Selected Papers of Internet Research 16:  

The 16th Annual Meeting of the  
Association of Internet Researchers 

Phoenix, AZ, USA / 21-24 October 2015 
 

 
PANEL:  KARMA  POLICING:  RE-­IMAGINING  WHAT  WE  CAN  (AND  
CAN'T)  POST  ON  THE  INTERNET.  
  
Michael  Burnam-­Fink  
Arizona  State  University  
  
Katrin  Tiidenberg  
Tallinn  University  
  
John  Carter  McKnight  
  
Cindy  Tekobbe  
University  of  Alabama  
  
Abstract  
  
Popular  discourse  and  culture  on  the  internet  of  2014-­2015  is  well-­removed  from  that  
envisioned  by  the  pioneers,  idealists,  and  many  scholars  of  the  medium  in  its  formative  
years.  Far  from  the  “early  days  of  a  better  nation,”  a  phrase  of  Alasdair  Gray’s  engraved  
upon  the  Scottish  Parliament  Building  and  often  deployed  in  public  discourse  on  social  
media  during  the  2014  campaign  for  Scottish  independence,  this  past  year  has  seen  
attention  drawn  to  some  of  the  worst  of  online  behavior,  from  videos  of  beheadings,  to  
rape  and  death  threats,  to  the  aggressive  vitriol  of  what  some  regard  as  a  backlash  by  
young  white  men  against  the  increased  visibility  of  women,  people  of  color,  and  those  
identifying  with  one  or  more  non-­hegemonic  identities.  Whatever  today’s  internet  may  
be,  it  is  not  Barlow’s  (1996)  independent  republic  of  cyberspace  or  Rheingold’s  (1993)  
“virtual  community”  of  the  WELL,  a  homogeneous  assemblage  of  white  male  late-­Baby  
Boomer  software  engineers  of  libertarian  bent.  With  global  reach  and  diversity  have  
come  challenges  to  discourse  traditions,  cultures,  and  social  identities  engaging  with  
each  other  over  new  platforms  which  enable  and  favor  some  discourses  while  
challenging  or  suppressing  others.  Clashes  are  perhaps  inevitable.  However,  the  
technologies  and  socio-­technical  practices  which  have  given  rise  to  conflict  may  also  be  
used  to  address  imbalances  of  power,  to  create  if  not  the  libertarian  republics  of  1990s  
imagining,  then  creative  counterpublics  of  peer  production  in  which  official  and  dominant  
narratives  are  refuted,  repurposed,  or  simply  ignored.    
  
Presenter  One  describes  GamerGate  as  a  systemic  problem  enabled  by  the  ubiquity  of  
the  internet  in  everyday  life;;  argues  for  a  proactive  counter-­insurgency  strategy  rather  
than  the  passive  ‘don't  feed  the  trolls’  conventional  wisdom  written  into  the  terms  of  



service  (TOS)  documents  of  many  online  platforms;;  and  suggests  the  implementation  of  
a  modified  Bayesian  filtering  technique  that  has  been  successful  in  regard  to  reducing  
email  spam  to  combat  online  harassment  and  trolling.  Interrogating  the  February  2015  
memes  of  “Left  Shark,”  “Llama  Drama,”  and  “The  Dress,”  Presenter  Two  argues  that  
collaborative  meme-­making  can  build  solidarity  and  community,  while  countering  anti-­
meme  discourse  and  the  “serious  business”  of  the  internet,  by  invoking  collective  
whimsy  and  humor.  Presenter  Three  takes  on  dominant  ideologies  around  gender,  
embodiment,  age,  aesthetics,  sexuality,  body  policing,  and  more  by  investigating  the  
#over40  and  #over50  women  posting  on  Tumblr  and  Instagram  arguing  for  a  
complicated  notion  of  resistance  through  self  image  re/crafting  of  fitness,  motherhood,  
and  lifestyle  among  women  over  25.  Presenter  four  explores  the  rhetorical  genre  of  the  
satirical  review  on  Amazon.com  as  feminist  resistance,  and  argues  for  the  disruptive  
and  counter-­narrative  affordances  of  social  media  comments  contrasted  with  the  
conventional  wisdom  of  the  comments  as  a  cesspool  of  abuse  and  trolling.  
  
Together,  this  panel  presents  a  range  of  imagined  alternatives  to  polarized  and  bitter  
online  discourse,  from  perspectives  of  media  and  cultural  studies,  political  philosophy,  
counterinsurgency  theory,  science  and  technology  studies,  and  rhetorical  genre  theory.    
Problems  of  contemporary  internet  discourse  -­  both  textual  and  visual  -­    and  imagined  
alternatives  are  situated  not  only  historically  and  theoretically  but  are  also  grounded  in  
close  analysis  of  technological  affordances  and  constraints  of  media  and  platforms.    
  
References  
  
Barlow,  J.P.  (1996).  A  Cyberspace  Independence  Declaration.  Online:  
https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/barlow_0296.declaration  
Rheingold,  H.  (1993).  The  virtual  community:  Homesteading  on  the  electronic  frontier.  
MIT  Press.  
Turner,  F.  (2010).  From  counterculture  to  cyberculture:  Stewart  Brand,  the  Whole  Earth  
Network,  and  the  rise  of  digital  utopianism.  University  Of  Chicago  Press.  
  
  
  
Presenter  One:  Napalm  on  Trolls:  Counter-­Insurgency  Strategies  for  Internet  
Harassment  
  
Harassment  of  women  online  is  a  longstanding  problem,  rising  to  a  fever  pitch  with  the  
GamerGate  shambles  in  autumn  of  2014.    Online  harassment  ranges  from  persistent,  
detailed,  and  graphic  death  threats  against  specific  women[1]  to  increased  levels  of  
ordinary  “trash-­talk”  in  online  gaming[2].  Despite  the  scope  of  the  problem,  and  the  
consequences  of  violence  against  women  for  the  victims  and  the  communities  that  have  
been  targeted,  there  has  not  been  an  effective  response.  Law  enforcement  agencies,  
their  hands  bound  by  jurisdictional  and  evidentiary  standards,  are  unable  to  punish  
harassers  or  protect  their  targets.  Proposals  to  strengthen  community  norms  or  “don’t  
feed  the  trolls”  fail  to  address  how  deeply  embedded  the  internet  is  in  the  conduct  of  
daily  life,  or  harassers  who  simply  don’t  care  about  community  norms.[3]  Organized  and  
systemic  harassment  demands  an  organized  and  systemic  response.    I  propose  



incorporating  a  Bayesian  filter  for  detecting  harassing  messages  into  common  online  
platforms,  and  explore  how  and  why  said  filter  may  work  to  decrease  harassment.  
    
This  work  combines  and  extends  theories  of  online  technopolitics  and  counter-­
insurgency  warfare.  Technopolitics  in  generals  notes  that  political  values  are  embedded  
in  system  design,  that  technological  affordances  channel  human  action,  and  that  
political  and  technological  critique  must  be  done  in  parallel.[4]  For  computer  networks,  
the  creation  of  a  problem  and  a  community  are  historically  synonymous,  with  the  
paradigmatic  example  being  the  rise  and  decline  of  spam;;  unsolicited  commercial  
messages[5].  Counter-­insurgency  (COIN)  is  a  set  of  military  strategies  for  fighting  
guerrillas,  most  recently  associated  with  General  Petraeus  and  the  US  occupation  of  
Iraq,  which  focuses  on  protection  of  the  population  and  political    legitimacy  as  key  
objectives.[6]  
                           
  
Together,  these  frameworks  draw  attention  to  strategy,  terrain,  and  tactics.  The  
strategic  objective  is  significantly  reducing  online  harassment,  one  consonant  with  the  
first  principle  of  COIN:  that  security  of  the  population  is  key  and  a  perquisite  to  other  
objectives  (i.e.  “smashing  the  patriarchy”).  Terrain  means  analyzing  the  affordances  and  
encoded  political  values  of  online  platforms  seriously.  The  online  communication  
consider  in  this  piece  takes  place  via  privately  owned-­and-­operated  platforms  such  as  
Twitter,  Reddit,  and  Youtube,  which  have  design  commitments  to  making  it  easy  to  join  
and  post  content,  and  relatively  lax  or  under-­utilized  systems  of  content  moderation.  In  
short,  these  platforms  make  it  easy  to  send  harassing  messages  and  difficult  to  
maintain  a  persistent  digital  identity  in  the  face  of  harassment.  Terrain,  moreso  than  
political  or  social  factors,  is  a  significant  explanation  for  the  success  of  insurgent  groups  
as  analyzed  across  20th  century  conflicts.[7]  The  online  terrain  of  platforms,  as  
compared  to  the  physical  terrain  of  Earth,  is  amenable  to  changes  in  affordances  by  the  
development  team.  Finally,  a  tactical  lens  focuses  on  the  kinds  of  actions  that  are  
possible  and  successful.  In  analogy  with  the  advice  of  John  Paul  Vann,  America’s  most  
successful  practitioner  of  counter-­insurgency  warfare,  against  indiscriminate  aerial  
bombardment  during  the  Vietnam  War,  “This  is  a  political  war  and  it  call  for  
discrimination  in  killing.”[8]  I  propose  that  we  need  automated  tactics.  To  be  effective,  a  
defensive  tactic  must  require  less  cognitive  and  emotional  work  than  sending  a  
harassing  message.  
                           
The  test  I  am  proposing  is  a  modification  of  Bayesian  filtering  techniques,  which  have  
worked  extremely  well  in  countering  spam  email.  In  general,  Bayesian  filters  compare  
the  frequency  of  words  in  a  message  to  determine  the  probability  that  a  message  fits  
into  one  or  more  categories  (e.g.  spam,  harassment,  purposeful  communication).  The  
filter  would  assess  that  the  message  is  harassing,  notify  the  sender  if  they  wish  to  
proceed  (in  test  cases  notifying  the  sender  can  reduce  harassment  by  ~90%)[9],  notify  
the  recipient  of  a  harassing  message,  and  if  both  the  filter  and  a  human  agree  that  the  
message  is  harassment  (the  recipient  if  they  choose  to  the  view  the  message,  a  
moderator  if  not),  the  sender  is  automatically  banned,  with  increasing  duration  for  
multiple  infractions.  As  per  usual  practices,  the  filter  ‘learns’  from  human  judgment  of  
harassment,  and  is  applied  evenly  to  messages  in  all  directions.  The  human-­in-­the-­loop  
prevents  over-­zealous  machine  banning,  while  fair  application  makes  this  politically  



acceptable.  Those  who  care  to  live  glass  houses  of  safe  speech  will  not  be  able  to  
throw  stones.  New  accounts,  which  may  be  sock-­puppets,  will  be  under  the  tightest  
restrictions.  Those  who  do  throw  stones  will  suffer  immediate  consequences  for  their  
actions,  breaking  the  motivational  loop  that  sustains  this  form  of  behavior.[10]  
                           
Users  can  force  their  services  to  change.  Today,  no  self-­respecting  email  service  lacks  
a  spam  filter.  Platforms  interested  the  long-­term  engagement  with  their  userbase  should  
strongly  consider  building  anti-­harassment  systems  into  their  services,  as  Twitter  
suggested  in  early  February  2015.[11]  The  goal  of  this  research  is  to  explain  more  
clearly  what  online  harassment  is,  and  how  it  may  be  tactically  countered,  along  with  a  
prototype  filter.  
  
