StopCyberbullying PDF

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/330654105
Stop Cyberbullying
Chapter · January 2019
CITATIONS READS
0 1,116
1 author:
Kim Hua Tan

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
65 PUBLICATIONS 254 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Development of a bilingual (Eng-Malay) glossary in Management and Consultancy in the area of photography View project
language input, grammaticalitt judgement View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Kim Hua Tan on 26 January 2019.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 1 12/20/18 12:19 PM
edited by
Tan Kim Hua
PENERBIT UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA

BANGI 2018
http://ukmpress.ukm.my

Cetakan Pertama / First Printing, 2018
Hak cipta / Copyright Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 2018
Hak cipta terpelihara. Tiada bahagian daripada terbitan ini boleh diterbitkan semula,
disimpan untuk pengeluaran atau ditukarkan ke dalam sebarang bentuk atau dengan
sebarang alat juga pun, sama ada dengan cara elektronik, gambar, serta rakaman dan
sebagainya tanpa kebenaran bertulis daripada Penerbit UKM terlebih dahulu.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be produced or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording,
or in any information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission
in writing from the Penerbit UKM.
Diterbitkan di Malaysia oleh / Published in Malaysia by

PENERBIT UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA
43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor Darul Ehsan, MALAYSIA
http://ukmpress.ukm.my
e-mel: penerbit@ukm.edu.my
Penerbit UKM adalah anggota / is a member of the

MAJLIS PENERBITAN ILMIAH MALAYSIA /
MALAYSIAN SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING COUNCIL
PERSATUAN PENERBIT BUKU MALAYSIA /
MALAYSIAN BOOK PUBLISHERS ASSOSIATION
No. Ahli / Membership No. 198302
Diatur huruf di Malaysia oleh / Typesetted in Malaysia by

PANTAS SET SDN. BHD. (118872-P)
No. 5-1-1, Jalan Megan Setapak 1, Taman Megan Sri Rampai
53300 Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA
Dicetak di Malaysia oleh / Printed in Malaysia by

UKM CETAK
UKM Holdings Sdn. Bhd.
Aras Bawah, Bangunan Penerbit UKM
43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor Darul Ehsan, MALAYSIA
Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia Data Pengkatalogan-dalam-Penerbitan /

Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
Stop Cyberbullying / edited by Tan Kim Hua.

1. Cyberbullying.
2. Government publications--Malaysia.
I. Tan, Kim Hua.
302.343
ISBN 978-967-412-772-5

Contents
Preface ...7
Introduction ...9
Chapter 1 Cyberbullying: A Cursory Review ...17

Tan Kim Hua
Chapter 2 The Power to Destruct: Online Fat Shaming

Bullying in Social Media ...35
Bahiyah Abdul Hamid
Chapter 3 It Hurts When We Surf: Malaysian Undergraduate

Students’ Perception and Experiences on
Cyberbullying ...51
Ang Leng Hong & He Mengyu
Chapter 4 Framing the Victim: A Study of Cyberbullying ...62

Lee Siew Chin, T’ng Cheah Kiu Choon & Muhammad
Khair Abd Razak
Chapter 5 Haters Will Hate, But How? The Language of Body

Shaming Cyberbullies in Instagram ...80
Bahiyah Abdul Hamid, Habibah Ismail & Chairozila
Mohd. Shamsuddin
List of Contributors ...103

Index ...105

Preface
‘Stop Cyberbullying’ sets out to share with society information on one
of the most pervasive of crimes, one that is often ignored or deemed
harmless but is unknowingly detrimental to many-- young or old. It is
one of the few books that take on the broad spectrum of cyberbullying in
social media for discussion; ranging from analyses of a social taxonomy
of cyberbullying to societal perception to how cyberbullying is manifested
in linguistic forms and functions. Also, of no lesser importance is the fact
that the culmination of work in this book comes from a diverse list of
writers and the wide range of perspectives that they bring to their chapters.
The writers cum researchers not only represent Universiti Kebangsaan
Malaysia (UKM) but those from outside as well. Researchers from both
Universiti Sains Malaysia and Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia have
The research grant GUP-2015-014, under the auspices of UKM, has

generously funded the publication of this book. The grant also enabled
continuous work in further enriching the cyberbullying corpus and
translating the outcome to the development of an app. Ultimately, all
app (BuLI) that auto detects potentially harmful messages in forums or

message boards, blogs and social networking platforms like Facebook,
Twitter, Tumblr or WhatsApp. The BuLI app provides a guideline on the
typical language used by cyberbullies. Ultimately, all patterns and framing
of the bullying discourse as well as their level of harmfulness will be
automatically detected by the app. Victims can thus successfully self-
regulate and be empowered to overcome bullying. Likewise, cyberbullies
redeem themselves in time.

Last but not least, our profound gratitude to the Faculty of Social
Sciences and Humanities and UKM Press for providing us a platform for
a robust academic-related discussion so that our competing discourses
on the issue of cyberbullying will not be left unheard.
Tan Kim Hua

Introduction
Digital capabilities have revolutionised the way information is

communicated and accrued, to the extent of disrupting the nature of
society. A Digital Revolution, the third instalment of industrial revolutions
since the 18th century, has brought about – through means of personal
computers, the Internet, and Information and Communication Technology
(ICT) – fundamental changes in the mode of economic as well as
are becoming more relevant day by day and new disciplines emerge as a
result of it. Since then the cyber world has penetrated ever more deeply
into our consciousness, being, and social fabric that it requires a re-thinking
and re-assessment of our evolving reality. In attempts to capture this
phenomenon concisely, people have now started the conversation on the
fusion and embedment of technology onto society and even humanity

itself is discussed.
far reaching. However, wrongly embraced, technology can work against

us. Technology revolutionises communicating using social media and it is
communication are beyond policing and therefore opened to abuse when

communicators are anonymous to each other. This encourages proliferation
of crimes such as cyber frauds, scamming, pornography and dissemination
of fake news etc. Cyberbullying, one of the most pervasive of crimes in
social media, has reared its head in recent times,
Most of us would agree that any form of bullying is unacceptable.
However, the same ‘us’ again, at some point in our lives, may have been
a victim of bullying or may have bullied others. For the victims, some are
able to move on and live normal lives whilst others are less fortunate. Some
of them carry life-long scars from the trauma, damaging their self-worth,
resort to suicide due to the weight of the bullying and the foreboding pain.
The perpetrators would carry on with their lives regardless.

10 / Stop Cyberbullying
cyberbullying, is basically bullying

perpetrated on electronic or social media. This form of bullying is
often overlooked and yet, can be just as damaging as face to face
bullying. Much like traditional bullying, cyberbullying is repeated acts
of harassment over a period of time; however, there is also a crucial
difference. Unlike traditional bullying, the repetition in cyberbullying can
happen in different and arguably more insidious ways. For example, an
embarrassing or compromising picture of person A may be uploaded on
the web and then later further spread by other people who were not the
original uploaders, thus, one action by one perpetrator may ‘snowball’
for Person A to escape or to ‘contain’ the cyberbullying.

Due to its anonymous nature also, it is hard to detect this form of
bullying and policing it is almost impossible. Cyberbullying victims are
usually told to simply turn off the computer and ignore the bullies but
this rarely works unless one shuts down all communication in social
media. On the part of the perpetrator, the act of cyberbullying, due to its
detached nature, pretty much encourages a lack of empathy towards the
victim. In contrast to traditional bullying, the cyber bully would not be
there in person as the victim is hurt or damaged by the cyberbullying,
leaving less room for feeling sorry for the victim or acknowledgement
that it could have gone too far. Additionally, the anonymous nature of
cyberbullying also encourages the cyberbully to be brazen and ruthless
making it very easy for them to cyberbully someone time and time again
while also not seeing any true consequence to their actions.
There are many ways that cyberbullying can manifest. The most
common form of cyberbullying would be sending someone a message
nature. For example, with just a number unknown to the receiver, you
could send a WhatsApp or SMS message to anyone, saying any number
of unpleasant things, as long as you have their number. Or if anonymity
is not a factor to the cyberbully, it can be just as easy for any cyberbully
to use his/her real account to send angry or hurtful messages over
Facebook or Twitter via private messaging and direct messaging. With
the internet or even mobile phones, it can be very easy to write something
nasty about someone for a wide audience, for instance, posting rumours,
insults, threats or embarrassing information on social media sites such
as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram etc. A lot of times, the cyberbully
would even be using a decoy or fake account to do the deed, which makes

Introduction / 11
The most they can reliably do is report the post in question to social media
moderators in hopes of getting it taken down but by then, many other
people might have already seen or maybe even taken a screenshot of it.
as a group effort too. Sometimes, a group of cyberbullies will brigade

a victim by posting negative or derogatory things about the victim
simultaneously or in very short intervals between each attack, making
it seem to the victim that the whole world is out to get him/her, which
can be extra demoralising. This may even extend to reporting or false
and their social media presence stymied.

Another way cyberbullying may occur is by ‘hacking.’ Note that in
the context of social media use, ‘hacking’ refers to using the social media
accounts of a particular individual to post things without their consent
and essentially assume the individual’s identity. ‘Hacking’ is often done
in jest between friends and can be done in good humour but it can easily
that someone else has assumed control of their social media account
and is using it to post sexual, vulgar or other inappropriate things that
to ‘hacking’ a victim’s account to send hateful or rude messages to other

people which can really damage the relationship of the victim with the
recipients of the messages. Related to this is also simply setting up a
dummy or fake account that mirrors the victim’s account to do much
the same, which can still cause the victim’s friends and acquaintances to
have a wrongful impression of the victim while at the same time, taunt
the victim as fake accounts are easily set up again, no matter how many
times they are banned or reported.
Propagation or sharing of material/images/videos of the victim
compromising/vulnerable position (for instance, crying, being bullied,

having an outburst) and the video may be uploaded online to further
humiliate the victim. The video release might be even more insidious
if it is deliberately edited/cut to be easily taken out of context to frame
the victim negatively. Media uploaded on the internet may be extremely
before it is taken, not to mention the uploader may just re-upload it again
anyway.

Cyberbullying may manifest as cyberstalking.

as a sustained mental attack, in which the perpetrator repeatedly and
non-consensually disrupts the victim’s life via threats of stalking, harm,
intimidation, and/or offensive comments done through electronic media
channels. Of all the different heads cyberbullying has, cyberstalking is
one of the most malicious ones as there is often a very real possibility of
the cyberbullying spilling over into ‘real’-life and causing true physical
harm to the victim as cyberstalking is often done also in tandem with
real world stalking. Cyberstalking may also include behaviour such as
monitoring, identity theft, threats, vandalism, solicitation for sex, or
procuring information that may be used to threaten or harass the victim.
Cyberbullying, much like face-to-face bullying, has led to suicides
and self-harming, particularly among youths around the world, and
Malaysia is no exception. What is more alarming perhaps is the trend
of face-to-face victims of bullies turning out to be bullies themselves in
cyberspace. Is this a vicious cycle? Or is this an unintentional act? How
do we manage this and empower victims to counteract the bullying?
The methodological pursuit in overcoming cyberbullying could involve
eliciting language typically used by bullies in social media as well as
the level of harmfulness the bullying causes. It is worth examining the
psyche of bullies as well as the ones being bullied in order to ultimately
empower victims to overcome this predicament.
Review” is an overarching study on cyberbullying which tries to paint a big

picture on the issue. The author, Tan Kim Hua, begins with problematising
counterparts. Conceptual issues such as the principle of repetition and

power asymmetry are raised and solutions are proposed so as to better
apprehend and accommodate the exact object of discussion. It then goes
on to discuss the psychology of victims and perpetrators, which draws
much semblance to that of traditional bullying victims and perpetrators,
while making notes on the neurological development of teenagers in trial
to relate it to the causes and consequences of cyberbullying. The author
also draws attention to the prospect of auto-detection of cyberbullying
activities through utilisation of linguistic analytic tools. Much focus
has been dedicated to elaborating on the different systems at disposal
and the reliability of each. This chapter ends with a brief discussion
on cyberbullying in relation to physical disabilities, gender, and social
differences as well as a marking on dissimilarities between cyberbullying

Introduction / 13
Bullying in Social Media” by Bahiyah Abdul Hamid goes on to discuss

the prevalence of body shaming online as an outcome of fat phobia and
sizeism which is the judgement of one’s worth positively and/or negatively
through the lens of the societal ideal of body image. The chapter sets to
of accessibility to healthy lifestyle, which unfortunately is not in equitable

provision in society, contrasted with the previous ideal which assumes a
larger body form associated with ability to afford food. The author then
delves into the realities, forms and functions of cyberspace bullying in
the Malaysian context while offering an array of examples drawn from
real life instances, before applying linguistic analysis to them. The author
then sums up by exposing the façade of concerns in which fat-shaming
between body shapes and health.
When We Surf: Malaysian Undergraduate Students’ Perception and

Experiences on Cyberbullying” investigates the level of Malaysian public
universities undergraduates’ understandings of cyberbullying concepts
while surveying their opinions on the matter. This study incorporated 70
students, male and female, encompassing a wide range of ethnicities to
Bidayuh, Kadazan etc. The study utilises response sheet and interview
sessions to allow subjects free articulations of their thoughts and
experiences. It is worth mentioning that the study found that the majority
of female subjects (65%) reported never being embarrassed, harassed or
threatened online which is the opposite of male subjects (58%) where
the majority have reported encountering abuse online at least once. This
is in contrast with a report by Mesch (2009) and may open new avenues
of study which may ascertain the sociological differences which results
The next chapter brings into our discourse the problem of identity
psychology of the perpetrators and victims of cyberbullying but at the

same time also focusing more on the externalisation of said psychology
the Victim: A Study of Cyberbullying” by Lee Siew Chin, T’ng Cheah

Kiu Choon and Muhammad Khair Abd Razak tries to answer the question
of what and which victim self-presentation invokes aggression. In doing

so, it explores the provocative linguistic features by surveying the

utterances and articulations of social media users on a platform, namely
Twitter. Following the footsteps of Erving Goffman (1956), the concept
of self-framing is utilised as an analytical tool to classify the online
activities observed into all the different rubrics in which cyberbullying
trickery, cyberstalking as well as exclusion.
Instagram
Language of Body Shaming Cyberbullies in Instagram” by Bahiyah
Abdul Hamid, Habibah Ismail &and Chairozila Mohd. Focusing on this
subset of Instagram users and their preoccupation of conforming to the
Malaysian ideals of body size and appearance, this chapter discusses what
identifying the salient linguistic forms and structures used by cyberbullies

to degrade, belittle and offend their targets (those judged not to have
conformed to societal expectations of ideal size, shape, colour and
appearance of the parts of the body). The data was based on 20 Malaysian
Instagram posts, retrieved by keyword searching, which featured body
shaming comments in the form of insults utilising Critical Discourse
Analysis (Fairclough 2001) and Emotivity (Bednarek 2006) to study
language use in the Instagram posts for body shaming. Three main types
of body shaming occurrences were revealed: self-deprecation, other-
Instagram
users on passing judgements and making comments on another person’s
body or appearance is an act of discrimination. Although this kind of
discrimination is commonplace in our culture and society, it is detrimental
discrimination involves distressing language use and abuse.
non-dismissible to life, but also at the same time encapsulating itself and
forming a distinct universe apart of its own. Understanding this virtual
world requires a different paradigm to make sense of its mechanisms and
operations which, even though based on real life, goes through a long
funnel of amendments so that the same logic is no longer applicable to
both worlds. Undoubtedly, it now pertains to everything human including
bullying, a notion now aptly termed as cyberbullying. It assumes not
only a different format than its predecessors but it also assumes deep
conceptual differences which necessitates the more perplexing nature of

Introduction / 15
the latter in contrast to the former. It elicits exaggerated consequences and

thus warrants serious discourse. This book is an answer to such callings
The collection of works in this book is a coordinated effort to help counter
every stakeholder in this enterprise to participate in a concerted manner

to chime in and be part of the change. It takes all quarters to put an end
to cyberbullying.

Chapter 1
Cyberbullying: A Cursory Review
Tan Kim Hua
Introduction
The advent of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in the late 1980s has
brought a lot of disruption to how we perceive the world. It changed,
among other things, the extent and forms of communication, the
boundaries of education, the future of jobs, as well as power relations. In
essence, the underlying social fabric as we have understood it undergoes
constant evolution, if not revolution and to keep pace with it requires
incisive analysis and scholarly inquiry. The question of bullying, like
everything else, is under the purview of a growing social phenomenon
and we therefore cannot equate cyberbullying with face-to-face bullying.
What Makes a Cyberbully?

The study done by Olweus in 1978 has been traditionally quoted as
to negative action by other students. In a more recent study by Langos

and Sarre (2015), they expounded on the basis left by Olweus by adding
the following criterion: an act is considered to have constituted bullying
when it is intentional, repeated, aggressive, and a manifestation of
power imbalances. These are the fundamentals by which bullying is
differentiated from mere aggression.
But one would be surprised to learn that upon close scrutiny, much of
cyberbullying actually doesn’t satisfy all the criteria and hence falls short
of being considered ‘bullying’ in the traditional sense. This is evident
MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[01].indd 17 12/18/18 2:00 PM

through inconsistencies found by report studies on negated feelings.

For instance, when Raskaukas and Stoltz in 2007 surveyed adolescents
victims of cyberbullying, 93% reported feeling sad, hopeless, and
powerless. Nevertheless, the number plummeted to 38% in a report by
the Second Youth Internet Safety Survey, contradicting past researches
(Ybarra, Mitchell, Wolak & Finkelhor 2006). The discrepancy is thought
to have arisen from the lack of consensus to what demarcates bullying
(Van Hee et al. 2015).
Attempts have been made to capture the general idea with broad
that is carried out using electronic means by a group or an individual

repeatedly and over time against a victim who cannot easily defend him
harassment intentionally perpetrated online (Ybarra & Mitchell 2004),

insults and threats through electronic devices,and bullying perpetrated
through electronic devices. Despite all efforts, scholars cannot seem to
repetition and power asymmetry. For an act to be considered as a form

of bullying, the criterion repetition is required (Olweus 2010). This is
traditionally seen as the perpetrator being engaged in the act of aggression
multiple times over a certain time span. However, when this paradigm is
because a one-time aggression on the Internet might escalate to a degree

never before seen in the traditional setting, such as going viral, to the
extent of being incorporated into the Internet meme (the word meme is
unit of cultural transmission, imitation and replication by non-genetic

means). This creates a snowball effect where harassments are being
constantly reproduced and redistributed not by the original uploaders
(Slonje, Smith & Frisen 2012) thus creating an ever-encompassing reach
of perpetrator(s) over the victim, relegating them to systematic attack
all day long.
Another important point to note is that of power asymmetry.
Traditionally for bullying to happen there has to be an imbalance in
terms of physical strength and/or socioeconomic status such that the
perpetrator would assume the higher end of the relationship (Olweus
1978). But such conditions are no longer necessary for cyberbullying
to happen. The victim surprisingly may be of equal or greater standing
as compared to the perpetrator (Vandebosch & Van Cleemput 2008)

Cyberbullying: A Cursory Review / 19
and as such, those who do not normally engage as an active agent in a

traditional setting of bullying might end up being cyberbullies themselves
(Poland 2010). Research by Walrave & Heirman (2011) has suggested
that the time spent on the internet correlates with one’s tendency to
participate in cyberbullying. In the same volume, it is also found that
the greatest predictor of being a victim of cyberbullying is being a
perpetrator previously. Past research notes that the reason being that
cyber perpetrators are more prone to using applications such as instant
messenger, blogs, and chatrooms, leaving their personal information
(Kolwaski & Witte 2006). As such, it could be concluded that the
explained by the anonymity of users on the internet (Raskaukas 2010).

cyberharassment
as the constant online expression that purposefully targets a particular
person and causes the victim substantial emotional suffering and fear.
technology, intent, targeting, and substantiality of harm. Smith et al.

(2008) described seven main media – mobile phone calls, text messages,
picture/video, emails, chatroom, instant messaging, and websites – as the
(2011) cover similar media with different grouping schemes ending with
9-item and 5-item scale respectively. It is important to note however, that
aside from the studies listed above, a study by Tippet and Kwak (2012)
shows that cyberbullying is found to be very common in online games
in South Korea. However, at the risk of being pedantic, this can safely
be subsumed under the rubric ‘chatrooms’ for that is principally how
gamers could get harassed through the medium.
The Neuropsychology of Cyberbullying

As many the difference between cyberbullying and traditional bullying,
the psychological effect elicited is very much the same. Sizemore (2015)
conducted a study that noted that both bullies and victims of traditional
bullying are associated with physical, psychological and even social
status harm. This draws semblance to a prior study (Ybarra & Mitchell
2004) where it was found that those engaged in online harassment are
usually products of unstable parent-child relationship, substance abuse

and delinquency – all of which leads to psychological issues. The effects

can range from low self-esteem to suicidal ideation (Sizemore 2015) and
in the worst cases, even suicide (Goldman 2010; Smith-Spark 2013).
It cannot be overly emphasised that these problems are related to
both perpetrators and victims of cyberbullying alike. Perhaps it is not
so much that being a bully affects the perpetrators psychologically as it
does to the victims, and rather that the psychological issues experienced
beget the bullies. This adds up to the reason why such a dynamic role-play
exists in the bullying relationship where a bully might become victim
and vice versa, either within the same traditional context (Connell et
al. 2014; Schneider et al. 2012) or with the trans-context into the cyber
world (Hemphill et al. 2012; Kowalski et al. 2014) since the experience of
being bullied is in and of itself traumatic. This goes in very well with the
research that links cyberbullying victimisation to a number of problematic
behaviours such as violence, externalisation, deviance, delinquencies and
substance abuse. However, it is arguable that victims of cyberbullying
are more prone to become cyberbullies themselves rather than that of
traditional bullying due to the anonymity factor of the Internet.
Cyberbullying can be potentially more dangerous and harmful than
its traditional counterparts especially but not exhaustively because of its
expansive reach and its availability. The advent of social media with its
distinctive features of real-time updating, wide spread dissemination of
information, gathering point of people, ability to reach wide audience
incidences (Gonzales 2014). It does not help that adolescents, as the

researches show, spend more time on the Internet rather than in school
(Lenhart 2015). The McLean Study of Adult Development (MSAD)
has concluded that the human brain does not attain maturity until later
in life at the age around 25 years old, a period in which the decision-
making process would gradually shift from the amygdala region to
the frontal lobe (Zanari et al. 2005). The frontal lobe is part of the
cognitive organ responsible for mature future planning which accounts
for the consequences for every action taken. In contrast, the amygdala
is part of the limbic system of the brain which is the power house for
is emotional, to say the very least. Thus, the study suggests that when
facing emotionally burdening events, adolescents are just not equipped to
handle the situation in a mature manner. This coupled with the fact that
cyber perpetrators often are out of touch with the effect of their bullying
in terms of the distress and pain caused onto the victims leaves a very

narrow aperture for empathy when compared to traditional bullying

which is more physical and visceral in nature (Slonje, Smith & Frisen
2012). Corollary to this, a study shows that the effects of cyberbullying
on adults are lesser (Rybnicek et al. 2013).
Linguistic Analysis and Policing

Cyberbullying
As it has become a major threat especially with regards to mental health,
efforts have been taken to police the situation, and thus the likes of
Facebook Watchdog (Rybnicek et al. 2013) have been introduced to
detect and prevent grooming and bullying activities on social media.
However linguistic analysis, even with the help of machine learning,
proves to be hard. Raisi and Huang (2016) listed at least three problems
with cyberbullying detection even in supervised condition. First is the
and social structure of the individuals involved are required to discern

the subtleties that lie there in every interaction. This comes naturally
communication are prone to misinterpretation. Next, it is problematic

in terms of understanding which party involved in the relationship is
being the perpetrator and which is being the victim. Third and lastly is
the rapidly changing nature of language especially among the younger
population which will render static text indicators obsolete and outdated
very soon. Thus, a dynamic methodology is required to be able to capture
the gist of what is trending from time to time vis-à-vis cyberbullying.
The extremely large body of conversation and interaction happening
online makes it impossible for people to be vigilant of all that is
produced (Van Hee 2015). While currently, social network platforms
have been relying on reports from users to alert moderators who are in
a potential of coming up with a more technical solution to the problem

by developing a system of automatic detection (Dadvar et al. 2012).
The current trajectory of research is aligning towards said direction. A
survey study done by Van Royen et al (2014) discovered that most of their
respondents favoured automatic monitoring given that effective follow-
up strategies are included with autonomy and privacy being guaranteed.

To date, there have only been a limited number of studies done on

automatic detection. Reynolds et al. (2011), for instance, suggested
supervised learning method to facilitate and/or be the principal means
of detecting cyberbullying. But, similar to a study done by Dinakar et
al. (2012), both focus on only the contents or texts themselves without
regard to the contextual relevance of each. Hence Dadvar et al. (2012) in
his study describes the user context as auxiliary criteria to determining
cyberbullying and he proposes three key items to be included: content-
based feature, cyberbullying feature and user-based feature where users
showed that when the three are taken into consideration, detection rate
respectively. These two concepts are very important when measuring
arguably more important for it measures the rate of subjects that properly
by the formula:
R=tp/(tp+fn)
where tp is true positive and fn is false negative. In the context of this
study, the apparently emotion-neutral comments can easily be detected as
cyberbullying due to the consideration made on the user’s background,
making the rate of false negative, fn, lower and concurrently improving
the recall of the method used. The caveat, however, being that to boost
the value of recall experimenter could easily label all subjects of study
purpose and useless. Hence, the concept of precision is needed where

method employed would not identify that which does not belong in the
R=tp/(tp+fp)
where fp is false positive. In the context of interest, a friendly tease would
offer 100% rate in both precision and recall but most of the time there
are some trade-off between the two which can be calculated in terms of
F-measure:
F=2PR/(P+R)
Dadvar (2014) later came up with the suggestion of Hybrid Approach

as he described it in 2012. A survey into the literature has shown that it
(Figuera et al. 2005) as well as information retrieval information (Farah

& Vaderpooten 2006). The Machine Learning Approaches used in the
study are Naïve Bayes, Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Decision
Tree. Naïve Bayes is a probabilistic program where a supervised learning
method is employed to calculate the likelihood of an item belonging to
certain demarcations depending on metrics provided from trained data
which is principally similar to SVM except for the fact that the latter
between data samples. In contrast, Decision Tree utilises a command

and conquer approach which is structurally composed of leaves and arcs,
subsumed under it the features studied from studied data; composed of

leaves and arcs (Haidar et al. 2017). It is shown that Machine Learning
counter-intuitive result is hypothesised to be the result of the insensitivity

of machine learning to skewed data employed in the study where it was
manually set to be at the rate of 10% bullying and 90% non-bullying
material.
Seeing that the technique in use only discriminates between bullying
and non-bullying such that both groups are treated as if it they are
homogenous entities, an attempt by (Van Hee 2015) has been made to
recognise
annotation. Here, the distinction made is essentially non-binary. With
said implementation, insights are gathered into the various types of
cyberbullying and the degree to which they are alarming as well as
to discern few other measures such as author role. These data, when
incorporated into the auto-detection program, may help in the process.
are later sub-categorised into two: bystander-defender and bystander-
et al. (2006) and Willard (2005) which classify the roles as Targets of
entitlement bullies, Retaliators (individuals who have been bullied by
others and are using the Internet to strike back), Victims of retaliators
(Individuals who have been bullying others, and they are now being

cyberbullied), Bystanders (who are part of the problem) and Bystanders

(who are part of the solution). The difference being that the bystanders
(who are part of the problem) when contrasted to bystander-assistant
do not actively take part in the action of the harasser but rather remain
indifferent to it. Xu et.al (2012), when analysing cyberbullying on
Twitter, also came up with similar groupings with some additions. In
the aforementioned groupings, roles are differentiated into bully, victim,
assistant, defender, bystander, reinforce, reporter and accuser.
In the same volume Van Hee also came up with extensive text
categories which are analysed at a substantive level:
1. Threat/
psychological threats, or indication of such threats.
2.
language intended to insult the addressee.
3.
form of misfortune to befall the addressee or that of their exclusion
from certain social group either real, virtual, and/or imaginary.
4.
5.
sexual conduct or sexual crime.
6.
victim either from the victims themselves or bystanders.
7.
This largely appropriates what has been supplemented by Langos

and Sarre (2015) with some additional categories which are worth
mentioning: cyberstalking (extreme harassment which leads to threats
against the victims and makes them fear for their safety); happy slapping
(recording of abuse done to the victims which is subsequently distributed
publicly with intention of defamation); outing and prickery (in which the
harasser manipulates victim into exposing certain personal information
which is then made public to humiliate the victim); impersonation and
masquerading (harasser pretends to be the victim where messages are
sent to certain individuals/institutions on various purposes as if coming
from the victim) and indirect threat (implication of physical harm done
indirectly on the Internet).
Of all the previous categories, insult has been found as the most
frequent type of cyberbullying activity with defense statements following
right next and curse/exclusion after that. The least represented category
with a ratio of 1:2.034 is encouragements. Although encouragement

should be seen as the easiest form of participation in bullying, it is not

empirically the case with respect to cyberbullying in this study (Van
as repeated numerous time previously, that the different fundamental

nature of traditional bullying and cyberbullying in which participants
of the latter can afford more protection from anonymity of the platform,
might incentivise people who would traditionally be bystander-assistant
or reinforce them to be the principal harasser themselves. It is also worth
mentioning that the nature of this study where the cyberbullying event
is taken to be a direct expression in written words instead of other forms
of encouragement that can be manifested in social media platforms
such as ‘like,’ ‘love,’ ‘share,’ ‘retweet’ etc has led to the concluded
results. Intuitively speaking, if one were to invest such time and interest
to contribute in the comment sections or posting anything on one’s
wall, one ought to exhibit some sort of authority and originality in the
cyberbullying event instead of latching onto others’ contributions. This
explanation can be corroborated from the data yielded in the study itself
where the total number of harassers sums up to 3266 posts while that of
the victims stops at 1800 – there are a lot more harassers for each victim
than victims for each harasser.
Cyberbullying, Gender, the Challenged and

the Gifted
Humphrey and Symes (2010) has stated that students with exceptionalities
are bullied at all grade levels, as well as in and away from school; they
are bullied directly by physical means and vulgar language, which is
reportedly more prevalent among males, or indirectly/relational through,
apart from everything else, rumour spreading, which has been found
to be associated more with females. Children who are cognitively,
communicatively, emotionally and physically challenged are undoubtedly
the ones in higher risks to get victimised and abused from their non-
disabled peers. Clearly the literature suggests that children with Speech-
Language Impairment (SLI) are vulnerable to victimisation for their
et al. 2015). It goes without saying that this group of individuals would
endure much more bullying and cyberbullying to the extent of more than
a half times the rate of their physically unchallenged peers.

being a bully, academically gifted students as well as general education

students, all in all were less likely than students with mild disabilities to
be viewed as bullies by their peers. Upon further survey, teachers were
of the opinion that academically gifted students were more likely to be
bullied or become bullies themselves compared to both general education
students and students with mild disabilities. The inference that could be
made here is that the perception of a bully is almost always associated
with aggressiveness and inversely associated with popularity among
peers. Bullied people are most likely to be socially isolated. This is key
in understanding the dynamics of the described phenomenon. It could
well be explained that the reason being that social isolation is subjective
to the general mood of the society, or in the interest of this writing, the
micro-society of a class room or the extended school compound, whereas
while gifted students are less likely to be bullied where the normative
attitudes towards knowledge is positive, the chances are that they are
introduced in their academic milieu. This could be a prospect for future

studies.
In a research done to study the effect of gender and cyberbullying
(Adam 2010) it was found that more adolescent girls were reported
to have experienced cyberbullying than boys, 25.8% versus 16%
respectively. Most often, they involve themselves in relational bullying
while males are more likely to engage in a more aggressive mode of
hurtful expressions and distributing humiliating contents personal to the
victims. Studies from 2007 to 2010 show that females are more likely
to be victims of cyberbullying while boys are more prevalent than girls
in their involvement as bullies and victims (Boulton, Lloyd, Down &
Marx 2012). This resembles what the literature has been uncovering in
regard to the nature of bullying. This can be partially explained through
another research which has found that 71% of teen girls have posted
sexual content to a boyfriend. The social danger of sexting is eminent.
Promulgation of such content is very often used in cases of female
bullying. Sexting involves a spectrum of negative issues from teen dating
violence to blackmail, peer pressure, cyberbullying. In several instances,
sexting has even resulted in suicide.
Regrettably, bullying is seen as a way for gaining social status for
some (Bauman, as cited in Holloday 2011). This social status is gained
primarily through downplaying of other’s worth and is done through

different strategies by different gender. Targeting each other with labels

that carry a particularly vulgar denotation and connotation is the main
modus operandi for the girls while physical threats and aggression are
Females are also more likely to be implicated in bullying experiences

involving psychological torment (Stephenson & Smith 1989). As such,
cyberbullying is a greater risk for females. It still remains, however, that
no predominate gender differences in the research on victimisation could
be uncovered (Tokunaga 2010).
When Cyberbullying Gets Political
discussed. Properly understood as a collective online aggression directed

towards actors of public interest (Rost et al. 2016) due to perceived
injustices done on the actor’s part, it is a form of norm enforcement online
by which large amounts of criticism, either civil or not, is disseminated
by millions of people within hours. These actors may be individuals
or even legal bodies such as institutions, organisations or even the
the case (Opp 2002) is a social construct intentionally put in place to

secure good supply and distribution of social good and hence promote
public interests. Under the purview of social norm theory, enforcement
is done through simple social sanctions executed in order to trigger the
disapproval with the aim of securing public goods (Rost et al. 2016).
The norm must necessarily be enforced to maintain its sustainability. As
noted by Olson’s Zero Contribution theory (1965):
...that if all rational and self-interested individuals in a large group would gain
as a group if they acted to achieve their common interest or objective, they will
still not voluntarily act to achieve that common or group interest.
of public good is achieved. Therefore, it is in and of itself a kind of

public good, for all that achieves public good is a form of public good
as well, and might well be abused by free riders as noted previously in
a phenomenon aptly described as second-order public good dilemma
by Oliver (1980) and Ostrom (1990). The rationale for this behavior is
two-pronged:

1. That the public view of good does not automatically mean that social
all, social norms exclude certain groups/individuals or only cater to

one subgroup’s interest alone (e.g. the less fortunate).
being in the action group.
This can ultimately be disastrous to the cause for if the critical mass
needed for an Internet Firestorm or any second-order public good to
achieve its purpose is not met due to immobilised free riders, the whole
endeavor will be naught and null.
However, the phenomenon under discussion, as obviously
manifested, disagrees with the dilemma. Diekmann (1992) and Rauhut
(2008) has shown that the dilemma is solved if the enforcement is cheap,
gives disproportionate motivation to get involved, and if a number of

central actors are presently driven with intrinsic intangible motives. In
online settings, Internet Firestorms occur at relatively low-cost situations.
What underlies the low-cost hypothesis is that rational individuals are
more likely to participate even without participation constraint if the
condition where individuals would only participate willingly, if they
become better off by participating rather than maintaining status quo
due to the assumed restrictive property of yielded public good at the end
of the cause (Oda 2007), and thus behave according to their attitudes
and preferences (Best 2012). Similarities can be drawn from the voting
individual votes but vote nonetheless as they have very little to nothing
being part of the Internet Firestorm is entirely subjective to the nature of

the agenda and personality of the individuals as well as the characteristics
of the action group. Generally however, social media contributes to this
includes feelings of satisfaction which are altruistic in nature (Ginges &

Atran 2009). The Arab Spring or Arab Firestorm which started from the
Twittersphere has led to massive rallies all over the region, bringing about
geopolitical instabilities which in due course resulted in a disruption of
the previous political order, is an extremely powerful example.
It is clear that Internet Firestorms are not cyberbullying though
overlaps might exist. They differ in the way that one must always be
political or deemed to be in politically correct junctions while the other

is relation of matters of personal issue. As such Internet Firestorms are

always done in public spaces and not in the private sphere of the virtual
world where the latter usually dwells in. However, it is not dismissible
that both ventures are geared by means of revenge, or in a larger political
spectrum, to bring about justice; what differs is only in the nature of such
justice whether it is of personal or rather social and collective nature.
The motives for cyberbullying perpetration include reasons such as,
among other things, revenge. Likewise, another research done on 10 to
18 year olds has highlighted the same motives, with emphasis on revenge,
boredom and curiosity (Vandebosch & Van Cleemput 2008). Youngsters
who admitted to cyberbullying most often were found by Patchin and
Hinduja (2008) to give reasons for bullying under the theme ‘revenge,’
Conclusion
Bullying is essentially the power relation between the strong and the
weak. As long as both ends exist, bullying will persist and manifest in
varying gradations throughout the power spectrum. It is the appropriation
of technology for abusive purposes and thus is continually varying
itself in terms of its operational nature as technology changes. It must
therefore be understood, discussed, and tackled through new paradigms
and approaches. Cyberbullying might be the latest installment in this
speculation. Researches should probe into the inquiry and foresee the
direction of its trajectory. Such an endeavor in future studies of bullying
would aptly equip the stakeholders to tackle the issue when it appears
and/or to prevent its occurrences altogether. It is a given that phenomena
do not emerge out of nothing but they emerge as logical consequences
of material conditions and sociological changes.
The previous section has offered a discussion in regard to the key
and discerning it in its latest mode. However, as duly noted, the

fundamentals remain the same and as such elicits the same psychological
impact. Studies have concluded that both the perpetrators and the victims
suffered more or less equally. It is tentatively suggested in this chapter
nevertheless that the orientation by which psychological issues relate to
the fact of being a perpetrator of cyberbullying is not the same to, and

might as well be the reverse of, the relationship between being a victim of
bullying and psychological disturbances. Further research to look into the
validity of this hypothesis should be encouraged and properly supported.
Bullying as a research interest has virtually non-exhaustive areas
to be invested in. It is an important subject of study due to its ever-
changing nature, pervasiveness, and universality. Its adversity is
undoubted for it pertains mostly to the junior citizens of any particular
society and its impact is maximal onto this subject group as well. Thus,
serious consideration must be taken to cater to the need of keeping it at
manageable levels.
References
Adams, C. 2010. Cyberbullying: How to Make It Stop. 120(2): 44-49.

Best, H. & Kroneberg, C. 2012. Die low-cost-hypothese: Theoretische
grundlagen und empirische implikationen. The Low-cost-hypothesis:
Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Implications 64(3): 535-561.
prevalence rates of bully victimization among students with disabilities in

the United States. School Psychology Quarterly 27(4): 210-222.
Factors Associated with
Bullying Behavior in Middle School Students. 19(3): 341-362.
Boulton, M., Lloyd, J., Down, J. & Marx, H. 2012. Predicting Undergraduates’
Self-Reported Engagement in Traditional and Cyberbullying from Attitudes.
15(3): 141-147.
Connell, N. M., Schell-Busey, N. M., Pearce, A. N. & Negro, P. 2014. Badgrlz?
Youth Violence
Juvenile Justice 12(3):
Dadvar, M., Jong, D. F., Ordelman, R. & Trieschnigg, D. 2012. “Improved
cyberbullying detection using gender information.” Proceedings of the
Twelfth Dutch-Belgian Information Retrieval Workshop (DIR 2012).
Diekmann, A. & Preisendörfer, P. 1992. Persónliches umweltverhalten:
life: Inconsistencies between environmental attitudes and behavior.]. Kölner

Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 44(2): 226-251.
Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for
Collective Action. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Journal of Economic
Perspectives 3(4): 99-117.
(Student thesis, UMNAD)

2009. Students with exceptionalities and the peer group context of bullying
and victimization in late elementary school. Journal of Child Family Studies
18(2): 136-150.
Farah, M. & Vanderpooten, D. 2006. “A multiple criteria approach for
information retrieval.” International Symposium on String Processing and
Information Retrieval, hlm. 242-254.
Students with disabilities and involvement in peer victimization: Theory,

research, and considerations for the future. Remedial Special Education
36(5): 263-274.
Figueira, J., Mousseau, V. & Roy, B. 2005. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis:
State of the Art Surveys. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the
Art Surveys. Springer : 133-153.
Ginges, J. & Atran, S. 2009. What Motivates Participation in Violent Political
Action. 1167(1): 115-123.
Goldman, R. 2010. “Teens indicted after allegedly taunting girl who hanged
herself.” abc News 29
Gonzales, R. H. 2014. Social media as a channel and its implications on
cyberbullying. DLSU Research Congress..
Gredler, G. R. & Olweus, D. 2003. Bullying at school: What we know and what
we can do. Psychology in the Schools 40(6): 699-700.
Haidar, B., Chamoun, M. & Serhrouchni, A. A Multilingual System for
Cyberbullying Detection: Arabic Content Detection Using Machine
Learning.
Hemphill, S. A., Kotevski, A., Tollit, M., Smith, R., Herrenkohl, T. I.,
Toumbourou, J. W. & Catalano, R. F. 2012. Longitudinal predictors of
cyber and traditional bullying perpetration in Australian secondary school
students. Journal of Adolescent Health 51(1): 59-65.
Holladay, J. 2011. Cyberbullying. Education Digest 76(5): 4-9.
Humphrey, N. & Symes, W. 2010. Perceptions of social support and experience
of bullying among pupils with Autistic Spectrum Disorders in mainstream
secondary schools. European Journal of Special Needs Education 25(1):
77-91.
Kowalski, R. & Witte, J. 2006. “Youth internet survey.” (Unpublished
manuscript, University, C.)
Langos, C. & Sarre, R. 2015. Responding to cyberbullying: The case for family
conferencing. Deaking Law Review 20(299.
Lenhart, A. 2015. “Teens, social media and technology overview.” http://www.
pewinternet.org/2015/04/09/teens-social-media-technology-2015/
Cyberbullying in the Global Playground:
Research from International Perspectives. John Wiley & Sons.

Marczak, M. & Coyne, I. 2010. Cyberbullying at achool: Good practice and

legal aspects in the United Kingdom. Australian Journal of Guidance and
Counselling 20(2): 182-193.
Okada, A. 2008. The second-order dilemma of public goods and capital
accumulation. Public Choice 135(3-4): 165-182.
Olson, M. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/
catalog.php?isbn=9780674537514
Oliver, P. 1980. Rewards and punishments as selective incentives for collective
action: Theoretical Investigations 85(6): 1356-1375.
Olweus, D. 1980. Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do.
. 2010. Understanding and Researching Bullying: Some Critical

Issues : 9-34.
Opp, K.-D. 2002. When do norms emerge by human design and when by the
unintended consequences of human action? The example of the No-
Smoking norm. Rationality Society 14(2): 131-158.
Patchin, J. W. & Hinduja, S. 2008. Bullying Beyond the School Yard. California:
Corwin Press.
Patchin, J. W. & Hinduja, S. 2010. Cyberbullying and Self-Esteem 80(12):
614-621.
Poland, S. 2010. Cyberbullying continues to challenge educators. District
Administration 46(5): 55.
Vocabulary Consistency.
Raskauskas, J. 2009. Text-bullying: Associations with traditional bullying and
depression among New Zealand adolescents. Journal of School Violence
9(1): 74-97.
Raskauskas, J. & Stoltz, A. D. 2007. Involvement in traditional and electronic
bullying among adolescents. Developmental Psychology 43(3): 564-575.
Rauhut, H. & Krumpal, I. 2008. Die Durchsetzung Sozialer Normen in Low-Cost
Und High-Cost Situationen / Enforcement of Social Norms in Low-Cost and
High-Cost Situations. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 37: 380.
to detect cyberbullying.” 2011 10th International Conference on Machine

Learning and Applications and Workshops: 241-244.
Rost, K., Stahel, L. & Frey, B. S. 2016. Digital social norm enforcement: Online
Firestorms in social media. PLoS one 11(6): e0155923.
Rybnicek, M., Poisel, R. & Tjoa, S. 2013. “Facebook Watchdog: A research
agenda for detecting online grooming and bullying activities.” 2013 IEEE
International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics : 2854-2859.
Schneider, S. K., O’donnell, L., Stueve, A. & Coulter, R. W. 2012. Cyberbullying,
school bullying and psychological distress: A regional census of high school
students. American Journal of Public Health 102(1): 171-177.

Youth Bullying: From Traditional Bullying Perpetration

to Cyberbullying Perpetration and the Role of Gender.
Slonje, R., Smith, P. K. & Frisén, A. 2013. The nature of cyberbullying and
strategies for prevention. Computers in Human Behavior 29(1): 26-32.
Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S. & Tippett, N.
2008. Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 49(4): 376-385.
Smith-Spark, L. 2013. “Hanna Smith suicide fuels calls for cction on Ask. Fm
cyberbullying.”
Stevepheson, P. & Smith, D. 1989. Bullying in the junior school. DT Tattum ve
DA Lane , Bullying in schools.
Tokunaga, R. S. 2010. Following you home from school: A critical review and
synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human
Behavior 26(3): 277-287.
Trolley, B., Hanel, C. & Shields, L. 2006. Demystifying & Deescalating
Cyberbullying in the Schools: A Resource Guide for Counselors, Educators
and Parents
W. 2015. Guidelines for the Fine-Grained Analysis of Cyberbullying.

Van Royen, K., Poels, K., Daelemans, W. & Vandebosch, H. 2015. Automatic
monitoring of cyberbullying on social networking sites: From technological
feasibility to desirability. Telematics and Informatics 32(1): 89-97.
Vandebosch, H. & Cleemput, K. V. 2008.
Research into the Perceptions of Youngsters. 11(4): 499-503.
Varjas, K., Talley, J., Meyers, J., Parris, L. & Cutts, H. 2010. High school
students’ perceptions of motivations for cyberbullying: An exploratory
study. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine 11(3): 269-273.
Wachs, S. & Wolf, K. D. 2011. Zusammenhänge Zwischen Cyberbullying Und
Praxis der
Kinderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatrie 60(9): 735-744.
Are Anti-Bullying Laws Effective?
Walrave, M. & Heirman, W. 2011. Cyberbullying: Predicting Victimisation and
Perpetration. 25(1): 59-72.
by outline social cruelty.” (accessed April 29, 2010.)

Xu, J.-M., Jun, K.-S., Zhu, X. & Bellmore, A. 2012. “Learning from bullying
traces in social media.” Proceedings of the 2012 conference of the North
American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: Human
language technologies: 656-666.
Ybarra, M. L. & Mitchell, K. J. 2004. Online Aggressor/Targets, Aggressors,
and Targets: A Comparison of Associated Youth Characteristics. 45(7):
1308-1316.

characteristics and associated distress related to Internet harassment:

Findings from the Second Youth Internet Safety Survey. Pediatrics 118(4):
e1169-e1177.
Zanarini, M. C., Frankenburg, F. R., Hennen, J., Reich, D. B. & Silk, K. R.
2005. The Mclean Study of Adult Development (Msad): Overview and
Journal of
Personality Disorders 19(5): 505-523.

Chapter 2
The Power to Destruct: Online Fat
Shaming Bullying in Social Media
Bahiyah Abdul Hamid
Introduction
“You have such a pretty face. It’s such a pity you’re so fat. No man will ever
marry you.” My Mother to me circa age 12.” (Elise Hines@geekspertise in
Chastain 2017:1).
“When walking into a store, immediately accosted by sales person, ‘We don’t
carry plus sizes here.’ Literally no one asked for this.” feature.@adviceChicken
in Bahadur 2013:3).
“#TheySaid “You should stop eating”, “Being slim is the best body type” “No
one likes fat girls” “My mom and my grandma say this a lot.” (Queenwinters@
Queenwinters in Chastain 2017:1).
We are all familiar with the above scenarios. They are tangible and need
no explanations. We may have encountered one or more of the scenarios
ourselves or have heard of friends and family members who have gone
through these experiences themselves.
The scenarios above are familiar to us regardless of our culture,
religion, age, social status, ethnicity, gender and geography. Fat shaming
in these kinds of scenarios often come unsolicited. Some may even come
under the guise of advice in order to convince their targets to lose weight
not just for health reasons, but also for success in looking for a lifelong
partner, for success in gaining employment and for social mobility and
is regarded as the ideal beauty or the ideal standard of attractiveness in

a society, not least, what is the best body size, shape and attribute of the
body. More sinister is the fact that body shaming is based not solely on

judgments about the body and the attributes of the body but more so on
the judgement of character. More often than not, we have become numb
to these kinds of body shaming instances because of their prevalence
and power; it is clear that body shaming has become part and parcel of
our lives and of our culture.
We are now living in a heavily connected society, in the age of social
media where for many of us, what we do in private are gladly swapped
for public consumption. Many of us share ourselves completely with the
gossip and advertising. Where fat shaming before the advent of computers
and networks were the province of face-to-face interactions, it is now very
prevalent and prominent in cyberspace.
Forms and Functions of Body Shaming

Body shaming is the term used to describe the inappropriate negative
language/insults in statements and attitudes towards yourself or another
person’s body or appearance in public discourses. Body shaming is
prevalently related to insults on purely linguistic grounds. According to
Samarin (1996), insults have structure: they have topic, form and context
of use, these linguistic characteristics lend themselves to linguistic study.
According to Samarin (1996), the topics typically involved in insults not
only touch on a person’s physical characteristic, but also the moral aspect
of the target. This compels the target at times to respond with an equal
measure or to retort with more offensive loaded words. Samarin (1996: 325)
further explains that the core of insults is a characterisation of “some part
of the target’s body or his/her actions which may be preceded or followed
by other utterances appropriate to the situation.”
Insults may be direct or indirect. Direct insults may be spelled out and
involve pejorative terms. More subtle insults may be achieved linguistically
by the use of nominals, adjectives, descriptive adverbs and similes. Samarin
states that the forms of insults may be relatively short, consisting of two
or three sentences or more. He also illustrates that insults need not be just
verbal in nature but can also be in the form of gestures that are socio-
indicate that the target in mad or crazy (Samarin 1996). Mann (2016: 2)
like Samarin (1996) observes that insults “just don’t “mean” but also “do”,
and have real-world impact. Insults, to Mann, are akin to speech acts, such

The Power to Destruct: Online Fat Shaming Bullying in Social Media / 37
as “instructing,” “complaining,” “complementing,” “requesting” and so

on, they serve a function in communication. To him, insults violate the
general desires for freedom of action and from imposition.
Barber (2017: 1) states that “in a verbal society, such as in the human
one, physical aggression is less often used to settle issues of status. These
are mostly deferred to verbal interactions.” In his blog, Barber touches
on what is happening in the world of social media, the world that we
live in at present, where we are extremely concerned about how we are
perceived by others, sometimes to the point of obsession. He points out
to the prevalent problem of narcissism among youths in social media and
what scholars believe is the main cause of this trend. According to Barber,
scholars believe that the more children are measured on evaluative scales
such as those in IQ scores, aptitude tests and CGPA, the more sensitive they
are to being insecure when they face threats to their social rank. Barber
(2017:1) states that:
...concern with how one is perceived creates social insecurity that may be relieved
by lashing out. Social networks are replete with individuals who deliver stinging
rebukes because they enjoy doing so, and because they are mostly exempt from
the reprisals that one might expect for real-world put-downs.
Insults, especially online, can be interpreted as an attempt to reduce
the social status of the target and raise the relative status of the insulter
(Barber 2016).
Manifestations of Body Shaming

How is body shaming manifested? According to Vargas (2016), body
shaming can manifest in three ways:
1. Criticising your own body or appearance, through a judgement or a
comparison to another person (for instance, I am so huge, compared
to her.” “Oh my god, look at how I hunch, she doesn’t.”).
2. Criticising another person’s body or appearance in their presence,
(for instance, “You’ll never look good in that pair of jeans with those
thighs”, “Your big ears jut out from under your hair, you’ll never
catch her attention.”).
3. Criticising another person’s body or appearance in their absence (for
instance, “Shamsul’s hair was a disaster today! Thank god yours look
better than his”, “What is with her feet? Her feet look like Donald
Duck’s.”).

Vargas (2016) reiterates that no matter how body shaming is manifested,

what is harmful is that it leads to comparison and to shame. What is worse
is that it perpetuates the idea that people should be judged mainly by
their bodies, their physical features or their appearance.
Why is body shaming so common when it leads to harsh
consequences? According to Vargas (2016), body shaming is the default
annoyed or intimidated by someone. This is particularly so during

adolescence and in the young adult phase of life. According to Vargas
(2016), “in some ways, it feels easier to shoot for something that will
hurt, like targeting physical appearance, rather than expressing what is
really going on emotionally.” Body shaming can be subtle. More often
than not, those especially within the thin privilege group will not be quick
to notice or object to body shaming (Bahadur 2013).
Fatphobia and Fat Shaming

Because fatphobia is all around us, especially on the Internet and social
Twitter and Facebook), we must understand its
scope and depth and how it manifests online. Most of us have become
explicitly aware that popular culture sends subliminal messages of
beauty ideals which manifests in us unrealistic and generally unattainable
standards of body size and body image. We are constantly barraged by
messages that want us to question why we were born with the bodies we
have, to hate our bodies or are challenged to change our bodies altogether.
We are highly aware of how harmful these messages can be and many
of us have very real experiences of negative relationships to our body as
a result. We must be aware that the proliferation of ideal body image is
situated along a spectrum of sizeism where people are judged negatively
or positively, we can be harmed and marginalised simply by body ideals.
Our bodies are constantly scrutinised, categorised and criticised (see the
examples in the scenarios given at the beginning of this chapter).
In this day and age, this system of sizeism values thinness. In many
countries of the world, being thin is a status symbol. Most often, when
something is associated with status, many of us strive hard to attain it.
Being thin in this day and age can be seen to be a showcase of lifestyle-
showing off that that person has access to healthy eating and exercise.

This is very different from the association of status many decades ago
when a privileged lifestyle meant simply being able to afford food and
being able to consume foods not found in our immediate environment.
Therefore, shaming, silencing and dehumanising, all different parts of
bullying, are more often than not what many fat/overweight people
While sizeism values thinness, the body ideals of this day and age also
vilify those who are “too thin” in what is termed as thin/skinny shaming.
Thin/skinny shaming may come in the guise of concern, such as “Are
you sure you ate anything today. When did you last eat? Last week?”
Here are some stereotypical notions on social media (especially on
Twitter) about those who are fat/ overweight:
“Fat people are not “really people,” they don’t deserve to be treated like people.”
(Melissa McEwan blogger in Bahadur 2013:1)
“Fat people have greater health risks so highlighting how fat someone is is (sic) a
way to help them realise that their size is dangerous for them.” (D’Onfro 2013: 2)
“Fat people are not disciplined enough to get a higher degree.” (Ioniemc@
Ioniemc in Bahadur 2013:3)
“To gain so much weight, they must be lazy, greedy, unmotivated, and have
poor self-discipline.” (D’Onfro 2013: 3)
“Fat people are stupid, lazy, and dirty. We (fat women) are constantly told that we
are animals (pigs, cows, heifers) while fat men are insulted as having “feminine
bodies.” (D’Onfro 2013:3)
As can be seen from the above statements, being fat/overweight is not just
an assessment of weight but rather a judgement of character. Often what
is assumed is that, it is the person’s fault if they are fat/overweight. What
is harmful and destructive is that plus size people are often stereotyped
as being lazy, dirty, unmotivated, lack self- discipline and are deemed
emotionally unstable.
The following are some personal accounts of fat-shaming written by
those who have experienced fat shaming personally:
“I am constantly underestimated. My intelligence, my strength, my talents,
my tenacity, my cleanliness, my humanity” (shakestweetz @shakestweetz in
Bahadur 2013:2).
“Being told your wife is attractive w/ the questioning voice tone clearly implying
‘how did YOU attract such a beauty’ ” (Phil Prehn@philphren in Bahadur
2013:2).

“And on that note, I’ve heard ad nauseum: ‘If you’re a vegetarian, how can you
be that size?’ ”(Quen Took @gentlemandyke in Bahadur 2013:2).
Fat shaming according to D’ Onfro (2013: 2) is “one of the last socially
acceptable forms of discrimination.” It has devastating effects on children,
youths, minority groups, and so on and are related to bullying not only in
cyberspace, but also in popular culture, in academic institutions, health
facilities, workplaces and homes.
The Vulnerable Groups Online

Who are the vulnerable groups online? The Internet Users Survey 2017
conducted by Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission
reported that Malaysians are heavy users of social media. There were about
21.9 million social media users in 2016. Facebook was the preference
for Malaysians as 97.3% of the social media users owned a Facebook
account. The report indicated a healthy increase of accounts ownership as
compared to previous years as follows: Ownership of Instagram – 56.1%,
YouTube- 45.3%, Twitter 26.6%, LinkedIn 9.1% and Tumblr -4.8% (www.
mcmc.gov.my). Who are the internet users? The survey further reported
that 83.2% of Malaysian internet users were from the ages of 5 to 17 years
of age. With regards to gender, the survey reported that men outnumbered
women in the distribution of internet users with 57.4% as compared to
women at 42.6%. A United Nations Broadband Commission report in
2105 highlighted that 73% of women and girls have been exposed or
have experienced some form of online violence. According to this same
report, women are 27 times more likely to be abused online compared to
men while online harassers are more likely to be men, comprising 61% of
them (Malaymailonline.com, 2017). With such statistics, chances are that
many Malaysians would have encountered some form of body shaming
connected online communities.

Children and youths have been reported to be the most vulnerable
group in this regards because of their proclivity to social media, especially
Facebook, to connect with others such as friends- to chat, to post
a photo of the intended target, and then mem-fy the photo for the sake
of a fat-shaming joke. This can then be spread around in Reddit, or any
meme sites. According to D’ Onfro (2013: 2):

There are generally two kinds of online cruelty: the throw-away kind where
people might add a mean joke to a meme or Reddit comment thread and then
move on to the next distraction, and then the kind where it’s clear that there’s a
concentrated effort to effect someone’s life.
Adults can also be victims of fat shaming apart from youths,
especially women. A report by FMT reporters (2017) indicate that
online abuse is a frequent problem for Malay Muslim women who do
not conform to societal expectations. Presentation of self is the main
concern of cyberbullies and the issue of hijab, for instance, with the
target donning the hijab or not being the main source of abuse online.
The report states that “although the issue at hand may relate to religion
or social norms, the abuse received by such victims is often targeted at
seemingly irrelevant matters such as their physical appearance” (FMT
Reporters 2017: 2).
In the case of Malaysian Shida Amal, she was encouraged to kill
herself by fat-shamers. It all started in 2015 when she started being
harassed by a group of people on Twitter, calling her “fat” and “stupid.”
According to Shida, a pattern soon emerged – each time the bullying
will start with one person tweeting an insult and the others would chime
in. She could not escape the tauntings and insults hurled at her as they
tagged her in their tweets. She managed to block the hateful tweets
but each time, someone else who was not blocked will attack her. The
contemplated suicide. Arlina Arshad was tormented by cyberbullies

that she too, like Shida became suicidal and contemplated suicide. In
Arlina’s case, cyberbullies were not so keen to let her go easily, she was
accused of attention seeking with some cyberbullies even posting hurtful
sarcastic messages in the Malay language such as “ kalau tikam pun tak
lepas lemak” (translated to: “Even if she were stabbed, it wouldn’t go
past the fat”) ( FMT Reporters 2017: 3).
Besides issues of religion and social norms, ones’ beliefs and views
can act as the basis for tauntings and insults. Members of NGOs and
activists often bear the brunt of taunts and insults. For instance, Twitter
user Nalisa Alia Amin was condemned for her anti- patriarchal and pro-
LGBT views but those who criticised her focused on her body instead,
spreading screenshots zooming in on her thighs or posting photos of her
next to pictures of animals in order to humiliate her (EMT Reporters
2017). Minority groups, people with non- mainstream sexual orientation
and ideology may also be vulnerable to abuse online.

declining, with low body esteem becoming a challenging issue that
The report is an outcome of a study conducted by Edelman Intelligence

for Dove that included a survey of 10,500 females across 13 countries.
The countries involved in the study include South Africa, UK, Russia,
Turkey, India, China, Mexico, Germany, Brazil, USA, Canada, Australia
and New Zealand (Brown 2016). The report found that only 46% of girls
UK (39%t). Of the countries included in the report, the US (24%) and

Canada (22%) fared worse than the rest of the countries surveyed. South
Africa was reported to be the least body conscious country according to
the report (Brown 2016).
The Detrimental and Destructive Effects of

Body Shaming and Fat Shaming
A New Straits Times online newspaper report in May 2017 by Pillay
should open our eyes to one of the most destructive effects of body
shaming and fat shaming online. Pillay’s report indicated that research in
Malaysia shows that suicide is the second leading cause of death amongst
youths between the ages of 15 and 29 in Malaysia. There is increasing
evidence that social media could be a source for suicide-related behavior
with cyberbullying being a critical instigator for such behavior. Shida
Amal and Arlina Arshad’s cases as described in the previous section are
typical illustrations of the power and control that can emanate from fat
shaming. Fat shaming can be destructive; it can lead to death as in the
case of Jessica Laney, 16, who was found hanged in her home in Hudson,
Florida in 2012. It was found that Jessica suffered constant abuse from
online bullies and was pushed to the point where she could no longer
handle the abuse. Jessica’s death is one of the many suicide deaths
reported around the world and literature indicates that deaths related to
cyberbullying will rise in tandem with the rising numbers of those who
have active social media accounts. Cases like Jessica’s should make us
aware of the dangers of fat shaming and cyberbullying particularly. The
Daily Mail news report by Robson and Warren (12 December 2012)
indicated that Jessica suffered abuse after users on the social networking

site Ask.fm hauled insults at her, calling her “fat,” a “slut” and tormented
her over her looks and her love life. Comments by users such as, “Can
you kill yourself already?” and “Nobody cares about you” further added
fuel to Jessica’s abuse. Ask.fm was a website where netizens could ask
anonymous questions to anyone they want. This was how Jessica was
constantly put down and bullied. According to the newspaper report, the
website, a Latvian-based site targets 13 to 18 year old youths and it was
reported to have more than 20 million members. Jessica’s friends and
family have rallied for the website to be shut down.
In Malaysia, while such cases of cyberbullying leading to death
may be many cases of unreported suicide mainly because of the shame

and stigma brought about by deeply held socio-cultural and religious
sensitivities related to suicide in our society. The cases above also point
to the importance of communications and seeking help. Pillay’s (2017)
newspaper report highlighted the lack of ability of Malaysian youths
to communicate-face-to-face especially in seeking help in the case of
depression and suicidal- tendencies as a result of young people spending
too much time on the Internet and their smartphones that they are not
comfortable communicating with another person in real life, face-to-face-
effectively with their family members especially their parents, teachers

and peers about their problems, their stress and their everyday activities
leading Malaysian child and adolescent psychologist and early childhood

educator, “this is a poor substitute for real human contact and empathy.
People at the end of their rope need to share their problems with someone
face-to-face” (in Pillay 2017: 3). Continuing, Chiam iterated that:
...it is dangerous for suicidal individuals to try to get help on the Internet. Some
people don’t understand there is a real problem and might poke fun at them,
not realising that they might be making the problem worse by reinforcing the
person’s sense of worthlessness (in Pillay 2017: 3).
The health profession is not immune to fat shaming and this can lead
to detrimental consequences. The weight centric model of health with
its ‘thin is healthy’ motto leads to critical issues in health care especially
amongst those who are overweight and obese. This model of health puts
blame on the individual as it assumes that weight is within an individual’s
control. What is destructive about this model is that it equates higher
weight with poor health habits and believes that weight loss is the only

way to improve health. Much research has shown that weight is not the
only predictor of illness. Such aspects as genetics, diet, stress and poverty
are other aspects that also play a role in predicting illness (Urbanski
2017). Chrisler, a Connecticut psychology professor aptly points out the
backlash effect of the weight centric model. She says that:
...ironically, it appears that health care professionals’ attempts to shame their
patients into losing weight to improve their health might actually result in
weight gain and declines in health status due to inactivity or delay in seeking
health care (Ruiz 2017).
Chrisler and McHugh (in Urbanski 2017) both iterate the pervasive,
painful and harmful outcome of fat shaming. Chrisler points out to the
fact that there is a growing number of health professionals who are
guilty of “microaggressions” and “sizeism” when undertaking medical
tasks especially towards their obese/plus size patients. She pointed out
that studies show that patients’ psychological stress can be linked to
how doctors interact with them, especially in a negative way. Chrisler
states that:
Implicit attitudes might be experienced by patients as microaggresions- for
example, a health provider’s apparent reluctance to touch an obese/plus size
patient, or a headshake, wince or ‘tsk’ while noting the patient’s weight in the
chart. Microaggressions are stressful over time and can contribute to the felt
experience of stigmatisation (Urbanski 2017:1).
In the same news report, psychologist McHugh, states that “stigmatization
of obese individuals pose serious risks to their psychological health.
Research demonstrates that weight stigma leads to psychological stress,
which can lead to poor physical and psychological health outcomes for
obese people.” In the end, many overweight people are less likely to trust
the advice of their health care providers, they may even shy away from
stay away from medical examinations altogether.

