This study investigates the phenomenon of the ‘ratchet style’ among young women on Instagram, exploring how this aesthetic, originally associated with urban, working-class subcultures, has transcended its roots and been adopted by various social groups. We examine how the diversification of cultural interests and styles, driven by digitalization and social media, influences social distinction and mobility. Using a combination of Social Network Analysis and qualitative visual content analysis, we identify four distinct subtypes of the ratchet style: ‘Femininity Normative’, ‘Underground’, ‘Experimental’, and ‘Explicit’. Our findings reveal that, while the adoption of feminine ratchet style on Instagram may challenge traditional class hierarchies and offer opportunities for democratizing social positioning, it continues to operate within structured hierarchies of cultural consumption and visibility in Western societies. This suggests that, although social barriers persist in the digital era, markers of distinction have been repositioned.
AiresS (2020) Laboured identity: An analysis of user branding practices on Instagram. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique18(1): 494–507.
2.
AiroldiM (2018) Ethnography and the digital fields of social media. International Journal of Social Research Methodology21(6): 661–673.
3.
AlimHSIbrahimAPennycookA (eds) (2008) Global Linguistic Flows. Hip Hop Cultures, Youth Identities, and the Politics of Language. London: Routledge.
4.
AnthiasF (2008) Thinking through the lens of translocational positionality: An intersectionality frame for understanding identity and belonging. Translocations: Migration and Social Change4(1): 5–19.
5.
AoIR, Association of Internet Researchers (2019) Internet research: Ethical guidelines 3.0 [Guia ética]. Association of Internet Researchers. Available at: https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf
6.
ArmstrongJKRudúlphHW (2013) Sexy Feminism: A Girl’s Guide to Love, Success, and Style. Boston, MA: Mariner Books.
7.
AudrezetAde KervilerGGuidry MoulardJ (2020) Authenticity under threat: When social media influencers need to go beyond self-presentation. Journal of Business Research117: 557–569.
8.
BarrioC (2023) Images, female trappers, and Instagram. Slow-cooked nethnographical reflections. Teknokultura. Revista de Cultura Digital y Movimientos Sociales20(2): 165–173.
9.
BarrioCGordoA (2021) Self-consumption and promotion on Instagram. In: CastilloAGarcía-PrietoB (eds) Prosumidores emergentes: redes sociales, alfabetización y creación de contenidos. Madrid: Dykinson, pp.795–812.
10.
BeckUBeck-GernsheimE (2002) Individualization. Institutionalized Individualism and Its Social and Political Consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
BennettA (1999) Subcultures or neo-tribes? Rethinking the relationship between youth, style and musical taste. Sociology33(3): 599–617.
12.
BennettA (2005) Culture and Everyday Life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13.
BennettA (2014) Youth culture and the Internet: A subcultural or post-subcultural phenomena? In: The Subcultures Network (ed.) Subcultures, Popular Music and Social Change. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp.89–104.
14.
BorgattiSPEverettMGJohnsonJC (2013) Analyzing Social Networks. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
BourdieuP (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. London: Routledge.
16.
BovoneL (2006) Urban style cultures and urban cultural production in Milan: Postmodern identity and the transformation of fashion. Poetics34(6): 370–382.
BuckinghamDBraggSKehilyJ (eds) (2014) Youth Cultures in the Age of Global Media. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
19.
CaliandroA (2017) Digital methods for ethnography: Analytical concepts for ethnographers exploring social media environments. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography47(5): 0891241617702960.
20.
CastroE (2019) The Trap: Millennial Philosophy for the Crisis in Spain. Madrid: Errata Naturae.
21.
DeNoraT (1999) Music as a technology of the self. Poetics27(1): 31–56.
22.
DeNoraT (2004) Music in Everyday Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23.
DeVriesRReevesA (2020) What does it mean to be a cultural omnivore? Conflicting visions of omnivorousness in empirical research. SSRN Electronic Journal. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3541022
24.
DijkJVPoellT (2013) Understanding social media logic. Media and Communication1(1): 2–14.
25.
DjafarovaETrofimenkoO (2019) ‘Instafamous’. Credibility and self-presentation of micro-celebrities on social media. Information, Communication & Society22(10): 1432–1446.
26.