________________________________________  
[1]  Wu,  B.  (2015,  February  10).  I’m  Brianna  Wu,  And  I’m  Risking  My  Life  Standing  Up  
To  Gamergate.  www.Bustle.com.  Retrieved  from  http://www.bustle.com/articles/63466-­
im-­brianna-­wu-­and-­im-­risking-­my-­life-­standing-­up-­to-­gamergate  
[2]  Kuznekoff,  J.  H.,  &  Rose,  L.  M.  (2013).  Communication  in  multiplayer  gaming:  
Examining  player  responses  to  gender  cues.  New  Media  &  Society,  15(4),  541–556.  
doi:10.1177/1461444812458271  
[3]  Cross,  K.  (2014).  Ethics  for  Cyborgs:  On  Real  Harassment  in  an  “Unreal”  Place.  The  
Journal  of  the  Canadian  Game  Studies  Association,  8(13),  4–21.  
[4]  Winner,  L.  (1989).  The  whale  and  the  reactor  a  search  for  limits  in  an  age  of  high  
technology.  Chicago:  University  of  Chicago  Press.  
[5]  Brunton,  F.  (2013).  Spam:  a  shadow  history  of  the  Internet.  Cambridge,  
Massachusetts:  The  MIT  Press.  
[6]  United  States.  (2007).  The  U.S.  Army/Marine  Corps  counterinsurgency  field  manual:  
U.S.  Army  field  manual  no.  3-­24:  Marine  Corps  warfighting  publication  no.  3-­33.5  
(University  of  Chicago  Press  ed).  Chicago:  University  of  Chicago  Press.  
[7]  Fearon  J.D,  &  Laitin,  D.  D.  (2003).  Ethnicity,  Insurgency,  and  Civil  War.  The  
American  Political  Science  Review,  97(1),  75–90.  
[8]  Sheehan,  N.  (1989).  A  bright  shining  lie:  John  Paul  Vann  and  America  in  Vietnam  
(1st  Vintage  Books  ed).  New  York:  Vintage  Books.  
[9]  Prabhu,  T.  (2014).  Rethink:  An  Effective  Way  to  Prevent  Cyberbullying.  Google  
Science  Fair.  Retrieved  from  
https://www.googlesciencefair.com/projects/en/2014/f4b320cc1cedf92035dab51903bdd
95a846ae7de6869ac40c909525efe7c79db  
[10]  Kunzler,  J.  (2014,  October  22).  The  Gamification  of  Terror:  Manufacturing  
GamerGate’s  Sphere  of  Delusion.  Retrieved  from  
http://designislaw.tumblr.com/post/100651306295/the-­gamification-­of-­terror-­
manufacturing  
[11]  Tiku,  N.,  &  Newton,  C.  (2015,  February  4).  Twitter  CEO:  “We  suck  at  dealing  with  
abuse.”  The  Verge.  Retrieved  from  http://www.theverge.com/2015/2/4/7982099/twitter-­
ceo-­sent-­memo-­taking-­personal-­responsibility-­for-­the  
  
Presenter  Two:  The  Left  Shark,  White  Llama,  Blue  Dress  Sutra:  In  Defense  of  Silly  
Memes  
  



The  origin  of  Zen  Buddhism  is  traditionally  ascribed  to  the  event  described  in  the  Flower  
Sermon  (拈花微笑,  literally  "pick  up  flower,  subtle  smile"):  towards  the  end  of  his  life  the  
Buddha  called  together  his  disciples  and  held  up  a  single  lotus  flower.  The  learned  
group  debated  the  meanings  and  implications  of  the  flower  and  the  gesture,  but  one,  
Mahākāśyapa,  simply  smiled.  Recognizing  true  wisdom  in  that  disciple,  the  Buddha  
named  him  his  spiritual  heir  (Welter  2000).  
In  The  Agricola,  the  Roman  historian  Tacitus  grapples  with  the  proper  response  of  the  
honorable  citizen  to  a  media  environment  in  which  narratives  counter  to,  or  even  aloof  
from,  that  of  the  official,  are  impermissible.  Ultimately,  the  general  Agricola’s  abstinence  
from  either  support  or  criticism  of  imperial  propaganda  ends  in  an  untimely  and  perhaps  
suspicious  death.  (Tacitus  and  Mattingly  2010).    
  
February  2015  was  a  good  month  for  internet  memes;;  it  was  also  a  good  month  for  their  
castigation  as  not  merely  trivial  distractions  but  as  a  sign  of  moral  and  ideological  rot  
from  perspectives  on  both  the  Right  and  Left  of  American  discourse.  This  paper  
analyzes  the  rhetorical  and  affective  content  of  a  range  of  anti-­meme  posts  on  social  
media  in  the  last  week  of  February  2015  and  challenges  them  with  a  counter-­framing  of  
memes  as  giving  rise  to  an  alternative  public  discourse  to  corporate  and  governmental  
media  narratives,  one  which  replaces  a  focus  on  anger  and  othering  with  values  of  
solidarity  and  positivity  more  often  mobilized  to  criticize  the  current  diverse  media  
environment  from  a  perspective  of  the  era  of  monolithic  broadcast  television.  Memes  
and  their  critique  are  situated  in  traditions  of  critical  media  studies  and  political  
philosophy  which  grapple  with  questions  of  the  proper  roles  of  popular  and  official  
discourses.  
  
