Social Representations of Foreign & Turkish Women on the New Turkish Media: A Thematic Discourse Analysis Through Masculinity Ideology/ Türkiye Yeni Medyasında Yabancı ve Türk Kadınların Sosyal Temsilleri: Erkeklik İdeolojisi Üzerinden Bir Tematik Söylem Analizi

Abstract

Past research has laid bare the determining role of media content on people’s gender stereotypic beliefs. In this article, we aimed to examine social media content, which is one of the most influential causal factors in producing social representations in terms of masculinity ideology. We collected the written materials about women in various online collaborative dictionaries written by anonymous writers. We analyzed the entries using thematic discourse analysis, and obtained four themes consisting of (1) the woman as a body, (2) the woman as a persona, (3) the woman as a sexual partner, and (4) the woman as a wife. We discussed these themes in the frames of social representations and masculinity ideology, and the analysis clearly shows the new media’s role in reproducing traditional gender representations via masculinity ideology. This study extends the knowledge about the mechanism between stereotypic representations of women and masculinity ideology in Turkey. The paper contributes to the growing literature on the discursive construction of feminine identity by exploring the dictionary writers’ use of language and how these are complicit in the reproduction of masculinity ideology.

Keywords

• social representations
• masculinity
• gender
• thematic discourse analysis
• new media

Social Representations of Foreign & Turkish Women on the New Turkish Media: A Thematic Discourse Analysis Through Masculinity Ideology/Türkiye Yeni Medyasında Yabancı ve Türk Kadınların Sosyal Temsilleri: Erkeklik İdeolojisi Üzerinden Bir Tematik Söylem Analizi

Öz

Geçmiş araştırmalar, medya içeriğinin insanların toplumsal cinsiyet kalıp yargıları üzerindeki belirleyici etkisini açıkça ortaya koymuştur. Bu makalede, sosyal temsillerin en etkili belirleyicilerinden biri olan sosyal medya içeriğini, erkeklik ideolojisi açısından incelemeyi amaçladık. Bu amaçla, çevrimiçi katılımcı sözlüklerde anonim yazarlar tarafından kadınlar hakkında yazılan girdileri topladık. Girdileri tematik söylem analizi kullanarak analiz ettik ve analiz sonucunda dört tema elde ettik: (1) bir beden olarak kadın, (2) bir karakter olarak kadın, (3) bir cinsel partner olarak kadın ve (4) bir eş olarak kadın. Temaları, sosyal temsiller ve erkeklik ideolojisi çerçevesinde tartıştık ve analiz sonucunda, geleneksel toplumsal cinsiyet temsillerinin erkeklik ideolojisi aracılığıyla yeniden üretilmesinde yeni medyanın rolünü ortaya koyduk. Bu çalışma, Türkiye’de kadınların kalıp yargısal sosyal temsilleri ve erkeklik ideolojisi arasındaki mekanizmanın daha iyi anlaşılmasına katkı sunmaktadır. Makale, sözlük yazarlarının dil kullanımını ve bunların erkeklik ideolojisinin yeniden üretilmesine nasıl katkıda bulunduklarını keşfederek, kadın temsilinin söylemsel inşası ile ilişkili literatüre katkı sağlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• sosyal temsiller
• erkeklik
• toplumsal cinsiyet
• tematik söylem analizi
• yeni medya

References

1. Ainscow, M. (2005). Developing inclusive education systems: What are the levers for change? Journal of Educational Change, 6(2), 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-005-1298-4
2. Açer, T.M. (2020). Gender, power and body analysis through Eksi Sozluk - The new face of public space. Erciyes İleşitim Dergisi, 7(2), 767-788. https://doi.org/10.17680/erciyesiletisim.643315
3. Ager, A., Ager, W., & Long, L. (1995). The differential experience of Mozambican refugee women and men. Journal of Refugee Studies, 8(3), 265-287.
4. Akca, H. (2010). The internet as a participatory medium: An analysis of the Eksi Sozluk website as a public sphere. Unpublished master thesis. University of South Carolina.
5. Akkılıç, S. (2018). Bir ötekileştirme mecrası olarak sosyal medya: Ekşi Sözlük ve Ermeniler. Unpublished Master Thesis, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara.
6. Akpınar, Ş. (2015). Melodram ve modernite ilişkisi bağlamında, Yeşilçam sinemasında avrupalılık görünümlerinin kadın karakterler üzerinden temsili: Kezban filmleri örneği [The relationship between melodrama and modernity in the context of European representation of the view through the female characters in "Yeşilçam": The sample movies "Kezban"]. Turkish Studies, 10(10): 61-80.