DriskoJWMaschiT (2016) Content Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fernández EnguitaMVázquez-CupeiroS (2016) The Long and Complex Journey From CLIP to CLIC: Schools and Teachers in the New Digital Environment. Barcelona: Ariel.
30.
Fernández RodríguezCJHeikkiläR (2020) Taste in postmodernity: An assessment of the debate on cultural omnivorousness. In: AlonsoLEFernández RodríguezCJIbáñez RojoR (eds) Social Studies on Consumption. Washington, DC: Center for Internet Security, pp.345–361.
31.
FortunatoS (2010) Community detection in graphs. Physics Reports486(3–5): 75–174.
GlaserBGStraussAL (2006) The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Strategies for Qualitative Research. Houston, TX: Aldine Transaction.
34.
GordoAGarcíaAde RiveraJ, et al. (2018) Jóvenes en la encrucijada digital. Itinerarios de socialización y desigualdad en los entornos digitales. Madrid: Centro Reina Sofía sobre Adolescencia y Juventud, Fad.
35.
GoreaM (2021) Becoming your ‘authentic’ self: How social media influences youth’s visual transitions. Social Media and Society7(3): 20563051211047875.
36.
HaddonL (2015): Social Media and Youth. In: AngPHMansellR (eds) The International Encyclopedia of Digital Communication and Society. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 1st ed., pp.1–9.
37.
HallSdu GayP (1996) Cuestiones de identidad cultural. Buenos Aires: Amorrutu Editores.
38.
HallSJeffersonTClarkeJ, et al. (1976) Resistance Through Rituals: Youth Subcultures in Post-War Britain (HallSJeffersonT (eds)): London: Routledge.
39.
HebdigeD (1979) Subculture. The Meaning of Style. London: Routledge.
Herrera- UsagreM (2020) Imagination and omnivorousness: New strategies for class closure and their effect on cultural consumption. In: AlonsoLEFernández RodríguezCJIbáñez RojoR (eds) Social Studies on Consumption. Washington, DC: Center for Internet Security, pp.363–385.
42.
JacomyMVenturiniTHeymannS, et al. (2014) ForceAtlas2, a continuous graph layout algorithm for handy network visualization designed for the Gephi software. PloS ONE9(6): e98679.
43.
Karademir-HazirI (2015) Cultural Omnivorousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44.
KnowlesCSweetmanP (2004) Picturing the social landscape: Visual methods in the sociological imagination. London: Routledge.
45.
LahireB (2008) The individual and the mixing of genres: Cultural dissonance and self-distinction. Poetics36(2–3): 166–188.
46.
LambiotteRDelvenneJCBarahonaM (2014) Random walks, Markov Processes and the multiscale modular organization of complex networks. IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering1(2): 76–90.
47.
LangleyPLeyshonA (2016) Platform capitalism: The intermediation and capitalisation of digital economic circulation. Finance and Society3(1): 1–21.
48.
Latzko-TothGBonneauCMilletteM (2017) Small data, thick data: Thickening strategies in race-based social media research. In: Quan-HaaseASloanyL (eds) Sage Handbook of Social Media Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp.199–214.
49.
LeaverTHighfieldTAbidinC (2020) Instagram: Visual Social Media Cultures. Cambridge: Polity Press.
50.
LivingstoneS (2008) Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: Teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society10(3): 393–341.
51.
LivingstoneSSefton-GreenJ (2020) The Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age. New York: University Press.
52.
MccuneZThompsonJ (2011) Consumer Production in Social Media Networks: A Case Study of the ‘Instagram’ Iphone App. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
53.
McQuarrieEMillerJPhillipsB (2013) The Megaphone Effect: Taste and Audience in Fashion Blogging. Journal of Consumer Research40(1): 136–158.
54.
MaffesoliM (1996) The time of the tribes: The Decline of Individualism in Mass Society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
55.
ManovichL (2001) The Language of New Media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
56.
MarkhamABuchananE (2017) Research ethics in context: Decision-making in digital research. In: SchäferMTVan EsK (eds) The Datafied Society. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp.201–210.
57.
MartínezLM (2018) La muestra cualitativa en la práctica: una propuesta. Revista Eixo7(3): 4–15.
MendickH (2015) Youth cultures in the age of global media. In: BuckinghamDBraggSKehilyJ (eds) Studies in Childhood and Youth. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.718–719.
60.
