See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/299405753

Rape culture and social media: young critics and a feminist counterpublic

Article in Feminist Media Studies · March 2016

DOI: 10.1080/14680777.2015.1137962

CITATIONS READS

135 3,050

7 authors, including:

Sophie Sills Octavia Calder-Dawe

University of Auckland Victoria University of Wellington
1 PUBLICATION 135 CITATIONS 33 PUBLICATIONS 468 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Paulette Benton-Greig Nicola Gavey

The University of Waikato 80 PUBLICATIONS 3,516 CITATIONS
4 PUBLICATIONS 179 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Nicola Gavey on 18 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 1

Rape Culture and Social Media: Young Critics and a Feminist Counterpublic

Sophie Sills, [email protected]

Chelsea Pickens, [email protected]

Karishma Beach, [email protected]

Lloyd Jones, [email protected]

Octavia Calder-Dawe, [email protected]

Paulette Benton-Greig, [email protected]

Nicola Gavey, [email protected] (corresponding author)

School of Psychology, University of Auckland

Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand

This study was supported in part by the Marsden Fund Council from New Zealand

Government funding, administered by the Royal Society of New Zealand, and by the

University of Auckland.

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published in Feminist Media Studies, 1-17,

online 23 March 2016, doi:10.1080/14680777.2015.1137962

 2

Abstract

Social media sites, according to Rentschler (2014) can become both “aggregators of online

misogyny” as well as key spaces for feminist education and activism. They are spaces where

‘rape culture’, in particular, is both performed and resisted, and where a feminist

counterpublic can be formed (Salter 2013). In this New Zealand study, we interviewed 17

young people (16-23 years) who were critical of rape culture about their exposure and

responses to it on social media and beyond. Participants described a ‘matrix of sexism’ in

which elements of rape culture formed a taken-for-granted backdrop to their everyday lives.

They readily discussed examples they had witnessed, including victim-blaming, ‘slut-

shaming’, rape jokes, the celebration of male sexual conquest, and demeaning sexualized

representations of women. While participants described this material as distressing, they also

described how online spaces offered inspiration, education and solidarity that legitimated

their discomfort with rape culture. Social media provided safe spaces that served as a buffer

against the negative effects of sexism, and allowed participation in a feminist counterpublic

that directly contests rape culture.

Key words: rape culture, social media, matrix of sexism, counterpublics, feminism, activism
 3

In late 2013, a story unfolded on New Zealand national television (Rutherford 2013) that

highlighted the interconnectedness of ‘rape culture’ and social media. A group of Auckland

teenage boys calling themselves ‘Roast Busters’ were publically exposed for boasting on a

Facebook page about instigating sex with underage and intoxicated girls, including acts that

were denigrating and acts that fit with definitions of gang and/or statutory rape (Ryan 2013;

Gavey 2013). As well as bragging, the boys used social media to recruit more ‘Roast Busters’

and to name and shame girls they claimed to have ‘roasted’ (Gavey 2013).

This case shared many of the elements reported in high profile cases in other parts of

the world, in which sexual violence has been recorded, promoted, and its violation

exacerbated through sharing stories and images online (e.g., Burleigh 2013; Ng 2015; Penny

2013; see also Henry and Powell 2015). It generated wide public outcry, which played out on

social media, in mainstream media, and on the streets. Many experts and members of the

public were angry at what was seen as a slow and inadequate police response (see New

Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse 2013). Many also condemned popular talk-back

radio hosts for victim-blaming comments that minimised the perpetrators’ actions as

“mischief” (Dougan 2013). Wide dissatisfaction over the handling of the case contributed to

renewed discussion in New Zealand about the problem of sexual violence, including how to

improve the criminal justice system response to it (New Zealand Family Violence

Clearinghouse 2013, 2014; Independent Police Conduct Authority 2015). Many of these

discussions adopted the language of rape culture to emphasise the wider social and cultural

systems that made the boys’ actions possible (e.g., New Zealand Family Violence

Clearinghouse 2013; Satherley 2013).

Introduced by feminists in the 1970s, the concept of rape culture provides a radical

critique of conventional assumptions about rape as an aberrant act of a deviant individual.

Rather, it suggests, rape is connected to and enabled by a myriad of everyday social and
 4

cultural practices (see Gavey 2005). Two interlocking patterns are identified as creating the

conditions of possibility for sexual violence: (1) victim-blaming and other discourses that

minimize and excuse rape, and (2) taken-for-granted features of everyday heterosexuality that

normalize and naturalize male sexual aggression and female sexual passivity (Gavey 2005;

Gavey and Senn 2014). This ‘cultural scaffolding of rape’ (Gavey 2005) is widely tolerated

within many societies even while rape itself is ostensibly condemned. In the aforementioned

New Zealand case, widespread criticism of the boys and sympathy for the girls co-existed

with victim-blaming and with comments that minimized and normalized the boys’ sexually

aggressive behaviour.

Feminist attention to rape culture has recently undergone a revival in many countries,

responding to issues such as the widespread sexual objectification of women in the media,

routine victim-blaming in response to high profile rape cases, and humour that trivializes rape

(e.g., Bates 2014; Valenti 2013; Ringrose and Renold 2012). While none of these phenomena

are new, their everyday reach and visibility has arguably intensified through online

technologies in general, and through social media in particular.

Social media refers to a heterogeneous range of internet-based platforms that “allow

the creation and exchange of User Generated Content” (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010, 61),

enabling, and shaping specific forms of, online sociality and creativity (Van Dijck 2013). The

pervasiveness of these platforms – such as Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and numerous

others – has driven many social and cultural activities online (Van Dijck 2013). In spite of

social media’s association with innovation and social progress, however, traditional gendered

power relations that shape ‘offline’ spaces are replicated online. For example, women and

girls are threatened and sexually harassed through social media (Filipovic 2007; Megarry

2014), and bullied and shamed for their sexual behaviour (Henry and Powell 2015; Poole

2013). In the Roast Busters case, the identities of girls who were violated were revealed to
 5

their peers through the boys’ Facebook page (Rutherford 2013). Many girls were also named

and discussed in intimate detail on the social media site ask.fm (Gavey 2013).

