for example.

Targets of racist and sexist hate speech understand the likelihood that they will be targeted for further violence and victimization based on their race or gender and behave accordingly, escaping the situation whenever possible. But ending the interaction does not mean ending the experience as incidents of hate speech are not isolated. Hate speech is embedded in and designed to reinforce and perpetuate hierarchies of race and gender in pubic places.

As the accounts of my respondents reveal, racist and sexist hate speech often are designed to be out of earshot of others, leaving those who are not its intended target unaware that these interactions even occur. Thus, members of non-target groups systematically and significantly underestimate the frequency with which target groups hear such remarks. In other words, whites do not accurately estimate the frequency with which African Americans are targets of racist speech and men systematically underestimate the frequency with which women are subjected to such remarks. These data reveal that non-target groups do not fully appreciate how simply being in public place is different for members of different social groups. Conclusion Sexist and racist hate speech are common - more common and more severe than non-targets think. The data show that women and people of color suffer the disproportionate burden of such speech. Whether or not sexist hate speech leads directly to unwanted sexual aggression is an important empirical question. But the focus on linking sexist hate speech and physical violence obscures the fact that such speech is a harm in and of itself because of how it makes women feel and behave as well as the role such speech plays in maintaining and buttressing systems of gender hierarchy in public.

Similarly, racist hate speech calls up existing structures of racial hierarchy and often is interpreted by the target as threatening, although it may or may not lead to violence.

There can be little doubt that members of traditionally disadvantaged groups face a strikingly different reality on the street than do members of privileged groups. A decision about the regulation of any form of speech is based on an understanding of the nature of the harms that results from allowing such speech, which necessitates a full understanding of the complex nature of the harms of hate speech. Whether these harms are sufficient to justify legal regulation is an important question and merits examination in its own right. Although the legal status of such speech may remain ambiguous, its harms do not.