Buy Used
$0.04
+ $3.99 shipping
Used: Very Good | Details
Condition: Used: Very Good
Comment: Appearance of only slight previous use. Cover and binding show a little wear. All pages are undamaged with potentially only a few, small markings. Help save a tree. Buy all your used books from Green Earth Books. Read. Recycle and Reuse.
Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

The Price We Pay: The Case Against Racist Speech, Hate Propaganda, and Pornography Paperback – September, 1995


See all 2 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Paperback
"Please retry"
$0.25 $0.01

The Amazon Book Review
The Amazon Book Review
Check out The Amazon Book Review, our editors' fresh new blog featuring interviews with authors, book reviews, quirky essays on book trends, and regular columns by our editors. Explore now

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

Is enduring "hate speech" and "pornography" worth "the price we pay" for free speech? No, say the authors of these essays, many of which were presented at a 1993 conference at the University of Chicago Law School. The essayists include such familiar names as Andrea Dworkin, Catharine MacKinnon, and Eleanor Smeal. Most allege that "hate speech" and "pornography" (neither term is defined by the authors or editors) lead to hate crimes and violence against women. Many chastise the U.S. Supreme Court for its decision in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, which struck down that city's antipornography ordinance because, they believe, it may legitimize offensive speech. In the epilog, editors Lederer, a feminist theorist and editor of the anthology Take Back the Night (1980), and Delgado, a professor at the University of Colorado Law School, suggest that the Court, with its decisions on hate speech and pornography, "risks becoming an impediment to serious social dialogue." The implication in this volume is that the First Amendment must be emasculated in the cause of eliminating hate crimes and crimes against women. For another view, see Nat Hentoff's Free Speech for Me-But Not for Thee (LJ 9/15/92) and Aryeh Neier's Defending My Enemy (LJ 2/1/79). Recommended for academic and large public library collections, particularly where what constitutes free speech is an issue.
Sue Kamm, Inglewood P.L., Cal.
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc.
NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

Best Books of the Month
Best Books of the Month
Want to know our Editors' picks for the best books of the month? Browse Best Books of the Month, featuring our favorite new books in more than a dozen categories.

Product Details

  • Paperback: 380 pages
  • Publisher: Hill & Wang Pub; First Edition edition (September 1995)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0809015773
  • ISBN-13: 978-0809015771
  • Product Dimensions: 6.1 x 1.1 x 9 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds
  • Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,369,463 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

3.0 out of 5 stars
5 star
0%
4 star
0%
3 star
100%
2 star
0%
1 star
0%
See the customer review
Share your thoughts with other customers

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

2 of 8 people found the following review helpful By Sophist on June 30, 2008
Format: Paperback
I wonder if Stuteville even read the book, because the authors--and most other academics and lawyers who argue hate speech can be punished--clearly argue that it's not a matter of "just being offended." In fact, check out justice Clarence Thomas's argument saying cross-burning can be punished by law--he makes the case that the KKK is the oldest terrorist organization in the world (and their "speech" is aimed at anti-democratic purposes: limiting life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and equal rights of minorities: if you can't protect those, what the heck is the First Amendment for, anyway?). So my question: Why are you sympathizing with the terrorists?
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again