Two main categories of reactions identified were (a) shaming and denigration, and (b) justification and accusation. There were 505 instances indicating how men react to women-related issues. Of these, 368 (72.87%) were related to sex and the female body, expressed mainly by the following words/phrases: nosta (jezebel), dudh (boobs), oshlil (nasty), magi (slut), dhorshon (rape), khanki (prostitute), and pacha (hip). Another 137 (27.13%) instances expressed the male users’ resentments, using keywords and phrases like kharap (evil), nongra (lewd), and abal (idiot).

Shaming and denigration. According to men, as many comments suggest, women must adhere to certain social and behavioral codes, such as staying inside the house and always being veiled. Women who do not adhere to these instructions are likely to be the victims of body shaming and vigilantism in social media. Beyond purely verbal abuse, violation of such codes was also considered an offense that must be punished physically. “A” said: ‘Why are you talking like this (the slogan) by showing your boobs?’ “B” said:

They (the women) at first cause men’s erections by showing their boobs and hips, and then say do not stand too close to my body! I want to suggest to these stupid women that you should not wear such clothes making your body shape visible.

In the first comment, the user referred to a sensitive female body part for shaming, as is also the case in the second comment. The second user further deduced that women should not let men see the body shape that might stimulate them. Therefore, it must be women’s responsibility, according to some male users, to prevent men being stimulated. Many male users mocked the slogan of the campaign as well, such as “Do not look at my breasts, you cannot touch those,” “Stop staring at my hips as they belong to my husband,’ “Do not rub your penis on my ass,” and “Do not grab my boobs.” By such mockery, they shamed women’s bodies and demeaned their moral characters. The following offensive sarcasm was shared by 26 men including “C”, “D”, “E”, “F”, “G”, “H”, “I”, “J”, “K”, and several others:

A man and his sister-in-law were walking through the woods. She suddenly says, “Hey brother-in-law, I fear you will do something nasty to me now.” “How could I do so while I have a stick and a hen in one hand, a goat in the other, and a cage above my head?”, the man wonders. “If you insert the stick into the soil and tie the goat to it, and encage the hen with your cage, then you would do to me whatever you want. Alas! I am afraid,” she replies. [Sic]

By saying this, they attempt to promote the idea that it is women who tempt men to violate them, and men are nothing but the prey of such women. Therefore, women should be ashamed of themselves.

Denigration encompasses several traits, and underestimation is one of them. Men’s comments tended to treat women as inferior to men. According to some, women’s strength and vigor are no match for men. Thus, they refuse to learn anything from women. As women cannot be more qualified than men, so men may have the right to underestimate them by any means. “L” Islam said: “Alas! We need to learn manners from such harlots (women) nowadays.” Many users underestimated and abused women by using derogatory terms related to women’s moral character. The following comments are from “M” and “N”: “Those who say such words (the slogan) are jezebels”; “Nowadays, girls are becoming nothing but prostitutes.” The use of specific obnoxious words like khanki (prostitute), nosta (jezebel), and potita (slut) in discourse declares that women are debauched. They also reject women’s realistic demands by questioning their moral character and making them inferior to men. Of even more concern is that some users encourage others to punish outspoken women brutally. Shahin Hassan stated furiously: “If my mother and sister had dressed like this, I would butcher them for sure.” The user showed highly aggressive behavior, declaring he would even kill his female family members if they wore T-shirts. The tone of this comment might echo the idea of honor killing in many Muslim countries.

Justification and accusation. Many users tried to justify men’s aggression toward women through improper reasoning. They also accused female victims of their delicacy and misfortune. Many of them further discussed what would be the perfect punishment for women’s insubordination. As the first step, male users legitimized their aggression against women: “They [the women] live in Bangladesh, they live like Americans, but when they are raped, they want justice like Saudi Arabia.” It is noteworthy that men regarded America (as representative of the West) as uncivilized and Saudi Arabia (the epitome of the Muslim world) as a country of justice. A few more comments contain the same statements in one way or another. It is therefore easy to comprehend the conformity of men’s attitudes and worldviews regarding this matter.

In addition, the surge in incidents of rape were justified and/or supported by several males almost identically. For example, two men commented: “If nudity is a protest, then rape is a physical exercise,” and “They [the women] are the ones who rape men.” In the first statement, the user presented an irrational analogy. Nudity and rape should not be equated in this context, and this simply represents support for VAW. In the second comment, the user accuses female victims of raping men. This effort to justify VAW and declare women responsible for their victimhood is fundamentally flawed. Interestingly, it is apparent that many male users consider women wearing T-shirts as nudity.

