A Cyber-Parish: Gendered Identity Construction in an On-Line Episcopal Community

  • Sage Graham


Technology has historically had a tremendous impact on religion, from the invention of the printing press (which allowed the Bible to be read by mass populations) to the Evangelical Christian movement (which used radio and television to spread the word and preach to mass audiences). Just as religion has historically had an enormous impact on society, so also has the recent advent of the Internet changed our social and organizational frameworks. In the twenty-first century, these two powerful social forces have come together with the advent of online religious groups ranging from Usenet discussion groups on religious topics to virtual preaching and religious services. Participants in various types of religious groups can request prayers, inquire about others’ beliefs and/or doctrine, and even receive sacraments and communion via virtual blessings of bread and wine. The ability to worship and/or form religious communities online has tremendous implications for both participants and organized religion itself.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Clark, E., and Richardson, H. (1977). Women and religion: A feminist sourcebook of Christian thought. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  2. Corsaro, W. A., and Rizzo, T. A. (1990) Disputes in the peer culture of American and Italian nursery-school children. In: A. Grimshaw (Ed.), Conflict talk: Sociolinguistic investigations of arguments in conversations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (pp. 21–66).Google Scholar
  3. Davies, B., and Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. In: Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 20, 43–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Eder, D. (1990). Serious and playful disputes: Variation in conflict talk among female adolescents. In: A. Grimshaw (Ed.), Conflict talk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (pp. 67–84).Google Scholar
  5. Goodwin, M. H. (1990a). He said, she said: Talk as social organization among black children. Blookington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Goodwin, M. H. (1990b). Tactical use of stories: Participation frameworks within boys’ and girls’ disputes. Discourse Processes 13, 33–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goodwin, M. H., and Goodwin, C. (1987). Children’s arguing. In: S. U. Philps, S. Steele and C. Tanz (Eds), Language, gender and sex in comparative perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (pp. 200–48).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Graham, S. (2003). Cooperation, conflict and community in computer-mediated communication. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Washington, DC: Georgetown University. UMI number: 3114024.Google Scholar
  9. Grimshaw, A. (Ed.). (1990). Conflict talk: Sociolinguistic investigations of arguments in conversations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hall, K. (1996). Cyberfeminism. In: S. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication. Philadelphia: Benjamins (pp. 147–71).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hamilton, H. (1998). Reported speech and survivor identity in on-line bone-marrow transplantation narratives. In: Journal of Sociolinguistics 2/1, 53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harré, R., and van Langenhove, L. (1999). Positioning theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  13. Herring, S. (1992). Gender and participation in computer-mediated linguistic discourse. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. ED345552.Google Scholar
  14. Herring, S. (1994). Politeness in computer culture: Why women thank and men flame. In: Cultural performances: Proceedings of the third Berkeley women and language conference. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Women and Language Group (pp. 278–94).Google Scholar
  15. Herring, S. (1996a). Two variants of an electronic message schema. In: S. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication pp. 81–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Herring, S. (Ed.). (1996b). Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  17. Herring, S., Johnson, D., and DiBennedetto, T. (1992). Participation in an electronic discourse in a ‘feminist’ field. In: K. Hall, M. Bucholtz, and B. Moonwoman (Eds), Locating power: Proceedings of the second Berkeley women and language conference. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Women and Language Group (pp. 250–62).Google Scholar
  18. Herring, S., Johnson, D., and DiBennedetto, T. (1995). ‘This discussion is going too far!’: Male resistance to female participation on the internet. In: M. Bucholtz and K. Hall (Eds), Gender articulated: Language and the socially constructed self. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Hymes, D. (1974). Toward ethnographies of communication. In: Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press (pp. 3–66).Google Scholar
  20. Kakavá, C. (2003). Discourse and conflict. In: D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, and H. Hamilton (Eds), The handbook of discourse analysis. Malden, MA: Blackwell (pp. 650–70).Google Scholar
  21. Lawless, E. (1993). Holy women, wholly women: Sharing ministries of wholeness through life stories and reciprocal ethnography. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lawless, E. (1996a). Images of God in Christian women’s sermons: Finding God. In: N. Warner, J. Ahlers, L. Bilmes et al. (Eds), Gender and belief systems: Proceedings of the fourth Berkeley women and language conference. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Women and Language Group (pp. 403–9).Google Scholar
  23. Lawless, E. (1996b). Women preaching revolution: Calling for connection in a disconnected time. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  24. McWilliams, E. M. (2001). Social and organizational frames in e-mail: A discourse analysis of e-mail sent at work. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Washington, DC: Georgetown University.Google Scholar
  25. Phillips, S. (1990). The judge as third party in American trial-court conflict talk. In: Grimshaw (Ed.), Conflict talk (pp. 197–209).Google Scholar
  26. Tannen, D. (1982). Spoken and written language: Exploring orality and literacy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  27. Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand. New York: Dell Books.Google Scholar
  28. Tannen, D. (1994). Gender gap in cyberspace. Newsweek 16 May, 52–3.Google Scholar
  29. Tannen, D. (1998). The argument culture: Moving from debate to dialogue. New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sage Graham 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sage Graham

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations