1. Introduction
Twitter has been seen by many as a digital platform for social movements and social resistance) Gaffney, 2010; Hassan, 2012; Dubois and Gaffney, 2014). Usually, these movements are facilitated through a specific hashtag, which calls for a type of action—for example, #BlackLivesMatter or #MeToo. However, as will be shown in this article, hashtags are defined by the uses users give them; not their prescribed use from the leaders of a social movement. In other words, hashtags are living, polysemic signifiers, and as such, scholars should explore how specific hashtags are used in order to fully understand the relationship between Twitter and resistance. This article offers a case study of a hashtag and social movement that also brings into question the relationship between politics and religion.
The vocal and constant support of Donald Trump by Christian (majority Evangelical) churches in pre- and post-2016 election period have left many Americans confused [
1,
2,
3]. While the majority of white evangelicals voted for Trump [
4], there were those Christians (Evangelical and otherwise) and ex-Christians who strongly opposed the marriage between Trump and the Evangelical leadership [
5]. Trump, who was not an explicitly religious man before and during the elections (especially when compared to some of his republican runner-ups), and the unsolicited support he received from many churches, raised questions about the relationship between politics, religion, and media in the 21st century, USA [
1,
6]. Opinion pieces, tweets, posts, and memes reflected on what it means for these churches to support Trump. Especially after Trump’s seemingly inadequate respond to the terrorist event at Charlottesville, which led many business and organizational leaders to step away, resign, or disapprove of his actions, the support or silent acceptance by Evangelical leaders increased the disappointment and anger some of the Christian practitioners already felt.
This disappointment also gave birth to a Twitter hashtag, which, as this article shows, blurs the lines between a social movement and an online community. #EmptyThePews started as a Twitter hashtag by Chris Stroop in mid-August 2017, shortly after the protest at Charlottesville. Stroop, a prominent blogger, online author, and academic, launched the hashtag with a specific goal in mind: to show Evangelical leaders that their support of Trump or racist, sexist, and xenophobic behaviors will lead them to lose their congregations. In his words, Stroop is trying to lead people into leaving their churches in protest over the church’s support of Trump:
Noting that almost nothing will get most evangelicals’ attention apart from declining church attendance, last night I took to Twitter to exhort any wavering members of conservative evangelical churches, or indeed any churches complicit in Trumpism and white supremacy, to take now as a moment to leave those churches in protest, as publicly and vocally as possible. […] I have observed over the last couple of weeks […] many people stating that evangelical Trump support was the final straw that led them to leave evangelicalism behind. I believe that Evangelical pastors need to hear their message, and so do those still in the pews who may be harboring doubt and discomfort but who are afraid of leaving. To that end, I created the hashtag #EmptyThePews, asking those who have left evangelicalism over bigotry to tweet their stories along with the hashtag [
7].
The hashtag elicited moderate responses from Twitter community, with the original call (See:
https://twitter.com/C_Stroop/status/897967493800656896) for action from August 16th being retweeted 1389 times, and liked 2354 times (As of 3 June 2019). The hashtag itself has been used daily since. The hashtag also gained some attention from online media, with stories covering it on various online news or religious websites [
8,
9].
This study examines this hashtag in order to answer the questions: How has this hashtag been used? What is the relationship between the originator’s intent and the uses of the hashtag? Further, and even more broadly: Can a hashtag move people out of church? What does this teach about the relationship between online resistance and community?
To answer these questions, 250 #EmptyThePews tweets were sampled between August 2017 and December 2017 and then analyzed manually. The analysis points to six unique themes that emerge from the ways in which the tweets were employed, which are: resistance, religion, politics, gender/sexuality, race, and community. These polysemic theme point to a diversity of uses for a single hashtag. The broader theoretical implications of the main themes identified in the analysis are then discussed.
3. Method and Sample
The method used in this study is a thematic analysis of 250 selected tweets with the hashtag #EmptyThePews. This method is deemed appropriate because it would reveal the different ways the hashtag was employed by users. The sample and the analysis were informed by a few important tweets (for example, the first tweet with the hashtag); web-articles on the hashtag; and informal communication with the hashtag creator, Chris Stroop. The researcher has been following Stroop, the hashtag, and a few pages (on Facebook and Twitter) dedicated to the hashtag and movement since August 2017 in order to more deeply understand the context and various developments of the hashtag. This method can be understood as an in-depth qualitative research with contextualized data sampling based on the organic narrative development of the hashtag. I suggest thinking of this as a ‘hashtag narrative’ or ‘hashtag story’ where various systematic and academic methodologies are utilized to describe and understand the creation, meaning-making, uses, and ‘life’ of a hashtag.
