Abstract
This Shortcuts section engages the debate on whether the #MeToo movement is best understood as a form of social justice, bringing heinous acts often shrouded in decades of silence into the public domain, or as mob rule, foregoing official legal channels to summarily shame individuals through unmoderated character assassination. The four contributors offer diverse views on the efficacy of the #MeToo movement to bring forth structural change. They consider the relationship between #MeToo and other longer-running civil rights initiatives, the role of new communication technologies in producing collective suffering, and the need to better contextualize the production of shame. They address questions of how love and desire might fit into twenty-first-century biopolitics, and critically assess the relationship between hashtag movements and institutionalized law.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 21 Dec 2018 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Special Collection on #MeToo: #MeToo is little more than mob rule // vs // #MeToo is a legitimate form of social justice'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Research output
- 1 Article
-
#MeToo: legal quandaries, public shaming, and the violence of silence
Pipyrou, S., 21 Dec 2018, In: HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory. 8, 3, p. 415-419Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
Open AccessFile
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver