| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.15 MB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
A praticamente infinita variedade de formas que a comunicação humana pode adotar em diversos contextos levanta dúvidas e discordâncias sobre a identificação de uma expressão como caracterizadora de discurso de ódio. O reconhecimento de que esse tipo de discurso pode se manifestar de maneiras diversas já evidencia a complexidade inerente ao problema. O assim chamado discurso de ódio, embora não seja um fenômeno novo,
ganhou a dimensão de um problema mundial principalmente com o advento da internet e, posteriormente, das redes sociais, que intensificaram a prática de ofensas e injúrias presentes em discursos carregados de intolerância e desrespeito ao outro. Isso decorre da facilidade em se expressar e difundir pensamentos e opiniões, além da sensação de legitimidade dessas ações sob a justificativa do exercício da liberdade de expressão irrestrita em um ambiente percebido como desprovido de regulamentação: a rede. Isso gerou um impacto crescente e perigoso, especificamente quando se trata de um discurso sexista, destacando a necessidade urgente de regulação adequada em termos de prevenção e proibição, tanto em nível nacional quanto internacional. No entanto, um dos maiores desafios enfrentados nessa regulação reside em encontrar um equilíbrio adequado entre a liberdade fundamental de expressão, que não deve ser suprimida, e a proteção da dignidade da pessoa humana contra qualquer manifestação que possa ser classificada como discurso de ódio, o que faz com que a aplicação desse instituto fique cada vez mais relativizada. Nesse contexto, o objetivo da presente investigação é, a partir de uma análise comparada, encontrar o ponto de equilíbrio ideal entre a ponderação da liberdade de expressão e da ofensa, sem que isso afete o livre direito de manifestação.
A virtually infinite variety of forms that human communication can take in different contexts raises doubts and disagreements about the identification of an expression as constituting hate speech. The recognition that this type of discourse can manifest itself in diverse ways already highlights the inherent complexity of the problem. The so-called hate speech, although not a new phenomenon, has become a global issue mainly with the advent of the internet and later social media, which have intensified the practice of offenses and slanders present in speeches laden with intolerance and disrespect towards others. This stems from the ease of expressing and disseminating thoughts and opinions, as well as the sense of legitimacy of these actions under the justification of the exercise of unrestricted freedom of expression in an environment perceived as lacking regulation: the online realm. This has generated a growing and dangerous impact, specifically when it comes to sexist discourse, highlighting the urgent need for adequate regulation in terms of prevention and prohibition, both at the national and international levels. However, one of the greatest challenges faced in this regulation lies in finding an adequate balance between the fundamental freedom of expression, which should not be suppressed, and the protection of human dignity against any manifestation that can be classified as hate speech, which increasingly leads to a relativization of this institute. In this context, the aim of the present investigation is, through a comparative analysis, to find the ideal balance point between the weighing of freedom of expression and offense, without affecting the free right to expression.
A virtually infinite variety of forms that human communication can take in different contexts raises doubts and disagreements about the identification of an expression as constituting hate speech. The recognition that this type of discourse can manifest itself in diverse ways already highlights the inherent complexity of the problem. The so-called hate speech, although not a new phenomenon, has become a global issue mainly with the advent of the internet and later social media, which have intensified the practice of offenses and slanders present in speeches laden with intolerance and disrespect towards others. This stems from the ease of expressing and disseminating thoughts and opinions, as well as the sense of legitimacy of these actions under the justification of the exercise of unrestricted freedom of expression in an environment perceived as lacking regulation: the online realm. This has generated a growing and dangerous impact, specifically when it comes to sexist discourse, highlighting the urgent need for adequate regulation in terms of prevention and prohibition, both at the national and international levels. However, one of the greatest challenges faced in this regulation lies in finding an adequate balance between the fundamental freedom of expression, which should not be suppressed, and the protection of human dignity against any manifestation that can be classified as hate speech, which increasingly leads to a relativization of this institute. In this context, the aim of the present investigation is, through a comparative analysis, to find the ideal balance point between the weighing of freedom of expression and offense, without affecting the free right to expression.
Description
Keywords
Discurso de ódio Internet Redes sociais Liberdade de expressão Violência de género Conflito de direitos Teses de mestrado - 2025 Hate speech Internet Social networks Freedom of expression Gender-based violence Conflict of rights