Rice Bunnies vs. the River Crab: China’s Feminists, #MeToo, and Networked Authoritarianism

Vlady Guttenberg
{"title":"Rice Bunnies vs. the River Crab: China’s Feminists, #MeToo, and Networked Authoritarianism","authors":"Vlady Guttenberg","doi":"10.26443/firr.v11i1.59","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As censorship algorithms for digital communications evolve in China, so do netizens’ evasion techniques. In the last two decades, strategic users have employed the language of satire to slip sensitive content past censors in the form of euphemisms or analogies, with messages ranging from lighthearted frustration to wide scale resistance against repressive government policies. In recent years activists have used spoofs to discuss controversial subjects, including the president, violent arrests by the Domestic Security Department, and even the #MeToo movement. In addition to providing an outlet for criticism and free speech, spoofs can also be a powerful organizational tool for activists in authoritarian societies through their ability to facilitate decentralized, personalized, and flexible connective action. This paper investigates how feminists used spoofs for social mobilization throughout China’s #MeToo movement while evaluating potential frameworks for measuring activists’ success against the media censorship and political repression of a networked authoritarian regime.","PeriodicalId":417989,"journal":{"name":"Flux: International Relations Review","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Flux: International Relations Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26443/firr.v11i1.59","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

As censorship algorithms for digital communications evolve in China, so do netizens’ evasion techniques. In the last two decades, strategic users have employed the language of satire to slip sensitive content past censors in the form of euphemisms or analogies, with messages ranging from lighthearted frustration to wide scale resistance against repressive government policies. In recent years activists have used spoofs to discuss controversial subjects, including the president, violent arrests by the Domestic Security Department, and even the #MeToo movement. In addition to providing an outlet for criticism and free speech, spoofs can also be a powerful organizational tool for activists in authoritarian societies through their ability to facilitate decentralized, personalized, and flexible connective action. This paper investigates how feminists used spoofs for social mobilization throughout China’s #MeToo movement while evaluating potential frameworks for measuring activists’ success against the media censorship and political repression of a networked authoritarian regime.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
米兔vs河蟹:中国的女权主义者,#MeToo和网络威权主义
随着中国数字通信审查算法的发展,网民的规避技术也在不断发展。在过去的二十年里,有策略的用户使用讽刺的语言,以委婉语或类比的形式让敏感内容通过审查,传达的信息从轻松的沮丧到对压制性政府政策的广泛抵制。近年来,活动人士利用恶搞来讨论有争议的话题,包括总统、国内安全部的暴力逮捕,甚至是#MeToo运动。除了提供批评和言论自由的出口外,恶搞还可以成为专制社会活动家的强大组织工具,因为它们能够促进分散、个性化和灵活的联系行动。本文研究了女权主义者如何在整个中国的#MeToo运动中使用恶搞来进行社会动员,同时评估了衡量活动家在网络专制政权的媒体审查和政治镇压中取得成功的潜在框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Beyond the Veil Investigating the aspiration and feasibility of a Turkish shift to nuclear weapons Is Erdogan’s narrative something to fear? Fostering Inclusivity in Peacekeeping The Erasure of a Black Sense of Place for Capital Accumulation: The Case of Little Jamaica A Forgotten Mission, An Unrealized Referendum
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1