Swallowing Misandry: A Survey of the Discursive Strategies of r/TheRedPill on Reddit

by

Aaron Moses Dishy

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements

for the degree of Master of Information

Faculty of Information

University of Toronto

© Copyright by Aaron Moses Dishy 2018

ii

Swallowing Misandry: A Survey of the Discursive Strategies of r/TheRedPill on Reddit

Aaron Moses Dishy

Master of Information

Faculty of Information

University of Toronto

2018

Abstract

The Red Pill (r/theredpill) (TRP) subreddit lies at the heart of an interconnected network of misogynistic

blogs and websites known as the manosphere. It disseminates radical anti-feminist and discriminatory

content across Reddit and the broader internet. Acknowledging the community’s staggering size - with

membership that numbers in the hundreds of thousands - this research fills a gap in standalone

investigations into the toxic subreddit. Using mixed-methods critical discourse analysis (CDA),

qualitative and quantitative research methods identify how misogynistic ideologies are constructed,

consumed, and exchanged by RedPills on their virtual platform, Reddit. This study does not seek to

define their discursive strategies as uniquely RedPill. Instead, it situates them in the context of a growing

community based in gendered rage and the validation of violence. As result, it reveals the complex

affordances Reddit provides, to create, engage, and disseminate RedPill discourses online.

iii

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank my supervisor Patrick Keilty for their invaluable support and expertise,

alongside my second reader Alessandro Delfanti for their generous feedback. I also must thank u/ralter,

my spirit guide down the rabbit hole of online hate. Finally, thank you Wesley Chau for the support.

Funding Acknowledgement

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-

profit sectors.

iv

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction 1

2.0 Research Justifications and Considerations 4

3.0 Literature Review 6

3.1 Reddit and Social Networking Sites 6

3.2 New Media Misogyny and Computer Mediated Communication 8

3.3 Anonymity in Online Communities 11

3.4 The Men’s Rights Movement 14

3.5 Digital Masculinities and Geek Culture 16

4.0 Theoretical Framework 19

5.0 Methodology 22

5.1 Mixed-Methods Analysis 22

5.2 Coding Strategy 23

6.0 Data 25

6.1 Dataset 25

6.2 Critical Discourse Analysis and Reddit Posts 26

7.0 Affective Narratives 27

7.1 Biological Determinism and the RedPill Male Ideal 28

7.2 Masculinity, Mastery and RedPill Orthopraxy 30

7.3 Motivating Public Participation and a Masculinity under Siege 32

7.4 RedPill Masculinity the Validation of Reparative Violence 34

7.5 Representations of Females and Femininity 37

7.6 Representations of Third-Wave Feminism 41

7.7 Conclusion 45

8.0 Anonymity and Identity Play 46

8.1 RedPill Self-Presentation Strategies 47

8.2 RedPill In-Group Ways of Knowing 50

8.3 Anonymity and the Reddit Hivemind 53

8.4 Conclusion 56

iii

iv

vi

i. Acknowledgments

ii. Table of Contents

iii. List of Appendices

v

10.0 Interference of RedPill Community Moderators 69

10.1 The RedPill Patriarchal Meritocracy 70

10.2 The Discursive Powers of Mods and Flared Contributors 72

10.3 From Reader to Leader 76

10.4 Conclusion 78

11.0 Ecosystem Contribution 80

11.1 RedPill Leaking Out 81

11.2 Hypertext and Information Validity 83

11.3 Social Networking Sites and Hypertext Multimodality 85

11.4 Conclusion 87

12.0 Reflections on this Research 88

12.1 Summary 88

12.2 Limitations 91

12.3 Implications for the Study of RedPill Masculinity 93

12.4 Implications for the Study of the Radicalization of Men 94

12.5 Implications for the Study of Reddit 96

9.0 RedPill Trolling, Alienation, and Identity Policing 57

58

60

62

65

9.1 Reaffirming White Male Centrality

9.2 Reinforcing a Christocentric Identity on TRP

9.3 Trolling Queer Identities

9.4 Trolling Gender in Metaphors of Violence

9.5 Conclusion 68

vi

List of Appendices

13.0 Appendix A Coding Dictionary 98

14.0 Appendix B List of Figures 102

15.0 Bibliography: Work Cited 109

16.0 Bibliography: Internal Sources 123

1

Chapter 1

Introduction

Since the advent of the internet, manifestations of the Men’s Rights Movement (MRM) have

surfaced online (Markwick & Caplan 2018). Over the past decade however, the participatory internet

birthed a new kind of men’s social organization. In an informal network of blogs, websites, and forums,

that concentrate on issues concerning men, masculinity, the male sex role, and anti-feminism, a complex

community emerged. It is spoken of colloquially as the manosphere. Amongst their online forums, OPs

(original posts) and comments allege that Western civilization is devolving into misandry, defined by a

rejection of men and masculinity. Popular forums assert that men are oppressed by reverse sexism.

Concurrently, women are corrupted by SJWs (social justice warriors), their ‘feminist ideological lies’, and

the dangers of political correctness. Resulting tirades detailing graphic gendered violence and anonymous

threats of harassment and rape saturate online discourse.

The Red Pill (r/theredpill) (TRP) subreddit lies at the heart of this interconnected network of

misogyny. It exists in plain view amongst other subreddits, tagged “awww”, “funny”, “pics”, and “mildly

funny” (Cohen 2015). The subreddit derives its name from the popular science-fiction film, The Matrix

(1999). It recalls the biblical moment protagonist Neo decides to consume a red pill instead of a blue pill,

braving a world of new realizations about the status quo. The analogy is barefaced: “if you take the blue

pill - the story ends... you take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and [see] how deep the rabbit hole

goes” (Illimitablemen 2015a). In this case, the awakened reality results in entrance to an online

community that promotes a potent hyper-masculinity, and anti-feminist sentiment steeped in misogyny.

(Marche 2016).

This research looks to contribute to understandings of this largely unstudied online community.

Using mixed-method critical discourse analysis (CDA) (Wodak et al. 2001) that combines both

qualitative and quantitative research, it develops a comprehensive investigation into how radical anti-

feminist sentiment is communicated and contextualized by TRP. A single research question guides this

study. It looks to identify how misogynistic ideologies are constructed, consumed, and exchanged by

RedPills on and off their virtual platform - Reddit. To do so, this study centers the discursive strategies

employed by RedPills (Foucault 1977). Discursive strategies refer to the practices and methods that allow

RedPills to communicate their specific digital ideologies and subjectivities. In surveying those strategies,

this study develops insight into this hate-based community, its information dissemination, and influence

on the beliefs and actions of hundreds of thousands of men.

Essential is an understanding how the discursive strategies of TRP relate to, and are facilitated by,

the Reddit platform. The community building potentials of this subreddit reveal important calls for

inquiry into the complex relationships amongst hate-based virtual communities, and the social media

2

platforms that support them. Reddit exemplifies the participatory web, with high information diffusion

rates, that have led to faster content dissemination and larger audience reach (Von Behr 2013). In the case

of TRP, Reddit acts as “a venue for information exchange, ideological development and training, [that]

characteristically shapes a membering process made possible through the internet” (O'Callaghan et. al.

2014, 460). Reddit and the information exchange it supports uniquely inform TRP’s virtual ecosystem - a

platform where this online community can develop and sustain itself. Surveying the relationship amongst

Reddit’s digital infrastructures and the discourses it facilitates is paramount to this analysis.

In this study, TRP is investigated in five interrelated inquiries that allow for the effective mapping

of the community’s discursive strategies. They include:

1. What are the affective narratives, motifs, and stereotypes, that sustain RedPills in long-term

and charged public engagement, while enticing new members with their misogynistic

discourses?

2. In the context of Reddit’s socio-technical affordances for communication, with specific

attention to its quintessential anonymity, how do RedPills present themselves as active and

knowledgeable members of that community?

3. How do RedPills police their specific community identity and the subjectivities embedded

within them? Further, who is included and excluded in that process of identity and boundary

negotiation?

4. What discursive powers do RedPill community moderators have in influencing the posts and

comments that result on TRP?

5. How do RedPills contribute to a broader digital ecosystem - both within and outside of the

Reddit platform - in their distribution of hypertext and the resulting flow of web traffic?