7. Alp, H. (2016). Çingenelere yönelik nefret söyleminin Ekşi Sözlük’te yeniden üretilmesi [The Reproduction of Hate Speech Against Gypsies in Ekşi Sözlük]. İLEF Dergisi, 3(2), 143-172.
8. Aslantürk, G., & Turgut, H. (2015). 8284 vakası: Ekşi Sözlük’te cinsiyetçi kamusallığın yeniden üretilmesi [The 8284 Case: The Re-Production of Sexist Public Sphere in Ekşi Sözlük]. Ankara Üniversitesi İLEF Dergisi, 2(1), 45-76.

9. Bakth, S, & Kenber, B. (2022, April 9). Single British men offer beds to female refugees. The Times. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/single-british-men-offer-beds-to-female-refugees-d369hl6r7#:~:text=Ukrainian%20refugees%20using%20Facebook%20groups,exploitation%2C%20a%20Times%20investigation%20reveals.
10. Baştürk-Akça, E., & Ergül, S. (2014). Televizyon Dizilerinde Erkeklik Temsili: Kuzey Güney Dizisinde Hegemonik Erkeklik ve Farkli Erkekliklerin Mücadelesi [Representation of Masculinities: The Struggle of the Hegemonic and Other Masculinities in the TV Series ‘’ Kuzey Güney’’]. Global Media Journal: Turkish Edition, 4(8), 13-39.
11. Batı, U. (2010). Reklamcılıkta retorik bir unsur olarak kadın bedeni temsilleri [Representations of women as a rhetoric factor in advertising]. Culture and Communication, 13(1), 103-133. Becker, M., (1998). Women, morality and sexual orientation. UCLA Women’s Law Journal, 8(2) 165-207.
12. Becker, M. (1999). Patriarchy and inequality: Towards a substantive feminism. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1, 21-88.
13. Best, D. L., & Williams, J. E. (1997). Sex, gender, and culture. Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 3, 163-212.
14. Bilgin Ülken, F., & Yüce, N. (2020). Discrimination against the female body in new media: The case of Eksi Sozluk. Mersin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü e-Dergisi, 3(2), 40-79. Billig, M., Condor, S., Edwards, D., Gane, M., Middleton, D., & Radley, A. (1988). Ideological dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking. Sage Publications.
15. Bloch, A. (2011). Intimate circuits: modernity, migration and marriage among post‐Soviet women in Turkey. Global Networks, 11(4), 502-521.
16. Bolak-Boratav, H., Okman-Fişek, G. ve Eslen-Ziya, H. (2017). Erkekliğin Türkiye halleri. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
17. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2) 77-101.
18. Bulut, D. (2008). ‘Kadinlarda boşanma ve kültür ilişkisi’, [Divorce in women and its relation with culture]. Journal of Society & Social Work, 19(2), 111-118.
19. Burgess, D., & Borgida, E. (1999). Who women are, who women should be: Descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotyping in sex discrimination. Psychology, public policy, and law, 5(3), 665-692. Burr V. (2003). Social constructionism (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
20. Butler, J. (2012). Cinsiyet belası: Feminizm ve kimliğin alt üst edilmesi (3. Press). (B. Ertür, Trans.) (Gender Trouble, Subversion of Identity). Metis Yayınları. (Original work published in 1999).
21. Clarke, V. (2005). ‘We’re all very liberal in our views’: Students’ talk about lesbian and gay parenting. Lesbian and Gay Psychology Review, 6, 2-15.
22. Collins, R. L. (2011). Content analysis of gender roles in media: Where are we now and where should we go?. Sex roles, 64(3-4), 290-298.
23. Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power: Society, the person and sexual politics. Stanford University Press.
24. Connell, R, W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd Ed.) Cambridge: Policy Press.
25. Cosma, S. & Gurevich, M. (2020). Securing sex: Embattled masculinity and the pressured pursuit of women’s bodies in men’s online sex advice. Feminism & Psychology, 30(1) 42–62. DOI: 10.1177/0959353519857754
26. Courtney, A. E., & Lockeretz, S. W. (1971). A woman’s place: An analysis of the roles portrayed by women in magazine advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 8(1), 92-95.
27. Dedeoğlu, S. (2000). ‘Toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri açısından Türkiye’de aile ve kadın emeği’, [Labor of family and women in perspective of gender roles]. Toplum ve Bilim, 86(3), 139-170.
