“But if you walk the
footsteps of a
stranger, you’ll learn
things you never
knew, you never
knew.”
Acknowledgements
There are several people to thank that I have met
throughout this journey and have helped me either
knowingly or not.
First and foremost are those in India that I spent time with.
Thank you for opening up your world to me and inviting
me into your space to work on this project together.
I would like to pay special appreciation to all of those
who became a part of the online campaign and helped
lead me to the focus of my thesis; we will never know
each other, and I will never get to adequately say thank
you, and for that I am sad.
To those who have doubted me, questioned my abilities,
or called my writing “frankly annoying.” You have
helped me find motivation when I thought I couldn’t find
any. And for that, I appreciate you.
For my friends and family whom I have annoyed
endlessly with this topic, thank you, and I owe you.
And lastly but certainly not least, a special thank you to
my advisor, Eileen. You knew when to push me and
when to pull back. Without your help and advice, I would
not have made it and would not have created something
I can be this proud of.
Acknowledgements
There are several people to thank that I have met
throughout this journey and have helped me either
knowingly or not.
First and foremost are those in India that I spent time with.
Thank you for opening up your world to me and inviting
me into your space to work on this project together.
I would like to pay special appreciation to all of those
who became a part of the online campaign and helped
lead me to the focus of my thesis; we will never know
each other, and I will never get to adequately say thank
you, and for that I am sad.
To those who have doubted me, questioned my abilities,
or called my writing “frankly annoying.” You have
helped me find motivation when I thought I couldn’t find
any. And for that, I appreciate you.
For my friends and family whom I have annoyed
endlessly with this topic, thank you, and I owe you.
And lastly but certainly not least, a special thank you to
my advisor, Eileen. You knew when to push me and
when to pull back. Without your help and advice, I would
not have made it and would not have created something
I can be this proud of.
Abstract
Recently, an online campaign in India addressed intimate partner violence. The
campaign focused on the difference between love and control, using a tactic of
having users aim at defining these concepts. This research takes a critical look at
how users of the online campaign went about developing and replicating
definitions of love and control, and examine how that process fits within current
scholarly doctrine, different lines of study, and within the development
organization that created the campaign.
Key Words
Abstract
Recently, an online campaign in India addressed intimate partner violence. The
campaign focused on the difference between love and control, using a tactic of
having users aim at defining these concepts. This research takes a critical look at
how users of the online campaign went about developing and replicating
definitions of love and control, and examine how that process fits within current
scholarly doctrine, different lines of study, and within the development
organization that created the campaign.
Key Words
Love, Control, Intimate Partner Violence, Development Studies, Social Media, Truth
1. Introduction
1
1.1 Background Information
2
1.1.1 Social Media, #campaigns,
#movements, #comments
2
1.1.2 Intimate partner violence, what public
health has to say
3
2. Literature, Framework, and Inspired Theory
4
2.1 Truth and power, a history of repetition
4
2.2 Love, is all you need?
5
2.3 Violence and control, one and the same?
5
2.4 A critical look at development
6
3. Methods
8
3.1 The sites
9
3.1.1 The website
9
3.1.2 The organization
11
3.2 Data
11
3.2.1 Netnography
11
3.2.2 Participant Observation
12
3.2.3 Interviews
12
3.2.4 Participants/informants
13
3.2.5 Data analysis
13
3.2.5.1 Discourse Analysis
14
Table of Contents
3.3 Ethical Considerations
15
3.4 Positionality
15
4. The Users of the Campaign
17
4.1 Agents of free speech
19
4.2 “You're sowing the seed of misunderstanding”,
What is true?
20
4.3 Loving control, or is it controlling love?
21
5. The Makers of the Campaign
24
5.1 Getting control of life
25
5.2 “They say love comes after marriage”,
an Indian perspective
27
6. The Owners of the campaign
29
6.1 Who’s in charge around here?
30
6.2 We control because we care
31
7. Discussion
33
7.1 Future Research
34
7.2 Limitations
34
7.3 Conclusion
35
8. References
36
Table of Contents
I walk through the 2018 International AIDS conference’s Global Village, the section where entry is free and anyone can visit. It is huge. Stall after stall, there are countless organizations that work on HIV and AIDS from around the world. I feel like I am in a market, with people yelling out to me, “Hey! Do you want to come to our session on meaningful youth participation at 12?!” “Come! Find out how much you know about vulvas!” At the very back of the hall is the section dedicated to young people, and the organizations that focus on them. I stop at a corner booth made entirely of wood, a white birch or aspen. There are four people manning the booth, all from the same organization. I ask them who they are. “We are a youth led, youth centered organization, trying to reach others in our community and start a discussion about sex and sexuality, but trying to stay sex positive and pleasure focused.” He goes on to discuss their mission, saying that it doesn’t matter who you choose to have sex with but to do it with respect and “do it with love.”
This last part stuck with me, reminding me of the topics taken up in this thesis. Do it with love? What does that mean? I decided not to press him on it and just took his business card and the condom he was giving out and move along. The more I inquired or really looked at booths, the more I saw the word ‘love.’ Love yourself, love your partners, love your methods, go in love, etc. There was a surprising amount of concentration on love, and how if you go about your sexual or romantic experiences with love, you can...protect yourself? Help the fight against HIV and AIDS? I couldn’t help but wonder, is a focus on love, the future of sex positivity and sexual health education?
My goal with this thesis is to investigate how discourses on love and its idealization get (re)produced in the context of development interventions. Specifically, I look at love as it coincides with control and how, within the world of an online campaign, these two concepts reflect opposite values that are often intertwined in practice.
Throughout this thesis I aim to answer the following research question:
How do users of an interactive online campaign against intimate partner violence replicate the boundaries of love and control, and furthermore, how do those boundaries look when applied to the organization who created the campaign?
To do this, I examine a 2018 online campaign in India which was designed to give information and (eventually) change behaviors around intimate partner violence (IPV). I will refer to this campaign as Control Your Love in order to protect the anonymity of those who participated. To fully understand this reproduction of discourses on love and control, it is crucial that I look at Control Your Love from various perspectives including those of the users, the makers, and the owners. The makers and owners are affiliated with the organization that created the campaign, which I refer to as Sex and Relationships International to protect the anonymity of those working for it.