Shifman  (2014,  8)  regards  memes  as  “socially  constructed  public  discourses.”    Couldry  
(2012),  drawing  on  a  media  studies  tradition  stretching  from  Carey  (2008)  to  McLuhan  
(1967)  interpreting  the  role  of  media  in  creating  spectacle  and  ritual,  often  in  the  service  
of  reinforcing  national  identity  (Anderson  2004).  Shifman’s  work,  however,  suggests  a  
crucial  difference  in  the  role  of  social  media  as  opposed  to  broadcast  media:  the  ability  
of  “public  discourses”  to  arise  from,  rather  than  being  an  echo  of,  discourses  initiated  by  
a  unitary  power  source,  be  it  corporate  or  state.  These  social-­media  discourses  can  
imply  a  rejection  of  the  preferred  discourses  of  the  powerful:  the  2015  Super  Bowl,  while  
a  traditional  example  of  media  ritual  created  and  framed  by  powerful  organizations,  was  
subverted  by  the  popularity  of  the  “Left  Shark”  meme,  which  celebrated  a  genuine  
moment  of  awkwardness  in  the  midst  of  heavily-­produced  and  –scripted  spectacle.  
Alternatively,  they  may  begin  as  minor  and  local  media  ephemera  which  capture  the  
imaginations  of  a  global  collective  of  social  media  users,  who  remix  and  reimagine  the  
source  material  for  peer-­to-­peer  experiences  of  shared  community  building,  as  with  the  
“Llama  Drama”  meme.  Or,  apparently  most  threatening  to  a  particular  mindset  studied  
in  this  work,  utterly  unconnected  to  agendas  advanced  by  corporate  and  state  interests  
(“The  Dress.”).  
  
This  threefold  typology  of  the  relationship  of  memes  to  official  discourses  (countering,  
remixing,  and  ignoring)  is  situated  within  pre-­internet  manifestations  of  popular  culture  
and  their  critiques,  particularly  those  occurring  in  conditions  of  substantial  differentials  in  
power  between  the  “public”  in  which  they  circulate  and  the  dominant  institutions  of  
society:  here,  particularly  Jewish  humor  in  the  mid-­20th  Century  United  States  and  folk  



humor  and  samizdat  (self-­published)  literature  in  the  Soviet  Union,  though  examples  
from  other  relatively  disempowered  groups  are  extensive.  These  examples  are  chosen  
to  reflect  a  divergence  of  media  strategies  parallel  to  contemporary  conditions  involving  
social  media:  use  of  the  dominant  group’s  media  to  advance,  both  covertly  and  overtly,  
alternative  messages  (countering  and  remixing)  as  well  as  the  development  of  
alternative  and  oppositional  channels  (countering  and  ignoring).  
  
Having  established  the  “content,  form,  and  stance”  (Shifman  2014,  40)  of  the  three  
memes  at  issue,  this  work  performs  a  discourse  analysis  (Gee  2014)  of  public  critical  or  
antagonistic  comments  upon  or  in  response  to  the  memes.  From  a  broad  corpus  of  
comments,  key  themes  and  phrases  are  articulated  and  assembled  into  a  composite  
counter-­narrative.  This  counter-­narrative  is  then  situated  within  a  history  of  critiques  of  
popular  use  of  emerging  communications  technologies  and  associated  moral  panics.  
Finally,  a  counter-­counter  narrative,  an  apologia  for  the  meme  is  asserted:  one  in  which  
the  countering,  remixing,  and  ignoring  of  the  preferred  narratives  of  the  powerful  is  
valorized  as  the  expression  of  a  robust  “private  sphere”  (Papacharissi  2010)  founded  
upon  shared  delight  rather  than  divisive  antagonisms.  Here,  Tacitus’s  question  is  
resolved  by  the  Buddha’s  flower:  when  beauty  transcends  doctrine  and  dominant  
narratives  are  set  aside,  a  private  sphere  of  democratic  solidarity  may  -­  just  might  -­  
flourish.    
  
References  
Anderson,  B.  (2004).  Imagined  communities:  Reflections  on  the  origin  and  spread  of  
nationalism.  Nationality  and  nationalism.  Verso  Books.  
Baym,  N.  K.  (2010).  Personal  connections  in  the  digital  age.  Polity.  
Carey,  J.  W.  (2008).  Communication  as  culture,  revised  edition:  Essays  on  media  and  
society.  Routledge.  
Chilton,  P.  (2005).  Manipulation,  memes  and  metaphors.  In  de  Saussure,  L.  and  
Schultz,  P.J.,  eds.  Manipulation  and  Ideologies  in  the  20th  Century:  Discourse,  
Language,  Mind.  John  Benjamins  Publishing  Co.  
Couldry,  N.  (2012).  Media,  society,  world:  Social  theory  and  digital  media  practice.  
Polity.  
de  Seta,  G.  (2015).  Memes  in  digital  culture.  New  Media  &  Society,  17(3),  476-­478.  
Deuze,  M.  (2012).  Media  life.  Polity.  
Draitser,  E.  (1989).  Soviet  Underground  Jokes  as  a  Means  of  Popular  Entertainment.  
The  Journal  of  Popular  Culture,  23(1),  117-­125.  
Epstein,  L.  J.  (2002).  The  Haunted  Smile:  The  Story  of  Jewish  Comedians  in  America.  
PublicAffairs.  
Gee,  J.  P.  (2014).  An  Introduction  to  Discourse  Analysis  4th  Edition:  Theory  and  
Method.  Routledge.  
Harris,  D.  A.,  &  Rabinovich,  I.  (1988).  The  Jokes  of  Oppression:  The  Humor  of  Soviet  
Jews.  Jason  Aronson  Incorporated.  
Katz,  N.,  &  Katz,  E.  (1971).  Tradition  and  adaptation  in  American  Jewish  humor.Journal  
of  American  Folklore,  215-­220.  
Marwick,  A.  (2013).  Memes.  Contexts,  12(4),  12-­13.  
McLuhan,  M.,  &  Fiore,  Q.  (1967).  The  medium  is  the  message.  New  York,  123,  126-­
128.  
Papacharissi,  Z.  (2010).  A  private  sphere:  Democracy  in  a  digital  age.  Polity.  