Male users not only accused women of responsibility for the GBV they suffer, they also accused other males who support women. In most cases, the male supporters were addressed as abal (idiot) and hijra (eunuch). According to the accuser males, the supporters of women were idiots because they “do not understand anything but women.” They were further addressed as “eunuch” because they were “affected by impotency after supporting the women.” The conversation below is an example:

“O”: Most people in Bangladesh treat women as non-human. Even they would not acknowledge the necessity of women’s security.
“P”: [To “I”] Hey idiot, you people spoil women in the guise of a saint [sic].
“Q”: [To “I”] Ah! A womanizer is here to establish women’s rights.

When “O” tried to express his opinion in favor of women, both “P” and “Q” rebuked and ridiculed him. This could be a reason that prevents many male users from supporting women openly on social media.

What we found in the dataset after analyzing the codes was the deliberate instrumentalization of Islam to sustain online misogyny. In relation to the second research question, a total of 534 instances where vitriol against women was expressed referring to Islam were found. Of these, 391 dealt with the idea of decency. This category included several specific ideas, such as the Sahih (true) way of wearing clothes, and the idea of morality associated with clothing. In this part, the most used terms are genji (T-shirt), buk (breast), burkha (burqa), shalin (decent), and Purdah (veil), directly linked to the clothing and character of women. Another 143 instances either denied VAW or blamed the victims. More descriptively, male users tended to justify man’s aggression and denied women’s allegations against men, and also suggested how women should lead their lives in more “Islamic” ways. They further condemned feminists and Hindus along with seculars and atheists for spoiling the essence of Islam. The most used terms were Muslim, dharma (religion), and Islami (Islamic). Based on the instances, two broad areas of Islamic ideology were identified that help male users validate misogyny. One is the ideation of decency, and the other is the tendency of defending aggression through pseudo-Islamic reasoning. Both concepts correlate with each other and often overlap.

Ideation of decency. In Islam, Purdah (veiling) is a fundamental concept for both men and women. The burkha is an article of clothing widely used by Muslim women, which is thought to be the epitome of Purdah. However, popular Islamic interpretations attribute the idea of Purdah only to women, exempting men from it. Many male netizens repeatedly talked about how women should wear dresses, how they should remain veiled in public spaces. Surprisingly, we found only three instances in the entire dataset where the male users elucidated that Purdah has equal value for both men and women. For example, one user commented: “Men are advised in the Quran to control their gaze before women’s veiling.”

Many comments from male users hinted that the T-shirt is a symbol of indecency for women in Bangladesh society. Therefore, if a woman wearing a T-shirt appears in a public space, it would naturally create controversy. “R” rebuked and threatened: “No women from decent families wear a T-shirt without an urna (a piece of cloth).” This comment suggests that women should obey men’s words, that is, they should not go to public places wearing T-shirts. Some users thought that women should not wear T-shirts as it is not a sufficiently feminine form of dress. Otherwise, men would be confused and end up harassing women.

The following three comments are from “S,” “T,” and “U,” respectively: “They will be molested if they continue wearing men’s attire. Wear something feminine, so that we can distinguish between you and us”; “No gentlemen would touch the body of such shameless women who wear men’s attire”; “You let yourself be molested by wearing such T-shirts.” Notice how well the male users achieve the genderization of T-shirts. Such incoherent and sexist accounts bear the sign of moral policing, a form of vigilantism. Further, the women who wear T-shirts were considered shameless. Wearing T-shirts was also seen as a feminist/Western conspiracy to degrade Muslim women. Often, users also promulgated that Islam prohibits T-shirts for women, although no source for such information was mentioned. Two similar comments are: “It is [promoting T-shirts] nothing but a trick to degrade Muslim women”; “T-shirts are forbidden for women in Islam.” These remarks suggest that disobeying the man-made standard of decency is un-Islamic and unholy. Male users also offered solutions for how women can be safe from both men’s greed and being un-Islamic/unholy: “Wear a burkha, not T-shirts like the foreigners.”

Defending aggression. In many instances, male users tried to justify their aggression on women by victim-blaming that we have seen in earlier sections. However, in this case, they referred to Islam to validate their standpoints: Either the female victims did not maintain Purdah properly or they somehow aroused the perpetrators to involve in action. According to many extreme views, Purdah is not only wearing a burkha, it must be dhiledhala (loose). Unless the burkha worn is loose, women’s body shapes would be visible to men and it would provoke them. Several male users suggested a similar idea in different ways: “Cover your face and wear loose dresses”; “Start wearing a loose burkha, then you will not need to act like a victim”; “Wear a loose burkha”; “Only harlots think like that [the slogan]. Wear a loose burkha with a hijab.” Such vile expressions referring to Islam not only misrepresent the religion but also indicate deep-rooted misogyny.