Each inquiry is expounded in an affiliated chapter. Chapter one builds on the narratives that

engage and propel TRP. This section employs close reading to distill the resonant genres and

representations that attract young RedPills. Quantitative code-based analysis then mines the dataset to

gain access to the reservoir of cultural traditions that undergird this community. Posts and comments are

analyzed to account for the impact and distribution of each resonant theme, and their dominance in

directing the gendered narratives found on TRP. This dual analysis allows for a diverse collection of data

that identifies and illustrates the affective narratives that drive community participation, while enabling

further cultural creation and connectivity.

Chapter two studies the self-presentation strategies applied by TRP (Jung et al. 2007). Self-

presentation strategies, refer to the methods RedPills use to present themselves within the collective,

while they browse and converse in this primarily anonymous averment. It reviews how RedPills represent

their identities and contributions as valuable, while curating the limited amount of personal information

that they choose to disclose.

3

Being RedPill requires active public debate, perpetually reifying community identity on Reddit’s

networked ecosystem. Chapter three investigates who is included in that RedPill self-conception, and who

is excluded by the trolling practices initiated by this community. The use of text-based laughter on TRP

lies at its core – a force that serves to police identity in the tensions amongst inclusion and alienation

(Phillips & Milner 2017). Qualitative analysis provides insight into the trolling practices and stereotypes

harnessed by TRP. This is accompanied by analysis of the identities RedPills deem outside of community

participation.

If chapter three interprets the policing of TRP, chapter four investigates the discursive strategies

that sustain this community. The section interprets the influence, power, and labour of RedPill community

moderators (mods), and the members they flare or tag as valuable. In coding for the presence of mods and

flared contributors in posts and comments, the complex social hierarchy developed by TRP is placed

under scrutiny. In qualitative analysis, attention is directed towards the motivations of this mod hierarchy

- probing the communicative and relational powers they receive to validate their volunteer labour.

Specific attention is paid to ability of community mods to exploit the affordances provided to them by

Reddit administration.

The final chapter of analysis reviews the expansiveness of TRP’s communicative ecosystem. It

expands traditional understandings of text in discourse, to survey their use of multimodal hypertext

(Helmi 2016). This research investigates the links they embed in terms and claims, and where those links

direct RedPill members across the internet. A quantitative analysis first maps out the potential sites where

RedPills frequently direct their members. Qualitative analysis further delves into RedPill uses for

hypertext, and how it is used to disseminate their misogynistic ideologies throughout. Insight is, in turn,

gained into whether TRP is merely an isolated subreddit - relegated to the darkest corners of the

manosphere - or instead a highly connected online community.

Communities that center around the propagation of hate-based digital content are growing online

(Massanari 2015). Models to interpret the discursive strategies by which TRP popularizes their radical

misogyny on Reddit are increasingly relevant as this community, and communities like it, emerge and

populate online. It is essential to note, that the objective of this project is not to explain the internal, anti-

feminist motivations of each RedPill. Instead, it explores how their communication and community

discourses operate and self-perpetuate. In doing so, methods are identified through which the community

amplifies, disseminates and persuades new members to swallow the red pill online (Lily 2016).

4

Chapter 2

Research Justifications and Considerations

In 2009, American George Sodoni killed four people at an LA Fitness in suburban Pittsburgh

(Hamill 2009). A similar shooting took place in 2014, when a young man named Elliot Rodgers took

seven lives including his own, just outside of The University of California, Santa Barbara. A 26-year-old

(Myketiak 2016) Christopher Harper-Mercer went to his writing class and murdered nine people (eight

students and one assistant professor) injuring nine others at Umpqua Community College, in Roseburg,

Oregon in 2016 (Britton et al. 2018). Most recently, Alek Minassian killed ten individuals, driving a truck

down a busy sidewalk in northern Toronto, Canada (Brost 2018). Prior to their rampages, each of these

men were regular visitors and active contributors to blogs and forums affiliated with the manosphere, and

by extension, directly implicated within. Each of these men expressed their acts of terror were motivated

by the ideologies and social practices the community espouses, whether by publishing a lengthy

manifesto in Rogers case, or a brief Facebook post as in the case of Minassian.

Following each of these events, TRP bustled with a dissonant mix of validation, congratulation,

and denial (Marche 2016). Not only does TRP celebrate these attacks in discourse but validate their

murderous motivations: “Women must be punished for their crimes of rejecting such… magnificent

gentleman” (Rodgers 2014, 118). It goes without saying that each of these men were unstable; they did

receive the mental and emotional support they required (Lily 2016). To chalk up these circumstances to

mental illness alone however, ignores the impact of TRP and manosphere-related communities. Although,

“[t]he manosphere does not tell people to kill… [they] reinforce [their] mindset[s], telling [them] in

effect, that [they] are perfectly right to be enraged at half of the human race” (Lily 2016). Analysis into

the discursive strategies employed by TRP, provides insight to understand how members of these

communities impel a select group of members into murderous action.

The acts of terror committed by RedPills and manosphere-related actors are cited as evidence for

a variety of phenomena in contemporary politics and scholarship. The radicalization of white men in the

West (Marwick & Caplan 2018; Sculos 2017; Sunden & Paasonen 2018), the essentiality of gun control

(Wilkinson 2016), and the need for better regulation of online communities (Ging 2017; Massanari 2017),

are each considered through the actions these men. For this reason, better understanding of their

discourses to inform RedPill subjectivities and influence the perspectives of men is imperative. These

considerations are of particular use to future communication policy makers, online community

investigators, social media scholars, and internet security professionals.

This research is not alone in its considerations. It exists alongside a collection of scholarship

looking for greater understanding of gendered violence online, digital community organization, the

functionalities of Reddit, and of the manosphere (Betteridge 2016; Ging 2017; Gottel & Dutton 2016;

5

Jane 2014; Lily 2016; Massanari 2016; Mantilla 2015; Marwick 2018). In selecting TRP, a single

thoroughfare within the larger manosphere, this research fills a gap in the standalone investigations into

this community. No other centralized research into the communication strategies of the RedPill subreddit

exists to date. To provide greater understanding of a localized sector of the manosphere, insight into TRP

is given individual consideration. The community’s staggering size, with 275, 000 members (at the

moment of submission), exemplifies the importance of this research.

Some dismiss the relevance of research into such radical, fringe discourses online. Granted, TRP

discourses are extreme in their misogyny. Labelling a discourse radical however, assumes its irrelevance

from the mainstream and “creates an artificial distinction between the dirty ‘fringe’ element and sterile

mainstream ideology” (Lily 2016, 16). The boundaries of these two imagined audiences are in perpetual

collapse on contextually ambiguous platforms like Reddit. With audiences leveled on a shared SNS,

subreddit communities both mainstream and fringe must not be read as separate. They exist in constant

interaction with one another (boyd 2011). Through investigation into the radical, understandings enable

researchers to identify how and which fringe ideologies are invading the public consciousness, which is

preferable to promoting an ignorance to the realities of digital platforms and the communities they

harbour (Jane 2014).

Note that the following paper presents racist, Islamophobic, Anti-Semitic, homophobic,

transphobic, and misogynistic discourses. Uncensored, they are included to accurately relay the vulgar

language commonly found and weaponized on TRP. It is acknowledged, that reproducing and circulating

these discourses for consumption is problematic and can serve to normalize their antagonisms and

marginalizations (Jane 2014). This analysis turns to scholar Emma Jane’s conclusion in unpacking

misogyny online. They concede accuracy is required here; less explicit discussions of digital hate can

blind readers to the existence and proliferation of hate online, implying that it circulates infrequently or in

only far flung fringes of virtual life. Censored language cannot convey the hostile and hyperbolic hate that

fills TRP. As such, this analysis attempts to be frank and accurate – while avoiding the traps of sterilizing

and normalizing the community’s everyday antagonisms.

6

Chapter 3

Literature Review

Acknowledging the limited scholarship addressing TRP as a virtual community, and the

manosphere more broadly, there are various bodies of literature that both inform and reinforce this study.

The following literature review identifies a selection of these academic discourses. Each are informed by

one another and integral to the study of TRP. The collections of research are treated separately. Their

intersections and overlap however, must be considered in the production of a more cohesive vision of

TRP as a digital community, the social media infrastructure it inhabits, and the ideologies it amplifies.

