The positive and negative effects of the participation of digital platform companies in governance are a major issue of the times. Starting from the three subfields of internal governance, external governance, and co-governance, we construct an analytical framework for digital platform governance to understand the four-sided relationship among digital platform companies, the state, the market, and society. From the perspective of enterprise autonomy, we should view the effectiveness of platform company participation in social governance dialectically. The key of promoting good platform governance is to improve the external structural pressure from the state, promote the reform of the endogenous governance of enterprises, and build a sustainable architecture for co-governance. The mission of sociologists includes not only explanation but also intervention. Digital platform enterprises have become an important subject in global governance and sometimes even assume “primary responsibility.” However, the social consequences caused by digital platforms are becoming increasingly mixed. Fortunately, as an important pillar of science and technology, digital platform companies have played an important role in many public affairs because of their rapid reactivity, vibrant online community, dynamic knowledge output, and capacity to improve technology applications. In China, “intelligent governance” has played a positive role in promoting the systematic architecture of national governance, achieving well-reasoned government decisions, sophisticated social governance, and efficient public services.Concerns with the evils of capitalism and abuse of technology are also rising and have become one of the hottest social issues in the current era ever since people discovered that data, algorithms, and computing power are in the hands of digital platform companies. There is also concern over the insufficient mobilization of social forces. The rights of vulnerable groups such as elderly individuals, people with disabilities, and migrant workers are largely neglected. Regulatory problems such as algorithmic discrimination, “big data killing” (swindling regular customers by using big data), and sophisticated forms of forgery are emerging one after another. Taking the rise of “cyberpunk” culture among young people as a representative case, this trend reveals how reflection and criticism of the evils of capitalism and technology have broken through the limits of intellectual discussion to become a component of mass culture. We are in the midst of a new round of global criticism of digital technology.That said, the involvement of digital platform companies in public governance is not completely new; their involvement was already present before COVID-19, with various scenarios in different social contexts. In China, “smart governance,” that is, digital government, smart cities, and other smart infrastructure, complemented by large amounts of data collection and application, have been actively modifying the structure of state governance, implementing more data-based policy-making processes, enhancing precision in social governance, and improving public services , non-governmental organizations, and enterprises constitute the “governance triangle” for platform governance  and C-end (users) ecologies, which is a type of “governance by the platform,” merging with the co-governance. The platform can fully rely on enterprise rules, digital technology, and third-party institutions to build a hierarchical control system “across enterprise boundaries” or outside the enterprise . There are two ways digital platform companies can participate in governance: (1) participate in one part of the national governance architecture (P2G). For example, they can participate in governance indirectly as suppliers of “e-government,” mainly providing “technology.” (2) What truly triggers wide discussion is when digital platform companies directly become a main body of public governance. Some of them participate in civil society governance through “users” management (P2C);This governance model has triggered a series of urgent legal issues, calling attention to strengthening “external governance.” What we want to emphasize, however, is that the relative autonomy of platform companies in co-governance should not only be regarded as the object of state regulation. Although governance is often understood as state capacity Fukuyama , governaJust as the question “what is governance” Fukuyama  caused aThis analytic framework can also analyze any phenomenon of corporations participating in governance in general after a slight modification. The role of large companies in nation-states and global governance is gaining increasing importance, which is not unique to digital platform companies. However, the difference between digital platform companies and real estate, energy, finance, and other industries with corporate giants is that the state cannot completely replace technology companies; instead, it relies on them. Particularly in today’s world, digital technology and algorithms are inseparable, so the literature on “platform governance” is often combined with studies of the impact of algorithms on governance and the governance of algorithms  for National Economic and Social Development and Vision 2035 of the People's Republic of China, “regulatory overreach should be rolled back where it hurts business dynamism, while regulation will be strengthened wherever necessary in our effort to create an open, safe, and healthy rules-based digital ecosystem.” Strengthening external governance should further improve internal governance within platform enterprises to create a healthier new pattern of common governance. From this standpoint, we should realize that just as the state has its “relative