UN Women’s Feminist Propaganda on X
Graph of the Week
“We need action, not reflection.” UN Women, September 23, 2025
SYNOPSIS
United Nations (UN) Women is an entity within the UN dedicated to “gender equality” and the empowerment of women. Each year, UN Women receives hundreds of millions of dollars from taxpayers of member states. On the social media platform X, UN Women is often criticized for its posts, which seem to reflect ideological bias and a lack of compassion for boys and men. The underlying cause of UN Women’s problematic posting has been suggested to be UN Women’s adherence to feminist ideology. Here, my aim was to identify rhetorical strategies used by UN Women on X and then quantify the proportion of tweets that reflect each strategy. I analyzed all 499 tweets published by UN Women on X between September 24, 2024 and September 30, 2025. The results revealed that UN Women’s X account is replete with feminist propaganda. UN Women’s propaganda strategy consists of two main domains or stages: (1) Awareness and Belief Change and (2) Action. Within these two domains, UN Women uses various propaganda techniques. Examples include Female Victim Rhetoric, Alarmist Rhetoric, Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric, Threats and Battle Rhetoric, Empowerment Rhetoric, and various forms of Solidarity and Action Conformity Rhetoric, including Bossy Karen Rhetoric, Youth Coercion, and “Calls” to Action. The goal of UN Women’s propaganda is to convince its audience of widespread victimization only for females and to increase the likelihood that its audience will take UN Women’s prescribed actions to resolve the perceived victimization. Overall, the findings show that UN Women regularly uses feminist propaganda on X. UN Women’s tweets are often inaccurate, biased, contradictory, unprofessional, overly emotional, and lacking in common decency and empathy for boys and men. At minimum, member state representatives should insist on reform at UN Women. If UN Women refuses to rid itself of its problematic feminist ideology, member states should stop funding UN Women at the earliest possible instance. Taxpayers should not be forced to fund feminist propaganda.
1. INTRODUCTION
The United Nations (UN) is an international organization of 193 member states whose stated purposes are to “maintain international peace and security,” “develop friendly relations among nations,” and “achieve international cooperation in solving international problems.” The UN consists of various departments, offices, commissions, and subsidiary organs and entities. Each of these bodies has a specific mission or portfolio. The UN entity that is “dedicated to gender equality and the empowerment of women” is UN Women.
UN Women was created in 2011 with the merger of the UN’s Division for the Advancement of Women, International Training and Research Institute for the Advancement of Women, Office of the Special Advisor on Gender Issues and Advancement of Women, and the UN Development Fund for Women. The purpose of the merger was to combine resources, mandates, and expertise to “fuel faster momentum toward women’s empowerment.”
Each year, taxpayers of UN members states send hundreds of millions of dollars to UN Women. Member states such as Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States each send about $15-20 million to UN Women every year. Between 2011-2023, UN Women received $5.3 billion in financial contributions, with 80% coming directly from member states. As UN Women is a taxpayer-funded entity, it should strive to be evidence-based, free from ideological bias, and uphold high standards of behaviour and decorum. Unfortunately, UN Women has shown repeatedly that it is unable to live up to these standards. For example, the Coalition to End Domestic Violence has criticized UN Women for ignoring data on female perpetrators of domestic violence and male victims of domestic violence, publishing reports that contain sexism and logical contradictions, publishing biased data on civilian deaths in Gaza, and not condemning violent feminist protests.
A couple of years ago, UN Women was also criticized for one of its X posts about killings of female journalists. In the tweet, shown below and available at UN Women Australia’s X account, UN Women said that “[o]f all journalists killed in 2021, 11% were women.” Then, UN Women shouted out to the cyber world, “STOP TARGETING WOMEN JOURNALISTS”.
The problem with the tweet is that it lacks logic and is devoid of empathy for men. By virtue of their 11% representation in deaths, and their much higher than 11% representation in journalism as a whole, female journalists were presumably not targeted in these killings. If any sex was “targeted,” it was men, as they made up 89% of the journalists who were killed.
The root issue at UN Women – the one that causes the entity to continually publish questionable reports and social media posts – appears to be the entity’s adherence to feminist philosophy. Then, because the UN has never created a separate entity dedicated to boys’ and men’s issues, UN Women’s narratives go unchallenged. This then creates a substantial sex bias within the UN as a whole, and I have previously quantified this bias. The current report builds on this previous work.
2. AIM
Here, my aim was to identify rhetorical strategies used by UN Women on X (@UN_Women) and then quantify the proportion of UN Women’s tweets that reflect each strategy. In other words, my aim was to quantify UN Women’s use of feminist propaganda on X. As of November 2025, UN Women’s X account had 2.2 million followers.
3. METHODS
In the current analysis, I quantified the topics of UN Women’s tweets, and I examined the rhetorical features of their communications. I analysed all 499 tweets from UN Women that were published over the one-year period between September 24, 2024 and September 30, 2025. I downloaded the tweets using the TwExtract plugin for Google Chrome. The plugin generated a spreadsheet that included the tweet text, URL, type, author, handle, and number of comments, retweets, likes, views, and bookmarks. Tweets that were retweets with no additional comment also appeared in the spreadsheet, but only as the URL. In such circumstances, I visited the URL to see the tweet that was retweeted by UN Women. I then copied and pasted the text of that tweet into the spreadsheet for analysis. I uploaded the spreadsheet below. The uploaded spreadsheet includes the raw text of the tweets and the results of my analysis. Others are welcome to re-analyse the tweets.
For the analysis, I identified the sex of the individuals or groups mentioned in the tweets, the countries or geographic regions referred to in the tweets, the topics of the tweets, and the rhetorical elements of the tweets. In the cells, a “0” indicates “no” (i.e., the topic or rhetorical element was not present in the tweet), and a “1” indicates “yes” (i.e., the topic or rhetorical element was present in the tweet). A given tweet often contained more than one topic or rhetorical element. From the rhetorical elements that I observed, I built a conceptual framework that summarizes UN Women’s use of feminist propaganda on X
4. BASIC RESULTS
4.1. Sex
I recorded the sex of the individuals or groups who were referred to by UN Women in their tweets. UN Women’s reference could have been positive, negative, or neutral in tone, and it could have been associated with any topic (e.g., disadvantage, celebration, interest). I classified a tweet as “female-only” if it referred only to girls or women. I classified a tweet as “male-only” if it referred only to boys or men. If a tweet referred to both males and females, I classified it as “both sexes.” If a tweet did not refer to any sex, I classified it as “unspecified sex.” Some tweets on “gender equality,” which did not refer to either sex, almost certainly were intended by UN Women to refer only to girls and women. Nevertheless, I conservatively classified such tweets as “unspecified sex.”
Nearly 94% of UN Women’s posts referred only to girls or women. Less than 1% referred only to boys and men, and 1.6% referred to both males and females.
4.2. Country
I recorded the country or geographic region referred to by UN Women in their tweets. The majority UN Women’s tweets (72.9%) either referred to the global community or did not refer to any country or geographic region. The countries or geographic regions that UN Women referred to most frequently were Gaza (8%), Afghanistan (5.4%), Sudan (3.6%), Ukraine (3.4%), and Lebanon (2%). These countries were referred to by UN Women within contexts of providing women with safety, aid, or work opportunities during domestic or international conflicts.
4.3. Tweet Topics
I noted 26 topics of UN Women’s tweets. The graph below displays the 26 topics and the percentage of UN Women’s tweets that referred to these topics. A given tweet might have referred to multiple topics.
The five most common topics were Gender Equality and Women’s Rights (29.7% of tweets), Violence and Women’s Safety/Protection (21.0%), War and Peace (21.0%), Women’s Leadership (9.4%), and Fund and Invest in Women (9.2%). For the current analysis, the category Violence and Women’s Safety/Protection consisted of tweets on domestic violence against women, online (“digital”) threats against women, and any tweets that contained the words “safety” or “protection.” The category War and Peace included any tweets on war and any tweets that included the word “peace.”
Example tweets on the topics of Violence and Women’s Safety/Protection, Fund and Invest in Women, and Feminism are provided below. Tweets on these and all other topics are also provided throughout the rest of the current report.
Across all tweets, UN Women’s main message was that women around the world are experiencing widespread victimization, including unequal rights, and that “gender equality” can be achieved only if women are given more money, greater political power, and further protections from perceived physical and non-physical harms.
4.3.1. Violence and Women’s Safety/Protection
Domestic violence
November 29, 2024: “Everyone should feel safe at home. Yet, every day women and girls are killed by an intimate partner or someone in their own family. Governments must invest in the prevention of gender-based violence and support services for survivors.”
Digital “violence,” threats, and safety
May 3, 2025: “Digital threats are silencing women journalists. This isn’t trolling, it’s targeted violence. On #WorldPressFreedomDay, we call for safer newsrooms, stronger platforms and action #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
Climate threats and safety
November 3, 2024: “Climate change amplifies existing gender inequalities and poses threats to women’s and girls’ livelihoods, health, and safety.”
Social protections
October 15, 2025: “2 billion women and girls have no access to ANY form of social protection. Our new report ‘World survey on the role of women in development’ looks at gender gaps in social protection, including cash benefits, unemployment, and healthcare.”
Workplace protections
May 24, 2025: “From equal pay to safe workplaces, #GenderEquality can be a reality #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
4.3.2. Fund and Invest in Women
May 15, 2025: “It’s long past time we #InvestInWomen.”
September 22, 2025: “We demand that you fund the fight for gender equality and guarantee rights #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
July 3, 2025: “Listen to our Deputy Executive Director @vanyaradzayi highlight the critical need for financing #GenderEquality and #WomensEmpowerment at #FFD4. It’s time the global financial system works for half the world’s population.”
August 30, 2025: “#Beijing30 Action Agenda calls for bold investment in girls’ access, leadership and opportunity. Let’s take bold steps #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
July 1, 2025: “Chronic underfunding, weak tracking systems, and unfair financial rules are stalling progress on #GenderEquality. At #FFD4 in Sevilla, @UN_Women urges a reset—real investment, real accountability, and real change #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
May 16, 2025: “Women’s rights are under threat. Funding cuts are pushing women’s organizations in crises settings to a breaking point. Half may shut down in 6 months. Women and girls can’t afford to lose these lifelines.”
January 17, 2025: “During crises, investing in women isn’t optional, it’s essential.”
November 22, 2024: “Women and girls bear the brunt of climate change, yet only a fraction of all climate finance is gender responsive. On Gender Day at #COP29, we’re calling for investment in feminist movements, youth leaders, and women’s rights organizations.”
November 16, 2024: “We need a major boost in funding to address women’s needs and priorities in the climate crisis. Only with fair and inclusive financing can we create lasting change for women, girls, and our planet.”
4.3.3. Feminism
June 21, 2025: “Intersectional feminism gives us a prism to see how our experiences overlap—and how our freedom depends on freedom for all… See why intersectional feminism matters…”
November 22, 2024: “On Gender Day at #COP29, we’re calling for investment in feminist movements, youth leaders, and women’s rights organizations.”
December 29, 2024: “…there is no climate justice without feminist justice.”
May 6, 2025: “Time for feminist spring cleaning! What are you throwing out?”
March 8, 2025: “For #IWD2025, an Intergenerational Dialogue brought together feminist activists & key institutions to reflect on 30 years of gender equality in Albania since the Beijing Declaration.”
5. PROPAGANDA RESULTS: AWARENESS AND BELIEF CHANGE
Propaganda is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as “[t]he systematic dissemination of information, esp. in a biased or misleading way, in order to promote a particular cause or point of view, often a political agenda.”
UN Women’s X account is replete with feminist propaganda.
In the current analysis, I identified two broad domains or stages that comprise UN Women’s feminist propaganda strategy. Within these two domains, I identified several rhetorical elements or techniques that UN Women uses in trying to achieve its audience of its aims in these two domains.
The first domain is Awareness and Belief Change. The purpose of the rhetorical elements in the Awareness and Belief Change domain is to convince the audience of widespread victimization only for females. The Awareness and Belief Change domain can be thought of as UN Women’s sales pitch to the world.
The second domain is Action. The purpose of the rhetorical elements in the Action domain is to convince the audience to act to resolve the female victimization that was proposed in the Awareness and Belief Change domain.
In the diagram below, I have outlined the conceptual framework of UN Women’s propaganda strategy. Note that some of the same rhetorical elements are used in both domains.
The bar graph below displays the rhetorical elements and the percentage of UN Women’s tweets that incorporated them. In the Awareness and Belief Change domain, the most common rhetorical elements were Female Victim Rhetoric (66.1% of tweets), Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric (20.0%), and Alarmist Rhetoric (22.8%). In the Action domain, the most common elements were General Action Rhetoric (33.4%), Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric (6.4%), Alarmist Rhetoric (41.5%), Empowerment Rhetoric (29.8%), and Solidarity and Action Conformity Rhetoric (51.9%).
5.1. FEMALE VICTIM RHETORIC
Many girls and women are victims of violence and others forms of suffering or disadvantage. Many boys and men are also victims of violence and others forms of suffering or disadvantage. Moreover, just as not all boys and men are victims of violence, suffering, or disadvantage, not all girls and women are victims of violence, suffering, or disadvantage. In other words, violence, suffering, and disadvantage are not sex-exclusive. Both sexes experience these things - sometimes in similar ways, sometimes in different ways.
The first major part UN Women’s propaganda strategy is to convince the audience of widespread victimization only for females. This is why Female Victim Rhetoric was UN Women’s most common rhetorical element. UN Women used Female Victim Rhetoric in 330 tweets (66.1%). This included tweets that specifically mentioned women being victims; it also included tweets that implied females were victims – for example, by stating that “gender equality” remains unfinished or that gender “gaps” exist. Numerous examples of Female Victim Rhetoric can be found throughout the rest of the current report.
To increase the likelihood that the audience will believe in UN Women’s proposition of widespread victimization only for females, the entity then amplifies their message by using Alarmist Rhetoric and Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric.
5.2. EXCLUSIONARY OR PREJUDICIAL RHETORIC
UN Women used Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric in the Awareness and Belief Change domain in 100 tweets (20.0%). Suppression of Male Victimization Data and War: Women Most Affected were two forms of Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric that I identified in the Awareness and Belief Change domain.
5.2.1. Suppression of Male Victimization Data
The vast majority of UN Women’s tweets exclude mention of boys and men. This is perhaps unsurprising given that the mission of UN Women is “gender equality” and the empowerment of women. Nevertheless, UN Women’s relative lack of comment on boys and men represents more than an interest in advocating for girls and women. An international, taxpayer-funded entity can still present information on boys and men in instances when doing so might be humane, scientific, or provide a larger context for understanding a topic. UN Women often compares female and male data when the results of such comparisons are perceived to benefit the story of female victimization. For example, UN Women has published tweets that include comparisons between male and female data on topics such as the gender pay gap, women’s greater amount of time spent in unpaid care work, girls dropping out of sports more often than boys, women receiving less news coverage than men, and women making up fewer parliamentarians than men. Thus, when UN Women excludes data on male victimization, it does so purposely. It does this because the absence of male data in certain instances amplifies the message of widespread victimization only for females.
Therefore, Suppression of Male Victimization Data is a specific type of Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric used by UN Women. It stems from UN Women’s ideological bias, which predisposes UN Women to either-or thinking (i.e., zero-sum thinking). Either-or thinking leads to UN Women’s odd view that men and women are combatants in life and that advocating for one sex means that one cannot simultaneously advocate for the other sex.
I identified 61 tweets (12.2%) in which UN Women presented data (not just general comments) on female victimization but did not present the comparable data on male victimization. In these tweets, UN Women often presented numbers of female victims of poverty or domestic violence. Below are several examples:
July 2, 2025: “1 in 10 women lives in extreme poverty.”
