Tackling cyber violence against women and girls : the role of digital platforms.
Date: 2024-12-10
Institutions: European Institute for Gender Equality
Subjects: EU Member State, cloud computing, cyber-bullying, fight against crime, gender equality, legislation, sexual discrimination, sexual harassment, sexual violence, social media, woman

Tackling cyber violence 
against women and 
girls: The role of digital 
platforms

Tackling cyber violence 
against women and 
girls: The role of digital 
platforms

The European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) produces independent research and shares best practice 
to promote gender equality and eliminate discrimination based on gender. As the EU agency for gender 
equality, we help people achieve equal opportunities so everyone can thrive, independent of their gender 
and background.

We combine research, data and tools to help policymakers design measures that are inclusive, 
transformative and promote gender equality in all areas of life. We communicate our expertise and 
research effectively. We work closely with partners to raise awareness. We do this at the EU and national 
levels, and with EU candidate and potential candidate countries.

Cite this publication:  
EIGE (2024), Tackling cyber violence against women and girls: The role of digital platforms, Publications 
Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

Manuscript completed in October 2024

The provision of services for the preparation of this policy brief was contracted by EIGE to the Centre for 
Strategy and Evaluation Services.

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2024

© European Institute for Gender Equality, 2024

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. 

For any use or reproduction of elements that is not owned by EIGE, permission may need to be sought 
directly from the respective rightsholders.

Cover and pages 6, 7, 10, 11, 12 and 15: © Salomi art / stock.adobe.com
Page 5: © Hannah Syvak and ©  Salomi art / stock.adobe.com
Page 8: © Salomi art / stock.adobe.com and © Mental Health 
Page 9: © Bro Vector

Print 
PDF 

ISBN 978-92-9486-263-1  doi:10.2839/4861873  MH-01-24-002-EN-C 
ISBN 978-92-9486-260-0  doi:10.2839/1955989  MH-01-24-002-EN-N

European Institute for Gender Equality

EIGE Gedimio pr. 16 
LT-01103 Vilnius 
LITHUANIA

Tel. +370 52157444
Email: eige.sec@eige.europa.eu

Find us on

 
 
 
 
Contents

The significant impact of gender-related cyber violence 

Research process overview 

Important policy and legislative advances to combat gender-based violence 

What are digital platforms doing to address cyber violence? 

Dealing with the wide variety of definitions 

Digital platform reporting and moderation in practice 

Summary of the key challenges when combating CVAWG 

Recommendations for digital platforms 

5

7

8

8

10

12

14

16

The significant impact of gender-related cyber violence

 ▪ Digital platforms do not have cyber violence 
data that is disaggregated by sex available 
for incident reporting, response and follow-
up practices. This renders the assessment 
of the true extent of cyber violence acts 
and behaviours against women and girls 
challenging. More transparency is needed 
in relation to moderation and follow-up 
practices.

 ▪ This lack of a gender-sensitive approach 
at the level of reporting, recording and 
responding to different forms of violence 
online renders the scale of the phenomenon 
of cyber violence against women and girls 
largely invisible and contributes to obscuring 
its dynamics.

 ▪ Women and girls are more likely to be the 

targets of cyber violence on digital platforms 
and, as a result, they experience significant 
physical, sexual and psychological distress 
and/or financial difficulties.

 ▪ There is limited provision in digital 

platforms’ standards and trust and safety 
policies for keeping users safe from gender-
related cyber violence online, despite the 
high incidence of this phenomenon.

 ▪ The standards and trust and safety policies 
of the platforms make little reference to 
relevant human rights acts or important 
legislative advances in the fight against 
gender-based violence and cyber violence.

 ▪ Digital platforms dealing with the significant 

challenges of cyber violence acts and 
behaviours would benefit from greater 
collaboration across platforms. This would 
enable cross-platform reporting and the 
harmonisation of the wide variety of 
definitions of cyber violence.

The significant impact of gender-related 
cyber violence

Digital platforms such as Snapchat, Instagram, 
X and Reddit are forums for public and private 
expression and social interaction, and they 
provide many other useful services. However, 
the online space is not always welcoming 
to everyone. In an environment of pseudo-
anonymity and limited accountability, pervasive 
exclusionary and harmful narratives are often 
unleashed. Spreading virally, these practices 
are categorised as cyber violence and can have 
significant emotional and physical impacts on 
human lives.