Fat shaming in school and in workplaces can also be destructive to
the target. Those who are proponents of fat shaming may argue that it is
morally and ethically right to taunt, belittle and degrade someone into
that point to the psychologically and physically harmful effects it has

to those it targets. Body shaming not only affects self-respect and self-
leading to issues of inadequacy over body and appearance manifesting

in eating disorders. Besides this, targets of fat shaming become anxious,

depressed, or housebound; they avoid social and sports activities and
healthcare services.
Examples of Malaysian Fat Shaming Online:

Forms & Functions
Insults or invectives are linguistic entities, specifically, they are
paralinguistic entities that are symbolic communication forms which
are used to cause mental and emotional pain, embarrassment or disgrace
(Agyekum 2004). With regards to politeness, insults are non-polite forms
that can cause the breakdown of social cohesion. According to Leech
(1983), insults are considered a violation of the principles of politeness
in discourse. The act of insulting someone is one of the most serious
face-threatening acts that can be performed. Brown and Levinson (1978)
state that Face Threatening Act (FTAs) by the addresser infringes on the
addressee’s need to maintain self-esteem and to be respected. Fat shaming
usually comes in the guise of being concerned. Some people may have
good intentions but they may not be aware that they are being tactless
when fat shaming.
may call overweight persons heifers, cows (especially if the victim is a

woman or they many use any appropriate animal according to the cultural
context- see Example 1 below), a waste of space and are urged to kill
themselves (D’Onfro 2103). Below are some examples found in various
social media sites in Malaysia with regards to fat and body shaming.
The examples here are not exhaustive. For more examples and linguistic
analysis of the forms and functions of fat shaming and body shaming,
please refer to the chapter entitled: “Haters Will Hate, But How? The
Language of Body Shaming Cyberbullies in Instagram.”
Example 1 - C-Trimax Slimming product Advertisement video

This video as a form of advertising has gone viral and has irked many
Malaysians for its blatant instances of a boyfriend fat shaming his girlfriend
and soon- to- be- wife. The audience this video is pitching to is obviously
to its Malay customers. In this video shared on Facebook via (Pen Merah
(dot) com), the girlfriend pesters her boyfriend to start the process of
asking for her hand in marriage. But the boyfriend starts his delaying

tactics by telling her that before he can marry her, he needs to “kira bajet”
(calculate the budget), he needs to calculate his budget as it will be double
the cost if she is this big in size. In the video, he is heard to be telling her
that “belum kahwin, awak macam beruang bunting. Lepas kahwin, awak
jadi gajah bunting (Before marriage you are like a pregnant bear. After
marriage you will be a pregnant elephant.)” The boyfriend then tells her
that she has to lose 45 kilos so that his budget can be maximised in order
to support her as his wife. This angers the girlfriend who gives in to her
boyfriend’s demands. She takes up the challenge. She is seen to resort to
C-Trimax, a slimming product to lose weight. The video concludes with
the girlfriend losing weight in a matter of a month and how after losing
weight, the boyfriend agrees to marry her right away. This example
contains language use familiar to us. The plus size girlfriend is compared
to a pregnant bear and a pregnant elephant via the use of simile and animal
metaphors. In the Malay language, the lexical item “bunting” (pregnant)
is an archaic colloquial word and it is now deemed impolite to use this
word especially when it is used to describe a woman’s condition. Here,
the choice of animal metaphors, beruang/bear and gajah/elephant used are
be humiliating to the target as the animal’s traits/characteristics are taken

as being synonymous to the target.
This video is a good example of the dangers of fatphobia, sizeism and
fat shaming. It blatantly privileges thinness. It hinges on simple untruths
that can be detrimental not only to girls and women but also to boys and
men. Firstly, its main message is simple: No man ever wants to marry
an overweight girl. This is very familiar to girls and women but is it the
absolute truth for boys and men? This video plays up to stereotypes and
paints a very bleak picture of Malay boys and men, in choosing a lifelong
marriage partner, Malay men are only attracted to a woman’s physical
appearance and body size and not to the real substance of a woman.
Secondly, girls who want to get married must be slim. This video shows
that the onus lies in girls to be beautiful. They must constantly work hard
to be considered beautiful. This video is also dangerous for health reasons
as it shows the girlfriend losing weight in a matter of a month which is not
order to lose weight which may not be a product that is health regulated
and safe. Lastly, and more insidiously, the video shows us that the blame
is always on women. In this video, initially there was no marriage proposal
because there is not enough budget for living expenses after marriage as
the girlfriend’s body size demands that the food budget goes to feeding

her twice as much as her boyfriend. Therefore, it not just the girlfriend’s
body size that is the problem, the source of the problem is actually the
girlfriend because she did not take good care of herself and that she let her
Example 2
Nur Fazura, a Malaysian actress was reported to be disappointed at remarks
made when her representative, a fan of hers, went up on stage to receive
a trophy on Fazura’s behalf after she won the 2018 Telenovela Awards.
The emcee, actress Faezah Elan, was reported to have said in the Malay
language something in line with the following translation; “ Actress Fazura
when presenting the trophy, a remark seen as directed at the fan’s body
shape and body weight. In Malaysia and in many countries of the world,
women are fat shamed before and after pregnancy. Body shamers do not
understand that gaining weight is needed for a healthy pregnancy and that
the extra pounds will come off after delivery. In Malaysia, women when
they are married and have had children, are often taunted and ridiculed
point to the physical changes of women before and after child bearing as
natural processes dictated by hormones and genetics.
Example 3
Fashion style critic, Zaihani Mohd. Zain, vented on her personal Twitter
account that people who weigh over 60 kg should not attend fashion shows
because they disturb the people sitting next to them because of their body
size. Her Twitter message in Malay went viral – “Kalau berat badan
melebihi 60 kg, tak payah lah datang. Sebabnya peha awak tu melimpah
kat kerusi sebelah kiri dan kanan awak. It’s so awkward and uncomfortable
for persons seated next to you”(translation: If you weigh more than 60 kg,
please don’t attend fashion events, as your thighs would spread on the chair
on your left and on your right... It’s so awkward and uncomfortable for the
person seated next to you.). The use of the Malay phrase peha melimpah
evokes visualisation of an overweight person’s thighs that seem to spread
or ooze over the chair, taking much room and causing people sitting beside
that person to be most uncomfortable as the thighs would touch those sitting
on both sides of that person. Zaihani is no stranger to controversy for her
public display of fatphobia and sizeism. In 2016, in an interview published
in Malaysia Tatler, she said, “If you love fashion and enjoy dressing up,

doesn’t matter but who are we kidding? It does. Why do you think the big
fashion houses do not cater to plus sized women?”
Dealing with Fat Shaming Cyberbullies

How do we deal with cyberbullies? Tracy (2007 in Holmberg 2008:
online, Tracy’s suggestions can be freely used to guide us towards

effectively dealing with bullies. Firstly, Tracy (2007 in Holmberg 2008:
the target using harsh words in retaliation will only worsen the situation
and trying to justify oneself only encourages the bully to keep going
because the strategy to get the target out of balance is working. Secondly,
Tracy suggests: use the silent treatment. Here, he states that the target,
by being silent, will reveal that the bully has nothing to attack and the
silence will eventually make the bully feel uncomfortable which often
results in the bully being more reasonable. Ignoring the bully’s post and
statement is a similar strategy that we could use. Tracy strongly agrees
that ignoring a personal attack for example, can lead the bully to refocus
on the real discussion. Finally, Tracy advocates for the target to call a
spade, a spade. According to Tracy, the target should identify the bully’s
behavior, “get their attention by confronting them and then explaining to
them that their behavior will get them nowhere can often lead to change
in the bully’s behavior” (Tracy 2007, in Holmberg 2008: 10).
Conclusion
A healthy body does not mean a thin body. Most of us suffer a genetic
predisposition that leads to the variety of body shapes and form that
human beings come in. We must encourage people to strive to be healthier
versions of themselves instead of caving in to the pressure to conform
to what society believes should be the ideal body type and size. “The
opposition to our ability to love our bodies, no matter what size, shape
or form they come in” (Goerke 2013). Body positivity is the way to go
and we must inculcate in our children, youths and adults this positive

belief to respect their God-given bodies and appearances which should

include all, not just some. The issues related to sizeism and fatphobia
must be addressed in psychology and the medical profession, not just
in theory but in training and in research. “Treatments should focus on
mental and physical health as the desired outcomes for therapy, and not
on weight.” (McHugh, in Hamilton 2017).
According to Chastain (2017:3):
Fatphobia is insidious, the idea that body size has anything to do with talent, or
intelligence, or skills boils down to nothing more than stereotypes and stigma.
It keeps overweight people from being able to participate fully in society.
With regards to fatphobia and sizeism in the form of fat shaming in social
media, strict adherence to codes of decency and instituting mechanisms
and excluded have not been full proof to curb this scourge. In the end,
it is not the tool that needs tending to but the attitudes and changes in
mindsets that need our outmost attention. How do we dismantle sizeism
and end fatphobia? How do we respect the experiences of fat people, their
stories and their knowledge? We must stand in solidarity with activists,
parents, teachers and politicians who have these on their agenda. But
most of all, we must be more tolerant of all kinds of body size and shapes
especially in this age of embracing diversity and be more tactful and
polite in communicating with each other.
References
Agyekum, K. 2004. Invective language in contemporary Ghanaian politics.

Journal of Language and Politics. 3:2, 345-373.
Bahadur, N. 16 December 2013. 14 painful examples of everyday fat-shaming.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2103/12/16/fatmicroaggressions-fat-
shaming-tweets_n_4453060.html [accessed 1 August 2018].
Barber, N. November 21 2016. “The psychology of insults.” http://www.
psychology tolday.com/ blog//the-human-beast/2010/the-psychology-
insults [accessed 1 August 2018].
Brown, P. and Levinson, C.S. 1978. Politeness: Some Universals in Language
Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
worldwide, dove global study indicates. http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/
worldwide-dove-global-study-indicates/new [accesses 1 August 2018].

Chastain, R. 2018. #Theysaid Highlights Our Culture of Body Shaming. https://

www.ravishly.com/theysaid-highlights-our-culture-body-shaming [accessed
20 July 2018].
D’onfro, J. 2013. Inside the Horrifying World of Online Fat-Shaming.
FMT Reporters. 2017. “Report: Malay Muslim women abused online for
challenging norms.” http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/
nation/2017/08/21/ report-Malay- Muslim women- abused- online- for-
challenging- norms/ [accessesed 25 June 2018].
Goerke, C. 2018. “Thinking through thinness: Understanding fatphobia as
oppression.” | the F Word. http://www.feminisms.org/6099/6099/ [accessed
15 July 2018].
physically harmful.” http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2017/08/

fat-shaming.aspx [accesses 20 July 2018].
Leech, G. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman Group Ltd.
Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission. 2017. Internet Users
Survey 2017. http://www. mcmc.gov.my [accessed 15 June 2018].
Pillay, S. 2017. “Suicide on the rise among Malaysian youth.” https://www.nst.
com.my/news/exclusive/2017/05/243354/suicide-rise-among-malaysian-
youth [accessed 20 July 2018].
Robson, S. & Warren, L. 2012. ‘Can you kill yourself already?’ The vile online
messages from Internet trolls ‘that led girl, 16, to hang herself.” http://
www.dailymail.co.uk /news/article-2246896/Jessica-Laney-16-commited-
suicide-internet-trolls-taunted-told-to-kill-herself.html [accessed 20 July
2018].
— and harms its victims.” https://mashable.com/2017/08/06/fat-shaming-

mentally-and-physically-harmful/ [accessed 13 July 2018].
Samarin, W. T. 1969. The art of Genya insults. International Journal of American
Linguistics vol. 35. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press : 323-329.
Tracy, M. 2007. “How to deal with problem people.” Lecture Notes. Osaka
Kansai Gaidai University, Japan in Holmberg, A. 2008. The power of insults:
A study of condescending linguistic strategies in four online discussion
forums. (Unpublished paper for Bachelor’s course EN3103, School of
Humanities, English Linguistics, Vaxjo Universitet.) Accessed: diva-portal.
org [13 July 2018].
Urbanski, D. 2017. “Psych prof rips ‘fat shaming’ doctors and their
‘microaggressions,’ ‘sizeism’ toward obese patients. https://www.theblaze.
com/news/2017/08/07/psych-prof-rips-fat-shaming-doctors-and-their-
microaggressions-sizeism-toward-obese-patients [accessed 16 June 2018].

Chapter 3
It Hurts When We Surf: Malaysian
Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions
and Experiences on Cyberbullying
Ang Leng Hong & He Mengyu
Introduction
In line with a prevailing social emphasis on digital technologies, the
use of social networking sites, internet and smart phones is increasing.
Despite the key importance of these technologies as a tool of social
communication, they are used as a medium by people with an intent to
harass each other. This negative phenomenon is known as cyberbullying.
the use of digital technologies to harass, bully or intimidate an individual

or groups of people (Bryce & Fraser 2013). Cyberbullying has received
extensive scholarly attention over the past decades due to its serious
impacts on the physical and mental health of the public. Scholars have
assessed the knowledge of cyberbullying from the view of public health
(Kiriakidis & Kavoura 2010; Aboujaoude et al. 2015) and focused on
the relationship between cyberbullying and social medium from the
Winiewski 2013). Others have also examined the action of cyberbullying
Pearson & Kelley 2014). However, research on cyberbullying in Malaysia

is still rare. Literature indicates that there is few published work on
cyberbullying in the Asian countries (Huang & Chou 2010; Park, Na &
Kim 2014). As far as the researchers are concerned, two studies have
been conducted in Malaysia. Faryadi (2011) investigates emotions of
cyberbullying victims among university students and Balakrishnan
(2015) explores young adults’ experience on cyberbullying in Malaysia.