autonomy”  and ethics committees, established corporate foundations, and worked with third-party institutions, social organizations, and other partners; enterprises’ internal governance strategy becomes more credible through these efforts. Some enterprise founders personally participated in and designed enterprises’ environmental, social, and governance (ESG) projects, which brought much new potential energy to the enterprise and impacted the entire industry.How do platform companies work with the state and form a common governance structure? To answer this question, we take the performance of platform companies in the early stage of the epidemic as an example for analysis. The epidemic was an external shock to platform governance, ironically creating an opportunity for platform enterprises to compete with other entities. Through Baidu search, WeChat search, and Bing search, we collected examples of the “top 20” internet enterprises showcasing the power of science and technology support. We summarized 162 application scenarios and organized them into ten categories. The “top 20” enterprises come from the list of “Top 100 Chinese Internet Enterprises,” jointly released in 2019 by the Internet Society of China and the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. Our data collection ended on April 6, 2020, and we modified the categorization by refining the 162 scenarios into two categories. The first type is internal governance, including the initiatives taken by the platform that affect users and business partners. The second type is co-governance. The cooperation partners include foreign governmental organizations, domestic governments at all levels, public institutions, including medical institutions and scientific research centers, and official charitable organizations.Figure In the period that began on January 20, the internal governance of the platform was the most concentrated in the early stage; over time, an increasing number of joint governance actions were taken in cooperation with the government, hospitals, and scientific research institutions. The former mainly included consumer rights protection, content information governance, employee protection, community mobilization on the platform, and consumption support initiated by the platform; the latter mainly included technical support, scientific and technological development, financial/flow support for cooperation with the government, research empowerment, and consumption support for cooperation with the government.In the early stage, there were two reasons for the uptick in the internal governance of the platform: on the one hand, SARS-CoV-2 was a brand-new virus, and some solutions used by past platform governance could not be directly applied. In addition, most platforms had not accumulated policies for the public health field, so much work needed to be started from scratch and time spent matching new partners. For example, the epidemic prompted some platform enterprises to cooperate with the health department for the first time to obtain distribution information for fever clinics nationwide to launch on a map. On the other hand, the products and services first launched by platform companies during the epidemic are inseparable from accumulated advantages over time, displaying clear path dependency. The first response of many digital platform companies was to quickly launch “emergent” measures based on their existing products and service advantages.Take the governance of content information as an example. Whether refuting rumors or distributing authoritative information on preventing and treating COVID-19, the ultimate determinant is the platform’s investment in “knowledge/content” governance. Enterprises that invest in medical and health knowledge and have a strong “background” and good platform governance are more likely to attract more views during the epidemic. In this regard, the gap between different platform companies was obvious. Some platforms could not launch their own products and services until ten days later. As early as January 21, “Dr. Clove,” an online health consultation platform, launched a map of the epidemic and real-time broadcast on the WeChat official account. In fact, many of the actions of Dr. Clove were just to integrate the authoritative information released by the government. However, with the huge number of users accumulated by its previous original content, the credibility gained by past platform governance, and the technology for straightforward, real-time visualizations, it exceeded the popularity of the reporting by many official media outlets within a short period; it was so popular that even People’s Daily cooperated with it.We take the fight against the overpricing of medical masks as an example. Almost every e-commerce platform imaginable announced a policy of “no price gouging.” However, was there truly no price increase, or were these statements just a gesture of goodwill of the enterprise? At that moment, the ability to manage suppliers helped the enterprise stand out. Some platforms have obvious advantages, while some e-commerce companies can get the attention of the platform, but the actual effect on sales is not ideal. These platforms could only provide special subsidies to the masks produced by self-employed channels to ensure limits on price gouging.The same was true for platform companies that mobilized communities to participate in governance. During the epidemic, offline community mobilization was subject to various constraints. Whoever could fully mobilize the online community could win the first battle. Due to accumulated experience with digital rural governance, Tencent’s information service platform “Wecounty” started monitoring public opinion on epidemic prevention in villages from January 22. It urgently