Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Slut-Shaming 2.0

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Sexting

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Cyberpsychology ((PASCY))

Abstract

The practice of slut-shaming became rampant with the advent of social networking sites (SNS). This chapter will discuss how these platforms pose additional risks for female adolescents to be slut-shamed. It will be argued that SNS have expanded the impact and scope of slut-shaming through, for example, the easy replication and persistence of publicly visible content on SNS. Furthermore, this chapter will examine the prevalence and characteristics of slut-shaming (derived from perceptions of the victim’s point of view) particularly on SNS, based on a survey study amongst 476 adolescent females (12–18 years). To conclude, efforts will be discussed to prevent this form of harassment. Several actors such as parents, schools, mass media and social media providers, should take more responsibility as well as convey equal gender norms starting from a young age.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Armstrong, E. A., Hamilton, L. T., Armstrong, E. M., & Seeley, J. L. (2014). “Good girls” gender, social class, and slut discourse on campus. Social Psychology Quarterly, 77(2), 100–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, J., Steeves, V., Burkell, J., & Regan, P. (2013). Negotiating with gender stereotypes on social networking sites: From “bicycle face” to Facebook. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 37(2), 91–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barak, A. (2005). Sexual harassment on the internet. Social Science Computer Review, 23, 77–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister, R. F., & Twenge, J. M. (2002). Cultural suppression of female sexuality. Review of General Psychology, 6(2), 166–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, S., Sumter, S., Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. (2012). Identifying teens at risk: Developmental pathways of online and offline sexual risk behavior. Pediatrics, 130(6), e1489–e1496.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, S., Valkenburg, P., & Peter, J. (2010). Unwanted online sexual solicitation and risky sexual online behavior across the lifespan. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31(6), 439–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, G. (2006). Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(3), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • boyd, d. (2008). Why youth (h) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In Youth, identity, and digital media (Vol. 6, pp. 119–142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • boyd, d. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caron, C. (2008). Sexy girls as the « Other »: The discursive processes of stigmatizing girls. Presented at the Canadian Communication Association Conference, University of British Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carstensen, T. (2009). Gender trouble in web 2.0. Gender relations in social network sites, wikis and weblogs. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 1(1), 106–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, K. D., & Trafimow, D. (2007). A test of three hypotheses concerning attributions toward female promiscuity. The Social Science Journal, 44(4), 677–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, M., & Popp, D. (2003). Sexual double standards: A review and methodological critique of two decades of research. The Journal of Sex Research, 40(1), 13–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Döring, N. (2014). Consensual sexting among adolescents: Risk prevention through abstinence education or safer sexting? Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 8(1), article 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdur-Baker, Ö. (2010). Cyberbullying and its correlation to traditional bullying, gender and frequent and risky usage of internet-mediated communication tools. New Media & Society, 12(1), 109–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, C., & Kearl, H. (2011). Crossing the line: Sexual harassment at school (p. 444). Washington, DC: American Association of University Women (AAUW).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosseinmardi, H., Rafiq, R. I., Li, S., Yang, Z., Han, R., Mishra, S., & Lv, Q. (2014). A comparison of common users across Instagram and Ask.fm to better understand cyberbullying. Presented at the 2014 IEEE international conference on Big Data and Cloud Computing (BdCloud), pp. 355–362, Sydney, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapidzic, S., & Herring, S. C. (2011). Gender, communication, and self-presentation in teen chatrooms revisited: Have patterns changed? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(1), 39–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreager, D. A., & Staff, J. (2009). The sexual double standard and adolescent peer acceptance. Social Psychology Quarterly, 72(2), 143–164.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lenhart, A. (2009). Teens and sexting how and why minor teens are sending sexually suggestive nude or nearly nude images via text messaging. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. (Pew Internet & American Life Project).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenhart, A. (2015). Teens, social media & technology overview 2015. Retrieved May 3, 2016, from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/09/teens-social-media-technology-2015/

  • Lippman, J. R., & Campbell, S. W. (2014). Damned if you do, damned if you don’t…if you’re a girl: Relational and normative contexts of adolescent sexting in the United States. Journal of Children and Media, 8(4), 371–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Littleton, H. (2011). Rape myths and beyond: A commentary on Edwards and colleagues (2011). Sex Roles, 65(11–12), 792–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, S., & Görzig, A. (2014). When adolescents receive sexual messages on the internet: Explaining experiences of risk and harm. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 8–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahalik, J. R., Morray, E. B., Coonerty-Femiano, A., Ludlow, L. H., Slattery, S. M., & Smiler, A. (2005). Development of the conformity to feminine norms inventory. Sex Roles, 52(7–8), 417–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manago, A. M., Graham, M. B., Greenfield, P. M., & Salimkhan, G. (2008). Self-presentation and gender on MySpace. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 446–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks, M. J., & Fraley, R. C. (2005). The sexual double standard: Fact or fiction? Sex Roles, 52(3–4), 175–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marwick, A., & boyd, d. (2011). The drama! Teen conflict, gossip, and bullying in networked publics, SSRN scholarly paper no. ID 1926349. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, K., Finkelhor, D., & Wolak, J. (2001). Risk factors for and impact of online sexual solicitation of youth. JAMA, 285, 3011–3014. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.285.23.3011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, K. J., Ybarra, M. L., Jones, L. M., & Espelage, D. (2014). What features make online harassment incidents upsetting to youth? Journal of School Violence, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2014.990462.

