CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 495Gender, Feminism, and MediaGender and Feminist StudiesHate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Drinking male tears: language, the manosphere, and networked harassment

Open access
Marwick, Alice E., Caplan, Robyn·2018·Feminist Media Studies
DOI 10.1080/14680777.2018.1450568
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

While popular discourse often frames online harassment as an issue of individuals engaged in abhorrent behavior, harassing behavior is often networked in that it is coordinated and organized. When feminists and female public figures experience harassment, it often originates from members of a loose online network known as the manosphere, a set of blogs, podcasts, and forums comprised of pickup artists, men’s rights activists, anti-feminists, and fringe groups. While the particular beliefs of these groups may differ, many participants have adopted a common language. This paper explores the discourse of the manosphere and its links to online misogyny and harassment. Using critical discourse analysis, we examine the term misandry, which originates in the manosphere; trace its infiltration into more mainstream circles; and analyze its ideological and community-building functions. We pay particular attention to how this vocabulary reinforces a misogynistic ontology which paints feminism as a man-hating movement which victimizes men and boys.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14680777.2018.1450568

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Barton Alana, 2014, Violence and Harassment against Women in the News Media: A Global Picture
  2. Bradshaw, S. , and Philip N. Howard . 2017.Troops, Trolls and Troublemakers: A Global Inventory of Organized Social Media Manipulation. Working Paper 2017.12. Oxford, UK: Project on Computational Propaganda.
  3. Cameron Deborah, 1998, The Feminist Critique of Language, 1
  4. Coston Bethany M., 2012, Nev. LJ, 13, 368
  5. Fairbairn Jordan, 2015, EGirls, ECitizens, 229
  6. Franks Mary Anne, 2012, Maryland Law Review, 71
  7. Lilly Mary, 2016, Master’s thesis, Political Science
  8. Lyons Matthew N., 2017, Ctrl-Alt-Delete: The Origins and Ideology of the Alternative Right
  9. 10.2307/23719068 · DOI
  10. Michael George, 2017, Skeptic, 22, 9

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 495

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Marwick, A. E., & Caplan, R.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Data & Society Research Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Marwick, Alice E.
ORCID
Venue
Feminist Media Studies
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2018-03-26
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
543-559
ISSN
  • 1468-0777 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-5902
DOI
10.1080/14680777.2018.1450568
OpenAlex
W2789889202
Cited by
495
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 86 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 1
FWCI
63.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Feminist Media Studies (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Feminism, and Media
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Keywords
manosphere, online harassment, misandry, online misogyny, men's rights activism, anti-feminism, feminist discourse, misogyny, community building, language and ideology

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