Conference Program

In Italy, the legal debate on the amendment to Article 609-bis of the Criminal Code concerning sexual violence is currently stalled on the proposal of the Chair of the Justice Committee, Giulia Bongiorno: to establish the crime, it is not necessary to assess the possible presence of ‘free and current consent’, but rather the absence of the ‘will of the person’ to perform that particular act, giving importance to dissent.

The difference between these two expressions is not merely terminological but also prompts reflection on the symbolic level, which in turn interacts with the technical level. The concept of consent would open the way to questioning cultural models that portray women as passive subjects in sexual relationships, whose participation is assumed and men as active subjects, whose proactivity is taken for granted. The idea of sexuality that consent would express could lead to a renewal of gender roles, moving away from stereotypes and prejudices and towards a dynamic that is less susceptible to power imbalances, though still capable of improvement (Borrello 2023; Millefiorini 2024). From a technical perspective, this focus would also align with Article 36 of the Istanbul Convention (2011), ratified by Italy in 2013. Referring just to the ‘will of the person’ risks relegating these cultural models to the background. Also, it could allow for ex post reconstructions of will based on gender stereotypes, social expectations, or ambiguous interpretations of behaviour. In this sense, the choice of wording has a direct impact on regulatory technique: while ‘consent’ directs the assessment towards a paradigm shift, ‘will’ allows for flexible assessments that can compromise legal certainty and the preventive function of criminal law.

This contribution aims to explore this reflection further by considering the two expressions not merely as technical tools but as symbolic devices: ‘consent’ and ‘will of the person’ become two discursive categories that contribute to producing and legitimising, in the legal and social spheres, certain configurations of gender and power dynamics. Conversely, it will be considered how these configurations influence the push towards adopting ‘consent’ or ‘personal will’, highlighting what these efforts reveal about the current sexual order. To do so, this paper examines these categories through the lens of ‘grey areas’, that is, situations of sexual interaction that cannot be clearly classified as either consent or dissent (Graf e Johnson, 2020; Gunnarsson 2018, 2025). In this sense, ‘grey areas’ of sexual interaction could reveal how the legal recognition of consent and/or dissent is shaped by gendered interpretive frameworks that normalise stereotypical expectations, thereby constraining the intelligibility of certain experiences and producing forms of epistemic injustice (Fricker, 2007).

Digital platforms have become central sites of informal socialisation, shaping contemporary understandings of gender, power, and gender-based violence (Banet-Weiser, 2018). While online communities are often framed as empowering spaces for women, they can also function as environments where sexist stereotypes are reformulated and normalised (Gill, 2007). This study examines the Reddit community Female Dating Strategy (FDS) as a digital site in which stereotypes about women and men are simultaneously challenged and reproduced. The study combines digital ethnography (Sumial and Tikka, 2020) with qualitative content analysis of the FDS forum and its 500-page Handbook. The Handbook was coded using NVivo, allowing for the identification of recurrent discursive patterns, normative categories, and evaluative hierarchies. Particular attention was paid to the construction of femininity and masculinity through classifications such as “High Value Woman” and “Low Value Man”, as well as to representations of gender-based violence, relational risk, and emotional self-regulation. The analysis shows that FDS contests male entitlement and certain forms of gender-based exploitation; however, it also promotes rigid gender binaries, essentialised representations of male behaviour, and prescriptive models of female worth based on beauty, emotional control, and strategic heterosexuality. In doing so, the community contributes to the circulation of polarised and simplified narratives about gender relations, reinforcing stereotypes even within discourses of empowerment. An intersectional lens (Crenshaw, 1991) reveals how these constructions are shaped by classed, racialised, and heteronormative assumptions that marginalise non-conforming identities. At the same time, the study acknowledges its methodological limitations: while digital ethnography and platform-based analysis are crucial for understanding online discourse, they cannot fully capture how these narratives are internalised, negotiated, or resisted offline. Future research should therefore integrate interviews, focus groups, and the triangulation of online and offline data to explore how such representations influence everyday practices and relational expectations (Evans and Lankford, 2024). The study argues that digital communities such as FDS function as powerful informal agents of gender socialisation, influencing how young women and men understand equality, violence, and relational norms. Recognising these ambivalent dynamics is essential for developing critical media education strategies, beginning in schools and extending across media ecosystems, aimed at fostering reflexive engagement with online gender narratives and promoting more inclusive and democratic cultures (Gius, 2023).