3.1 Reddit and Social Networking Sites

Scholarship concerning social networking sites (SNS), emerges from interdisciplinary

methodological traditions. It addresses a range of topics, building on a large body of precedent CMC

research. Early studies into SNS identify the characteristics of social media members, interpreting the

presentation of the online self, and the impression management tools utilized. Questions of impression

management, self-presentation strategies, and online performances of friendship come to the fore. In early

prominent research into SNS, scholar danah boyd (2004) examines Friendster. SNS, they proclaim, acts

as a platform for a publicly articulated social network that allows for the negotiation of identity and public

connectivity. In 2005, Alice Marwick (2005), finds that users on three different SNS had complex

methods to negotiate authenticity and validation in representing the self. They conclude that both social

and technological affordances influence how members negotiate with social media.

Alongside impression management, scholarship also inquiries into the wealth of social and

behavioral data that permeate SNS databases. As boyd and Ellison note, when profiles communicate, they

create masses of data that can be gathered using automated collection techniques or archived datasets

(boyd & Elison 2007). This data enables social media researchers to explore behavioral patterns on a

scale unparalleled prior to digital communication1. Equipped with new means of engaging with data, the

field of research is expanding how SNS data can be utilized to create increasingly nuanced investigations

of digital publics, virtual interaction, and social participation. Golder et al. for example, examined an

anonymized dataset consisting of 362 million messages exchanged by four million Facebook users to gain

insight into friending and messaging activities (Golder et al. 2007). Kumar, Novak and Tomkins, perform

a parallel investigation - studying the structural evolution of the social rhetoric on Yahoo! and Flickr. This

research underpins questions relating to the collection and analysis of social data when studying TRP

subreddit and its various discourses online (Kumar et al. 2006).

1 This practice has precedence in the work of CMC scholars investigating forum and blog participation online (Balka 1993, 4).

7

Recent studies have taken more nuanced approaches when investigating discourses, interactions

and the functions of SNS sites (Hughes, et al. 2012). This research developed following questions

concerning the applicability of earlier CMC theories to the study of SNS (Back et al. 2010; Parks 2011).

With the rise of the participatory web and portable information and communication technologies, existing

methods for the study of SNS required revisiting. Wilson, Gosling and Graham’s classifications of

emerging Facebook research provide a useful model for emerging themes that run throughout this

literature. Such trends include the following; a descriptive analysis of users, motivations for using SNS,

identity presentation, and privacy and information disclosure (Wilson, et al. 2012).

Despite its popular usage as a SNS and platform for user-generated content, Reddit is an

upcoming arena for scholarship. Popularly spoken of as the ‘front page of the internet’, “Reddit has

emerged as one of the most populated spaces for digital sociality on the web today” (Miller 2015, 7).

Early discourses unpacking the function of the site are limited to analysis by journalists who are curious

at its proliferation and unusually young audiences (Marche 2016). More comprehensive early studies into

the site are limited. Scholar Kelly Bergstrom is first to acknowledge the explicit codes of conduct unique

to Reddit identity construction and participation (Bergstrom 2011). Eric Gilbert similarly states the under-

provisioned nature of the SNS (Gilbert 2013). Ryan Miller defines Reddit, as an “open-source platform,

upon which individuals produce user-generated content that forms corresponding communities of

interest2 (Subreddits)” (Miller 2015, 12). Massanari’s ethnographic work Participatory Culture,

Community and Play: Learning from Reddit (2015), remains the most comprehensive study of the site. It

discusses the technical functions Reddit enables, and the communicative interactions it allows. Matias

makes valuable contributions detailing the complexities of community moderators and their volunteer

labour in supporting the SNS (Matias 2016). The above scholarship is of essential import to this study.

Other investigations into the Reddit platform coalesce around the unique communicative

infrastructures of Reddit, and to its stark dedication to fundamental self-governance. For instance, Rachel

Metz details the mass exodus of internet participants to Reddit from its digital predecessor Digg, founded

in 20043 (Metz 2012). Investigations into the sites dedication to self-regulation follow, many highlighting

how Reddit illustrates “a design oriented towards user-generated content and self-governance” (Massanari

2015, 330). Originally, the lack of regulation is seen as a neutral aspect of the site, that harbours positive

and negative potentials (Mills 2015, 229). In a study about Reddit’s reaction to the Boston Marathon

2 They detail the sites function in relation to how registered community members submit and upvote content, and how that

influences visibility and discursive power on the site (Milner 2015).

3 They conclude that this digital displacement occurred in response to Reddit's ability to predict user expectation in the

infrastructural communication abled by the site (Metz 2012).

8

Bombing however, Potts and Harrison illuminate some problematic tendencies4 (Pots & Harrison 2013,

145). Alongside, this event and corresponding eruptions of hate on the platform, additional research looks

to understand why Reddit popularly attracts toxic online communities (Massanari 2017).

With Reddit’s position to self-regulation unchanged, interest in the unique ways individuals and

amorphous online communities can leverage the SNS as a channel of harassment results (Massanari

2017). As Betteridge notes, members of Reddit communities demonstrate great technical skill in engaging

with ethical grey zones online, such as doxing5, and identity theft (Betteridge 2016). Thompson also

evidences these exploitation strategies in their extensive ethnography of toxicity on Reddit (Thompson

2016). Brady unpacks the neo-tribalism and sense of belonging essential to participation on the site6

(Brady 2018). What is evident from all these studies is that Reddit functions as a hotbed for toxic, hate-

based communities, a quality facilitated by the SNS, in collaboration with its members.

3.2 New Media Misogyny and Computer Mediated Communication

Explicit virtual misogyny is subject to relatively little academic attention. This is unusual

considering its status as the lingua franca amongst many sectors of the internet. Social media scholar

Emma Jane asserts that this absence is related to the position of cyber-hate as metaphorically unspeakable

(Jane 2014). Digital misogyny, they explain, “... is laced with expletives, profanity and explicit imagery

of sexual violence: it is calculated to offend, it is often difficult and disturbing to read” (Jane 2014, 558).

The content is located outside of the norms that define what is considered civil academic discourse. Also,

as media critic Anita Sarkeesian notes, those who address forms of gendered hatred online often become

victims of that same hatred; internet trolls are primed to rebuke those concerned with such hate (Valenti

2015). Regardless of impediments to the study of online misogyny, a collection of scholars (often trailing

journalists and new media outlets) have developed research that centers around understanding the

consumption and dissemination of virtual misogyny in text and image (Thompson 2018). As gendered

hate defines much of TRP’s content, investigation into this misogyny, and the taxonomies that attempt to

define it, are constitutive to this study.

Discourses that exist online are governed by an alternative set of norms and ethics. They behave

differently to offline discourses (Dijck & Poell 2013). Andrew Herrmann explains, “Computer mediated

communication is considered a separate, isolated social world distinct from interaction in the real (read:

4 Following this event, a member created a “FindBostonBombers” subreddit that began crude vigilante investigation. A group of

redditors then began attempting to identify individuals in the photographs and posted these “suspects”’ personal information (a

strict violation of Reddit rules) to the site. The subreddit was shut down.

5 Doxing is the internet-based practice, of revealing and broadcasting identifiable information about an individual or organization

who chose to remain anonymous. The practice can put the individual or organization in danger of trolling, personal threats, and

possible violence (Pollmann 2017). 6 Centivany and Glushko come to similar conclusions in their studies of the policy infrastructures that support Reddit (Centivany

& Glushko 2016)

9

offline) world”. (Herrmann, 2007, 550). Essential to this revelation is the work of scholar Susan Herring.

They are among the first to acknowledge that computer mediated communication (CMC) and public

debate online, are not inherently gender neutral but perpetuate structural bias and male supremacy online.

According to Herring, the masculine communicative ethic accepts misogyny as it values “free speech”,

above freedom from misogyny (Herring 1994. 278). The discursive norms of a masculine net culture are

then codified in popular netiquette7, making cyberspace innately inhospitable to women (Shea 1994).

After Herring, a movement of researchers followed suit with corresponding claims (Dwight, 2004;

Herrmann, 2007; Yates, 1997). This disruption of the cyber-sphere’s pretense of a utopian neutrality is

vital to this study.