On Cyberbullying
Cyberbullying is the behaviour performed by college students that
conveys hostile messages through electronic venues to harm other
students (Tokunaga 2010). Unlike the general aggressive behaviour of
traditional bullying, cyberbullying is a new mode of bullying. Through
the new means of electronic technologies, cyberbullying has the trait of
anonymity, which is the inability to see perpetrator or victim (Dehue,
Bolman & Völlink 2008). The use of the Internet, mobile phones and
social media sites has led cyberbullying to become widespread across the
globe. According to the World Health Organisation (2002), cyberbullying
is perceived as a prevailing issue for a high 20% of the students. As
Hanewald (2008) pointed out that cyberbullying does not only happen
in school but also outside school hours. This phenomenon has received
intense attention especially in recent years after reports of several suicides
related to cyberbullying (Aboujaoude et al. 2015). Cyberbullying is
mostly bullying through the Internet (Vandebosch & Van Cleemput 2008).
There is a variety of ways of cyberbullying (Reynolds 2012, summarised
1. Cellular or digital imaging messages considered derogatory, harmful

or mean to another student.
2. Discussion board messages considered harmful or mean-spirited to
another student.
3. E-mails, instant messages, pictures, photographs or ‘sexting’ of
videos considered homophobic, racist or sexual if not humiliating
and offensive to another student or students.
sites considered offensive to another student or students.

5. Impersonating or messaging on gossip, personal polling or virtual
reality sites or systems and “outing” or targeting other students if
not stalking and threatening them.
Although researchers have conducted a wide range of studies on

cyberbullying, including its forms, the emotional status of victims,
etc., works on cyberbullying appear to be limited in the United States
and Europe. In the United States, Ybarra and Mitchell (2004) studied
are cyber victims in their investigated samples aged 13 to 18 years. This

It Hurts When We Surf: Students’ Perceptions and Experiences on Cyberbullying / 53
is a worrying phenomenon. Also, there is research analysing factors

related to cyberbullying victimisation. For example, Hinduja and
to victimisation. In the Europe, Oliver and Candappa (2003) focused
et al. (2008) did a survey on cyberbullying using mobile phones and
call and text message are the most prevalent forms of cyberbullying.
examined reasons for cyberbullying among college students and

possible interventions to reduce cyberbullying. Likewise, Whittaker
and Kowalski (2015) investigated cyberbullying among college students
and they discovered that texting and social media are the most common
between being a victim and being a cyberbully among Portuguese and
were once victims showed a tendency to become cyberbullies whereas

the Portuguese students were seen putting in effort to break the cycle
between being a victim and being a cyberbully.
countries are generalisable across other culture samples. Malaysia is

a developing country with diverse cultural settings. The diverse races
contribute to cultural values of different levels. At present, cyberbullying
is seen growing epidemically in Malaysia (Balakrishnan 2015). The
phenomenon of cyberbullying is still under-researched in the Malaysian
context. The next section of this chapter is therefore undertaken to
examine the Malaysian undergraduate students’ perceptions and
experiences on cyberbullying in order to ascertain the severity of such
online abuse in the Malaysian context.
Data Collection and Analysis
In order to learn more about how the undergraduate students view

cyberbullying, the study adopted interview of the undergraduate students
at a Malaysian public university as the data collection strategy. The

1. Do you know what cyberbullying is?

2. Have you had any experiences being cyberbullied before?
3. How do you see the trend of cyberbullying in the Malaysian context?
Understanding of Cyberbullying Terminology
Do you know what cyberbullying is?
Table 3.1 Responses of participants according to gender distribution
Percentage
Female
Clear understanding of cyberbullying 30
Vague understanding of cyberbullying
Male
Clear understanding of cyberbullying 13
Vague understanding of cyberbullying 21
Total 100
From the analysis, most participants (57%) showed a vague

understanding of what constitutes cyberbullying, with most of them
the Internet; an act of using social media to hurt someone; a way to

harass people by sending awful messages and so on. In terms of gender
showed a better understanding of the term cyberbullying. In analysing

male participants’ responses, only 38% of male participants managed to
provide clearer views on cyberbullying. This can be explained by females
is in line with Smith et al.’s study (2008), which reported that girls are
more likely to be victims of cyberbullying. The following present some
responses of the participants who showed a clearer understanding of
what constitutes cyberbullying.

Example 1
A form of harassment using social media such as Instagram or Twitter
such as writing negative comments, sharing negative photos or videos
of someone over the Internet.
Abuse that takes place over cyber through electronic computer, cell phone
or tables, through posting negative comments, rumours, or gossips to
embarrass others deliberately.
An act of discriminating someone based on who the person is, how the
person acts, talks, or dress through any social media such as Facebook,
Twitter or Instagram.
An act of threatening, harassing or shaming others through social
media that can affect other peoples’ physical and mental health due to
unnecessary, mean and embarrassing comments pointed towards them
directly.
Bullying that takes place using digital devices like cell phones, computers
and tablets through the use of SMS, text and apps on social media or
forum by sending, posting or sharing negative or private contents or
information about someone.
Bullying state where people use digital devices like smartphones or
computers to embarrass or threaten people through writing negative
comments on Facebook and Twitter as well as sharing negative videos
or photos of someone over the Internet.
Through the interviews, it shows that

act of abuse over cyberspace through the use of digital devices such as
smartphones or computers to embarrass or threaten others by sending,
posting or sharing negative or private contents including textual comments,
photos or videos that could affect the physical and mental health of the
that some students are aware of what constitutes cyberbullying and some
of them could even demonstrate more a comprehensive understanding of
Fraser (2013), clearly it shows that students do not only know about the
tools (digital devices) that are used to bully other people online, they also
demonstrate an understanding of the venue (social media) people use to
intimidate the victims as well as the contents (comments, photos, videos)
that could affect the victims’ physical and mental health. The results of

analysis indicate the prevalent use of social media as the common venue
for harassing, embarrassing or intimidating others.
Nevertheless, there are more than half (57%) of the participants who
only provided simple explanations of cyberbullying terminology such as
bullying on the Internet; use of electronic devices to bully a person; virtual
version of bullying; bullying that involves the devices such as telephones
and computers and bullying that happens through social media. This result
indicates that some Malaysian undergraduates might not realise that they
were cyberbullied before as they were not aware of the different ways
that some participants did not realise they were being cyberbullied until
they had completed the interview.
Experiences of Being Cyberbullied
Have you had any experiences being cyberbullied before?
Percentage
Female
Yes 23
No 43
Male
Yes 20
No 14
Total 100
The analysis shows that most participants (57%) thought that they
had not encountered any cyberbullying attacks in the past, while the
rest claimed that they were only victims of cyberbullying once. In
terms of gender distribution, it is interesting to learn that most female
or threatened online whereas more than half of the male participants

shows contrast to the one reported by Mesch (2009) in which most of his
to the inconsistencies in the target participants. The sample in Mesch’s

research (2009) is youth population in the United States, whereas the
in Balakrishnan’s research (2015), which claimed that females (53.8%)
Malaysia. The following present some examples of cyberbullying acts

encountered by some participants.
Example 2
I am an Indian Muslim, when I was little, I used to receive racist messages
on my Facebook.
It happened to me back in my high school where kids are pretty much
love to pick on others. They would text me some harsh words such
they help me to overcome that trauma.

People used to call me short, ‘ketot’ ‘terbantut’ when they were
commenting on my pictures on my Facebook. It made me feel bad with
my appearance.
From the examples given, it seems apparent that cyberbullying

can happen by upon attacking the personal appearances of the victims.
This indicates that students who are disadvantaged physically are
study indicate that most of the participants never had any experiences
of getting cyberbullied in the past, it still warrants our concern as it is
possible that those participants who feel that they are not cyberbullied
before actually do not realise the various ways cyberbullying can occur
prior to the interviews. With regard to learning more about the students’
experiences in encountering cyberbullying, future research is needed to
shed more light on this by interpreting the various ways cyberbullying
could happen to the participants before carrying out the survey, as
suggested by Whittaker and Kowalski (2015).

Trend of Cyberbullying in the Malaysian Context
How do you see the trend of cyberbullying in the Malaysian context?
Percentage
Female
Serious 35
Under control 31
Male
Serious 23
Under control 11
Total 100
The results indicate that more than half of the participants (58%) felt
that cyberbullying is a serious issue in Malaysia while the rest (42%) did
majority of the participants (70%) felt that cyberbullying is a serious issue

in colleges in the United States. Besides, of all the female participants,
53% believed that the phenomenon of cyberbullying is getting serious.
becoming more rampant nowadays. The analysis results also show that
more females (47%) than males (33%) believed that the phenomenon of
cyberbullying is under control in Malaysia. Example 3 presents some of
the views about the uprising trend of cyberbullying in Malaysia while
Example 4 shows some opposing views about the trend.
Example 3
Cyberbullying in the Malaysian context is serious these days and I think
it’s increased over the time as people increasingly use social media
nowadays.
Cyberbullying in Malaysia seems to have no end as kids tend to do it
by violent games.

I think cyberbullying being an isolated case is far from true because the
issue of cyberbullying is much worst now.
I think it’s getting serious because some people can easily say nasty things
over social media than saying it face to face and apparently getting more
entertained by their actions.
Example 4
I think this case is still under control. However, caution and prevention
is needed to make sure this case is not getting serious.
I don’t think that cyberbullying is a big issues in our country, I think it’s
still under control.
I think cyberbullying in Malaysia is isolated case.
In the context of our country, I won’t say it’s very serious.
From the analysis, it is indicative that the participants held two different
views with regard to the trend of cyberbullying in the Malaysian context.
However, there is a consensus among the participants when it comes to
suggesting the needs of precautions in order to prevent the situation from
getting more deteriorated.
Conclusion
This study is exploratory in nature and it aims to learn about the Malaysian
undergraduates’ perceptions and experiences on cyberbullying. In
identifying how university students view cyberbullying, semi-structured
interviews were carried out individually on 70 participants and it is seen
useful in providing data that contributes towards the understanding
cyberbullying. Participants have generally indicated that cyberbullying

is a problem that affects students in the local context. It is worth noting
that more than half of the participants were not aware of the various
ways cyberbullying could happen in the cyber world as they were not
the interviews. The university needs to be more pro-active in educating

the campus community to prevent more students from becoming
victims of cyberbullying. With regard to the participants’ experiences

in cyberbullying encounter, more than half of them felt that they had
never experienced cyber abuse or harassment in the past. In observing
the trend of cyberbullying in the Malaysian context, slightly more than
in the country and steps needed to be taken to address the prevalence of

such phenomenon in the local context. It is hoped that this chapter has
drawn some attention to the importance of learning more about students’
perceptions and experiences on cyberbullying so that more relevant
prevention programmes could be designed to tackle this epidemic of
is never hurtful, but joyful and fruitful.
References
Aboujaoude, E., Savage, M. W., Starcevic, V. & Salame, W. O. 2015.

Journal of Adolescent
Health
roles of gender, age and internet frequency. Computers in Human Behavior
Cyberbullying among
Adolescent Bystanders: Role of the Communication Medium, Form of
Violence, and Empathy
It’s Common Sense That It’s Wrong”: Young People’s
Perceptions and Experiences of Cyberbullying
Convergent and divergent predictor variables. Computers in Human

Behavior
students’ perspectives on cyberbullying. Computers in Human Behavior
Dehue, F., Bolman, C. & Völlink, T. 2008. Cyberbullying: Youngsters’

Experiences and Parental Perception
Doane, A. N., Pearson, M. R. & Kelley, M. L. 2014. Predictors of cyberbullying
reasoned action. Computers in Human Behavior

Faryadi, Q. 2011. Cyberbullying and academic performance. International
Journal of Computational Engineering Research
Doing Applied Linguistics: A Guide for
Students. Routledge.

Hanewald, R. 2008. Confronting the pedagogical challenge of cyber safety.

Australian Journal for Teacher Education
Deviant Behavior
Huang, Y.-Y. & Chou, C. 2010. An analysis of multiple factors of cyberbullying

among junior high school students in Taiwan. Computers in Human
Behavior
on harassment through the Internet and other electronic means. Family

Community Health
Parental Mediation, Online Activities, and Cyberbullying.
Information Systems Education Journal

Oliver, C. & Candappa, M. 2003. Tackling Bullying: Listening to the Views of
Children and Young People. DfES Nottingham.
Park, S., Na, E.-Y. & Kim, E.-M. 2014. The relationship between online
activities, netiquette and cyberbullying. Children and Youth Services
Review 42(74-81.
bullying among adolescents. Developmental Psychology
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education
Computers in Human
Behavior
Vandebosch, H. & Cleemput, K. V. 2008.
Research into the Perceptions of Youngsters
Whittaker, E. & Kowalski, R. M. 2015. Cyberbullying via social media. Journal
of School Violence
Online Aggressor/Targets, Aggressors,
and Targets: A Comparison of Associated Youth Characteristics

Chapter 4
Framing the Victim: A Study of
Cyberbullying
Lee Siew Chin, T’ng Cheah Kiu Choon & Muhammad Khair
Abd Razak
Introduction
Facebook, XBox Live Instagram YouTube Twitter Snapchat

WeChat WhatsApp

Framing the Victim: A Study of Cyberbullying / 63
Dynamics of Bullying and Victimisation

Table
Direct bullying Direct bullying
Indirect bullying Indirect bullying
Source:


Goffman’s Framing Theory

The Cyberbullying Personas
The Victim Persona


Source:

The Bully Persona
Source:
The Discourse of Cyberbullying

YouTube
Table
“Indians are always drunk and good at creating chaos.”
“I think Najib is the culprit here.”
“DAP is useless when it comes to charity unlike BN.”
“These UMNO leaders suck at their leadership quality and should

be treated like a dog.”
“This man has been involved in gambling business and does drugs.”
“Everyone should stop voting for this party.”
The girl is the video is very pretty. So beautiful I fainted watching

this video. haha.”

videos.”
“Face me one to one if you dare.”
His nose is too pointy - looks like a damaged axe.
“idiots are clapping for another idiot.”
“This bitch has a terrible face but a damn nice body. I will play
all day.”
Source:
What Makes a Tweet Offensive?
Twitter

A Victim’s Self-frame
Tweets
poor me
I am suffering

Extract 1: Twitter
Aku rasa aku kena start bagitau satu Malaysia the real sakit aku sbb semua dh salah
anggap aku ni mental illness la bipolar la & dgr eh aku ni kena buatan manusia
(DISIHIRKAN OLEH KWN SEKERJA ORNG BATU PAHAT JOHOR NAMA DIA NAIL
AWATIF BINTI OMAR) pergi cri ig & twitter dia
(Source: Twitter)
Analysis of Julia’s framing
Disihirkan
pergi cri ig & twitter dia
the real sakit aku
Aku rasa aku kena start bagitau satu Malaysia the real sakit aku sbb semua dh
salah anggap aku ni mental illness
Aku rasa aku kena start bagitau

sakit dh salah anggap aku ni

mental illness .
aku ni kena buatan manusia (disihirkan

oleh kwn sekerja
dgr eh
aku ni kena buatan manusia –

This person feels that she has been wronged and

seeks to tell the public
There are expressions defensive behaviours and a

sense of helplessness
The victim believes in the worst and is therefore

full of negative emotions
Victim expresses self-pity, expects sympathy by

spinning tales of woe, and alternately putting
blame on others
Victim role plays, shows self-abasing

abasing and passive
demeanors, yet this act is being done aggressively
FIGURe 4.1
Source:
Conclusion

References
Cyberbullying and Victimization: Psychosocial

Characteristics of Bullies, Victims, and Bully/Victims
From Crime Policy to Victim Policy:

Reorienting the Justice System,
Educate, Medicate, or Litigate?: What Teachers, Parents,

and Administrators Must Do About Student Behavior.
Understanding Victims and Restorative Justice.
Bullying in North American Schools
Journal of Social Distress

and the Homeless
The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.
The
Information Society
Journal of
Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture

Jurnal Komunikasi, Malaysian

Journal of Communication
Journal
of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture
Psychology of Violence
Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma
Child Psychiatry & Human

Development
Journal of Communication
Journal of Youth and Adolescence
Communications of the ACM
Understanding and Managing Bullying
A Social-Ecological Model for Bullying Prevention

and Intervention in Early Adolescence.
American
Psychologist
Cyberbullying among Youngsters:

Journal of Personality Social Psychology
Information and Communication Technology (ICICTM):

Chapter 5
Haters Will Hate, But How? The
Language of Body Shaming Cyberbullies
in Instagram
Bahiyah Abdul Hamid, Habibah Ismail & Chairozila Mohd.
Shamsuddin
Introduction
The rise of social media usage has of late provided an outlet for others
to upload personal posts, photos and leave comments about each other’s
pictures and casually, insulting and degrading others. Social media
sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram have been the favoured
choices for online users to use in order to express themselves while at
the same time create bonds with others of shared interests. While social
much lamentable actions online which include reacting to posts, such as

criticising posts, mocking on public posts and also commenting in jest and
shaming others for the sake of having fun online. Reich (2010) calls this
phenomenon “networked individualism” (Purdy 2018), a trend where
people share their personal thoughts and feelings with friends, family
and even with new friendships established online, even at the expense of
others. Statistics have shown that 73% of individuals have access to one
or more social media sites (Bliss 2017), with some postings including
pictures of individual users. Bliss adds that online users or ‘netizens’
are known to leave abusive comments, which on the other hand, would
not have been used or spoken in the public domain. The types of online
shaming can include shaming of one’s appearance and habits (Gallardo
2017) even by anonymous online users.
The emerging trend of body shaming others has previously been

Haters Will Hate, But How? The Language of Body Shaming Cyberbullies / 81
a group or an individual in electronic forms of contact” (Hamm 2015).