Parker,  E.  (2014).  Now  I  Know  Who  My  Comrades  Are:  Voices  From  the  Internet  
Underground.  Sara  Crighton  Books.  
Pyzik,  A.  (2014).  Poor  But  Sexy:  Culture  Clashes  in  Europe  East  and  West.  John  Hunt  
Publishing.  
Rheingold,  H.  (1993).  The  virtual  community:  Homesteading  on  the  electronic  frontier.  
MIT  press.  
Shifman,  L.  (2014).  Memes  in  digital  culture.  MIT  Press.  
Shifman,  L.  (2013).  Memes  in  a  digital  world:  Reconciling  with  a  conceptual  
troublemaker.  Journal  of  Computer-­‐Mediated  Communication,  18(3),  362-­377.  
Tacitus  (Mattingly,  H.,  trans.)  2010.  The  Agricola  and  The  Germania.  Penguin  Classics.  
Terranova,  T.  (2004).  Network  culture:  Politics  for  the  information  age  (Vol.  23,  p.  25).  
Pluto  Press.  
Wellman,  B.,  &  Gulia,  M.  (1999).  Net  surfers  don't  ride  alone:  Virtual  communities  as  
communities.  Networks  in  the  global  village,  331-­366.  
Welter.  (2000).  Mahākāśyapa’s  Smile:  Silent  Transmission  and  the  Kung-­an  (Kōan)  
Tradition.  In  Heine,  S.  and  Wright,  D.S.,  eds.  The  Kōan:  Texts  and  Contexts  in  Zen  
Buddhism.  Oxford  University  Press,  pp.  75–109.  
Whitfield,  S.  J.  (1986).  The  distinctiveness  of  American  Jewish  humor.  Modern  Judaism,  
245-­260.  
Wiggins,  B.  E.,  &  Bowers,  G.  B.  (2014).  Memes  as  genre:  A  structurational  analysis  of  
the  memescape.  new  media  &  society,  1461444814535194.  
  
Presenter  Three:  FITNESS,  FATNESS  AND  PHOTOGRAPHABILITY  OF  WOMEN’S  
BODIES  AFTER  40  AND  50  
  
The  ubiquity  of  social  media  and  photography  (Hand,  2013)  and  the  historical  tradition  
of  overburdening  (Schilling,  1993)  women’s  bodies  means  that  by  observing  what  is  
considered  photographable  (Bourdieu,  1996)  and  sharable  about  them  allows  us  access  
to  dominant  ideologies  about  gender,  embodiment,  age,  aesthetics,  sexuality  and  much  
more.  This  paper  explores  the  social  imaginaries  women  themselves  construe  of  
women  over  40  and  50  on  image-­heavy  social  media  platforms  tumblr.com  and  
Instagram.  
  
Theoretical  background  
  
The  contemporary  visual  economy  has  been  labeled  “profoundly  ageist,  (dis)ablist  and  
heteronormative”  (Gill,  2009:  139)  and  a  connection  has  been  made  between  it  and  
women's  feelings  of  inadequacy  and  dissatisfaction  (McRobbie,  2009).  Women  have  
traditionally  been  seen  as  more  embodied  than  men,  thus  the  discourses  that  equate  
slenderness  and  youth  with  beauty  and  fitness  with  moral  character,  have  particularly  
strong  implications  to  whether  women  are  accorded  ‘embodied  subjecthood’  (Gill,  2008:  
44)  or  not.  
  
To  understand  the  relations  between  the  social  imaginaries  of  appropriate  feminine  self-­
presentation  and  the  coded  structure  of  social  media  patforms  (van  Dijck,  2013)  I  will  
look  at  womens  selfie-­practices  on  tumblr.com  -­  a  blogging  and  social  media  platform  
founded  in  2007  and  sold  to  Yahoo  in  May  2013  for  1.1.  Billion  USD;;  and  Instagram  –  a  
mobile  social  media  platform  founded  in  2010  and  sold  to  Facebook  for  $1  billion  in  



2012.  Both  of  these  have  seen  a  significant  recent  growth  in  users  (tumblr  120%,  
Instagram  64%  in  the  past  six  months  in  November  2014,  Global  Web  Index,  2014).  
  
