Behind the Comments. A Mixed-Methods Study of Perpetrators and Patterns of Online Hostility Toward (Women) Politicians

Research on online political violence has largely focused on targets, overlooking those who author hostile content. This study shifts attention to perpetrators of online hostility directed at political candidates. Drawing on role congruity theory and gender norms, we conceptualize online hostility -including general negativity and both benevolent and hostile sexism- as social sanctions reinforcing traditional power hierarchies. We expect men and anonymous users to express more hostility than women or collective accounts, and women candidates to be disproportionately targeted. Using a mixed-method design, we analyzed 43,937 reactions to 2,922 social media posts by 40 Belgian candidates during the 2024 elections and conducted 21 interviews with women candidates to explore perceptions of online hostility and mechanisms enabling gendered aggression online. Findings show that anonymous users and men are primary sources of hostility, especially hostile sexism, but women and collective accounts are not exempt, engaging through benevolent sexism. These gendered patterns reveal how online hostility functions as social control, challenging women politicians’ legitimacy and normalizing everyday sexism in digital debate. Addressing this requires understanding perpetrator profiles to reduce disinhibition and strengthen accountability. This paper contributes by centering perpetrators as political actors, whose actions have concrete consequences on women political representation and the quality of the political debate.