Is
your gender and identity a performance or a platform on social media?
You
Don't Know Me so Don't Try to Judge Me: Gender and Identity Performance on
social media Among Young Indian Users is an article that my research colleagues
and I recently released. In order to do this, we looked at how men and women
interacted on social media on open Facebook pages regarding the hotly debated
subjects of feminism and gender.
Our
fundamental goal in doing this was to investigate these discursive tactics as
normative, goal-directed social identity performances. We examined the data in
light of the setting, which is characterised by shifting perspectives on
gender, and discovered the rise of new types of discursive activism in online
forums.
By
employing both conventional and cutting-edge words that allude to the
descriptive meanings of gender categories, we discovered that speakers
expressed disputes about the language of feminism in a variety of ways. These
included men's rights and fresh feminist discourses (such as faux and choice
feminism) (Incels, MGTOW, etc.).
In
certain cases of flaring, the historically contentious territory of sex and
sexual preference was exploited to subvert evolving gender roles. Finally,
through referencing intersecting identities, exchanges also highlighted a
number of difficulties with the conventional understandings of feminism. This
article presents our findings.
First,
there was an effort to create an exclusive and distinct ingroup (feminist) and
outgroup, in line with social identity theory (antifeminist). Members of the
group would willingly repeat terms and meanings to ensure that their personal
identity was recognised as belonging to the ingroup legitimately. This was used
for both mobilisation and consolidation.
As
evidenced by comments like, "It's completely their own choice and no one
can dictate a woman what she should do!" members emphasised that women
should have their individual freedom, wear the clothes they choose, and be free
from societal pressure. They also stressed that feminism did not equate to
"men haters." Members made their comprehension of the feminist
ideology clear and assertive.
Our
research identified three common themes in the broader antifeminist discourse:
the first was the dearth of "feminists" who were open to criticism;
the second was the notion that feminists are overly aggressive and reactionary;
"Many of these feminists on this page will react very violently and aggressively
if something will not match with their views." Finally, there were
allegations regarding gender stereotypes in roles for women.
The
discursive ramifications of preconceptions about female gender roles typically
repeat that women should prioritise their marriages, blaming female liberation
for divorces, doubting their ability to be mothers, and demonising them as
"money diggers."
The
term "feminazi," which has a negative connotation when combined with
the "nazi" suffix, is now used in a casual context, making it the
most frequent occurrence in our corpus. Leave these feminazis, people say.
"Being a feminazi it's her birthright to be a hypocrite. These vultures
constantly have problems in everything. So let her be" actually referred
to feminism and radicalising women.
Though
it was distinct from feminism, the discussion of men's rights and their place
in a changing society was closely tied to it. Again, two main themes were at
play: the first was the portrayal of the "manosphere," which was
primarily done by women, and the second was the defence of men's rights, which
was primarily done by men.
The
manosphere was thought to be a sexist environment that was associated with
unfavourable traits like violence and illiteracy in addition to obvious normative
marks (misogynistic).
Men
who have chosen not to pursue romantic connections with women are referred to
as Men Going Their Own Way. Statements like "Feminism is a sickness, MGTOW
is the treatment" serve as evidence that the discursive notion of MGTOW is
fundamentally anti-feminist. This identity is boldly shown as a mark of
preference and superiority, even in conversations with anonymous women online.
MRA
and MGTOW, which up until recently were almost exclusively used in the
manosphere, are now a part of a common language tradition on social media. This
develops interpersonal ties, fosters a sense of camaraderie among various
subgroups, and adds to the MRAs' intellectual resolve to reject feminism.
We
also noted the frequent use of the term "Mansplaining." Our study
found that women regularly used mansplaining to disprove assertions about the
purported manosphere. By utilising hashtags like #Mansplaining, it is possible
to draw from pervasive gender discourses that have a significant impact on
online interactions.
Women
used this phrase a lot to uphold ingroup norms and assert their strong
identifying principles, which have become symbols of the widely accepted
feminist discourse, particularly on social media.
Finally,
we saw intersectionality in the Indian setting, which was especially evident
between four aspects of one's social identity: caste (Upper castes are
privileged, with SCs, STs, and OBCs bearing the brunt), religion (Hindu or
Muslim), and political ideology (Right wing or Left and Liberal).
We
identified a number of new themes that both challenge the power structures
inside dominant narratives and signify the emergence of new identity standards
(for feminism and gender identity). Here, terms like "Urban Feminism"
and "Upper-Caste Liberal Feminism" were utilised to highlight
distinctions within this common discourse.
The
results thus confirm a complex and critical perspective of computer-mediated
communication that simultaneously allows for gendered emotions and perpetuates gender-based
fears that may lead to unsatisfactory and unfavourable social media
experiences.