5

European Institute for Gender EqualityThe significant impact of gender-related cyber violence

While cyber violence practices and behaviours 
can affect anyone, women and girls are 
more likely to be the targets of this form of 
violence (1) and, as a result, they experience 
significant physical, sexual and psychological 
distress and/or financial difficulties (2). 
Incidents of cyber harassment, cyber stalking, 
coercive control, hate speech and the non-
consensual sharing of intimate images tend 
to spill over into the physical environment, 
causing severe distress.

Cyber violence against women and girls 
(CVAWG) occurs as part of the broader 
continuum of gender-based violence (GBV), 
which is embedded in persisting unbalanced 
power structures. This form of violence against 
women and girls (VAWG) is linked to the 
societal reproduction of gender stereotypes. 
In addition, emerging technologies (3) are 
exacerbating the impact of cyber violence on 
victims by providing perpetrators with 
automated intelligence mechanisms they can 
use to intrude on their victims’ personal and 
professional lives, monitoring them without 
consent and/or spreading disinformation in 
their online and offline communities. 

The accurate assessment of the prevalence 
and incidence of CVAWG is essential to 
further inform EU Member State policies and 
legislation across the European Union, and 
to advise stakeholders on how to strengthen 
their collaborative efforts to combat this 
phenomenon. To address and assess CVAWG, 
a standardised, collaborative approach is 
required across legislative jurisdictions, digital 
platforms and digital service providers. This 
brief by the European Institute for Gender 
Equality (EIGE) aims to support digital and 
social media platforms by providing evidence-
based actionable recommendations on how 
to strengthen their policies and practices to 
combat CVAWG.

(1)  Council of Europe (2021), GREVIO General Recommendation No 1 on the digital dimension of violence against women, 

Strasbourg (https://rm.coe.int/grevio-rec-no-on-digital-violence-against-women/1680a49147). GREVIO is the Council of 
Europe’s Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence.

(2)  EIGE (2022a), Combating Cyber Violence against Women and Girls, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg 

(https://eige.europa.eu/gender-based-violence/cyber-violence-against-women); UN Women (2022), ‘Accelerating efforts to 
tackle online and technology-facilitated violence against women and girls’, New York (https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-
library/publications/2022/10/accelerating-efforts-to-tackle-online-and-technology-facilitated-violence-against-women-and-
girls).

(3)  UNESCO (2023), ‘Your Opinion Doesn’t Matter, Anyway’ – Exposing technology-facilitated gender-based violence in an era of 

generative AI, Paris (https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000387483).

6

European Institute for Gender EqualityResearch process 
overview

Building on ongoing cyber violence research (4), 
this study, conducted from April 2023 to March 
2024, analysed selected online platforms’ 
standards and trust and safety policies and how 
they play out in practice (5). Box 1 illustrates 
the research process undertaken. Publicly 
available documentation on 17 platforms was 
reviewed (6) and analysed through a gendered 
lens. Then a series of anonymised (7) interviews 
took place with 10 (8) platform representatives 
about moderation practices. Based on the 
findings, recommendations for digital  
platforms were drawn up.

Research process overview

Box 1: Multi-stage model of the research 
conducted by EIGE on digital platforms’ online 
standards and trust and safety policies 

1. Analysis of publicly available digital platform 
trust and safety standards and regulations

An in-depth qualitative analysis of trust and 
safety standards and platform community 
guidelines was undertaken using a sample of 
17 prominent online platforms. These were 
examined with reference to the CVAWG context.

2. Identification of challenges and concerns

Commonalities and gaps in the standards and 
regulations were identified, as well as common 
challenges in terms of gender-sensitive policies 
and specific approaches to dealing with CVAWG. 
A series of interview questions was drawn up to 
ascertain what happens in practice.

3. Filling the gaps: anonymised interviews with 

platform representatives

Anonymous interviews were conducted with 
10 platform representatives about how these 
standards and regulations are implemented, with 
a specific focus on content moderation, reporting 
processes and follow-up.

4. Recommendations for platforms to address 

CVAWG

Based on the evidence uncovered, several 
actionable recommendations have been provided 
to strengthen the fight against CVAWG and 
provide a more inclusive and safe digital space. 

Source: Developed by EIGE (2024).

(4)  EIGE (2022a), Combating Cyber Violence against Women and Girls, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg 

(https://eige.europa.eu/gender-based-violence/cyber-violence-against-women); EIGE (2022b), ‘Cyber violence against women 
and girls – Key terms and concepts’, Vilnius (https://eige.europa.eu/sites/default/files/cyber_violence_against_women_and_
girls_key_terms_and_concepts.pdf).

(5)  Digital platforms call their standards and policies by a wide variety of names, such as community standards; trust and safety 
policies; user terms; codes of conduct; and abuse or bullying and harassment policies. In this brief, EIGE uses ‘online platforms’ 
standards and trust and safety policies’ as an overarching term to refer to these policies.

(6)  This sample of 17 service providers was selected to be representative of different platform focuses and sizes. The platform 

standards and policies examined were from Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, X (Twitter), TikTok, Google/YouTube, Snapchat, 
Reddit, Hinge/Tinder/Match.com, eHarmony, Uber, Depop, Bumble and Aylo.

(7)  Except where permission was provided to include details.
(8)  A total of 60 representatives from 30 online platforms were approached for interview; anonymity was guaranteed. However, 
only 10 representatives of 7 digital media platforms and meta-platforms, covering 11 distinct online platforms and services, 
agreed. Getting platform representatives to engage with this research was challenging, due in part to their busy schedules and 
in part to the fact that the names of key management staff responsible for platform trust and safety and governance are not, 
in general, publicly available. In addition, when representatives did engage, they provided information related to moderation 
practices and responsiveness to reporting with a high degree of caution.

7

European Institute for Gender EqualityResearch process overview 
 Important policy and legislative advances to combat gender-based violence

Important policy and legislative advances 
to combat gender-based violence

The European Commission’s gender equality 
strategy 2020–2025 (9) and the EU’s accession 
to the Istanbul Convention (10) represented 
important milestones in the fight against GBV. 
These instruments put increased focus on 
ending all forms of GBV. In addition, the Digital 
Services Act (DSA) (11), which regulates online 
intermediaries and platforms, now places 
increased responsibility on service providers 
to create a safer digital space for users. 
Furthermore, Directive (EU) 2024/1385 of the 
European Parliament and of the Council of the 
European Union of 14 May 2024 on combating 
violence against women and domestic violence 
(the VAW/DV directive) constitutes a significant 
legislative commitment to combating CVAWG, 
as it obliges Member States to act against 
specific forms  
of cyber violence crimes.

Although digital platforms in EU jurisdictions 
are obliged to comply with the DSA (see Box 2), 
the other aforementioned important legislative 
acts and directives are not, as yet, reflected in 
their standards and trust and safety policies.

Box 2: Explanatory note on digital platform 
compliance with the Digital Services Act 

Platforms were found to be generally working 
towards compliance with DSA standards and 
demands. Digital platforms either had already 
published or were preparing to publish transparency 
reports (12) providing the public with insights into 
moderation, safety and legal requests. However, not 
all platforms provided reports on: 

 ▪
 ▪

 ▪

time taken to act on violative content (13);
the proportion of violative content out of total 
content (14);
the different sanctions imposed on users 
violating standards, based on types of incidents.

Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 on a 
single market for digital services 
(the DSA) was adopted in October 
2022 and has been applicable 
since February 2024. It places a 
range of legal obligations on online 
platforms, including reporting on 
moderation practices.

(9)  https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/items/682425/en.
(10) https://www.coe.int/en/web/istanbul-convention.
(11) Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 on a single market for digital services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act) 

(OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, p. 1).

(12) The DSA was adopted in October 2022 and became applicable on 17 February 2024. The DSA places a range of legal obligations 
known as ‘transparency reporting obligations’ on online platforms, including requirements related to content moderation, with 
additional obligations set up for very large online platforms. Note also that the transparency reports that platforms need to 
submit are gender blind, making it difficult to collect data on GBV, as highlighted by EIGE (https://eige.europa.eu/newsroom/
news/eige-stresses-need-gender-dimension-dsa-transparency-reporting). 

(13) Snapchat does provide this, whereas Facebook/Instagram do not.
(14) Snapchat and Facebook/Instagram do provide this, but X does not.

8

European Institute for Gender Equality 
 
 
 
 
 
 
What are digital platforms doing to address cyber violence ?

What are digital platforms doing to address 
cyber violence?

Digital platforms have many initiatives in place 
to deal with abuses of standards, breaches of 
user agreements and incidents of technology-
related violence, in addition to many other 
violations. These standards and trust and 
safety policies focus, in the main, on a general 
user audience.

