Go to content

Summary

Existing academic research and policy reports indicate that global pushback against gender equality, sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) advocacy, and LGBTQI+ rights is increasing across Europe. Such pushback is often coordinated and strategically well-funded. However, the impact of this opposition on the daily work of gender equality practitioners remains under-researched.
This study provides an initial assessment of the extent and impact of opposition encountered in gender equality advancement work and LGBTQI+ rights advocacy in the Nordic countries. The aim of the study was to gather data on whether Nordic experts in gender equality advancement had encountered opposition to their work, and if so, to assess its extent, frequency and impact.
The study is based on an online survey distributed to government officials, civil society organisations and academics working as experts within the broad field of gender equality in all the Nordic countries. The survey was designed to examine whether opposition arises in the context of gender equality work carried out by civil society organisations, researchers and government officials. Where such opposition was reported, the survey also assessed its forms and impacts.
A total of 88 responses from organisations and individuals were received from Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, the Åland Islands, and Greenland. The response rate was 31%, which is typical for online surveys.
Based on the results of this survey, opposition to gender equality work is widespread and frequently takes the form of harassment and intimidation. Across the Nordic countries, reported incidents included threats of legal measures, doxing, and attempts to discredit gender equality expertise. The main trends reported by respondents were as follows:
  • 52% had experienced threats or harassment directed at their organisation.
  • 44% had experienced threats or harassment directed at an individual or employee.
  • Of reported threats or harassments, 35% occurred face to face, 67% via phone calls and email and 93% via social media platforms.
Among those who reported having experienced threats or harassment, the forms included:
  • 44% threats or harassment during events organised by the respondent or their organisation.
  • 42% threats of legal measures against the respondent or their organisation.
  • 25% unauthorised online distribution of personal or sensitive information with deliberate intent to harm (doxing).
  • 19% stalking or persecution.
  • 16% death threats.
  • 12% threats to family members’ health and safety.
These findings have both individual and systemic consequences. Respondents reported withdrawing from public engagements, engaging in self-censorship and, in some cases, taking sick leave due to stress and fatigue. Of all respondents, 48% reported that the opposition had a negative impact on their emotional safety and their mental and physical wellbeing. In addition, 26% reported withdrawing from work-related tasks such as public appearances and advocacy.
Beyond the personal impact, such forms of intimidation undermine democratic participation and academic freedom and may also constrain policy development in the field of gender equality advancement. Reflecting these concerns, 60% of respondents anticipated an increase in violent extremism in the Nordic region within the next two years, and 82% perceived gender equality to be under threat.
In order to avoid opposition, respondents reported completely avoiding or taking extra precautions when advocating for or speaking about LGBTQI+ rights (46%), gender equality issues in general (29%), sexual and reproductive health and rights and comprehensive sexuality education (19%), sexual and gender-based violence (18%), and violence against women and girls or migration (16%).
The findings of the study provide a preliminary picture indicating that this type of opposition is not simply an expression of differing values or political opinions. Rather, opposition to gender equality work, SRHR and LGBTQI+ rights restricts and slows progress in gender equality advancement work across the Nordic countries.
The findings also indicate that recurring online intimidation and discursive pushback in particular are associated with increased self-censorship and pressure to alter or avoid gender equality terminology, including among government officials.
Because gender equality experts maintain a strong online presence as part of their professional participation in public debate, their visibility also increases their exposure to hostility. As a result, digital harassment is not only a security concern but also affects the conditions for public participation. This pattern is consistent with existing Nordic research identifying online hostility as a factor that restricts public debate.
Based on the findings of this report, there is an urgent need to recognise discursive pushback not only as a potential safety threat but also as a substantive challenge to the core values underpinning Nordic democratic institutions and gender equality policy cooperation, including equal participation in public debate and the right to work free from harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence. The report also provides insights into possible counter-strategies and preventive measures. According to survey respondents, the most important support mechanisms include stronger legal protections, public statements supporting targeted individuals, as well as psychological support and supervisor training.
Do experts in gender equality advancement encounter opposition to their work?
52% of respondents reported experiencing opposition directed at their organisation. 44% reported experiences of opposition directed at an individual or employee.
How frequent is the encountered opposition, and what are the main forms of it?
Opposition was reported to occur frequently and appeared to increase with the respondent’s online visibility.
What is the concrete impact of encountered opposition on gender equality work?
48% reported that opposition had a negative effect on their emotional and physical wellbeing. As a result, 26% withdrew from work-related tasks, including public appearances and advocacy activities.
Best practices. What preventive foresight strategies and support mechanisms have been most beneficial?
The most valued support mechanisms were stronger legal protections (47%), public statements supporting targeted individuals (46%), and psychological support combined with supervisor training (44%).