Results  and  Discussion  
  
For  a  previous  research  project  with  people  who  post  sexy  selfies,  I  interviewed  an  
over-­50  female  blogger  and  self-­shooter  about  the  role  photographic  and  textual  self-­
expression  and  social  media  interactions  have  had  in  her  embodied  subjecthood.  This  
sparked  an  interest  in  better  understanding  how  the  coded  structures  of  different  social  
media  platforms  enable  and  reject  particular  forms  of  subjecthood.  
To  explore  this  topic  further,  I  analyzed  images,  captions  and  tags  of  20  women  over  40  
and  50  who  post  selfies  on  tumblr  or  Instagram  and  tag  them  with  #over50,  #over40  and  
the  like.  Considering  my  previous  work  has  found  that  safe  and  enabling  spaces  for  
embodied  subjecthood  are  possible  on  NSFW  tumblr,  I  am  now  questioning  the  (style  
of)  visibility  of  mature  women  on  Instagram  and  tumblr.  
Not  all  images  on  tumblr  and  Instagram  are  publicly  available,  and  not  all  of  them  are  
tagged.  Tagging  makes  one’s  content  searchable  and  enters  it  into  the  attention  
economy  (Goldhaber,  1997)  that  may  bring  with  it  like-­minded  peers,  new  friends,  
hateful  trolls,  popularity,  economic  gain,  community,  all,  or  none  of  the  above.    I  suggest  
that  because  of  this  tagged  content  reflects  dominant  normative  ideologies  more  closely  
than  non  tagged  content.  
  
The  women  whose  accounts  I  analyzed  for  this  paper  all  tag  at  least  some  of  their  
content  with  specifically  age-­related  tag  words.  I  have  no  way  of  assessing  what  portion  
of  all  women  over  40  on  Instagram  and  tumblr  they  represent,  but  it  can  be  said,  that  
they  are  doubly  visible  (searchable  content  and  visible  as  embodied  women  on  social  
media).  In  the  limited  sample  of  these  visible  women,  it  seems  that  both  on  tumblr  and  
on  Instagram,  age-­specific  tags  are  used  alongside  fitness  (weight  loss,  nutrition)  and/or  
motherhood,  with  there  being  more  of  it  (and  more  of  fitness  content  overall)  on  
Instagram.  Additionally,  while  narrating  captions  are  technically  possible  and  used  on  
Instagram,    the  women  included  in  this  research  seemed  often  to  just  rely  on  tags  when  
captioning  their  images.  
  
In  comparison,  the  three  over-­40  women  and  one  over-­50  woman  whose  NSFW  tumblr  
blogs  I  followed  in  a  previous  research  project  never  used  age-­related  tag  words  
although  they  addressed  issues  of  body-­image,  sexuality  and  age  in  their  interviews.  
Both  motherhood  and  fitness  have  been  interpreted  as  morally  and  socially  successful  
statuses  in  previous  research  (Featherstone,  2010;;  Dworkin  &  Wachs,  2004).  
Considering  that  age  is  revealed  in  images  of  women  who  focus  on  these,  I  argue  that  
women  have  to  ‘earn’  the  right  to  exhibit  bodies  that  diverge  from  the  restricting  norms  
of  the  Western  visual  economy.  Sexy  selfies  make  a  woman  vulnerable  -­  if  revealing  
one’s  age  alongside  them  is  avoided,  it  could  be  claimed  that  revealing  one’s  age  (past  
25)  on  social  media  would  increase  one’s  vulnerability  as  well.  Looking  at  the  discursive  
tools  used  in  images  marked  as  mature  both  on  tumblr  and  Instagram,  they  come  
across  as  trying  to  explain  or  apologize  for  their  existence.  
  
As  these  women  posted  plenty  of  images  that  were  not  tagged  with  age-­specific  tag-­
words,  it  is  significant  that  it  was  the  mid-­exercise  images  (holding  a  difficult  yoga  pose,  



lifting  weights);;  beach-­bikini  images;;  dressed-­to-­kill  images  and  face-­selfies  with  a  lot  of  
make-­up  that  had  indications  of  age  attached  to  them.  Together  with  the  comments  -­  
“OMG  50?!  Gorgeous!”  -­  I  suggest  they  speak  of  the  “looking  good  for  40/50”  social  
imaginary  rather  than  the  “I’m  40/50  and  I  think  I  look  good”  one.  
A  discourse  of  success,  pride  and  hard  work  is  present  in  the  way  age-­specific  tag  
words  are  combined  with  image  content  and  other  tags.    Most  captions  –  for  example  
“#awesome  #weekend  #fitness  #insanity  #inshape  #love  #workingout  #over50  
#healthylife  #beachbody  #dedication  #strength  #determined  #foreveryoung”  -­  come  
across  as  celebratory  or  even  bragging.  The  hard  emotional  and  physical  work  that  
goes  into  reclaiming  or  maintaining  a  very  fit  body  after  40  is  offered  as  evidence  of  
strength,  the  necessity  of  which  is  never  questioned.  
  
Conclusion  
  
Based  on  content  explicitly  tagged  as  #over40  and  #over50,  women  on  both  Instagram  
and  tumblr  seem  to  follow  the  same  logic  of  having  to  excuse  or  earn  the  right  to  make  
their  bodies  visible.  We  can  question  whether  the  wide  spread  of  sharing  bodies  among  
women  of  any  age  are  a  result  of  the  normative  architectures  of  the  social  media  
platforms  (van  Dijck,  2013)  and  my  previous  research  with  sexy  self-­shooters  on  tumblr  
indicates  the  possibility  of  spaces  safe  for  non-­normative  expression,  it  appears  that  the  
social  imaginary  of  women  over  40  is  equally  restricted  within  the  tagged  spaces  of  both  
platforms.  
  