Two specific attitudes were discerned among male users. First, some said that sexual VAW is closely linked to the dress women wear. The more women wear Islamic dress, the safer they will be. The following are two men’s statements:

These dresses would surely invite rape. Muslim girls must have urna covering their bodies.
Islam is a religion of peace. If these women would maintain Purdah rather than wearing T-shirts, groping and raping would not take place.

As Islam is a religion of peace, according to them, it already includes how a woman can protect herself from men’s lust. Wearing Islamic dresses and maintaining Purdah, some male users surmised, would protect women from sexual harassment even while commuting. Two such comments are: “Commute in public transportation wearing a burkha, you will be respected instead of molested”; “Wear a sunnati (prescribed in Islam) burkha, no one will touch and molest you.”

Second, male users often tried to decriminalize the act of sexual VAW by blaming the victims. They stated that the female victims usually do not properly observe the Islamic dress code. This exposes them to sexual violence and men are not responsible for that. Further, they argued that men may rape women if their dress is not sufficiently Islamic. They also implied that it is men’s responsibility to compel women to obey Islamic rules. In this case, disobedient women must be punished. Two excerpts from the comments are:

Who wears these clothes (T-shirt and jeans) should be burnt. Wear a standard burkha, no one would molest you.
Protesting while naked! Such women must be raped by dogs and, thereafter, be banished from this Muslim country.

It seems male users try to defend their violent behavior by using Islam as a shield. It is also noticeable that they accuse women of becoming victims of men’s greed. It should be the women’s responsibility, according to many male users, to try not to be dishonored by men.

Some male users also blamed Hindus, seculars, atheists, and feminists for spoiling the essence of Islam. They suspect that Hindus with other infidels are actively trying to infect Islam. The following excerpt is a conversation between two male users, the first one is “V” and the second one is “W”:

V: Saudi women are the most backward. No one should, from now onward, stay behind the door, and the language of protest should be like this.
W: Damn! You are an infidel. Must be a Hindu.

Western feminism’s eternal struggle against Islam can be understood from the statements of some male users. They perceive women’s emancipation as equal to men’s defeat. This also represents a defeat of Islam, according to them, as men represent and uphold Islam. Male users described the campaign as a naribadi shorojontro (feminist conspiracy), ojouktik (irrational), and nostami (perversion). In similar cases, feminism is the usual scapegoat. Some male users stated that “feminism is a corrupt ideology and only depressed and unhappy women circulate this,” “feminists are enthusiastic to spoil the familial bonds in Bangladesh,” and “all feminists should go to hell.” These statements are expressions of anger against feminism as well as the campaign.

From the analysis, two propensities are explored. First, most of the male netizens show a hatred for women in cyberspace that is evident in a variety of expressions. They humiliate and disparage women verbally and shame the female body as it allegedly attracts and arouses men. They also decide to punish the women whose visible body shapes arouse them. In many comments, women are also mocked for disobeying men’s cultural instructions, such as wearing a burkha or maintaining Purdah. Besides, underestimation is abundantly used to demean women’s capability and contribution to society. Most of these expressions are accompanied by slurs that primarily indicate men’s communicative power over women in cyberspace. These expressions of online misogyny are similar to offline misogyny, what Azad (2004) and Mannan (2011) described in their works. It is important to mention that men’s cultural instruction is based on a somewhat narrower view of society and Islam. Bangladesh society was generally more open in the period from the 1970s to the 1990s before the new Islamic revivalism in the 2000s (Islam & Islam, 2018). During that time, women’s clothing was more liberal than the present time, with almost no moral policing (Al-Zaman, 2018). This suggests that the cultural promotion of women’s religious clothing is a relatively novel phenomenon in Bangladesh that might be an aftermath of the popular Islamic revivalism and/or a new form of male dominance over women’s lifestyles. Second, male users tend to establish that men are innocent and women are corrupt. They justify this standpoint in two specific ways: by denying the allegations and by accusing others. Victim-blaming is one of their common traits. Men accuse women of disturbing them with their beauty and visibility. Rape is admissible, according to some, if the women wear vulgar dress. Interestingly, male users think that wearing T-shirts is vulgar. It could be an instance of poor reasoning that is mainly intended to hide/justify men’s violent traits and to sustain their authority over the female body (Infante & Rancer, 1996; Littlejohn & Foss, 2009).