However, the phenomenon of online body shaming does not necessarily
equate negative consequences, with some posts being made viral through
insults. Mateo and Yus (2013) explains that some ‘insults’ depend on
contextual attributes; they involve context, intentions, inferences and
culture, which contribute to the complexity of the meaning used for body
shaming. This unique interpretation of insults in body shaming needs to
be researched for its underlying intention in both visual and words used
to express such reactions.
This chapter aims to discuss the types and functions of body shaming
Instagram posts by Malay youths in Malaysia.
Furthermore, this chapter discusses how language is used, identifying the
salient linguistic forms and structures used by cyberbullies to degrade,
belittle and offend their targets- those judged not to have conformed to
societal expectations based on the ideal size, shape, colour and appearance
of the parts of the body deemed sensitive to their target/s.
Self-deprecation Online
One trend used when denigrating is the usage of self-deprecation in
shaming online posts. These insults serve different purposes. Researchers
Archard (2014) explains that one of the features of insults, are that it is
an expressive act that is communicated in public. These acts are directed
and have propositional content, which sets insults apart from profanities
and obscenities (Archard 2014: 128). Whereas Mateo and Yus (2013)
describe these shaming acts as communicated mostly for the intention
to offend, praise, or to establish a social bond. Whereby the task of
understanding the message contained in the insult depends on the targets’
reaction or even the lack of it. One such research on the language used in
social media investigated the language used in Facebook, or ‘netspeak’
(Crystal 2001) among Puerto Ricans by Carroll and Mari (2017). They
found that authentic language or daily used language was practiced among
users. Apart from this, research on language usage in social media is still
very minimal. Research on shaming or insults on social media has not
been conducted among Malaysian users. This proves that there is a lack
of research towards investigating language of insults in body shaming
on social media, particularly on Instagram and Facebook. The task of

investigating messages in body shaming and insults in social media

can be rather complicated due to the paradoxical nature or irony in the
messages communicated, but nevertheless a necessary process in order to
understand the self-deprecating language that is contained among social
media users, or netizens. Studies on self-deprecation or describing oneself
negatively goes far back to research that was previously conducted by
Wicklund and Gollwitzer (1981) on self-symbolizing. This negativity
marks self-deprecation that displays modesty, failure or incompetence,
which was previously researched among teachers’ self-descriptive
statement.
Deprecation in Hashtags and Pictures

This current study looks into how deprecation is used in social media
such as Instagram, with consideration for the use of hashtags that are
accompanied by Instagram pictures. These hashtags have become a
by other users, where other users will use the same hashtags. Zappavigna
(2015) explored the use of hashtags in linguistic contexts from Halliday
and Mathiessen’s (2004) systemic functional linguistics in social media
posts. Zappavigna adds that hashtags function as part of the linguistic
structure and also operates as metadata, information appended to some
primary form of content to assist in retrieving and understanding that
content when it is stored and published (ibid: 276).
In short, these hashtags contain information that can be found
retrieved and easily searched among users familiar with the term or word
used. This means that the hashtag used is part of the discourse among
the online community, with the metadata being ‘user-generated’ and
appearing within the community that uses this particular discourse. The
function of these hashtags depend on the # symbol and are not searchable
among the community unfamiliar with the repertoire. For example, the
hashtag #muslimcandyheartrejects was used among the Muslim diaspora
communities in 2012 (Wills & Fecteau 2016) on Twitter. The analysis
of hashtags in this study deployed humour as a method to relief stress
among Muslims in the West. Wills and Fecteau add that the combination
of social media networks such as Twitter also helped to create social
space and established social identities. One of the ways is through

customising these hashtags. With the nature of these hashtags being user
generated among online users, only like-minded individuals would be
using these hashtags in order to establish that similar identity and topic
of interest. Calvin et.al. (2015) discovered some commonalities in the
use of bullying hashtags on Twitter and found eight associated features of
tweets. These hashtags differ in the retweets, and in the conversation that
is contributed. Hashtags that are used mostly are incomplete sentences,
non-grammatical, and only serve discursive functions. At the moment,
much is unknown about how these hashtags function to communicate
and establish an online trend of verbal abuse in a range of pictures and
hashtags used among the online users. Therefore, in this chapter, the
pictures and hashtags that were associated with body shaming and any
representation of deprecation that were implied in these Instagram posts
This chapter analysed data collected from 20 Malaysian Instagram

pages that publically posted the Instagram users’ body shaming through
the use of hashtags (#). All the Instagram data were from Malay youths,
with an exception of one post. The hashtags analysed carry meanings
of shaming one’s physical condition, in the Malay language, such as
#gemuk, and #debab. Data is collected through the hashtags that were
tagged by the users. These hashtags that were used in the Instagram data
collected provided accessible data and are limited to the hashtags that
contain body shaming comments. The hashtags were generated through
random samples of posts tagging with hashtags using words related to
body shaming. The posts were chosen from the keywords that had the
potential for body shaming, for instance those keywords that carry the
meaning of being fat; #gemuk, #debab, #gemukisawesome. The Malay
language was the language of preference of the Instagram users in the
data with very few English language usage.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)

This chapter utilised Critical Discourse Analysis (Fairclough 2001) to
study language use in the Instagram posts for body shaming. Also utilised
in tandem is Emotivity (Bednarek 2006).
Fairclough’s 2001 framework is used to explicate the linkage between
the properties of language: the “texts” and social practice. Fairclough’s
framework (see Figure 5.1) is divided into three dimensions: text or the

discourse, the discursive practice and the social practice. The objective
of the three-dimensional framework is to investigate the connections of
the language used in the text, the ideas or beliefs and how Instagram
users utilise the connection between these aspects to body shame. In
this chapter, because we investigated the language features of Instagram
posts and how language is used to body shame, this framework is deemed
suitable for the research purposes.
Figure 5.1 Critical Discourse Analysis Framework (Fairclough 2001)
The data was analysed following Fairclough’s Critical Discourse

Analysis Framework. Firstly, analysis on the textual aspect of the
framework focused on the linguistic aspects and features that were
found in the Instagram posts. In order to further elaborate on the textual
the analysis of emotivity, the linguistic means used by Instagram users
attributes.
The Parameters of Evaluation: Emotivity

In this chapter, the analysis also focused on the parameters of evaluation.
These parameters refer to “the standards, norms and values according
to which we evaluate something through language” (Bednarek & Caple
2012: 139). For the purpose of examining the instances of body shaming,

the parameters of emotivity (positive/negative evaluation) is adopted.

Analysis involving emotivity is concerned with how positive/good
or negative/bad an entity is evaluated. The evaluated entities can be
people, events, actions and other evaluated entities (Bednarek 2006: 45;
2010b: 21). Emotivity is also an expression of the evaluator’s approval
or disapproval (Bednarek 2006: 19; 2010b: 21). In this chapter, the
evaluators are those who wrote the Instagram posts and the hashtags.
The evaluation may be positive or negative and is realised in language
through the use of many linguistic resources (Bednarek & Caple 2012:
144). For example, the word fat itself does not carry good or bad emotive
meanings. However, when paired with other verbal resources such as
hate. It becomes negative or is evaluated as bad.
Types of Body Shaming & Their Functions

From the analysis, there are three types of body shaming:
1. Self-deprecation.
2. Other-deprecation.
3. Self-realisation.
1. Self-deprecation
Pattern 1 – Deprecation of self alone
With regards to self-deprecation, the Instagram users are found to
show either direct or indirect disapproval of self. Instances of indirect
disapproval can be in the form of sarcasm. For example, a Malaysian
actress/singer wrote a caption for her own picture posted on Instagram as
“Debabnya lah!!!” which can be translated as Oh [she] is [so] fat lah!!!.
(see Figure 5.2). This is a type of sarcasm that echoes other people or is
reminiscing of what other people have responded to her and others like
way that lightens face or to water down any possible negative comments
that others might posts in response to the picture. So, we posit that this
type of self-deprecation as seen in Example 1 does not necessary have
negative connotation.

Figure 5.2 Example 1
Other examples of self-deprecation can also be found in instances

of direct disapproval of self, see Figure 5.3. In Example 2, a lot of
negative indicators were used in the Instagram post : One upon a time....
kurus comel --->>gemok cute... phui...!!! masa dolu2... #gemok #buncit
#gedempol #AkuBenciiGambarGemok...!!!
The use of the structure “One upon a time” which is familiar in story
telling followed by four fullstops and masa dolu2 (past times) indicate
that the Instagram user is reminiscing on the past with some time lapse
when he was thin and cute (kurus comel) and is comparing the past
with the present (see the arrow drawn out by the user using symbols
to indicate the present time somewhat like writing a formula). While
the Malay language word gemok/fat is paired with cute [EMOTIVITY:
POSITIVE], it was followed by other negative indicating words. The
word phuii..!!! [EMOTIVITY: NEGATIVE] is an onomatopoeia, it
indicates the sound of someone in the act of spitting. This can be translated
as an expression of disgust or repulsion. The use of interjection or
exclamation marks further enhances the negative feeling. The direct use of

hashtag #AkuBenciiGambarGemok...!!! [EMOTIVITY: NEGATIVE] or

translated as I hate fat picture emphasizes how bad the user thinks about
himself being fat. The combination of these verbal resources ultimately
results in a classic example of self-deprecation.
Pattern 2- Deprecation of self + other/s (in- group)

In the category of self-deprecation, there is also a sub-category where
a person not only deprecates himself/herself but this deprecation also
includes other people, usually those who are a part of the person’s in-
group. The other people (in-group) can be family members or friends. In
Figure 5.4, the Instagram user not only implicates herself but also four of
her friends featured in the posted picture. The caption says Muka putih,
kaki Bangla (note the shortened form of Bangladeshi) which literally
means fair face, legs like a Bangladeshi. However, metaphorically the
second part of the post also means legs as dark colored as a Bangladeshi

[EMOTIVITY: NEGATIVE]. This caption is also racist and derogatory as

it generalises all Bangladeshis as having dark coloured skin. The caption
also contains hashtags #Bangla + laughing emoticon [EMOTIVITY:
NEGATIVE], #ketot which means short and #Gemuk which means fat.
Except for #Bangla, all the other hashtags cannot be considered good or
bad since there were no other verbal sources that shows the evaluation
of these words by the Instagram user.
All the posts discussed so far contain different degrees of negative

evaluation or negative emotivity. These are considered to some degree
harmful to the self-esteem and mental health of the Instagram users. The
next examples of Instagram posts do not carry the same negativity as the

Pattern 3- Self- realisation + others (in-group)

Self-realisation is a different category of fat shaming. It points out to the
body and the attributes of the body (such as, gemuk/fat which is mostly
negative) but it does not function to degrade or put self or others down.
Instead, it is used to motivate self and/or others to do better in whatever
they are doing and to feel good about one’s self. So, a person can say
gemok (fat) is awesome as a caption with his/her smiling picture, or he/
she is saying that he/she happy and is trying to lose weight. So, words
like awesome and happy construct good, positive meanings when they
surround the word fat. The context surrounding it is positive with verbal
resources accompanying the picture contains positive emotivity. The post
below about two brothers is a good example of self-realisation posts.

In Figure 5.5, the Instagram user implicates not only himself but
also his brother by comparing their body sizes in his post: Abang gemuk,
adik chubby which means fat big brother, chubby baby brother. This post
In contrast, the caption was followed by other verbal resources that can
be considered as carrying positive emotivity: Nice result sem 1 [EMOTIVITY:
POSITIVE], #kipidap [EMOTIVITY: POSITIVE] #dongibab [EMOTIVITY: POSITIVE] #debab
[EMOTIVITY: NEUTRAL]. Kipidap means keep it up while dongibab means do
not give up.
Figure 5.6 Example 5 Figure 5.7 Example 6
Pattern 4 – Self –realization alone

Example 5 and Example 6 are examples of the same kind of posts
categorised as self-realisation posts but in these posts, no one else is
implicated. In Figure 5.6, the hashtag sukaakupun (like myself too) with
two smiling emoticons indicate positive emotivity. In Example 6, the
Instagram user reminisces back to December 2014 ( Satu ketika dahulu,
Disember 2014) . Her rather lengthy caption includes a photo of the
Instagram user exercising in order to reduce her weight. The caption is
familiar to us; it is a conversation with oneself in the form of questions

and answers. The question: Will I have the same body like this? (Adakah
aku akan kembali berbadan seperti ini?) denotes that the Instagram user
is afraid that she will return to her former self in body weight, one that is
not to her liking. The caption continues with the Instagram user issuing an
answer to the question she posed which is highly motivating. She says “ The
answer lies within me (Jawapannya hanya pada diriku). Most importantly
is that people around me support and give me motivation. Alhamdulillah-
(“Yang paling penting adalah orang di sekeliling aku yang menyokong dan
memberi dorongan kepada aku. Alhamdulillah”.) The Instagram user then
adds a passing note in netspeak - (p/s) time ni (this time – referring to the
picture) slalu tahan nafas n tarik perut bila nak bergambar (always hold
my breath and tuck in my stomach when taking photos). Hahh (laughter).
Lawak (Funny). This particular ending , couched in humour shows the
user’s particular feelings about her former self.
2. Other-Deprecation
Pattern 1 – Deprecation of others alone
The second type of body shaming is other -deprecation where the posts
target other people for the purpose to humiliate or insult them. Similar
with self-deprecation, Instagram users use sarcasm as one of the tools
to deprecate other people.

In the post on the left-hand side (Figure 5.8), the user congratulates
his friend on his wedding day: Tahniah pendek tralala hahaha #wedding
#ketot. Despite the well wishes, it seems that there are other implied
meanings in the post. The use of pendek/short tralala [EMOTIVITY:
NEGATIVE] is considered negative since the word pendek is paired
with tralala. While tralala does not have any meaning, it might actually
refer to the seven dwarves in the animated Disney’s Snow White movie.
The theme song the dwarfs sang in the movie include the word tralala:
“Whistle while you work, tra, la, la, la…”. This sarcasm is further
emphasised by the word hahaha (laughing) [EMOTIVITY: NEGATIVE]
and hashtag #ketot [EMOTIVITY: NEGATIVE]. While the language use
is quite indirect and the caption written as if it were a joke, it may have
been written as such to lighten the load of the insult.
Pattern 2- Comparing target to another person

There is also the pattern of comparing the target person to another
person. For example, in Figure 5.10 (see Example 9, the user compares
his friends body to that of a celebrity namely Abam Bocey who is known
as being overweight. However, his remarks are mixed with positive and
negative emotivities:
Figure 10 Example 9

Junior aku sorang ni dah macam Abam Bocey pulak (translated as “this one
junior of mine looks like Abam Bocey”), followed by a laughing emoticon
[EMOTIVITY: NEGATIVE]. While this particular Instagram user seems
like he is making fun of his junior’s body, there is a twist at the end of
the post where he inserted the hashtags #GEMOKK #IS #AWESOME
[EMOTIVITY: POSITIVE].Gemok is awesome is actually a tagline made
popular in Malaysia by Abam Bocey, a famous Malaysian comedian.
In the post about the junior, there seems to be a mixture of positive and
negative emotivities. Such mixtures were also evident in several previous
posts such as the Tahniah pendek tralala where a congratulatory wish
(Tahniah/congratulation) was oddly paired with implicitly insulting words
(See Example 7). This mixture of positive and negative emotivities might
be a strategy to save face or to lighten the bite of the insult. It also serves
to lighten the mood somewhat. Some might even consider such instances
as harmless jokes between friends.
Pattern 3- Using food metaphors

The use of metaphors is also a very popular pattern applied by users of
Instagram. Two particularly popular types of metaphors were utilised
namely animal and food metaphors. With regards to food metaphors,
the body parts usually associated with it are the cheeks and the chin.
Examples include hashtags like #pipipau (see Figure 5.11) which associates
someone’s cheeks with the pau. In Malaysia, pau is a type of steamed bun
Malaysia, paus can be savoury or sweet.