In terms of the informal context, the author contacted Stroop via Twitter shortly after his August 2017 announcement. They met in person in November 2017 for an informal interview, and stayed in touch via online communication since then. At times, Stroop tagged the author into specific conversations on Twitter. The author follows the Twitter account for #EmptyThePews, and became friends with Stroop on Facebook.
The body of the analysis is made of a sample of n = 250 tweets with the hashtag, posted between August 2017 and December 2017. In December 2017, a Python library (
https://github.com/Jefferson-Henrique/GetOldTweets-python) was used to retroactively retrieve any tweet that used the hashtag. This yielded n = 24,247 unique tweets that were outputted into a Comma-separated values (CSV) file. Using Microsoft Excel and an online random number generator (
https://www.random.org), n = 250 tweets were selected and inputted into a new excel file. These tweets were then coded into six overlapping themes, which were constructed out of fifteen sub-themes, based on initial analysis and inductive coding. The themes originated from a manual, iterative, analysis. While reading through the entire data set of 250 tweets, each tweet was interpreted to have a central or few central theme: for example, attacking a political figure; or sharing a sexual trauma. The tweets were analyzed in an excel tweet, where new columns were created for each theme. Then, if a theme was also present in a different tweet, that tweet would have been tagged as having that idea. A single tweet could have multiple themes. Once these themes were tallied, similar themes were then conceptualized as sub-themes of a larger theme, which resulted in six over-arching themes throughout the data: resistance, politics, religion, sexuality/gender, race, and community.
This method included certain limitations. Most significantly, because of the random selection of the tweets, the conversational aspects were difficult to follow. Twitter allows for long threads with multiple participants. A random selection, as conducted in this methodology, takes tweets out of the context of these threads. To overcome this limitation, the author would, whenever possible, search for the original thread in which a certain tweet originated, and add that to their notes. The random selection of tweets was supplemented by an in-depth understanding of the contextualized nature of the tweets. Thus, the sample was built by highlighting the benefits of both randomized sample (overcoming selection biases) and contextualized and nuanced supplemental sample (positioning the case at hand within its thick and entangled organic development).
4. Making Sense of Emptying the Pews
In the first few days following Stroop’s initial tweet, users took to the hashtag to call out and electronically “walk out” of church. Some of the most popular tweets using the hashtags from August 26th follow the rationale and call for action presented by Stroop. For example: “If your pastor doesn’t condemn racism tomorrow...walk out. #EmptyThePews”. However, emptying the pews was not the only way this hashtag was used. The following discussion outlines the polysemic uses of the hashtag.
4.1. Resistance
The most obvious use of the hashtag, indeed, its intended use, is for resistance. Tweets collected under this theme (overall, n = 159) were either tweets that were explicitly calling users to leave churches (n = 91); or generally against religion and/or tweets in which users shared reasons why they left the church (n = 68). The last two were related to resistance because, they include either stories of past resistance to the church by leaving it, or resistance to religion. However, as will be noted from the analysis below, those tweets are not adhering to the suggested call-for-action, but instead take the hashtag into a different direction.
An explicit form of resistance were tweets that clearly called for action, for moving out of churches that promote hate, for example: “#EmptyThePews if your church supports hate don’t go” or “It’s time to #EmptyThePews—BEEN TIME”. Or make visual arguments supporting the call for action, for example:
The caption following the image reads: “Seems to be working. This is our local megachurch. The parking lot is not full these days” (
Figure 1). The need to visually argue for a decline in church attendance suggests a need for the hashtag to “work” from the online to the offline world. This is further supported by the caption “seems to be working”, indicating that the call to #EmptyThePews is, indeed, emptying churches.
Other tweets, however, were interpreted to use the hashtag to call for action, but in an implied manner. For example: “#EmptyThePews When almost every Christian I knew refused to denounce Trump, and denounced me for not wanting him in office” or even more indirectly: “when Muslims take care of Americans and evangelicals won’t #EmptyThePews#YouDontKnowEvangelicals
https://twitter.com/GordMacey/status/902318804356788224”. This last tweet links to a different tweet that discusses Joel Osteen’s decision to keep his Houston churches closed during Harvey flooding (The tweet reads: “FYI while Joel Osteen refuses to open the doors of his “Christian Church” to victims of Hurricane Harvey, three mosques have opened theirs”). By adding the hashtag #EmptyThePews, the user is implicitly communicating that this behavior of a Christian leader is a reason to empty the pews. These implicit uses of #Emptythepews are nonetheless important to be considered as a form of resistance, because they tie the action of resistance—walking out—with the reasons for resistance: corruption, discriminations, etc. In that way, they use the hashtag as a call for action while at the same time explaining the rationale for this action.
