自2018年以来，女性主义话语实践成为中国数字平台中引人注目的媒介现象。本研究选择微博、小红书、小宇宙三个数字平台，以女性主义知识分子日常性的话语实践为切入点，厘清她们在不同数字平台与话语实践相关的平台化机制影响下所形成的话语生产与传播策略，以及相应的话语模式，进而借鉴附属性公共领域理论，阐释她们的话语实践在推动当下性别平等进程中发挥的作用。本研究的实证部分围绕两个问题展开：三个平台中的女性主义知识分子“如何说”和“说了什么”。就“如何说”而言，即话语生产与传播策略，本研究首先将与话语实践相关的平台化机制概括为四个要素：技术可供性、商业运作模式、内容生产实践治理及用户实践共识。进而，本研究借助软件应用程序漫游法、对相关文件的分析（如公司财报、新闻宣传稿等），以及对三个平台的内部人员的半结构访谈，总结了三个平台在前述四个要素上所体现的主要特征。接下来，研究者基于网络民族志数据，细描了平台化机制影响下各个平台中的女性主义知识分子所形成的话语生产及传播策略。就“说了什么”而言，本研究将微博女性主义话语概括为“跨越公私二分的女性主义”，小红书女性主义话语为“作为生活方式的女性主义”，小宇宙女性主义话语为“重塑公共生活的女性主义”。进而，本研究借助社交媒体批判性话语研究的方法、结合附属性公共领域理论，回答“为何这样说”。三个平台中的女性主义知识分子的话语实践分别塑造出三种类型的附属性公共领域：基于微博的“卫星型”附属性公共领域、基于小红书的“飞地型”附属性公共领域、基于小宇宙的“对抗型”附属性公共领域，并分别讨论了它们对当下性别平等进程的影响。本文将平台化定义为一种由平台化机制性因素与用户实践之间的“推-拉”张力塑造的“文化集置”，并探讨了作为“文化集置”的平台化的公共性，提出正是数字平台对具有公共价值的意义生产实践的承载，使其得以突破市场逻辑和媒介技术更替逻辑、持续对社会生活发挥结构性影响。在理论层面，本研究提出了与话语实践相关的平台化机制的四个要素，将对平台化机制的讨论由流行文化生产拓展至公共性文化生产；此外，本研究将平台化定义为“文化集置”，回应了平台化研究对数字平台的结构性影响与用户能动性之间关系的强调，加深了对平台化这一概念内涵的理解；通过关照女性主义话语实践这一公共性文化生产过程，本研究也丰富了平台化与公共价值的研究脉络。

Since 2018, feminist discursive practices have become a prominent phenomenon in China’s digital platforms. Based on three digital platforms, Weibo, Xiaohongshu, and LittleUniverse respectively, and taking the daily discursive practices of feminist intellectuals as the starting point, this study clarifies the feminist discursive production and dissemination strategies of feminist intellectuals under the influence of platformization mechanisms, as well as corresponding discursive models. Drawing on the subaltern public sphere theory, this study reflects on how everyday discursive practices promote China’s gender equality. The empirical part of this study revolves around two questions: “How to say” and “What did they say”. In terms of “how to say”, this study proposes the platformization mechanisms related to discursive practices take in four dimensions: technological affordances, business operation models, content production governance, and user practice common sense. The first three dimensions are adopted from the framework used by researchers on “platformization of cultural production”, and user practice common sense is a supplement to this study based on the review of relevant literature on feminist discursive practices in the pre-digital era. Furthermore, this study employed Walkthrough Method, analyzed relevant documents (such as company financial reports, press releases, etc.), and conducted semi-structured interviews with algorithm technicians, business operators, and content auditors on three platforms to summarize the main characteristics reflected by the three platforms in the aforementioned four dimensions. Next, based on netnography data, the researchers detailed the discursive production and communication strategies formed by feminist intellectuals on various platforms under the influence of platformization mechanisms. The research results show that there is a “push-pull” tension between the platformization mechanism and the daily discourse practice of feminist intellectuals: the “mutual domestication” of content production and platform technology afforandances, different trade-offs for the commercialization of feminism, emotional labor based on imagination of content production governance, and expectations for reshaping the feminist discursive practices ecology of the platform.In terms of “what did they say”, this study deployed constructed week sampling, and combined the overall perception of feminist intellectual discourse texts formed in the process of online ethnography to summarize the feminist discursive models on three platforms respectively: the feminist discourse on Weibo is “feminism that transcends the public and the private”; on Xiaohongshu, it is “feminism as a way of daily life”; and that on LittleUniverse is “feminism that reshapes public life”. Furthermore, this study employs Social Media Critical Discourse Studies, combined with subaltern public sphere theory, to answer “why they said in such way?”. The discourse practices of feminist intellectuals have cultivated three types of subaltern public sphere respectively - the satellite subaltern public sphere on Weibo, the enclave subaltern public sphere on Xiaohongshu, and the counter subaltern public sphere on LittleUniverse. Their impacts on China’s gender equality are also discussed separately.Based on the research results, this article defines platformization as a “cultural assemblage” formed by the “push-pull” tension between platformization mechanisms and user practices. At the user practice level, platformization includes three interrelated processes: compliance, adjust, and transformation; those are reflected in the platformization mechanism as framing, resonance, and reshaping. Furthermore, this study explores the publicness of platformization as a “cultural assemblage” and proposes it is digital platforms carry the meaning of production practices with public value that enables them to break through market logic and media technology replacement logic, having a structural impact on social life.At the theoretical level, this study proposes four elements of platformization mechanisms related to discursive practices: technological affordances, business operation models, content production governance, and user practice common sense. In addition, this study defines platformization as “cultural assemblage”, responding to the emphasis of platformization research on the relationship between the structural impact of digital platforms and user agency, deepening the understanding of the connotation of platformization, and enriching the researches relating to platformization and public values. At the practical level, this study preliminarily clarifies the different understandings and specific demands of Chinese women on gender equality. On the one hand, it can provide references for the formation of more targeted measures of Chinese internet governance. More importantly, it offers a foothold for different social actors (such as the state and new mainstream media, platforms) to get together, promoting the advanced socialist gender culture.