Preliminary research into discharges of cyber-misogyny are addressed through investigations into

the practice known as flaming. Martin Lea uses the term to discuss hostile and aggressive interactions via

text-based CMC8 (Lea 1992). Much of the first wave of research into flaming - which appeared in the late

1980s and 1990s - includes a broader debate surrounding technological determinism and so-called,

“computer effects” (Postmes et al. 1998). This debate concerns itself with understanding whether flaming,

is caused primarily by the social environments that prompt its production or computers and digital

technologies independently (Kayany 1998). In their early study, “Affect in Computer-Mediated

Communication”, Kiesler, Zubrow, & Moses investigate the social and psychological effects of

communication online. Their findings highlight the asocial and unregulated communication that

computers facilitate and place some onus on the digital for facilitating hate (Kiesler, Zubrow, & Moses

1985). Later studies however, such as Lea’s “Social Influence and the Influence of the Social…” reject

precedent determinism by studying group behavior online. They observe that flaming is radically context

dependent (Lea 1992, 91). This revelation about the context dependence of online hate is critical; it

continues to undergird understandings of misogyny online.

The second wave of flaming-related research, emerges with increased public access to

information and communication technologies in the early twenty-first century. Attempts to formulate a

definition of flaming that can account for all possible variations in “...producer, intention, audience

reception, outside observer perception, and every participant’s individual social context” are constant

(Kaufer 2000, 7). Prior research is critiqued for failing to designate flames according to strictly uniform

criteria, and complex definitional rubrics are offered as antidotes9 (O’Sullivan & Flanagin 2003). Rather

7 Netiquette here, refers to author Virginia Shea’s term, referring to the boundaries of acceptable communication that exist in

networked digital spaces (1994). 8 Other scholars question how the characteristics of the discourse medium (such as anonymity) facilitate flaming and affect how

it is experienced by women and men (Biber et al. 2002).

9 The most influential rubric is offered by O’Sullivan and Flanagin in a journal article in New Media & Society. Their proposal is

for an “interactional norm cube” which defines “true” flames only as those online communications in which the sender’s intent is

to violate norms with each participant aware of the text as a violation (O’Sullivan & Flanagin 2003, 80–82).

10

than achieving its stated goal of “enabling more accurate assessments of the prevalence, causes, and

consequences of problematic interactions” (O’Sullivan & Flanagin 2003, 84), the taxonomic demands

made by these definitional rubrics instead prevent scholarship from making of any sort of assessment at

all.

With the term flaming at a discursive impasse, another digital keyword begins to cling to

literature about online animus and abuse, namely the term “trolling” (Phillips 2011). Trolling in its early

use, is the “luring [of] others into pointless and time-consuming discussions” according to Martin Lea

(Lea 1992, 93). The name alludes to the practice of fictional trolls waiting under bridges to snare innocent

bystanders. Trolling often starts with a message that is, “intentionally incorrect but not overly

controversial” (Phillips 2011, 21). In this respect, trolling in its early form contrasts with flaming, which

is “intended to insult, provoke or rebuke, or the act of sending such a message” (Dictionary of

Computing, 1998). Although birthed as a relatively gentle inside joke by veteran users, as Kiesler details,

“the troll quickly evolved into a menace with intention to upset and inflame online discourse” (Kiesler

1992, 90). Trolling assumes the lexicon for online hate -usurping the place of flaming entirely.

Trolling as a digital practice is bound up with gendered hate since its early appearances in the

most isolated corners of Usenet bulletins10. Scholar Miranda Mowbray highlights that trolls tend to

disproportionately target “women, the young, and other non-traditional computer users” (Mowbray 2002,

8). The generic targets of trolling practices are assumed to be gendered as “she” indiscriminately (Andrew

1996, 1). Literature detailing the disruption of online feminist spaces for example, dates back to the

origins of CMC research. They are commonly the target of negative attention from male-identifying

users. Ellen Balka traces the history of four feminist forums from the 1980s, all of which experienced

some degree of gender-based harassment (Balka 1993, 26). Reid reports an incident within an online

community for sexual abuse survivors, in which a male-presenting character with the name “Daddy”

traumatized the community by shouting graphic descriptions of violent sexual acts (Reid 1994, 141).

While trolling in its early incantations remains vague and innocuous, its amplifying relationship with

misogyny and gender-based hate becomes longstanding and well-documented.

As participatory internet use emerges as the digital standard, a new generation of scholars looks

to take a critical stance on trolling. Informed by its ubiquity as a digital practice, and its normalization as

a tool for hate by sexually-explicit and misogynistic virtual communities, trolling comes to focus. Karla

Mantilla for example, dubs the practice, “gendertrolling”, producing a classification scheme to identify

the use of trolling by misogynistic, and hate-based communities online. Mantilla explains that through the

widespread use of, “pejorative terms (‘cunt’, ‘whore’, ‘slut’), and comments designed to humiliate the

female target (focusing on weight, physical appearance, and ‘fuckability’)”, the online participant wields

10 Usenet is an early digital bulletin board system. It is infamous within early scholarship around hate in digital communities. It is

one of the first to exemplify the potentials seen contemporarily on Reddit (Benson 1996).

11

a powerful online sexism (Mantilla 2013, 38). Scholars including Emma Jane, in her classification of

what they term “e-bile” (Jane 2014, 581), or Henry and Powell in their construction of the term,

“embodied harm” (Henry & Power 2015, 758), make other attempts at new definitions for this

amorphous form of gendered virtual harassment. This study acknowledges all attempts to define gendered

hate online11

.

A decade into the participatory internet - trolling is a part of mainstream internet use. No longer

the malevolent bridge-dweller, as Phillips notes, “trolls are not outside of mainstream culture, rather they

are born within the dominant institutions and tropes, which are every bit as damaging as the trolls’ most

disruptive behaviors” (Phillips 2015, 11). The symbiotic relationship amongst individuals, communities,

and their technologies, are made inseparable from the systemic injustices of the analog world that is

amplified through CMC. As Lumsden and Morgan note, the social proliferation of trolling has by no

means accompanied a reduction in visible misogyny online. Instead, the practice threatens any form of

female participation when entering the men’s online domain, which in practice, includes any form of

internet participation (Lumsden & Morgan 2017, 8).

3.3 Anonymity in Online Communities

Anonymity is a fittingly elusive concept. Its definition is in constant flux as result of its cyclical

redefinition. As the term is included in a variety of interdisciplinary vocabularies, each imbues the term

with diverse interpretations. As Brazier explains, “anonymity is an interdisciplinary challenge” (Brazier

2004, 137). To distill this concept, scholars have traced the contours of anonymity in debate. More

particularly, its potential for commercial gains (Hoffman et al. 1999), legal standing (Froomkin 1999),

and technical composition (Wayner 1999). Considerable efforts are also expended in attempting to

understand how the term can be utilized to enrich both digital and analog contexts (Nissenbaum 1999).

Some consider it a tool for liberation, and the freedom to communicate. Other scholars view it as a tool

for hate speech and juvenile levels of personal responsibility (Levmore and Nussbaum 2010). At its core

however, anonymity is concerned with non-identifiability. This is generally the outcome of removing key

identifiers such as a name, address, or image (Wallace 1999).

Typically, the discussion of anonymity’s role in processes of CMC focus on its function as a

facilitator of two social processes. The first is known as deindividuation (deindividuation theory)

(Postmes & Spears 1998). Deindividuation promotes concern about anonymity, due to its role in

facilitating “anti-normative behaviors” or what Phillips and Milner deem “shitty group behaviors”, while

subsumed within a crowd (Phillips and Milner 2017). Primary attention is directed towards the

understanding that the “individual norm of one person get[s] lost when that person is in a large enough

11 It turns however, to scholar Russell Belk’s explanation that in discourse, description as opposed to definition, is a superior

method as this form of misogyny remains in the process of negotiating new meaning in its shifting digital contexts (Belk 2010).

12

group” (Paskuda & Lewkowicz 2016, 14). Offline, worry about deindividuation centers on violent or

potentially violent groups. Common examples include mobs of white nationalists, G20 protesters, and

pissed off hockey fans, all of whom pose a direct physical threat to life and property (Phillips & Milner

2017). Online, these concerns are directed at the deindividuating effects of digital anonymity, and the

havoc one can wreak while sitting behind a computer screen (Meyerowitz 2010). From this view people

behave badly online because they aren't physically there and can sidestep the emotional and physical

impact of their actions.

