Mapping affective circuits of a Twitter trolling attack against feminist arts-based pedagogy during the COVID-19 global pandemic

References

• Ahmed, S. (2004). Affective economies. Social Text, 22(2), 117–139. https://doi.org/10.1215/01642472-22-2_79-117
   Google Scholar
• Ahmed, S., & Bonis, O. (2012). Feminist Killjoys (and other willful subjects). Cahiers du Genre, 53(2), 77–98. https://doi.org/10.3917/cdge.053.0077
   Google Scholar
• Allan, J. A. (2016). Phallic affect, or why men’s rights activists have feelings. Men and Masculinities, 19(1), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X15574338
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, L. (2013). Girls’ portraits of desire: Picturing a missing discourse. Gender and Education, 25(3), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2012.752795
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banet-Weiser, S. (2018). Empowered: Popular feminism and popular misogyny. Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Banet-Weiser, S. (2021). Ruined’ lives: Mediated white male victimhood. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 24(1), 60–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549420985840
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benner, J. (2018, October 5). Researchers troll academic journals with ridiculous hoax papers, they still get published. The Josh Benner Blog. https://joshbenner.org/2018/10/04/researchers-troll-academic-journals-with-ridiculous-hoax-papers-they-still-get-published/
   Google Scholar
• Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Burgess, J., & Baym, N. (2020). Twitter: A biography. University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Crociani-Windland, L., & Hoggett, P. (2012). Politics and affect. Subjectivity, 5(2), 161–179. https://doi.org/10.1057/sub.2012.1
   Google Scholar
• Crociani-Windland, L., & Yates, C. (2020). Masculinity, affect and the search for certainty in an age of precarity. Free Associations: Psychoanalysis and Culture, Media, Groups, Politics, 78, 105–127. https://doi.org/10.1234/fa.v0i78.332
   Google Scholar
• Dann, S. (2018). Facilitating co-creation experience in the classroom with Lego Serious Play. Australasian Marketing Journal, 26(2), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2018.05.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987/2004). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (Brian Massumi, Trans. and Foreword). Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Fine, M. (1988). Sexuality, schooling, and adolescent females: The missing discourse of desire. Harvard Educational Review, 58(1), 29–54. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.58.1.u0468k1v2n2n8242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ging, D., & Siapera, E. (Eds.). (2019). Gender hate online: Understanding the new anti-feminism. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96226-9
   Google Scholar
• Ging, D. (2017). Alphas, betas, and incels: Theorizing the masculinities of the manosphere. Men and Masculinities, 22(4), 638–657. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X17706401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ging, D. (2019). Bros v. Hos: Postfeminism, anti-feminism and the toxic turn in digital gender politics. In D. Ging & E. Siapera (Eds.), Gender hate online: Understanding the new anti-feminism. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96226-9_3
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. J. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haslop, C., & O’Rourke, F. (2021). “I mean, in my opinion, I have it the worst, because I am white. I am male. I am heterosexual”: Questioning the inclusivity of reconfigured hegemonic masculinities in a UK student online culture. Information, Communication and Society, 24(8), 1108–1122. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1792531
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haslop, C., O’Rourke, F., & Southern, R. (2021). #NoSnowflakes: The toleration of harassment and an emergent gender-related digital divide, in a UK student online culture. Convergence, 27(5), 1418–1438. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856521989270
   Google Scholar
• Hickey-Moody, A. (2013). Affect as method: Feelings, aesthetics and affective pedagogy. In R. Coleman & J. Ringrose (Eds.), Deleuze and research methodologies (pp. 79–95). Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hillis, K., Paasonen, S., & Petit, M. (2015). Networked affect. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jane, E. J. (2017). Misogyny online: A short (and Brutish) history. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, H., Ford, S., & Green, J. (2013). Spreadable media: Creating value and meaning in a networked culture. New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johanssen, J. (2022). Fantasy, online misogyny and the manosphere: Male bodies of dis/inhibition. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kehily, M. J., & Nayak, A. (1997). ‘Lads and Laughter’: Humour and the production of heterosexual hierarchies. Gender and Education, 9(1), 69–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540259721466
   Google Scholar
