This paper investigates the extent to which misogynistic communication in digital spaces can be analyzed as a practice of hegemonic masculinity in Connell’s sense. The present analysis seeks to demonstrate how online communication practices operate as mechanisms of dominance and control by situating digital misogyny within the framework of masculinity studies. The study will also consider the limitations of applying Connell's pre-digital framework to contemporary digital environments. In particular, it will explore whether the concept of hegemonic masculinity requires adaptation in light of algorithmic structures, transnational discourses, and emergent forms of resistance. The present paper seeks to contribute to an understanding of how gendered power is reproduced and potentially contested in the digital age.
Das Paper untersucht, wie digitale Medien zur Reproduktion hegemonialer Männlichkeitsnormen beitragen und dadurch misogynistische Kommunikation online fördern. Basierend auf R. W. Connells Konzept der hegemonialen Männlichkeit wird gezeigt, dass Online-Hass, Cybermobbing und „Revenge Porn“ nicht bloß individuelle Handlungen sind, sondern Ausdruck struktureller Geschlechterhierarchien. Digitale Affordanzen wie Anonymität, Viralität und algorithmische Verstärkung begünstigen die Sichtbarkeit und Normalisierung solcher Praktiken. Anhand von Beispielen wie der „Manosphere“ und dem Fall Elliot Rodger wird deutlich, wie digitale Räume männliche Dominanz performativ festigen. Zugleich diskutiert das Paper die Verantwortung von Plattformen und die Notwendigkeit regulatorischer Maßnahmen, um hegemoniale Strukturen im Netz zu hinterfragen und sicherere Kommunikationsräume zu schaffen.
Table of Contents
- 1. INTRODUCTION
- 2. MISOGYNISTIC COMMUNICATION
- 3. CONNELLS CONCEPT OF HEGEMONIC MASCULINITY
- 3.1 CRITICISM OF THE CONCEPT
- 4. AFFORDANCE OF DIGITAL MEDIA
- 5. MISOGYNY AS A PRACTICE OF HEGEMONIC MASCULINITY
- 5.1 FULFILLING HEGEMONIC MASCULINITY TRAITS IN DIGITAL SPACES
- 5.2 EXAMPLE, CYBERBULLYING'
- 5.3 REVENGE PORN
- 5.4 PLATFORM RESPONSIBILITY AND REGULATION
- 6. THE MANOSPHERE
- 7. ELLIOT RODGER
- 8. CONCLUSION
- 9. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Objective & Thematic Focus
This paper investigates how misogynistic communication in digital spaces functions as a practice of hegemonic masculinity, as defined by Connell. It seeks to demonstrate the role of online communication in mechanisms of dominance and control, while also considering the limitations of applying Connell's pre-digital framework to contemporary digital environments and exploring how gendered power is reproduced and contested in the digital age, particularly in light of algorithmic structures and emerging forms of resistance.
- Analyzing misogynistic communication in online environments.
- Applying Connell's concept of hegemonic masculinity to digital contexts.
- Examining the influence of digital media affordances (anonymity, virality, algorithmic amplification).
- Investigating misogyny as a performative practice of male dominance.
- Exploring platform responsibility and regulation in managing harmful content.
- Understanding online subcultures like the 'Manosphere' and their role.
- Discussing real-world implications through case studies such as cyberbullying, revenge porn, and Elliot Rodger.
- Considering the adaptation and contestation of hegemonic gender norms in digital spaces.
Excerpt from the Book
3. Connells Concept of hegemonic masculinity
The concept of hegemonic masculinity was developed by sociologist Raewyn W. Connell and forms a central part of her sociological theory of masculinities (Connell, 1995; Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). The idea originally stems from Antonio Gramsci and describes the social processes through which a group achieves a dominant position in society and maintains it over time. Building on this foundation, Connell explored how stereotypical notions of masculinity shape society and affect both women and other men (Connell, 2000). She defines hegemonic masculinity as “a concept that emphasizes the social linkage of masculinity with power and dominance” (Connell, 2000, p. 10). Hegemonic masculinity encompasses both heterosocial and homosocial dimensions. In the heterosocial dimension—men versus women-men define themselves in opposition to women, distancing themselves from anything socially coded as feminine, while asserting a general superiority over women. In the homosocial dimension, distinctions are drawn between “other” masculinities, where hegemonic men claim greater authority over marginalized male groups. Importantly, hegemonic masculinity is not a fixed entity but a historically and socially variable configuration (Connell, 1995; Connell, 2000). It is not equivalent to the majority of male behavior but functions as a symbolic ideal that stabilizes and legitimizes societal power relations between genders. Key characteristics of hegemonic masculinity include heterosexuality, physical and emotional control, economic dominance, and a tendency toward asserting authority and differentiating oneself from the “Other,” particularly women and non-conforming masculinities. This relational and performative perspective is particularly relevant in digital spaces, where online behavior, including misogynistic communication, can be understood as enactments of hegemonic masculinity, reinforcing male dominance while policing both gender boundaries and non-hegemonic masculinities (Ging, 2019; Jane, 2017). While originally developed in pre-digital contexts, Connell's framework remains a powerful lens for analyzing contemporary online cultures. Digital affordances such as anonymity, virality, and algorithmic amplification allow hegemonic masculinity to be performed, disseminated, and contested in new ways, offering both mechanisms of reinforcement and sites of potential resistance (Banet-Weiser & Miltner, 2016; Nagle, 2017).
Chapter Summaries
Chapter 1: Introduction: This chapter provides an overview of digital spaces as central arenas for misogynistic communication, framing it within critical gender studies and Connell's hegemonic masculinity concept, and outlining the paper's aim to analyze this phenomenon in digital contexts.
Chapter 2: Misogynistic communication: This chapter discusses the various forms of online misogyny, emphasizing its performative nature, its amplification by digital media affordances, and its role in reinforcing gendered power imbalances and social hierarchies.
Chapter 3: Connells Concept of hegemonic masculinity: This chapter explains Raewyn W. Connell's theory of hegemonic masculinity as a culturally dominant configuration of gender practice that legitimizes male dominance, encompassing both heterosocial and homosocial dimensions.
Chapter 3.1: Criticism of the concept: This chapter addresses critiques of Connell's hegemonic masculinity concept, particularly Demetriou's "hybrid masculinity" framework, which highlights the concept's adaptability and appropriation of traits from marginalized masculinities to maintain patriarchal power.
Chapter 4: Affordance of digital media: This chapter explores how digital media affordances such as anonymity, algorithmic amplification, and virality shape and enable the expression and reinforcement of hegemonic masculinity and misogynistic communication online.
Chapter 5: Misogyny as a practice of hegemonic masculinity: This chapter describes online misogyny as a performative practice that reinforces hegemonic masculinity through harassment, insults, and sexist memes, making traditional masculine behaviors more visible and socially supported.
Chapter 5.1: Fulfilling hegemonic masculinity traits in digital spaces: This chapter details how digital environments offer opportunities for men to display and strengthen traits like dominance, control, heterosexuality, and emotional restraint through trolling, harassment, and sexualized language.
Chapter 5.2: Example „Cyberbullying': This chapter defines cyberbullying as systematic digital harassment, highlighting how anonymity creates power asymmetry and how it functions as a tool for gendered power enforcement, particularly targeting women.
Chapter 5.3: Revenge Porn: This chapter presents revenge porn as an aggressive form of gender-based violence that perpetuates male domination, objectifies women, and serves as a power strategy to validate male supremacy within the paradigm of hegemonic masculinity.
Chapter 5.4: Platform Responsibility and Regulation: This chapter examines how algorithmic visibility mechanisms on social media platforms can amplify misogynistic content, emphasizing the platforms' role in reproducing gender hierarchies and the need for accountability and regulation.
Chapter 6: The Manosphere: This chapter introduces the "manosphere" as an online subculture where men share anti-feminist views, reinforce hegemonic masculinity traits like dominance and aggression, and objectify women, demonstrating how online spaces can reinforce gender norms and male competition.
Chapter 7: Elliot Rodger: This chapter uses the case of Elliot Rodger's mass shooting to illustrate how digital spaces, particularly the manosphere, can validate extreme misogynistic beliefs and reinforce norms of hegemonic masculinity, linking personal frustration to collective online sentiment.
Chapter 8: Conclusion: This chapter summarizes that misogynistic communication in digital spaces is a structural practice sustaining hegemonic masculinity, amplified by digital affordances, and discusses the need to address both social and technological factors for safer online environments.
Keywords
Misogynistic communication, hegemonic masculinity, digital spaces, social media, online harassment, cyberbullying, revenge porn, manosphere, platform regulation, gender hierarchies, anonymity, virality, algorithmic amplification, gendered power, online culture.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this paper fundamentally about?
This paper fundamentally examines how misogynistic communication in digital environments functions as a practice of hegemonic masculinity, analyzing its reproduction, reinforcement, and potential contestation online.
What are the central thematic areas?
The central thematic areas include misogynistic communication, Connell's concept of hegemonic masculinity, the affordances of digital media, platform responsibility, and specific manifestations like cyberbullying, revenge porn, and the 'Manosphere'.
What is the primary goal or research question?
The primary goal is to investigate the extent to which misogynistic communication in digital spaces can be analyzed as a practice of hegemonic masculinity and to demonstrate how online communication acts as a mechanism of dominance and control.
What analytical framework is used?
The paper primarily uses Connell's concept of hegemonic masculinity as its analytical framework, while also considering critiques and adaptations for digital environments.
What is covered in the main body?
The main body covers definitions of misogynistic communication and hegemonic masculinity, the role of digital media affordances, misogyny as a performative practice, platform responsibility, and illustrative case studies such as cyberbullying, revenge porn, and the 'Manosphere' including the Elliot Rodger case.
Which keywords characterize the work?
Key terms characterizing this work include misogynistic communication, hegemonic masculinity, digital spaces, social media, online harassment, cyberbullying, revenge porn, manosphere, platform regulation, and gender hierarchies.
How do digital media affordances contribute to misogynistic communication?
Digital media affordances such as anonymity, virality, and algorithmic amplification allow misogynistic discourse to spread rapidly, enable aggressors to act with minimal accountability, and increase the visibility of harmful content, normalizing it as "humor" or "banter."
What is the "manosphere" and how does it relate to hegemonic masculinity?
The 'manosphere' is a loosely organized online subculture where men share anti-feminist views. It reinforces hegemonic masculinity by promoting strength, dominance, and aggression, often objectifying women and solidifying gender hierarchies through online discussions.
What is the significance of "hybrid masculinity" in the critique of Connell's concept?
Demetriou's "hybrid masculinity" critiques Connell's concept by arguing that hegemonic masculinity is dynamic and can appropriate traits from marginalized masculinities (e.g., from gay subcultures) to appear more appealing and adaptable, while still fundamentally preserving patriarchal power.
How does platform responsibility relate to the spread of misogynistic content?
Social media platforms, through their algorithmic visibility mechanisms and design choices, play a significant role in amplifying and normalizing misogynistic content. This highlights the importance of holding platforms accountable through governance decisions, community guidelines, and regulation.
- Citar trabajo
- Cynthia Rust (Autor), 2025, Misogynistic Communication in Digital Spaces. Hegemonic Masculinity and the Affordances of Media, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1672894