Similarly, other users used the tweet to share their stories of why they left the church in the past. Users seem to feel that sharing their reasons for leaving the church in the past corresponded with the intention of #EmptyThePews. This use of the hashtag tends to be personal and emotive. For example, “I left Evangelicalism after being condemned to hell for being gay. #EmptyThePews” or “As a smart & devout 21 yo woman, was told the only way I’d ever have leadership role in any church was to marry a pastor #EmptyThePews”. These examples, while showcasing different reasons for leaving, all include some reference to discrimination or trauma. By telling their stories of ‘why I left’ rather than explicitly calling people to leave now, these users re-appropriate the hashtag for sharing personal traumas, while at the same time keeping the initial intention verbalized by Stroop, by showing how discrimination can lead to lower church membership.
Another types of resistance were tweets in which #EmptyThePews was used to vocally belittle and ridicule religion. For example: “…You’ve always been damaging + hurtful + cruel. Your shitty theology has always been shitty theology. #EmptyThePews”—in this tweet the user is explicitly insulting a theological stance (‘shitty theology’) and connecting it with abuse, and as a result, the need to empty pews. Or, for instance, comparing Evangelical churches with cults: “This crap largely comes directly from the pulpit. Believers in skygod cult easily brainwashed. #YouDontKnowEvangelicals #EmptyThePews”. In other cases, empty the pew is more of an ideological stance, an atheist perspective on the subject. For example: “Lovely. Bragging about ignorance. If there were a god, he/she would want more for his/her creation. #EmptyThePews #Atheist”. These tweets are resisting Evangelical Christianity by-and-large, not for racism or other social/political reasons, and seem to be anti-religion in general, as this tweet clearly summarizes: “#ReligionMakesYouStupid #ReligionIsDarkness #ReligionIsTheProblem #ReligionPoisonsEverything #emptythepews”.
One of the most emotional uses of the hashtag was one in which users shared stories of emotional or religious abused (total of n = 35 were coded for this sub-theme of emotional/religious abuse). For example: “This is like ‘what is #gaslighting’ on the Church Abuse Jeopardy game show. #EmptyThePews” or “When the pastor pulled out a diagram from the cult leader I was raised under and I had a panic attack and fled outside. #EmptyThePews”. In these tweets, words like abuse, trauma, survivor or descriptions of emotional reactions are used frequently, clearly tying forms of abuse with reasons for leaving the church. Some of the tweets under this category are tied to sexual abused, like: “Sexual predator abused children and treated priests who did the same #EmptyThePews #ChurchToo” while other have to do with general discrimination or other forms of power and abuse, like: “Conservative Evangelicals want the power to dominate others. Authoritarianism is inherently abusive, and they are authoritarian through and through”.
In these various tweets, stories of religious abuse in the form of, for example: gas-lighting, authoritarianism, or cutting off support systems, are shared. Through sharing these traumas, users here again (re)appropriate the hashtag: while it is still used for resisting discriminating churches, this use highlights the complicities and deeper problems within the church, problems that have little explicit relationship to the current political situation. As pointed out by one tweet in this theme: “I left b4 45-just SO toxic”—meaning, this user left the church before the election of the 45th president, Donald Trump, because of the toxic and harmful environment, in other words, the various types of abuse users felt in the church. Through sharing their personal traumas, users utilized this hashtag to call for resistance based on the need to protect people from these types of abuse.
4.3. Religion
Aside from making space for those who left, and amplifying stories of abuse and discrimination within churches, the hashtag also serves as a tool for religious discourse and negotiation. A total of n = 152 tweets were coded under this theme, including the sub-themes: theology, religious institutions, and ‘anti-religious’ (some overlapping with over themes). Tweets were coded as ‘religion’ if they included religious terms like Bible, God, etc. (or anti-religious terms like atheism); if they discussed theology in some way; or made reference to religious meanings. While some #EmptythePews users are vocally ex- and anti-religious, as discussed above, others are trying to negotiate their own understanding of a bigotry-free Christianity. In fact, the @EmptyThePews account on Twitter has in its info the following statement: “If you’re faith is important to you but you cant [sic] support your church or if you arent [sic] a Christian and want to vent- Join us. All are welcome” (emphasis added). This description is inviting people of faith to discuss and develop religious ideas too.