MiheljSLeguinaADowneyJ (2019) Culture is digital: Cultural participation, diversity and the digital divide. New Media & Society21(7): 1465–1485.
61.
MirzoeffN (2016) How to See the World: An Introduction to Images, From Self-Portraits to Selfies, Maps to Movies, and More. New York: Basic Books.
62.
MuggletonD (2000) Inside Subculture: The Postmodern Meaning of Style. Oxford: Berg Publishers.
NoyC (2008) Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology11(4): 327–344.
65.
Olaiz (2016) ‘Quinqui cinema’: Injustice and the city. Semiosfera4: 120–134.
66.
PalinkasLAHorwitzSMGreenCA, et al. (2015) Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research42(5): 533–544.
67.
PetersonRA (2005) Problems in comparative research: The example of omnivorousness. Poetics33(5–6): 257–282.
68.
PetersonRAKernRM (1996) From snob to omnivore. American Sociological Review61(5): 900–907.
69.
PinkSHorstHAPostillJ, et al. (eds) (2016) Digital Ethnography: Principles and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
70.
RančićJ (2022) The role of digital media in the socialization of children. Communication and Media17(52): 239–261.
71.
Rey- GayosoRDizC (2021) Trap music in Spain: Youthful aesthetics in times of crisis. AIBR, Revista De Antropología Iberoamericana16(3): 583–607.
72.
RiederBRöhleT (2017) Digital methods: From challenges to Bildung. In: SchäferMTvan EsK (eds) The datafied society. Amsterdam University Press, pp.109–124.
73.
RogersR (2019) Doing Digital Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
74.
RoseG (2001) Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual Materials. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
75.
SassatelliR (2007) Consumer Culture: History, Theory and Politics. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
76.
SaundersBSimJKingstoneT, et al. (2018) Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality and Quantity52(4): 1893–1907.
77.
SchlosserEA (2020) Self-disclosure versus self-presentation on social media. Current Opinion in Psychology31: 1–6.
78.
ScottJCarringtonPJ (eds) (2011) The Sage Handbook of Social Network Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
79.
SemenzinSBainottiL (2020) The use of Telegram for non-consensual dissemination of intimate images: Gendered affordances and the construction of masculinities. Social Media + Society6(4): 1–12.
80.
SrnicekNDe SutterL (2016) Platform capitalism. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Polity Press.
81.
StokesJPriceB (2017) Social media, visual culture and contemporary identity [Libro de actas]. In: The 11th International Multi-Conference on Society, Cybernetics and Informatics (IMSCI), Orlando, Florida, USA, 8–11 July.
82.
StringhiE (2022) Addressing gendered affordances of the platform economy: The case of UpWork. Internet Policy Review11(1): 1–28.
83.
TarjanR (1972) Depth-first search and linear graph algorithms. SIAM Journal on Computing1(2): 146–160.
84.
TiidenbergK (2018) Ethics in digital research. In: FlickU (ed.) Sage Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 466–481.
85.
van DijkTA (1996) Análisis documental de contenido. Procesamiento de la información. Sitges: Síntesis.
VrontisDMakridesAChristofiM, et al. (2021) Social media influencer marketing: A systematic review, integrative framework and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies45(4): 617–644. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12647
88.
WardeAWrightDGayo-CalM (2007) Understanding cultural omnivorousness: Or, the myth of the cultural omnivore. Cultural Sociology1(2): 143–164.
89.
WarrDGuilleminMCoxS, et al. (eds) (2016) Ethics and Visual Research Methods. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
90.
WeingartnerS (2021) Digital omnivores? How digital media reinforce social inequalities in cultural consumption. New Media and Society23(11): 3370–3390.
91.
WillisP (2004) Culturas vivas: Una entrevista con Paul Willis. Entrevistado por Roger Martínez. Estudios de Juventud64: 123–136.
92.
WillisP (2014) Profane Culture. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
93.
Yenilmez-KacarG (2024) Instagram as one tool, two stages: Self-presentational differences between main feed and story on Instagram. Atlantic Journal of Communication32(1): 108–123.
94.
Yuval-DavisN (2011) The Politics of Belonging: Intersectional Contestations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
95.
ZulliD (2017) Capitalizing on the look: Insights into the glance, attention economy, and Instagram. Critical Studies in Media Communication35(2): 137–150.