increased the number of messages issued by the village committee to the villagers in the notice template and promptly transmitted authoritative epidemic information to rural people through “today’s hot news” and WeChat official accounts. In addition, it provided positive guidance against “excessive” lock-down behaviors in the village, such as road closures and intimidation or violence. For example, the Transfar Group built a nationwide green logistics channel for anti-epidemic materials, providing free transportation connections and warehousing and material transfer services. In less than three days, it received nearly 200 demands for transportation at full capacity destined for Wuhan and delivered the materials to Hubei. Transfar could deliver all these services because they developed an online community app called “Transfar Comfort Station,” where truck drivers helped each other and created a community that values public welfare. During the epidemic, 22,000 community netizens responded positively to the app, inseparable from community accumulation, cultural construction, and even online party building.Figure As the epidemic escalated, there were increasing scenarios for co-governance. Many cooperations resulted from government requirements (such as issuing purchase coupons) and from active matching by platform companies. For example, on February 10, at the press conference of the Joint Prevention and Control Mechanism of the State Council to cope with the outbreak of COVID-19, Yueliang Chen, the director of the Department of Community Governance at the Ministry of Civil Affairs, said: “Technical support is very important. I ask those large internet companies, such as Tencent and Alibaba, to develop community public software and provide it to social workers. A useful public welfare software is more valuable than donating one billion yuan.” Soon after, Alibaba launched a free smart community epidemic prevention and control applet.Because the “anti-epidemic” products and services of the platform companies met the demands of governance, we witnessed the diffusion of large-scale technology applications under strong government support. A notable feature of this process was that in the cities where enterprises are based, the local government took the lead in supporting platform programs, which then diffused nationwide. The application scenarios included AI temperature measurement and agricultural produce sales through live streaming. This model had existed before, but the COVID-19 outbreak accelerated the diffusion. The most typical example was the rapid spread of the “Health Code” from the local to the national level. Alibaba and Tencent took the lead in launching their own health code products, first in Hangzhou and Shenzhen, respectively, where their headquarters are located. Taking Alipay’s health code as an example, the process from local cities to nationwide application of health codes only took seven days. According to media reports, the Yuhang District Government of Hangzhou City first adopted Alibaba’s health codes on February 9, and Hangzhou City and all of Zhejiang ProvinceFigure Overall, the platform governance structure where government and business intersect is jointly shaped by the state and enterprises. The state is the leading party and rule maker in this process, but enterprises are not completely passive recipients; instead, they can and should actively pursue good platform governance. Platform governance between the state and enterprises is not a zero-sum game: the main demands of the state include legitimacy and economic development; the demands of platform companies also include development (profitability) and legitimacy. There is no substantive contradiction in it, which allows for coexistence. This overlap in goals explains the internal logic of why the state and enterprises have more affinity on some governance issues than the general contours of society as expressed through demands. It is a microcosm of the broader relationship between politics and business.“Data governance” involves the government, internet enterprises, technology communities, non-governmental organizations, citizens, and other stakeholders. It is no longer a tool for enterprise value or government management but an infrastructure for forging interdependence among data stakeholders and developing the value of data itself Xu . CurrentDigital technology plays an important role in common governance, and digital platform companies have become one of the multiple collaborative governance entities that cooperate with the state in supervising users. In the past two years, many documents have emphasized the general direction of “technologically supported” social governance. For example, the 14th Five-Year Plan, issued by the Chinese central government on March 13, 2021, comprehensively discusses “accelerating digital development and building a digital China” in Chapter 5 and proposes “accelerating the construction of a digital economy, a digital society, and a digital government, and driving the transformation of production, living, and governance modes through digital transformation as a whole”; the same document proposes “encouraging social forces to participate in the “Internet+ public service” and to innovate service modes and products.” In the section “strengthening and innovating social governance,” it is clearly stated that it is necessary to “facilitate and regulate the channels for market participants, new social strata, social workers, and volunteers to participate in social governance.” Another document, The Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Strengthening the Modernization of the Grassroots Governance System and Governance Capacity, issued on July 11, 2021, puts forward clear requirements for “empowering the building