28. Demirdizen, D. (2013). Türkiye'de ev hizmetlerinde çalışan göçmen kadınlar: Yeni düzenlemelerle yarı köle emeğine doğru mu? [The migrant women as houselhold employee: Is it going towards semi-slavery with the rearrangements?]. Labour and Society, 38(3), 325-346.
29. Deniz, A. ve Özgür, E. M. (2013). Antalya’daki Rus gelinler: Göçten evliliğe, evlilikten göçe [The Russian Brides in Antalya: From Migration to Marriage, from Marriage to Migration], The Journal of Sociology, 3(27), 151-175.
30. Dill, K., E., & Thill, K., P. (2007). Video game characters and the socialization of gender roles: Young people’s perceptions mirror sexist media depictions. Sex Roles, 57, 851-864.
31. Dixon, J. ve Wetherell, M. (2004). On discourse and dirty nappies: Gender, the division of household labour and the social psychology of distributive justice. Theory & Psychology, 14(2), 167-189.
32. Dominik, J. R. & Rauch G. E. (1972). The image of women in network tv commercials. Journal of Broadcasting, 16(3), 259-265.
33. Dökmen, Z. Y. (1999). Bem cinsiyet rolü envanteri kadınsılık ve erkeksilik ölçekleri Türkçe formunun psikometrik özellikleri [The Turkish version of the Bem sex role inventory]. Kriz Dergisi, 7(1), 27-40.
34. Drakett, J., Rickett, B., Day, K. & Milnes, K. (2018). Old jokes, new media – Online sexism and constructions of gender in Internet memes. Feminism & Psychology, 28 (1), 109-127.
35. Edley, N. (2001). Analysing masculinity: Interpretative repertoires, ideological dilemmas and subject positions. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor ve S.J. Yates (Ed.), Discourse as Data: a guide for analysis (pp. 189-229). London: Sage.
36. Edley, N. ve Wetherell, M. (1999). Imagined futures: Young men’s talk about fatherhood and domestic life. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38(2), 181-194.
37. Erdem, R., & Bardak, N. (2010). Türkiye’deki yönetim ve organizasyon otoritelerinin ‘Ekşi Sözlük’perspektifi ile incelenmesi [Exploring of authorities of management and organization in Turkey in the perspective of “ekşi sözlük”]. Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi, 2(2), 113-120.
38. Erder, S. (2007). İstemedikleri Halde Sürülenler - Zorunlu Göç ve Sonrası [Involuntarily banished - Forced migration and post-factum]. İstanbul.
39. Erder, S. (2011). Zor Ziyaret: Nataşa mı? Döviz getiren bavul mu? Eski Doğu Bloku ülkelerinden gelen kadınların emek piyasasına girişi [Tough visit: Natasha or luggage full of foreign currency? Women entering the labor market from the former Eastern Bloc countries]. Birkaç Arpa Boyu (21): 191-218.
40. Erkeç, U. F. (2017). Evlilik yoluyla kadın göçü ve Türkiye’de “Rus gelin”lerin durumu [Female migration through marriage and the status of Russian brides in Turkey]. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 1(2), 21-43.
41. Feasey, R. (2013). From soap opera to reality programming: Examining motherhood, motherwork and the maternal role on popular television. Imaginations: Journal of Cross-Cultural Image Studies, 4(2), 25-46.
42. Ferguson, J. H., Kreshel, P. J., & Tinkham, S. F. (1990). In the pages of Ms.: Sex role portrayals of women in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 19(1), 40-51.
43. Flores-Palacios, F. & Serrano Oswald, E. (2019). Social representations, gender and identity: interactions and practices in a context of vulnerability. Papers on Social Representations, 28(2), 3.1-3.41. Friedan, B. (1963). The feminine mystique: What the married woman has-and what she wants. Penguin Books, Middlesex, United Kingdom.
44. Gedik, Ö. Ü. E., & Turgut, S. T. (2019). ‘Sosyal Medya Delikanlılığı: Ekşi Sözlük Örneği’, [Rowdysm on social media: The sample of Ekşi Sözlük]. Sosyal Bilimlerde Güncel Tartışmalar İnsan Çalışmaları 2, 51-60.
45. Gergen, K. J. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern psychology. American Psychologist, 40(3), 266-275.
46. Giaccardi, S. Ward, L. M., Seabrook, R. C., Manago, A., Lippman, J. (2016). Media and modern manhood: Testing associations between media consumption and young men’s acceptance of traditional gender ideologies. Sex Roles, 75, 151–163.