That is, this theme highlights users who identify as Christians, claim to care for the reputation and theology of Christianity, and/or negotiate the meaning of being Christian. While some use this hashtag to distance themselves (and others) from Christianity at large, other use it as insiders, members of the Christian community demanding change. For example, one user citing an online article writes: “To the #Church: you sold #Jesus out for #political power. I’m out. […] #Christian #EmptyThePews”. Or “#EmptyThePews […] THIS is not the Jesus they taught me about. Evangelicals have sold their souls”. In these examples, uses are making a theological and political polemical claims against the church. They also identify as members of the community by adding the #Christian, for example. Juxtaposing #Christian and #EmptyThePews indicates that the two are not mutually exclusive—that in fact, it is Christian members who are those seeking and calling for a change.
Some of the tweets explicitly dismiss the religiosity/theology of current Evangelical institutions, by saying things like: “You must understand that they have more in common with @realDonaldTrump & #GOP than they do Jesus—Jesus is just their mascot #EmptyThePews”. This was also evident when the Nashville statement was discussed, for example: “Exhaustive List of Everything Jesus Ever Said about Homosexuality [link] #NashvilleStatement #lgbtq #lovewins #EmptyThePews”. In these tweets, theology is negotiated to be more inclusive, and certain official stances, like the one taken in the Nashville Statement, are rejected as not representing the spirit of love these uses associate with Jesus or Christianity.
A few users try to suggest that having issues with discriminatory practices within the churches does not necessitates abandoning the religion altogether, for example: “Yes, #EmptyThePews of churches that don’t follow the gospel; HOWEVER, #DontAbandonTheChurch! Find a place that knows how to love & serve!” In this example, users are encouraged to find liberal or more supportive churches, rather than emptying the pews altogether. Even more aggressively, a few users try to discourage others from leaving, for example: “‘Let us not neglect meeting together, as some have made a habit, but let us encourage one another’. Heb.10:25 Don’t #EmptyThePews” or “The people using the #EmptyThePews hashtag know nothing about true relationship with Christ. I pity them, honestly. They’re missing out”. In these more explicit tweets, users object the notion of emptying the pews, and say that those who do so are “missing out”. That is, users here are not necessarily disagreeing with the criticism voiced through the hashtag; but they do disagree with the call for action—the idea of leaving churches.
4.4. Gender/Sexuality
Tweets coded under this theme included references to men/women, sex, gender and sexual identity, and gender roles (n = 86). From the first days of the hashtag, it was immediately used to share stories related to either sexual abuse, or gender/sexual identity discrimination. As the use of the hashtag developed, two events were tied to it: (1) the Nashville Statement, published late August 2017, which was explicitly against LGBT rights, and authored by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood in Nashville, Tennessee; and (2) the #MeToo movement and specifically #ChurchToo, which emerged a few months after #EmptyThePews started. Thus, it was clear from the beginning that #EmptyThePews, while not explicitly related to issues of gender and sexuality, was quickly used to discuss them.
Some users shared that their main reason for leaving the church was discrimination against women, for example: “#EmptyThePews the pews bc I attended Vision Forum’s father/daughter event and was told my sole purpose is to bring honor to my dad” or “Because she sposta be home makin’ babies, cookin’ supper, pleasin’ her man, and stayin’ quiet in church! #EmptyThePews”. In these and similar tweets, users use the hashtag to express their frustration at being belittled as a woman and discriminated against. This use of the hashtag also tends to combine issues of gender inequality and sexual abuse, as those are often intertwined experiences within religious traditions. For example, one user shared that she broke with the church: “When I was told that ‘men don’t rape godly women’. #EmptythePews”. Other examples include: “Women have never been safe in the church. Women have never been protected, valued, elevated, or listened to there. We confess to being assaulted and are made to repent for impurity. #churchtoo #metoo #emptythepews”. Or “Countless sermons abt how wife owes husband sex anytime—is sin to deny. Never one respecting wife as human being #metoo #EmptyThePews”. In these examples, users express how church theology enables sexual abuse through victim blaming. These experiences then led these users to leave the church and use the hashtag to share their stories online.
Other users do not explicitly tie church doctrine to sexual abuse, but do condemn the church for cases of sexual abuse or what users see as support of abusers, for example: “Philippines to extradite ex-priest accused of abusing two North Dakota boys #EmptyThePews #ChurchToo”. Or, retweeting a story about an ex-Evangelical sexual abuse survivor’s reaction to Trump’s election, a user writes: “Stories like this are why we need to #EmptyThePews”. In these examples, users either explicitly argue that people should leave churches because of churches’ attitudes towards sexual abuse, or use the hashtag to condemn what they see as support of the abusers.
