The gendered dimensions of the anti-mask and anti-lockdown movement on social media

The paper investigates how gendered discourses are mobilized within anti-mask and anti-lockdown conversations on social media during COVID-19. While masks and distancing became globally recommended to limit transmission, resistance has been politicized and linked to notions of freedom and individual choice. Social media offers insight into public responses, yet few studies examine gendered polarization in this context. The study asks: What are the gendered discourses around anti-mask and anti-lockdown measures on Facebook and Instagram?

The literature on gender differences in compliance with COVID-19 measures is mixed. Some studies suggest women are more compliant with health regulations, have higher risk perception, and adhere more to masking, distancing, and hygiene than men. Other studies find no statistically significant gender differences in social distancing or dishonest mask-wearing. A French survey of anti-maskers reported a predominantly female composition, highlighting contextual variability. The paper draws on Connell’s theory of hegemonic masculinity and the concept of toxic masculinity to frame how dominant masculine norms may influence resistance to public health guidance. Background evidence underscores the effectiveness of masks and social distancing, cultural differences in mask adoption, and the politicization of masking, including conspiracy narratives. Lockdowns, while effective in reducing transmission, have social and economic costs and gendered impacts, including increased mental health burdens, interpersonal violence, reduced access to sexual and reproductive health services, and disproportionate job losses for women. Few studies have analyzed how social media communication reinforces gender norms in opposition to public health directives, indicating a gap this study addresses.

The study employed multimodal discourse analysis (MDM), integrating visual and textual elements (e.g., images, memes, captions, hashtags) to interpret how posts appeal to emotions and reasoning and how modes interact to create meaning. Data were collected via CrowdTangle using 24 search terms related to anti-mask and anti-lockdown content (e.g., nolockdown, nomask, nosocialdistancing, NoNewNormal, MasksDontWork, ReopenAmerica), covering January–October 2020. The dataset comprised 4209 posts: 2385 Instagram and 1824 Facebook posts drawn from the most active public anti-mask/anti-lockdown users, with users prioritized by posting frequency. Only posts from anti-mask users were retained (excluding posts that merely referenced or criticized the movement). Posts were reorganized by descending user activity; top Instagram users (top 10) and top Facebook users (top 100) were examined. The analysis focused on English-language content and primarily North American discourse, though posts could originate globally. Researchers conducted iterative coding: initial descriptive notes of multimodal content (visuals, text, hashtags), followed by inductive grouping into broader discourses based on content and context. Manual filtering identified 297 posts with explicit gendered visuals or textual references: 215 Instagram posts from 4 users and 82 Facebook posts from 20 users. Thematic identification emphasized content, form, and function, recognizing potential bias and the possibility of overlooked minor themes.

• From 4209 collected posts, 297 posts explicitly featured or referenced gender (215 Instagram from 4 users; 82 Facebook from 20 users). - Three main gendered discourses were identified: 1) Hypermasculine discourse: Posts framing non-compliance (no masks/distancing) as a marker of strength, independence, and invulnerability; compliant individuals depicted as weak (e.g., “wuss”). This discourse frequently aligned with conservative politics and support for Donald Trump, leveraging hashtags such as #ChinaVirus, #MAGA, #Trump2020, and framing public health guidance as threats to freedom and the economy. 2) Sexist and pejorative portrayals of “Karen”: Women critical of anti-maskers are labeled “Karens,” depicted as overemotional, privileged, or intellectually inferior. Posts often couple this trope with delegitimizing public health authorities and conspiracist hashtags (e.g., #plandemic, #covidhoax, #scamdemic, #endlockdown, #medialies). The label is asymmetrically applied to women, evidencing sexist overtones; both conservative and liberal users employ the term but for opposing ideological targets. 3) Appropriating freedom and feminism discourse: Female anti-mask/anti-lockdown users present themselves as strong, defiant, and humorous, appropriating feminist and bodily autonomy language (e.g., #mybodymychoice, #wedonotconsent, #itsourbody, #choice) to oppose mandates and contact tracing, and pairing these with broader conspiracist or freedom-oriented hashtags (e.g., #CoronaFascism, #ChooseLife, #RiseUp, #FightBack, #ReopenAmerica, #ReopenSchools) and references to Pizzagate/child trafficking. - Overall, the movement’s gendered rhetoric blended hypermasculinity, misogynistic tropes, and co-optation of feminist frames to normalize non-compliance with public health measures and to attack public authorities.

The findings address the research question by delineating how gendered narratives function within anti-mask/anti-lockdown social media content. Hypermasculine rhetoric aligns with hegemonic masculinity theory, framing mask refusal as toughness and autonomy, which prior studies link to lower compliance. The “Karen” trope illustrates gendered and politicized disparagement of women who enforce or advocate compliance, reinforcing sexist norms and undermining public health authority. In contrast, women within the movement leverage feminist and bodily autonomy language to legitimize non-compliance and privacy concerns, often in tandem with conspiratorial worldviews. Together, these discourses reveal how gendered values and identities are mobilized to resist public health guidance, offering insights for designing counter-messaging and interventions sensitive to gendered frames and political polarization.

The study contributes a detailed account of gendered discourses underpinning anti-mask and anti-lockdown narratives on Facebook and Instagram. It highlights the prominence of hypermasculinity in opposing public health measures, the persistence of sexist pejoratives like “Karen,” and the strategic appropriation of feminist language to frame non-compliance as autonomy. These insights can inform public health communication strategies that anticipate and address gendered rhetoric and political polarization. Future research should further examine hypermasculinity’s role in health-risk behaviors, explore broader platforms and languages, and apply complementary methods (e.g., content analysis, cross-cultural comparisons) to assess generalizability and intervention effectiveness.

• Platform scope: Only Facebook and Instagram were analyzed; other platforms (e.g., YouTube, Twitter, Reddit, Telegram) may host different dynamics. - Sample scope: Only posts with explicit gendered visuals or text were included; implicit gender references may have been missed. - Language and context: Analysis was limited to English-language posts, predominantly reflecting US/North American contexts, limiting global generalizability. - Methodological considerations: Inductive identification of major discourses via multimodal discourse analysis may introduce bias and overlook minor themes; alternative or complementary methods (e.g., systematic content analysis) could yield additional insights. - Theoretical framing: The feminist paradigm guiding analysis may predispose interpretations; efforts were made to mitigate bias through multiple review rounds.