網路空間同志話語權的聲張與策略：以台大批踢踢實業坊的西斯板與甲板衝突事件為例

本文以PTT西斯板與甲板衝突事件為例，觀察性／別在網路空間的論述模式。同志族群透過在網路建立介於真實與虛擬的「我群」（異質）空間，獲得相對現實世界更自由的表述場域，並透過議題設定與論戰，聲張己方的話語權。其最終目的是希望在權力槓桿上，對我群身分位置與比重產生有利的變化。準此，這樣的過程可被劃分為跨界轉介、引爆話題、反制壓制與話權聲張等四個階段。在衝突事件爆發後，同志大致上分為兩派人馬，以相異之行動策略展現其「話語權」。根據資料顯示，甲板鄉民可分為溫和派與鷹派；前者主張同志與異性戀應和平共處，後者主張衝撞西斯板，藉由不斷地現身與發聲，也就是發文與回應，促使主流群體正視多元性別群體的存在。並陸續進行了三波行動，從嘗試獲得主流族群的目光、反制板主限制同志話語權，再到最後一波行動發表聯合聲明，對西斯板提出四項訴求，並尋求其他性少數族群的支持。即便到最後，事件的紛爭沒有具體解決，對於同志在主流異性戀空間話語權的提升，是否有影響也不得而知。但是同志與異性戀話語權交鋒的過程，確實有喚起部分大眾的注意，使現實社會中習以為常的價值被懷疑與挑戰，此乃同志在網路聲張其話語權的意義與影響。

關鍵字

同志族群；異質空間；話語權；網路空間

並列摘要

This paper takes the conflict between PTT Sex Board and Gay Board as an example, observing sex/gender discussing patterns in cyberspace. The LGBTQQ groups build a ＂we-group＂ (heterotopia) space between real and virtual world on the internet, gaining a relatively free expression field relative to the real world, and claim their rights of discourse by agenda setting and debate. The ultimate goal is changing the position and the proportion of we-group in the power of leverage. Accordingly, this process can be divided into four stages: cross-border referral, bring out topic, anti-suppression and discourse advocate. After the outbreak of the conflict, the Gay Board netizens are roughly divided into two factions to show their ＂discourse＂ with different strategies of action. According to network data, the Gay Board netizens could be divided into moderates and hawks. The former advocated that gay and heterosexuality should live in peace. The latter advocated to strike the Sex Board, through the continuous appearance and speeches, that is, post an article and give a respond to make the mainstream groups face the existence of multiple gender groups. And three waves of action were successively carried out, from trying to catch the attention of mainstream group to opposing the board manager who limited gay's discourse, and then a joint statement was given out in the last wave of action to ask the Sex Board to respond their four demands and seek other sex minorities to support them. Even in the end, the dispute is not specifically resolved, and nor did we know if it really impacted LGBTQQ's discourse in the mainstream heterosexual cyberspace. But the process in which gay confronted the power of heterosexuality did have aroused the attention in public, and let the accustomed values in the real world questioned and challenged. This is the meaning and influence of the discourse right advocated by LGBTQQ in cyberspace.