[A] big part of the gay agenda for decades has been to repudiate what are regarded as overly restrictive expectations of monogamy and sexual fidelity . . . the rise of multi-partner relationships as a way of life has been a major force in the decline of marriage. — Prof. Amy Wax, Federalist SocietyThat's interesting, Prof. Amy Wax. Unchastity, you say?
[B]ecause certain people view homosexuality as particularly reprehensible and immoral conduct, several New York courts have concluded that imputations of homosexuality are slanderous per se. [This] Court recognizes that many in our society no longer hold such beliefs, and that gay and lesbian persons have achieved many civil rights that were once denied them due to their status. However, homophobia is sufficiently widespread and deeply held that an imputation of homosexuality—at least when directed to a man married to a woman—be deemed every bit as offensive as imputing unchastity to a woman. I therefore agree with those New York courts who have added "imputations of homosexuality" to the list of these types of statements that are per se slanderous. Gallo v. Alitalia-Linee Aeree Italiane-Societa, 585 F.Supp. 2d 520, 549 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (citations omitted).Huh.
I wonder what a Wisconsin court, among which have indeed affirmed that "imputing unchastity to a woman" is per se defamation, would say.