The concepts love and control are often taken for granted in everyday life, usually understood as
universal truths: ‘love is good, control is bad.’ In practice, these terms are much more complex and intertwined, defined differently depending on social, economic and political context. I believe that it is
important to dissect how these concepts play out in daily life, specifically within interventions that focus on IPV, which promote normalized ideas about love and control. Most interventions and studies that focus on violence look at it in a way that takes the human out of the equation, presuming that those who are victims have little agency in the face of controlling behaviors, and that all control is negative (Keller, Wilkinson, &
1.1 Background Information
1.1.1 Social Media, #campaigns, #movements, #comments I walk through the 2018 International AIDS conference’s Global Village, the section where entry is free and
anyone can visit. It is huge. Stall after stall, there are countless organizations that work on HIV and AIDS from around the world. I feel like I am in a market, with people yelling out to me, “Hey! Do you want to come to our session on meaningful youth participation at 12?!” “Come! Find out how much you know about vulvas!” At the very back of the hall is the section dedicated to young people, and the organizations that focus on them. I stop at a corner booth made entirely of wood, a white birch or aspen. There are four people manning the booth, all from the same organization. I ask them who they are. “We are a youth led, youth centered organization, trying to reach others in our community and start a discussion about sex and sexuality, but trying to stay sex positive and pleasure focused.” He goes on to discuss their mission, saying that it doesn’t matter who you choose to have sex with but to do it with respect and “do it with love.”
This last part stuck with me, reminding me of the topics taken up in this thesis. Do it with love? What does that mean? I decided not to press him on it and just took his business card and the condom he was giving out and move along. The more I inquired or really looked at booths, the more I saw the word ‘love.’ Love yourself, love your partners, love your methods, go in love, etc. There was a surprising amount of concentration on love, and how if you go about your sexual or romantic experiences with love, you can...protect yourself? Help the fight against HIV and AIDS? I couldn’t help but wonder, is a focus on love, the future of sex positivity and sexual health education?
My goal with this thesis is to investigate how discourses on love and its idealization get (re)produced in the context of development interventions. Specifically, I look at love as it coincides with control and how, within the world of an online campaign, these two concepts reflect opposite values that are often intertwined in practice.
Throughout this thesis I aim to answer the following research question:
How do users of an interactive online campaign against intimate partner violence replicate the boundaries of love and control, and furthermore, how do those boundaries look when applied to the organization who created the campaign?
To do this, I examine a 2018 online campaign in India which was designed to give information and (eventually) change behaviors around intimate partner violence (IPV). I will refer to this campaign as Control Your Love in order to protect the anonymity of those who participated. To fully understand this reproduction of discourses on love and control, it is crucial that I look at Control Your Love from various perspectives including those of the users, the makers, and the owners. The makers and owners are affiliated with the organization that created the campaign, which I refer to as Sex and Relationships International to protect the anonymity of those working for it.
The concepts love and control are often taken for granted in everyday life, usually understood as
universal truths: ‘love is good, control is bad.’ In practice, these terms are much more complex and intertwined, defined differently depending on social, economic and political context. I believe that it is
important to dissect how these concepts play out in daily life, specifically within interventions that focus on IPV, which promote normalized ideas about love and control. Most interventions and studies that focus on violence look at it in a way that takes the human out of the equation, presuming that those who are victims have little agency in the face of controlling behaviors, and that all control is negative (Keller, Wilkinson, &
Otjen, 2010; Collins, 2008). However, I look at this in a very different way. My approach is one that allowed the users, creators, and makers of this campaign to lead me to various debates of love and control. Over the course of this thesis, I will show that there is an intersection between love and control, which means one
cannot always easily define the boundaries violence and nonviolence, even when it might be highly desirable to do so.
This was an ‘exploratory' type of research. I began my research with ideas about what I wanted to focus on, but mainly, my informants helped me decide how to adjust my focus as I learned more about the context in which I was working. This was especially the case in regards to my engagement with the online intervention. Because I did not want to directly influence what people were posting, I did not engage with the users on the website and ask scripted questions. Instead I chose to observe the natural progression of information, allowing the online users to guide me towards the intellectual puzzle I would eventually analyze.
This thesis starts with background information which helps build understanding of general ideas and directions of my fieldwork and thesis. After this groundwork is laid and common knowledge is established, I move onto my framework and authors who inspired my arguments. I aim to do their work justice and also
build upon their theories, striving to explain with clarity which aspects are key to my arguments and establish the lens in which I utilize for my analysis.
After introducing the framework, I describe in detail how I collected my data, how I analyze it, and how my position affected my research. From there, I divide my data into three main chapters based on with whom the data were found: the users, the makers, and the owners. Within each chapter, I dissect the data and the findings while applying my framework in order to execute my arguments. Finally, I discuss what each of these findings mean for my argument, where I was limited in my research, and where this research can go in the future. My intention is not to give a definition of the concepts of love and control, rather to engage in a critical discussion as to how the same discourse is repeated and how this reproduction might complicate the efforts to implement IPV interventions.
To lay the foundation of this research and thesis, I will go through the concepts and information which will help provide context for the coming chapters. With a focus on social media and IPV, both situating them within the Indian context.
Control Your Love is not the first online campaign to address violence. Two of the most famous social change movements today are grassroots social media campaigns that aim to address violence: the #MeToo and #BLM (Black Lives Matter) movements. With these movements in mind, there is clear discourse on social change occurring online (see Dosemagen and Aase, 2016; Freeman et al., 2015, Kahn and Kellner 2004; Markhem 2004; Postil and Pink 2012; Daniels 2009). However, the question remains, how the users actually discuss and conceptualize different forms of violence, and furthermore, why should we care? Daniels (2009) argues that the internet has proven an interesting sociological research site when looking at social change and embodiment, stating that the academic world has thus far taken a step back because of the unrealized potential it has to offer as a research site. While Daniels’ definition of ‘unrealized potential’ is broad, for this
1.1.2 Intimate partner violence, what public health has to say
Otjen, 2010; Collins, 2008). However, I look at this in a very different way. My approach is one that allowed the users, creators, and makers of this campaign to lead me to various debates of love and control. Over the course of this thesis, I will show that there is an intersection between love and control, which means one
cannot always easily define the boundaries violence and nonviolence, even when it might be highly desirable to do so.