Significant challenges are faced by the 
platforms in ensuring compliance with these 
standards and trust and safety policies. 
The platform representatives interviewed 
referred to the difficulty they have with user 
age verification and the verification of other 
personal characteristics given digital privacy 
rights. Another challenge faced relates to the 
immense volumes of data and content posted 
by users, which require constant monitoring 
efforts across a multitude of geographical and 
legal jurisdictions.

In spite of these challenges, all platforms do:

 ▪ have core policies and regulations 

on general content moderation and 
continuously monitor and review moderation 
processes (15);

 ▪ provide generally clear information that 
is publicly available to users on reporting 
processes;

 ▪ have terms and conditions in place stating 

the agreement between the user and 
the platform and covering the platform’s 
expectations of the user in terms of conduct, 
privacy, platform rights and payment (16);

 ▪ provide general community guidelines or 

standards, which have been developed on a 
global basis in the main (17). 

(15) Google highlights differences in the permissibility of content of a sexual nature, particularly differences across Western and 

Middle Eastern populations.

(16) In some cases, these are supplemented by other documents, for example, Reddit’s code of conduct for moderators and 

Snapchat’s explanations of each type of prohibited content.

(17) Exceptions to this are WhatsApp, X and TikTok, which use specific terms of service for different geographies.

9

European Institute for Gender Equality 
What are digital platforms doing to address cyber violence?

In addition, all serious violations are reported 
by the platforms to the relevant state agencies. 
For example, criminally defined and/or illegal 
content is reported to law enforcement 
agencies (e.g. child sexual abuse material).

Box 3: How platforms deal with the gender 
perspective

Although platforms have generic policies to 
combat cyber violence, they do not apply 
a specific gender perspective in policy 
development, nor do they explicitly refer to 
the cyber violence experiences of women and 
girls (18). Where gender is highlighted as a 
protected category, it is often just within the 
context of hate speech online. Although some 
specific forms of abuse and harm to users that 
are listed in standards and trust and safety 
policies have an implicit gender aspect, it is 
not explicitly stated (examples include ‘sexual 
content’, ‘harassment and bullying’, ‘hate 
speech’ and ‘non-consensual nudity’). Neither 
do platform policies reference international 
legislation on VAWG in their approaches to trust 
and safety (e.g. GREVIO General Recommendation 
No 1) (19). 

Dealing with the wide variety of definitions

An example of how the definitions and details 
of different offences vary widely across 
platforms is provided in Table 1 regarding non-
consensual intimate image (NCII) or material 
abuse.

Platforms’ definitions of cyber offences (20) 
vary widely as, to date, they have not typically 
consulted with each other to harmonise 
definitions at the initial stage of policy 
development (21). The platform representatives 
interviewed described the lack of common 
definitions as a barrier to tackling cyber 
violence. Urging policymakers to harmonise 
definitions across global legal jurisdictions, they 
stated: ‘Harmonisation is key and will greatly 
simplify our operations.’

(18) https://www.coe.int/en/web/istanbul-convention.
(19) See note 1.
(20) Definitions vary in terms of both the behaviours and acts described and the level of detail provided.
(21) Roblox and Depop called for more collaboration across platforms, and the consensus from interviews is that a trust and safety 

community is emerging.

10

European Institute for Gender Equality 
 
 
Dealing with the wide variety of definitions

Table 1: Non-consensual intimate image abuse: samples of variations in definitions across 
platforms