  • Moore, S., & Rosenthal, D. (2006). Sexuality in adolescence: Current trends. Hove, East Sussex: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papp, L. J., Hagerman, C., Gnoleba, M. A., Erchull, M. J., Liss, M., Miles-McLean, H., & Robertson, C. M. (2015). Exploring perceptions of Slut-shaming on Facebook: Evidence for a reverse sexual double standard. Gender Issues, 32(1), 57–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poole, E. K. (2014). Hey girls, did you know? Slut-shaming on the internet needs to stop, SSRN scholarly paper no. ID 2483433. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rafaeli, S., & Sudweeks, F. (1997). Networked interactivity. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2(4). Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00201.x/full

  • Ringrose, J. (2011). Are you sexy, flirty, or a slut? Exploring “sexualization”and how teen girls perform/negotiate digital sexual identity on social networking sites. In R. Gill & C. Scharff (Eds.), New feminities: Postfeminism, neoliberalism and subjectivity (pp. 99–116). Houndmills/Basingstoke/Hampshire/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringrose, J., & Barajas, K. (2011). Gendered risks and opportunities? Exploring teen girls’ digitised sexual identities in postfeminist media contexts. International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 7(2), 121–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringrose, J., Gill, R., Livingstone, S., & Harvey, L. (2012). A qualitative study of children, young people and “sexting.” A report prepared for the NSPCC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringrose, J., Harvey, L., Gill, R., & Livingstone, S. (2013). Teen girls, sexual double standards and “sexting”: Gendered value in digital image exchange. Feminist Theory, 14(3), 305–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringrose, J., & Renold, E. (2010). Normative cruelties and gender deviants: The performative effects of bully discourses for girls and boys in school. British Educational Research Journal, 36(4), 573–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, K. (2005). Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities through sexual harassment: Issues of identity, power and popularity in secondary schools. Gender and Education, 17(1), 19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., Fetterolf, J. C., & Sanchez, D. T. (2013). What motivates the sexual double standard? More support for male versus female control theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(2), 250–263.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Salter, M., Crofts, T., & Lee, M. (2013). Beyond criminalisation and Responsibilisation: Sexting, gender and young people, SSRN scholarly paper no. ID 2271378. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skoog, T., & Bayram Özdemir, S. (2016). Physical appearance and sexual activity mediate the link between early puberty and sexual harassment victimization in male adolescents. Sex Roles, 75(7–8), 339–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sticca, F., & Perren, S. (2012). Is cyberbullying worse than traditional bullying? Examining the differential roles of medium, publicity, and anonymity for the perceived severity of bullying. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(5), 739–750.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanenbaum, L. (2015). I am not a slut. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walrave, M., & Heirman, W. (2011). Cyberbullying: Predicting victimisation and perpetration. Children & Society, 25(1), 59–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walther, J. B., & D’Addario, K. P. (2001). The impacts of emoticons on message interpretation in computer-mediated communication. Social Science Computer Review, 19(3), 324–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, K. G. (2010). Too ashamed to report: Deconstructing the shame of sexual victimization. Feminist Criminology, 5(3), 286–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ybarra, M. L., Diener-West, M., & Leaf, P. J. (2007). Examining the overlap in internet harassment and school bullying: Implications for school intervention. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(6, Supplement 1), S42–S50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ybarra, M. L., & Mitchell, K. (2008). How risky are social networking sites? A comparison of places online where youth sexual solicitation and harassment occurs. Pediatrics, 121(2), e350–e357.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication Studies, MIOS, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium

    Kathleen Van Royen, Karolien Poels, Heidi Vandebosch & Michel Walrave

Authors
  1. Kathleen Van Royen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karolien Poels
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heidi Vandebosch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michel Walrave
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication Studies, MIOS, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium

    Michel Walrave

  2. Department of Communication Studies, MIOS, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium

    Joris Van Ouytsel

  3. Department of Communication Sciences, IMEC-MICT, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Koen Ponnet

  4. Department of Ob/Gyn, UTMB Health, Galveston, TX, USA

    Jeff R. Temple

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Van Royen, K., Poels, K., Vandebosch, H., Walrave, M. (2018). Slut-Shaming 2.0. In: Walrave, M., Van Ouytsel, J., Ponnet, K., Temple, J. (eds) Sexting. Palgrave Studies in Cyberpsychology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71882-8_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation