CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 300Gender, Feminism, and MediaGender and Feminist StudiesSocial Media and Politics

Special issue on online misogyny

Open access
Ging, Debbie, Siapera, Eugenia·2018·Feminist Media Studies
DOI 10.1080/14680777.2018.1447345
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This special issue seeks to identify and theorise the complex relationships between online culture, technology and misogyny. It asks how the internet’s anti-woman spaces and discourses have been transformed by the technological affordances of new digital platforms, and whether they are borne of the same types of discontents articulated in older forms of anti-feminism, or to what extent they might articulate a different constellation of social, cultural and gender-political factors. This collection of work is intended to lend focus and cohesion to a growing body of research in this area; to map, contextualise and take stock of current frameworks, making scholars aware of one another’s work and methodologies, and hopefully forging new interdisciplinary collaborations and directions for future work. Crucially, we move beyond the Anglophone world, to include perspectives from countries which have different gender-political and technological landscapes. In addition to mapping the new misogyny, several contributions also address digital feminist responses, evaluating their successes, limitations and impact on the shape of digital gender politics in future.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14680777.2018.1447345

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Misogynist groups often employ the Internet to reassert male dominance despite their lack of social and economic capital in everyday lives.

    “This includes misogynist groups, which often employ the Internet to reassert male dominance despite their lack of social and economic capital in everyday lives (Debbie Ging and Eugenia Siapera 2018), and who spread homophobic, racist, and violent language (Farrell et al. 2019).”

    From “Victims of feminism”: exploring networked misogyny and #MeToo in the manosphere (2023) · cites this paper as Debbie Ging and Eugenia Siapera 2018

    In “Online misogyny in context,” the paper describes online spaces where self-described beta males weaponise misogyny to protect spaces as white and male, although they may have little social or economic capital offline. The claim broadens this example to misogynist groups generally and treats their lack of capital as certain rather than possible. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Online misogyny becomes a means of violently reinforcing gender power relations.

    “In the case of sexism, online misogyny becomes a means of violently reinforcing gender power relations (Ging and Siapera, 2018).”

    From “It’s just a joke”: gender, sexuality and trivialisation in adolescent online violence such as cyberhate, cyberbullying, and online grooming (2025) · cites this paper as Ging and Siapera, 2018

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [3]3. Chachra, D. 2017, August 2. "To Reduce Gender Biases, Acknowledge Them. " Nature 548 (7668). https:// www.nature.com/news/to-reduce-gender-biases-acknowledge-them-1.22502
  2. [20]20. Turton-Turner, P. 2013, March. Villainous Avatars: The Visual Semiotics of Misogyny and Free Speech in Cyberspace. Forum on Public Policy: A Journal of the Oxford round Table. Forum on Public Policy. Academic One File.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ging, D., & Siapera, E.
Affiliations
  • Dublin City University (IE)
  • School of Communications, Dublin City University , Dublin, Ireland
Corresponding author
Ging, Debbie
ORCID
Ging, Debbie
Venue
Feminist Media Studies
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2018-07-04
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
515-524
ISSN
  • 1468-0777 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-5902
DOI
10.1080/14680777.2018.1447345
OpenAlex
W2871400465
Cited by
300
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 66 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 1
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • Feminist Media Studies (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • Dublin City University Open Access Institutional Repository (Dublin City University) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Feminism, and Media
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
Keywords
online misogyny, anti-feminism, digital platforms, technology affordances, online culture, digital feminism, gender politics, online discourse

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review