Two main themes emerge from the analysis that shows how men attempt to validate misogyny by referring to Islam. First, they propose a concept of decency based on popular Islamic interpretations. Second, they try to validate men’s aggression toward women referring to Islamic sermons. In both cases, it seems, they try to present their reasons by misinterpreting the main tenets of Islam. Put another way, rather than addressing core Islamic values and principles, they try to advocate their version of Islam. In the first instance, many male users try to outline the limits of decency. This conceptualization of decency is a combination of Islamic values and the social norms of Bangladesh society: the kernel of it is Purdah. To oppose the “Ga gheshe daraben na” campaign, they formulate a conceptual framework mainly based on Islamic Purdah. For example, men and women must have two separate dress codes, and women should not wear male dress, such as T-shirts. Thus, they seek to stigmatize the whole campaign that promotes women’s T-shirts with a benign quote. They also repeat Islamic instructions on clothing in support of their stance. According to them, T-shirts are forbidden in Islam, although not a single user presents evidence on behalf of such a claim. However, Islamic scripture, such as the Quran, only suggests both men and women dress moderately and does not impose any strict regulations (Barlas, 2019). Unintentionally, or intentionally, ignoring core Islamic preaching, they state that wearing T-shirts is un-Islamic and a violation of Purdah, while wearing burkha is the Islamic and Sahih way of Purdah. Therefore, women wearing T-shirts are unholy and women wearing a burkha are holy. It is addressed as the main theme of decency. Thus, to become decent, a woman must wear a burkha when she appears in a public space. In this case, men’s reconceptualized/reproduced concept of Purdah sounds more puritanical and seems to contradict the concept of Islamic Purdah.

Secondly, male users link Purdah to the victimhood of women. They repeatedly reason that a woman becomes a victim of sexual violence as a result of not maintaining proper Purdah. While some users propose a moderate version of Purdah, i.e., wearing a burkha, the extremists suggest women must wear a loose burkha. Otherwise, her body shape would be visible and she could be harassed. Some users further suggest that men can harass women who do not obey Islamic codes of conduct, and it is not men’s fault at all. Women must remain at home when it is dark and not go outside without wearing an urna that conceals the shape of their breasts. Male users also tend to use vile language to compel women to obey these rules. However, these popular interpretations of Islam frequently contradict the basic idea of Purdah and Islamic codes of conduct (Barlas, 2019) and are the widespread patriarchal interpretations of Islam that are more related to misogyny (Mernissi, 1992). Further, Barlas (2019) and Wadud (1999) state that nowhere is it mentioned in the Quran that women must wear a burkha. Rather, both men and women should have modest clothing (Purdah), which has no clearly defined dress code.

Overall, the dataset is full of verbal aggression, including character attacks, appearance attacks, mockery, teasing, scolding, and insults (Infante, Riddle, Horvath, & Tumlin, 1992; Littlejohn & Foss, 2009). It is a sign of destructive human behavior usually motivated by one of four underlying causes: frustration, social learning, psychopathology, and argumentative skill deficiency (Infante, Trebing, Shepherd, & Seeds, 1984). These reactions suggest that most male netizens, at least in the present sample, are misogynists. Also, Islam is employed by some males to bolster their social supremacy in cyberspace, just as in real space (Manne, 2018). While Islam itself decrees moderate rights for women (Barlas, 2019; Lamrabet, 2016; Wadud, 1999, 2013), men on Bangladesh SNSs appear to be the moral police and self-proclaimed custodians of Islam. Moreover, the contestation between Islam and feminism is evident (Kausar, 2001). Finally, the findings are closely linked to each other, and even one factor could be the outcome or initiator of the other.

The prime strength of this research is its methodological novelty and analytical style. In Bangladesh, analyzing social media text using a qualitative content analysis method is not common. Following such a methodology, to the best of our knowledge, the present research is the first interdisciplinary research in Bangladesh that has attempted to bridge three fields of study: communication, gender, and religion. Therefore, in this under-researched area, this study would help academicians and policymakers to understand the features of online misogyny and how Islam contributes to it. Furthermore, this study may also help to better understand the interrelationship between women and the growing Islamic piety in contemporary Bangladesh.

This study also has some limitations. First, a single case may not represent all other cases. Moreover, Bangladesh is a relatively small South Asian country. Therefore, generalizing these results could be problematic. Second, only those who participated and commented on the discourse were counted, a group that represents only a small portion of total Facebook users in Bangladesh and the results may therefore not be representative; having said that, the sample size seems large enough to generalize the findings but only for similar incidents. Third, the comments of male users were determined based on their male names and profile information. However, such information can be false since social media allows users to create fake identities.