47. Glick, P. & Fiske, S. T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism: measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119-135.
48. Gönül, S. (2020). Zorunlu Göç ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet: Suriyeli Kadınların Evlilik Deneyimleri. In K. Biehl & D. Danış (Ed.) Toplumsal Cinsiyet Perspektifinden Türkiye’de Göç Araştırmaları. İstanbul: Sabancı Üniversitesi Toplumsal Cinsiyet ve Kadın Çalışmaları Mükemmeliyet Merkezi (SU Gender) & Göç Araştırmaları Derneği (GAR).
49. Greenwood, D., N. & Lippman, J. R. (2010). Gender and Media: Content, Uses, and Impact. In J. C. Chrisler & D. R. MacCreary (Ed.) Handbook of gender research in psychology, vol. 2: Gender Research in Social and Applied Psychology.
50. Gülçür, L., & İlkkaracan, P. (2002). The “Natasha” experience: Migrant sex workers from the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in Turkey. In Women’s Studies International Forum (Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 411-421). Pergamon.
51. Gürel, E., & Yakın, M. (2007). Ekşi Sözlük: Postmodern elektronik kültür [Sözlük Sourtimes: Postmodern electronic culture], Selçuk Communication, 4(4), 203-219.
52. Hall, C. C. I., & Crum, M. J. (1994). Women and “body-isms” in television beer commercials. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 31(5-6), 329–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01544592
53. Harunoğulları, M. (2021). Suriyeli sığınmacı kadınların sözlü anlatılarında savaş, göç ve evlilik [War, migration and marriage with Syrian asylum seeker women's oral narratives]. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 7(4), 353-368.
54. Hearn, J. (2004). From hegemonic masculinity to the hegemony of men. Feminist theory, 5(1), 49-72.
55. Heflick, N.A. & Goldenberg, J.L. (2009). Objectifying Sarah Palin: Evidence that objectification causes women to be perceived as less competent and less fully human. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 598-601. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.02.008
56. Hinojosa, R. (2010). Doing hegemony: Military, men, and constructing a hegemonic masculinity. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 18(2), 179-194.
57. Hollway, W. (1984). Women’s power in heterosexual sex. In Women’s studies international forum 7(1), 63-68.
58. Howarth, C. (2006). A social representation is not a quiet thing: Exploring the critical potential of social representations theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), 65-86.
59. Höijer, B. (2011). Social representations theory: a new theory for media research. Nordicom Review 32 (2), 3-16.
60. Hughes, D. M., (2000). The “Natasha” trade: The transnational shadow market of trafficking in women. Journal of International Affairs. 53(2), 625-651.
61. Jewkes, R., Morrell, R., Hearn, J., Lundqvist, E., Blackbeard, D., Lindegger, G., ... & Gottzén, L. (2015). Hegemonic masculinity: combining theory and practice in gender interventions. Culture, health & sexuality, 17(sup2), 112-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2015.1085094
62. Joffe, H., (2003). Risk: From perception to social representation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42(1), 55–73.
63. Karaduman, S., & Adalı-Aydın, G. (2017). Hegemonik Erkekliğin Medyadaki İnşası ve Temsili: Survivor 2017 Program İncelemesi [The construction and representations of hegemonic masculinity on media: Examination of Survivor 2017]. Middle Black Sea Journal of Communication Studies, 2(2), 26-40.
64. Kekeç Gören, S. & Taşçıoğlu, R. (2018). Özgecan Aslan Cinayetinin dijital platformlarda yansıması:Ekşi Sözlük üzerine bir inceleme [Reflection of Özgecan Aslan’s murder on the digital platforms: an investigation on Ekşi Sözlük]. Akdeniz Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, (30), 439-452
65. Keskin, İ.R. (2018). Syrian Women in The Context of Otherness: Analising of the Representations of Syrian Women Refugees in Local and National Newspapers. (Unpublished PhD thesis). Istanbul Bilgi University.
66. Kimmel, M. (2011). The Gendered Society (4th Ed.). Oxford University Press.
67. Kitsa, M., & Mudra, I. (2020). Gender stereotypes of women in television advertising in Ukraine. Feminist Media Studies, 20(3), 381-397.
68. Kurzban, R., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2001). Can race be erased? Coalitional computation and social categorization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(26), 15387-15392.
