Cover not available
Article published In:
Young researchers in action
Edited by Angeliki Tzanne
[Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 10:1] 2022
► pp. 111–139

Disagreements in a feminist digital safe space

The relationship between impoliteness, identity and power

| National and Kapodistrian University of Athens

Research on impoliteness has underlined the need for multidisciplinary approaches to impoliteness (Sifianou 2019a). In this article, I adopt the concept of “safe space”, as discussed in works on feminist digital media (Clark-Parsons 2018; Rentschler 2014), to explore how impoliteness relates to identity construction and the negotiation of power dynamics in the context of a Greek feminist website, constructed as a safe space. Both the concept of “safe space” and discursive and relational approaches to impoliteness (Angouri and Locher 2012; Graham 2007; Locher and Watts 2005, 2008) relate to norms of appropriate behaviour in particular contexts and relational issues, such as power and identity.

The data for this article comprise comments posted in discussions taking place in the Greek website of A, mpa, in which participants became involved in disagreements. Culpeper’s (2010) framework for conventionalised impoliteness formulae is the starting point of the analysis, which takes a discourse analytical approach to investigate the intersection of identity and power in the site. Results show that criticisms and challenging questions are linked to the identification of participants with particular feminist positions, and to the negotiation of the power distribution between the administrator and themselves. Furthermore, the paradoxical nature of safe spaces plays an important role in these processes, as the use of impoliteness points to the negotiation of the norms for interaction among participants and reveals the struggle between individual expression and maintenance of safety.

Keywords: impoliteness, disagreements, conventionalised impoliteness formulae, digital discourse, identity construction, feminist digital media, safe spaces
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1(Im)politeness, conflict, and disagreement: An overview
    • 2.2Impoliteness and identity in on-line contexts
    • 2.3Feminist safe spaces online
  • 3.Methodology
  • 4.Discussion of findings
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 25 May 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00064.kri
References
Angouri, Jo, and Miriam A. Locher
2012 “Theorising Disagreement.” Journal of Pragmatics 44(12):1549–1553. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Angouri, Jo, and Theodora Tseliga
2010 “ ‘you HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!’ From e-disagreement to e-impoliteness in Two Online Fora.” Journal of Politeness Research 6(1):57–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bou-Franch, Patricia, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich
2014 “Conflict Management in Massive Polylogues: A Case Study from YouTube.” Journal of Pragmatics 731:19–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bousfield, Derek, and Miriam A. Locher
2008 “Introduction: Impoliteness and Power in Language.” In Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited by Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 1–13. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bridges, Judith
2017 “Gendering Metapragmatics in Online Discourse: ‘Mansplaining man gonna mansplain…’.” Discourse, Context & Media 201: 94–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brownlie, Julie
2018 “Looking out for each other Online: Digital Outreach, Emotional Surveillance and Safe(r) Spaces.” Emotion, Space and Society 271: 60–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall
2005 “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach.” Discourse Studies 7(4–5): 585–614. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carstensen, Gunilla
2016 “Sexual Harassment Reconsidered: The Forgotten Grey Zone.” NORA-Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research 24(4):267–280. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark-Parsons, Rosemary
2018 “Building a Digital Girl Army: The Cultivation of Feminist Safe Spaces Online.” New Media & Society 20(6): 2125–2144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Claire
2018 A Decade after Lynndie: Non-ideal Victims of Non-ideal Offenders–Doubly Anomalised, Doubly Invisibilised. Bristol: Policy Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Connelly, Sarah M.
2015 “ ‘Welcome to the FEMINIST CULT’: Building a Feminist Community of Practice on Tumblr.” Undergraduate Senior Thesis, Gettysburg College.Google Scholar
Cosper, Caitlin
2022 “Patterns of Conflict Speech and Young Adult Feminist Identity Construction on Tumblr.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan
2005 “Impoliteness and Entertainment in the Television Quiz Show: The Weakest Link .” Journal of Politeness Research 1(1):35–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 “Conventionalised Impoliteness Formulae.” Journal of Pragmatics 42(12):3232–3245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, and Claire Hardaker
2017 “Impoliteness.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, edited by Jonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 199–225. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Fina, Anna, Deborah Schiffrin, and Michael Bamberg
2006 Discourse and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eelen, Gino
2001 A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Ermida, Isabel
2013 “ ‘A Beached Whale Posing in Lingerie’: Conflict Talk, Disagreement and Impoliteness in Online Newspaper Commentary.” Revista Diacrítica 27(1):95–130.Google Scholar
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar
2009 “Impoliteness and Identity in the American News Media: The ‘Culture Wars’.” Journal of Politeness Research 5(2):273–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 “The YouTubification of Politics, Impoliteness and Polarization.” In the Handbook of Research on Discourse Behavior and Digital Communication: Language Structures and Social Interaction, edited by Rotimi Taiwo, 540–563. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 “Introduction: Face, Identity and Im/politeness. Looking Backward, Moving Forward: From Goffman to Practice Theory.” Journal of Politeness Research 9(1):1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018 “Globalization, Transnational Identities, and Conflict Talk: The Superdiversity and Complexity of the Latino Identity.” Journal of Pragmatics 1341:120–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, and Patricia Bou-Franch
2019 “Introduction to Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions.” In Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions, edited by Patricia Bou-Franch and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 3–22. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, and Maria Sifianou
2017 “(Im)politeness and Identity.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, edited by Jonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 227–256. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 “Im/politeness and Discursive Pragmatics.” Journal of Pragmatics 1451:91–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Georgakopoulou, Alexandra
2001 “Arguing about the Future: On Indirect Disagreements in Conversations.” Journal of Pragmatics 33(12):1881–1900. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gill, Rosalind
2017 “The Affective, Cultural and Psychic Life of Postfeminism: A Postfeminist Sensibility 10 Years on.” European Journal of Cultural Studies 20(6):606–626. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gill, Rosalind, and Shani Orgad
2018 “The Shifting Terrain of Sex and Power: From the ‘Sexualization of Culture’ to #MeToo.” Sexualities 21(8):1313–1324. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graham, Sage Lambert
2007 “Disagreeing to Agree: Conflict, (Im)politeness and Identity in a Computer-Mediated Community.” Journal of Pragmatics 39(4):742–759. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graham, Sage Lambert, and Claire Hardaker
2017 “(Im)politeness in Digital Communication.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, edited by Jonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 785–814. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, Kira, and Mary Bucholtz
2013 “Epilogue: Facing Identity.” Journal of Politeness Research 9(1):123–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, Anita
2008 “Young Women, Late Modern Politics, and the Participatory Possibilities of Online Cultures.” Journal of Youth Studies 11(5):481–495. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haugh, Michael
2007 “The Discursive Challenge to Politeness Research: An Interactional Alternative.” Journal of Politeness Research 31:295–317. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 “The Metapragmatics of Consideration in (Australian and New Zealand) English.” In From Speech Acts to Lay Understandings of Politeness, edited by Eva Ogiermann and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 201–225. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Sue
2018 “Young Feminists, Feminism and Digital Media.” Feminism & Psychology 28(1):32–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jeffreys, Sheila
2009 “Prostitution, Trafficking and Feminism: An Update on the Debate.” In Women’s Studies International Forum 32(4):316–320. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kádár, Dániel Z., and Michael Haugh
2013 Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kakavá, Christina
1993 Negotiation of Disagreement by Greeks in Conversations and Classroom Discourse. Ph.D. diss., Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Kanai, Akane
2015 “WhatShouldWeCallMe? Self-branding, Individuality and Belonging in Youthful Femininities on Tumblr.” M/C Journal 18(1) (2015) Retrieved February 1, 2019, from [URL]. DOI logo
Keller, Jessalynn
2016 Girls’ Feminist Blogging in a Postfeminist Age. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kent, Antonia
2018 “Power and Agency: Characterisations of the Female Victim of Family Violence.” Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 0004865818794804. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred, and Maria Stopfner