Though social media is undoubtedly implicated in the perpetuation of rape culture,

Rentschler (2014) argues that it is an important space for young people in particular to learn

about rape culture, and challenge it. This is not surprising given the internet and new media

have been identified as important contemporary sites of feminist participation in the public

sphere and for activism, particularly for young women (e.g., Harris 2008, 2010; Keller 2012;

McLean and Maalsen 2013; Schuster 2013). As Salter (2013) argues, online spaces can be

used to host discussions about sexual violence that run “contrary to established social and

legal norms” (226). In this way, and through circumventing the gatekeeping of “old media”,

he argues, they provide a “counterpublic” (a notion popularised by Fraser 1990) that operates

not only as a forum for women’s and girls’ voices, but in which online activists can seek

accountability and justice outside of the criminal justice system. As Fraser (1990) argues, the

‘public sphere’ in which issues are debated and deliberated upon has never been a truly open

forum that is accessible for all people to participate in on equal terms. In particular, the

dominant ‘public’ is rife with exclusions along gender, race/ethnicity and class lines, and

women’s voices have always struggled for legitimacy. However, as Fraser (1990) notes, this

does not mean that subordinated groups have been silent. They have created their own

discursive spaces in which “members invent and circulate counterdiscourses, which in turn

permit them to formulate oppositional interpretations of their identities, interests, and needs”

(67). Fraser (1990) cites the example of the U.S. feminist subaltern counterpublic of the late

twentieth century, which had its own media, academic programs, conferences, festivals, local

meeting places, and so on. These feminist spaces provided an alternative public sphere for

feminists to develop new terms and analyses of their social reality that worked to directly

contest and reduce “the extent of our disadvantage in official public spheres” (67).
 6

This kind of alternative discursive space is now flourishing, in various forms, on the

internet (e.g., McLean and Maalsen 2013), where rape culture has been a prominent target of

feminist activism (e.g., Rentschler 2014). This activism documents what rape culture is and

critiques it (e.g., the Tumblr blog ‘stfurapeculture’ [shut the fuck up rape culture]; the Twitter

hashtag #RapeCultureIsWhen started by Zerlina Maxwell, Culp-Ressler 2014). It satirizes

victim blaming (e.g., the Twitter hashtag #SafetyTipsForLadies started by Hilary Bowman-

Smart, Davies 2013, and then blogged about on Tumblr). And it provides fora for

testimonials (the Twitter hashtag #mencallmethings, Megarry 2014; The Everyday Sexism

Project, n.d.) and for giving support and advice to those who have experienced sexual

violence (e.g., stfurapeculture) (Rentschler, 2014).

Importantly, Rentschler (2014) argues, critiques on social media produce supportive

spaces where women and girls can share understandings of, and mobilize against, sexual

violence and rape culture. Young women’s social media use creates a network within which

they have the capacity to construct a collective response to rape culture – what Rentschler

(2014) terms “response-ability” (drawing on Kelly Oliver’s concept). Through the uptake of

these “response-able” forms of mediated feminism, she and others would argue, a

counterpublic of young feminists is emerging online.

This kind of social media-based resistance was evident in the wake of the Roast

Busters scandal. Young people, in particular, were instrumental in orchestrating public

responses and action. Two young women used social media to organise protest marches in

main cities through the country (3 News 2013), and to circulate a petition about rape culture

addressed to the Prime Minister (Satherley 2013). Another group of current and former

schoolmates of some of those involved used social media, alongside public rallies and

meetings, to critique what they argued was the school’s climate of tolerance surrounding
 7

sexual violence and rape culture, and its lack of action in relation to the Roast Busters

(S.O.S.: Support Our Survivors 2013; McCracken and Leask 2013).

In this paper we report on a study conducted in Auckland soon after this high profile

case came to public attention. Given the ways social media was prominent in promoting the

boys’ rape-supportive ethos, we were interested in finding out more about young people’s

exposure to rape culture online. Social media was also important in circulating critiques of

the boys’ actions and of victim-blaming responses that minimised their actions. We were also

therefore interested in exploring what kinds of critical responses to rape culture young people

found online, and how they engaged with these. Building on Rentschler’s (2014) and Salter’s

(2013) analyses of online sexual violence activism, we draw on young people’s own

descriptions of their exposure and responses to rape culture and to challenges to it online, to

explore the possibilities for contesting rape culture through social media.

Methodology

Participants

We sought to interview young people who had noticed elements of rape culture online,

particularly those who were ‘critical of and uncomfortable with’ it. We recruited participants

using flyers posted around the University of Auckland campus, through notices on social

media and our project website 1, and via email. We also used snowballing, whereby

participants recruited interested friends. We explicitly sought participants aged between 16

and 23 (to enable a focus on young people who were likely to have grown up using social

media, but be old enough that parental consent was not required for them to participate), who

had resided in New Zealand for at least two years (so that some familiarity with local culture

and events could be assumed), and who lived in Auckland and spoke fluent English (for

practical reasons to facilitate face to face interviews). As the great majority of young people
 8

in New Zealand use the internet (Adolescent Health Research Group, 2013), and around 95%

of people aged 16-30 use a social networking site (Gibson et al. 2013), we did not screen for

social media use. Our information for potential participants noted that we were also interested

in hearing about whether they had come across anything “on social media (or elsewhere) that

is challenging [rape culture], such as feminist critiques and other kinds of social justice

activism”. The notices provided brief phrases to spark interest and to cue prospective

participants into what we meant by rape culture, such as, Robin Thicke’s ‘Blurred Lines’, the

Roast Busters case, and more generalized terms like victim-blaming. All potential

participants who contacted us within the first five weeks of promoting the study and who

fitted our criteria were offered interviews, which took place during June and July 2014.

We interviewed 17 young people. One participant was not included in the analysis

because they did not demonstrate any critical engagement with rape culture. The 16 we

included were aged between 16-18 (5), 20-21 (5), and 22-23 (6). On an open-ended

questionnaire they identified their gender as female (14), male (1), and transmasculine (1);

and their sexuality as heterosexual/straight (8), queer (2), pansexual (2), gay (1), and “slutty”

(1) – two provided no response to this question. Participants’ self-reported ethnicity spanned

one or more of the following: Pākehā 2 (14), Māori (3), Indian (3), Japanese (1), Chinese (1),

Chinese Singaporean (1), Turkish (1). Most participants were university students (9) with the

remainder either secondary school students (3) or in paid employment (4).