September 16, 2025: “Over 351 million. That’s how many women and girls will live in extreme poverty in 2030 if we don’t act NOW to #EndPoverty.”
July 6, 2025: “Every 10 minutes, a woman or girl is killed by an intimate partner or relative. This is UNACCEPTABLE.”
November 12, 2024: “1 in 3 women globally have faced physical or sexual violence at least once in their lifetime.”
April 11, 2025: “6 million displaced women and girls are bearing the brunt of the world’s worst humanitarian crisis after two years of relentless conflict in #Sudan.”
December 1, 2024: “4,000. That’s how many young women & girls are newly infected with #HIV EVERY WEEK around the world.”
March 14, 2025: “Over 600 million. That’s how many women and girls live near armed conflict.”
September 25, 2024: “Education is not a privilege. It is a fundamental RIGHT. Yet, 119.3 million girls are still out of school globally.”
July 26, 2025: “1 million women and girls are starving in Gaza. 1 million women and girls are starving in Gaza. 1 million women and girls are starving in Gaza.”
5.2.2. War: Women Most Affected
A subtype of Suppression of Male Victimization Data is War: Women Most Affected. War: Women Most Affected is an element of feminist propaganda that suggests that women are the sex most impacted by war or similar conflicts.
Many women are, of course, impacted by war. But to claim that women are the sex most or disproportionately impacted by war is absurd. Men, as the primary combatants in war, are much more likely than women to die and be physically injured during war. Being killed or physical maimed is a higher degree of victimization than being hungry, homeless, or temporarily out of a job. Moreover, if UN Women were to rid itself of its either-or thinking, the entity could easily mention the unique ways that both sexes are victims in war. This would be the most empathetic and decent thing that UN Women could do.
UN Women used War: Women Most Affected in 66 tweets (13.2%). One example comes from October 7, 2024, when UN Women purposely left out any mention of male victims in relation to the Israel-Hamas War. In the tweet, which is shown below, UN Women displayed a shocking absence of professionalism, decency, and empathy. UN Women stated that in Israel, “women and children were killed abducted, and assaulted,” while not mentioning the male victims in Israel. UN Women then said that in Gaza “women” were “injured, assaulted, illegally detained and displaced.” Again, there was no mention of any non-combatant males who experienced similar fates. Finally, UN Women stated that “[h]umanitarian aid must be allowed to reach all women and girls in need immediately” (see also Section 6.3.1. Women Prioritized in Emergencies).
Below are additional sample tweets from UN Women that exhibit their use of War: Women Most Affected propaganda:
Ukraine
July 16, 2024: “3 years into the full-scale invasion of #Ukraine, women and girls continue to bear the heaviest burden.”
February 16, 2025: “3 years into Russia’s full-scale invasion of #Ukraine, women and girls continue to be disproportionately impacted.”
February 24, 2025: “3 years into Russia’s full-scale invasion of #Ukraine, an entire generation of Ukrainian women has been pushed backwards. More than ever, we need women’s full engagement to rebuild a gender-equal Ukraine.”
December 18, 2024: “When blackouts hit #Ukraine, women shoulder the heaviest burden.”
February 22, 2025: “The full-scale invasion of #Ukraine continues to take an unimaginable toll on the lives of women and girls. There can be no lasting peace in Ukraine without women at the table.”
Sudan
April 11, 2025: “6 million displaced women and girls are bearing the brunt of the world’s worst humanitarian crisis after two years of relentless conflict in #Sudan.”
April 17, 2025: “Women in #Sudan are bearing the brunt of unimaginable violence.”
Gaza
March 20, 2025: “@UN_Women is deeply alarmed by the intensified attacks on #Gaza, overwhelmingly killing women& children.”
November 21, 2024: “70,000 women in #Gaza will face catastrophic food insecurity in the next two months. This war MUST end. Our latest data highlights the unprecedented scale of this devastating war on women and girls…”
July 29, 2025: “UN Women joins the @UN and humanitarian actors in calling for an end to the horror for women and girls in #Gaza.”
October 19, 2024: “Women and girls in #Gaza are enduring unbearable suffering…This war on women needs to stop NOW!”
Yemen
June 6, 2025: “Airstrikes in Yemen are pushing women and girls to the brink. Take a closer look at the spiraling consequences of recent bombardments on women’s survival, well-being, and rights…”
Haiti
May 3, 2025: “Escalating gang violence in #Haiti is landing hardest on women and girls.”
Miscellaneous
February 23, 2025: “Women and girls are often the first victims of conflict, but they are ALWAYS our greatest hope for peace and recovery.”
May 23, 2025: “In conflicts worldwide, women and girls are not just caught in the crossfire—they’re deliberately targeted.”
Tone-deafness
Tone-deafness is a term used to describe a person or group who is oblivious to how insensitive or inappropriate their comments are. UN Women sometimes exhibits tone-deafness in their communications. This tone-deafness stems from UN Women operating in a feminist echo chamber.
The tweet referenced earlier about the “targeting of female journalists” is an example of tone-deafness. Below is a more recent example. It reflects the lack of empathy and understanding of the male experience present in War: Women Most Affected. The tweet, which was published on February 24, 2025, reads:
“During 3 years of the full-scale Russian invasion, the percentage of female entrepreneurs in #Ukraine rose from 40% to 61%. @epicentrk_ua, a proud signatory of #WEPs in Ukraine, is dedicated to supporting women’s entrepreneurship.”
The reason that this tweet represents tone-deafness is because an increased number of female entrepreneurs in Ukraine is hardly something to brag about given the larger story of the war, which includes hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded male soldiers. In fact, the large number of dead and wounded male soldiers might be one factor that contributes to increased numbers of female entrepreneurs.
Contradictory Messaging
A final observation, which is related to War: Women Most Affected, is UN Women’s use of contradictory messaging. Contradictory messaging is the result of UN Women wanting to frame women as victims in some instances and virtuous leaders in other instances. The decision on which narrative to put forward is determined by what will be most practically useful to UN Women in a given moment. In multiple tweets, UN Women said that women bear the heaviest burden and are the primary victims of the war in Ukraine. Yet, UN Women also stated that Ukrainian women are “leading through” the war, “driving the humanitarian response and recovery,” and are at the “forefront of resistance and resilience.” These statements are contradictory because typically if a group is truly experiencing widespread victimization, then they cannot possibly be simultaneously leading much of anything.
5.3. ALARMIST RHETORIC
Alarmist Rhetoric is a propaganda strategy used to induce fear, worry, or anxiety in an audience. The purpose of heightening the levels of these psychological states is to make an audience more compelled to believe in a statement and then respond in a way that is prescribed by the propogandist. Language that communicates alarm is appropriate when it is used at a level congruent with the magnitude and temporal features of an actual threat. Thus, the distinguishing feature of Alarmist Rhetoric used by the propogandist is that the propogandist communicates a level of threat that is incongruent with reality.
UN Women used Alarmist Rhetoric regularly in the Awareness and Belief Change domain (114 tweets, 22.8%). I identified two elements of Alarmist Rhetoric used by UN Women in the Awareness and Belief Change domain (Threats and Battle Rhetoric and Exaggeration Rhetoric) and two elements of Alarmist Rhetoric used by UN Women in the Action domain (Threats and Battle Rhetoric and Urgency Cues).
5.3.1. Threats and Battle Rhetoric
In the Awareness and Belief domain, UN Women tries to convince its audience that widespread female victimization is caused by current threats, dangers, emergencies, or enemies. I call this Threats and Battle Rhetoric. Threats and Battle Rhetoric involves presenting a threat and then communicating that the threat is of significant and/or immediate concern.
In the tally for this category, I did not include “threats” such as bias, discrimination, stigma, stereotypes, or misogyny, which were mentioned in 8.6% of UN Women’s tweets. Those types of “threats” are often not communicated in an alarmist manner. Instead, those threats are typically communicated in a way that suggests that they are always present at certain constant levels. Also, though specific types of threats were mentioned in many tweets (e.g., violence, starvation), I did not include those tweets in this tally unless those tweets also included some of the alarmist or battle-related words shown below.
