Gender Dimension of Digital Vigilantism in Russia

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Digital vigilantism can be defined as the coordinated actions of civic groups in virtual space (not excluding the possibility of going offline) in response to imaginary or real actions of third parties or as the expression of outrage at a real-world event recorded and uploaded online. Digital vigilantism serves as an informalised institution of online civil society, regulating behaviour and punishing citizens for actions or intentions that are inappropriate from the vigilantes’ point of view. In modern Russia, movements that were formed as a result of the interactions between NGOs, individual activists and the authorities, that are now acting as auxiliary institutions, become quite popular. This phenomenon suggests the spread of guided vigilantism. The authors argue that the governmental structures recognize the impossibility of solving some conflict situations within formal institutions and therefore legitimize their regulation through network interactions. This article focuses on the gender aspects of digital vigilantism in Russia. In order to analyze gender characteristics of Russian vigilante communities, the authors collected the data on the subscribers of six online communities using the VKontakte API (application programming interface): “StopHam”, “Lev Protiv”, “Khrushi Protiv”, “Sorok Sorokov”, “Anti-Dealer” and “Sober Yard”. A dataset of 818 927 records was generated, which included basic socio-demographic information about the users (ID, user-specified name, gender, age, city). Analyzing the posts and comments uploaded over the last two years and the database of subscribers of typical vigilante communities in the VKontakte social network (2900 subscriptions), the authors were able to come closer to understanding users’ motivations, define the social portrait of a “typical digital vigilante” and identify gender characteristics of the movement. Research outcomes confirm the problematic persistence of gender asymmetry and the inheritance of enduring cultural stereotypes regarding the correlation between “the female” and “the male”, even concerning such a new form of civic activism in Russia as digital vigilantism.

About the authors

Anna V. Volkova

Saint Petersburg State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: AV.Volkova@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3687-5728

Doctor of Science in Political Sciences, Professor, Department of Political Governance of the Faculty of Political Science

Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation

Galina V. Lukyanova

Saint Petersburg State University

Email: g.lukiyanova@spbu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1260-2124

PhD in Political Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Political Institutions and Applied Political Research of the Faculty of Political Science

Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation

Tatiana A. Kulakova

Saint Petersburg State University

Email: t.kulakova@spbu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3386-8079

Doctor of Science in Political Sciences, Professor, Department of Political Governance of the Faculty of Political Science

Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation

References

  1. Ajvazova, S.G. (2007). The “gender game” on the field of Russian politics: The possibility of institutional changes. Reforming Russia, 6, 319–331. (In Russian).
  2. Volkova, A.V., Lukyanova, G.V., & Martyanov, D.S. (2021). Digital vigilantism: Behavioral patterns and value orientations. South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences, 22(2), 37–52. (In Russian).
  3. Kulakova, T.A., Volkova, A.V., & Budko, D.A. (2021). Conflicts of the «era of digital vigilantism”. Conflictology, 16(4), 9–27. (In Russian).
  4. Popova, O.V. (2015). Role of women’s parties in modern Russia: Problems and prospects. Political Science (RU), 1, 186–199. (In Russian).
  5. Abrahams, R. (2003). What’s in a name? Some thoughts on the vocabulary of vigilantism and related forms of informal criminal justice. In D. Feenan (Ed.), Informal Criminal Justice (pp. 25–40). London: Ashgate.
  6. Anderson, D.M. (2002). Vigilantes, violence and the politics of public order in Kenya. African Affairs. 101(405), 531–555. https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/101.405.531
  7. Arrobi, M.Z. (2018). Vigilantism as ‘twilight institution’: Islamic vigilante groups and the state in post-Suharto Yogyakarta. PCD Journal, 6(2), 213–237. https://doi.org/10.22146/pcd.35215
  8. Asif, M., & Weenink, D. (2019). Vigilante rituals theory: A cultural explanation of vigilante violence. European Journal of Criminology, November, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370819887518
  9. Bateson, R. (2021). The politics of vigilantism. Comparative Political Studies, 54(6), 923–955. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414020957692
  10. Brighenti, A. (2007). Visibility: A category for the social sciences. Current Sociology, 55(3), 323–342.
  11. Burrows, W. (1976). Vigilante. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
  12. Caparini, M., & Gogolewska, A. (2021). Governance challenges of transformative technologies. Connections, 20(1), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.11610 /Connections.20.1.06
  13. Chang, LYC, & Poon, R. (2017). Internet vigilantism: Attitudes and experiences of university students toward cyber crowdsourcing in Hong Kong. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 61(16), 1912–1932. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16639037
  14. Dennis, K. (2008). Keeping a close watch: The rise of self-surveillance and the threat of digital exposure. Sociological Review, 56(3), 347–357.
  15. Douglas, D. (2016). Doxing: A conceptual analysis. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(3), 199–210.
  16. Fuchs, C. (2015). Social media and the public sphere. TripleC: Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 12(1), 57–101.
  17. Helmke, G., & Levitsky, S. (2004). Informal institutions and comparative politics: A research agenda. Perspectives on Politics, 2(4), 725–740.
  18. Keijzer, M.A., Mäs, M., & Flache, A. (2018). Communication in online social networks fosters cultural isolation. Complexity, November, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/9502872
  19. Lund, C. (2006). Twilight institutions: Public authority and local politics in Africa. Development and Change, 37(4), 685–705.
  20. Mclure, H. (2000). The wild, wild web: The mythic American west and the electronic frontier. The Western Historical Quarterly, 31, 457–476.
  21. Meagher, K. (2007). Hijacking civil society: The inside story of the Bakassi Boys vigilante group of south-eastern Nigeria. Journal of Modern African Studies, 45(1), 89–115.
  22. Nivette, A.E. (2016). Institutional ineffectiveness, illegitimacy, and public support for vigilantism in Latin America. Criminology, 54, 142–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12099
  23. Obert, J., & Mattiacci, E. (2018). Keeping vigil: The emergence of vigilance committees in pre-civil war America. Perspectives on Politics, 16(3), 600–616.
  24. Rosenbaum, H.J., & Sederburg, P.C. (1974). Vigilantism: An analysis of establishment violence. Comparative Politics, 6(4), 541–570.
  25. Schuberth, M. (2013). Challenging the weak states hypothesis: Vigilantism in South Africa and Brazil. Journal of Peace, Conflict & Development, 20, 38–51.
  26. Shukan, I. (2019). Defending Ukraine at the rear of the armed conflict in Donbas: wartime vigilantism in Odessa (2014–2018). Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research, 3, 71–104.
  27. Skoric, M.M., Wong, K.H., Chua, J.P.E., Yeo, P.J., & Liew, M.A. (2010). Online shaming in the Asian context: Community empowerment or civic vigilantism? Surveillance and Society, 8(2), 181–199.
  28. Smith, N.R. (2019). Contradictions of democracy: Vigilantism and rights in post-apartheid South Africa. Oxford University Press.
  29. Stan, L. (2011). Vigilante justice in post-communist Europe. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 44(4), 319–327.
  30. Tanner, S., & Campana, A. (2019). “Watchful citizens” and digital vigilantism: a case study of the far right in Quebec. Global Crime, 21(3–4), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17440572.2019.1609177
  31. Trottier, D. (2017). Digital vigilantism as weaponisation of visibility. Philosophy & Technology, 30(1), 55–72.
  32. Trottier, D. (2019). Denunciation and doxing: towards a conceptual model of digital vigilantism. Global Crime. https://doi.org/10.1080/17440572.2019.1591952; 15
  33. Wilkinson, D.L., Beaty, C.C., & Lurry, R.M. (2009). Youth violencecrime or self-help? Marginalized urban males’ perspectives on the limited efficacy of the criminal justice system to stop youth violence. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 623(1), 25–38.
  34. Zizumbo-Colunga, D. (2017). Community, authorities, and support for vigilantism: Experimental evidence. Political Behavior, 39(4), 989–1015.

Copyright (c) 2022 Volkova A.V., Lukyanova G.V., Kulakova T.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies