Gender, culture and morality: A case study of young people’s negotiations of sexual intimacy online

References

1. Albury, K.. ( 2015;), ‘ Selfies, sexts, and sneaky hats: Young people’s understandings of gendered practices of self-representation. ’, International Journal of Communication, 9:12, pp. 1734–45.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Baym, N.. ( 2010), Personal Connections in the Digital Age, Cambridge:: Polity;.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Bond, E.. ( 2011;), ‘ The mobile phone = bike shed? Children, sex and mobile phones. ’, New Media & Society, 13:4, pp. 587–604.
   [Google Scholar]
4. boyd, d.. ( 2014), It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens, New Haven, CT:: Yale University Press;.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Brett, J. M.. ( 2000;), ‘ Culture and negotiation. ’, International Journal of Psychology, 35:2, pp. 97–104.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Brett, J. M., and Gelfand, M. J.. ( 2005;), ‘ A cultural analysis of the underlying assumptions of negotiation theory. ’, in L. Thompson. (ed.), Frontiers of Social Psychology: Negotiations, New York:: Psychology Press;, pp. 173–201.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Buckingham, D.. ( 2009;), ‘ Creative visual methods in media research: Possibilities, problems and proposals. ’, Media, Culture & Society, 31:4, pp. 633–52.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Buckingham, D., and Bragg, S.. ( 2004), Young People, Sex and the Media: The Facts of Life?, New York:: Palgrave Macmillan;.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Butler, J.. ( 1990), Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, London:: Routledge;.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Carastathis, A.. ( 2014;), ‘ The concept of intersectionality in feminist theory. ’, Philosophy Compass, 9:5, pp. 304–14.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Cooper, K.,, Quayle, E.,, Jonsson, L., and Svedin, C. G.. ( 2016;), ‘ Adolescents and self-taken sexual images: A review of the literature. ’, Computers in Human Behavior, 55:B, pp. 706–16.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Crenshaw, K.. ( 1989;), ‘ Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. ’, University of Chicago Legal Forum, pp. 139–67.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Dobson, A.. ( 2014;), ‘ Laddishness online: The possible significations and significance of “performative shamelessness” for young women in the post-feminist context. ’, Cultural Studies, 28:1, pp. 142–64.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Dobson, A.. ( 2015), Postfeminist Digital Cultures: Femininity, Social Media, and Self-Representation, New York:: Palgrave Macmillan;.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Dobson, A., and Ringrose, J.. ( 2016;), ‘ Sext education: Pedagogies of sex, gender and shame in the schoolyard of tagged and exposed. ’, Sex Education: Sexuality, Society and Learning, 16:1, pp. 8–21.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Fiske, S. T., and Taylor, S. E.. ( 1991), Social Cognition, Reading:: Mcgraw-Hill Book Company;.
    [Google Scholar]
17. García-Gómez, A.. ( 2014;), ‘ Deconstructing “mean girls”: Impolite verbal behaviours, on/offline selfrepresentations and evaluative beliefs. ’, in A. S. Macarro, and A. B. Cabrejas Peñuelas. (eds), New Insights into Gendered Discursive Practices: Language, Gender and Identity Construction, Valencia:: Universitat de Valencia;, pp. 73–100.
    [Google Scholar]
18. García-Gómez, A.. ( 2017;), ‘ Teen girls and sexual agency: Exploring the intrapersonal and intergroup dimensions of sexting. ’, Media, Culture & Society, 39:3, pp. 391–407.
    [Google Scholar]
19. García-Gómez, A.. ( 2018;), ‘ From selfies to sexting: Tween girls, intimacy, and subjectivities. ’, Girlhood Studies, 11:1, pp. 43–58.
    [Google Scholar]
20. García-Gómez, A.. ( 2019a;), ‘ Sexting and hegemonic masculinity: Interrogating male sexual agency, empowerment and dominant gendered norms. ’, in P. Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, and P. Bou Franch. (eds), Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions, London:: Palgrave;, pp. 313–39.
