This article proposes a joint application of online network analysis and NLP techniques to explore dynamics of “polarized intersectionality”—that is, how (mis)representations of women that develop online and at the intersection of different axes of discrimination entwine with ideological and affective polarization. We look in particular at whether and how digital (mis)representations change together with political scenarios in which political parties, leaders, and partisan communities more in general swing from collaboration to hostility. Our analysis of two Twitter conversations that put women at the center of attention show that changing political scenarios generate different digital conversations which, in turn, reflect patterns of alliances and rivalry. Regardless of these changes, women are invariantly (mis)represented in narratives that are often weaponized against political enemies in ways that foster both ideological and affective political polarization.
BaldassarriDGelmanA (2008) Partisans without constraint: political polarization and trends in American public opinion. American Journal of Sociology114(2): 408–446.
3.
BodrunovaSSBlekanovISmoliarovaA, et al. (2019) Beyond left and right: real-world political polarization in Twitter discussions on inter-ethnic conflicts. Media and Communication7(3): 119–132.
4.
BordignonF (2020) Leader polarisation: conflict and change in the Italian political system. South European Society and Politics25: 285–315.
5.
BorgattiSEverettMJohnsonJ (2013) Analyzing Social Networks. London: SAGE.
6.
BraccialeRCepernichC (2018) Hybrid 2018 campaigning: the social media habits of Italian political leaders and parties. Italian Political Science13(1): 1–15.
7.
ClausetANewmanMEJMooreC (2004) Finding community structure in very large networks. Physical Review E70(6): 1–6.
8.
ConoverMRatkiewiczJFranciscoM, et al. (2011) Political polarization on twitter. Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media133: 89–96.
9.
DonàA (2021) Radical right populism and the backlash against gender equality: the case of the Lega (Nord). Contemporary Italian Politics13(3): 296–313.
10.
DruckmanJNLevenduskyMS (2019) What do we measure when we measure affective polarization?Public Opinion Quarterly83(1): 114–122.
11.
Dvir-GvirsmanS (2017) Media audience homophily: Partisan websites, audience identity and polarization processes. New Media & Society19(7): 1072–1091.
12.
EschmannR (2021) Digital resistance: how online communication facilitates responses to racial microaggressions. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity7(2): 264–277.
13.
European Institute for Gender Equality (2022) Gender Equality Index 2022. The COVID-19 pandemic and care. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
FerreeMM (2021) Under different umbrellas: intersectionality and alliances in US feminist politics. European Journal of Politics and GenderXX: 1–18.
16.
FiigC (2010) Media representation of women politicians from a gender to an intersectionality perspective. Kvinder, Køn & Forskning3(2): 41–49.
17.
GraffAKorolczukE (2022) Anti-Gender Politics in the Populist Moment. London: Routledge.
18.
HarmerESouthernR (2021) Digital microaggressions and everyday othering: an analysis of tweets sent to women members of Parliament in the UK. Information, Communication & Society24(14): 1998–2015.
19.
Inara RodisPdC (2021) Let’s (re)tweet about racism and sexism: responses to cyber aggression toward Black and Asian women. Information, Communication & Society24(14): 2153–2173.
20.
InguanzoIZhangBGildeZúñigaH (2021) Online cultural backlash? Sexism and political user-generated content. Information, Communication & Society24(14): 2133–2152.
21.
IyengarSSoodGLelkesY (2012) Affect, not ideology. Public Opinion Quarterly76(3): 405–431.
22.
KubinEvon SikorskiC (2021) The role of (social) media in political polarization: a systematic review. Annals of the International Communication Association45(3): 188–206.
23.
LevenduskyMS (2010) Clearer cues, more consistent voters: a benefit of elite polarization. Political Behavior32(1): 111–131.
24.
McCoyJRahmanTSomerM (2018) Polarization and the global crisis of democracy: common patterns, dynamics, and pernicious consequences for democratic polities. American Behavioral Scientist62(1): 16–42.
25.
MartellaABraccialeR (2022) Populism and emotions: Italian political leaders’ communicative strategies to engage Facebook users. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research35: 65–85.
26.
MasonL (2018) Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
27.
MoscaLTronconiF (2019) Beyond left and right: the eclectic populism of the Five Star Movement. West European Politics42(6): 1258–1283.
28.
NeuendorfKA (2019) Content analysis and thematic analysis. In: BroughP (ed.) Advanced Research Methods for Applied Psychologists: Design, Analysis and Reporting. New York: Routledge, pp. 211–223.
OndercinHLLizotteMK (2021) You’ve lost that loving feeling: how gender shapes affective polarization. American Politics Research49(3): 282–292.
31.
PavanEMartellaA (2021) The release of #SilviaRomano: a case of mediated polarized intersectionality. Problemi dell’informazione3: 377–411.
32.
RobisonJMullinixKJ (2016) Elite polarization and public opinion: how polarization is communicated and its effects. Political Communication33(2): 261–282.
33.
RoncaroloFManciniP (2018) The traditional media, political parallelism and public opinion on contentious issues in the 2018 Italian election campaign. Contemporary Italian Politics10(3): 243–266.
34.
SobierajS (2020) Credible Threat. Attacks against Women Online and the Future of Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
35.
SwamiVColesRWyrozumskaK, et al. (2010) Oppressive beliefs at play: associations among beauty ideals and practices and individual differences in sexism, objectification of others, and media exposure. Psychology of Women Quarterly34(3): 365–379.
36.
UrmanA (2020) Context matters: political polarization on Twitter from a comparative perspective. Media, Culture & Society42(6): 857–879.
37.
UtychSM (2021) Sexism predicts favorability of women in the 2020 democratic primary . . . and men?Electoral Studies71: 102184.
38.
WardLM (2016) Media and sexualization: state of empirical research, 1995–2015. The Journal of Sex Research53(4–5): 560–577.
39.
WardSMcLoughlinL (2020) Turds, traitors and tossers: the abuse of UK MPs via Twitter. The Journal of Legislative Studies26(1): 47–73.
40.
WestEAIyengarS (2022) Partisanship as a social identity: implications for polarization. Political Behavior44(2): 807–838.
41.
YarchiMBadenCKligler-VilenchikN (2021) Political polarization on the digital sphere: a cross-platform, over-time analysis of interactional, positional, and affective polarization on social media. Political Communication38(1–2): 98–139.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
