Travelling and sticky affects: Exploring teens and sexualized cyberbullying through a Butlerian-Deleuzian-Guattarian lens

Abstract

In this paper we combine the thinking of Deleuze and Guattari (1984, 1987) with Judith Butler's (1990, 1993, 2004, 2009) work to follow the rhizomatic becomings of young people's affective relations in a range of on- and off-line school spaces. In particular we explore how events that may be designated as sexual cyberbullying are constituted and how they are mediated by technology (such as texting or in/through social networking sites). Drawing on findings from two different studies looking at teens’ uses of and experiences with social networking sites, Arto in Denmark, and Bebo in the UK, we use this approach to think about how affects flow, are distributed, and become fixed in assemblages. We map how affects are manoeuvred and potentially disrupted by young people, suggesting that in the incidences discussed affects travel as well as stick in points of fixation. We argue that we need to grasp both affective flow and fixity in order to gain knowledge of how subjectification of the gendered/classed/racialised/sexualised body emerges. A Butlerian-Deleuzian-Guattarian frame helps us to map some of these affective complexities that shape sexualized cyberbully events; and to recognize technologically mediated lines of flight when subjectifications are at least temporarily disrupted and new terms of recognition and intelligibility staked out.

Keywords:

• affectivity
• subjectification
• rhizoanalysis
• assemblage
• social networking sites
• schools

Notes

1. In psychological accounts analysing a bullying event in time, the positions of victim and bully tend to be positioned in a binary and this formulation tends to pathologize both positions (see Ringrose, 2008). Where movement is suggested is the risk that the victim could become the bully.

2. There is considerable debate around the possibilities of bringing Butler and Deleuzian approaches together. We, like others, do not see these approaches as inimical and seek to build up a dialogue between the theories through the interweaving of specific theoretical concepts that help us understand the relational processes of subjectification through an affective lens (see also Hickey-Moody & Rasmussen (2009) and Renold & Ringrose (2008) for feminist and educational discussions of working at the interstices between Butler and Deleuze).

3. Sara Ahmed in her work elaborates how 'what sticks’ operates (Ahmed, 2004). There are obvious similarities between Ahmed 2004 and our analysis, which is in part inspired by her creative work on affect. However, our theoretical framework is directly conceptually organised around describing how concepts from Butler, Deleuze and Guattari help us to understand the movement of affect in our empirical research accounts.

4. For a longer discussion of the concept of ‘affective assemblages’, see Ringrose, 2010.

5. Recent research has discussed the exchange of sexually explicit content (text and images) on mobile phones or online as a phenomenon of ‘sexting’ (see for instance, Lenhart, 2009; Livingstone et al., 2011). The notion of ‘sexting’ is certainly provocative if defined widely, as it can help us think about how specifically sexualised affects are circulating through mobile technologies.

6. MSN refers here to the instant messaging ‘chat’ feature.