Interviewing

Each semi-structured interview was conducted face-to-face by one of our team of four peer

interviewers (the first four authors; aged 21, 21, 22, and 26), accommodating participants’

preference for interviewer gender. The interviewers identified as women (3), and men (1); as

heterosexual (2), lesbian (1) and pansexual (1); Pākehā (3) and Pākehā/Fijian Indian (1).
 9

Three were highly engaged users of social media; one was less engaged. The interviews took

place at a location convenient for participants (mostly on campus), and ranged in length from

40 minutes to 2.5 hours, averaging approximately 1.5 hours.

Our interview schedule was loosely divided into three sections. In the first part, we

gauged participants’ social media usage: which media they used, how they used them and

with what frequency and duration. We presented participants with a social media mind map

of a range of popular social media to guide conversation (see Appendix A). The diagram

functioned as a visual note and point of reference about the range of media that we interested

in hearing about participants’ engagement with. Presenting the scope of our interest in a non-

linear and non-hierarchical way like this allowed participants to lead with topics they wished

to focus on, at the same time as providing a context that allowed the participant or

interviewer to easily move the conversation within this wider field. The second section of the

interview focussed on participants’ accounts of rape culture. We used prompt cards (e.g.,

‘rape jokes’, ‘slut shaming’) to spark conversation and to help participants recall examples

that were salient for them, which we subsequently pursued in depth. In the final section of the

interview, we asked participants to describe their encounters with resistance to rape culture

on social media. During the interview, participants were able to use a tablet to find and

document examples they were describing. Although our questions asked specifically about

experiences with rape culture on social media, most participants provided broader and more

comprehensive accounts, tracing rape culture across multiple domains of everyday life.

Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed. Quotations used here have been lightly

edited to remove fillers and word repetition, taking care not to change meaning. We use

square brackets to indicate that we have inserted a clarification that is not in the participant’s

own words, and […] to indicate that a portion of speech has been cut.
 10

To protect anonymity, all participants were assigned pseudonyms and potentially

identifying information has been altered or excluded from this analysis. Because the

demographic information supplied by some participants is unique enough to be potentially

identifying (within a small city), we do not match these details with pseudonyms. While we

recognise the limitations of this omission in terms of contextualising participants’ accounts,

we considered it necessary in order to maintain anonymity. We were mindful that the

material discussed in the interviews could be distressing for some participants, and all were

provided with a list of resources at the end of the interview, with contact details for local

support and information sites, groups, and services. The study was approved by the

University of Auckland Human Participants Ethics Committee.

Our analyses were developed through collaboration that began in the early stages of

the project. As authors of different generations and levels of social media use we shared and

discussed our own knowledge and observations in the process of refining our research

questions and teasing out relevant dimensions of the phenomenon of rape culture and

responses to it on social media. This enabled us to fine-tune the interview format in ways to

best elicit participants’ accounts of their relevant experiences. During the interview period

and subsequent data analysis we met roughly weekly to discuss how the interviews were

going and what was coming up in them. As the first four authors each engaged in close

readings of the transcripts, we all met to discuss key patterns across the interviews, as well as

other notable points of interest. We were interested both in what participants told us about

their experiences, and the way they described them, seeking primarily to attain a rich

description of the ways in which this group of young Aucklanders were encountering and

responding to rape culture through social media.

The analysis is presented in two sections. The first outlines participants’ descriptions

of a ‘matrix of sexism’ in which misogyny, rape culture, and sexism are normalised, both
 11

online and offline. The second section focuses on what participants identified as key domains

of critical responses on social media to the matrix of sexism and to rape culture more

specifically: feminist education, safe space, and challenges for accountability.

Analysis and Discussion

The Matrix of Sexism

When participants talked about rape culture they conveyed a sense of living within what we

are referring to as a matrix of sexism: that is, an environment in which sexism, misogyny and

elements of rape culture merge as a normalized backdrop to everyday life. Mimi, for instance,

referred to a “blanket of sexism”, and Katie noted “you can’t really escape it; it’s

everywhere”. At the same time, many participants suggested that the sexism that seemed

obvious to them was not always apparent to those around them. As Jess remarked, “lots of

people do [think that] ‘rape culture doesn’t exist’, or that these things are just normal parts of

life.” Participants discussed several examples of rape culture in particular, including everyday

trivializing uses of the word rape, normalizing portrayals of male sexual conquest, and

widespread victim-blaming and ‘slut-shaming’.

Many participants noted with concern the way in which the word rape is used as a

metonym for everyday acts of, relatively trivial, domination or ruination. For example,

Bridget spoke of a friend who “if she’s on her cell phone […] she says oh this app is just

raping my battery, you know” and commented that the term rape was “so normalized to talk

about”. Similarly, Claire explained:

 12

[To] the guys [playing World of Warcraft], it was just a casual thing that you threw out as

a sort of shock jock thing, like, ‘oh man that guy raped my face’, or ‘I’m gonna rape his

face’ and that kind of thing, they would just throw it around in a really casual way.

Although the casual use of the word rape may not seem inherently sexist, it contributes to a

matrix of sexism in the way it invites desensitization towards acts of violence that are

disproportionately perpetuated by men against girls and women. It renders the term rape

familiar, but in using it to refer to ordinary everyday aggravations it arguably trivialises the

act and experience of actual rape.

In painting a picture of the place of sexism and rape culture in society, participants drew

examples from popular music and television to illustrate how women’s bodies are portrayed

as decorative objects and men are portrayed as exercising an aggressive entitlement to sex.

They also pointed out the problematic, selective way in which very few instances of sexism

and rape culture come to be ‘called out’ and widely criticised. For instance, Bridget referred

to the lyrics of a Chris Brown song which appear to condone male sexual aggression, noting

that it did not receive the same kind of wide critical attention that Robin Thicke’s ‘Blurred

Lines’ received in 2013:

The line was something about ‘saying no is not an option, I’m going to take what’s mine’

[…] before that it had all been talking about ‘you sexy girl’ […] I was like ‘okay that’s

sick.’ I hated that. There was no huge deal about that.

Similarly, Katie referred to a popular television show character whose sexually aggressive

behaviour was admired: “a lot of the cool male characters are womanizers and they’re

[portrayed as] awesome because they convince the girl to have sex with them […] like

Barney Stinson off ‘How I Met Your Mother’. Everyone loves him”. In relation to the high
 13

profile local Roast Busters case, Jess noted that she was surprised it got so much publicity

given such events were “not that uncommon”.

Yet even in high profile sexual violence cases where the dominant public response was

commonly condemnation and outrage, most participants (12) noted the co-existence of

traditional victim-blaming responses, particularly on social media:

This guy just kept coming on the [Facebook] page [for a street march protesting the Roast

Busters case] and we couldn’t get rid of him […] [he would] constantly post that these

girls […] were falsely accusing them [the Roast Busters] and they [the victims] were

asking for it. (Claire)

A lot of comments [on social media] are like, ‘oh, the girl deserved it because she was

wearing revealing clothing which may have sent the wrong message.’ (Jamie)

Both victim blaming and ‘slut shaming’ were portrayed as commonplace by many

participants. As Samira observed, “guys who have had lots of sex, they tend to get celebrated,

whereas the girls get shunned, even by their friends and stuff”. Participants described this

sexual double standard as normal online (such as in response to photos posted on Facebook)

as well as offline. As Bridget said, “I can think of right now a couple of examples where I’ve

been in town or something at a bar and my friends have said ‘oh my god like she’s such a slut

look at what she’s wearing’ kind of thing”. In portraying slut shaming as ubiquitous,

participants also sometimes directly drew links to its role in controlling female sexuality and

in preparing the ground for blaming women for sexual aggression against them. Taylor noted:

Yeah my sister has one [ask.fm account], and she constantly just gets random comments

being like, ‘you and your sisters are such sluts’ […] occasionally someone will post a
 14

photo of themselves and you’ll see the really gross comments like, ‘you’re gonna go get

raped’.

Some participants noted how depictions of male sexual aggression towards girls and

women as simply natural could morph into justifications of some kinds of male sexual

aggression as not only normal but acceptable:

[Lots of people think] it’s natural for men to be quite sexually aggressive – that’s fine

‘cause women (laughs) are really into that or, I don’t know, something stupid. (Jess)

We’re so used to violence against women as just a normal part of entertainment and

media, and if we don’t like it it’s just not to our taste. But breastfeeding and

mastectomies, I think because they’re not sexual, they’re not [considered] an

acceptable part of entertainment in any scope and so they’re not [considered]

appropriate. (Victoria)

Victoria’s account highlights the power of rape culture to obfuscate any moral dimension to

portrayals (and enactments) of violence by one whole class of people against another. Sexism

and rape culture are so normative, she suggests, that to object is counter-normative, and likely

to be (dis)regarded as an expression of personal taste. In this way, the matrix of sexism works

to reinforce itself.

At the same time, many participants described witnessing explicit violence and

aggression. They commonly encountered misogynistic remarks online, and explained that

they have come to expect this level of violence. For example, Samira said that if a woman

commented on YouTube that a video was “very sexist”, she would expect a hostile response

– such as “oh get back into the kitchen bitch”. Participants also identified social media groups

or pages which overtly celebrated physical and sexual violence against women:
 15

There are pages on Facebook called Kicking sluts in the vagina, I notice a little bitch that

needs a good slap, Riding your girlfriend slowly ‘cos you don’t wanna wake her up […]

But the one I was talking about had actual pictures of incredible violence […] It was

really difficult to get it removed (Victoria).

As in this example, where Facebook refused to remove sites showing and arguably

celebrating violence against women, participants often discussed how difficult it can be to

speak back to or resist sexism. They described anger, frustration, disappointment, and

sometimes distress with the pervasiveness of sexism and rape culture, and the ineffectiveness

of mainstream responses to it. Ivy, for instance, described the power of sexist attitudes as

“disturbing”. And Maddie said the Roast Busters case was “just, ugh. The police! The

police’s attitude towards it was just appalling […] it made me so angry”.

A sense of resignation about sexism and rape culture coloured many participants’ talk.

The risk of misogynistic backlash could make critiques of sexism very difficult to articulate

(see also Calder-Dawe forthcoming), with some participants noting that this would

discourage them or their peers from openly identifying as feminist. As Victoria described:

I tend to shy away from ever actually engaging in Facebook arguments […] if

someone who’s feminist tries to defend something, people will be like ‘oh you’re just

a boring bitch’ or ‘you’re just a stupid slut, you just need to get fucked’.

Alongside frustration and anger, however, most participants reported actively engaging in

some way with feminist critiques of rape culture, as we discuss in the following section.

A feminist counterpublic
 16

Participants discussed three key kinds of response against the matrix of sexism. Firstly, they

described feminist education online as a way of challenging sexism and creating change.

Secondly, they talked about the facilitation of an intersectional feminist community online,

which carved out spaces for critique in an otherwise sexist public environment. Thirdly, they

described this education and community as forming a platform that enabled direct and

deliberate forms of critical engagement or activism.

Feminist education on social media. Participants described social media as a

powerful medium for raising awareness and educating people about feminist issues. This kind

of ‘feminist education’ can occur in the course of a person’s everyday engagement with

social media, allowing new ideas and information to be introduced, shared, and taken up. As

Victoria noted:

With social media I feel like I’ve been really educated in lots of different areas of

feminism that I wouldn’t have learned about or considered without it […] It’s kind of

like this whole new education for different opinions and stuff like that.

Social media sites were portrayed as particularly effective for raising feminist issues

in ways that are accessible, user-oriented and able to be widely disseminated. As well as

making it easy to deliberately create and seek out feminist or social justice material, the

nature of people’s engagement with social media meant it was possible to be exposed to ideas

and issues that might not otherwise be sought out. When asked what influenced her in

becoming a feminist, Taylor said “I think being a young person on social media, [feminist

discourse] just gets amplified […] you just gradually learn more and more.” Rather than

actively seeking out feminist material, she described feminist messages as part of the online

landscape for young people. As an active producer of online content, Jyoti described how

feminist and other kinds of theory could be packaged in ways that attracted a wider audience:
 17

Anything that somebody finds relatable is going to get passed around […] you might

make a post that’s really serious and really intelligent but nobody kind of understands

it so it’s not going to get popular […] a lot of the time [Tumblr] posts by people like

me who are kind of somewhat literate in gender theory or race theory or able to put it

into words but also talk like teenagers, that tends to get really popular because people

find that accessible and educational. It’s not scary, it’s not ‘learning’ right, it’s not

‘social justice’.

