Adetutu Aragbuwa, George Adekunle Ojo


Scholars have researched resistance discourses across varied contexts; however, resistance discourses to domestic violence against women (DVAW) still remain under-researched in (critical) discourse analytical studies. In view of this paucity, the present paper seeks to explore women’s discursive resistance to male oppression and power abuse in the domestic sphere by eliciting the discourse structures deployed by readers in their online feedback comments on victims’ narratives of domestic violence (DV), culled from Stella Dimoko Korkus’ Domestic Violence Diary – Part One. This is with a view to analysing the commenters’ ideological stances on DVAW. The data, which comprise one hundred and seventy-two (172) readers’ comments, are subjected to qualitative analysis using some aspects of van Dijk’s socio-cognitive ideological approach. The findings reveal that the readers’ comments are replete with instances of discourse structures such as: polarisation; positive self-presentation and negative other-presentation (achieved via lexicalisation and implication); victimisation; evidentiality; number game; metaphor; and consensus. Functionally, these discourse structures underscore resistance ideologies; and illustrate some sub-ideologies of resistance, namely: the oppressed versus the oppressor; positive in-group presentation versus negative out-group presentation; the captive versus the captor; combativity; empathy; and solidarity. These findings establish that the commenters’ discursive interactive patterns are dominantly controlled by women’s growing resistance to male domination. The study thus foregrounds the potentiality of Stella Dimoko Korkus’ Domestic Violence Diary weblog as a site for promoting the movement for female discursive resistance to male oppression.


Article visualizations:

Hit counter


discourse, ideology, resistance, weblogging, domestic violence against women

Full Text:



Abercrombie, N., Hill, S., & Turner, B. S. (1980). The dominant ideology thesis. G. Allen & Unwin.

Alexandra, J. H., Jane, M. U., & Janette, P. (2017). Regulation and resistance: Negotiation of premarital sexuality in the context of migrant and refugee women. The Journal of Sex Research, 00(00), 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2017.1336745

Arawomo, Y. K. (2016). Representation of gender-based violence in victims’ narratives in Stella Dimoko Korkus’ blog. (An Unpublished M. A. Thesis). Department of English, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria.

Bartels, L. (2010). Emerging issues in domestic/family violence research. Research in Practice Report, 10, 1-11. Australian Institute of Criminology www.aic.gov.au

Brown, A. D. (2000). Making sense of inquiry sensemaking. Journal of Management Studies, 37, 45-75.

Chiluwa, I. (2012). Social media networks and the discourse of resistance: A sociolinguistic CDA of Biafra online discourses. Discourse & Society, 23(3), 217–244.

da Silva, M. T. (2015). What do users have to say about online news comments? Readers’ accounts and expectations of public debate and online moderation: A case study. Participations, Journal of Audience and Reception Studies, 12(2), 32-44.

Dimitra, L. M., Konstantinos, V., & Venetia, P. (2012). “Their two cents worth”: Exploring user agency in readers” comments in online news media. Observatorio (OBS*) Journal, 6(3), 021-047.

Duranti, A., & Goodwin, C. (Eds.). (1992). Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon. Cambridge University Press.

Eagleton, T. (1991). Ideology. An introduction. Verso.

Eamonn, C. (2004). Power, discourse, and resistance: A genealogy of the Strangeways Prison Riot. Ashgate Publishing.

Fairclough, N. (1994). Discourse and social change. G.U.P.

Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Language and social identity. Cambridge University Press.

Henrich, N. & Holmes, B. (2013). Web news readers’ comments: Towards developing a methodology for using on-line comments in social inquiry. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 5(1), 1-4.

Knights, D., & McCabe, D. (2000). Ain’t misbehavin’? Opportunities for resistance under new forms of “quality” management. Sociology, 34, 421-436.

McCluskey, M. & Hmielowski, J. (2012). Opinion expression during social conflict: Comparing online reader comments and letters to the editor. Journalism, 13(3), 303-319.

McKenzie-Mohr, S., & Lafrance, M. N. E. (2014). Women voicing resistance: Discursive and narrative explorations. Routledge.

Negm, M. S. (2015). Resisting Power in Discourse. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 192, 284 – 289.

Ó Baoill, A. (2004). Conceptualizing the Weblog: Understanding What it is in order to imagine what it can be. Interfacings: A Journal of Contemporary Media Studies. http://www.comm.uiuc.edu/icr/interfacings

Okemgbo, C. N., Omideyi, A. K., & Odimegwu, C. O. (2002). Prevalence, patterns and correlates of domestic violence in selected Igbo communities of Imo State, Nigeria. African Journal of Reproductive Health, 6 (2), 101-114.

Putnam, L. L., Grant, D., Michelson, G., & Cutcher, L. (2005). Discourse and resistance: Targets, practices, and consequences. Management Communication Quarterly 19(1), 5–18.

Reich, Z. (2011). User comments: The transformation of participatory space. In J.B. Singer, A. Hermida, D. Domingo, A. Heinonen, S. Paulussen, T. Quandt, Z. Reich, Z & M. Vujnonic (Eds), Participatory journalism: Guarding open gates at online newspapers (pp. 96–117). Wiley-Blackwell.

Ronfeldt, D. & Arquilla, J. (2001) Networks, netwars and the fight for the future. http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issues6_10/ronfeldt/index.html.

Schuth, A., Marx, M.&, de Rijke, M. (2007). Extracting the discussion structure in comments on news-articles. 9th ACM International Workshop on Web Information and Data Management (WIDM 2007) (pp. 97-104).

Scott, D. (2006). Eamonn Carrabine, Power, Discourse, and Resistance Book Review. Theoretical Criminology 10 (4), 536-539. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273072927

Stella, D. K. (2013-2017). Domestic Violence Diary 1-4. www.stelladimokorkus.com

Sunstein, Cass R. (2007). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton University Press.

Törnberg, A. (2013). Resistance Matter(s): Resistance Studies and the Material Turn. RSN (Now Journal of Resistance Studies) 1, 1-15. http://rsmag.nfshot.com/wp-content/uploads/Resistance-Matters-Anton...

van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: a multidisciplinary approach. Sage.

van Dijk, T. A. (2000). Ideology and discourse. A multidisciplinary introduction. English version of an internet course for the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC). www.discourses.org

van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Politics, ideology, and discourse. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Doi: 10.1016/BO-08-044854-2/00722-7. https://www.researchgate.net

Vinthagen, S., Lilja, M., (2007). “The State of Resistance Studies”. In: European Sociologists Association Conference, Glasgow, Scotland.

Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds). (2001). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. Sage.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejals.v4i2.328


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The research works published in this journal are free to be accessed. They can be shared (copied and redistributed in any medium or format) and\or adapted (remixed, transformed, and built upon the material for any purpose, commercially and\or not commercially) under the following terms: attribution (appropriate credit must be given indicating original authors, research work name and publication name mentioning if changes were made) and without adding additional restrictions (without restricting others from doing anything the actual license permits). Authors retain the full copyright of their published research works and cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the license terms are followed.

Copyright © 2015-2018. European Journal of Applied Linguistics Studies (ISSN 2602 - 0254 / ISSN-L 2602 - 0254). All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library. All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and standards formulated by Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002), the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) and Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyrights of the published research works are retained by authors.