skip to main content
10.1145/3328020.3353910acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Chinese women's rhetorical agency in reproduction and social media

Published:04 October 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

This research examines twenty pregnant women's and new mothers' posts on the 2017/2018 number-one childbirth and parenting app in China, named Baby Tree, to see how these women have written their embodied experience of pregnancy and mothering into the online narratives and stories. This study also examines how women respond to China's dominant and hegemonic healthcare and medical discourse and practice while simultaneously asserting their rhetorical agency politically and economically through online writing.

References

  1. Ali Abdallah Alalwan, Nripendra P Rana, Yogesh K Dwivedi, and Raed Algharabat. 2017. Social media in marketing: A review and analysis of the existing literature. Telematics and Informatics 34, 7 (2017), 1177--1190.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Elizabeth C Britt. 2014. Conceiving normalcy: Rhetoric, law, and the double binds of infertility. University of Alabama Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Wendy Brown. 2015. Undoing the demos: Neoliberalism's stealth revolution. MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Robert Crammond, Kingsley Obi Omeihe, Alan Murray, and Kirstin Ledger. 2018. Managing knowledge through social media: Modelling an entrepreneurial approach for Scottish SMEs and beyond. Baltic Journal of Management 13, 3 (2018), 303--328.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Carl G Herndl and Adela C Licona. 2007. Shifting agency: Agency, kairos, and the possibilities of social action. Communicative practices in workplaces and the professions: Cultural perspectives on the regulation of discourse and organizations (2007), 133--154.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Amy Koerber. 2006. Rhetorical agency, resistance, and the disciplinary rhetorics of breastfeeding. Technical Communication Quarterly 15, 1 (2006), 87--101.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Kim Hensley Owens. 2015. Writing childbirth: Women's rhetorical agency in labor and online. SIU PressGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Carol Reeves. 1996. Language, rhetoric, and AIDS: The attitudes and strategies of key AIDS medical scientists and physicians. Written Communication 13, 1 (1996), 130--157.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. J Blake Scott. 2003. Risky rhetoric: AIDS and the cultural practices of HIV testing. SIU Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Marika Seigel. 2013. The rhetoric of pregnancy. University of Chicago Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Jenna Vinson. 2017. Embodying the Problem: The Persuasive Power of the Teen Mother. Rutgers University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Shouzhi Xia. 2017. A Study on the Profit Model of We Media in China. Global Media Journal 15, 28 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Chinese women's rhetorical agency in reproduction and social media

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      SIGDOC '19: Proceedings of the 37th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication
      October 2019
      308 pages
      ISBN:9781450367905
      DOI:10.1145/3328020

      Copyright © 2019 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 4 October 2019

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • extended-abstract

      Acceptance Rates

      SIGDOC '19 Paper Acceptance Rate85of105submissions,81%Overall Acceptance Rate355of582submissions,61%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)14
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader