FEMINIST HCI FOR REAL: DESIGNING TECHNOLOGY IN SUPPORT OF A SOCIAL MOVEMENT ADissertation Presented to The Academic Faculty by Jill P. Dimond In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in Human-Centered Computing in the School of Interactive Computing Georgia Institute of Technology December 2012 FEMINIST HCI FOR REAL: DESIGNING TECHNOLOGY IN SUPPORT OF A SOCIAL MOVEMENT Approved by: Professor Amy Bruckman, Advisor Professor Elizabeth Mynatt School of Interactive Computing School of Interactive Computing Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology Professor Wenda Bauschspies Professor Shaowen Bardzell School of History, Sciences, and School of Informatics and Computing Technology Indiana University Georgia Institute of Technology Professor Eric Gilbert Date Approved: 14 August 2012 School of Interactive Computing Georgia Institute of Technology For the Hollaback activists and for those working to stop street harassment. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There have been many people who have supported me in this journey—admittedly, it takes a community to raise a doctoral graduate. First, I would like to thank everyone from Hollaback. To Emily May for her tenac- ity, wisdom, friendship, and also for her openness to participate in this work—thank you for all that you do. To Inti Maria Tidball-Binz, Lauren Alston, Crystal Rodgers, and Daphne LaRose—I admire your strength, acumen, and judgement. Thank you all for reading drafts of my chapters and putting yourself out there so that this work can help us all to grow. I would also like to thank Veronica Pinto for her hard work in growing the Hollaback community. Thank you to Alex Alston and Amalia Rose for helping me conduct and transcribe the interviews. To all of the other Hollaback site leaders, thank you for participating in this work and for taking a stand in your community, I continue to be blown away by all the amazing work that you do. Next, I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Amy Bruckman and my committee. To Amy for believing in me and the work I wanted to pursue—thank you for taking ariskinme.ToDrs.BethMynattandEricGilbert,thankyoufortakingthis work seriously, supporting me, and providing invaluable feedback. To Dr. Wenda Bauschspies for being my mentor and friend, and supporting me when I wanted to quit. To Shaowen Bardzell for blazing paths in feminism and HCI that helped legitimize and position this work. I would also like to thank the NSF for giving me the freedom to pursue research that would otherwise be almost impossible to fund. To my academic siblings in the ELC lab: Betsy DiSalvo, Sarita Yardi, Kurt Luther, and Casey Fiesler, thank you for sitting through practice presentations, read- ing drafts, chatting in the lab, and drinking beers with me—I couldn’t have asked for iv abetterlab.TotheotherPh.Dstudentsandfaculty,LanaYarosh,EugeneMedinsky, Evan Barba, Chris LeDantec, Carrie Bruce, especially the Proposal Solidarity group including Andrew Miller, Kim Weaver, Brian O’Neill, and T.J. Yun, thank you for your feedback and support. To my first home at Georgia Tech, the CSL lab, including Dr. Mark Guzdial, Dr. Brian Dorn, Dr. Allison Tew, Michael Hewner, and Dr. Lijun Ni, thank you for your support. To my collaborator Michaelanne Dye, thank you for your insights and work on the storytelling chapter. Thank you to my friends outside of academia who provided much-needed perspec- tives and distractions outside of academic life including Amy Cobden, Leah Kokinakis, Jane Middleton, Kelli Zerbel, Marissa Yurko, Anne Phillips, Molly Barba, Meg Hope- man, Laura Lashley, Amanda Lang-Maher, Renata Le Dantec, my Reynoldstown neighbors, my friends at All Life is Yoga, the Sugar Creek Community garden, and Kelli’s Radical Childcare Collective—I love you all. To my parents Diane Ebaugh and Mike Dimond, thank you for all your support and love in this process. To my brother, Dan Dimond thank you for always listening to me. To my new family, James Smyth and Maxine White, thank you for your support. I also need to thank my dog, Dewey, for providing much needed walk breaks and for lying at my feet while I wrote. Finally, to my partner in life, Tom Smyth. Thank you for your love and for growing with me in this journey. You always believed in me. v TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION .................................. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................... iv LIST OF TABLES ............................... xi LIST OF FIGURES .............................. xii LIST OF SYMBOLS OR ABBREVIATIONS .............. xiii SUMMARY .................................... xiv 1INTRODUCTION............................. 1 1.1 Hollaback! AMovementtoEndStreetHarassment . 2 1.2 Researcher Positionality . 4 1.3 Research Framing . 5 1.3.1 RQ 1: What is the relationship between the Hollaback orga- nizationandthetechnology? . 6 1.3.2 RQ 2: What technological tactics do activists use in social media? . 6 1.3.3 RQ 3: What is the role of storytelling using technology in a socialmovementorganization? . 6 1.3.4 RQ 4: What are the opportunities and challenges for doing action research in a social movement organization as a tech- nology developer? . 6 1.4 Overview of Dissertation . 7 1.5 Contributions .............................. 7 2RELATEDWORK............................. 9 2.1 StreetHarassment............................ 9 2.1.1 TheoriesofStreetHarassment . 10 2.1.2 ImpactofStreetHarassment . 11 2.2 Feminism,Activism,andICTs . 11 2.2.1 CyberfeminismandFeminismOnline . 12 vi 2.2.2 Feminism and Design . 13 2.3 Non-Profit,Community,andServiceDesign . 13 2.4 ICTs and Social Movements . 14 2.4.1 Mobilizing Structures . 15 2.4.2 OpportunityStructures . 16 2.4.3 Framing Processes . 17 3METHODS................................. 19 3.1 Theoretical Reflection . 20 3.2 OverviewofActionResearch . 22 3.2.1 Scientific-Technical . 23 3.2.2 Practical/Pragmatic . 24 3.2.3 Emancipatory . 24 3.2.4 Spectrum of Researcher Participation . 25 3.3 Overview of Methods . 26 3.3.1 Design Methods . 26 3.3.2 Qualitative Methods . 28 3.3.3 QuantitativeAnalysisofSocialMediaData . 30 3.4 Researcher Self-Disclosure . 30 4 BUILDING AN INTERNATIONAL FEMINIST COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE ............................... 32 4.1 Methods . 33 4.1.1 Data Collection . 33 4.1.2 DataAnalysis .......................... 34 4.2 HistoryofHollaback........................... 35 4.2.1 My Involvement . 36 4.3 HollabackOrganizationalModel . 38 4.3.1 StatisticsofUsage........................ 40 4.4 FosteringCommunityandAccountability . 42 4.4.1 TheLaunchProcessandNewcomers. 42 vii 4.4.2 Building Strong Ties and Community Online . 46 4.4.3 CreatingArtifactsTogether. 48 4.4.4 Slutwalks . 49 4.5 Site Leaders . 50 4.5.1 Getting Support . 50 4.6 Sources of Contention . 52 4.6.1 AnonymousParticipation . 54 4.6.2 NonParticipation ........................ 54 4.7 Technology Description . 55 4.7.1 Apps ............................... 55 4.7.2 LocalHollabackImplementation . 58 4.7.3 Internal Tools and Social Media . 59 4.8 Case Studies . 60 4.8.1 BuenosAires........................... 60 4.8.2 Atlanta . 66 4.8.3 Edmonton,Alberta ....................... 71 4.9 Discussion . 72 4.9.1 ToolsandtheSubject: ActivismasHobby . 74 4.9.2 Tools, Rules, and Division of Labor: A Tension Between De- centralization and Sustainability . 76 4.9.3 ToolsandtheCreationofCommunity . 79 4.10 Contribution . 81 5 TACTICAL SOCIAL MEDIA ...................... 83 5.1 SocialMediaUsage ........................... 84 5.2 Method . 88 5.3 Results . 89 5.4 Discussion . 93 5.4.1 The Role of Traditional Media . 94 5.4.2 OfflinePresenceandLocalAction . 98 viii 5.4.3 ConnectionstoOtherSocialNetworkSites . 98 5.5 Contribution............................... 99 6 THE ROLE OF STORYTELLING ONLINE IN A SOCIAL MOVE- MENT ORGANIZATION ........................ 101 6.1 Social Movement Framing . 102 6.2 Methods . 103 6.2.1 Data Collection . 103 6.2.2 DataAnalysis .......................... 104 6.3 Findings ................................. 104 6.3.1 Prior Structural Impediments . 104 6.3.2 Diagnosing a Problem and Frame Extension . 106 6.3.3 Frame Transformation . 107 6.3.4 HollabackasaNetworkedPublic. 110 6.3.5 Responding Back and Dealing . 112 6.3.6 UnpackingActivism. 113 6.3.7 Method of Sharing . 114 6.4 Discussion . 115 6.4.1 Crowd-Sourced Framing . 115 6.4.2 Concealed and Resistance Stories . 116 6.4.3 SafeSpacevsNetworkedPublic . 118 6.4.4 Methodological Considerations . 119 6.5 Contribution............................... 120 7 ACTION AND FEMINIST RESEARCH IN HCI ......... 121 7.1 FeministHCI............................... 122 7.1.1 Self-Disclosure . 122 7.1.2 Pluralism . 124 7.1.3 Advocacy............................. 125 7.1.4 Ecology . 126 7.1.5 Embodiment . 127 ix 7.1.6 Participation . 128 7.2 Emancipatory Action Research and Feminist HCI . 129 7.2.1 Opportunities .......................... 130 7.2.2 Challenges . 131 8 CONCLUSION ............................... 136 8.1 Research Questions . 136 8.1.1 RQ 1: What is the relationship between the Hollaback orga- nizationandthetechnology? . 136 8.1.2 RQ 2: What technological tactics do activists utilize in social media? . 138 8.1.3 RQ 3: What is the role of storytelling using technology in a socialmovementorganization? . 139 8.1.4 RQ 4: What are the opportunities and challenges for doing action research in a social movement organization as a tech- nology developer? . 140 8.2 Contributions .............................. 140 8.2.1 The Role of Storytelling Online for Social Justice . 141 8.2.2 TheHollabackCommunityandLocalSites . 141 8.2.3