This form of accessible education about social justice issues is powerful as it is able to

(often inadvertently) reach people on a large scale without necessarily appearing to ‘preach’

feminism. Hinsey (2013) suggests that a potential disadvantage of online feminism is that in

the rush to be ‘easily-digestable’, bloggers can reduce feminism to entertainment, and not end

up providing young people with critical feminist tools. Our participants, however, rejected a

strict demarcation between education and entertainment. Jyoti, for instance, emphasised that

simplicity does not have to detract from the strength of an overall message, which may be

rooted in quite complex theory. As Hinsey (2013) herself notes, this is the other side of the

story of online feminism – the potential for creative contributions to ‘infuse dense theory with

humor’ (30) in ways that introduce feminism in intriguing ways (giving the example of

Danielle Henderson’s popular ‘Feminist Ryan Gosling’ memes). Likewise, Keller (2012,

440) describes a kind of “playful activism” in which girl bloggers intersperse “fluffier fare”

with serious feminist analyses in order to strategically appeal to a more mainstream audience.

Participants also described social media as an effective tool for deliberately seeking

out a feminist education. Victoria, for instance, talked about how social media helped her to

understand the importance of intersectionality in feminism, and to incorporate this into her

own views. To illustrate this, she described her proactive efforts to understand the particular

type of feminism of African-American singer Beyoncé:

 18

So I tend to use these websites to try and clarify certain things and see if I can identify

with what some people say. Without social media I wouldn’t have [been] checking

my awareness around why and how my views are formed compared to how other

people’s might be formed […] that particular website was like a young African

American woman who’s gay, living in the States, talking about how white feminists

love to criticize over-sexual women of colour, and constantly are saying how that’s

like, degrading feminism, without having any perception of really different

backgrounds, and really different opportunities.

In these ways, social media provides a space where diverse feminists can share

knowledge and experience, and learn from each other. This has huge potential for the

development of a more intersectional feminism that understands and accepts difference, and

recognizes privilege (Mann 2014; Thelandersson 2014). With a political will to inclusivity

and respect, social media offer routes for exchange that not only can educate people about

feminism, but can diversify and enrich understandings about what feminism is.

Safe counterpublic space. Many participants described social media as a space in which

they could be a part of alternative virtual communities. Following Salter (2013), we draw on

Fraser’s (1990) notion of ‘subaltern counterpublics’ as a way of understanding how these

online spaces can function for young people critical of rape culture. While Salter (2013)

focuses specifically on the use of social media for making public allegations of sexual

violence and abuse, we found that participants described internet spaces functioning to host

broader counterpublics in contesting rape culture. Rather than identifying with a defined

group or community, these young people often depicted themselves as part of a large diffuse
 19

network or movement of feminists. For example, when asked whether she belonged to any

particular feminist groups, Samira responded:

I don’t know; I’m not part of any specific [feminist] group. But I don’t think there is

any specific group; I think it’s just the wider feminist movement really [...] so I’m just

kind of a part of that [...] I don’t tend to talk out that much on social media. I tend to

just see it [feminist critiques of rape culture] and learn about it and tell my friends in

real life, and I have actually gotten quite a few of my friends really into the

movement.

As Samira suggests, social media is a vehicle through which young people can easily become

connected with a feminist movement. While online spaces are not always clearly separable

from “real life”, as Samira indicates, some young women value online communities for

reducing a sense of being isolated as a feminist (Schuster 2013). Such communities operate

through virtual networks and discursive spaces to host a sense of collective belonging. While

Web 2.0 offers young feminists the opportunity to actively engage in the production of

cultural meaning (Harris 2010; Keller 2012; McLean and Maalsen 2013; Salter 2013), several

of our participants like Samira suggest that a sense of belonging can be gained not only

through creating content, but also through the consumption and re-distribution of what their

peers are producing (c.f. Keller’s 2015 point about the exclusionary potential of

contemporary ‘brand’ feminism).

Many participants described social media spaces in which there was an emphasis on

kindness, the construction of safe spaces, and accessibility for marginalised groups. Through

a “politics of care” (Rentschler 2014), safe online spaces can operate not only as healing

spaces for those who have experienced sexual violence and abuse, but also to provide

validation and support for anyone critical of rape culture and sexism. They can provide what
 20

Ivy referred to as a “whole other world of understanding”. Referring to Tumblr in particular

she said it,

had quite an effect on showing how wrong mainstream media gets it when they

represent women. Once you go into Tumblr you’ve kind of created a whole other

world and understanding of the world […] It’s a place where you see the

representation that’s not seen in most aspects of society because of the power

structures that hold everything together.

For Fraser (1990), counterpublics are not enclaves, because by definition they are

formations that seek to address and contest the dominant public sphere. However, in

emphasising the importance of safe spaces for marginalized groups, Squires (2002, 458)

describes the role of “‘enclaved’ publics” which have been particularly important for African

Americans in the United States during periods of intense oppression. These are spaces and

discourses that are “hidden from the view of the dominant public and the state” (458), which

are dedicated to Black needs and fostering resistance. Squire differentiates this way of

responding to the dominant public sphere with counterpublics, a term she reserves for types

of response that adopt more direct communication. In the different forms of community

shaped by the internet, Tumblr was spoken of by our participants in a way that seemed to

provide both. As McLean and Maalsen (2013) note, social media occupies a paradoxical

space between the private and the public. Social media like Tumblr in particular, can provide

forms of interaction that function to promote safety for a subaltern community, enabling a

safe enclave of sorts even though it is not strictly hidden or bounded. At the same time it

provides a vehicle for more direct forms of engagement with the dominant public sphere. As

Jyoti notes, this relative safety of Tumblr can enable people from marginalized positions to

feel freer to share their experiences and knowledge of the world, which can in turn effect

change through expanding the knowledge and understanding of peers in this wider network:
 21

If you want to know about something ask the people who are affected by it, right? [...]

Tumblr feels like a safer space for people to say a lot of things they actually mean,

even if it’s ‘I’m tired of white people’ [...] so definitely it’s activism because people

learn about your life, and people learn about who you are and how you conceptualize

the world and sort of incorporate that into their world view.

Several participants portrayed the feminist spaces on social media as ‘counter’, not

only in terms of the subversion of traditional rape culture discourses, but also in terms of the

subversion of race-based power relations within feminism. Maddie, for instance, commented

that “feminism isn’t just about gender equality; it is about equality of races, because you

include everyone in that. And it’s also about accepting other genders as well”. In this way,

participants portrayed social media as a helpful feminist tool with potential to build new

kinds of safe and more equal feminist spaces, where the politics of race and transgender

rights, for example, are incorporated.

