Week 10: Digital Citizenship, Gendered Harassment, and Platform Responsibility – Why “Logging Off” Isn’t the Answer
This week’s reading by Haslop, O’Rourke & Southern (2021) challenged me to rethink digital citizenship within spaces where gendered harassment has become normalized. Their research into UK student online culture reveals a concerning pattern: online abuse isn’t just tolerated, it’s expected as part of participating in certain digital environments.
🚩 When Harassment Becomes a Cultural Norm
Haslop et al. (2021) argue that online harassment—particularly targeting women and LGBTQ+ individuals—is often seen as "just part of being online." What stood out to me was how many participants internalized this logic, viewing harassment as inevitable. This creates a gendered digital divide, where masculine-coded behaviors like aggression or trolling are normalized, while those outside dominant groups are pressured to either adapt or withdraw.
Personally, this resonates with my own experience in online spaces like gaming communities, where toxic behaviors are often brushed off as "just jokes." Haslop et al. highlight how platform governance often fails by relying on self-policing instead of taking active responsibility to protect vulnerable users.
GIF by canadianabroadvery
🧩 The Manosphere and Organized Harassment
This normalization connects directly to Ben Rich & Eva Bujalkaj (2023), who explore how Andrew Tate gained popularity by exploiting manosphere rhetoric. Tate thrives in a culture where harassment is reframed as “pushing back” against supposed political correctness. This mirrors the conditions outlined by Haslop et al., where toxic behaviors are rewarded by both social and algorithmic dynamics.
Marwick & Caplan (2018) describe this as networked harassment, where collective online actions target marginalized groups, creating toxic solidarity. The manosphere and cases like Gamergate show how harassment becomes not only accepted but also weaponized.
GIF by vowled
💡 Resistance and Platform Responsibility
While creators and activists resist through satire or community action (e.g., Vitis & Gilmour, 2017), Haslop et al. make it clear that this burden shouldn’t fall solely on individuals. Platforms benefit from high engagement, yet moderation remains reactive and inconsistent.
For me, this raises key questions about what digital citizenship means today. It should move beyond passive participation to include active work in reshaping exclusionary digital cultures. The reading leaves me wondering: is legal reform like the Online Safety Act 2021 (Australia) enough, or must we push platforms harder to enforce structural change?
🔄 Final Reflection
This week reinforced how systemic gendered harassment is—rooted in cultural attitudes, platform design, and profit models. While individual resistance is essential, Haslop et al. challenge us to rethink collective and institutional responsibilities within the digital sphere.
💬 Discussion Prompt: What does meaningful action against online harassment look like—platform reforms, cultural shifts, or both? 💬👇
GIF by jylljylljyll
Reference list
Ben Rich, & Bujalkaj, E. (2023). The draw of the ‘manosphere’: Understanding Andrew Tate’s appeal to lost men. The Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/the-draw-of-the-manosphere-understanding-andrew-tates-appeal-to-lost-men-199002
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/10.1177/13548565211010683
Marwick, A. E., & Caplan, R. (2018). Drinking male tears: Language, the manosphere, and networked harassment. Feminist Media Studies, 18(4), 543–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1447334
Vitis, L., & Gilmour, F. (2017). Dick pics on blast: A woman’s resistance to online sexual harassment using humour, art and Instagram. Crime, Media, Culture, 13(3), 335–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659016652445











