Unruly Souls: The Digital Activism of Muslim and Christian Feminists
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A hip-hop artist in a hijab stares defiantly at the camera in a YouTube music video.A Twitter user jokes about the trauma she endured in Christian purity culture.Two women laugh on a podcast as they talk about "gender apartheid" in American Christianity.These are among the tactics of resistance that Kristin Peterson spotlights in Unruly Souls: the digital activism of Muslim and Christian feminists.Peterson dedicates her book to "all the unruly souls," signalling at the outset that she sees the work of the religious feminists that she chronicles as full of revolutionary potential."Unruliness," for Peterson, is about a lack of fit, as in those women who do not conform-because of their race, their size, or their beliefs-to the normative frame of womanhood constructed by patriarchal religious traditions.But unruliness also implies a playful sort of agency exemplified by the way that women use seemingly innocuous digital practices like meme-ification and selfie-taking as transgressive acts that challenge domination.As Peterson explains, "traditional religious spaces rarely welcome criticism from the margins, so digital spaces like Twitter, Instagram, podcasts, and digital videos offer creative outlets for these significant critiques" (93).Peterson argues that digital media enable and incubate new feminist critiques of religious traditions.In Unruly Souls, the author takes a broad view of the digital toolkit at the disposal of religious feminist activists by analyzing Twitter discourse, Instagram influencers, popular podcasts, and YouTube music videos.In her first chapter, Peterson carefully lays out the intersecting hierarchies that structure racial, religious, and gender oppression in American society.She begins with American evangelical Christians and explains how this group has successfully syncretized their religious exegeses to support white supremacy and male dominance, in effect marginalizing Black Christians and women.Following on from this, she charts how American Christians see Muslims either as in need of saving or as enemies in a holy war, and she traces these discourses to European colonial thought.Peterson does not fall into the trap of seeing religious feminism as birthed by the internet's possibilities, and, in this chapter, she looks back to the scholars of religious feminism, many of them "unruly souls" themselves, that preceded those she chronicles in this book.Peterson makes the interesting choice to examine two different religious traditions in her case studies: Christianity and Islam, and she focuses on the cultural, rather than the theological or formal expressions of these faiths.Chapter two looks at how Christians, organizing first through message boards and Facebook groups and then through Twitter hashtags, used humour and meme-ification to collectively recover from the trauma associated with Christian purity culture.In doing so, Peterson argues, these women created the activist networks that would scaffold the later #ChurchToo movement that ultimately led to several known abusers being removed from positions of authority in evangelicalism.Chapter three switches to examine unruly Muslim influencers on Instagram whose self-fashioning subverts both colloquially understood stereotypes about pious Muslim women and normative gender expression on
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,012 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,010 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».