Another form of metaphor associated with local food, is #kuihlapis

(see Example 11). Kuih lapis is a sweet Malay delicacy which is usually
colourful and is made by stacking different colours of the delicacy on
top of another before baking and forming their layered appearance. The
hashtag #kuihlapis in Example 11 is used to show how the chin of the
person involved appears to have the layered appearance of the delicacy.
In both examples shown above, the hashtags #pipipau and #kuihlapis
are considered as carrying neither positive or negative emotive meaning.
Pattern 4- Using animal metaphors

For animal metaphors, words like gajah/elephant, badak/rhinoceros,
sapi/cow, babi/pig and baboon were used in the data analysed. The use
of baboon may be inspired by popular culture especially as Malaysian
youths are exposed to movies especially animated movies that feature
baboons as big and menacing. The choice of using these metaphors are
especially with children, youths and young adults. Quite rarely, due to
religious sensitivity, is babi/pig ever used by Malay Muslim Instagram
users to describe the body. However, there is an exception especially
when directly insulting someone. The use of babi/pig by Malay Muslim
Instagram users can be very offensive and humiliating as the animal’s
traits/characteristics are taken as being synonymous to the person targeted.
Thus the person is seen as despicable, dirty, greedy and ugly. In Malay
literature, pigs are placed at the lower rung of the animal hierarchy in terms
of rank and status. In some context however, the same word when used
by non-Muslim Malaysians may have a different and sometimes positive
effect. The difference can be seen from the posts below. The posts on the
left might be written by a non-Muslim, see the post with regards to the
hashtag pig (see Figure 5.13) while the post on the right is by a Muslim
man, see the post with regards to the hashtags gajah, badak and baboon
(see Figure 5.14).

The two posts above (see Examples 12 and 13) used hashtags instead
of description/caption. It is quite interesting to see quite similar patterns
appearing from them. Moving from top to bottom, together the hashtags
seem to imply the increasing dehumanisation of the target person (either
self or other) from a #big human or #buncit human, to shape (bujur) and
We theorise that there is a kind of narrative that is being constructed

by hashtag users. Alone, the use of hashtags does not actually carry any
negative or positive emotive meanings. But when using different patterns
or combinations of patterns, they are likely to imply or suggest certain
meanings to the readers, like the one discussed above to dehumanise
the person.
Gender Differences & Similarities: Linguistic

Resources Used For Body Shaming
There is slight differences and similarities in the use of linguistic

resources when the target of shame (either self or/and other) is a female
or male. Here is a short list of lexical items found to describe the body
and physical features of the target:

Table 5.1 Lexis used for body shaming self/others (Instagram data)
Male Female
Height Pendek, ketot ketot
Weight Gemok, debab, tembam*, gedempol, Debab, tembam*
besar, gempal
Cheek/Pipi Tembam*, chubby, labuh tembam*, chubby, labuh, pau
Stomach buncit, boroi, one pack N/A
Skin colour N/A Dark (Bangla)
Shape Bulat (round), bujur (oval) N/A
Face N/A hodoh (Ugly), bulat (round)
Based on Table 5.1, we can see what parts of the body and what issues
related to physical attributes are Malaysian Malay males and females
preoccupied with in their Instagram posts: for similarities, both males
and females are preoccupied with their height, weight, and cheeks. The
difference in terms of how women are preoccupied with skin colour and
their face while men are more interested to talk about the stomachcan
be seen. There are also words like tembam which are ambiguous and
may refer to both cheeks and body/weight. For males, there seems to
stomachs, thus words like buncit, boroi and one pack (rather than six
pack) were found.
Recommendations for Future Research

For this chapter, the analysis and discussions were focused on collected
Instagram data. However, there are several instances of self-deprecation
through body shaming that simply function to get attention. This is
especially when fat shaming of self is used by a person who is not
see Figure 5.15 of the post found on Twitter:

thin, normal looking girl. However, the post seems to indicate that the
user feels otherwise. The caption can be translated as: I’m tired having
an ugly face, fat like a piglet Haa damn when will I be pretty how will
my crush notice me.
This is an extreme example where curse words (sial/damn) are found
and religiously sensitive words ( pig and anak babi/baby pig/piglet) are
used in the form of animal metaphor i.e., gemok macam anak babi(fat
like a baby pig/piglet). Take note also that the user used bold words to
be more succinct – the bold words together form the following structure:
Gemuk macam babi. Such extreme self-deprecation may function to seek
approval from the follower to praise her instead. The intention might
also be to gain more likes or followers. However, this kind of posts
might not actually be perceived well by other netizens (internet citizens).
They might even gain haters instead of gaining likes or followers as the
following post attests (see Figure 5.16).

The post in Figure 5.16 can be loosely translated as: Those who are
thin like banana tree stems but say that they are fat like a pig, I’m going
to claim you all as attention seekers. This is to show that some netizens
are well aware of self-deprecation as a strategy to get attention and are
irked by such posts.
The examination of such posts for future studies is recommended.
Researchers might consider both visual and verbal texts in their future
analysis to investigate the motives of those who proclaim themselves
overweight/fat but in reality they are the direct opposite of what they
say they are. Investigations into this phenomenon might reveal issues
of self-esteem, self- worth and can even point to deep seated mental
problems. This kind of online behaviour might also display deep- rooted
issues that underlie behavioural and health problems such as anorexia
though they are not.

We also found from our initial examination of Facebook posts more
extreme examples of other deprecations written by those who own fake
accounts, researchers might be interested to analyse the way these posts
holders. This is to validate whether or not the degree of extremism in
insult and humiliate others without any obvious legal repercussions. An

example of extreme other-deprecation by a possible fake account holder
is shown below (see Figure 5.17):

In this post illustrated in Example 16, Ustazah Hamidah rants about a

famous Malaysian singer, Aishah. The lexical item Ustazah is a title
derived from Arabic and is used in Malaysia to indicate that the person
with this title is a female Islamic religious teacher. However, the use of
lexical items such as (translated as: hypocritical
pigs) is not becoming of language use by a religious teacher. These lexical
humiliation and insult the target-Aishah. The hashtag AisyahGemuk

BabiPanDap indicates not just body shaming but also shaming the
particular person who is attacking the target.

Conclusion
This chapter shows different types and different patterns of body shaming
used by Malaysian Malay youth Instagram
that Malay youth Instagram users’ posts analysed can either come in
the form of self-deprecation or other- deprecation but sometimes the
deprecation comes in a combination of both. Within these types, there
are also different patterns used which show that insults can come in a
myriad of forms accompanied by different functions. Through analysis
of emotivity, body shaming posts were distinguished from other types
of posts (self-realization) by looking at the combination of natural
words (fat) with negative (benci/hate) or positive emotive meanings
(#GemokIsAwesome). The comparison between language features used
by female and male Instagram users also show similarities and we found
focusing on the body, the physical attributes of different parts of the body
or appearance by way of language use. However, through the analysis, it
is found that a particular post might not carry only one emotive meaning
(only negative emotivity) which may directly suggest a blatant instance of
body shaming. Instead, many posts analysed show a mixture of positive
and negative emotive meanings of one target/subject. It is argued that this
may be a strategy for saving face and reducing the load of the insult and
decreasing the backlash from netizens. The misconception with regards
to insults especially those thrown at others is that they function solely
to degrade and belittle. However, this chapter shows otherwise. In our
analysis, we found much data in support of the positive rather than the
References
Bednarek, M. 2006. Evaluation in Media Discourse: Analysis of a Newspaper

Corpus. A&C Black.
. 2010. Evaluation in the news: A methodological framework
for analysing evaluative language in journalism. Australian Journal of
Communication 37(2): 15.
Bednarek, M. & Caple, H. 2012. News Discourse. 46. Continuum International
Publishing Group: A&C Black.
Bliss, L. 2017. The Crown Prosecution Guidelines and grossly offensive
comments: An analysis. Journal of Media Law 9(2): 173-188.

Calvin, A. J., Bellmore, A., Xu, J.-M. & Zhu, X. 2015. #Bully: Uses of hashtags in
posts about bullying on Twitter. Journal of School Violence 14(1): 133-153.
Carroll, K. S. & Mari, V. Z. 2017. Puerto Rican language use on Facebook.
Centro Journal 29(2):
Fairclough, N. 2013. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of
Language. Routledge.
Hamm, M. P., Newton, A. S., Chisholm, A. & Et Al. 2015. Prevalence and effect
of cyberbullying on children and young people: A scoping review of social
media studies. JAMA Pediatrics 169(8): 770-777.
Mateo, J. & Yus, F. R. 2013. Towards a Cross-Cultural Pragmatic Taxonomy
of Insults. 1(1): 87-114.
Purdy, E. R. 2018. Social media as social interaction. Research Starters Sociology
1.
Slack, J. 2017. Twitter wars: How the Kentucky General Assembly and Courts
should strike back against virtual victim-blaming in sexual assault cases.
U. Louisville L. Rev. 56: 411.
Wills, E. R. & Fecteau, A. 2016. Humor and identity on Twitter:
#Muslimcandyheartrejects as a digital space for identity construction.
Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 36(1): 32-45.
Zappavigna, M. 2015. Searchable talk: The linguistic functions of hashtags.
Social Semiotics 25(3): 274-291.

List of Contributors
Tan Kim Hua, Ph.D, is an Associate Professor, lecturing in Corpus

Linguistics at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels at Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM). She is also the Editor-in-Chief of the 3L
Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. Spear heading
and cyberbullying, gives her opportunities to develop customised apps
may vary according to societal demands and needs but her inclination
Bahiyah Abdul Hamid, Ph.D, is an Associate Professor at the Centre for

Literacy and Sociocultural Transformation, Faculty of Social Sciences
and semiotics analysis. She has headed an international research study
stereotyping and has headed numerous research projects nationally and

at university level.
Ang Leng Hong, Ph.D, is currently teaching at the English Language
and English language teaching. She has published papers in international

3L: Language,
Linguistics, Literature and PERTANIKA
Chairozila Mohd Shamsuddin
studies in language learning, linguistics and social semiotics approaches.
a second language to undergraduates, focusing on courses that emphasise
MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[06]loc.indd 103 12/18/18 2:31 PM

on competencies in English such as academic communication, creative
HE Mengyu is currently a PhD student at the English Language Studies
publications have appeared in 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature®

The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies and GEMA
Online® Journal of Language Studies.
Habibah Ismail is a lecturer at the Faculty of Major Language Studies,
at the Department of Language Studies, School of Communication and

Language, Kuala Lumpur Infrastructure University College (IUKL).
Lee Siew Chin, MESL, is a senior lecturer at the Centre for Literacy and
and curriculum design. She specialises in language and media and she
blogs, and the incorporation of media in language teaching, particularly
Muhammad Khair Abd Razak is currently completing his Master’s
delves into the framing strategies in media, particularly on the linguistic
Malaysia).
MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[06]loc.indd 104 12/18/18 2:31 PM

Index
animal metaphors 94 harassment 70
blackmail 24 impersonation 70
body shaming 36, 37, 42, 80, 85 insult 24, 45
bullying 19, 26, 63, 65 Internet Firestorms 28
bully persona 70
masquerading 24
Critical Discourse Analysis 83, 84
curse 24 networked individualism 80
cyberbullying 10, 12, 17-20, 23,
26, 52, 55, 64, 70, 72 power asymmetry 18
cyberharassment 19
cyberstalking 24, 70 repetition 18
defamation 24 self-deprecation 85
defence 24 self-realisation 89
deprecation 82 sexual talk 24
stalking 12
encouragement 24
trolling 71
fatphobia 38, 46
fat shaming 38-39, 41-42, 44 victim mentality 68
victim persona 67
food metaphors 93 victim’s self-frame 73
Goffman’s Framing Theory 66
MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[07]idx.indd 105 12/18/18 2:31 PM

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[07]idx.indd 106 12/18/18 2:31 PM
View publication stats

StopCyberbullying PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

StopCyberbullying PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Chapter · January 2019

Kim Hua Tan

language input, grammaticalitt judgement View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

PENERBIT UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 3 12/20/18 12:19 PM

Diterbitkan di Malaysia oleh / Published in Malaysia by

Penerbit UKM adalah anggota / is a member of the

Diatur huruf di Malaysia oleh / Typesetted in Malaysia by

Dicetak di Malaysia oleh / Printed in Malaysia by

Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia Data Pengkatalogan-dalam-Penerbitan /

Stop Cyberbullying / edited by Tan Kim Hua.

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 4 12/20/18 12:19 PM

Chapter 1 Cyberbullying: A Cursory Review ...17

Chapter 2 The Power to Destruct: Online Fat Shaming

Chapter 3 It Hurts When We Surf: Malaysian Undergraduate

Chapter 4 Framing the Victim: A Study of Cyberbullying ...62

Chapter 5 Haters Will Hate, But How? The Language of Body

List of Contributors ...103

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 5 12/20/18 12:19 PM

The research grant GUP-2015-014, under the auspices of UKM, has

app (BuLI) that auto detects potentially harmful messages in forums or

redeem themselves in time.

Tan Kim Hua

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 7 12/20/18 12:19 PM

Digital capabilities have revolutionised the way information is

fusion and embedment of technology onto society and even humanity

far reaching. However, wrongly embraced, technology can work against

communication are beyond policing and therefore opened to abuse when

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 9 12/20/18 12:19 PM

cyberbullying, is basically bullying

for Person A to escape or to ‘contain’ the cyberbullying.

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 10 12/20/18 12:19 PM

as a group effort too. Sometimes, a group of cyberbullies will brigade

and their social media presence stymied.

to ‘hacking’ a victim’s account to send hateful or rude messages to other

compromising/vulnerable position (for instance, crying, being bullied,

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 11 12/20/18 12:19 PM

Cyberbullying may manifest as cyberstalking.

Review” is an overarching study on cyberbullying which tries to paint a big

counterparts. Conceptual issues such as the principle of repetition and

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 12 12/20/18 12:19 PM

Bullying in Social Media” by Bahiyah Abdul Hamid goes on to discuss

of accessibility to healthy lifestyle, which unfortunately is not in equitable

between body shapes and health.

When We Surf: Malaysian Undergraduate Students’ Perception and

psychology of the perpetrators and victims of cyberbullying but at the

the Victim: A Study of Cyberbullying” by Lee Siew Chin, T’ng Cheah

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 13 12/20/18 12:19 PM

so, it explores the provocative linguistic features by surveying the

trickery, cyberstalking as well as exclusion.

identifying the salient linguistic forms and structures used by cyberbullies

discrimination involves distressing language use and abuse.

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 14 12/20/18 12:19 PM

the latter in contrast to the former. It elicits exaggerated consequences and

The collection of works in this book is a coordinated effort to help counter

every stakeholder in this enterprise to participate in a concerted manner

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[00]kan.indd 15 12/20/18 12:19 PM

What Makes a Cyberbully?

to negative action by other students. In a more recent study by Langos

MYRA Stop Cyberbullying[01].indd 17 12/18/18 2:00 PM

through inconsistencies found by report studies on negated feelings.