Norms concerning the recognition of victimhood in postconflict societies

An analysis of “whatabouteries” in online sectarian arguments

Bibliographic Data

ID6337396
AuthorsW M L Finlay (0000-0002-9351-0151, School of Psychology and Sport Science Anglia Ruskin University Cambridge UK, corresponding author), J Cattier (School of Psychology and Sport Science Anglia Ruskin University Cambridge UK), Katrine Donois (0000-0002-0003-1881, Anglia Ruskin University), Lewis Goodings (0009-0009-3439-4435, Anglia Ruskin University), Emma Kaminskiy (0000-0001-6307-5710, Anglia Ruskin University), Carol Owens (0000-0003-2837-2204, Anglia Ruskin University), C Owen (School of Psychology and Sport Science Anglia Ruskin University Cambridge UK), L Storey (School of Psychology and Sport Science Anglia Ruskin University Cambridge UK), L R O Storey (Anglia Ruskin University), Viren Swami (0000-0002-4866-7950, Anglia Ruskin University), Swami
Year2025
Volume46
Issue1
Pages205-224
Publication date2025-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolitical Psychology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0162-895X • E-ISSN: 1467-9221
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/pops.12988
OpenAlexW4397041782
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited56

Acknowledging the victims on both sides of a conflict is crucial to peacebuilding and reconciliation. However, recognizing the victims of one community can challenge an opposing group's conflict narrative, particularly when their own group is seen as the primary victim. Suggestions of inclusive victimhood and blame can also threaten the sense of distinctiveness of each group's experience, leading to resistance. This article examines the conflict that arose when historical victimhood was discussed in the online comments sections of U.K. newspapers in response to the 2021 Coroner's Inquest into the Ballymurphy massacre. We focus on one common turn in sectarian argument in Northern Ireland: “Whatabouteries,” and the conflict that arises when whatabouteries appear in discussions. We describe the variety of forms whatabouteries—and responses to them—can take and analyze two extended conflict sequences in which they occur. Responses to such posts often invoke an implicit norm in these discussions: That when the victims of one group are publicly recognized in truth‐finding mechanisms, raising the issue of the opposing group's victims is illegitimate and can be treated as an act of provocation. This illustrates the need for sensitivity and an understanding of local, context‐specific norms when discussing victimhood and violence

Criminology · Sociology · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · Middle East and Rwanda Conflicts · Political Conflict and Governance · Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access