References  
Bourdieu,  P.  (1996).  Photography:  A  Middle-­Brow  Art.  Stanford:  Stanford  University  
Press.  
Dworkin,  S.  L.,  &  Wachs,  F.  L.  (2004).  “Getting  your  Body  Back”:  Postindustrial  Fit  
Motherhood  in  Shape  Fit  Pregnancy  Magazine.  Gender  &  Society,  18(5),  610–624.  
Featherstone,  M.  (2010)  ‘Body,  Image  and  Affect  in  Consumer  Culture,’  Body  &  Society,  
16(1):  193–221.  
Gill,  R.  (2008)  ‘Empowerment/Sexism:  Figuring  Female  Sexual  Agency  in  
Contemporary  Advertising,’  Feminism  &  Psychology,  18(1):  35–60.  
Gill,  R.  (2009)  ‘Beyond  the  ‘Sexualization  of  Culture’  thesis:  An  intersectional  analysis  of  
‘Sixpacks’,‘Midriffs’  and  ‘Hot  Lesbians’  in  advertising,’  Sexualities,  12  (2):  137–60.  
Goldhaber,  MH.  (1997).  The  Attention  Economy  and  the  Net,  First  Monday,  2  (4  –  7)  
April  1997  http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/519/440  
Hand,  M.  (2013).  Ubiquitous  Photography:  Digital  Media  and  Society  Series.  
Cambridge:  Polity  Press.  
McRobbie,  A.  (2009)  The  aftermath  of  feminism:  Gender,  culture,  and  social  change.  
London,  England:  Sage.  
Olszanowski,  M.  (2014).  Feminist  Self-­Imaging  and  Instagram:  Tactics  of  Circumventing  
Sensorship.  Visual  Communication  Quarterly,  21,  83–95.  
Shilling,  C.  (2003)  The  Body  and  Social  Theory,  Thousand  Oaks:  Sage
  
van  Dijck,  Jose  (2013).  The  Culture  of  Connectivity:  A  Critical  History  of  Social  Media  
Oxford  University  Press.  Kindle  Edition.  
  
Presenter  Four:  Do  Read  the  Comments!  Re-­imagining  the  comment  genre  as  
feminist  resistance  



  
Conventional  wisdom  advises  social  media  denizens  to  avoid  the  comments  sections  of  
social  media  platforms  that  are  often  sites  of  abject  abuse,  logical  fallacies,  trolling,  and  
spam.  In  her  May  2014  article  in  Wired  magazine,  “Curbing  Online  Abuse  Isn’t  
Impossible.  Here’s  Where  We  Start,”  Laura  Hudson  explains  that  too  often  abusive  
comments  are  considered  part  and  parcel  of  being  online.  Problematically,  she  
describes,  “online”  is  now  a  generally  persistent  state,  with  many  people  regularly  
socializing,  dating,  communicating,  generating  commerce,  working,  and  being  online.  
While  some  research  demonstrates  that  most  online  abuse  is  directed  at  women,  fully  
70%  of  online  users  experience  harassment  (Pew,  2014).  The  ugliness  of  the  
comments  section  appears  to  be  common  knowledge  and  the  subject  of  popular  
imagination.  The  poor  quality  of  YouTube  commenters  specifically  are  the  subject  of  the  
popular  online  comic  XKCD  #202  “YouTube,”  drawn  by  Randall  Munroe,  where  Munroe  
captions  “  The  Internet  has  always  had  loud  dumb  people,  but  I’ve  never  seen  anything  
quite  as  bad  as  the  people  who  comment  on  YouTube  videos”  (Munroe,  2006).  
Comments  are  not  always  the  location  of  terrible  behavior;;  rather  they  can  also  be  the  
site  of  humorous  audience  engagement,  e.g.  spontaneous  GIF  partiers  where  
commenters  swap  reaction  GIFs  in  response  to  a  post.  They  can  also  be  the  site  of  viral  
innovations,  such  as  when  memes  are  created  to  respond  to  specific  comments  and  
commenters.  A  number  of  Amazon  reviews  have  achieved  viral  and  meme  status,  such  
as  in  December,  2009  when  writer  and  cultural  critic  Cory  Doctorow  posted  on  the  
technology  culture  blog  Boing  Boing,  “Just  look  at  this  awesome  banana  slicer.  Just  
look  at  it,”  and  then  linked  the  post  to  the  Amazon.com  listing  for  the  Hutzler  571  
Banana  Slicer,  a  plastic  kitchen  tool  advertised  as  able  to  uniformly  slice  bananas.  What  
followed  were  hundreds  of  people  posting  satirical  reviews  exaggerating  the  practicality  
and  innovation  of  the  banana  slicer,  and  then  many  other  users  sharing  the  satirical  
reviews  across  social  media  platforms.  While  entertaining  to  the  many  who  wrote  and/or  
shared  these  reviews,  the  collaborative  satirical  meme-­ing  of  the  banana  slicer  functions  
as  community  building  and  collective  identity  construction  for  the  Boing  Boing  audience  
by  replicating  some  aspects  of  the  review  genre,  such  as  commenting  on  the  ease  of  
use  and  reliability  of  the  banana  slicer  in  the  Amazon  reviews,  and  pairing  them  with  the  
technology  culture  sensibilities  of  the  Boing  Boing  community  (Shifman,  2014).    
  