69. Lease, S. H., Çiftçi, A., Demir, A. & Boyraz, G. (2009). Structural validity of Turkish versions of the gender role conflict scale and male role norms scale. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 10(4), 273-287. Levant, R. F. & Richmond, K. (2007). A review of research on masculinity ideologies using the male role norms inventory. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 15(2), 130-146.
70. Marciniak, K. (2008). Foreign women and toilets. Feminist Media Studies, 8(4), 337-356.
71. Mina, M., C. Y. & Goellner S. V. (2015). Representaciones sociales de la selección femenina de fútbol de Colombia en la Copa América 2014 [Social representations of the Colombian women's soccer team in the 2014 Copa America]. Educación Física y Deporte, 34 (1), 39-72. http://doi.org/10.17533/udea.efyd.v34n1a03
72. Minibas-Poussard, J., Erkmen, T., & Karsak, B. (2011). Kadın yöneticilere ilişkin sosyal temsiller: Bankacılık sektörüne yönelik bir inceleme [Social representations of women managers: Examination of banking sector]. Communication, 15, 45-58.
73. Mondé, G. C. (2018). # BlackDontCrack: a content analysis of the aging Black woman in social media. Feminist Media Studies, 18(1), 47-60.
74. Moscovici, S. (1963). Attitudes and opinions. Annual Review of Psychology, 14, 231-260. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.14.020163.001311
75. Moscovici, S. (1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In R. M. Farr and S. Moscovici (Eds.), Social representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
76. Moscovici, S. (1988). Notes towards a description of social representations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 211–250.
77. Moscovici, S. & Hewstone, M. (1983) Social Representations and Social Explanations: From the “Naive” to the “Amateur” Scientist. In M. Hewstone (Ed.) Attribution Theory: Social and Functional Extensions Oxford: Blackwell.
78. Neto, F., & Pinto, I. (1998). Gender stereotypes in Portuguese television advertisements. Sex Roles, 39(1-2), 153-164.
79. Öztekin, H. (2015). Yeni medyada nefret söylemi: Ekşi Sözlük örneği. Journal of International Social Research, 8(38), 925-936.
80. Peker-Dural, H. (2021). Yeni medyada erkekliğin sosyal inşası: Ekşi Sözlük ve açıklayıcı repertuvarlar [The Social Construction of Masculinity on New Media: Ekşi Sözlük and Interpretative Repertoires]. Nesne Journal of Psychology, 9(21), 511-533.
81. Pleck, J. H., Sonenstein, F. L., & Ku, L. C. (1993). Masculinity ideology: Its impact on adolescent males’ heterosexual relationships. Journal of Social issues, 49(3), 11-29.
82. Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. Sage Publications.
83. Pyke, K. D., & Johnson, D. L. (2003). Asian American women and racialized femininities: “Doing” gender across cultural worlds. Gender & Society, 17(1), 33-53.
84. Ricciardelli, R., Clow, K.A., & White, P. (2010). Investigating hegemonic masculinity: Portrayals of masculinity in men’s lifestyle magazines. Sex Roles, 63, 64–78.
85. Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. & Akbas, G. (2013). Namus kültürlerinde “namus” ve “namus adına kadına şiddet”: Sosyal psikolojik açıklamalar [“Honor” and “honor violence against women” in honor cultures: Social psychological explanations]. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 16 (32), 76-91.
86. Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., Türkoğlu, B. & Kuzlak, A. (2018a). How are women and men perceived? Structure of gender stereotypes in contemporary Turkey. Nesne Journal of Psychology, 13(6), 309-336.
87. Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., Türkoğlu, B., Kuzlak, A. & Gupta, A. (2018b). Stereotypes of single and married women and men in Turkish culture. Current Psychology. doi:10.1007/s12144- 018-9920-9.
88. Sakallı, N. ve Türkoğlu, B. (2019). “Erkek” olmak ya da olmamak: Sosyal psikolojik açıdan erkeksilik/erkeklik çalışmaları [To Be or Not to Be “Man”: Masculinity/Manhood Studies from Social Psychological Perspective]. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 22(44), 52-76.
89. Schneider, D. J. (2005). The psychology of stereotyping. New York: Guilford Press.
90. Schippers, M. (2007). Recovering the feminine other: Masculinity, femininity, and gender hegemony. Theory and society, 36(1), 85-102.
91. Seymour-Smith, S. (2017). A critical discursive approach to studying masculinities. In R. F. Levant, Y. J. Wong (Ed.), The psychology of men and masculinities (pp. 105-138), USA: APA.
