Think of the last time you saw a post about a woman in public life that focused on her outfit, her age, her family, or her relationships instead of her actual work. That instinct to judge by gender is not just a personal bias; it can be deliberately weaponized. According to Iryna Lysychkina, a Ph.D and Associate Professor at NATO DEEP eAcademy, gendered disinformation is the deliberate use of false, misleading, or manipulative information that exploits gender stereotypes to influence opinions, emotions, and behavior. It often targets women in public life, but its ultimate objective is much broader: to shape public perceptions, undermine trust, and influence democratic decision-making. In other words, it is not just about hurting one person. It is about using that person’s identity as a lever to move entire societies. Unlike general online harassment or propaganda, gendered disinformation weaponizes ideas about gender and social roles. It may be accompanied by trolling, coordinated campaigns, or media smears, but it attacks people not only for what they do, but for who they are as women or men. By tapping into deeply rooted stereotypes, these campaigns make manipulation feel natural and persuasive. A woman may be portrayed as overly emotional, incompetent, excessively ambitious, unfit to lead, or successful only because of personal connections. In wartime contexts like Ukraine, she may be depicted as incapable of military service or reduced to a symbolic figure rather than recognized as a professional. These narratives are designed to undermine credibility and erase professional achievement. The immediate goal is often to damage reputations and silence voices. The broader purpose, however, is to deepen social polarization, discourage participation in public life, and weaken democratic resilience. In wartime Ukraine, these campaigns may also seek to undermine national unity and public support for the country’s defense. Understanding this is the first step to resisting it.
Earlier this summer, the Nordic Centre for Gender in Military Operations (NCGM) held its annual NATO key leader seminar on gender for flag officer level leaders, both military and civilian. Through briefings, round tables, and panel discussions, the seminar focused on how to implement gender perspectives in military operations, missions, and activities, and how this can contribute to achieving political, military strategic, and operational objectives. This year’s theme was gender perspectives in strategic communication, including gendered disinformation. Lysychkina was one of the experts invited to speak. The setting might seem unusual at first—why would military leaders need to understand gender stereotypes? Because disinformation is not just a social media problem; it is a security problem. When hostile actors use gendered narratives to divide societies, erode trust, and manipulate public opinion, they are engaging in a form of warfare that does not require tanks or missiles. It requires an understanding of what makes people tick, and gender stereotypes are among the most powerful tools available. The seminar explored how military and civilian leaders can integrate gender analysis into strategic communication, not as a box-ticking exercise, but as a way to make operations more effective and societies more resilient. For example, recognizing that women in the military are often targeted by false narratives about their competence or motives helps commanders understand the information environment they are operating in. It also helps them craft messages that counter those narratives and support the real contributions of all personnel. The conversation was not abstract. Participants discussed real cases, shared lessons, and considered how to apply gender perspectives in their own organizations. The underlying message was clear: gender is not a side issue in modern conflict. It is central to how information is used, how trust is built or destroyed, and how democratic societies defend themselves.
How can we recognize gendered disinformation? Lysychkina offers practical guidance. Legitimate criticism focuses on actions, decisions, and evidence. Gendered disinformation, by contrast, shifts attention to characteristics unrelated to professional performance, such as appearance, age, family status, or private life. Another warning sign is coordinated amplification. The same narrative may suddenly appear across multiple social media platforms, anonymous accounts, and media outlets, creating the false impression of widespread public consensus. Although the specific narratives vary, the underlying mechanisms remain remarkably similar across countries. “The tactics are global, but the narratives are local,” Lysychkina says. Disinformation campaigns exploit whichever stereotypes are most powerful in a particular society. A recent case from Ukraine illustrates how this works in practice. In May 2026, the appointment of Anna Dorosh as Chief of Protocol at Ukraine’s Ministry of Health triggered widespread online debate. Initial social media posts and media reports described her as a “20-year-old girl” lacking the qualifications for the role. Subsequent reporting painted a very different picture. Dorosh was 25 years old, held a master’s degree in political science, had previous government experience, and met the formal requirements for the position. Nevertheless, much of the public discussion continued to focus on her age, appearance, and alleged family connections rather than her qualifications and professional record. The case demonstrates how attention can be deliberately diverted from competence to stereotypes, shaping public perception before accurate information gains traction. It also shows how quickly a false narrative can take hold, and how hard it is to correct once it has been repeated across platforms. The lesson is not that every critical comment is disinformation. It is that when the focus shifts from what someone has done to who they are—especially in gendered terms—we should pause and ask what is really going on.