Platform

Reddit

TikTok

Tinder

Hinge

Definitions related to NCII abuse

‘Rule 3 prohibits sharing intimate or sexually explicit media of a person created or posted without 
their permission. Intimate media include a depiction of the person in a state of nudity or engaged in 
any act of sexual conduct, including depictions that may have been AI-generated or faked. Images or 
video of intimate parts of a person’s body, even if the person is clothed or in public, if contextualized 
in a salacious manner (e.g. “creepshots” or “upskirt” imagery), are also prohibited. The Rule applies to 
leaked, stolen or privately shared images of an individual where the individual, or their representative, 
reports that they do not consent to the public sharing of the images. Additionally, images or video 
of another person posted for the specific purpose of faking explicit content or soliciting “lookalike” 
pornography (e.g. “deepfakes” or “bubble porn”) is also against the Rule’ (22).
The guidance on this point goes on to provide explicit examples of content that violates Rule 3, before 
providing links to where users can report non-consensual intimate media and where users can find more 
information and support. The support signposted includes StopNCII and the international resources page 
of the US-based Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, which provides links to organisations focused on image-
based sexual abuse in 10 Member States (Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Spain, France, Italy, the 
Netherlands, Austria, Finland) (23).
‘Image-based sexual abuse is the creation, manufacture, or distribution of nude, partially nude, or 
sexually explicit content without the consent of the person in the content, for the purpose of sexualizing 
their body, or portraying them in a sexual manner’ (24).
This definition is accompanied by a link through which users can report content; a link to sexual assault 
resources, including advice for victims of sexual assault and their friends and family; and links / contact 
details for specialist local (i.e. country-specific) organisations, including in 11 Member States (e.g. 
Violences Femmes Info and Solidarité Femmes in France, or NANE Egyesület in Hungary).
‘Don’t post images or private messages from other people unless you’ve been given consent to do 
so’ (25).
Prohibition of uploading or sharing content that ‘includes the image or likeness of another person 
without that person’s consent’ (26).

Source: Developed by EIGE from publicly available policies.

(22) https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043513411-Never-Post-Intimate-or-Sexually-Explicit-Media-of-

Someone-Without-Their-Consent.

(23) https://cybercivilrights.org/intl-victim-resources/#1652883217730-29d4a1a0-71b2.
(24) https://www.tiktok.com/community-guidelines/en/safety-civility/.
(25) https://policies.tinder.com/community-guidelines/intl/en-gb/.
(26) https://hinge.co/terms.

11

European Institute for Gender Equality 
Digital platform reporting and moderation in practice

Digital platform reporting and moderation 
in practice

It was challenging (27) to determine exactly 
how the digital platform standards and trust 
and safety policies and regulations play out in 
practice. With regard to the internal platform 
workings of moderation, user reporting, follow-
up processes and subsequent sanctioning, 
findings showed that:

 ▪ online platforms lack transparency in 

their internal mechanisms and processes 
for reporting, recording and managing 
complaints;

 ▪ the division of labour between machine 
learning (ML) technology and human 
moderators across the platforms is difficult 
to ascertain;

 ▪ the time limit for someone to make a 

complaint and the timeline for addressing 
reports are not always clear;

 ▪ reporting follow-through procedures are not 

always transparent;

 ▪ there are no specific provisions with 

regard to gender within the descriptions 
of penalties and sanctions that platforms 
impose on perpetrators;

 ▪ there is no indication that tailored 

considerations are used in relation to CVAWG 
cases;

 ▪ the exact percentages of user reports 

resulting in some action being taken, and the 
exact outcome of these reports, are largely 
unknown (28);

 ▪ finally, with few exceptions, the breakdown 
of reports by sex/gender, language and 
geographical region is not publicly available.

Improving women’s safety online implies that 
appropriate consequences will be enforced 
in cases of CVAWG. Cyber violence is under-
reported by victims (29), and those who do 
report it often find it difficult to navigate 
platforms’ reporting systems to find and define 
the specific violations they have experienced. 
Many women who experienced cyber violence 
and reported it to the relevant platform said 
they were not satisfied with the outcome of 
their complaint (30). 

(27) See also note 8.
(28) With very few exceptions – notably Snapchat, which offers 
a report on ‘violative view rate’, which is the proportion of 
violative content out of the total content reported.

(29) Refer to note 2.
(30) Jurasz, O. (2024), Online Violence against Women: A Four 
Nations study, The Open University (https://oro.open.
ac.uk/96398/).

12

European Institute for Gender Equality 
Digital platform reporting and moderation in practice

Furthermore, the statistics related to GBV 
reports are not often made public by digital 
platforms. However, to comply with DSA 
reporting requirements, platforms are now 
required to provide this information, in 
addition to providing more public detail on 
the time taken to act on violative content (31); 
the proportion of violative content out of 
total content (32); and the different sanctions 
imposed based on the type of content. As 
yet, however, in the platforms’ reporting 
mechanisms for the DSA, sex-disaggregated 
data is not available, so it is not currently 
possible to gather detailed CVAWG statistics 
from these reports to better inform future 
legislation, standards and policy development. 

In terms of moderation processes, many digital 
platforms engage the services of external 
agencies to support them. StopNCII is one 
such provider. In addition, digital platforms 
do engage in the continuous refinement of 
their approaches to human-assisted and 
artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted content 
moderation. Reddit, a digital platform that 
hosts thousands of online communities, has a 
particularly innovative crowd-sourced approach 
to moderation, as illustrated in Box 4.