92. Spelman, E. V. (1982). Woman as body: Ancient and contemporary views. Feminist Studies, 8(1), 109-131.
93. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4-28.
94. Strouse, J. S., Buerkelrothfuss, N., & Long, E. C. J. (1995). Gender and family as moderators of the relationship between music video exposure and adolescent sexual permissiveness. Adolescence, 30, 505–521.
95. Suppiah, P. C., Kaur, S., Arumugam, N., & Shanthi, A. (2019). News coverage of foreign sex workers in Malaysia: A critical analysis. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 19(1), 136-152.
96. Şeker, D. & Uçan, G., (2016). Göç sürecinde kadın [Women in migration]. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Social Journal Studies, 14(1), 199-214.
97. Tartaglia, S., & Rollero, C. (2015). Gender stereotyping in newspaper advertisements: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(8), 1103-1109.
98. Taylor, G. W. & Ussher, J. M. (2001). Making sense of S&M: a discourse analytic account. Sexualities, 4, 293-314.
99. Ter Bogt, T. F., Engels, R. C., Bogers, S., & Kloosterman, M. (2010). “Shake it baby, shake it”: Media preferences, sexual attitudes and gender stereotypes among adolescents. Sex Roles, 63(11-12), 844-859.
100. Thompson, E. H. Jr. & Bennett, K. M. (2015). Measurement of masculinity ideologies: A (critical) review. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 16(2), 115-133.
101. Thompson, E. H. Jr., Pleck, J. H. & Ferrera, D. L., (1992). Men and masculinities: Scales for masculinity ideology and masculinity related constructs. Sex Roles, 22 (11/12), 573-607.
102. Thompson, L. (2018). “I can be your Tinder nightmare”: Harassment and misogyny in the online sexual marketplace. Feminism & Psychology, 28(1), 69–89. DOI: 10.1177/0959353517720226
103. Tortajada-Giménez, I., Araüna-Baró, N., & Martínez-Martínez, I. J. (2013). Advertising stereotypes and gender representation in social networking sites. Comunicar, 21(41), 177-186.
104. Tunçer, Ç. P. (2020). Sosyal medya ve şiddet: Ekşi Sözlük’te Çinli algısı [Social Media and Violence: Chinese Perception in Ekşi Sözluk]. İnsan ve İnsan, 7(25), 65-84.
105. Vandello, J. A., Cohen, D., Grandon, R., & Franiuk, R. (2009). Stand by your man: Indirect prescriptions for honorable violence and feminine loyalty in Canada, Chile, and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(1), 81-104.
106. Wagner, W. (1996). Queries about social representation and construction. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 26, 95–120.
107. Wagner, W. (1998). Social representations and beyond – brute facts, symbolic coping and domesticated worlds. Culture and Psychology, 4, 297–329.
108. Wagner, W., Duveen, G., Farr, R., Jovchelovitch, S., Lorenzi‐Cioldi, F., Marková, I., & Rose, D. (1999). Theory and method of social representations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2(1), 95-125.
109. Wagner, W., & Hayes, N. (2005). Everyday discourse and common sense: The theory of social representations. Palgrave.
110. Waling, A., Duncan, D., Angelides, S., & Dowsett, G.W. (2018). Men and masculinity in men’s magazines: A review. Sociology Compass., e12593. DOI: 10.1111/soc4.12593
111. Ward, L. M. (2002). Does television exposure affect emerging adults’ attitudes and assumptions about sexual relationships? Correlational and experimental confirmation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31, 1–15.
112. Ward, L., M., Merriwether, A., & Caruthers, A. (2006). Breasts are for men: media, masculinity ideologies, and men’s beliefs about women’s bodies. Sex Roles, 55, 703-714.
113. Wood, A. G. (2001). Revolution in the street: women, workers, and urban protest in Veracruz, 1870-1927. Rowman & Littlefield.
114. Yaşa, H. (2017). Nefret söylemi işşasında sosyal medyanın rolü: Ekşi Sözlük örneği. Unpublished Master Thesis. Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Antalya
115. Yıldırım, S. & Tekdemir-Yurtdaş, G., (2016). Türkiye’deki katılımcı sözlüklerde Suriyeli sığınmacıların sosyal inşası: sosyal medya ve açıklayıcı repertuarlar [Social Construction of Syrian Refugees in Daily Speech in Turkey: Interpretative Repertoires and Social Media]. Middle East Journal of Refugee Studies, 1(1), 77-122.
116. Yılmaz, F. (2014). Social representations of psychology of gender and women in Turkish novels. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Middle East Technical University.