/lit/ - Literature

>>7377460
Yeah, she's important in online gender but she's pretty outdated. I've argued against her theory that online geek-talk is still a patriarchal context. If she catches your eye then check out Lori Kendall then read
>Morris, M., & Anderson, E. (2015). ‘Charlie Is So Cool Like’: Authenticity, Popularity and Inclusive Masculinity on YouTube. Sociology, 0038038514562852.

it's modern and I, personally, agree with it.

>>7376461
under wing? fuck that kid, go out and find your own passion. I cant tell you what that is.

> I bet there's something you love equally, something that given amphetamines, you'd spend all your time doing.

>>7376693
basic digital humanities theory is best summed up by

>Berry, D. M. (2012). Understanding digital humanities. Palgrave Macmillan.

because it's written by people who actually know how to code and have their shit together.

In online gender? I've mentioned all the top authors:

>Turkle
>Kendall
>Berry and his new dpmt at Sussex
>Anderson and his trainees
>maybe look at things coming out of the oxford internet institute.

I don't know about what's going on across the pond but the feminist bullshit seems to be holding you yanks back from making any qualitative movement.

DESU, get on google scholar and look into the search terms about political culture and online communities.

>Van Dijck, J., & Poell, T. (2013). Understanding social media logic. Media and Communication, 1(1), 2-14.

is something I dug up from my archive after you mentioned you were in political science, it covers all the main bases. It asks 'can online spaces become a "public sphere" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_sphere).).

That's where I would start. Sorry for being slow to respond, was finding the data that caused a buffer overflow in my database and swearing alot.