<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/IzpisGradiva.php?id=173988"><dc:title>Expanding boundaries</dc:title><dc:creator>Smrdelj,	Rok	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Kuhar,	Roman	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Kalin Golob,	Monika	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>gender theory</dc:subject><dc:subject>gender ideology</dc:subject><dc:subject>gender-sensitive language</dc:subject><dc:subject>anti-gender mobilizations</dc:subject><dc:subject>Twitter</dc:subject><dc:subject>social network analysis</dc:subject><dc:description>This study examines the transition of the “gender theory” discourse from the realm of political and activist circles to the general population, focusing on the 2018 Twitter (X) debate in Slovenia regarding the gender-sensitive language policy at the Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana. Through a mixed-methods approach combining social network analysis and linguostylistic and critical frame analyses, this paper explores the dynamics and implications of this discourse shift. Our analysis identifies distinct user communities with primarily right-leaning political affiliations, revealing how these groups navigate and emphasize various themes related to gender-sensitive language, often broadening the debate to include new topics. The concept of “gender theory” emerges as a pivotal element, serving as a unifying thread that transforms discussions into ideological battlegrounds, thereby creating an “echo chamber” effect that sidelines opposing viewpoints. The findings underscore the colonizing effect of the “gender theory” discourse, which not only diverts attention to new ideological issues but also has a de-democratizing impact by constraining the range of acceptable debate and excluding divergent perspectives. This paper corroborates the initial premise that the discourse on “gender theory” has evolved, acquiring a broader societal and ideological dimension that challenges the inclusivity of public debate.</dc:description><dc:date>2025</dc:date><dc:date>2025-09-25 15:55:30</dc:date><dc:type>Neznano</dc:type><dc:identifier>173988</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>