In the Awareness and Belief Change domain, UN Women used Threats and Battle Rhetoric in 103 tweets (20.6%). I identified four types of Threats and Battle Rhetoric in these tweets.
The first type communicated the existence a perceived threat, crisis, or emergency. Common words and phrases included:
· “crisis” (28 tweets, 5.6%)
· “threat” or “under threat” (16 tweets, 3.2%)
· “under attack”
· “emergency”
· “horror”
May 16, 2025: “Women’s rights are under threat. Funding cuts are pushing women’s organizations in crises settings to a breaking point.”
September 11, 2025: “Violence against women is a global emergency.”
May 4, 2025: “In a year of pushback and crises like no other, let’s push forward to create a world where EVERYONE can enjoy equal rights and equal opportunities.”
March 25, 2025: “More violence. Rights under attack. Laws rolling back. Not on our watch…”
April 4, 2025: “10.4 million women and girls in #Myanmar are now facing a crisis within a crisis. The earthquake has worsened an already dire situation—from collapsing healthcare to rising risks of violence.”
July 31, 2025: “One million women and girls in Gaza are facing mass starvation, violence and abuse. @UN_Women joins the call of the @UN and humanitarian organizations to put an end to this horror.”
The second type communicated the idea of losing ground in the battle against the threat. Examples included:
· “backlash”
· “resistance” (to gender equality)
· “challenges progress”
· “reversed”
· “setback”
· “step back”
· “stalled”
· “pushed backward”
March 11, 2025: “No more setbacks! Women’s & girls’ rights are facing unprecedented threats worldwide. 30 years after the Beijing Declaration, the backlash on women’s rights is growing.”
September 26, 2025: “Gender equality continues to face resistance.”
July 1, 2025: “#GenderEquality is under threat. 1 in 4 countries saw backlash on women’s rights in 2024.”
February 17, 2025: “Our world is failing women and girls. 30 years after the Beijing Declaration, the backlash on women’s rights is growing.”
June 7, 2025: ““Red pill” narratives are central to the #manosphere and challenges progress on #GenderEquality.”
March 18, 2025: “Time moves forward. So should our rights. Yet, for many women & girls, their rights are being pushed backward.”
The third type communicated fear in losing ground in the battle. Examples included:
· “slipping away”
· “falling behind”
· “left behind”
· “abandon”
· “fear”
· “risk”
· “dire”
January 24, 2025: “But without action, women will be left behind.”
February 7, 2025: “Women’s rights = human rights. But at this pace, that promise is slipping away. The stakes are higher than ever. We can’t afford another step back.”
February 15, 2025: “The Beijing Declaration is the world’s boldest plan for #GenderEquality, tackling jobs, peace, violence & power since 1995. 2025 marks #Beijing30, but we’re falling behind.”
March 31, 2025: “No girl should ever live in fear. Yet, 50 million girls alive today have experienced sexual violence.”
May 13, 2025: “A new @UN_Women report reveals a dire warning: Half of women’s organizations in humanitarian crisis zones may shut down in 6 months due to funding cuts.”
The fourth type communicated the stage between threat awareness and action. Examples included:
· at a “crossroads”
· at a “turning point”
· “key moment”
· “the moment”
· “defining moment”
July 15, 2025: “We’re at a turning point for #GenderEquality.”
April 6, 2025: “2025 is our turning point. We refuse to step back—we march forward.”
September 28, 2025: “A girl born today arrives at a crossroads in history. We can either choose a world where she’s trapped in poverty or a world that paves the way for her future.”
December 25, 2024: “As we mark #Beijing30, 2025 is the key moment to advance women’s rights.”
July 23, 2025: “2025 is a defining moment for #GenderEquality.”
5.3.1.a. Manosphere Identified as an Enemy
UN Women has proposed many different enemies that it believes threaten “gender equality.” These enemies include plastic pollution, climate change, global warming, biodiversity, natural disasters, financial systems, artificial intelligence (AI), the internet, war, etc.
In 2025, UN Women took the unprecedented step in also naming certain men’s groups as a threat to “gender equality” and UN Women’s agenda. Between May 31 and June 26 2025, UN Women published a series of tweets, all shown below, identifying the “manosphere,” “incels,” “red pill” culture, and “men’s rights” activists as “harmful” and promoters of “misogyny.” UN Women was rightly criticized by various commenters on X for their mischaracterizations of these groups.
May 31, 2025: “Ever heard of the “manosphere“? It’s a growing corner of the digital world that promotes narrow views of masculinity—often at the expense of #GenderEquality. Learn more about the #manosphere and why you should care about its harmful impact…”
June 3, 2025: “Incels believe women owe them sex—and they’re not just ranting online. This toxic culture has been linked to real world violence. We need to address how incel culture and the #manosphere are spreading misogyny online and offline.”
June 7, 2025: “Do you know what it means to be “redpilled”? It’s the belief that society favors women over men—a view that fuels harmful gender narratives. “Red pill” narratives are central to the #manosphere and challenges progress on #GenderEquality.”
June 15, 2025: “Men’s rights groups say they support men—but often blame #feminism for male “disadvantage,” framing men as victims of #equality. See how they fit into the #manosphere…”
June 26, 2025: “The #manosphere is shaping how young men see themselves and others. From dating advice to crypto tips, boys and men are being drawn into online communities that promote misogyny and reject #GenderEquality.”
5.3.1.b. Cheap Shot Fired on Father’s Day
Most of UN Women’s tweets against men’s groups were published in June of 2025. June is recognized by many organizations as Men’s Health Month, and Father’s Day is observed on June 15. On June 15, around noon, UN Women published a tweet that celebrated dads, but with a feminist twist that rendered the tweet half-hearted (tweet on right below). Worse yet, earlier the same day, UN Women published its misguided tweet on “men’s rights groups” (tweet on left below). UN Women’s decision to publish its misguided critique of men’s groups on Father’s Day, and the decision to critique men’s groups throughout Men’s Health Month, may not have been incidental. As seen throughout the current report, UN Women repeatedly demonstrates poor decorum and lack common decency in its social media activity.
5.3.1.c. Threat-Coupling for Emotional Leverage
UN Women also couples threats to magnify the perceived level of female victimization. This strategy involves taking one non-specific threat (e.g., war, climate, natural disaster) and coupling it with another non-specific threat. Or, it involves taking one non-specific threat and coupling it with existing “gender inequalities.” For example, in the tweets below, UN Women claimed that the “climate crisis” magnifies “gender inequalities.” A total of seven tweets (1.4%), all shown below, made this or a similar claim.
November 3, 2024: “Climate change amplifies existing gender inequalities and poses threats to women’s and girls’ livelihoods, health, and safety.”
November 20, 2024: “The climate crisis is NOT gender-neutral. It amplifies existing gender inequalities, threatening women’s and girls’ livelihoods, health and safety.”
November 22, 2024: “Women and girls bear the brunt of climate change, yet only a fraction of all climate finance is gender responsive.”
April 23, 2025: “The climate crisis is not gender-neutral. It amplifies existing gender inequalities and poses threats to women’s livelihoods, health, and safety. This #EarthDay, see how gender inequality and climate change are connected…”
April 7, 2025: “A warming planet is a threat to health - including maternal health. See how women are disproportionately impacted by climate change, and join the call for more sustainable climate solutions for #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
May 23, 2025: “Biodiversity loss isn’t gender-neutral. Women and girls in rural areas are hit hardest, as their lives and livelihoods depend on natural resources.”
June 6, 2025: “Plastic pollution is not gender-neutral.”
UN Women also coupled non-specific threats to magnify the level of alarmism and create additional emotional leverage for convincing the audience of female victimization. UN Women did this for pairings of topics like war, natural disasters, domestic violence, food insecurity, and healthcare. For example, on April 4, 2025, UN Women stated “10.4 million women and girls in #Myanmar are now facing a crisis within a crisis. The earthquake has worsened an already dire situation—from collapsing healthcare to rising risks of violence.”
