Shaming, group face, and identity construction in a Russian virtual community for women

Abstract

Impoliteness, often described as non-cooperative and norm-disrupting verbal behavior (Keinpointner 2008; Culpeper et al. 2003; Beebe 1995), can also serve important sociability functions. When tension is present between individual and group face wants, impoliteness can be used to establish, reinforce, or (re)negotiate values salient to the group (Culpeper 2011; Lea at al. 1992; Graham 2007). The intersection of impoliteness with group face concerns is especially important in polylogous online contexts (Blitvich 2010; Lorenzo-Dus at al. 2011; Perelmutter 2013). This study examines the intersection between individual and group face concerns by examining impoliteness in an online Russian-language forum dedicated to discussions of marital infidelity. This forum is frequented by both mistresses and cheated-upon wives. Mistresses post confessions, expecting and sometimes even soliciting shaming responses from other forum members; wives engage in troubles-telling and are mocked by mistresses; mistresses and wives insult and shame each other. Since the overarching societal norms and expectations of family mores and gendered behavior in the post-Soviet society are often unclear, these shaming practices help Russian-speaking women construct and negotiate their identities within a group of peers. These negotiations integrate individual, group, and societal face concerns.

Impoliteness in Reader Comments on Japanese Online News Sites

“…Further, this also indicates the posters' awareness of identity, and in turn encourages them to behave aggressively and to perform varying types of verbal abuse by attacking the individual face of the Russian vice-president, the group face of Russian people in general, and the face of posters (such as Eric in Example 15) who seem to be less strongly against the Russian vice-president or Russian people. Impoliteness performed here also has a sociability function, as pointed out by previous studies: "when tension is present between individual and group face wants, impoliteness can be used to establish, reinforce, or (re)negotiate values salient to the group" [8] (p. 149). It functions to "establish alliances through conflict discourse, thus reinforcing the individual's feeling of belonging to a specific group" [8] (p. 150).…”

“…Impoliteness performed here also has a sociability function, as pointed out by previous studies: "when tension is present between individual and group face wants, impoliteness can be used to establish, reinforce, or (re)negotiate values salient to the group" [8] (p. 149). It functions to "establish alliances through conflict discourse, thus reinforcing the individual's feeling of belonging to a specific group" [8] (p. 150). By performing the face-attacking acts using hostile and offensive language, posters established stronger awareness of their national identity and reinforced their feeling of belonging to the nation/group.…”

“…Impoliteness therefore can "have a positive sociability function such as establishing and reinforcing community norms …… or contributing to alliance-building". It is for this reason that impoliteness "can be ratified/expected within a group; this communally-ratified impoliteness is often enacted within specific and recognizable genres, such as the flamewar" [8] (p. 150-151). These claims made in previous studies help to explain why it seems that, in some online discussions, the participants are tolerant of verbal aggression or share a similar aggressive attitude.…”

“…Kádár, Haugh and Chang [4] also claim that "face should be analysed not only at the level of interpersonal interaction but also at the intergroup level" (p. 343). The notions of group face and the social identity face are especially important when investigating impoliteness in online polylogues [1], [8], as in many situations, the key issue "is not about individual face so much as it is about the enactment of belonging to a specific social group, which is constituted in opposition to another social group" [8] (p. 174). These provide the current study with useful tools to answer the research questions, by identifying what exactly motivates people to behave differently in terms of im/politeness when posting comments on Japanese online news sites.…”

“…That is, impoliteness does not only function negatively as face-threatening or is a violation of the social norms which are commonly accepted and followed by members of the society. It "can also be used to establish alliances through conflict discourse, thus reinforcing the individual's feeling of belonging" to a specific group [8] (p. 150). Summarising claims made in previous studies, Perelmutter wrote, "when tension is present between individual and group face wants, impoliteness can be used to establish, reinforce, or (re)negotiate values salient to the group".…”