In Italy, gender segregation in upper secondary education - with some studies being perceived as “for girls” and others as “for boys” - represents a structural phenomenon that has still received limited public debate. This so-called “stereotyped education” intersects with dynamics of “early socialization,” fueled by stereotypes deeply rooted in society and in the labor market, and often reproduced by schools starting in early childhood education. In this way, they contribute to reproducing gender inequalities in professional opportunities and careers, reinforcing the traditional division of roles in the world of work.

The causes of this phenomenon are multiple and can be traced back to structural, cultural, and institutional factors. The Italian upper secondary school system includes more than 180 different study choices, distributed across academic high schools (“Licei”) and, above all, technical and vocational programs (“Istituti Tecnici” e “Istituti professionali”). Fifty-two percent of these studies show a strongly unbalanced gender composition: in many cases, girls or boys account for more than 75% of enrolled students, and not infrequently reach or exceed 80%, 90%, or even near totality. In practical terms, one out of every two students experiences an education in which they belong either to a clear gender majority or a clear minority.

Girls encounter greater difficulties than their male peers in overcoming barriers linked to “male-dominated” education. Only one third of the studies with strong gender imbalance are skewed in favor of girls, while the remaining two thirds are dominated by boys. Moreover, male students tend to enroll - albeit in smaller proportions - in female-dominated studies (acquiring, among others, care-related, educational, artistic, and linguistic skills).

What then, are the underlying causes of this gendered education? And which strategies can be adopted to counter it at the micro level (individual schools), meso level (school systems and local contexts), and macro level (national policies)? What role can other educational agencies and local stakeholders play?

The contribution first aims to provide an updated and comprehensive overview of the phenomenon through the analysis of data and its determinants. Secondly, it will present several practical proposals to address it. Particular emphasis will be placed on the Gender Equality Charter Mark (“Carta della parità di genere”), promoted by Oxfam Italy and piloted, in collaboration with INDIRE, in numerous schools across primary and secondary education throughout Northern, Central, and Southern Italy. This is a systemic tool that enables schools to carry out a self-assessment regarding the actions undertaken - in terms of a school’s vision and mission, organization, leadership, subject teaching, textbooks, communication and relationships with students, as well as engagement with local communities - in order to prevent gender discrimination and violence and to make the school environment increasingly inclusive and equal. Finally, the contribution will focus on the tool’s impact, namely the processes activated and the evidence emerged.

Democratic education requires more than just formal equality; it also demands the development of social and emotional competencies that allow students to actively participate in collective life as equals. Within the OECD framework on social and emotional skills (OECD, 2019; 2023), these competencies are conceptualised as measurable and malleable traits based on the Big Five model (Costa & McCrae, 1985; John & Srivastava, 1999) that are strongly linked to educational attainment, well-being, and life outcomes (Heckman & Kautz, 2014; Roberts et al., 2007). At the same time, gender stereotypes emerge early in childhood and progressively consolidate through socialisation processes, influencing expectations, aspirations, and self-efficacy (Bian et al., 2018; Makarova et al., 2019; Trautner et al., 2005). As socio-emotional skills are teachable and context-sensitive (OECD, 2019; World Health Organization, 1997), they may interact with stereotypes, shaping distinct developmental profiles. From a critical perspective, gender stereotypes can therefore be understood as relational and emotional schemas embedded in educational environments that could limit democratic participation and epistemic recognition.

Against this backdrop, this paper investigates whether gender stereotyping among Italian students is systematically associated with social-emotional skills (SESS), and whether endorsement of stereotypes varies by gender and territorial context.