Deindividuation, anonymity and hate hold a longstanding relationship that saturates public

opinion via a variety of concepts within academic political philosophy and social psychology. The topics

have become so entangled that they are often discussed in relation to Arendt’s (1963) “Banality of Evil”

thesis12

. The thesis states that “a person need not be evil, psychotic or malicious to commit horrendous

acts” (Phillips & Milner 2017). An individual need only to think in terms of social roles, instead of

personal responsibility, and anything can happen. Anonymity is found in this context to have negative and

dangerous connotations (Phillips & Milner 2017). Psychologist John Suler (2004) affirms this

perspective, suggesting that the process of severing the embodied self from the dissociated and

anonymous self, fosters behaviors one would avoid in embodied spaces. Discourses surrounding

anonymity and cyberbullying come to similar conclusions (McKenna & Bargh 2000; Slonje & Smith

2008). Even popular internet colloquialisms facilitate this understanding. For example, the web-comic

Penny Arcade’s “Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory” confirms Sulers hypothesis. According to the Comic

“Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = Total Fuckwad” (Whitney & Phillips 2017). This is a joke to

be sure, but one premised on the presumed dark-side of deindividuation, behavior, and anonymity.

Evidence supporting these theories whether applied online or offline however, are mixed. Tom

Postmes and Russell Spears (1998) found little to no direct correlation between deindividuation,

anonymity and anti-social behaviors in their meta-analysis of sixty independent deindividuation studies.

Being subsumed by a group they argue, does not in itself account for misbehavior. Rather, behavior - both

beneficial and destructive - appears influenced by existing group norms (Postmes & Spears 1998). In

autonomy, participants actively choose what behaviors to perform. Alex Haslam and Stephen Richer echo

these findings. They contest the banality of evil thesis. They explain that it fails to account for the

relational nature of tyranny; the fact that “people follow orders not blindly but as an active reflection of

personal affinity” (Haslam & Reicher 2012, 6). Destructive behavior is considered not as a function of

mob rule, or a sudden ethical lapse. It is about who is in the group, and how individuals in that group

want to be perceived.

12 A concept proposed in response to the trial of Adolf Eichmann, one of the primary architects of the Holocaust (Shoah) (Phillips

& Milner 2017).

13

These conclusions align more closely with second theory commonly used to discuss anonymity in

CMC, the social model of deindividuation effect (SIDE) (Lea et al. 2002). Although SIDE is also a theory

of deindividuation, it explains that the mechanisms and outcomes of anonymity in computer mediated

groups differently (Cress 2005). According to this theory, members of a group do not only shed their

norms and identities in anonymity, but also adapt to the norms of the anonymous collective. This occurs

regardless of whether the norms of the collective conflict with the precedent social norms of the

individual. In anonymous collectives, individual difference is made invisible; identification with the

group is an inevitability. Anonymity is thought to strengthen group identification, which can result in both

negative and positive behaviors. It acts as a conduit for uniformity in group norms (Paskuda &

Lewkowicz 2016).

Accordingly, SIDE theory more closely aligns with contemporary studies of anonymity and

CMC. For example, while anonymity in digitally mediated spaces can facilitate toxic expression, the

disinhibiting effects of anonymity can also motivate compassion and openness. In their investigation of

digital participation by rural LGBT American Youth Mary Gray (2009) finds that for these youth online

environments “...function as a refuge from their embodied environments often replete with unsupportive

or outright dangerous individuals and institutions” (Gray 2009, 35). Similar conclusions are made by

scholar Anna Poletti in their “Intimate Economies: PostSecret and the Affect of Confession” (2011)

which looks to the supportive confessional practices of teenage content producers on the photo-sharing

site PostSecret. What both studies demonstrate is that deindividuated, anonymous participation can

facilitate every permutation of expression - from racist initiatives to random acts of kindness.

Acknowledging this shift in conceptions of anonymity and CMC is essential to the following study.

Beyond the two influential theories regarding anonymity and CMC, recent scholarship is taking a

closer look at the potentials for accomplishing anonymity online. They probe at the previously

incontestable binary dividing being anonymous and “not anonymous”. They reject the assumption that

anonymity in discourse exists as a binary. It is instead, understood as performative. It is performed by

members and facilitated by SNS in highly complex sociotechnical dialogue (Elison, Heino & Gibbs 2006;

Rosenberg & Egbert 2011; Rui & Stefanone 2013). For example, in their analysis of Korean weblog

Cyword, Jung, Youn and Mcclung identify a variety of self-presentation strategies for the curation of

personal information in digital publics. Similar conclusions are found in Bareket-Bojmel’s findings about

the self-presentation strategies used on Facebook (Bareket-Bojmel 2016). On the other hand, the very

notion that anonymity is even possible in CMC is under scrutiny in contemporary scholarship. A body of

scholars hold that anonymity is a false promise, impossible in today’s socio-technical landscape (Ohm

2009). This promise of an achievable anonymity is merely a techno-utopian ideal - ensconced in the

tradition of Turing’s promise to create a communication that liberates individuals from the confines of

14

recognition (King 2015). This study addresses matters concerning anonymity - taking into account the

myriad of nuance identified by precedent scholarship.

3.4 The Men’s Rights Movement

Investigations of the analog men’s rights movement tend to view the social body through two

established ideological camps. The first camp analyzes canonical men’s rights texts. They hold that the

discourse resembles a call and response. There is the publication of a reactionary work attacking feminist

writings and ideals, and then there is a rejection of that sentiment by a feminist men’s rights activist. This

back and forth provides meaningful insight into the motivations of men’s rights activism, their hegemonic

tendencies, misogyny, and feelings of ostracization in the context of feminist activism. For example, in

the 1990s, publications like David Blankenhorn’s Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent

Social Problem (1995), defend traditional masculinity and fatherhood against egalitarian family norms.

This publication, in company with Warren Farrell’s The Myth of Male Power (1993), or Kenneth

Clatterbaugh’s Contemporary Perspectives on Masculinity: Men, Women, and Politics in Modern Society

(1997) reject feminist impulses in return to a more traditional masculinity and activism (Coston &

Kimmel, 2013). To counter that anti-feminism, works like Michael Kimmel and Michael Messner's Men's

Lives (1995) outline anti-feminist concepts and offer counterpoint essays from the feminist perspective13

.

The second camp investigates the motivations, offline organization, discourse and rhetorical

tactics of Men’s Rights Groups (Blais & Dupuis-Déri, 2012). Early scholarship identifying the

motivations of that regressive misogyny coalesces around the word ‘backlash’. Coined by journalist

Susan Faludi (Faludi 1991), backlash involves the men’s rights movement’s rejection of their ideological

antithesis, the women’s liberation movement of the early 1970s. They characterize the anti-feminist

movement as grounded in “male hostility and fear surrounding the increased possibility that women

might win full equality upsetting the privileges enjoyed by men leading to a crisis” (Faludi 1991, 18)14

.

Faludi describes this crisis of masculinity as the experience of men who feel they have lost their foothold

in masculinity, such as being the primary breadwinner. The men understand masculinity to have devolved

into a perpetual state of crisis, “in constant need of trellising and nourishment” (Faludi 1991, 76). Men

attempt to resolve this crisis of presumed feminization by a restorative call for a return to the traditional

confines and expectations of normative gender (Blais and Dupuis-Deri 2011).

13 For an earlier example, see George Gilder’s Sexual Suicide (1973, reissued in 1986 as Men and Marriage) expressed a

conservative standpoint essentializing male and female biological difference, a return to male traditionalism, and a rejection of

feminist gay or sexual liberation. In response, Jon Snodgrass, a pro-feminist Men’s Rights activist, produced a work comprised if

a collection of pro-feminist writings, namely, A Book of Readings for Men against Sexism (1977), that rejected the sentiments

expressed by Gilder. 14 For example, see Fred Pfeil’s work, White Guys: Studies in Postmodern Domination and Difference (1995), which asserts the

Men’s Rights as a movement is weighted in its patriarchal backlash (Pfeil 1995, 5). Also see Michael Salter’s early Australian

men’s rights activists, which details multiple discursive and performative strategies used to reject feminist advance (Salter 2016,

78).

15

Faludi describes primary narratives utilized by men’s rights groups. These groups argue that

women and men have already reached egalitarian equality and feminism has now gone too far -

victimizing men in processes of reverse discrimination. Men’s rights activists also argue that women are

less satisfied than they were prior to women’s liberation, by reason of gender confusion, shortages in male

attention, and infertility (Faludi 1991, 45-62). The narratives explain to women “[they] may be free and

equal now… but have never been more miserable” (Faludi 1991, 11). Backlash discourses thus blame

feminism, rather than the hegemonic gender structures, for the unhappiness associated with the status quo.