Another avenue that leads users to leave the church is the anti LGBT+ sentiments expressed by various churched in the USA. For example: “The “church” has been so bad for so long, I haven’t been in a pew in 40 yrs, since my lesbian daughter was vilified by the vast majority!” Here, the user is not sharing a current story, but rather that they left the church because of discrimination. Various tweets related to discrimination against LGBT+ individuals are also shared with the hashtag, for example: “#EmptyThePews because the LGBT community is more accepting of others than Christians are”. In total n = 35 tweets were coded for dealing with “sexual preferences”, about 14% of the total sample. In both examples of gender and sexual discrimination (and in their intersection) users utilize the hashtag to share reasons for leaving, thus supporting the original use of the hashtag, but also use it to condemn and express their own pain and frustration, using the hashtag as a tool of empowerment to tell their stories, not unlike the #MeToo movement.
5. Conclusions: Between Resistance and Community
This paper sought out to examine the life and uses of the hashtag #EmptyThePews in order to explore how hashtags related to resistance are used in a polysemic fashion. #EmptyThePews was created in August 2017 with the goal to “exhort any wavering members of conservative evangelical churches, or indeed any churches complicit in Trumpism and white supremacy, to take now as a moment to leave those churches in protest, as publicly and vocally as possible” [
7]. This hashtag and the movement it tries to create raises questions about social media movements and moving people. Indeed, the analysis of the tweets pointed to six different themes and five uses of the hashtag. The themes were: resistance, politics, religion, sexuality, race, and community. When separated and compared, it seems that the specific issues users wanted to bring up using this hashtag were, in order of frequency: sexual abuse (total of 39 tweets), sexual identity and LGBT rights (35 tweets), emotional or religious abuse (35 tweets), racism (18 tweets) and gender discrimination (12 tweets).
Building on these themes and supported by U&G theory, the analysis also points out to five different but not mutually exclusive uses of the hashtag: (1) highlighting racial, gender, and sexual identity-based discrimination and sharing stories of religious or sexual abuse, (2) negotiating Christianity, (3) speaking against current political and religious institutional discrimination, (4) creating a community and identity, and (5) actively calling for people to empty churches.
It seems then, that the hashtag functions as a movement and as a signifier for a community. In that way, it connects concepts of activism and online community, positioning the community itself as a form of activism. While some uses call for action or are more explicitly politically driven, and thus better understood as part of a movement, other uses have to do more with personal needs, such as sharing and supporting, classified by Gruzd, Wellman and Takhteyev [
28] as indicators of a real community. Through sharing, liking, retweeting, and commenting, users try to craft an online space for this identity and community. While this might not be the direct call of action of marching or protesting, creating this community and giving voice to this identity can be thought of as a form of activism, of resistance: creating a community is giving visibility to those who left.
#EmptyThePews started as a verb—asking people to actually empty churches. It was an imperative, a command. But as the analysis shows, it moves from being an imperative to a symbol that represent various experiences and stances, and that happens, I suggest, because of users’ various social and emotional needs (e.g., uses and gratification theory). This is shown throughout the analysis: people seem to want to share their stories of religious abuse and discrimination, and this hashtag, while not official created for that purpose, was re-appropriated for it. As shown by scholars such as Rosenbaum [
15] and Yadlin-Segal [
16], hashtags are polysemic and can hold multiple meanings and, I would add, usages [
17]. The hashtag sign is empty and re-interpretable and thus can be appropriated for needs that were not foreseen by the actual hashtag creators.
This Twitter hashtag did not facilitate an active movement of people leaving churches, did not work as a mobilization for social action, but instead facilities a Twitter community. Because social media is based in quantitative values (numeric counts of likes, shares, retweets, etc.), there is an inherent inclination for the signs to be interpreted in a context that affords the greatest amount of meaning to the large numbers. In the case of #EmptyThePews, however, it was not one shared meaning that created traction, but that the multiple meanings all contributed to a sense of solidarity, the idea of a community. Further, communities are based on shared meanings and experiences. Thus, through the polysemic use of the hashtag, a community was born. This use of the hashtag did not manifest in the mass leaving of multiple churches, at least not in a way that can be quantitatively proven. But it does allow for a community and identity to emerge and flourish, creating a discourse and relationships that can strengthen individuals who felt hurt by churches across the USA. By creating and strengthening ex-Evangelicals this hashtag does work towards resistance—for one needs a name before they can march.