Box 4: Spotlight on Reddit’s moderation 
system regarding non-consensual intimate 
images 

Reddit (33) is divided into thousands upon 
thousands of different subreddits created 
by users and primarily moderated by users 
according to rules appropriate to the particular 
subject of the subreddit. Reddit supports the 
moderators’ ability to have those rules and 
provides them with tools to enforce them more 
efficiently. Generally, Reddit will not intervene 
with rules specific to subreddits unless there 
is behaviour violating Reddit’s platform-wide 
content policy (34). Every individual user on 
Reddit has a role to play in content moderation 
through democratic means, as content on Reddit 
is primarily sorted by the upvotes and downvotes 
of the users.

Most of the NCII abuse that Reddit takes action 
on is flagged by either automation or humans. 
When Reddit is taking that content down, 
most of the reports (around 75 %) come from 
Reddit’s automation rather than user reports 
or moderator actions. Reddit recognises that it 
is very distressing for people to be victims of 
this type of behaviour; therefore, it has a help 
centre article that directs victims to resources 
for this situation and gives them instructions on 
how to engage with the StopNCII image-hashing 
database, if they would like to put their content 
therein. Reddit also has a partnership with Crisis 
Text Line, which people can use to get one-to-one 
help from trained crisis counsellors. 

Source: Provided with permission from Reddit interview 
participant.  

(31) Snapchat does provide this, whereas Facebook/Instagram do not. 
(32) Snapchat and Facebook/Instagram do provide this, but X does not.
(33) Reddit is a platform that ‘hosts a variety of online communities – thousands of subreddits address topics ranging from 

books and TV shows to science and politics … Reddit was explicitly founded on the principles of free speech’, according to 
Chandrasekharan et al. So, when violative content is flagged by a community member, Reddit employs quarantining as a 
moderation strategy, helping the platform fulfil its mission to be ‘the best place online to have truly authentic conversations’, 
according to Stephen. See Chandrasekharan, E., Jhaver, S., Bruckman, A. and Gilbert, E. (2022), ‘Quarantined! Examining the 
effects of a community-wide moderation intervention on Reddit’, ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction, Vol. 29, 
No 4, pp. 1–26 (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.11483); Stephen, B. (2018), ‘Reddit updates its quarantine policy with an appeals 
process’, The Verge, 28 September (https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/28/17914240/reddit-update-quarantine-policy-
appeals-process) (as quoted in Chandrasekharan et al.). This example was chosen as Reddit employs an innovative community 
moderation mechanism.

(34) https://redditinc.com/policies/content-policy.

13

European Institute for Gender Equality 
 
Digital platform reporting and moderation in practice

It is important to support the human 
moderators who process and identify violative 
content, as they often experience psychological 
stress as a result of this work. The burden of 
viewing graphic and/or distressing content can 
cause severe strain. Digital platforms employ 
various technologies to mitigate this effect, 
and these technologies are intended to ‘spare 
the reviewers from having to view upsetting 
content’ (research interview participant). 
However, they protect moderators only to a 
certain extent, for the following reasons.

 ▪ Aspects of CVAWG and the violations that 

are interconnected with offline offences and 
offences on other platforms are frequently 
too subtle or contextual to be flagged 
by ML technologies. Therefore, human 
moderators are often tasked with the burden 
of identifying cases of CVAWG. In addition, 
views on what constitutes online hate may 
differ; it is unclear whether ‘appropriate 
training on legal thresholds for identifying 
online hate’ (35) is provided across the digital 
platforms.

 ▪ Human content moderators face significant 

challenges, as they are exposed to 
emotionally taxing content and are given 
often quite unclear guidelines. This raises 
concerns about ensuring that adequate 
support mechanisms and training from 
technology companies are provided. Little 
evidence was provided in the course of this 
study of such comprehensive support for 
moderators.

Finally, with regard to the provision of direct 
support or tailored guidance offered to 
complainants:

 ▪ it is unclear whether direct support or 

tailored guidance is offered to complainants 
as potential victims of cyber violence;

 ▪ while there are some links provided by 

platforms to suicide prevention helplines, 
very few relate specifically to GBV or 
reference specialised support services for 
victims of GBV.