Some social media sites were described as more useful than others in providing

feminist counterpublic space. As the examples above highlight, Tumblr was emphasised as a

particularly prominent medium in which feminist spaces could be created. This is not to say

that other social media sites were not host to feminist action, as participants brought

numerous examples to us from other sites (nor is it to imply that Tumblr is always or

inherently a feminist space). Rather, many participants described Tumblr, in the way that they

used it, as the most common place to be able to access feminist ideas and space. For example,

Jyoti commented that:

I think misbehaviour [on Facebook] gets shut down a lot less quickly than Tumblr

partly because Tumblr is very collective justice, we stick together, and Facebook is
 22

very, you know, if you don’t report stuff to the Facebook admin you’re basically

screwed.

This resonates with Rentschler’s (2014) use of the notion of response-ability, where the

ability to collectively and directly respond to sexism and rape culture defines many feminist

social media endeavours. The direct interaction and response to sexism or rape culture that is

possible on sites such as Tumblr, without the (necessary) intervention of administrators of the

site, may explain Tumblr’s affinity with social justice dialogues. Tumblr was often portrayed

as a collectively-operated safe space, as Jyoti describes. The more youth-oriented, peer-

constructed spaces of sites such as Tumblr may provide a particular freedom in which to

conduct a response-able (Rentschler 2014) form of feminism, as it allows some reworking

and restructuring of traditional power relations, including those that are age-related. Thus, our

participants’ ideas about safe space incorporated not only an intersectional feminist

community, but also a space less constrained by generational dynamics and by sexist

gatekeepers.

Accountability and Justice. Many participants explained how social media offers

an important vehicle for seeking accountability and justice – from targeting everyday acts of

sexism and rape-supportive statements to sexual violence itself. As Jyoti notes below, the

internet provides a powerful technology for exposing problematic behaviour of others – “‘call

out’culture” (e.g., Munro 2013) – in ways that have potential to disrupt traditional power

relations:

‘Trial by internet’ is still accessible to a lot of us […] and that’s a lot of what keeps

us safe […] I’ve known parents who literally have stopped hitting their kids because

their kids will put it on Facebook.

 23

The mechanisms of this kind of exposure can vary considerably. Samira explained

that when young feminists see sexist or rape-supportive comments on Tumblr, the people

posting the comments can be called out and held responsible, but in ways that are not seen as

overly hostile and can be taken up as learning opportunities. She described a comment on a

photograph posted on Tumblr of a woman at Slutwalk, saying “when you think about it it’s

like putting a piece of meat in front of a dog and telling them not to eat it.” In response,

somebody else posted a photograph of their dog sitting in front of an open jar of peanut butter

with the caption “peanut butter is my dog’s favourite food ever; do you know why he’s not

eating it? ‘Cause I told him ‘no’.” Samira described this humorous, yet direct type of reaction

as typical of Tumblr activism. Resonating with the notion of response-ability (Rentschler

2014), it shows the power of social media in enabling users to immediately and directly

contest sexism at a peer to peer level. While debate has been growing in the blogosphere

about the complexities of call out culture, including what some argue are its toxic edges 3,

participants did not discuss this operating negatively within their own online communities.

Rather, they conveyed a sense of the communicative dynamics on Tumblr, at least, in a way

resembled a process of “calling in” (Tran 2013) rather than calling out.

Quite a different phenomenon is the use of online technologies to directly expose

individual perpetrators of sexual violence. One participant, Ruby, told the story of how she

utilised Facebook to seek justice in the wake of her own sexual assault by a male

acquaintance. She contacted this man and asked him to post a Facebook status admitting to

the assault in detail. He complied with her requests, Ruby said, in the hopes that she would

not take legal action. She explained, however, that she took this course of action in an attempt

to gain justice for a crime that she did not think would be taken seriously by the legal system,

given she was intoxicated at the time. In this way, her story resonates with the three cases

analysed by Salter (2013) in which women used social media to publish extrajudicial
 24

allegations of sexual violence, with the aim of holding perpetrators accountable for their

actions. As noted earlier, Salter (2013) builds on Fraser’s notion of subaltern counterpublics,

to examine the ways in which online counterpublics provide new and unique opportunities

for girls and women like Ruby to seek justice and revenge for sexual violence in ways that

counteract and challenge social and legal norms. This kind of “trial by internet”, as Jyoti

coins it, can be a powerful opportunity for those who lack “access to, or faith in, the

mechanisms of the public sphere and the criminal justice system” (Salter 2013, 238). As a

form of ‘vigilante justice’ it is reminiscent of some early feminist anti-rape activism that

identified and exposed perpetrators of sexual violence through means such as publishing their

identities in feminist newspapers (Gavey 2009).

In Ruby’s case, however, although the man publicly admitted the sexual assault, she

faced victim-blaming from his friends, and many of them made excuses for his actions. Thus,

although she was able to actively pursue justice for sexual violence through social media, her

case shows, as do those discussed by Salter, how fragile this power can be; and how wider

cultural and institutional change is required to move beyond outcomes shaped by

conventional constructions of the ideal victim.

Conclusion

In the wake of a high profile exposé of systematic sexual violation conducted and

promoted (on social media) by a group of Auckland teenage boys, public attention to sexual

violence and rape culture was particularly prominent in New Zealand in 2014. Widespread

condemnation of the boys’ actions co-existed with minimizations and victim-blaming (see

New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse 2013). Critiques of rape culture and an

inadequate criminal justice system response circulated alongside contestations of the very
 25

notion of rape culture (Gavey 2014). In this charged context we interviewed young people

who were critical of rape culture to find out more about their encounters with, and responses

to, it on social media. They spoke about elements of rape culture in ways that emphasised its

pervasiveness in their everyday lives, both online and elsewhere. Elements such as the

normalization of male sexual conquest, the everyday shaming of women’s sexual

expressions, and victim blaming for sexual assault were described in ways that situated them

within a broader matrix of sexism, which both fuelled and reinforced rape culture. Several

participants observed that within this matrix everyday forms of sexism as well as more overt

and threatening expressions of misogyny appeared not to be noticed by and/or were taken for

granted as natural and normal within mainstream culture.