• Lather, P. (1993). Fertile obsession: Validity after poststructuralism. The Sociological Quarterly, 34(4), 673–693. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1993.tb00112.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madrigal-Borloz, V. (2021). Protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. United Nations. https://undocs.org/A/76/152
   Google Scholar
• Mäkinen, K. (2016). Uneasy laughter: Encountering the anti-immigration debate. Qualitative Research, 16(5), 541–556. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794115598193
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mantilla, K. (2013). Gendertrolling: Misogyny adapts to new media. Feminist Studies, 39(2), 563–570. https://doi.org/10.1353/fem.2013.0039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick, A. E., & Boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick, A. E., & Lewis, R. (2017). Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online, Data & Society Research Institute. Retrieved from https://datasociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/DataAndSociety_MediaManipulationAndDisinformationOnline-1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Papacharissi, Z. (2016). Affective publics and structures of storytelling: Sentiment, events and mediality. Information, Communication & Society, 19(3), 307–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1109697
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, M. (2015). Interview with Michael Apple: The biography of a public intellectual. Open Review of Educational Research, 2(1), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2015.1010174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renold, E. (2018). ‘Feel what I feel’: Making da(r)ta with teen girls for creative activisms on how sexual violence matters. Journal of Gender Studies, 27(1), 37–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2017.1296352
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringrose, J. (2011). Beyond discourse? Using Deleuze and Guattari’s schizoanalysis to explore affective assemblages, heterosexually striated space, and lines of flight online and at school. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(6), 598–618. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2009.00601.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringrose, J. (2018). Digital feminist pedagogy and post-truth misogyny. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(5), 647–656. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1467162
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringrose, J., Warfield, K., & Zarabadi, S. (2019). Feminist posthumanisms, new materialisms and education. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ringrose, J., Whitehead, S., Regehr, K., & Jenkinson, A. (2019). Play-Doh Vulvas and Felt Tip Dick Pics: Disrupting phallocentric matter(s) in sex education. Reconceptualizing Educational Research Methodology, 10(2–3), 259–291. https://doi.org/10.7577/rerm.3679
   Google Scholar
• Russo, N. (2017). The still-misunderstood shape of the Clitoris. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/03/3d-clitoris/518991/
   Google Scholar
• Salter, M. (2018). From geek masculinity to Gamergate: The technological rationality of online abuse. Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal, 14(2), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659017690893
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strom, K., Ringrose, J., Osgood, J., & Renold, E. (2019). Editorial: PhEmaterialism: Response-able research & pedagogy. Reconceptualizing Educational Research Methodology, 10(2–3):1–39. https://doi.org/10.7577/rerm.3649
   Google Scholar
• Sundén, J., & Paasonen, S. (2020). Who’s laughing now?: Feminist tactics in social media. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Twitter Help Center (n.d.). Twitter’s policy on hateful conduct. Retrieved November 25, 2021, from https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-conduct-policy
   Google Scholar
• Urban Dictionary (n.d.-a). ALtErNaTiNg CaPs. Retrieved March 14, 2022, from https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=aLtErNaTiNg%20CaPs
   Google Scholar
• Urban Dictionary (n.d.-b). For fuck’s sake. Retrieved October 20, 2021, from https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=For%20fucks%20sake
   Google Scholar
• Urban Dictionary (n.d.-c). Shoomer. Retrieved October 20, 2021, from https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Shoomer
   Google Scholar
• Urban Dictionary (n.d.-d). Twat. Retrieved October 20, 2021, from https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=twat
   Google Scholar
• Whittle, J., Elder-Vass, D., & Lumsden, K. (2019). ‘There’s a Bit of Banter’: How male teenagers ‘do boy’ on social networking sites. In K. Lumsden & E. Harmer (Eds.), Online othering (pp. 165–186). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12633-9_7
   Google Scholar
• Xie, X., Cambazoglu, I., Berger-Correa, B., & Ringrose, J. (2022). Anti-feminist misogynist shitposting: The challenge of feminist academics navigating toxic Twitter. In P. J. Burke, R. Gill, A. Kanai, & J. Coffey (Eds.), Gender in an era of post-truth populism. Bloomsbury Academic.
   Google Scholar