“Cupcake vegans,” “cult vegans,” and “animal abusers”: Multimodal critical discourse analysis of stancetaking towards ‘aggression’ in online interactions about veganism

• Published in: Discourse, context & media Vol. 67; p. 100921
• Main Authors: Wilczek-Watson, Marta, Brickley, Katy
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 01.10.2025
• Subjects: Aggression; Food identity; Multimodal critical discourse analysis; Othering; Social media; Stance; Veganism; Stance; Aggression; Veganism; Social media; Multimodal critical discourse analysis; Food identity; Othering
• ISSN: 2211-6958
• DOI: 10.1016/j.dcm.2025.100921

[Display omitted] •Perceived aggression constitutes the crux of online debates on veganism.•Othering is salient not only between vegans and non-vegans, but also among vegans.•Vegan identity is constructed as a spectrum, which ethical vegans delegitimise.•Stancetakers leverage online affordances, such as emojis, links, video stills, and GIFs.•Multimodal negotiation of veganism can foster discursive violence in digital space. With the consumption of meat and dairy increasingly reported in the media as unethical and harmful to the environment, discussions around alternative lifestyles, including veganism, proliferate. This study interrogates representations of veganism and vegans in social media. Specifically, it focuses on interactions on Facebook and YouTube in response to Kate Taunton’s series Veganville (BBC, 2020), which documented a pro-vegan campaign in Merthyr Tydfil, a town in South Wales, UK. Adopting a qualitative approach grounded in Multimodal Critical Discourse Analysis, we explore how interactants leverage the affordances of social media to express their stance (Du Bois, 2007), i.e. their subject positions, here in relation to veganism. Our analysis reveals that the concept of ‘aggression’ is recurrently used by commentators as a lens for defining both vegans and non-vegans. In the posts examined, commentators attribute ‘aggression’ to each other, downplay or reject it, and sometimes legitimise, claim, or even grotesquely up-play it. These stances are mediated not only through language (e.g. labelling, comparison, hyperbole, moral evaluation, and rationalisation), but also visually, through strategically used typography, emojis, video stills, videos, and GIFs. Interestingly, ‘aggression’ likewise constitutes a salient negotiation point within the vegan community, leading to mutual online multimodal othering (Spivak, 1985) – acts of social distancing – between different types of vegans. This manifests through pejoration, stereotyping, and mockery, highlighting fractures within vegan identity. The study marks veganism as a spectrum and underscores how its negotiation can result in digital violence.