Domestic violence on #qanda: The “Man” question in live Twitter discussion on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Q&A

Domestic violence is currently undergoing a period of heightened visibility in Australia. This article uses social media to analyze public discussions about this violence with respect to a specific theoretical frame, which Adrian Howe has called the “Man” question: where and how are men visible or invisible in narratives about their violence against women? The article presents a qualitative study of the Twitter conversation surrounding a special episode of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's television program Q&A, themed around family violence, which aired in February 2015. We found that the place of men in this conversation was contested. Some tweets privileged men's voices and concerns, as did the organization and production of the program. However, feminist voices were also highly visible via presenting facts, legitimating survivor voices, and recuperating anti-feminist memes to challenge hegemonic patriarchal discourses on men's violence against women. La violence conjugale connait actuellement une visibilité accrue en Australie. Les auteures du présent article utilisent les réseaux sociaux pour analyser les débats publics sur cette violence selon un cadre théorique précis, qu'Adrian Howe a appelé la question de « l'homme » : où et comment les hommes sont-ils visibles ou invisibles dans les récits de leur violence envers les femmes? L'article présente une étude qualitative d'une conversation sur Twitter au sujet d'un épisode axé sur la famille diffusé en février 2015 dans le cadre de l'émission Q & A, à la télévision nationale d'Australie. Nous avons remarqué que dans cette conversation la place des hommes était remise en question. Certains tweets privilégiaient les voix et les craintes des hommes, comme l'ont fait les organisateurs et les producteurs de l'émission. Cependant, il y avait une forte présence de voix féministes dans la présentation des faits, légitimant le point de vue des survivantes et relevant des éléments culturels antiféministes afin de défier les discours hégémoniques et patriarcaux sur la violence des hommes envers les femmes.

Warfare in stingless bees

Bees are well known for being industrious pollinators. Some species, however, have taken to invading the nests of other colonies to steal food, nest material or the nest site itself. Despite the potential mortality costs due to fighting with an aggressive opponent, the prospects of a large bounty can be worth the risk. In this review, we aim to bring together current knowledge on intercolony fighting with a view to better understand the evolution of warfare in bees and identify avenues for future research. A review of literature reveals that at least 60 species of stingless bees are involved in heterospecific conflicts, either as attacking or victim colonies. The threat of invasion has led to the evolution of architectural, behavioural and morphological adaptations, such as narrow entrance tunnels, mud balls to block the entrance, decoy nests that direct invaders away from the brood chamber, fighting swarms, and soldiers that are skilled at immobilising attackers. Little is known about how victim colonies are selected, but a phylogenetically controlled analysis suggests that the notorious robber bee Lestrimelitta preferentially attacks colonies of species with more concentrated honey. Warfare among bees poses many interesting questions, including why species differ so greatly in their response to attacks and how these alternative strategies of obtaining food or new nest sites have evolved.