2017 “Ideology and (Im)politeness.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, edited by Jonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 61–87. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kissil, Karni, and Maureen Davey
2010 “The Prostitution Debate in Feminism: Current Trends, Policy and Clinical Issues Facing an Invisible Population.” Journal of Feminist Family Therapy 22(1):1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koller, Veronika
2014 “Applying Social Cognition Research to Critical Discourse Studies: The Case of Collective Identities.” In Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies, edited by Christopher Hart and Piotr Cap, 147–165. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Krikela, Sofia
2019 “ ‘This is a website for humans, who are women’: Counter-discourses and Alternative Identities in a Greek Website.” Master’s Thesis, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens.Google Scholar
Langlotz, Andreas, and Miriam A. Locher
2012 “Ways of Communicating Emotional Stance in Online Disagreements.” Journal of Pragmatics 44(12):1591–1606. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A.
2004 Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A., and Richard J. Watts
2005 "Politeness Theory and Relational Work". Journal of Politeness Research 1(1):9-33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A., and Richard J. Watts
2008 “Relational Work and Impoliteness: Negotiating Norms of Linguistic Behaviour.” In Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited by Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 77–99. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria, Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, and Patricia Bou-Franch
2011 “On-line Polylogues and Impoliteness: The Case of Postings Sent in Response to the Obama Reggaeton YouTube Video.” Journal of Pragmatics 43(10):2578–2593. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luzón, María José
2013 “ ‘This is an Erroneous Argument’: Conflict in Academic Blog Discussions.” Discourse, Context & Media 2(2):111–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matos, Carolina
2017 “New Brazilian Feminisms and Online Networks: Cyberfeminism, Protest and the Female ‘Arab Spring’.” International Sociology 32(3):417–434. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, Sara
2003 Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mullany, Louise
2008 “ ‘Stop Hassling Me!’ Impoliteness, Power and Gender Identity in the Professional Workplace.” In Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited by Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 231–251. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Negra, Diane
2009 What a Girl Wants?: Fantasizing the Reclamation of Self in Postfeminism. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ogiermann, Eva, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich
2019 “Im/politeness between the Analyst and Participant Perspectives: An Overview of the Field.” In From Speech Acts to Lay Understandings of Politeness: Multilingual and Multicultural Perspectives, edited by Eva Ogiermann and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 1–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reicher, Stephen D., Russell Spears, and Tom Postmes
1995 “A Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Phenomena.” European Review of Social Psychology 6(1):161–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rentschler, Carrie A.
2014 “Rape Culture and the Feminist Politics of Social Media.” Girlhood Studies 7(1):65–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Nicola, Catherine Donovan, Kate Tudor, and Matthew Durey
2018 “Agency, Resistance and the Non ‘Ideal Victim’: How Women Deal with Everyday Sexual Violence.” Paper presented at British Society of Criminology Annual Conference, Birmingham City University, 3–6 July, 2018.
Roestone Collective
2014 “Safe Space: Towards a Reconceptualization.” Antipode 46(5): 1346–1365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segal, Lynne
[1999] 2015 Why Feminism?: Gender, Psychology, Politics. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Shaw, Frances
2013a “Blogging and the Women’s Movement: New Feminist Networks.” In The Women’s Movement in Protest, Institutions and the Internet: Australia in Transnational Perspective, edited by Sarah Maddison and Marian Sawer, 118–131. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2013b “FCJ-157 Still ‘Searching for Safety Online’: Collective Strategies and Discursive Resistance to Trolling and Harassment in a Feminist Network.” The Fibreculture Journal 22 2013, Trolls and the Negative Space of the Internet 221: 93–108.Google Scholar
Shorey, Samantha
2015 “Fragmentary Girls: Selective Expression on the Tumblr Platform.” Master’s thesis, University of Massachusetts Amherst.Google Scholar
Sifianou, Maria
2012 “Disagreements, Face and Politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics 44(12): 1554–1564. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019a “Conflict, Disagreement and (Im)politeness.” In The Routledge Handbook of Language in Conflict, edited by Matthew Evans, Lesley Jeffries, and Jim O’Driscoll, 176–195. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019b “Im/politeness and In/civility: A Neglected Relationship?.” Journal of Pragmatics 1471:49–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sileo, Amanda
2018 “On Consent and the ‘Gray Zone’.” Bust, March 8.Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen
2002 “Managing Rapport in Talk: Using Rapport Sensitive Incidents to Explore the Motivational Concerns Underlying the Management of Relations.” Journal of Pragmatics 34(5):529–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory. 2nd ed. London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
2011 “Conceptualising ‘the Relational’ in Pragmatics: Insights from Metapragmatic Emotion and (Im)politeness Comments.” Journal of Pragmatics 43(14):3565–3578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen, and Vladimir Žegarac
2017 “Power, Solidarity and (Im)politeness.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im) politeness, edited by Jonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 119–141. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stengel, Barbara S.
2010 “The Complex Case of Fear and Safe Space.” Studies in Philosophy and Education 29(6):523–540. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweeney, Brian N.
2017 “Slut shaming.” In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Psychology and Gender, edited by Kevin L. Nadal, 1579–1580. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah
2002 “Agonism in Academic Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 34(10–11):1651–1669. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Terkourafi, Marina
2001 Politeness in Cypriot Greek: A Frame-based Approach. Ph.D. diss., University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
2002 “Politeness and Formulaicity: Evidence from Cypriot Greek.” Journal of Greek Linguistics 3(1): 179–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “Toward a Unified Theory of Politeness, Impoliteness, and Rudeness.” In Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited by Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 45–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Upadhyay, Shiv R.
2010 “Identity and Impoliteness in Computer-mediated Reader Responses.” Journal of Politeness Research 6(1):105–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Bom, Isabelle, and Sara Mills
2015 “A Discursive Approach to the Analysis of Politeness Data.” Journal of Politeness Research 11(2):179–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vásquez, Camilla, and Addie Sayers China
2019 “From ‘My Manly Husband…’ to ‘… Sitting Down to Take a Pee’: The Construction and Deconstruction of Gender in Amazon Reviews”. In Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions, edited by Patricia Bou-Franch and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 193–218. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watts, Richard J.
2003 Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Brown, Lucien
2023. “The denigration of Korean men’s genitals”. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict DOI logo
Saz-Rubio, Ma Milagros del
2023. Assessing impoliteness-related language in response to a season's greeting posted by the Spanish and English Prime Ministers on Twitter. Journal of Pragmatics 206 ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.