    [Google Scholar]
21. García-Gómez, A.. ( 2019b;), ‘ T(w)een sexting and sexual behaviour: (D-)evaluating the feminine other. ’, Psychology and Sexuality, 13:1, pp. 115–27, https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2019.1699154. Accessed 22 March 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Gauntlett, D., and Holzwarth, P.. ( 2006;), ‘ Creative and visual methods for exploring identities. ’, Visual Studies, 21:1, pp. 82–91.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Gergen, K. J.. ( 1991), The Saturated Self: Dilemmas of Identity in Contemporary Life, vol. 166, New York:: Basic Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Grogan, S.,, Rothery, L.,, Cole, J., and Hall, M.. ( 2018;), ‘ Posting selfies and body image in young adult women: The selfie paradox. ’, The Journal of Social Media in Society, 7:1, pp. 15–36.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Halkier, B.. ( 2010;), ‘ Focus groups as social enactments: Integrating interaction and content in the analysis of focus group data. ’, Qualitative Research, 10:1, pp. 71–89.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Hand, J. Z., and Sanchez, L.. ( 2000;), ‘ Badgering or bantering? Gender differences in experience of, and reactions to, sexual harassment among US high school students. ’, Gender & Society, 14:6, pp. 718–746.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Hand, M.. ( 2012), Ubiquitous Photography, Cambridge:: Polity Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Handyside, S., and Ringrose, J.. ( 2017;), ‘ Snapchat memory and youth digital sexual cultures: Mediated temporality, duration and affect. ’, Journal of Gender Studies, 26:3, pp. 347–60.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Heath, S.,, Brooks, R.,, Cleaver, E., and Ireland, E.. ( 2009), Researching Young People’s Lives, London:: Sage;.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Hepp, A.. ( 2012), Cultures of Mediatization, Malden, MA:: Polity Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Highfield, T., and Leaver, T.. ( 2015;), ‘ A methodology for mapping Instagram hashtags. ’, First Monday, 20:1, pp. 1–11.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Highfield, T., and Leaver, T.. ( 2016;), ‘ Instagrammatics and digital methods: Studying visual social media, from selfies and GIFs to memes and emoji. ’, Communication Research and Practice, 2:1, pp. 47–62.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Hill, D. B.. ( 1996;), ‘ The postmodern reconstruction of self. ’, in C. Tolman,, F. Cherry,, R. Van Hezewijk, and I. Lubek. (eds), Problems of Theoretical Psychology, North York:: Captus Press;, pp. 265–73.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Ibrahim, Y.. ( 2012;), ‘ The politics of watching: Visuality and the new media economy. ’, International Journal of E-Politics, 3:1, pp. 1–11.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Ito, M.,, Horst, H.,, Bittani, M.,, boyd, d.,, Herr-Stephenson, B.,, Lange, P. G.,, Pascoe, C. J., and Robinson, L.. ( 2009), Living and Learning with New Media: Summary of Findings from the Digital Youth Project, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Julien, H.. ( 2008;), ‘ Content analysis. ’, in L. M. Given. (ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, Thousand Oaks, CA:: SAGE Publications;, pp. 121–23.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Korkmazer, B.,, De Ridder, S., and Van Bauwel, S.. ( 2019;), ‘ Reporting on young people, sexuality, and social media: A discourse theoretical analysis. ’, Journal of Youth Studies, 23:3, pp. 323–39.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Lasén, A.. ( 2015;), ‘ Digital self-portraits, exposure and the modulation of intimacy. ’, in J. S. Carvalheiro, and A. S. Telleria. (eds) Mobile and Digital Communication: Approaches to Public and Private, Covilhã:: Livros LabCom;, pp. 61–78.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Lasén, A., and Gómez-Cruz, E.. ( 2009;), ‘ Digital photography and picture sharing: Redefining the public/private divide. ’, Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 22:3, pp. 205–15.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Livingstone, S.. ( 2002), Young People and New Media: Childhood and the Changing Media Environment, London:: Sage;.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Livingstone, S.. ( 2008;), ‘ Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: Teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. ’, New Media & Society, 10:3, pp. 393–411.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Longhurst, B.. ( 2007), Cultural Change and Ordinary Life: Sociology and Social Change, Maidenhead:: Open University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Lyon, D.. ( 2006;), ‘ 9/11, synopticon, and scopophilia: Watching and being watched. ’, in K. D. Haggerty, and R. V. Ericson. (eds), The New Politics of Surveillance and Visibility, Toronto:: University of Toronto Press;, pp. 35–54.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Lyon, D.. ( 2018), The Culture of Surveillance, Cambridge:: Polity Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Marwick, A.. ( 2012;), ‘ The public domain: Surveillance in everyday life. ’, Surveillance & Society, 9:4, pp. 378–93.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Messerschmidt, J. W.. ( 2000), Nine Lives: Adolescent Masculinities, the Body and Violence, Boulder, CO:: Westview;.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Messerschmidt, J. W.. ( 2018), Hegemonic Masculinity: Formulation, Reformulation, and Amplification, London:: Rowman & Littlefield;.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Miguel, C.. ( 2016;), ‘ Visual intimacy on social media: From selfies to the co-construction of intimacies through shared pictures. ’, Social Media + Society, 2:2, pp. 1–10.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Miguel, C.. ( 2018), Personal Relationships and Intimacy in the Age of Social Media, London:: Palgrave Pivot;.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Mills, S.. ( 2003), Michel Foucault, London:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Petersen, J. L., and Hyde, J. S.. ( 2013;), ‘ Sexual harassment by peers. ’, in E. L. Zurbriggen, and T. Roberts. (eds), The Sexualization of Girls and Girlhood: Causes, Consequences, and Resistance, New York:: Oxford University Press;, pp. 109–28.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Piazzesi, C., and Mongrain, C. L.. ( 2019;), ‘ Women “doing selfies”: Reflexivity and norm negotiation in the production and circulation of digital self-portraits. ’, Sociologia e Politiche Sociali, 3, pp. 95–111, https://doi.org/10.3280/SP2019-003005. Accessed 22 March 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Polkinghorne, D. E.. ( 1995;), ‘ Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. ’, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 8:1, pp. 5–23.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Presser, L.. ( 2005;), ‘ Negotiating power and narrative in research: Implications for feminist methodology. ’, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30:4, pp. 2067–90.