The young people we spoke with also, however, discussed a diverse range of ways in

which they acted against this matrix of sexism by identifying and contesting elements of rape

culture. Several scholars (e.g., Harris 2008; Keller 2012; McLean and Maalsen 2013) suggest

we may need to rethink what counts as activism, and although we did not set out to interview

activists per se, the accounts of many of our participants resonate with recent discussions of

online activism. Rentschler (2014), for instance, in examining feminist social media

responses to rape culture, identifies its key features as providing “testimonial, advice giving,

and cultures of support” (68). This fits with our participants’ accounts of the value of social

media in providing feminist education and safe, inclusive, intersectional spaces. As

individuals who notice a matrix of sexism that remains invisible or appears acceptable within

mainstream culture, many of our participants could be said to occupy marginalized cultural

spaces. Yet through their engagement with social media, they were able to access and

participate in an alternative – networked and collective – cultural space. The way that online

feminist social media, and in particular Tumblr, seemed to operate allows it to provide the

dual functions of counterpublics: “withdrawal and re-entry into the wider communicative
 26

flows of the public sphere” (Asen 2000, 429; Fraser 1990). Such counterpublic spaces are

essential, it has been suggested, for nurturing shared culture and fostering collective

resistance by marginalised groups (Fraser 1990; Squires 2002). According to many of the

young critics we interviewed this online feminist counterpublic provided a “whole other

world” (Ivy) that resourced them with the support, knowledge and tools to critically respond

to rape culture.
 27

Acknowledgements

We thank the young people who generously agreed to be interviewed for this study.

Thanks also to the transcribers, and to Helen Madden and two anonymous reviewers for

helpful comments on the manuscript. The interviews we base this article on were conducted

by the first four authors for the purposes of their Honours dissertations, which were

supervised by the last author.

 28

References

3 NEWS. 2013. “Quick uptake for anti-rape protests.” November 9. Accessed March 13,

2015. http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/quick-uptake-for-antirape-protests-

2013110909#disqus_thread

ADOLESCENT HEALTH RESEARCH GROUP. 2013. The Health and Wellbeing of New

Zealand Secondary School Students in 2012: Youth’12 Prevalence Tables. Auckland:

The University of Auckland.

ASEN, ROBERT. 2000. “Seeking the ‘counter’ in counterpublics.” Communication Theory

10 (4): 424-446.

BATES, LAURA. 2014. “This is rape culture – and look at the damage it does.” The

Guardian, February 14. Accessed April 13, 2014.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/feb/14/rape-culture-

damage-it-does-everyday-sexism

BURLEIGH, NINA. 2013. “Sexting, shame & suicide: A shocking tale of sexual assault in

the digital age.” Rolling Stone (1192): 48-55.

CALDER-DAWE, OCTAVIA. Forthcoming. “The Choreography of Everyday Sexism:

Reworking Sexism in Interaction.” New Formations.

CULP-RESSLER, TARA. 2014. “Feminists Take to Twitter to Explain that Rape Culture is

Alive and Well.” Think Progress, March 25. Accessed August 6, 2015.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/03/25/3418728/rape-culture-hashtag
 29

DAVIES, MADELEINE. 2013. “Women Take Over #safetytipsforladies and Make It 100

Times Better.” Jezebel, March 25. Accessed August 17, 2015.

http://jezebel.com/5992329/women-take-over-safetytipsforladies-and-make-it-100-

times-better

DOUGAN, PATRICE. 2013. “Roast Busters: Radio show hosts ‘victim blaming’.” The New

Zealand Herald, November 5. Accessed April 13, 2014.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11151911

FILIPOVIC, JILL. 2007. “Blogging while female: How internet misogyny parallels ‘real-

world’ harassment.” Yale Journal of Law and Feminism 19 (1): 295-303.

FRASER, NANCY. 1990. “Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of

actually existing democracy.” Social Text 8 (25/26): 56–80.

GAVEY, NICOLA. 2005. Just sex? The cultural scaffolding of rape. London and New York:

Routledge.

GAVEY, NICOLA. 2009. “Fighting rape.” In Theorizing sexual violence, edited by Renee. J.

Heberle and Victoria Grace, 96-124. New York: Routledge.

GAVEY, NICOLA. 2013. “Roast busting and the revival of misogynist sexual culture.”

SexualPoliticsNow (blog), November 5. Accessed April 13, 2014.

http://www.sexualpoliticsnow.org.nz/roast-busting-and-the-revival-of-misogynist-

sexual-culture/

GAVEY, NICOLA. 2014. “This is what we mean by rape culture.” SexualPoliticsNow

(blog), October 14. Accessed August 20, 2015.

http://www.sexualpoliticsnow.org.nz/this-is-what-we-mean-by-rape-culture/
 30

GAVEY, NICOLA, AND CHARLENE Y. SENN. 2014. “Sexuality and sexual violence.” In

APA Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology: Vol. 1. Person-Based Approaches, edited

by Deborah L. Tolman, Lisa M. Diamond and Jose A. Bauermeister, 339-382.

Washington, D.C.: APA Press.

GIBSON, ANDY, MELISSA MILLER, PHILIPPA SMITH, ALLAN BELL, AND

CHARLES CROTHERS. 2013. The Internet in New Zealand 2013. Auckland, New

Zealand: Institute of Culture, Discourse & Communication, AUT University.

HARRIS, ANITA. 2008. “Young women, late modern politics, and the participatory

possibilities of online cultures.” Journal of Youth Studies 11 (5): 481-495.

HARRIS, ANITA. 2010. “Mind the gap: Attitudes and emergent feminist politics since the

Third Wave.” Australian Feminist Studies 25 (66): 475-484.

HENRY, NICOLA, AND ANASTASIA POWELL. 2015. “Embodied harms: Gender,

shame, and technology-facilitated sexual violence.” Violence Against Women 21 (6):

758-779.

HINSEY, VERA. 2013. “Girls get digital: A critical view of cyberfeminism.” On Our Terms,

1 (1): 1-13.

INDEPENDENT POLICE CONDUCT AUTHORITY. 2015. “Report on Police’s handling

of the alleged offending by ‘Roastbusters’,” March. Accessed March 28, 2015.

www.ipca.govt.nz/includes/download.aspx?ID=138623

KAPLAN, ANDREAS. M., AND MICHAEL HAENLEIN. 2010. “Users of the world, unite!

The challenges and opportunities of Social Media.” Business Horizons 53 (1): 59–68.
 31

KELLER, JESSALYNN MARIE. 2012. “Virtual feminisms: Girls’ blogging communities,

feminist activism, and participatory politics.” Information, Communication & Society

15 (3): 429-447.

KELLER, JESSALYNN. 2015. “Girl power's last chance? Tavi Gevinson, feminism, and

popular media culture.” Continuum 29 (2):274-285.