5.3.2. Exaggeration Rhetoric
Another form of Alarmist Rhetoric that UN Women uses in the Awareness and Belief domain is Exaggeration Rhetoric. Exaggeration Rhetoric is often hyperbole. However, with UN Women, the difference between hyperbole and literal speech is sometimes difficult to discern, because their literal speech is often illogical or otherwise disconnected from reality. Either way, Exaggeration Rhetoric is part of UN Women’s propaganda strategy.
Exaggeration Rhetoric involves overstating the results or consequences of something. UN Women used Exaggeration Rhetoric to overstate the number of female victims. For example, in multiple tweets, UN Women stated that all girls and women are being failed by society and that nowhere in the world is safe for girls and women.
Such claims are untrue. Vast numbers of girls and women around the world live relatively safe lives and have just as much opportunity an access to the necessities of life (e.g., food, education, employment, housing) as boys and men.
UN Women used Exaggeration Rhetoric in 17 tweets (3.4%) in the Awareness and Belief domain. Examples tweets are provided below:
World is Failing Girls and Women
February 17, 2025: “Our world is failing women and girls.”
September 11, 2025: “The world is failing women and girls — but change is possible.”
September 22, 2025: “Dear World Leaders, You’re failing half the world’s population. No #GenderEquality target is on track…”
July 3, 2025: “It’s time the global financial system works for half the world’s population.”
September 24, 2025: “30 years. Billions of stories. But women remain almost invisible.”
No Country has Achieved Gender Equality
September 23, 2025: “No nation has achieved full equality for women & girls.”
January 12, 2025: “It’s 2025 and no country has achieved #GenderEquality, nor is close to it.”
Nowhere is Safe for Girls and Women
April 18, 2025: “Femicide affects women and girls in EVERY corner of the globe.”
September 25, 2025: “In every corner of the globe, women and girls are fighting for their rights.”
September 23, 2025: “Sustainable peace is impossible while half of humanity’s population is silenced or targeted with violence.”
Either-Or
September 28, 2025: “A girl born today arrives at a crossroads in history. We can either choose a world where she’s trapped in poverty or a world that paves the way for her future. The choice is ours.”
June 4, 2025: “Women and girls in #Gaza face an unbearable choice: Die of starvation or die trying to find food.”
Of note, UN Women also uses Exaggeration Rhetoric outside of the Alarmist Rhetoric presented above. UN Women’s use of Exaggeration Rhetoric also includes statements that exude infallible certainty (e.g., “Behind every inspiring woman is an inspiring teacher”) or are unrealistic, untestable, or oversimplify nuance or contextual factors related to a topic (“Women and girls are unstoppable”, “Women can do…anything,” “women can do EVERYTHING,” “Any job is a woman’s job). Tweets that included this form of Exaggeration Rhetoric were not included in the above tally, because the above tally was limited to examples of exaggeration of female victimization.
6. PROPAGANDA RESULTS: ACTION
In the Action domain, UN Women’s purpose is to convince the audience to act to correct the female victimization that was presented in the Awareness and Belief Change domain. UN Women uses several techniques to try increase the audience’s likelihood of acting as directed. These techniques include General Action Rhetoric, Alarmist Rhetoric, Exclusionary and Prejudicial Rhetoric, Empowerment Rhetoric, and Solidarity and Action Conformity Rhetoric.
6.1. GENERAL ACTION RHETORIC
In the current analysis, General Action Rhetoric referred to the direct use of the following action-related words: “act,” “action,” “activist,” and “activism.” Many tweets also included actions that were specifically-named, but those tweets were only included in the General Action Rhetoric category if they also included one of the four previously mentioned words. UN Women used General Action Rhetoric in 167 tweets (33.4%). Below are some examples:
November 1, 2024: “COMING SOON: #16Days of activism against gender-based violence starts on 25 November.”
September 18, 2025: “Women leaders are #RedefiningLeadership—driving change from politics to activism to everyday courage.”
September 23, 2025: “We need action, not reflection.”
September 25, 2025: “Progress on women’s rights has been too slow. But there’s a way forward. The #Beijing30 ActionAgenda is our global blueprint for action.”
July 15, 2025: “We’re at a turning point for #GenderEquality. At #HLPF 2025, with #SDG5 under review and #Beijing30 on the agenda, the world must act boldly #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
6.2. ALARMIST RHETORIC
UN Women used Alarmist Rhetoric in the Action domain in 139 tweets (27.8%), inclusive of Urgency Cues and Threats and Battle Rhetoric.
6.2.1. Urgency Cues
As shown earlier, Alarmist Rhetoric was regularly used by UN Women in the Awareness and Belief Change domain. However, UN Women also used Alarmist Rhetoric in the Action Domain. Specifically, UN Women used Urgency Cues.
Urgency Cues are words or phrases that try to decrease the time between audience deliberation and audience action. Whereas Alarmist Rhetoric is intended to grab the attention of the audience to make them aware of a problem, Urgency Cues are used to get the audience to act on the problem quickly. In other words, Urgency Cues have a time or temporal component to them.
UN Women used Urgency Cues in 59 tweets (11.8%). The Urgency Cues most commonly used by UN Women are listed below, with example tweets also provided:
· “urgent” (16 tweets, 3.2%)
· “now,” “NOW,” or “act now” (23 tweets, 4.6%)
· “immediate”
· “can’t wait”
· “it’s time”
September 29, 2025: “#GenderEquality can’t wait.”
September 28, 2024: “Women need a de-escalation and a ceasefire now.”
September 28, 2025: “A girl born today arrives at a crossroads in history…See why NOW is the time to invest in girls’ future.”
January 28, 2025: “We need fully funded national plans to end violence against women, NOW. There is #NoExcuse for inaction.”
December 5, 2024: “When governments prioritize women’s safety, violence drops. We need action NOW. #NoExcuse Safety can’t wait.”
September 19, 2025: “This #EqualPayDay, see why the time to close the gender pay gap #ForAllWomenAndGirls is now…”
July 10, 2025: “As leaders gather at the #AIForGood Summit, now’s the time to push for tech that drives #GenderEquality.”
May 16, 2025: “Women’s rights are under threat. Funding cuts are pushing women’s organizations in crises settings to a breaking point. Half may shut down in 6 months. Women and girls can’t afford to lose these lifelines. Join the urgent call for sustained funding…”
October 24, 2024: “Violations of women’s rights in conflict zones are intensifying, leaving women and girls to face devastating impacts. Urgent action is needed to protect decades of progress.”
September 16, 2025: “Over 351 million. That’s how many women and girls will live in extreme poverty in 2030 if we don’t act NOW to #EndPoverty.”
July 2, 2025: “1 in 10 women lives in extreme poverty. At this rate, we’re 137 years from ending it. It’s time to act.”
September 3, 2025: “For more than 500 days, women and girls in #Sudan’s El Fasher city have endured siege, starvation, and sexual violence. The world cannot remain silent. The time to act is now.”
August 25, 2025: “Women and girls in #Gaza are out of basic supplies. A woman told us, “we had to mix wheat flour with animal fodder.” We demand full humanitarian access, release of all hostages, and an immediate ceasefire.
October 22, 2025: “The situation in North #Gaza is dire. Women and girls are trapped and urgently need life-saving assistance. They cannot wait. They need food, water, and medicine now. Humanitarian aid must be allowed in immediately.”
6.2.2. Threats and Battle Rhetoric
I identified two types of Threats and Battle Rhetoric in the Action domain. In total, 88 of UN Women’s tweets (17.2%) included Threats and Battle Rhetoric in the Action domain. The two types of Threats and Battle Rhetoric that I identified were Breadcrumbing (for Troop Morale) and Fight Rhetoric.
6.2.2.a. Breadcrumbing (for Troop Morale)
Breadcrumbing occurs when an entity offers an audience a small reward – often the minimal level of sustenance required for survival (i.e., a crumb) – to keep the audience engaged and motivated to keep acting in a prescribed way. UN Women uses Breadcrumbing to keep the morale of its feminist foot soldiers high enough to keep them pursing “gender equality.”
