“女权主义”:女权主义后结构主义话语分析主流媒体对女权主义行动主义的表述

D. Brannan
{"title":"“女权主义”:女权主义后结构主义话语分析主流媒体对女权主义行动主义的表述","authors":"D. Brannan","doi":"10.53841/bpspowe.2019.2.2.85","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using a feminist poststructuralist discourse analysis (FPDA) this research examines discourses surrounding feminist activists within mainstream Western online media articles. The mainstream media can be accused of portraying feminism and its goals negatively (Scharff 2009), often leading to negative consequences regarding identification with the feminist movement (Callaghan et al., 1999). To examine these discourses within mainstream media, 50 articles relating to the Women’s March on Washington were sampled from US and UK online newspaper sites. The findings of this research suggest that although there are both positive and negative discourses surrounding feminist activism within mainstream media, a large proportion were negative, including discourses of ‘feminism is fractured’, ‘hashtag activism’ and ‘What about the men?’ Discussions around intersectionality (including race), social media and men within feminism were seen within these overarching discourses and throughout the research the possible implications of these negative discourses surrounding feminist activists is discussed.","PeriodicalId":253858,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Women and Equalities Section Review","volume":"114 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Feminazis’: A feminist poststructuralist discourse analysis into the mainstream media’s representations of feminist activism\",\"authors\":\"D. Brannan\",\"doi\":\"10.53841/bpspowe.2019.2.2.85\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Using a feminist poststructuralist discourse analysis (FPDA) this research examines discourses surrounding feminist activists within mainstream Western online media articles. The mainstream media can be accused of portraying feminism and its goals negatively (Scharff 2009), often leading to negative consequences regarding identification with the feminist movement (Callaghan et al., 1999). To examine these discourses within mainstream media, 50 articles relating to the Women’s March on Washington were sampled from US and UK online newspaper sites. The findings of this research suggest that although there are both positive and negative discourses surrounding feminist activism within mainstream media, a large proportion were negative, including discourses of ‘feminism is fractured’, ‘hashtag activism’ and ‘What about the men?’ Discussions around intersectionality (including race), social media and men within feminism were seen within these overarching discourses and throughout the research the possible implications of these negative discourses surrounding feminist activists is discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":253858,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology of Women and Equalities Section Review\",\"volume\":\"114 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology of Women and Equalities Section Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53841/bpspowe.2019.2.2.85\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Women and Equalities Section Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53841/bpspowe.2019.2.2.85","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

运用女权主义后结构主义话语分析(FPDA),本研究考察了西方主流网络媒体文章中围绕女权主义活动家的话语。主流媒体可以被指责消极地描绘女权主义及其目标(Scharff 2009),往往导致对女权主义运动认同的负面后果(Callaghan et al., 1999)。为了研究主流媒体中的这些话语,我们从美国和英国的在线报纸网站上抽取了50篇与华盛顿妇女大游行有关的文章。这项研究的结果表明,尽管主流媒体中围绕女权主义行动的话语既有积极的,也有消极的,但很大一部分是消极的,包括“女权主义断裂”、“标签行动主义”和“男人怎么办?”关于女权主义中的交叉性(包括种族),社交媒体和男性的讨论在这些总体话语中被看到,并且在整个研究中讨论了围绕女权主义活动家的这些负面话语的可能含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
‘Feminazis’: A feminist poststructuralist discourse analysis into the mainstream media’s representations of feminist activism
Using a feminist poststructuralist discourse analysis (FPDA) this research examines discourses surrounding feminist activists within mainstream Western online media articles. The mainstream media can be accused of portraying feminism and its goals negatively (Scharff 2009), often leading to negative consequences regarding identification with the feminist movement (Callaghan et al., 1999). To examine these discourses within mainstream media, 50 articles relating to the Women’s March on Washington were sampled from US and UK online newspaper sites. The findings of this research suggest that although there are both positive and negative discourses surrounding feminist activism within mainstream media, a large proportion were negative, including discourses of ‘feminism is fractured’, ‘hashtag activism’ and ‘What about the men?’ Discussions around intersectionality (including race), social media and men within feminism were seen within these overarching discourses and throughout the research the possible implications of these negative discourses surrounding feminist activists is discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信