Why does this matter beyond the individuals targeted? Because gendered disinformation is an attack on democratic resilience itself. When public trust declines, social cohesion weakens, and citizens make decisions based on fear, prejudice, or misinformation instead of evidence, hostile actors gain influence. Those seeking to weaken democratic societies benefit most from these narratives. The immediate victim may be a politician, a journalist, a soldier, or a civil servant. But the real target is the public’s ability to think clearly and act together. If women are driven out of public life, if young people are discouraged from speaking up, if citizens become cynical about the information they receive, then democracy loses. In wartime Ukraine, these campaigns have an additional edge: they can undermine national unity and public support for the country’s defense. By portraying women in the military as incompetent or symbolic, or by attacking female officials for their age and appearance, disinformation campaigns try to fracture the social fabric. They want people to doubt each other, to question the legitimacy of institutions, and to retreat into fear and prejudice. This is why countering gendered disinformation is not only about correcting false claims. It is also about challenging the stereotypes that make those claims persuasive and ensuring that authentic voices are heard. It means creating an information environment where competence matters more than gender, where evidence matters more than emotion, and where diverse voices are not silenced by coordinated attacks. It is a collective responsibility, not just for governments or tech companies, but for everyone who consumes and shares information. The more we understand the mechanism, the less likely we are to fall for it. And the more we support one another, the harder it becomes for hostile actors to divide us.
There is no single solution to gendered disinformation, according to Lysychkina. Effective responses require a combination of stronger media literacy, independent journalism, greater accountability from digital platforms, improved digital security, and strategic communication that promotes factual, evidence-based narratives. Media literacy helps people recognize manipulation before they share it. Independent journalism provides accurate information and holds power to account. Digital platforms have a responsibility to address coordinated amplification and anonymous abuse. Improved digital security protects those who are targeted from further harm. And strategic communication ensures that positive, factual narratives are not drowned out by hostile ones. The challenge is evolving. Public awareness of disinformation is growing, but technological developments are making the problem more complex. Artificial intelligence now enables false or misleading content to be produced more quickly, personalized more effectively, and distributed at an unprecedented scale. As our understanding of disinformation improves, so do the tools used to spread it. Increasingly, AI-enabled disinformation and strategic communication are discussed in the context of cognitive warfare—the effort to influence how people think, perceive reality, and make decisions. Gender stereotypes have existed for centuries, but social media and AI allow these narratives to be amplified and spread globally within minutes. This means that the response must also be dynamic. It is not enough to debunk individual false claims. We need to build systems and habits that make societies less vulnerable to manipulation. That includes investing in education, supporting quality journalism, demanding transparency from platforms, and developing strategic communication that reflects democratic values. It also means recognizing that the first narrative people encounter often has the greatest influence. If we leave an information vacuum, hostile actors will fill it. Promoting narratives grounded in democratic values, equality, and factual reporting helps build resilience against manipulation and reduces the space in which disinformation can flourish.
What can each of us do? Lysychkina’s advice is simple but powerful. Before sharing emotionally charged content, take a moment to verify it through reliable sources. Ask whether a story is based on evidence or whether it relies on stereotypes, personal attacks, or sensationalism. Challenge narratives that judge people according to their gender, appearance, or private lives instead of their competence and actions. This is not always easy. Disinformation is designed to trigger an emotional reaction, to make us feel angry, afraid, or righteous before we have time to think. But that moment of pause—that decision to check before sharing—can make a real difference. It can stop a false narrative from spreading. It can protect someone from being unfairly attacked. It can help create a culture where evidence matters more than prejudice. Cognitive warfare succeeds when emotional reactions replace critical thinking. Democratic societies should not leave an information vacuum. Strategic communication matters because the first narrative people encounter often has the greatest influence. By promoting narratives grounded in democratic values, equality, and factual reporting, we help build resilience against manipulation and reduce the space in which hostile disinformation can flourish. In the end, gendered disinformation is not just a problem for women or for the military or for Ukraine. It is a problem for anyone who believes that decisions should be based on facts, that people should be judged by their actions, and that democracy depends on trust. We all have a role to play. The next time you see a post that makes you feel something—especially something that confirms a stereotype—stop. Ask who benefits. Check the source. Think before you share. That small act of critical thinking is a form of resistance. And it is one of the most powerful tools we have.