While central to over a decade of anti-feminist literature, Faludi’s explanatory framework of anti-

feminist backlash is not free from criticism. Scholar Ann Braithwaite argues that in the process of

defining men’s rights activism as a rejection of feminist liberation, an unintended consequence limits

what women’s liberation can include. Further, the assumption of a uniform backlash from men’s rights

organizations essentialize women’s liberation, erasing the multi-faceted experiences of marginalized

groups, such as the various women of colour’s liberation movements, and those spurred through queer

social organization (Braithwaite 2013). Canadian scholars Melissa Blais and Francis Dupuis-Deri also

respond to the backlash theory (which they describe as the scapegoat thesis) in their investigation of

Quebecois Anti-Feminist movements (Blais & Dupuis-Deri 2011). They deem the explanatory thesis

insufficient as it does not provide a whole, layered explanation for the rationale of men’s rights

collectivity. They explain that “masculinists not only scapegoat women and feminists for the problems

men face … they also mobilize to defend male privileges and to oppose the real advances achieved by

women … grounded in political, economic, and social power” (Blais & Dupuis-Deri 2011, 25). Here, the

scholars explain that men’s rights activism goes beyond resistance to feminist change in fear and

victimization. Instead, it rejects crisis by actively (even violently) working to regain and sustain male

power and socio-economic privilege (Superson 2002).

In search of a more nuanced and expansive explanatory theory for anti-feminism protest and

aggression, Michael Kimmel’s Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era (2013),

makes significant contributions to the study of misogyny and Men’s Rights Activism. Kimmel produces

an investigation of Men’s Rights Activist collectives that target women and feminism, through a unique

“framework of masculinity rooted in entitlement, control and uncontested dominance” (Kimmel 2013,

31). They argue that the catalyst for expressions of misogyny is a form of aggrieved entitlement.

Aggrieved entitlement, according to Kimmel, is the feeling that an individual has been robbed of their

“birthright”; it is the violence and hate that amasses when one's social and economic expectations are

unmet. In attempts to safeguard traditional conceptions of gender, these men “champion a return to the

traditional nuclear family… queer invisibility, and gender inequality”15

(Kimmel 2013, 151). They argue

15 To frame this notion differently, Kimmel argues that when masculinity is defined by discipline and close regulation, any loss of

control can challenge manhood, and male dominion (Kimmel 2013).

16

that a restoration of masculinity can only be achieved through violent means. As for men, violence is

justified as “an acceptable means of conflict resolution - acceptable and admired,” (Kimmel & Mahler,

2003). The combination of aggrieved entitlement, and the belief that violence is restorative of

masculinity, functions as the dangerous ideological impetus for anti-feminist violence and rejection. This

conception of the state of contemporary masculinity bolsters this study (Stein 2005).

Feminist scholarship into Men’s Rights Activism and its relationship to the manosphere is in a

process of negotiation. These scholars identify Men’s Rights Activism as related to, but separate from, the

geek masculinity found in the manosphere (Lily 2016). They are in the process of negotiating to what

extent the manosphere is the digital progeny of its predecessor, or something completely different. Central

questions include the shifting anti-feminist discourses of the past and their influence on what is produced

and amplified online (Nicholas & Agius 2018). Notwithstanding, these limitations, the scholarship

develops insight into the discursive strategies essential to anti-feminism, which are fundamental this

study.

3.5 Digital Masculinities and Geek Culture

TRP functions wholly within the realm of geek masculinity online. To understand TRP, geeks and

their complex cultural production is essential. The contemporary geek however, is no longer the benign,

teenaged STEM aficionado once imagined. Scholarship surrounding the geek has developed over the past

three decades. It centers on questions about who makes up the geek community, what their relationship to

technology is, and why they sustain such a fraught relationship to gender, race and misogyny. Early

research into geeks and geek culture, understate their interests as connected in one way or another related

to technology, which is culturally constructed as masculine and controlled by an overwhelmingly male

demographic (Massey 1995). The foremost scholar into geek masculinity, Lori Kendall explains that

“...the stereotypical image of the geek, is still bound up in conflations between interests in computing, and

technology with specific gender and racial formations” (Kendall 1999, 256). They assert that geeks are

almost uniformly understood in the Western cultural imagination as males, who do well in school, and

have an above average knowledge of gaming and computers.

It is that connection to technology that leaves geeks with their second cultural determinant - a

perpetual feeling of otherness. As scholar Deborah Lupton explains, the myth of the geek creates a cycle

of isolation involving the human body and technology. Physical unattractiveness alongside social inability

directs geeks inwards to computers. Their immersion in the digital - isolated from the real world - makes

them perpetually more unattractive and socially unfit (Lupton 2000). Despite increases in numbers of

individuals who identify with the geek community, geeks sustain feelings of marginalization from the

mainstream. Self-perception as an outsider and dejection through assumed misandry act as a fundamental

tenet of community engagement (Kendall 2002). Geek self-perception as deviant, their cultural

17

production a secret - purposefully kept from the mainstream - is essential to their exclusionary practices

that follow.

Laurie Penny suggests that geeks who view themselves as perpetual outsiders, are unable to

recognize the privileges they yield. Any dissent or difference within that group of alienated people is

made a marker of exclusion from the community (Penny 2014). Acknowledging the racialized and

gendered ideological underpinnings of geek masculinity, alienation often follows those identity

boundaries. Scholars Nakamura and Chow-White expand understandings of white centrality, in the

context of geek exclusion practices (Nakamura & Chow-White 2013). Christopher Fan notes that the

“revenge fantasies” of Silicon Valley founders, in which the lowly geek bullied in childhood gains power,

and dominates their competitors through intellect, valorizes the white male singularly (Fan 2014, 3). Ryan

Milner, in their exploration of politicized meme production, asserts that geek-friendly online spaces

assume white male centrality (Milner 2014, 41). In the case of TRP, when investigating expressions of

geek culture online, one is unpacking a uniquely white masculinity and its negotiation in virtual

discourse.

Recent scholarship suggests that geeks reject all individuals who do not align with their white,

cisgender, heterosexual identity from digital participation. For example, Massanari explains that online

spaces for geeks exhibit tendencies to view female-identifying members through two distinct lenses. They

are presented unambiguously, as objects of either sexual satisfaction or as interlopers lurking16 in

unwelcome spaces (Massanari 2017, 331). As scholar Roli Varma notes, regardless of this duality,

women are uniformly seen as an excluded other, and told either subliminally or explicitly to stay out

(Varma 2007, 359). In their analysis of the Free Culture Movement, Reagle articulates various ways in

which online communities contest female participation (Reagle 2012, 31). Massanari deems these

exclusive communities “toxic technocultures” as virtual subcultures based in othering and hate, that are

propagated through various SNS (Massanari 2017, 332). The subcultures are not separate from other

issue-based, networked (boyd 2011), or affective publics (Papacharissi 2015). They are marked however,

in that they rely on the implicit or explicit harassment of those deemed other to facilitate community

identity and participation.

Over the past half-decade, due to internet happenings such as the infamous #gamergate

(Braithwaite 2016) and #thefappening (Betteridge 2016), a rapidly developing body of research looks to

understand geeks, manospheric masculinity, and their pervasiveness on Reddit. Attention to Reddit

specifically, accumulates due to the geek community’s visible embeddedness amongst the platforms

labyrinthine subcultures (Massanari 2017). Scholar Gabriella Coleman reiterates this understanding, in

ethnographic research. They explain that geeks valorize the niche expertise and specialized knowledge

16 Lurking is understood as the practice of engaging with content, without directly participating in a community or discourse

(Muller 2012).

18

available on the Reddit platform. The site, functions as a playful arena for the negotiation of humor,

intelligence, and craft, amongst senses of inclusion, otherness and collectivism within geek communities

(Coleman 2017). Debbie Ging investigates geek culture and its particularly toxic brand of anti-feminism

present online. They position their understanding of whiteness as a baseline for participation, and the

exclusion of women are two essential aspects of Geek masculinity online17

(Ging 2017). Here, gendered

exclusion is made inseparable from the digital discourses of geek communities; this study is indebted to

the scholarship that clarifies this understanding.

17 Alice Marwick explores, conceptions of misandry and the validation of gendered harassment in geek centered digital spaces

like Reddit (Markwick 2018). Nicholas and Agius too, examine the persistence of masculinist discourses in a more global

context, conceptualizing geek masculinity and a recent turn to populist traditionalism as birthed from sibling digital misogynies

(Nicholas & Agius 2018).

19

Chapter 4

Theoretical Framework

Words serve as a platform for and through which people comprehend their individual and

collective realities. Accordingly, researchers to consider how information acts within specific

sociocultural contexts. These considerations form a relevant methodology for the study of TRP, namely –

critical discourse analysis (CDA). This methodology is in debt to an array of scholars responsible for its

development. Foucault’s studies of language and discourse ground its use for example. Foucault ties

power and language - defining discourses as “practices that systematically form the objects of which they

speak” (Foucault 1980, 54). This process of discourse formation occurs with the production of language

and its understanding (Foucault 1980). Power here, is centrally linked to the production of knowledge;

this knowledge owes its realization to the power relations it is produced by. As Gutting notes, for

Foucault, “in knowing we control, and in controlling we know” (Gutting 2012, 41). If knowing functions

to persuade, language alters perceptions of reality and understanding. This notion in the context of TRP

informs much of the CDA to follow.

Norman Fairclough is another scholar CDA is indebted to. Departing from what they feel are

inadequacies in precedent sociolinguistic theories of language and power, Fairclough holds that

scholarship does not do enough to address the complex relationships that underlie discourse (Fairclough

1992, 62). According to Fairclough, any discursive event may be seen as a piece of text to be analyzed

linguistically; discourse is extended to samples of either spoken or written language. Based on social

theory, Fairclough interprets discourse as language "[that is] a form of social practice” and a means of

structuring knowledge (Fairclough 1993, 134). In this way, a discursive event is "a mode of action, one

form in which people may act upon the world" (Fairclough 1992, 63). For Fairclough, discourse becomes

not just a means of representing human reality, but of signifying that reality.

Building upon precedent conceptions of the methodology, discourse scholars such as van Dijk,

Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer advocate flexible, multi-methodical, and multidisciplinary approaches

(Weir 2005; Wodak et al. 2008). Central here, is their focus on both larger units of communication and

isolated terms. Their methods further explore naturally occurring language or language use by users,

together with an analysis of a vast number of phenomena of text, grammar, and language (Dijk 2010).

Communication beyond the text alone is examined, including “...coherence, anaphora, macrostructures,

speech acts, interactions, signs, politeness, argumentation, rhetoric, mental models” (Wodak et al. 2001,

17). Attention to larger and isolated terms, together with naturally occurring language and factors that

extend beyond the text all inform this study.

20

In the digital context, scholars such as Rodney Jones look to understand “the situated social

practices that people use discourses to perform” (Jones et al. 2015, 17). They explain that social practices

must be seen less as a collection of knowledge, and more as a matter of the concrete situated actions that

people perform with particular mediational means (such as various ICT technologies), to enact

membership in social groups (Jones et al. 2015). Within such approaches, “practice... refers to observable,

documentable... events involving real people, relationships, purposes, actions, places, times,

circumstances, feelings, tools, (and) resources” (Tusting et al. 2000, 213). Together, action and digital

technologies are utilized by virtual communities to attain or enact certain social goals and identities.

Digital technologies provide evidence of the need to construct new modes for communication and social

engagement (Wells 2012, 7). If all networked social practices are mediated through discourse, then

discourse functions as an essential document in maintaining, reproducing and transmitting those practices.

Discourse analysis here, is the study of different ways “technologies of entextualization” influence the

knowledge individuals construct, actions they perform, and relationships they build online (Jones et al.

2015, 11-17).

What further establishes CDA as crucial to this investigation is its treatment of information as an

inherently loaded artifact. Fairclough notes, “information is [understood] to be produced and disseminated

in a non-egalitarian fashion” (Fairclough 1992, 64). A select group of agents propagating the discourse

often wield a disproportionate amount of power. This power is of such significance, that it informs the

language practices that present an idea or discourse as objective fact (Wells 2012, 8). Discourse can serve

to legitimize the dominance of existing, and unequal power structures. For this reason, a crucial concern

of CDA is to expose the social, cultural, economic, and political agents that leverage power within

discourse. Attention to the discursive strategies that allow TRP to legitimize and purpurate unequal power

structures and subjectivities, both on and off their platform lies at the center of this investigation.

With its neutrality rejected, discourse is understood to mirror the expectations, ambitions and

desires of specific individuals, communities, and institutions. For this reason, discourse is inextricably

linked to those who produce, and disseminate it (Weir 2005). This understanding acknowledges that the

scholar using CDA is neither an apolitical actor. As Matthew Wells notes, “critical discourse analysis

denies that any such objectivity could ever be developed” (Wells 2012, 19). They assert that just as all

information is embedded within specific contextual meanings, so too, is the researcher bound up in

apolitical and non-objective processes. Communication according to this theory implicates both the

communicator and investigator, in a “vast and longstanding network of meaning” (Blommaert 2005, 1).

CDA provides the researcher with allowances to acknowledge the personal and political - rather than

mimic an impossible objectivity. This acknowledgement of the limits of academic objectivity are crucial

to the analysis of TRP.

21

CDA is not without limitation. There are concerns regarding the viability of CDA as a

methodology in investigating virtual communities like TRP. The limitations of the methodology when

applied to textual systems of communication must be noted (Wodak 2008). In the case of many Reddit

discourses, statistics and ratings outside of language are essential to the construction and negotiation of

communal identity. It is valid to suggest the inclusion of alternative academic methodologies are more

conducive to technical actors and infrastructures (Wells 2012). Wodak argues, there is potential for

further complications, proclaiming “...[h]ow do we understand/construct utterances in context? Why is the

same text or utterance understood in significantly different ways by different groups of

listeners/writers/viewers?” (Wodak et al. 2008, 17) They state that words, text, and discourse alone;

meaning making is personal. Behavior and meaning are constructed by communities and cultures -

embedded within layers of cultural memory and ways of knowing (Wodak et al. 2008, 17). This

investigation acknowledges CDA’s limitations but is mindful to Wells’ assertion that although CDA lacks

a master-key to unlock a discourse, it provides a series of related pathways through which it can be

explored (Wells 2012, 19).

22

Chapter 5

Methodology

5.1 Mixed-Methods Analysis

This project utilizes mixed-methods CDA. It employs both qualitative close reading and

quantitative code-based analysis (Feldon et al. 2007). Qualitative close reading first maps the community

on its virtual venue - Reddit. It includes parsing through select posts and comments (see dataset), to

identify the key features, characters and discursive strategies relevant to TRP (Merriam 2016). This form

of close reading is subject to the influence of the researcher. It allows however, for better explication of

meaning from the complex social practices of TRP. Through this practice, the primary, secondary, and

tertiary nodes used in coding analysis are developed. Specific attention is paid to the complex use of

discursive metaphors and in-group speech patterns that mediate social cognition and organization on TRP.

Discourse in this sense, is understood not as a social practice. Instead, it is a diversity of social practices,

that must be analyzed in conjunction with their various contextual elements, participants and material

surroundings (Fairclough 1993).

Close reading independently can lead to deficits in understanding how frequently communicative

metaphors and mechanisms are distributed. Combining, qualitative close reading with quantitative code-

based analysis, enables the development of a more in-depth understanding of TRP and its discourses

(Krzyanowski 2011). Quantitative analysis allows for a more effective attempt at “tracing intertextual

connections among areas of social life, as a necessary step to uncover genres and discourse topics spread

across time and social domains” (Given 2008). This dual methodology includes the production of a

coding-dictionary that accounts for the use of specific terms, communication styles, content modalities.

The codes are organized under three specific but interrelated nodes that break down into corresponding

subjects. As this study relies on multiple data sources (various posts and comments across TRP)

quantitative coding analysis provides the most effective method to gain insight into the systems of

communication that support TRP (Wodak 2009).

Mixed methods critical discourse analysis is imperfect, in that attention is directed to internet

phenomena in the communicative functions of a technology - from an either instrumental or theoretical

approach. A focus on one of these two approaches exclusively, can limit understanding of the

characteristics of the divergent spaces tailored to facilitate online discussion (Freelon 2010). To avoid

those limitations, this study takes from Brock’s promotion of a critical cultural approach to internet and

new media technologies. This approach combines mixed-methods analysis with information technology

and virtual design, to interrogate the multimodal and semiotic complexities framed by digital discourses

23

(Brock 2018). This allows for the investigation of Reddit at its intersections as an artifact, practice and

social text (Grint & Woolgar 1997; Brock 2018).