In  late  February  2015,  social  media  platforms  dissolved  in  intense  debate  of  the  color  
(gold/white;;  or  blue/black)  of  “The  Dress,”  and  the  Amazon  listing  for  the  “Roman  
Women’s  Lace  Detail  Bodycon  Dress  Royal  Blue”  accumulated  a  large  number  of  
humorous  reviews  that  acted  as  both  satire  of  social  systems  and  identity-­building  of  
social  media  savvy  users,  e.g.  the  review  by  user  “Angela”  posted  on  February  27,  2015  
titled  “Perfect  Outfit  For  a  Life  of  Crime,”  where  “Angela”  writes,  “Robbed  a  bank  in  this  
dress.  Nobody  could  agree  on  a  proper  description  of  me.  Sketch  artist’s  head  
exploded.  Got  away.  Fantastic.”  Here,  Angela  signals  her  familiarity  with  the  review  
genre  by  making  a  reference  to  the  functionality  of  the  dress  in  her  title,  suggesting  it  is  
“perfect”  for  crime.  She  also  comments  on  her  overall  experience  with  the  product  in  the  
body  of  her  review,  calling  it  “[f]antastic.”  Angela  nods  to  the  virality  of  the  dress  and  its  
meme  status  when  she  writes  in  her  review  that  the  “[s]ketch  artist’s  head  exploded.”    
  
While  the  creation  of  satirical  memes  can  be  amusing,  as  well  as  a  site  of  humor  and  
communal  identity  building,  satire  can  also  serve  the  social  functions  of  critique  and  



resistance.  Jacqueline  Jones  Royster  and  Gesa  Kirsch  argue  that  social  media  
platforms  offer  unique  opportunities  for  acts  of  feminist  resistance  when  they  enable  the  
production  of  innovative  multimodal  compositions  that  not  only  rethink  and  repurpose  
genres  but  also  “invite  democracy  quote  boldly  into  the  public  sphere”  (66-­67).  Several  
product  listings  on  Amazon  unite  features  of  viral  meme-­ing,  community  building,  
identity  building,  insider-­signaling,  and  feminist  resistance.  The  listing  for  the  Avery  
Durable  View  Binder  with  2”  Slant  Ring  became  a  site  of  transmedial  and  multimodal  
feminist  composing  for  those  reacting  to  U.S.  presidential  candidate  Mitt  Romey’s  
description  of  his  “binders  full  of  women,”  a  reference  to  the  number  of  female  job  
candidates  submitted  to  Romney  during  his  tenure  as  the  governor  of  Massachusetts.  A  
review  by  “PenName220”  titled  “One  Missing  Bit  of  Information  You  Might  Want  to  
Know,”  makes  a  feminist  argument  while  fulfilling  the  evaluative  requirements  of  the  
review  genre  by  writing,  “[w]hile  this  is  a  lovely,  multi-­purpose  binder,  IT  DOES  NOT  
COME  WITH  WOMEN.  Presumably  one  is  expected  to  find  women  on  one’s  own,  or  
contact  women’s  groups  who  are  supposedly  eager  to  help  stock  your  empty  binder  
with  women.”  
  
The  listing  for  BIC  Cristal  For  Her  Ball  Pen,  1.0mm  also  received  the  satirical  meme  
treatment  resulting  in  transmedial  and  multimodal  feminist  resistance.  Reviewer  
“Courtney,”  in  a  review  titled  “Great  fit,  but  I  have  a  question…,”  writes  “I  see  this  comes  
in  a  sleek  design.  But  as  a  “full  figured”  woman,  do  these  pens  come  in  “curvy  and  
carefree?”  While  Amazon.com  does  have  a  question  and  answer  section,  and  this  
question  may  have  been  posted  there  where  satirical  questions  and  answers  are  shared  
on  this  listing,  Courtney  does  post  her  review  in  the  form  of  a  question.  Questions  and  
points  of  YMMV  (your  mileage  may  vary),  as  in  this  might  work  for  you  but  it  did  not  
work  for  me,  do  appear  in  the  Amazon  review  genre.  In  this  case,  Courtney’s  question  is  
an  expected  YMMV  in  the  review  genre,  but  the  writer  also  uses  this  ‘question’  to  
comment  on  the  postfeminist  consumer  culture  that    BIC  is  attempting  to  tap  into  with  
their  product  by  suggesting  cutesy  names  for  plus  sizes.    
  
Based  on  these  examples,  and  others  collected  but  not  described  here,  the  online  
comments  section  affords  resistance  possibilities  by  leveraging  meme-­ability,  virality,  
rhetorical  genre  theory,  and  multimodality  in  community  and  identity  building  efforts.  
Employed  this  way,  comments  can  unify  audiences  behind  a  cause,  disrupt  
stereotypical  online  cruelty  with  strategically-­deployed  satire  and  whimsy,  and  interrupt  
hegemonic  narratives  with  counter-­narratives  of  resistance.    
  
References  
Angela  (2015).  Perfect  Outfit  For  a  Life  of  Crime.  Amazon.com.  Online.  
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/pdp/profile/APGEXX15DLCAC/ref=cm_cr_dp_pdp/279-­
1469608-­7818940  
Courtney  (2012).  Great  fit  but  I  have  a  question  …  Amazon.com  Online.  
Doctorow,  C.  (2009).  Just  look  at  this  awesome  banana  slicer.  BoingBoing.net.  Online.  
http://boingboing.net/2009/12/06/just-­look-­at-­this-­aw-­2.html  
Hudson,  L.  (2014).  Curbing  Online  Abuse  Isn’t  Impossible.  Here’s  Where  We  Start.  
Wired.  Online.  
Monroe,  R.  (2006).  202.  XKCD.com.  



Pew  Research  Center  (2014)  Online  Harassment.  
http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-­harassment/  
PenName220  (2012).  One  Missing  Bit  of  Information  You  Might  Want  to  Know.  
Amazon.com.  Online.  
Royster,  J  J  and  Kirsch,  G.  (2012.  Feminist  Rhetorical  Practices:  New  Horizons  for  
Rhetoric,  Composition,  and  Literacy  Studies.  Southern  Illinois  University  Press.  
Shifman,  L.  (2014).  Memes  in  digital  culture.  MIT  Press.