Pierre Bourdieu's Theory Of Deviance In Online Subcultures

In the wake of Sandy Doyle’s Twitter hashtag #mencallmethings in 2011, the disproportionate amount of abuse suffered by women online has gone from an issue of feminist discourse to an increasingly visible, public issue. There has simultaneously been a popular insurgence of mens’ groups online, often purporting to be advocating gender equality, while supporting rhetoric that reinforces gendered abuse toward women. Criticisms of abuse and rationalisation of behaviour both from within and without MRA groups commonly blame the absolute agency of individuals acting out on the one hand, and various kinds of deterministic structural domination on the other. I would argue for a different explanation. The individual’s choices are structured, enabled and restricted by their particular social environment. An analysis of deviant behaviour can only make sense within its structural context. Understanding the social dynamics defining deviance in online subcultures is difficult- they foster their own distinct values and dispositions, but mirror attitudes and behaviours of the real world. Nonetheless, participants’ choices shape- and are shaped by- the structures of these spaces. To this end, the work of French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu will be used to identify two

In the interest of clarity, I will begin with a brief outline of some key concepts, and their relevance.

Habitus is the ongoing collection of experiences informing future action in a person. It is both the internal principle informing their practices, as well as the lens through which they ‘make sense’ of external social structure. Most importantly, it is enduring, but not static or permanent (Wacquant 2005). Habitus bridges static notions such as ‘class’, as individuals exposed to like stimuli and conditioning will share a like habitus, but may be dissimilar in terms of socio-economic status, to give one