CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 240Ethics and Social Impacts of AIGender, Feminism, and MediaGender and Feminist Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Baking Gender Into Social Media Design: How Platforms Shape Categories for Users and Advertisers

Open access
Bivens, Rena, Haimson, Oliver L.·2016·Social Media + Society
DOI 10.1177/2056305116672486
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In recent years, several popular social media platforms have launched freeform custom gender fields. This decision reconstitutes gender categories beyond an oppressive binary only permitting “males” and “females.” In this work, we uncover many different user-facing gender category design strategies within the social media ecosystem, ranging from custom gender options (on Facebook, Google+, and Pinterest) to the absence of gender fields entirely (on Twitter and LinkedIn). To explore how gender is baked into platform design, this article investigates the 10 most popular English-speaking social media platforms by performing recorded walkthroughs from two different subject positions: (1) a new user registering an account, and (2) a new advertiser creating an ad. We explore several different spaces in social media software where designers commonly program gender—sign-up pages, profile pages, and advertising portals—to consider (1) how gender is made durable through social media design, and (2) the shifting composition of the category of gender within the social media ecosystem more broadly. Through this investigation, we question how these categorizations attribute meaning to gender as they materialize in different software spaces, along with the recursive implications for society. Ultimately, our analysis reveals how social media platforms act as intermediaries within the larger ecosystem of advertising and web analytics companies. We argue that this intermediary role entrusts social media platforms with a considerable degree of control over the generation of broader categorization systems, which can be wielded to shape the perceived needs and desires of both users and advertising clients.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2056305116672486

Cites

34 of 34 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?

  • LGBTQ+ users encounter intensified algorithmic surveillance through content moderation tactics such as shadowbanning, demonetization, and account suspension.

    “LGBTQ+ users face a paradox: social media is crucial for identity formation, community building, and self-expression ( Robards et al. 2019), yet they encounter intensified algorithmic surveillance through content moderation tactics such as shadowbanning, demonetization, and account suspension (Are 2022; Bivens and Haimson 2016; Gillespie 2022).”

    From Staring Back at the Surveillance Gaze: The Resistance of LGBTQ+ Users on Social Media (2026) · cites this paper as Bivens and Haimson 2016

  • For LGBTQ+ users, social media has been known to reinforce gender binaries and to conflate queer content as 'sexual' or 'inappropriate,' increasing the risk of being moderated against.

    “For LGBTQ+ users, social media has been known to reinforce gender binaries and to conflate queer content as”

    From Staring Back at the Surveillance Gaze: The Resistance of LGBTQ+ Users on Social Media (2026) · cites this paper as Bivens and Haimson 2016

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. 10.1215/9780822392149 · DOI
  2. Burgess J., 2015, Paper presented at the ICA Conference
  3. Butler J., 1999, Gender trouble
  4. Chun W. H. K., 2013, Race after the Internet, 38
  5. Stryker S., 2008, Transgender history

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Bivens, R., & Haimson, O. L.
Affiliations
  • Carleton University (CA)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
Corresponding author
Bivens, Rena
ORCID
Venue
Social Media + Society
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2016-10
Volume
2
Issue
4
ISSN
2056-3051 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1177/2056305116672486
OpenAlex
W2530495025
Cited by
240
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 6
FWCI
7.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Social Media + Society (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Carleton University's Institutional Repository (MacOdrum Library, Carleton University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Rural Development Administration
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Feminism, and Media
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
Keywords
gender categories, social media design, gender binary, platform design, user registration, advertising, intermediaries, web analytics, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, gender categorization

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