    [Google Scholar]
55. De Ridder, S.. ( 2014), Unfolding Intimate Media Cultures: An Inquiry into Young People’s Intimacies on Social Networking Sites, Ghent:: University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
56. De Ridder, S.. ( 2018;), ‘ Sexting as sexual stigma: The paradox of sexual self-representation in digital youth cultures. ’, European Journal of Cultural Studies, 22:5&6, pp. 563–78.
    [Google Scholar]
57. De Ridder, S., and Van Bauwel, S.. ( 2013;), ‘ Commenting on pictures: Teens negotiating gender and sexualities on social networking sites. ’, Sexualities, 16:5&6, pp. 565–86.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Riessman, C. K.. ( 1993), Narrative Analysis, vol. 30, London:: Sage;.
    [Google Scholar]
59. Ringrose, J.,, Harvey, L.,, Gill, R., and Livingstone, S.. ( 2013;), ‘ Teen girls, sexual double standards and “sexting”: Gendered value in digital image exchange. ’, Feminist Theory, 14:3, pp. 305–23.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Ringrose, J., and Renold, E.. ( 2012;), ‘ Slut-shaming, girl power and “sexualisation”: Thinking through the politics of the international SlutWalks with teen girls. ’, Gender and Education, 24:3, pp. 333–43.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Saatcioglu, B., and Ozanne, J. L.. ( 2013;), ‘ Moral habitus and status negotiation in a marginalized working class neighborhood. ’, Journal of Consumer Research, 40:4, pp. 692–710.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Saukko, P.. ( 2003), Doing Research in Cultural Studies: An Introduction to Classical and New Methodological Approaches, London:: Sage;.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Sev’er, A., and Yurdakul, G.. ( 2001;), ‘ Culture of honor, culture of change: A feminist analysis of honor killings in rural Turkey. ’, Violence Against Women, 7:9, pp. 964–98.
    [Google Scholar]
64. Thomson, R., and Holland, J.. ( 2002;), ‘ Young people, social change and the negotiation of moral authority. ’, Children & Society, 16:2, pp. 103–15.
    [Google Scholar]
65. Thumim, N.. ( 2012), Self-Representation and Digital Culture, Hampshire:: Palgrave Macmillan;.
    [Google Scholar]
66. Turkle, S.. ( 2011), Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other, New York:: Basic Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
67. Uskul, A. K.,, Cross, S. E.,, Gunsoy, C., and Gul, P.. ( 2019;), ‘ Cultures of honor. ’, in S. Kitayama, and D. Cohen. (eds), Handbook of Cultural Psychology, New York:: The Guilford Press;, pp. 793–821.
    [Google Scholar]
68. Van Dijck, J.. ( 2013), The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
69. Van Zoonen, L.. ( 1994), Feminist Media Studies, London:: Sage Publications;.
    [Google Scholar]
70. Winchester, D.. ( 2008;), ‘ Embodying the faith: Religious practice and the making of a Muslim moral habitus. ’, Social Forces, 86:4, pp. 1753–80.
    [Google Scholar]
71. Woodward, K.. ( 2015), The Politics of In/Visibility: Being There, Hampshire:: Palgrave Macmillan;.
    [Google Scholar]
72. Korkmazer, Burcu,, De Ridder, Sander, and Van Bauwel, Sofie. ( 2022;), ‘ Gender, culture, and morality: A case study of young people’s negotiations of sexual intimacy online. ’, Catalan Journal of Communication & Cultural Studies, 14:1, pp. 3–21, https://doi.org/10.1386/cjcs_00057_1
    [Google Scholar]