Summary of the key challenges when 
combating CVAWG

Standards and trust and safety policies could 
be improved, as ‘integrating gender-based 
perspectives into policy development and 
content moderation would be appropriate 
and would promote inclusivity and enhance 
effectiveness of moderation efforts’. In 
addition, closer collaboration among platforms 
to improve policy and practice in trust and 
safety is beneficial. This has already been 

prompted by DSA regulatory requirements: 
‘The emergence of a moderation community 
and closer cooperation among platforms 
regarding moderation [was] prompted by the 
DSA.’ However, ‘further cooperation is needed 
across platforms’ to address the challenges 
they face online (36).

(35) European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2023), Online Content Moderation – Current challenges in detecting hate 
speech, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-
2023-online-content-moderation_en.pdf).

(36) Quotes in this paragraph are all from (anonymised) digital platform representatives interviewed during the course of this 

research.

14

European Institute for Gender Equality 
Summary of the key challenges when combating CVAWG

In summary, a significant set of challenges need 
to be overcome by digital platforms to 
effectively tackle CVAWG. These issues are 
summarised in Table 2. Note, however, that EIGE 
acknowledges that policies and technologies in 
the digital and social media field evolve rapidly, 
and that research in this field needs to be 
continually updated. In the final section of this 
brief, a series of key policy recommendations 
for digital platforms is provided to help them in 
addressing the challenges they face.

Table 2: Challenges to be tackled by digital platforms in the fight against CVAWG

A lack of gender focus in 
standards and trust and 
safety policies 

Data fragmentation due 
to variations in cyber 
violence definitions

Insufficient provision for 
moderation, reporting 
and response mecha-
nisms related to GBV, 
VAWG and CVAWG

Insufficient cooperation, 
transparency and collab-
orative support across 
relevant stakeholders 

• Persistence of gender-
neutral language and 
approaches in tackling 
different forms of 
violence on online 
platforms

• Lack of reference to 
relevant national 
legislation or 
international women 
and/or human rights 
treaties on GBV, CVAWG 
and VAWG

• Limited 

acknowledgement of 
gender-related and 
intersectional cyber 
violence vulnerabilities 

• Multiplicity of 

• Unclear guidelines, 

• Lack of clear and 

diverse definitions 
of CVAWG across 
platforms, hindering 
the comparability of 
data and giving rise to 
the fragmentation of 
data (*)

• Lack of homogeneity, 
hampering efforts 
to accurately 
measure CVAWG 
across jurisdictions 
and platforms and 
hampering the ability of 
users to report harmful 
behaviours

standards and support 
related specifically to 
GBV, CVAWG and VAWG

• Absence of sex-

disaggregated data 
collection at the level 
of incidents moderated 
and investigated

• Unavailability of 

harmonised standards 
to provide swift 
responses to users’ 
reports

• Lack of recognition 
that CVAWG crosses 
platforms and physical 
boundaries

publicly available data 
on the reporting of 
GBV-related violations 
and behaviour and the 
outcomes of reporting

• Insufficient willingness 
of platforms to engage 
in discussions with other 
relevant stakeholders 
about their safety 
standards and practices 
and their AI and ML 
developments

• Adequate CVAWG 

training and support 
needed for human 
content moderators 

(*) Data recorded in DSA transparency reports and data recorded by individual platforms.
NB: Evidence from EIGE’s 2024 study of online platform standards and trust and safety policies and interviews with platform 
representatives.
Source: Developed by EIGE.

15

European Institute for Gender Equality 
Recommendations for digital platforms

Recommendations for digital platforms

On addressing the challenge of 
inadequate gender focus in standards 
and trust and safety policies

Incorporate a gender-sensitive approach 
into the creation of policies and moderation 
procedures, fostering a more inclusive 
environment and improving content 
moderation.

Refer to significant legislative frameworks 
combating GBV and CVAWG, such as the 
Istanbul Convention and the VAW/DV 
directive, when developing and reviewing 
standards and trust and safety practices.

On improving provision for 
moderation, reporting and response 
mechanisms related to GBV, VAWG 
and CVAWG

Put in place user-friendly guidelines and 
mechanisms at the level of reporting and 
recording, tailored specifically to incidents of 
CVAWG (37). Ensure guidelines are language 
and context specific.

Provide for trust and safety policies and 
support that adequately acknowledge CVAWG 
and use clear and uniform terminology across 
platforms.

Implement policies and follow-up procedures 
attuned to distinct types of CVAWG and 
acknowledge intersectional cyber violence 
vulnerabilities.