MANN, LARISA. K. 2014. “What can feminism learn from new media?” Communication

and Critical/Cultural Studies 11 (3): 293-297.

MCCRACKEN, HEATHER, AND ANNA LEASK. 2013. “Roast Busters: Girls hit back

with online campaigns.” The New Zealand Herald, November 9. Accessed March 13,

2015. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11154064

MCLEAN, JESSICA, AND SOPHIA MAALSEN. 2013. “Destroying the joint and dying of

shame? A geography of revitalised feminism in social media and beyond.”

Geographical Research 51 (3): 243-256.

MEGARRY, JESSICA. 2014. “Online incivility or sexual harassment? Conceptualising

women’s experiences in the digital age.” Women’s Studies International Forum 47: 46-

55.

MUNRO, EALASAID. 2013. “Feminism: A Fourth Wave?” Political Insight 4 (2): 22-25.

NEW ZEALAND FAMILY VIOLENCE CLEARINGHOUSE. 2013. “Responses to the

‘Roast Busters’.” Accessed May 8. 2015. https://nzfvc.org.nz/?q=node/1513

 32

NEW ZEALAND FAMILY VIOLENCE CLEARINGHOUSE 2014. “No charges laid:

Response to the ‘Roast Busters’ decision.” November 11. Accessed May 20, 2014.

https://nzfvc.org.nz/news/no-charges-laid-responses-roast-busters-decision

NG, EVE. 2015. “Structural Approaches to Feminist Social Media Strategies: Institutional

Governance and a Social Media Toolbox.” Feminist Media Studies 15 (4): 718-722.

PENNY, LAURIE. 2013. “Steubenville: This is rape culture’s Abu Ghraib moment.” New

Statesman, March 19. Accessed November 3 2013.

http://www.newstatesman.com/laurie-penny/2013/03/steubenville-rape-cultures-abu-

ghraib-moment

POOLE, EMILY. 2013. “Hey girls, did you know? Slut-Shaming on the internet needs to

stop.” University of San Francisco Law Review 48: 221-260.

RENTSCHLER, CARRIE A. 2014. “Rape culture and the feminist politics of social media.”

Girlhood Studies 7 (1): 65–82.

RINGROSE, JESSICA, AND EMMA RENOLD. 2012. “Slut-shaming, girl power and

“sexualisation”: Thinking through the politics of the international SlutWalks with teen

girls.” Gender and Education 24 (3): 333–343.

RUTHERFORD, KAREN. 2013. “Facebook teen sex shaming exposed”. 3News, November

3. Accessed May 20, 2014. http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/facebook-teen-sex-

shaming-exposed-2013110317#.Unft9pRgZcY

SALTER, MICHAEL. 2013. “Justice and revenge in online counter-publics: Emerging

responses to sexual violence in the age of social media.” Crime, Media, Culture: An

International Journal 9 (3): 225-242.

 33

SATHERLEY, DAN. 2013. “Rape culture a ‘national health crisis’.” 3News, November 18.

Accessed April 14, 2014. http://www.3news.co.nz/Rape-culture-a-national-health-

crisis/tabid/423/articleID/321760/Default.aspx#ixzz30k92qJpJ

SCHUSTER, JULIA. 2013. “Invisible feminists? Social media and young women’s political

participation.” Political Science 65 (1): 8-24.

S.O.S.: SUPPORT OUR SURVIVORS. 2013. Facebook (group page). Accessed March 13,

2015. https://www.facebook.com/supportoursurvivors

SQUIRES, CATHERINE R. 2002. “Rethinking the Black public sphere: An alternative

vocabulary for multiple public spheres.” Communication Theory 12 (4): 446-468.

THE EVERYDAY SEXISM PROJECT. n.d. http://www.everydaysexism.com/ Accessed 26

August 2013.

THELANDERSSON, FREDRIKA. 2014. “A less toxic feminism: Can the internet solve the

age old question of how to put intersectional theory into practice?” Feminist Media

Studies 14 (3): 527-530.

TRAN, NGOC LOAN. 2013. “Calling IN: A less disposable way of holding each other

accountable. Black Girl Dangerous. December 18. Accessed August 24. 2015.

http://www.blackgirldangerous.org/2013/12/calling-less-disposable-way-holding-

accountable/

VALENTI, JESSICA. 2013. “Asking for it”. The Nation, January 11. Accessed April 13,

2014. http://www.thenation.com/blog/172156/asking-it
 34

VAN DIJCK, JOSÉ. 2013. The culture of connectivity a critical history of social media. New

York: Oxford University Press.

 35

Author Bios

Sophie Sills is a Masters student in the School of Psychology at the University of Auckland,

with interests in social justice and feminist issues relating to power and privilege. Her current

research is on queer athletes in women’s team sports and the underlying gendered

frameworks in sporting contexts.

Chelsea Pickens is a Masters student in the School of Psychology at the University of

Auckland, researching the cultural expectations placed on single women in relation to their

performance of femininity. She is also interested in issues surrounding sex offending and

rehabilitation.

Karishma Beach is analysing the culture of self-identifying “nerds” in social media spaces,

with a focus on female nerds and gender relations, as part of her Master of Arts degree in

Psychology at the University of Auckland. Her wider research interests include social justice

and feminist issues, and the impact of social media in these areas.

Lloyd Jones is an Honours graduate from the University of Auckland with research interests

in masculinity and rape culture. He currently works as a rape prevention educator.

Octavia Calder-Dawe is a doctoral candidate in the School of Psychology at the University of

Auckland. Octavia’s doctoral research project connects senior secondary school students with

critical feminist analyses of gender, sexuality and bodies and examines how those involved

(re)negotiate their relationships to gender, feminism and sexism as a consequence.

Paulette Benton-Greig is a doctoral candidate in the Women’s Studies programme at the

University of Auckland and project manager with the Pornography in the Public Eye research

project in the School of Psychology.

 36

Nicola Gavey is a professor in the School of Psychology at the University of Auckland, with

interests in the intersections of gender, power, and sexuality. Much of her research has been

concerned with understanding and unpicking the cultural scaffolding of rape.

 37

Appendix A

Social Media Map

 38

1
www.sexualpoliticsnow.org.nz

2
New Zealander of European descent.

3
We have also noticed a shift in this direction in feminist online spaces in the year since we

completed our interviews.

View publication stats