We construct a synthetic index of gender stereotyping using data from the ENRICH project (approximately 6,000 students) and an adapted version of the Gender-Stereotyped Attitude Scale for Children (GASC; Liben & Signorella, 1985). This index ranges from 0 (no endorsement of stereotypes) to 1 (full endorsement of stereotypes). We examined its association with nine SESS dimensions: Open-mindedness (Curiosity and Creativity), Task performance (Perseverance and Responsibility), Engaging with others (Sociability and Assertiveness), Collaboration (Empathy) and Emotional Regulation (Stress resistance and Optimism).

Pearson correlations reveal systematic and statistically significant associations. Higher endorsement of stereotypes is negatively correlated with Curiosity (r = −0.185), Creativity (r = −0.116), Perseverance (r = −0.129), Responsibility (r = −0.170), Empathy (r = −0.217), Sociability (r = −0.042) and Optimism (r = −0.038) (p < 0.001). The strongest negative association is with Empathy. Conversely, stereotyping is positively associated with Assertiveness (r = 0.133) and Stress resistance (r = 0.090).

Regression analyses confirm these patterns. Empathy (β = −0.152), Responsibility (β = −0.107), Curiosity (β = −0.060) and Creativity (β = −0.055) emerged as robust negative predictors, while Assertiveness (β = 0.112) and Stress resistance (β = 0.077) showed positive associations. When gender is added to the analysis, a strong independent effect is revealed (β = −0.217, p < 0.001), indicating significantly lower stereotype endorsement among girls. The effects of territorial macro-areas are comparatively smaller.

Overall, the findings suggest that gender stereotyping is systematically associated with particular socio-emotional traits. Therefore, addressing sexist stereotypes in school contexts requires cognitive deconstruction and deliberate pedagogical investment in empathy, responsibility, and openness — core competencies for democratic coexistence and epistemic justice.

In recent years, the Italian political landscape has been marked by the rise of radical right-wing parties which, also through electoral campaigns based on anti-gender rhetoric, have contributed to reinforcing a climate of polarization and delegitimization toward LGBTQ+ people. In this context, public and media discourse plays a crucial role in shaping the democratic imaginary; however, it often tends to normalize gender stereotypes and discriminatory narratives, thereby contributing to the reproduction of inequalities and forms of both symbolic and material violence.

In Italy, in the absence of specific legislation aimed at protecting victims of discrimination and homotransphobic violence, and in the lack of structured policies for prevention and education on diversity, LGBTQ+ movements have progressively self-organized by promoting the creation of a nationwide network of Anti-Discrimination Centers (CAD). These organizations provide health, psychological, and legal support services at the local level, with particular attention to the most vulnerable groups—including minors, transgender people, people with disabilities, and migrants. However, beyond their role in providing support and assistance, CADs also perform a political and cultural function, contributing to the construction of counter-narratives capable of challenging stereotypes, biases, and victim-blaming cultures that often characterize the public representation of sexual minorities.

This paper presents the preliminary results of a research project conducted within the framework of the European CERV programme (Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values), funded by the European Union. The study, qualitative in nature and conducted on a national scale, is based on in-depth interviews with operators and coordinators from fifteen Italian CADs. Through these interviews, the research analyzes, on the one hand, the services provided by the centers and their impact on local contexts, and, on the other, the advocacy and communication strategies developed to intervene in public debate, raise public awareness, and influence institutions and policy-makers.

The research design also includes two focus groups involving the same actors who participated in the interviews. These collective moments of discussion make it possible to revisit and further explore the main issues emerging from the individual interviews, highlighting convergences, divergences, and shared interpretations among participants, while offering a space for collective reflection on practices of resistance, advocacy, and the construction of alternative narratives.

Ultimately, the paper aims to show how the practices developed by CADs can be interpreted not only as forms of social support, but also as expressions of democratic action. By addressing situations of violence against LGBTQ+ people on a daily basis, CADs contribute to dismantling stereotypes and prejudices, while promoting more inclusive models of society.