This was an ‘exploratory' type of research. I began my research with ideas about what I wanted to focus on, but mainly, my informants helped me decide how to adjust my focus as I learned more about the context in which I was working. This was especially the case in regards to my engagement with the online intervention. Because I did not want to directly influence what people were posting, I did not engage with the users on the website and ask scripted questions. Instead I chose to observe the natural progression of information, allowing the online users to guide me towards the intellectual puzzle I would eventually analyze.
This thesis starts with background information which helps build understanding of general ideas and directions of my fieldwork and thesis. After this groundwork is laid and common knowledge is established, I move onto my framework and authors who inspired my arguments. I aim to do their work justice and also
build upon their theories, striving to explain with clarity which aspects are key to my arguments and establish the lens in which I utilize for my analysis.
After introducing the framework, I describe in detail how I collected my data, how I analyze it, and how my position affected my research. From there, I divide my data into three main chapters based on with whom the data were found: the users, the makers, and the owners. Within each chapter, I dissect the data and the findings while applying my framework in order to execute my arguments. Finally, I discuss what each of these findings mean for my argument, where I was limited in my research, and where this research can go in the future. My intention is not to give a definition of the concepts of love and control, rather to engage in a critical discussion as to how the same discourse is repeated and how this reproduction might complicate the efforts to implement IPV interventions.
To lay the foundation of this research and thesis, I will go through the concepts and information which will help provide context for the coming chapters. With a focus on social media and IPV, both situating them within the Indian context.
Control Your Love is not the first online campaign to address violence. Two of the most famous social change movements today are grassroots social media campaigns that aim to address violence: the #MeToo and #BLM (Black Lives Matter) movements. With these movements in mind, there is clear discourse on social change occurring online (see Dosemagen and Aase, 2016; Freeman et al., 2015, Kahn and Kellner 2004; Markhem 2004; Postil and Pink 2012; Daniels 2009). However, the question remains, how the users actually discuss and conceptualize different forms of violence, and furthermore, why should we care? Daniels (2009) argues that the internet has proven an interesting sociological research site when looking at social change and embodiment, stating that the academic world has thus far taken a step back because of the unrealized potential it has to offer as a research site. While Daniels’ definition of ‘unrealized potential’ is broad, for this
research I choose to focus on an aspect of unrealized potential which is the inner workings of how an online campaign elicits discussion on love and control. Taking that a step further, is the unseen aspect of those behind the campaign, the makers and owners.
Before embarking on fieldwork, I read How the World Changed Social Media (Miller et al., 2016), in which the author describes how the online world pulls from or mirrors the offline world, and furthermore, why we should go about studying it. "Rather than being seen as a virtual ‘other' world, social media stands accused of being embedded in the most mundane toenail painting and lunch eating aspects of the everyday world" (pg.11, 2016). This sentence, while amusing, has a compelling argument: social media has relevance to what real life might look like. In the case of my research, this meant that the comments posted on the campaign, were arguably a reflection of users’ thoughts and actions.
Concentrating on the Indian context, Venkatraman discusses how Indians ‘move' through Facebook and how they show their identities. The study makes two main points: 1) people generally socialize online within their caste1, and when socializing outside of caste, discussions tend to be more practical in focus; 2) caste shapes the way people post on social media. According to Venkatraman (2017), upper/middle class users tend to comment in more abstract ways, sharing information that leads to the reader either agreeing or not, while the lower classes are more explicit and to the point with their posts. Although not foolproof, following Venkatraman’s description allowed me to hypothesize as to who the users might have been based on how they commented on the campaign. For example, the difference between the comments: “control is bad” versus “Sometimes we lack in our judgement around a person, but anyone can make a mistake, I could too.”
This background information and introduction of the literature on social media and campaigns aims to situate this thesis within current doctrine. As social media and online campaigns become more prevalent, it is crucial more research is done in order to understand how users of these online platforms are responding to such campaigns.
Because this campaign relies exclusively on the public health definitions of IPV, it is important to make explicit how this concept is framed within this context. The World Health Organization defines IPV as “any behavior within an intimate relationship that causes physical, psychological or sexual harm to those in the relationship (2012).” While IPV can be present in any type of intimate relationship (e.g. hetero, homo, or polyamorous), most of the research and efforts to prevent/stop IPV operate under the assumption that violence is mostly perpetrated by men towards women (Ellsberg et al, 2008). A study from the WHO states “The global prevalence of physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence among all ever-partnered women was [as of 2010] 30.0%” (Moreno, pg. 16, 2013).
The causes and risk factors of IPV are still being studied. However, researchers have agreed that there are a few different factors which might contribute. Socioeconomic status, alcohol and/or drug use, living in
areas with little opportunities for women, and gender inequality all contribute to a higher risk of experiencing IPV (Moreno, 2013; Jewkes, 2002). As Jewkes, a medical researcher who focuses on IPV, states:
“Poverty and associated stress are key contributors to intimate partner violence. Although violence occurs in all socioeconomic groups, it is more frequent and severe in lower groups across such diverse settings as the USA, Nicaragua, and India” (pg. 1424, 2002). I have not found any literature that supports the idea that IPV occurs because of a lack of love within a relationship.
The analysis and discussion of this research derives from different fields of study, which includes: the power
of truth, anthropology of love, the connection between IPV, gender, and violence, and the anthropology of development. Literature from all of these fields have helped guide me within my research and together, they
create a framework for how I formulate my argument and findings.
This section begins with critical theory from Foucault, in hopes that with this framework I can argue
how there is a powerful importance placed on love, how love intertwines with control, and what consequences this has for development. I want to focus on these ideas and bring forth the significance of
researching emotions and everyday actions. In order to do this, I highlight authors whose writing has inspired much of this thesis. Their writing leaves off with open ended discussion, ready for their informants to help lead the way. The authors I’m discussing are Charles Lindholm and Veena Das.
Charles Lindholm became relevant for me when I started my search for academic resources on love. What is most magnetic about Lindholm’s work is that there is a strong focus on questioning what these emotions have meant historically and breaks them down through anthropological analysis. Giving way for this thesis to evaluate the data which focuses on love and love’s relevance to a discussion.
Veena Das has been an inspiration to this thesis from the conception of my fieldwork. With a wide range of credits under her belt, one of the most important for this thesis is that Das has helped pave the way for a ‘new’ way of analyzing violence. With Das’ methods and theories concerning fieldwork that involves analysis of any sort of violent behavior, I stress Das’ theories the most when dissecting how users and makers define relationships and IPV.
As the birth of development was more than fifty years ago, there has been ample research aimed at analyzing it. As I embarked on this research with a development organization, and inevitably found data
within the organization itself, I found it crucial to add authors from the line of anthropology and development. By using Critical Development Studies as a cornerstone of my framework, I am able to evaluate how the organization applies the values its promoting, within its own walls.
Within the following subsections I set up the framework of this thesis. With the aim to create clarity of how I went about analyzing my data and therefore presenting it. With all of these theories and concepts combined, I hope to establish an explicit structure in order to make arguments in further chapters.
Foucault provides the basis for my analysis of the relationship between truth and power. “We are subject to the production of truth through power, and we cannot exercise power except through the production of truth” (Foucault & Gordon, pg. 211, 1980). When Foucault discusses truth here, he does not describe a fact of nature, he describes an accepted truth and its logic within a society. This ‘truth’ I argue is the significance of love within relationships. Control Your Love reproduces an unrealistic ideal of love originated in ‘Western’ ideals in top down approaches, which Sex and Relationships International is not able to follow in their work life, a concept analyzed deeper in coming chapters. Within my first findings chapter, I explore how this ‘truth’ is reproduced by users of the campaign.
Truths, once they are established, are reinforced by reproduction in discourse; that discourse then becomes powerful and highly regarded because of its repetition, and without this acclaimed power, it would then not be a truth (Foucault & Gordon, 1980). With this notion, the definition of love within this campaign becomes a production of truth and therefore, has power.
The analysis and discussion of this research derives from different fields of study, which includes: the power
of truth, anthropology of love, the connection between IPV, gender, and violence, and the anthropology of development. Literature from all of these fields have helped guide me within my research and together, they
create a framework for how I formulate my argument and findings.
This section begins with critical theory from Foucault, in hopes that with this framework I can argue
how there is a powerful importance placed on love, how love intertwines with control, and what consequences this has for development. I want to focus on these ideas and bring forth the significance of
researching emotions and everyday actions. In order to do this, I highlight authors whose writing has inspired much of this thesis. Their writing leaves off with open ended discussion, ready for their informants to help lead the way. The authors I’m discussing are Charles Lindholm and Veena Das.
Charles Lindholm became relevant for me when I started my search for academic resources on love. What is most magnetic about Lindholm’s work is that there is a strong focus on questioning what these emotions have meant historically and breaks them down through anthropological analysis. Giving way for this thesis to evaluate the data which focuses on love and love’s relevance to a discussion.
Veena Das has been an inspiration to this thesis from the conception of my fieldwork. With a wide range of credits under her belt, one of the most important for this thesis is that Das has helped pave the way for a ‘new’ way of analyzing violence. With Das’ methods and theories concerning fieldwork that involves analysis of any sort of violent behavior, I stress Das’ theories the most when dissecting how users and makers define relationships and IPV.
As the birth of development was more than fifty years ago, there has been ample research aimed at analyzing it. As I embarked on this research with a development organization, and inevitably found data
within the organization itself, I found it crucial to add authors from the line of anthropology and development. By using Critical Development Studies as a cornerstone of my framework, I am able to evaluate how the organization applies the values its promoting, within its own walls.
Within the following subsections I set up the framework of this thesis. With the aim to create clarity of how I went about analyzing my data and therefore presenting it. With all of these theories and concepts combined, I hope to establish an explicit structure in order to make arguments in further chapters.
Foucault provides the basis for my analysis of the relationship between truth and power. “We are subject to the production of truth through power, and we cannot exercise power except through the production of truth” (Foucault & Gordon, pg. 211, 1980). When Foucault discusses truth here, he does not describe a fact of nature, he describes an accepted truth and its logic within a society. This ‘truth’ I argue is the significance of love within relationships. Control Your Love reproduces an unrealistic ideal of love originated in ‘Western’ ideals in top down approaches, which Sex and Relationships International is not able to follow in their work life, a concept analyzed deeper in coming chapters. Within my first findings chapter, I explore how this ‘truth’ is reproduced by users of the campaign.
Truths, once they are established, are reinforced by reproduction in discourse; that discourse then becomes powerful and highly regarded because of its repetition, and without this acclaimed power, it would then not be a truth (Foucault & Gordon, 1980). With this notion, the definition of love within this campaign becomes a production of truth and therefore, has power.
This truth of what love is, or is not, and where these boundaries come from are never questioned. Although implicit, there is an idea that this truth comes from the ‘western’ world (or read: the more powerful). The owners of the campaign are the agent of this power, repeating the definition of love within their development campaign, but they are also at the mercy of this power becoming subjects to this truth, as they present themselves to live within or under the definition of love, even if not embodying it. Creating no space for love to be situated within the Indian context properly. Therefore, the Indian version of love is powerless because it is not what we believe to be love, or there is no room to explore it.
For anthropologists, love and control have proven complicated concepts to pin down. Possibly, because, when asked to discuss love, many research participants tend to reproduce shared norms and “truths” about love with little reflection. As Lindholm states in his article “Romantic Love and Anthropology,” the domain of love has been widely neglected by the academic setting, choosing more to focus on more ‘dysfunctional’ emotions. He wonders if this is because of the “practical application” they bring to the table. Where, if it is dysfunction academics want, love has plenty of examples: love-sick, crazy in love, in love’s spell, etc. All these concepts are comparable to a “kind of madness.” He goes on further to talk about how “western” society has created this idea of love. Not even to define the ideal love, but to say that love is necessary for a good life, at its core, the idea is that love is seen as a major life goal and is synonymous with ‘healthy’ or ‘good’ (2006).
Lindholm writes about how romantic love has become seen as a necessity to many in the western world, and more than that, the ideals of love have spilled over into other non-western societies as well (2006). The utopian concept of love came up several times when analyzing the users’ responses, giving a clear transition into Lindholm’s conjecture. According to Lindholm, not only is the concept of love a lowly regarded subject for researchers, but how precisely it is defined determines how it is researched and where it is found (2006). When aiming to understand love within a specific context, implications arise if one has already mapped out the definition prior to research. Meaning and contextualization of the concepts becomes lost or diluted when researchers do not look at how a group of people themselves see this concept.
In this thesis, I respond to Lindolm’s critique and attempt to discuss love in an open, definition-less way, making sure to concentrate on how it has been idealized and how that idealization is reflected within each aspect of this campaign (the users, makers, and owners). In this way, I build on the premise that when given a strict definition, the concept loses its context and freedom. I also aim to add to Lindholm’s approach, which brings this subject in to academic discussion, with the hope that more scholars and researchers choose to take it up as a subject.
There are several organizations working on the issue of IPV around the world, yet there has been no concrete evidence as to what approach has created the most change. An article by Mancini et al. (2006) proposes that in order for campaigns against IPV to be more effective, there needs to be more work done in creating a space that allows individuals to work together on shifting social norms. The campaign Control Your Love was a space where users discussed the concepts of love and control, which could be seen as an extension of a social norm or truth when applying Foucault’s theory on how truth is manufactured.
2.2 Love, is all you need?
However, the question remains, within this common space, did the users find any common ground when discussing love and control?
In “Violence, Gender and Subjectivity”, Veena Das shines a light on the blurry boundaries in which society and individuals conceptualize both gender and violence (2008). Das’ objective is to situate violence and gender as concepts, not to be defined, but to be seen and then reacted to. Das argues that we, as researchers, should not research such using strict definitions, but instead we should allow the data to show how individuals react and subject themselves to concepts (2008). Using a framework in the article written by
Das, gender and violence are relational in this sense, creating space for research to understand the connection between these two concepts (2008). On a similar note, Das argues that gender and violence are
concepts that are connected, reasoning that because of social norms of gender, violence (either presence or lack of) becomes an embedded subject (2008). Utilizing Das' theory, I too look at concepts that are relational and do not have a strict definition: love and control. I have argued that love and control do not need to be defined, preferably used as exploratory methods that are relational.
As I initially went into this research with the idea that I would focus on violence and gender, Das had already become an integral aspect of the framework from the beginning. However, now I am making use of her work and applying it to a slightly different area. If IPV is considered a concept rather than just a public health term, a relationship between love and control is easily seen. When discussing intimate partnerships, many would argue that love is a significant aspect of them. Delving deeper into the discussion of violence, the discourse shifts towards examining behaviors similar to the ones discussed within the campaign, where there is a focus on specific, visible actions happening. One of the first signs of IPV is ‘controlling behaviors’, the ‘psychological side of abuse’. Scholars argue that IPV escalates over time, while agreeing with the basis of the online campaign in its suggestion that love and control are the cornerstones of IPV (see: Cismaru, Jensen, & Lavack, 2010; NHFS, 2006; WHO, 2012; Wolfe & Jaffe, 1999).
There is a long history of anthropologists and sociologists who have analyzed development projects, drawing attention to unintended consequences (Brokensha, Warren & Werner, 1980; Gardner and Lewis, 2015; Geertz, 1983; and Mancini et al., 2006; etc). Much of the anthropology of development literature focuses on the deconstruction of power relations. A large part of my own research attends to the power
relationships between employees of Sex and Relationships International. In Anthropology and Development, Gardner and Lewis discuss the challenge of doing anthropology of development organizations, "While anthropologists are trained to be cultural relativists, development agencies are usually
committed to universal principles of progress" (pg.125, 2015). However, they also argue that anthropology brings a critical eye to the world of development, with the hope of making it work better and more ethically. Gardner and Lewis are also interested in the way that control plays out in development contexts. Historically, development organizations have worked to control the communities they target, which they claim is one of the main reasons development has failed (pg.141, 2015). Gardner and Lewis’ reasoning help shape how I
view my work with Sex and Relationships International, allowing me to argue for an anthropology of development approach within my study.
The campaign, Control Your Love left an open-ended question: "Is this love?" giving the illusion of freedom to answer. However, as some users pointed out, there was hardly a choice of how to answer. When reading through the content of the campaign, it becomes apparent to the user what the ‘right' answer ought
However, the question remains, within this common space, did the users find any common ground when discussing love and control?
In “Violence, Gender and Subjectivity”, Veena Das shines a light on the blurry boundaries in which society and individuals conceptualize both gender and violence (2008). Das’ objective is to situate violence and gender as concepts, not to be defined, but to be seen and then reacted to. Das argues that we, as researchers, should not research such using strict definitions, but instead we should allow the data to show how individuals react and subject themselves to concepts (2008). Using a framework in the article written by
Das, gender and violence are relational in this sense, creating space for research to understand the connection between these two concepts (2008). On a similar note, Das argues that gender and violence are
concepts that are connected, reasoning that because of social norms of gender, violence (either presence or lack of) becomes an embedded subject (2008). Utilizing Das' theory, I too look at concepts that are relational and do not have a strict definition: love and control. I have argued that love and control do not need to be defined, preferably used as exploratory methods that are relational.
As I initially went into this research with the idea that I would focus on violence and gender, Das had already become an integral aspect of the framework from the beginning. However, now I am making use of her work and applying it to a slightly different area. If IPV is considered a concept rather than just a public health term, a relationship between love and control is easily seen. When discussing intimate partnerships, many would argue that love is a significant aspect of them. Delving deeper into the discussion of violence, the discourse shifts towards examining behaviors similar to the ones discussed within the campaign, where there is a focus on specific, visible actions happening. One of the first signs of IPV is ‘controlling behaviors’, the ‘psychological side of abuse’. Scholars argue that IPV escalates over time, while agreeing with the basis of the online campaign in its suggestion that love and control are the cornerstones of IPV (see: Cismaru, Jensen, & Lavack, 2010; NHFS, 2006; WHO, 2012; Wolfe & Jaffe, 1999).
There is a long history of anthropologists and sociologists who have analyzed development projects, drawing attention to unintended consequences (Brokensha, Warren & Werner, 1980; Gardner and Lewis, 2015; Geertz, 1983; and Mancini et al., 2006; etc). Much of the anthropology of development literature focuses on the deconstruction of power relations. A large part of my own research attends to the power
relationships between employees of Sex and Relationships International. In Anthropology and Development, Gardner and Lewis discuss the challenge of doing anthropology of development organizations, "While anthropologists are trained to be cultural relativists, development agencies are usually
committed to universal principles of progress" (pg.125, 2015). However, they also argue that anthropology brings a critical eye to the world of development, with the hope of making it work better and more ethically. Gardner and Lewis are also interested in the way that control plays out in development contexts. Historically, development organizations have worked to control the communities they target, which they claim is one of the main reasons development has failed (pg.141, 2015). Gardner and Lewis’ reasoning help shape how I
view my work with Sex and Relationships International, allowing me to argue for an anthropology of development approach within my study.
The campaign, Control Your Love left an open-ended question: "Is this love?" giving the illusion of freedom to answer. However, as some users pointed out, there was hardly a choice of how to answer. When reading through the content of the campaign, it becomes apparent to the user what the ‘right' answer ought
to be. Summed up very well by Mark Hobart is a notion from Foucault, “The criteria of what constitutes knowledge, what is to be excluded and who is designated as qualified to know involves acts of power” (Hobart pg. 8, 1993). This conjunction of knowledge and power becomes very relevant when critiquing the campaign and its aim to manifest discussion about love and control. Regardless of the intention behind the open-ended question, scholars agree that when the developers and their aimed community work together to find an answer, the work is more sustainable (see Gardner and Lewis, 2015 and Mancini et al., 2006). Because of the impact of an open-ended question, the participation and opinion of the users become a valid point of reality.
As a first-time anthropologist, it was a long process for me to not only understand my role but what this research was really about. At the start of my research I was hired as an intern for this organization, which I hoped to study, and asked by them to focus on their online campaign which focused on IPV. I was handed materials as to what they planned the campaign to look like, what they expected, and what their indicators of success were (as defined by the donor). When I started my research, I was relatively certain that the focus on my research would be IPV. Surely, I thought, my research must be about IPV if the organization says their campaign is about IPV. However, although a large part of my research did focus on IPV, after the first few weeks of research I slowly started to expand my focus as I developed a better sense of what the campaign was in practice and got to know more about the users. Every day when I would log onto the website or sift through the Facebook posts, the first thing I did was look at the new comments. Afterward, I would read all of the comments together, to see how discussion was progressing (if at all) on the given subject. As I was asked by Sex and Relationships International to create a code manual, I started to write out what things I noticed and tried to ‘clump’ comments together. The first two clumps of comments fell under the description of explanations of what love/care is, and what control/violence is. The following is a conversation had about my first code:
“Wow, this is so funny...” I said as I leaned over in my chair towards Isabel, “...users are consistently trying to give definitions for love or control.” Isabel finished whatever she was typing on her computer and looked up “oh wow that is funny, let me see some.”
Another colleague, Lana, took out her earbuds “Hey that’s kind of cool, maybe we can use those definitions somehow for the website or something...” earbuds are back in, and she’s back to work. Isabel came and hovered over my shoulder and reads a comment “haha that’s so funny, why the fuck do they think that’s love?” I look up and laugh “Yea, it’s quite interesting. This is going to be one of the codes.”Isabel looks at me, straightens up, and grabs the end of her hair, possibly a thinking technique “well, it is interesting, sure, but make sure you also include codes that are useful in our analysis, like behavior change and what-not.”
“Ok...I will, but for now, I am just creating codes from what I am seeing, and definitions of love and control keep coming up. But yeah, ok will do!” I say, enthusiastically.
It is only now after the campaign is over and that I have had time to be ‘away’ from the data that I have been able to digest what was actually happening with the users. Why didn’t I see it before? Was I so focused on the fact that I was told this campaign was about IPV that I missed the one main aspect that had been staring me in the face since day one? I often wonder, is this a side-effect of my previous schooling of public health? I must think of things as complex issues that are multi-faceted aiming to be reduced to one ‘diagnosis’, in this case, IPV? Or was I blinded by the organization and their background information and objective for this campaign, that I didn’t force myself to really look outside? I think, yes. So now, looking back at this very simple realization, I have a better sense of what happened with the campaign and its users.!!
This was a multi-sited research project; two ‘in-person’ sites and one ‘online site,’ making use of ethnographic techniques, both off and online (netnography). In this section, I describe the sites, the kinds of data I collect-ed, how I analyzed it, ethical considerations, and offer a reflection on my own positionality and how that [probably] affected my work. It is vital that I go into detail about my techniques and sites, as they shaped what sort of data I collected and how I then analyzed it. These research methods, when combined, created the accessibility points for getting information. As described above, I was under the impression that I was looking to measure how users discussed gender and violence online, yet soon found that what I actually observed was how users considered love and control, and furthermore, how those discussions eventually translated offline to those who created the campaign.
When discussing ethnographic research, it is important to outline where the study took place in order to not only set the stage for analysis, but to give context to data. For me, this happened to be three different places. The first site, and what I expected to be my main site when initially embarking on research, was the online campaign. The second site was in person and was conducted when I traveled to India to meet those from the organization who made the campaign. The last location was the office of the organization where I spent most of my time, located in the Netherlands. Each site of research looked different, and curated
different pieces of knowledge. My role as a researcher changed with each setting as did the type of information I collected. The following are the in-depth descriptions of each site.
To understand the online data, I provide an in-depth description of the campaign website and its content. This campaign’s core intensely focused on control, love, care, and ultimately, IPV. The campaign was designed to share stories which exhibited controlling or violent behaviors and then asked visitors to the
site to answer the question: “Is this love?” This campaign ran exclusively online, both on a website dedicated to the campaign and through the organization’s Facebook.
The website welcomes users with bright pink and blue colors, a faded picture of a man and a woman in the background leaning in for a kiss. In focus and bolded, is a scenario written:
“My Bf doesn’t allow me to talk to other boys or even girls. But he does the same behind my back. We argue but I give in because jealousy is a sign of love, isn’t it?”
Next to this text is a blue arrow pointing to the right, if clicked it takes you to the next scenario:
“My friend’s BF at any time asks for her mobile “to check”. He also asks for her FB/ phone password. Should my friend give it to him if she does not want to?”
Continuing for three more scenarios:
“My BF gets me all I need even before I ask. But he raises his hand at the smallest mistakes I make. I think this is for my own good and to improve me, but sometimes it makes me feel bad. What should I do?” “Of late my BF is insisting on picking me up and dropping me off at college. I’m worried that someone sees. Also I’ll miss out on time with my gal pals. What should I tell him?”