5.2 Coding Strategy

This section details the development of this study’s coding dictionary. This dictionary is in turn

used in the collection of quantitative data. Using a close reading of the dataset (see dataset18

) three

primary nodes emerge; they are TRP’s affective narratives, rhetorical methods, and the sociotechnical

affordances provided by Reddit. These three primary nodes form the backbone of this analysis. Each node

is broken down into secondary and tertiary nodes. On completion of this dictionary, it is used to code the

dataset for quantitative information. Those results provide insight into how the discursive strategies of the

community, the pervasive narratives it shares, and the platform that facilitates their collective discourses.

Attention to the affective narratives of TRP is the first primary node; affective narratives refer to

the key ideological elements and resonant themes that develop as hundreds of thousands of men engage in

collective discourse. Three secondary nodes are identified as a subset of this primary node, namely,

central themes, recurring representations, and ingroup terminology. Examples of the central themes

include false rape accusations, make inequality, and the decline of Western civilization19

. Recurring

representations include, victim narratives, villain narratives and hero narratives20

. The third secondary

node references RedPill’s infamous in-group terminology, used to communicate their emic perspectives

and community ideology. It includes terms like alpha, Chad, and AWALT21

. By way of this collection of

nodes alongside qualitative contextualization, the affective narratives that drive RedPill participation, and

attract new members are they a in full.

The second primary node - the rhetorical methods utilized by TRP - refers to the conversational

techniques that drive and sustain RedPill discourse. Rhetorical methods are broken down into three

secondary nodes. The emic ways of knowing utilize to validates their claims are identified. They include

appeals to personal to personal experiences, appeal to populism, and appeal to science22

. The next

element refers to the replies and admissions found in discourse, such as admissions of agreement,

admissions of disagreement and public inquiry23. The final secondary node associated with RedPill

rhetorical methods include RedPill constitutive humour which generally refers to RedPill trolling

18 See page 25.

19 See coding dictionary in Appendix A on page 98 (1.1).

20 See 98 (1.2).

21 See 98 (1.3).

22 See 98 (2.1).

23 See 98 (2.2).

24

practices. The targets of RedPill trolling are identified, and include trolling gender, trolling concepts of

race, and trolling political correctness24

.

The third primary node that emerges refers to the socio-technical affordances provided by Reddit

to RedPills. Socio-technical affordances here refer to the characteristics of the RedPill platform, and the

opportunities they provide RedPills. They are broken down into three secondary nodes. The self-

presentation strategies developed RedPills include pseudonyms, throwaway accounts and digital

handles25

. The affordances provided to RedPill community moderators in their ability to flared

contributors are then presented. These categories include point flares, endorsed contributors and the

RedPill vanguard26

. The last secondary node affiliated with Reddit’s socio-technical affordances, are the

ecosystem contribution enacted by RedPills. Ecosystem contribution refers to the hypertext links included

by RedPills in discourse, that migrate members to alternative digital sites across the web. Inbound link

destinations, outbound link destinations, and outbound social media sites are all reviews in this context27

.

This coding dictionary and the nodes recorded in it, form of the foundation this research. It

develops both quantitative and qualitative data that details TRP’s affective narratives, rhetorical methods,

and the sociotechnical affordances provided by Reddit. Through this data, key understandings are

developed into this virtual community and the discourses it perpetuates. The data and the information it

reveals will only increase in relevance with the growth of this community and others like it on

participatory platforms like Reddit.

24 See coding dictionary in Appendix A on page 98 (2.3).

25 See 98 (3.1).

26 See 98 (3.2).

27 See 98, (3.3).

25

Chapter 6

Data

6.1 Dataset

This analysis investigates the content, conversations, and conflict produced by TRP over twelve

sequential months during the year 2015. The sampling is contained to these twelve months so that the

findings are representative of TRP over a defined period of communication and community development.

Amongst the twelve months, this study codes the top three posts and their affiliated comments. These

posts have comments rose to the top of the subreddit monthly queue under the subreddit’s “top” category.

These posts rise to the top of the queue by way their popularity, decided through a combination of

upvotes, comments, and Reddit’s administrative algorithms (Massanari 2015). They can also rise if

sticked28 to the top of the queue by a community moderator (mod). As the posts and comments are

decided by way of Reddit, community members, and TRP community mods, it is assured that the data

remains free from the influence of the researcher’s selection bias. This is essential to prevent the

researcher from unfairly selected more visibly radical or misogynistic posts to develop a polarizing study

of the community. It also ensures a collection of sources that accurately represent the ideals of the

subreddit community, the perspectives of their mods, and the influence of Reddit’s technological

infrastructure.

In total, 36 posts and their affiliated 6,744 comments are coded for in this discourse analysis. In

total, this accounts for 6,780 posts and comments held fixed in 36 internal sources on NVivo data analytic

software. The comments coded are limited to those that appear on the first page of each of the 36 posts

used in this study. The first page according to Betteridge’s accurately depicts how discourses are

communicated and consumed on Reddit (Betteridge 2016). As well, limiting the scope in this manner

practically allows for a diverse dataset to be surveyed over the course of this analysis. In this way, Reddit

posts and comments serve as an ideal discursive space to explore the perspectives and discursive

strategies of TRP members. As forums rely on the contributions of commenters for understanding, unlike

a standalone blog post, each of the 36 sources are read in unison, while acknowledging diversity of the

users; each voice contributes to a post or comment in an active process of curation and consumption.

6.2 Critical Discourse Analysis and Reddit Posts

Given that CDA holds disciplinary roots in linguistics, the specificities of text and language

constitute a core element of this research (Given 2008). Most often, this methodology is applied to stable

texts, published in a fixed manner, by a single or small collection of authors (Wodak 2009). The

28 Stickied posts are those highlighted by a community mod. It remains the top post on a subreddit front page independent of

votes or time since posting until the mod removes it (Miller 2016).

26

discourses of TRP are antithetical to this standard for textual analysis. Produced in collaboration, RedPill

posts and comments play out like live conversations; they are subject to constant development in

community engagement. As members engage with posts and comments, discourses and the perspectives

conveyed therein are subject to indefinite change, with perspectives perpetually moved in and out of

view. In text and hypertext, authorship is also largely unidentifiable. Even the discourses themselves are

vulnerable in the face of Reddit’s administration. Regardless of Reddit’s hands-off approach, TRP

remains on the fringes of acceptability on Reddit, in perpetual fear of being deleted without warning,

along with a variety of other manosphere affiliated Subreddits. The instability of RedPill discourses, as

such, creates a host of challenges when using CDA as a methodology.

To mitigate the challenges associated with Reddit posts and comments, this study takes several

steps. To obtain the constancy of text in discourse, this analysis looks exclusively to RedPill materials

that are archived. Archived posts and comments represent the aftermath of live public debate playing out

on TRP, and are closed to additional tampering in comments, upvoting, downvoting, in addition to mod

interference. Reddit materials are archived approximately six months after their production (Reddit 2016).

The exact moment a post is archived remains unclear and undeclared - likely to avoid trolls. This period is

at its longest, six months, therefore posts from 2015 are free from additional tampering. To access these

archived sources, this study looks with gratitude to the Internet Archive’s affiliated Wayback Machine29.

Using this web archive, the service enables engagement with a lengthy collection of RedPill posts that

date back to the community’s origins in late 2012. These posts are then captured and coded for using

NCapture30 and affiliated discourse analysis software NVivo31. Through this process, the stability of

RedPill posts and comments are guaranteed and made valuable as texts for CDA.

29 The Wayback Machine is a digital archive of the world wide web. It is designed to “crawl” the web and create stable

downloads of all publicly accessible web pages (Internet Archive 2016). 30 NCapture is a web browser extension that allows for the capture and upload of web pages into PDFs for social media analysis

(QSRInternational 2014). 31 NVIvo is a digital tool used for qualitative data analysis. It is particularly useful in coding web pages from social media sites,

through its affiliated analytic software (QSRInternational 2014).

27

Chapter 7

Affective Narratives

The impact of narrative - both individual and collective - is commonly overlooked in virtual

community scholarship (Phillips & Milner 2017). RedPills are familiar with the irreverent power of

narrative; they craft them indefinitely. Their narratives however, do not appear ex nihilo. They result from

a chorus of actors within TRP and the broader manosphere. Self-contained and densely referential, they

hold “cultural references, textual call-backs, narrative motifs, each influencing further call-backs and

m