Design reporting systems to permit the 
collection of sex-disaggregated and other 
relevant data.

On tackling data fragmentation 
due to variations in cyber violence 
definitions

Recognise that violence crosses boundaries. 
Facilitate the reporting of CVAWG that 
happens outside of the platform’s immediate 
scope.

Aim to employ common, harmonised 
definitions of the different forms of CVAWG, 
referring to EIGE’s publications and the 
CVAWG measurement framework developed 
in line with the VAW/DV directive.

React promptly and respond swiftly to 
reports of harmful content – for example, by 
immediately suspending potential offenders’ 
profiles and escalating the case to law 
enforcement where appropriate.

(37) Actions and penalties: the actions that platforms already take as a result of complaints depend on the nature of the 

platform and the severity of the offence; however, in most cases (including for Facebook/Instagram, TikTok, YouTube and 
Snapchat), these actions include removing the offending content and imposing some form of penalty on the account that 
shared the offending content (e.g. temporary suspension of the user’s account). However, the approaches to warning, 
suspending or terminating accounts differ slightly across the platforms examined. For example, both TikTok and YouTube 
implement a warning/strike system. However, TikTok requires that strikes be counted by category of violation in relation 
to a particular policy (e.g. bullying and harassment) in order to reach a category-specific threshold, whereas YouTube’s 
strikes are counted inclusive of all types of violative content. In addition, where required, content is reported to relevant 
law enforcement agencies by all platforms. Most platforms provide a clear means by which to appeal any penalties or 
sanctions. Note that there is no consideration of the gender dimension within the descriptions of penalties and sanctions 
researched, and no indication that tailored considerations are used in relation to CVAWG cases.

16

European Institute for Gender Equality 
Recommendations for digital platforms

On improved cooperation among 
relevant stakeholders

moderation practices, and continue to  
create partnerships for tackling CVAWG.

Collaborate further with researchers and 
contribute data, thus providing greater public 
transparency when it comes to the reporting 
and follow-up of GBV-related behaviour 
and violations. Assist in the mapping of the 
various forms of online violence.

Continue to expand cross-platform 
cooperation. Exchange best practices on 
moderating CVAWG. Work together to use 
AI responsibly and adopt gender-sensitive 

Further train and support internal platform 
stakeholders, particularly human content 
moderators, as they play a crucial role in 
evaluating and addressing such cases. 
Acknowledge the burdens of this emotionally 
taxing job, continuing to invest in AI and ML 
to support moderation efforts and lessen 
the burden of viewing harmful content while 
ensuring the gender perspective is considered.

17

European Institute for Gender Equality 
Read more about EIGE’s research  
in the field

EIGE’s previous reports and publications on CVAWG are available at:

https://eige.europa.eu/gender-based-violence/cyber-violence-against-women

https://eige.europa.eu/publications-resources/publications/combating-cyber-violence-against-
women-and-girls

https://eige.europa.eu/sites/default/files/cyber_violence_against_women_and_girls_key_
terms_and_concepts.pdf

https://eige.europa.eu/gender-statistics/dgs

https://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming?language_content_entity=en

GETTING IN TOUCH WITH THE EU

In person

All over the European Union there are hundreds of Europe Direct centres. You can find the 
address of the centre nearest you online (european-union.europa.eu/contact-eu/meet-us_en).

On the phone or in writing

Europe Direct is a service that answers your questions about the European Union. You can 
contact this service: 

— 

by freephone: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (certain operators may charge for these calls), 

— 

at the following standard number: +32 22999696, 

— 

via the following form: european-union.europa.eu/contact-eu/write-us_en.

FINDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE EU

Online

Information about the European Union in all the official languages of the EU is available on 
the Europa website (european-union.europa.eu).

EU publications

You can view or order EU publications at op.europa.eu/en/publications. Multiple copies of 
free publications can be obtained by contacting Europe Direct or your local documentation 
centre (european-union.europa.eu/contact-eu/meet-us_en).

EU law and related documents

For access to legal information from the EU, including all EU law since 1951 in all the official 
language versions, go to EUR-Lex (eur-lex.europa.eu).

EU open data

The portal data.europa.eu provides access to open datasets from the EU institutions, 
bodies and agencies. These can be downloaded and reused for free, for both commercial 
and non-commercial purposes. The portal also provides access to a wealth of datasets from 
European countries.

eige.europa.eu