“I love a boy very much but he forces me to come to his room all the time. He keeps trying physical stuff with me. I don’t want to lose him, but I feel uncomfortable with the things he asks me to do. Should I continue going to his room?”
After the section with the scenario there is a bright green ‘button’ which says “join the discussion” and then “60 comments” (or however many comments match that particular scenario). To the right of this is a hashtag, in bold lettering with bright pink, yellow, and white colors, “kya yahi pyaar hai” which is Hindi for “Is This Love.”
Scrolling down further on the site revealed a “Create Your Own Meme” station, full of memes already 3.1 The sites
different pieces of knowledge. My role as a researcher changed with each setting as did the type of
site to answer the question: “Is this love?” This campaign ran exclusively online, both on a website
created and the access to create your own as well. The memes are cartoon-like images of famous Bollywood stars, who according to the employees of the organization, have played characters which were
in controlling relationships. On the image, users can write whatever they would like. If you scroll down past the memes, there’s a “Wait, there’s more!” section. Proceeding to three different columns, one of which features a story about someone who was/is in a controlling relationship, the next which reads “Services” in case any user realizes they would like to seek help, and the final, a link to the organization’s main website and discussion board.
If you click on the discussions, you can follow the responses made and have the ability to reply to other users or leave your comment if desired. When commenting, each user gets to decide what ‘username’ is shown, and often ‘anonymous’ would be used.
created and the access to create your own as well. The memes are cartoon-like images of famous
The organization Sex and Relationships International has several offices around the world ranging from China, India, Africa, Mexico, and more. They are an organization which operates almost exclusively online and works towards reaching the general public (those with internet access) to give them information about sex and relationships, both fact and story-based, which they might not have gotten otherwise (UNESCO, 2018). Although an international organization, Sex and Relationships International’s headquarters is based in the Netherlands and they receive the majority of their funding from the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. For special projects and campaigns, they also receive funding from a variety of other donors. For the online campaign I studied, funding was received from an American social science research institute.
When first beginning to develop a research project for my Master’s degree, I approached Sex and Relationships International to see if there was a possibility of collaboration or if it would be possible for me
I could use their networks to access a site to conduct fieldwork. My reason for approaching them was that I was interested in doing research on sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) promoted through social media and online spaces. Soon after approaching Sex and Relationships International, they agreed to take me on as an intern who would be fully dedicated to the new campaign. I spent most of my time in the Dutch office (February 20th-April 6th), with the last portion of my research spent at the India office (April 9th-18th 2018).
Data was collected through observation in each setting, in-depth, open interviews, and casual conversations. The online portion of data collection utilized the method of ‘netnography’ which entails a
passive observer within an online space. With an inductive approach, I was able to let the informants lead me to the most relevant and compelling data, and find a focus from that. I went into this research with aims
to understand how the users of the campaign understood violence and gender, making use of the organization employees to get background information and a fuller picture. However, I soon realized that
while in the spaces with the employees, I also became a trusted participant and was often offered information about the inner workings of the organization and what it takes to run an online campaign. This
lead me to shift my focus toward the concepts of love and control.
I kept notes in three main places, in a black, leather-bound notebook, a word document on my computer, and in the ‘notes’ section of my phone. There were several times when I would engage in discussion with my informants when we were in a social setting and to take out my notebook would have
been inappropriate. When looking at the data online, I would be sure to write down my thoughts as I read, and copy what I was reading.
Data was collected by splitting my time up as follows:
Hours spent in the Dutch office added up to approximately 150 hours. Hours spent in the Indian office added up to approximately 45 hours.
Hours spent outside of office hours with organization employees added up to approximately 50 hours. Hours spent on the online space of the campaign added up to approximately 100 hours.
Netnography is a method initially coined by Robert Kozinets in 1998 for marketing research on consumers. Since then, this method of research has been widely adopted and used in several fields, specifically in anthropology and sociology. Kozinets brings the most concise definition; “a new qualitative research
3.1.2 The organization
3.2 Data
12
When first beginning to develop a research project for my Master’s degree, I approached Sex and
Data was collected through observation in each setting, in-depth, open interviews, and casual
to understand how the users of the campaign understood violence and gender, making use of the while in the spaces with the employees, I also became a trusted participant and was often offered
computer, and in the ‘notes’ section of my phone. There were several times when I would engage in
methodology that adapts ethnographic research techniques to the study of cultures and communities emerging through electronic networks” (pg.62, 2002). I made use of this method when researching the campaign and its users, closely following their reactions to the campaign and how they created discourse
and shared opinions on the concepts of love and control. As the internet changes, especially when examining how social media is used, netnography is an easy choice of method when research such as this
concerns online spaces and discussions. “Netnography is particularly well suited to dealing with personal or politically sensitive topics or illegal acts, discussed in online communities by individuals who prefer to conceal their offline identities and welcome the online anonymity offered” (Costello et al, pg.3, 2017).
My netnography of the online space was purely observational, taking a passive approach. I think this was the best approach as it allowed the content of the comments and site to stay as natural and organic as possible. When performing the act of netnography, I would either be on my MacBook or a Dell desktop. This entailed hours of simply scrolling through the campaign website or Facebook page. I kept notes in word documents on my computer. Here I would make sure to keep a record of the comments, and in a different colored font, write my notes down. In addition to the word document with notes, I kept notes in my black notebook. The notes I would write in my notebook were broader observations which I wanted to keep tabs on in daily life, or bring up to the employees at SRI. For example, in the first week I wrote down a note saying “there is a frequent mention of family members, mostly fathers and cousins, keep an eye out for more mentions of family. Note when colleagues discuss family.” By the end of each day, I could tell my eyes needed a break from the computer screen.
I made use of participant observation in two offices where I conducted fieldwork. By being in the same
office as informants, listening to conversations, observing interactions, attending meetings, and participating in passive chit-chat, I collected most of my ethnographic data. I would make sure to keep
in-depth notes in my black notebook when possible, and otherwise would write down quick notes in my phone when it was not appropriate to take my notebook out.
My participant observation looked different for each in-person site. In the Netherlands, the participant observation followed the working hours of the office, where I usually spent two days a week.
