Understanding the Manosphere: Bibliometric Analysis of Studies on Manosphere Communities

Abstract

Web-based communication technologies have brought many innovations and freedoms, as well as led to the formation of many negative discourses and groups. Among these communities, manosphere groups stand out. The Manosphere is used to describe groups that produce hostile discourses against women and advocate male supremacy in online networks. Although the concept of manosphere is actually a very old concept, it has started to come to the fore more frequently in recent years with the groups formed on the internet and social media networks. This study examined the research articles on the "manosphere" in the Web of Science database by bibliometric method. The bibliometric data of 79 research articles on the manosphere in the Web of Science database were visualized with the help of the VOSviewer program. The study aims to introduce the concept of manosphere, which is not frequently used in Turkish literature, as well as to determine the focus of the studies in this field. It has been determined that researchers in Turkey, where 79 research articles examined within the scope of the study have started to be published since 2016, have not published any studies on this subject. In addition, as a result of the study, it was determined that the relationship between the manosphere and sexual abuse, cyberhate, online sexualization, gender politics and ideology was not focused on.

Keywords

• Online Communities
• Manosphere
• Misogyny
• Bibliometric Analysis
• VOSviewer

Manosferi Anlamak: Manosfer Topluluklarına İlişkin Yapılan Çalışmaların Bibliyometrik Analizi

Öz

Web tabanlı iletişim teknolojileri birçok yeniliği ve özgürlüğü beraberinde getirdiği gibi birçok olumsuz söylemin ve grubun oluşmasına da yol açmıştır. Bu topluluklar arasında manosfer grupları öne çıkmaktadır. Manosfer, çevrimiçi ağlarda kadınlara yönelik düşmanlık besleyen söylemler üreten ve erkek üstünlüğünü savunan grupları tanımlamak için kullanılmaktadır. Manosfer kavramı aslında çok eski bir kavram olmasına rağmen internet ve sosyal medya ağlarında oluşturulan gruplarla son yıllarda daha sık öne çıkmaya başlamıştır. Bu çalışma, Web of Science veri tabanında yer alan “manosfer” konulu araştırma makalelerini bibliyometrik yöntemle incelemiştir. Web of Science veri tabanında yer alan manosfer konulu 79 araştırma makalesinin bibliyometrik verileri VOSviewer programı yardımıyla görselleştirilmiştir. Çalışma, Türkçe literatürde sık kullanılmayan manosfer kavramını tanıtmayı amaçladığı gibi bu alanda yapılan çalışmaların odaklandığı noktaları da belirmeyi hedeflemektedir. Çalışma kapsamında incelenen 79 araştırma makalesinin 2016 yılından itibaren yayımlanmaya başladığı Türkiye’de yer alan araştırmacıların bu konuda çalışma yayımlamadığı belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca çalışma sonucunda manosfer ile cinsel istismar, siber nefret, çevrimiçi cinselleştirme, cinsiyet politikaları ve ideoloji arasındaki ilişkiye odaklanılmadığı belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çevrimiçi Topluluklar
• Manosfer
• Kadın Düşmanlığı
• Bibliyometrik Analiz
• VOSviewer

References

1. Baele, S. J., Brace, L., & Coan, T. G. (2021). From “Incel” to “Saint”: Analyzing the violent worldview behind the 2018 Toronto attack. Terrorism and Political Violence, 33(8), 1667–1691.
2. Baele, S., Brace, L., & Ging, D. (2023). A diachronic cross-platforms analysis of violent extremist language in the incel online ecosystem. Terrorism and Political Violence, 1-24.
3. Balcı, E. V., Tiryaki, S., & Karakuş, M. (2024). “Sosyal medya bağımlılığı” ile ilgili çalışmaların incelenmesi: Bir bibliyometrik analiz. Kıbrıs Türk Psikiyatri ve Psikoloji Dergisi, 6(1), 84-92.
4. Copland, S. (2020). Reddit quarantined: Can changing platform affordances reduce hateful material online?. Internet Policy Review, 9(4), 1-26.
5. De Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and citation analysis: from the science citation index to cybermetrics. Lanham: Scarecrow Press.
6. Demir, Y., & Öztürk, M. (2023). Hegemonik erkeklik ve medya: Bibliyometrik bir analiz. Kastamonu İletişim Araştırmaları Dergisi, (10), 49-67.
7. Demir, Y., & Öztürk, M. (2023). Tarihsel süreçte “çevrimiçi taciz”: Bibliyometrik bir analiz. Abant Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 23(2), 939-953.
8. Dickel, V., & Evolvi, G. (2022). “Victims of feminism”: exploring networked misogyny and# MeToo in the manosphere. Feminist Media Studies, 1-17.

9. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296.
10. Eddington, S. M. (2020). Alt-resilience: A semantic network analysis of identity (re) construction in an online men’s rights community. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 48(1), 114-135.
11. Farrell, T., Fernandez, M., Novotny, J., & Alani, H. (2019, June). Exploring misogyny across the manosphere in reddit. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Web Science (pp. 87-96).
12. Galla, S. (2021). Manosphere: A guıde to understand the manosphere ideology better https://mensgroup.com/manosphere/
13. Gentry, C. E. (2022). Misogynistic terrorism: it has always been here. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 15(1), 209-224. Ging, D. (2019). Alphas, betas, and incels: Theorizing the masculinities of the manosphere. Men and masculinities 22 (4), 638-657.
14. Ging, D., Lynn, T., & Rosati, P. (2020). Neologising misogyny: Urban Dictionary’s folksonomies of sexual abuse. New Media & Society, 22(5), 838-856.
15. Gotell, L., & Dutton, E. (2016). Sexual violence in the ‘manosphere’: Antifeminist men’s rights discourses on rape. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 5(2), 65.
16. Hartmann, M. (2021). The totalizing meritocracy of heterosex: Subjectivity in NoFap. Sexualities, 24(3), 409-430.
17. Hooks, B. (2016). Feminizm herkes içindir (E. Aydın, B. Kurt, Ş. Özgün, A. Yıldırım, Çev.), İstanbul: Bgst Yayınları.
18. Hopton, K., & Langer, S. (2022). “Kick the XX out of your life”: An analysis of the manosphere’s discursive constructions of gender on Twitter. Feminism & Psychology, 32(1), 3-22.
19. Işık, M. F. (2022). Örtbas edilmiş mizojini: Imposter Fenomeni, Korumacı Cinsiyetçilik ve Cam Tavan Sendromu. İstanbul Üniversitesi Kadın Araştırmaları Dergisi (25), 99-110.
20. Jane E (2018) Systemic misogyny exposed: Translating Rapeglish from the manosphere with a random rape threat generator. International Journal of Culture Studies 21(6), 661–680.
21. Jones, C., Trott, V., & Wright, S. (2020). Sluts and soyboys: MGTOW and the production of misogynistic online harassment. New Media & Society, 22(10), 1903–1921.
22. Krendel, A. (2020). The men and women, guys and girls of the ‘manosphere’: A corpus-assisted discourse approach. Discourse & Society, 31(6), 607-630.
23. Lilly, M. (2016). 'The World is Not a Safe Place for Men': The Representational Politics Of The Manosphere (Doctoral dissertation, Université d'Ottawa/University of Ottawa).
24. Love, N. S. (2020). Shield Maidens, Fashy Femmes, and TradWives: feminism, patriarchy, and right-wing populism. Frontiers in Sociology, 122.
25. Manne, K. (2017). Down girl: The Logic of misogyny. New York: OUP USA.
26. Marwick, A. E., & Caplan, R. (2018). Drinking male tears: Language, the manosphere, and networked harassment. Feminist Media Studies, 18(4), 543-559.
27. Marwick, A. E., & Lewis, R. (2017). Media manipulation and disinformation online.New York: Data & Society Research Institute. https://datasociety.net/output/media-manipulation-and-disinfoonline/
28. Mejia, C., Wu, M., Zhang, Y., & Kajikawa, Y. (2021). Exploring topics in bibliometric research through citation networks and semantic analysis. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 6, 742311.
29. Menzie, L. (2022). Stacys, Beckys, and Chads: the construction of femininity and hegemonic masculinity within incel rhetoric. Psychology & Sexuality, 13(1), 69-85.
30. O'Donnell, C., & Shor, E. (2022). This is a political movement, friend: Why “incels” support violence. The British Journal of Sociology, 73(2), 336-351.
31. Öztürk, M., & Demir, Y. (2023). Bilgilendirme ve kaos arasında: Afet yönetiminde medyanın rolüne yönelik bibliyometrik bir analiz. Trt Akademi, 8(18), 506-527.
32. Rey-Martí, A., Ribeiro-Soriano, D., & Palacios-Marqués, D. (2016). A bibliometric analysis of social entrepreneurship. Journal Business Research, 69(5), 1651–1655.
33. Ribeiro, M. H., Blackburn, J., Bradlyn, B., De Cristofaro, E., Stringhini, G., Long, S., ... & Zannettou, S. (2021, May). The evolution of the manosphere across the web. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (Vol. 15, pp. 196-207).
34. Sugiura, L. (2021), "The Emergence and Development of the Manosphere", The Incel Rebellion: The Rise of the Manosphere and the Virtual War Against Women (Emerald Studies In Digital Crime, Technology and Social Harms), Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 15-36.
35. Tileagă, C. (2019). Communicating misogyny: An interdisciplinary research agenda for social psychology. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(7), e12491.
36. Tiryaki, S. (2023). Riskler ve olanaklar arasında dijital ebeveynlik: Bibliyometrik bir analiz. TRT Akademi, 8(19), 746-765.
37. Tomkinson, S., Harper, T., & Attwell, K. (2020). Confronting Incel: exploring possible policy responses to misogynistic violent extremism. Australian Journal of Political Science, 55(2), 152-169.
38. Uzun, B. (2023). Kolektif Bellek ve Medya ile İlgili Çalışmaların Bibliyometrik Analizi. Korkut Ata Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, (12), 1518-1532.
39. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2017). Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics, 111, 1053-1070.
40. Van Eck, N., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538.
41. Van Valkenburgh, S. P. (2019). “She thinks of him as a machine”: On the entanglements of neoliberal ideology and misogynist cybercrime. Social Media+ Society, 5(3), 2056305119872953.
42. Van Valkenburgh, S. P. (2021). Digesting the red pill: Masculinity and neoliberalism in the manosphere. Men and Masculinities, 24(1), 84-103.