UN Women’s Breadcrumbing involves informing the audience that some progress toward “gender equality” has been made (i.e., giving the audience the crumb), but then informing the audience that the goal has not been fully achieved. By giving the audience a crumb, UN Women hopes that the audience will continue to act in the way prescribed by UN Women. UN Women’s Breadcrumbing Rhetoric typically reads something like: “progress has been made, but…”
UN Women used Breadcrumbing in 12 tweets (2.4%). Examples are provided below:
February 6, 2025: “Progress has been made, but we’re not done. Let’s keep pushing…”
May 11, 2025: “30 years ago, the world committed to #GenderEquality. Today, that goal is within reach—but only if we keep pushing forward.”
September 11, 2025: “The world is failing women and girls — but change is possible.”
June 28, 2025: “We’ve come far, but #GenderEquality isn’t a reality.”
March 6, 2025: “Progress is real, but the fight isn’t over.”
March 11, 2025: “…the promise of gender equality remains unfulfilled. 2025 must be the turning point…”
September 24, 2025: “#GenderEquality remains unfinished business—and the greatest untapped opportunity. @UN_Women’s new report shows that while there is progress on gender equality in the private sector, we must do better #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
Of note, in its use of Breadcrumbing, UN Women has sometimes communicated contradictory messages about whether the world is close to achieving “gender equality.” In a tweet from May 11, 2025, UN Women said that the goal of gender equality is “within reach.” However, in a tweet from January 19, 2025, UN Women said that “[t]he distance to gender equality is long.” Moreover, though not quantified in the current analysis, UN Women’s Breadcrumbing is likely associated with the deceitful tactic of moving the goal posts away from the audience as progress on a goal is made. A strategy of moving the goal posts would be helpful to UN Women because it would justify the entity’s continued existence.
6.2.2.b. Fight Rhetoric
Fight Rhetoric in the Action domain is the natural response to the Threats and Battle Rhetoric presented by UN Women in the Awareness and Belief Change domain. Women, according to UN Women, are in a struggle for their rights and thus must fight back. UN Women used Fight Rhetoric in 81 tweets (16.2%). The words and phrases most commonly used by UN Women are listed below, with example tweets also provided:
· “fight” (18 tweets, 3.6%)
· “battle”
· “struggle”
· “tackle”
· “push”
· “push forward”
· “march forward”
· “move forward”
· “the way forward”
· “never give up”
· “never back down”
· “no steps back”
· “resist” or “resistance”
· “weapon”
· “revolution”
· “front lines”
· “pay the ultimate price”
· “stand up”
· “speak up”
· “step up”
September 25, 2025: “In every corner of the globe, women and girls are fighting for their rights.”
July 11, 2025: “Ukrainian women are at the front lines of resistance and recovery.”
September 23, 2025: “The revolution remains unfinished… We will never stop fighting #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
March 17, 2025: “The backlash against women’s human rights is not new. Each hard-won gain has been the result of battles fought by feminists since before our time.”
May 4, 2025: “In a year of pushback and crises like no other, let’s push forward to create a world where EVERYONE can enjoy equal rights and equal opportunities. #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
March 16, 2025: “Let’s march forward on #CSW69 and every day to fund, protect, and support women-led peace efforts.”
September 18, 2025: “The #Beijing30 Action Agenda is our shared roadmap—to march forward and take NO STEPS BACK.”
July 2, 2025: “15 years ago, @UN_Women was created. Today, we continue to stand up for the rights, equality, and empowerment of the world’s 4 billion women and girls. We will never back down. We will never give up.”
October 30, 2025: “They defend our planet. They protect our future. They risk everything Yet too often, women environmental defenders pay the ultimate price for doing so.”
[NB. The phrase “pay the ultimate price” has historically been used to describe soldiers who have lost their lives during war (i.e., paid the ultimate price). Most soldiers who have died in war throughout history have been men. UN Women minimizes this historical aspect of the male experience when it says the women “pay the ultimate price” in trying to protect the environment.]
6.3. EXCLUSIONARY OR PREJUDICIAL RHETORIC
UN Women’s focus on girls and women is unsurprising given UN Women’s mission. Nevertheless, as mentioned earlier, UN Women’s relative lack of comment on boys and men represents more than a significant interest in advocating for girls and women. It reflects an entity that is so driven by feminist ideology that it publishes statements that reflect misandry or sex discrimination against males.
Earlier, I presented evidence that UN Women uses Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric in the Awareness and Belief Change domain. UN Women also used Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric in the Action domain. I identified two different types of this rhetoric in the Action domain. The first type is Women Prioritized in Emergencies Rhetoric. The second type is Women are the Future, Better, and Key to Peace Rhetoric. UN Women used one or both of these Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric techniques in 32 tweets (6.4%).
6.3.1. Women Prioritized in Emergencies
In Women Prioritized in Emergencies, UN Women states explicitly their position that girls and women ought to be “prioritized” over boys and men during emergencies. UN Women’s position represents overt sex discrimination and a human rights violation, because medical care and other forms of aid ought to be based on medical need not sex.
UN Women used Women Prioritized in Emergencies in 9 tweets (1.8%). Importantly, these tweets only represent those in which UN Women explicitly declared that girls and women should be prioritized in emergency responses. One can also make the argument that this position was communicated by UN Women in many other tweets. Also, though not an emergency in the same sense as war and natural disasters, I included a tweet by UN Women on HIV in this tally. This tweet, and other examples of UN Women’s use of Women Prioritized in Emergencies, are provided below.
September 3, 2025: From urgent assistance and care to safe shelter and protection, @UN_Women urges local and international responders to ensure women and girls are prioritised in the response to the earthquake in #Afghanistan.
March 31, 2025: “We’re working with partners to prioritize the needs of women & girls in the response [to the earthquake in Myanmar].” [NB. This is a retweet from the UN Women national committee in Myanmar.]
December 1, 2024: “4,000 That’s how many young women & girls are newly infected with #HIV EVERY WEEK around the world. To end the HIV epidemic, we must prioritize their rights, health, & agency.”
May 24, 2025: “There is no pathway to peace that doesn’t begin with the protection of women and girls.”
November 16, 2024: “We need a major boost in funding to address women’s needs and priorities in the climate crisis.”
December 5, 2024: “Countries enacting domestic violence laws, have lower rates of intimate partner violence than those without. The message is clear: When governments prioritize women’s safety, violence drops.”
6.3.2. Women are the Future, Better, and Key to Peace
UN Women also engages in a form of Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric that I call Women are the Future, Better, and Key to Peace. Statements made via this rhetorical strategy project a belief that “the future is female,” with boys and men playing little or no meaningful role in the future. Statements in this propaganda strategy also reflect a belief that increased representations of women in positions of power, qua woman, are better for seemingly any societal outcome, including the establishment of world peace. These statements often imply that men are somehow automatically deficient or unable to accomplish certain outcomes. For example, when UN Women said, “When women lead, progress follows!”, this implied that when men lead, progress does not follow. Or, when UN Women said that “When women advance, innovate, and lead, everyone moves forward”, this implied that when men advance, innovate, and lead that not everyone moves forward and that women somehow are better in this regard.
The fundamental error made by UN Women when it publishes these types of statements is either-or thinking – for example, that the future is one sex or the other. Moreover, to appreciate how prejudicial many of these statements by UN Women are, one only needs to imagine the public outcry if the same statements were made with the sexes reversed.
In total, UN Women used Women are the Future, Better, and Key to Peace Rhetoric in 24 tweets (4.8%). Example tweets are provided below:
Women are the Future
September 30, 2025: “…investing in women and girls is the smartest choice we can make”
March 4, 2025: “Young women and adolescent girls are not just the future – they are the present.”
Women are Better
March 31, 2025: “More women leaders = Better future #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
March 21, 2025: “When women lead, progress follows!”
April 5, 2025: “When women advance, innovate, and lead, everyone moves forward.”
June 6, 2025: “…it’s time to let women lead the solutions to #BeatPlasticPollution.”
