Women’s bodies and appetites attract a disproportionate level of media coverage, and reveal heightened cultural concern around ‘appropriate’ behaviour. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the ‘Women Who Eat on Tubes’ Facebook group, which raises important questions about the nature of ‘the public’ and monitoring of female desires, as well as the historically gendered surveillance of women’s relationship with food and eating. This chapter explores the emergence of ‘Women Who Eat on Tubes’ as a social phenomenon, and what its existence, and challenges to that existence, reveals about sexism, misogyny and gender in early-21st century digital culture.
AbrahamB (2014) FCJ-170 challenging hate speech with Facebook flarf: The role of user practices in regulating hate speech on Facebook. The Fibreculture Journal23: 47–72.
2.
AllenPSachsC (2002) Women and food chains: The gendered politics of food. In: ForsonPWCounihanC (eds) Taking Food Public: Redefining Foodways in a Changing World. London: Routledge, pp.23–40.
3.
BakerESchootmanMBarnidgeE, et al. (2006) The role of race and poverty in access to foods that enable individuals to adhere to dietary guidelines. Preventing Chronic Disease3: A76.
BullerR (2016) Performing the breastfeeding body: Lactivism and art interventions. Studies in the Maternal8: 1–15.
14.
CheungA (2014) Revisiting privacy and dignity: Online shaming in the global e-village. Laws3: 301–326.
15.
ChoiEY (2012) A case study of promotion through the communication contents of Facebook for fashion brands-focused on empathy and participation based on the communication contents. Journal of the Korean Society of Costume62: 137–151.
CorcoranLGuckinCPrenticeG (2015) Cyberbullying or cyber aggression? A review of existing definitions of cyber-based peer-to-peer aggression. Societies5: 245–255.
18.
EdgeS (1998) The power to fix the gaze: Gender and class in Victorian photographs of pit-brow women. Visual Studies13: 37–56.
GangadharbatlaH (2008) Facebook me: Collective self-esteem, need to belong, and internet self-efficacy as predictors of the iGeneration’s attitudes toward social networking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising8: 5–15.
22.
GayR (2017) Hunger: A Memoir of (My) Body. London: Corsair, Little Brown.
Inequality.org (n.d.) Gender economic inequality: Men dominate at the top of the economic summit while women are saddled with debt and poverty. Available at: https://inequality.org/gender-inequality/
29.
InnesSA (2001) Introduction: Thinking food/thinking gender. In: InnessSA (ed.) Kitchen Culture in America: Popular Representations of Food, Gender, and Race. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp.1–12.
30.
JaneEA (2014) ‘Back to the kitchen, cunt’: Speaking the unspeakable about online misogyny. Continuum 28: 558–570; 562.
31.
JaneEA (2017) Misogyny Online: A Short (And Brutish) History. London: Sage.
LarcombeW (2011) Falling rape conviction rates: (Some) feminist aims and measures for rape law. Feminist Legal Studies19: 27–45.
37.
LazerDMBaumMABenklerY, et al. (2018) The science of fake news. Science359: 1094–1096.
38.
LeetsL (2001) Responses to internet hate sites: Is speech too free in cyberspace?Communication Law & Policy6: 287–317.
39.
LennonJ (2017) ‘Dreams that hunger makes’: Memories of hunger in Yeats, Mangan, Speranza, and Irish folklore. Irish University Review47: 62–81.
40.
LivingstoneCSmithPK (2014) Annual research review: Harms experienced by child users of online and mobile technologies: The nature, prevalence and management of sexual and aggressive risks in the digital age. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry55: 635–654.
LuptonD (2018) Vitalities and visceralities: Alternative body/food politics in new digital media. In: PhillipovMKirkwoodK (eds) Alternative Food Politics: From the Margins to the Mainstream. London: Routledge, p.151.
43.
MahH (2000) Phantasies of the public sphere: Rethinking the Habermas of historians. The Journal of Modern History72: 153–182.
44.
Mahon-DalyPAndrewsGJ (2002) Liminality and breastfeeding: Women negotiating space and two bodies. Health & Place8: 61–76.
45.
ManneK (2017) Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
RothL (2015) Beyond communities: Cinematic food events and the negotiation of power, belonging and exclusion. In: LongLM (ed.) The Food and Folklore Reader. London: Bloomsbury, p.339.
SarracinoCScottKM (2008) The Porning of America: The Rise of Porn Culture, What It Means, and Where We Go from Here. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
55.
Shapiro SandersL (2010) Consuming Nigella. In: GillisSHollowsJ (eds) Feminism, Domesticity and Popular Culture. London: Routledge, pp.151–164.
56.
SheldonPBryantK (2016) Instagram: Motives for its use and relationship to narcissism and contextual age. Computers in Human Behavior58: 89–97.
57.
SlavichMAO’HallarnBMoreheadCA (2018) ‘We smoked a gator!’ An exploration of college football fans’ Instagramming of food. Journal of Intercollegiate Sport11: 1–23.
58.
ThomsenSRMcCoyJKWilliamsM (2001) Internalizing the impossible: Anorexic outpatients’ experiences with women’s beauty and fashion magazines. Eating Disorders9: 49–64.
59.
TiggemannMSlaterA (2013) NetGirls: The Internet, Facebook, and body image concern in adolescent girls. International Journal of Eating Disorders46: 630–633.
60.
TokunagaRS (2010) Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior26: 277–287.
61.
TrottierD (2017) Digital vigilantism as weaponization of visibility. Philosophy & Technology30: 55–72.
62.
WardPCoveneyJHendersonJ (2010) Editorial: A sociology of food and eating. Journal of Sociology46: 347–351.
Williams-ForsonP (2013) More than just the ‘big piece of chicken’: The power of race, class and food in American consciousness. In: CounihanCVan EsterikP (eds) Food and Culture: A Reader. New York: Routledge, 342–353.
65.
WuP (2015) Impossible to regulate? Social media, terrorists, and the role for the UN. Chicago Journal of International Law16: 281–311.
