Reacting to homophobia in a French online discussion: The fuzzy boundaries between heteronormativity and homophobia

IF 2.4 1区文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION

Discourse & Society Pub Date : 2023-05-02 DOI:10.1177/09579265231168760

Simo K. Määttä, Samuel Vernet

引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article analyzes how participants of an online discussion thread related to a YouTube video on homophobia expressed their opposition to homophobia. Both the video and the 403 posts in the discussion thread are in French. On the surface, the data are characterized by strong antagonism between the stances that support and those that are critical of LGBTQ persons. However, a closer look at the posts expressing a pro-LGBTQ stance reveals considerable variation among them: they range from an open deconstruction of homophobia to more ambivalent positions that draw on ideologies circulating within the heteronormative order and are naturalized in the everyday discourse of spontaneous online interactions. We analyze five categories of posts expressing different forms of pro-LGBTQ stances to highlight their fuzzy boundaries with homophobic stances. The analysis draws on argumentative discourse analysis, focusing on process types used to construct arguments and topoi, as well as deictic elements through which the authors of these posts express their distance vis-à-vis homophobia and LGBTQ persons.

查看原文本刊更多论文

法国在线讨论中对恐同症的反应：非规范性和恐同症之间的模糊界限

这篇文章分析了一个关于同性恋恐惧症的YouTube视频的在线讨论线程的参与者如何表达他们对同性恋恐惧症的反对。视频和403个帖子都是法语。从表面上看，数据的特点是支持和批评LGBTQ人群的立场之间存在强烈的对立。然而，仔细观察表达支持lgbtq立场的帖子，会发现它们之间存在相当大的差异:它们从公开解构同性恋恐惧症到更加矛盾的立场，这些立场借鉴了在异性恋规范秩序中流传的意识形态，并在自发的在线互动的日常话语中自然化。我们分析了五类表达不同形式的支持lgbtq立场的帖子，以突出它们与恐同立场之间的模糊界限。该分析利用论证话语分析，重点关注用于构建论点和话题的过程类型，以及这些帖子的作者表达他们与-à-vis同性恋恐惧症和LGBTQ人群的距离的指示元素。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Discourse & Society Multiple-

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

4.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Discourse & Society is a multidisciplinary peer-reviewed journal whose major aim is to publish outstanding research at the boundaries of discourse analysis and the social sciences. It focuses on explicit theory formation and analysis of the relationships between the structures of text, talk, language use, verbal interaction or communication, on the one hand, and societal, political or cultural micro- and macrostructures and cognitive social representations, on the other hand. That is, D&S studies society through discourse and discourse through an analysis of its socio-political and cultural functions or implications. Its contributions are based on advanced theory formation and methodologies of several disciplines in the humanities and social sciences.