June 24, 2025: “we call for gender parity in politics to achieve an inclusive future #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
Women are the Key to Peace
February 22, 2025: “There can be no lasting peace in Ukraine without women at the table.”
January 31, 2025: “The world needs peace and peace need women. Women’s participation in the peace processes increases the likelihood of reaching lasting peace and achieving the #GlobalGoals.”
6.4. EMPOWERMENT LANGUAGE
Empowerment Rhetoric involves the use of words or phrases that are intended to boost confidence or self-esteem, with the ultimate aim of increasing the likelihood of action. UN Women used Empowerment Rhetoric in 149 tweets (29.8%).
Sometimes, Empowerment Rhetoric involved direct use of the words “power” and “empower” or their derivatives (e.g., “powerful,” “empowerment”). I have called this General Empowerment Rhetoric.
Sometimes, Empowerment Rhetoric involved use of the word “bold” to communicate that an action was particularly risky or impressive. I have called this “Bold” Action Rhetoric.
Sometimes, Empowerment Rhetoric highlighted positive traits or characteristics of women. The purpose of highlighting these traits or characteristics is presumably to increase audience confidence and likelihood of action. I have called this strategy Virtuous Woman Rhetoric. Often, Virtuous Woman Rhetoric centres around the idea of women being leaders. Example words used in Virtuous Woman Rhetoric include: “brave,” “brilliant,” “courage,” “strength,” “resilience,” “inspiring,” “fearless,” “fierce,” “unstoppable,” “breaking stereotypes,” “breaking barriers,” and “work tirelessly.” Finally, other examples of Empowerment Rhetoric included use of assertive statements that reassure the audience of female ability (e.g., “Any job is a woman’s job.”).
6.4.1. General Empowerment Rhetoric
UN Women used general Empowerment Rhetoric in 57 tweets (11.4%). Examples are provided below:
November 5, 2024: “Women and girls can do EVERYTHING when they have access to education. Even the sky is not the limit. Let us empower them to reach their full potential.”
March 2, 2025: “Let’s march forward on March 8 and every day for rights, equality & empowerment#ForAllWomenAndGirls”
December 19, 2024: “Women and girls make up roughly half of all international migrants. Yet, safe migration remains out of reach for many. This #MigrantsDay and every day, let’s make #EveryStep of the migration journey empowering for all women and girls.”
April 8, 2025: “Sport isn’t just a game — it’s a force for empowering women, uplifting girls, and transforming society.”
6.4.2. “Bold” Action Rhetoric
UN Women used “Bold” Action Rhetoric in 11 tweets (2.2%). Examples are provided below:
June 30, 2025: “The world’s financial system must deliver #ForAllWomenAndGirls. At #FFD4, @UN_Women calls for bold action to close the $420B gender financing gap. Gender equality isn’t just a goal—it’s an investment in our future.”
July 15, 2025: “We’re at a turning point for #GenderEquality. At #HLPF 2025, with #SDG5 under review and #Beijing30 on the agenda, the world must act boldly #ForAllWomenAndGirls. We have 5 years left—and one chance.”
February 15, 2025: “The Beijing Declaration is the world’s boldest plan for #GenderEquality, tackling jobs, peace, violence & power since 1995.”
6.4.3. Virtuous Woman Rhetoric
UN Women used Virtuous Woman Rhetoric in 78 tweets (15.6%). Examples are provided below:
September 30, 2025: “Women and girls worldwide are showing unstoppable courage and calling on us to match their ambition with action. Actor, activist and @UN_Women Goodwill Ambassador @DanaiGurira shares why investing in women and girls is the smartest choice we can make.
November 30, 2025: “They’re brave, brilliant, critical. Women human rights defenders stand at the forefront of global progress. We stand in solidarity with them today & every day.”
6.5. SOLIDARITY AND ACTION CONFORMITY RHETORIC
Solidarity means being united for a common a purpose. UN Women states or implies that solidarity is necessary for achieving its aims.
In the current analysis, I identified six rhetoric elements in the Action domain. I call this group of elements Solidarity and Action Conformity Rhetoric. The six elements are: (1) General Solidarity Rhetoric; (2) Bossy Karen Rhetoric; (3) No Debate Rhetoric; (4) Youth Coercion; (5) Intersectional Allies; and (6) “Call” to Action. The overriding purpose of these six rhetorical elements is to maximize the number of action allies and ensure that all allies conform to the same beliefs and actions, as dictated by the propagandist. UN Women used Solidarity and Action Conformity Rhetoric in 259 tweets (51.9%).
6.5.1. General Solidarity Rhetoric
The first element of UN Women’s Solidarity Rhetoric and Action Conformity Rhetoric was their direct use of the word “solidarity” or other words that similarly reflect a desire for unity toward a given action. I have called this category of words and phrases General Solidarity Rhetoric. The most frequently used words and phrases in this rhetorical category included:
· “solidarity” (12 tweets, 2.4%)
· “unite” (7 tweets, 1.4%)
· “together” (12 tweets, 2.4%)
· “stand with” (12 tweets, 2.4%)
UN Women used General Solidarity Rhetoric in 44 tweets (8.8%). Example tweets are provided below:
November 1, 2024: “Let’s UNITE to end violence against women.”
December 2, 2024: “Women with disabilities face higher rates of intimate partner violence than those without. We mustunite to build a world free from violence for ALL.”
June 19, 2025: “Together, we’re driving meaningful change.”
June 20, 2025: “Together we move forward—with clarity, courage and a shared purpose to deliver #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
March 12, 2025: “Together, we move forward toward a just and equal future #ForAllWomenAndGirls”
August 15, 2025: “Stand with Afghan women.”
June 28, 2025: “We continue to stand in solidarity with Afghan women and girls.”
November 30, 2024: “Women human rights defenders stand at the forefront of global progress. We stand in solidaritywith them today & every day.”
December 20, 2024: “It’s International Human #SolidarityDay! Let us: Celebrate our unity in diversity; Raise awareness of the importance of solidarity; Encourage debate on the ways to promote solidarity for the achievement of the #GlobalGoals”
6.5.2. Bossy Karen Rhetoric
Bossy Karen Rhetoric is a feature of Solidarity and Action Conformity Rhetoric. Bossy Karen Rhetoric involves use of words or phrases that imply that a given action must be taken and that no alternative options for thought or action will be considered. Bossy Karen Rhetoric tries to create solidarity through ideological conformity. Words that reflect Bossy Karen Rhetoric include:
· “need” (31 tweets, 6.2%)
· “must” (68 tweets, 13.6%)
· “demand” (27 tweets, 5.4%)
UN Women used Bossy Karen Rhetoric in 134 tweets (26.8%), inclusive of the No Debate Rhetoric listed below. However, this result underestimates UN Women’s preference for using Bossy Karen Rhetoric. The command “NOW,” which was used in 23 tweets by UN Women, also reflects Bossy Karen Rhetoric; however, in the current analysis, “NOW” was categorized as an Urgency Cue, because “NOW” has a temporal component to it, whereas Bossy Karen words like “need,” “must,” and “demand” do not necessarily have temporal components to them. Finally, UN Women often used the pronoun “we” when using Bossy Karen Rhetoric (e.g., “We demand,” “We must”). This finding supports the conclusion of a link between Bossy Karen Rhetoric and the broader concept of solidarity. Example tweets from UN Women that include Bossy Karen Rhetoric are provided below:
September 22, 2025: “Dear World Leaders…We demand that you fund the fight for gender equality and guarantee rights #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
September 4, 2025: “It’s time to demand #GenderEquality in and through the media #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
December 8, 2024: “The violence is real, even when it’s virtual. Online harassment and abuse are posing rising threats to women and girls’ safety - both in digital spaces and in real life. We must make EVERY space - online and offline - safe for all.”
December 12, 2024: “Despite notable progress on #GenderEquality, women still earn on average 20% less than men globally. We demand equal pay for work of equal value.”