When in India, the participant observation had less of a ‘strict’ schedule. As I traveled to the Indian office with two employees from the Netherlands, we spent most of our time together, from breakfast to bedtime.
I made sure to encourage informants to share with me and did my best to ensure that they felt safe and heard when sharing personal details or stories. I never pushed informants to give me more information
than they felt comfortable with. Mainly, all of my data comes from passive chit-chat, overheard conversations, and information that informants served to me on a platter (if you will).
I conducted four open-ended interviews. This method of interview was a natural choice for me, as it allowed me to ask open questions and allow the interview to flow as a ‘typical’ conversation (Briggs, 1986). Three of which were held with Indian employees and one which was done with an employee from the Dutch office. I went into each interview with ideas of what subjects I wanted to touch on, but in general, I let the interview unfold naturally to encourage impromptu answers and discussion. The longest interview I conducted lasted about an hour. The other three were shorter, more informal, and ranged from twenty to fifty minutes. The hour-long interview was conducted at the office in India. I took notes in my black notebook. One interview was conducted in the metro, as we traveled from the Indian office to somewhere else in Delhi to get dinner.
3.2.2 Participant Observation
and shared opinions on the concepts of love and control. As the internet changes, especially when
office as informants, listening to conversations, observing interactions, attending meetings, and
My participant observation looked different for each in-person site. In the Netherlands, the
than they felt comfortable with. Mainly, all of my data comes from passive chit-chat, overheard
We stood away from other employees, although still surrounded by strangers. During this interview, I took notes initially in the ‘notes’ section of my phone, and then later wrote down more information in my black notebook. The third interview took place while walking around in the city of Delhi. We were not next to anyone else from the organization, and did not stay in one place which made the chances of someone overhearing less likely. During this interview, I took notes in my phone, and then when back at the hotel, wrote down more in my black notebook. The last interview I conducted was an impromptu interview in the back of a cab on the way back to the hotel. We were in the cab for approximately fifty minutes, and talked the whole time. Again, I took notes in my phone and then wrote down more in my notebook when I had the chance.
As this was multi-sited research, there were different groups of participants or informants. Starting with the employees from the office in the Netherlands. While the organization itself is quite large, those involved in this project were of a limited number. The employees in the Netherlands were Dutch (2), American (1), and Mexican (1); all were women. To my knowledge, all of the employees in the Netherlands held at least a bachelor's degree, and most (if not all) had a master’s degree in social sciences. The second group of informants is the group of regional colleagues in India, all of whom were Indian, and to my knowledge, held at least a bachelor level degree. A few of the Indian employees held a master’s level graduate degree.
The third group, which is the largest, and least known in terms of demographics, consists of the online users of the campaign. The campaign ran in India; however, because it is a website, it is difficult to know who exactly the users were. It would be a safe inference to assume some were Indian, as language in which some of the comments were made was Hindi. It was impossible to know exactly who they were though, what their education level was, and where they were based, from their comments and online interactions. When comments were made in English, we generally assumed that such users had a fairly high level of education (Vijayalakshmi & Manchi Sarat Babu, 2014).
Because there are two main sets of data—netnography and the in-person ethnography—I had to analyze the data using different techniques. For the data from the online part, I coded all data using a method of “thematic content analysis” (Green, & Thorogood, 2004), asking myself over and over again: “what is this an instance of?” All of the online data was compiled into an excel sheet, which had spaces on the right-hand side to designate different codes, where the comment was found, and what the translation was.
See figure below to see the coding:
3.2.4 Participants/informants
14
As an intern working on this campaign analysis, I worked alongside Sex and Relationships International colleagues who also focused on the campaign. There were four of us in a room who sat and coded all the comments together. Because I was the one who created the code manual, I was also in charge of training everyone how I wanted comments to be coded. We spent four, eight-hour days coding. Two Indian colleagues took the lead on translating and coding the comments made in Hindi and I would work on the comments made in English.
For the in-person data, I found myself doing the same, but in a much more informal way. Meaning, I would look over my notes and observations and lay them out on the floor according to their relevance to each other, eventually finding commonalities and themes. For example congregating data which discussed control. It became apparent to me during this time that online data and offline data are very different. When assessing offline data, there was much more context and background to keep in mind. While the online data, was simply text and discussion.
Comments made on the Facebook page were initially extracted by a data analyst working for the organization via a Facebook API which included an online code to extract website comments. It can be
assured that only the text was obtained and all profile names were kept anonymous. However, some comments had to be manually retrieved by myself, using “copy and paste.” It is imperative to note, as Facebook has an ever-changing platform and, at times, comments appeared to be out of order when looking at the post online vs. at the raw data extracted. Another important point is that when using data from Facebook, users can delete their comments after they have posted them, which I only realized when I was cross-checking the data extracted compared to the Facebook post online. It is unknown why the comment was deleted and if it was based on the decision of the user who commented or because of a technological glitch from Facebook’s end. In regards to the website, all comments made stayed in order. Indian employees of the organization translated comments made in Hindi.
Throughout research and analysis, I followed the theories of authors who aimed to examine discourse analysis from different viewpoints. However, one message kept being repeated: research cannot know the exact meaning behind the words, even when talking to someone face to face. For example, Rangel, Paulston, and Kiesling discuss that contrary to what is historically believed, a dialogue is a form of “cultural codes,” though not to be mistaken for what people are actually thinking, meaning there must be assumption when it comes to what knowledge or information others possess (2014). When analyzing either my online or offline data, this method of directly using the text for face value, was pivotal. The method of discourse analysis can also be seen an addition to my framework.
As this thesis moves forward, it is clear that I do not aim at adding definitions, rather than merely
looking at what is said in the discourse. I call upon critical discourse analysis to see how there are relationships of power made between the groups (between users, between makers and owners). According
to Blommaert and Bulcaen, critical discourse analysis looks at how language, and the society utilizing it, gives a view of social interaction, power relationships, and control within discussion (pg.448, 2000). Also chosen is the Foucauldian notion of discourse analysis which allows for the ‘socio-historical’ context of the discussion to be present, in addition to allowing the discourse to be identified as part of the ‘collective’ rather than just the individual (Diaz-Bone et al, 2008). With this concept, comments made on the campaign website are able to be understood as a whole, in relation to each other, and situated within the specific context of the campaign.
