Imaginaries of feminism and political discourse: rhetoric or hate speech?
Main Article Content
Abstract
The proliferation of hostile discourses in the political sphere has increased in recent times as a consequence of a pressing ideological polarization in relation to the social phenomenon of feminism. This work explores the polarized discursive production of the main Spanish political formations on their Instagram accounts, after the application of Organic Law 10/2022 of September 6, comprehensively guaranteeing sexual freedom, known in the media as the law of “only yes is yes”. Through content analysis and critical discourse analysis, the contents that stage social visions of women and feminism are addressed, and that were published by the political parties themselves on their Instagram accounts since 11/01/22. as of 04/30/23. The results obtained allow us to identify how political parties enact intersubjective and imaginary visions of what women and feminism should be, through rhetorically hostile and intolerant speeches. From this point of view, this work aims to stimulate reflection on the productive role that Spanish political parties adopt when inciting hatred through language.
Downloads
Article Details
Issue
Section

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported License.
Miguel Hernández Communication Journal is an open access magazine. To publish on MHCJ, the authors accept the following terms:
- The authors will retain their copyright and guarantee the journal the right to first publish their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Creative Commons Atribución/Reconocimiento-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional, which allows third parties share the work as long as its author and his first publication in this magazine are indicated.
- Authors may adopt other non-exclusive license agreements for the distribution of the version of the published work (eg, deposit it in an institutional telematic archive or publish it in a monographic volume) provided that the initial publication in this journal is indicated .
- Authors are allowed and recommended to disseminate their work through the Internet (e.g., in institutional telematic archives or on their website) before and during the submission process, which can produce interesting exchanges and increase citations. of the published work. (See The effect of open access).
- The document RESIGNATION OF PERCEPTION OF BENEFITS OF COPYRIGHT is intended for the print publication of MHCJ by the UNIVERSITAS publishing house. Both authors and publishers renounce the collection of economic benefits, if any, when the aforementioned publisher takes over the entire cost of printing, distribution and dissemination.
How to Cite
References
Basulto, O., Segovia L, P., y Julian, C. (2020). Imaginarios y representaciones para configurar un perfil mediático de la prensa tradicional en Chile: El caso del diario El Mercurio y El sur en torno al movimiento estudiantil universitario 2011. Universum (Talca. Impresa), 35(1), 250–287. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-23762020000100250
Ben-David, A & Matamoros-Fernández, A. (2016). Hate Speech and Covert Discrimination on Social Media: Monitoring the Facebook Pages of Extreme-Right Political Parties in Spain, International Journal of Communication 10, 1167-1193.
Cartes, MJ.; (2018). El uso de Instagram por los partidos políticos catalanes durante el referendum del 1-O, Revista de Comunicación, SEECI, 47, 17-36. https://doi.org/10.15198/seeci.2018.0
Chakraborti, N. et al (2014). The Leicester Hate Crime Project. Findings and Conclusions. Leicester, University of Leicester.
Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2013). Conceptualizing Mediatization: Context, Traditions, Arguments. Communication Theory, 23(3), 191-202.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
Gagliardone, I., Gal, D., Alves, T., & Martinez, G. (2015). Countering online hate speech. Unesco
Publishing. University of Oxford.
Guix, J. (2007). El análisis de contenidos ¿qué nos están diciendo? Calidad Asistencial, 23(1), 26-30
Howard, J. W. (2019) “Free Speech and Hate Speech”. Annual Review of Political Science 22: 93-109. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051517-012343
Instagram. (2022). Comunidad: Respect other members of the Instagram community. https://help.instagram.com/477434105621119/?helpref=hc_fnav
Jurado Martín, M. (2010). La investigación académica sobre periodismo en México: una mirada crítica. Revista Mediterránea De Comunicación, 1(1), 141–157. https://doi.org/10.14198/MEDCOM2010.1.1.08
Khosravinik, M. & Esposito, E. (2018). Online hate, Digital Discourse and critique: exploring digitally-mediated discursive practices of gender-based hostility, Lodz Paper in Pragmatics, 14.1, 45-68.
Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content Analysis. An introduction to its methodology. SAGE Publications.
Laclau, E. (2005) “Populism. What’s in a Name?”, en Panizza, F. (ed.), Populism and the Mirror of Democracy, 33-49. London: Verso
Leaver, T., Highfield, T., & Abidin, C. (2020). Instagram: Visual Social Media Cultures. Polity Press.
Losada-Díaz, J. C., Zamora-Medina, R., & Martinez-Martínez, H. (2021). El discurso del odio en Instagram durante las Elecciones Generales 2019 en España. Revista Mediterránea De Comunicación, 12(2), 195–208. https://doi.org/10.14198/MEDCOM.19142
Marciel Pariente, R. (2022). Populismo y discursos del odio: un matrimonio evitable (en teoría). Isegoría, (67), e06. https://doi.org/10.3989/isegoria.2022.67.06
Miró Llinares, F. (2016). Taxonomía de la comunicación violenta y el discurso del odio en Internet. IDP. Revista de Internet, Derecho y Política, 22, 82-107. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=78846481007
Riffo-Pavón, I. (2022). Imaginarios sociales, representaciones sociales y re-presentaciones discursivas. Cinta de Moebio, 74, 78–94. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0717-554x2022000200078
Segovia Lacoste, P., Basulto Gallegos, O., & Zambrano Uribe, P. (2018). Imaginarios sociales y representaciones: su aplicación a análisis discursivos en tres ámbitos diferentes. Empiria. Revista De metodología De Ciencias Sociales, (41), 79–102. https://doi.org/10.5944/empiria.41.2018.22605
Sola, J. (2021) “La confusión populista: problemas conceptuales y sesgos ideológicos”. Revista Internacional de Sociología 79 (2): e187. https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2021.79.2.20.02
Torres Cubeiro, M., & Carretero, Á. E. (2020). The Social Imaginaries Sociologies: the beginning of a needed conceptual clarification. Sociedad Hoy, (28), 141–161. https://doi.org/10.29393/sh28-7simt20007
Torrijos Zurita, R. (2021). Formas de pensar, sentir y ser en el mundo figurado de la empresa. [Tesis de Doctorado, Universidad de Alcalá]. Repositorio Institucional – Universidad de Alcalá.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2013). Ideology and Discourse. En: Freeden, M., & Stears, M. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Ideologies, 175-196. Oxford University Press.