January 12, 2025: “It’s 2025 and no country has achieved #GenderEquality, nor is close to it. We need to step up our efforts for a better future #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
July 2, 2025: “Sustainable finance must reflect the lived experiences of women and girls…”
6.5.3. No Debate Rhetoric
No Debate Rhetoric is a specific form of Bossy Karen Rhetoric. Whereas most forms of Bossy Karen Rhetoric imply that that no alternative thoughts or actions are acceptable, No Debate Rhetoric states this explicitly.
UN Women used No Debate Rhetoric in 13 tweets (2.6%). Words and phrases that exemplify No Debate Rhetoric are listed below, followed by example tweets:
· “not up for debate”
· “not negotiable”
· “no exceptions”
· “isn’t optional” or “not an option”
· “cannot” or “can’t wait”
September 18, 2025: “#GenderEquality is NOT up for debate.”
September 26, 2025: “As backlash grows, we march forward because #GenderEquality is not up for debate.”
February 23, 2025: “Women and girls are often the first victims of conflict, but they are ALWAYS our greatest hope for peace and recovery. Their rights are not optional.”
August 15, 2025: “4 years since the Taliban takeover in #Afghanistan, the rights of Afghan women and girls—including to education, work and safety—are being denied. Silence is NOT an option.”
July 14, 2025: “Women’s. Rights. Are. Not. Negotiable.”
March 8, 2025: “…we push forward #ForAllWomenAndGirls because equality is non-negotiable…”
January 17, 2025: “During crises, investing in women isn’t optional, it’s essential.”
6.5.3. Intersectional Allies
To add voices and foot soldiers to its feminist army, UN Women allies with certain demographic groups. UN Women’s underlying philosophy is intersectional feminism. Thus, UN Women sometimes comments on “marginalized” or intersectional groups. UN Women views these groups as allies in their fight for “gender equality.” A total of 28 tweets (5.6%) involved comment on a person or group of people associated with an intersectional group, based on race/ethnicity, sexual identity or orientation, or disability status.
6.5.4. Youth Coercion
One concerning behaviour at UN Women, and the UN more broadly, is the use of children and adolescents as pawns to help achieve the UN’s political aims. Sometimes, UN Women refers to these children and adolescents as “youth advocates.” Other times, UN Women refers to them as “activists.”
In one problematic video tweet from UN Women on February 11, 2025, a 10-year girl read a prepared statement about girls and women in science, engineering, and technology. The girl used Bossy Karen Rhetoric (i.e., “must”) and then said, “I want to see at least 50% of science and technology companies led by women.”
The girl likely did not write the statement herself. The statement was likely prepared for her by UN staff or some other feminist-friendly adult. The girl’s statement reflected some of the hallmarks of feminist propaganda that I have shown in this report. Of additional concern is that the girl read a line where she that she was “slightly ashamed” about how girls apparently have to prove their abilities in school. Thus, UN Women, or whoever prepared the girl’s statement, imputed guilt onto the girl in relation to a topic that neither the girl nor other children can fully understand (e.g., sex differences in psychology, vocational interests, etc.).
UN Women referred to youth allies, advocates, and activists in 13 tweets (2.6%). Example tweets are provided below:
March 15, 2025: “Youth participation at #CSW69 isn’t optional; it’s essential! We spoke to young activists at the CSW69 Youth Forum who are shaping a better future #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
March 18, 2025: “At #CSW69, women leaders, activists & youth are marching forward—driving action for gender equality. Let’s stand with them and march forward #ForAllWomenAndGirls.”
July 16, 2025: “It’s World #YouthSkillsDay! #AI is reshaping the future, and young people must be empowered with skills to be co-creators of this change. By investing in their skills, we invest in a brighter and more gender-equal world. Do you believe in the power of youth to lead the way?”
6.5.5. “Call” to Action
UN Women frequently made “calls” for action in their tweets. A “call” to action is a pronouncement to organizations or the general public that they should take a certain action. I included Call to Action Rhetoric in the Solidarity and Action Conformity Rhetoric category because “calls” are often requests for group solidarity in action. This category included any tweets that included the words or phrases “call to action,” “call for,” “calling for,” “call on,” or “calling on.” UN Women used Call to Action Rhetoric in 52 tweets (10.4%). Examples are provided below:
March 20, 2025: “@Aly_Raisman’s powerful message at #IWD2025 is a call to action.”
September 24, 2025: “5 inspiring women presidents took the stage yesterday during #UNGA. Their call to action: invest in #GenderEquality.”
November 22, 2024: “On Gender Day at #COP29, we’re calling for investment in feminist movements, youth leaders, and women’s rights organizations.”
January 7, 2025: “In 2024, over 2 mothers were killed in #Gaza EVERY HOUR. This unbearable reality cannot continue in 2025. We continue to call for: An immediate ceasefire; The release of all hostages; Unrestricted humanitarian access. We continue to call for peace.”
March 20, 2025: “At #CSW69, young people made their voices heard & brought fresh perspectives and innovative solutions #ForAllWomenAndGirls. Their call to action is simple: “Stand with us. Act with us. Fund us.”
September 29, 2025: “Over 103 million women and girls live in places where abortion is prohibited altogether. On #SafeAbortion Day we call for the protection of women’s health and safety.”
7. CONCLUSION
The aim of this research was to identify rhetorical strategies used by UN Women on X and then quantify the proportion of tweets that implemented each rhetorical strategy. I analyzed all 499 tweets published by UN Women between September 24, 2024 and September 30, 2025. The results revealed that UN Women’s X account is replete with feminist propaganda. The purpose of the propaganda appears to be to convince the audience of widespread victimization only for females and then convince the audience to act to resolve the proposed female victimization. In the first step, which I call the Awareness and Belief Change domain, UN Women presents the idea of widespread victimization only for females (Female Victim Rhetoric) and then attempts to magnify this victimization narrative by using rhetorical strategies that are prejudicial toward boys and men (Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric) and that attempt to induce fear and worry in the audience by first presenting “threats” to “gender equality” and then exaggerating the consequences of these threats (Alarmist Rhetoric). In the second step, which I call the Action domain, UN Women again uses Alarmist Rhetoric and Exclusionary or Prejudicial Rhetoric but then adds rhetoric that is intended, first, to introduce the importance of political activism (General Action Rhetoric), second, to maximize numbers of allies and ensure all allies conform to the same beliefs and actions (Solidarity and Action Conformity Rhetoric), and, third, to increase the likelihood of action by increasing audience confidence and sense of purpose (Empowerment Rhetoric).
Overall, the findings show that UN Women regularly uses feminist propaganda on X. UN Women’s tweets are often inaccurate, biased, contradictory, unprofessional, overly emotional, and lacking in common decency and empathy for boys and men. At minimum, member state representatives should insist on reform at UN Women. UN Women should focus on sharing fair and objective information that has a more wholesome, positive, and less combative message – one that acknowledges the virtues and hardships of both men and women. There is no reason why UN Women cannot express empathy and understanding toward both sexes, even if its main focus remains on girls and women. If UN Women refuses to rid itself of its problematic feminist ideology, member states should stop funding UN Women at the earliest possible instance. Taxpayers should not be forced to fund feminist propaganda. Other reforms at the UN might include formal observation of International Men’s Day and the establishment of UN Men (at no additional taxpayer expense) to communicate and address issues facing boys and men.
Related Content at The Nuzzo Letter
SUPPORT THE NUZZO LETTER
If you appreciated this content, please consider supporting The Nuzzo Letter with a one-time or recurring donation. Your support is greatly appreciated. It helps me to continue to work on independent research projects and fight for my evidence-based discourse. To donate, click the DonorBox logo. In two simple steps, you can donate using ApplePay, PayPal, or another service. Thank you!
Exceptional analysis above from James Nuzzo... Comprehensive, structured, balanced, authoritative, with clear conclusions.
"Taxpayers should not be forced to fund feminist propaganda."
Hear, hear!!
Brilliant work James and quite depressing, though my regular involvement with young professionals suggests the times they are a'changing.
I think the next 10 years will see a substantial push back.