of grassroots-knowledgeable governance capacity” and implemented the agenda of “internet + grassroots governance.” These policies improved digital availability and community surveillance of grassroots governance.At the practical level, He and Ma  illustraOn the other hand, although we can see that the expansion of digital technology has brought some positive governance efficiency, the pressure on external platform governance will not be eliminated in the long run, whether at home or abroad. In fact, the spread of digital technology has also brought some negative effects. For example, data privacy has received unprecedented attention, and some legal and institutional gaps have to be filled to provide a clearer definition of user rights. The disorderly expansion of capital leads to the risk of market monopolies. Enterprises operating outside the market rules need to follow more social norms and bear more social responsibilities; the risks brought by data transactions have surged, and national data security supervision has intensified unprecedentedly.In addition to the phenomena that have been closely examined and discussed from the perspective of the “state–market” relationship, another phenomenon that has received less attention is “selective governance.” In areas that both the enterprises and the state emphasize at a specific time, government–enterprise cooperation is relatively smooth, and governance efficiency is significantly improved; on the other hand, areas that are neglected by both the state and enterprises will become the weak side of governance, while areas that are of interest to only one of the actors may become unbalanced. For example, during the epidemic, the paper certificates in the hands of residents were in sharp contrast to the newly instituted facial recognition access device at the door, and the so-called informatization in many places became a synonym for the extra input of information. The health codes in various places were not common to other places, and even a case such as “adding codes to the codes” appeared. What was embarrassing about these new technologies was that in many “social” scenarios, due to poor coverage, limited daily active users, and different standards, the traditional mobilization methods of household visits and monitoring must be adopted to meet treatment requirements (such as “full coverage”) during the “wartime” situation of the epidemic.This coexistence of “advanced” technical equipment and “backward” data collection tactics reflected the reality of the conditions of limited sources and poor quality of data collection tools, insufficient circulation of information, and serious data isolation accumulated over a long time  should also be seen in this way. There are many external “obstacles” to platform governance from the perspective of platform companies. They include the local government’s lack of sufficient ability to cope with social issues caused by the platform economy and the low digital literacy of officials, which are reflected in the chaotic platform governance of ride-sharing  to measure a stable society, it intends to reveal the oppression, domination, and inequality in the social structure, especially in the face of dramatic social changes, and participate in liberation with reflective actions Shen . Many apWhat we call “algorithm governance” is different from “algorithmic governance”  Musiani . The AI Although the audit of program algorithms has existed for a long time, algorithm governance has its own characteristics in the era of AI.From a technical point of view, AI can rapidly develop with the help of annotated data and prior knowledge, which are embodied in perceptual intelligence and cognitive intelligence, respectively. These aspects of intelligence correspond to connectionism, represented by machine learning, especially deep learning, symbolism, and logical representation and reasoning in cognitive schemas. In perceptual intelligence, machine learning and deep learning are often in a “black box” coupled with complex artificially adjusted parameters. It makes the final AI model inseparable from the subjective bias of all participants, including data collectors, data taggers, and programmers. Considering a simple example, we have an algorithm framework in which the facial data input only comes from a certain racial group. If the algorithm itself is a “clear code” and there is no deliberate bias after identification, it will still happen that the algorithm fails to apply to other racial groups. More than 40 kinds of similar subjective biases cannot be identified by auditing the “clear code.”To take another example, as the basis of cognitive intelligence, a knowledge graph seems to be a neutral technical medium; however, the “knowledge” in it, either through the construction of vertical domain knowledge by the ontological approach or through the large-scale collection of lexical data on the network, is derived from the subjective construction of human beings, carrying different social prejudices and other risks. Thus, sociology is required to intervene in the closed loop of the process, especially at the source of the AI industry. The role of sociological intervention is to guide all parties to understand the consequences of algorithms as “social consequences” in algorithmic audits. After all, the algorithm of AI reconstructs social prejudice and discrimination through coding in the process of building a digital society. In other words, in addition to computer science, the algorithmic audit of AI needs sociology to provide systematic social reflection, professional theoretical judgment, and scientific methods of social research. The main approaches of the algorithmic audit include but are not limited to the following aspects.The first is participating in data production and algorithm improvement at the source. Platform companies have the advantages of technological research & development and practical experience in AI and big data, which allow them to play an important role in the construction of digital governance systems on different levels, including the national level, be it the governance of data or data-based governance. However, this is not to say that technology can solve all problems , nor that those platform companies are the main, or even the only driving force of social–technological progress as their marketing often claims   and consuming women (such as exposed bodies), which exposes obvious discrimination. Second, when searching for the words “doctor,” “nurse,” and “scientist,” the picture results only reflect a real occupational gender imbalance dominated by men, a form of hidden discrimination. Third, when searching for terms such as “domestic violence” and “mistreatment of women,” the algorithm fails to provide necessary help and support through technical means. As mentioned before, when AI merely repeats and even deepens inequality in the real world, it is not a good technology, contrary to the ethics of “AI for good.”If we want to change the status quo, the first step should be to carry out the gender equality audit in AI and launch targeted interventions to prevent people from encountering increasing inequality in all aspects of life and work due to the misuse of technology. In a joint study with Baidu on AI social value, we posed this problem. After receiving a positive response, we cooperated with relevant departments to intervene with the algorithm of the search engine. In the initial stages of cooperation, we facilitated the weakening, shielding, and elimination of gender discrimination in search results. At the same time, we optimized and enhanced the functional channels to support women’s rights (Zhou and Lv The third is participating in the construction of governance ecology in co-governance, empowering social communities to become “useful” actors. For example, in the “anti-COVID-19” campaigns, many companies launched functions such as mask detection and face recognition with masks to help prevent and control the epidemic and ensure the orderly resumption of work and school. However, many developers lack a full understanding of the ethical issues and the norms of using face recognition; they only provide a technical interface and skill training, ignoring the corresponding education of concepts and norms. From a corporate perspective, they will not invest a dime if they cannot understand and intuitively see what benefits social science will bring—economic performance, public legitimacy, or technological progress. On the other hand, the involvement of social scientists in the participation and building of digital governance has not been limited to abstract theoretical discussions; from very early on, they have flourished in empirical research, policy research, and behavioral intervention through corporate research institutes/think tanks, data opening plans, and various empirical research projects of their own choosing.In recent years, China has made great progress in this area and has made outstanding achievements in some vertical areas, but it is still in the “catch-up” stage in general. Sociological intervention on this matter requires more solid empirical research results, more grounded action plans, and a more input-oriented understanding of penetration strategies to show, in a direct way, that “the increment of social science” can indeed make real contributions. In this way, social science researchers can become the real “fifth force,” in addition to government decision-makers, capital operators, technology developers, and the public media. More importantly, we need to cultivate more people capable of sociological intervention. On the one hand, sociologists should improve their digital literacy and skills and become architects, interpreters, and researchers in the “technological solutions of platform governance.” On the other hand, they should also empower and cultivate more people with different backgrounds to become developers who are literate in social science and computer science to promote “social solutions for platform governance.” Without the construction of social infrastructure, the application of fancy technology on the front end is limited and unsustainable.In summary, the introduction of sociological intervention in all aspects of platform governance can better regulate the interaction between technology and society. It not only provides ideas and abilities to understand and solve social problems to digital platform companies interested in social innovation while maintaining their autonomy but also inhibits the possible damage to social interests through participation at the source, content audit, and social community empowerment so that they can play a positive role and promote the smooth implementation of technology.More importantly, the sociological intervention into platform governance should be an indispensable application of computational sociology in practice. Computational sociology tends to emphasize the use of computational methods and complex statistical methods to excavate and integrate multiple forms of data to realize the description, interpretation, and prediction of complex social phenomena. However, in our view, social computing is not only a technical means but also a generative process for social reality. Just as computational sociologists can play an important role in developing new social computing tools, research on the relationship between computing and society and the social problems related to computing/technology should also be an important part of sociology. Although sociology has accumulated some experience, it has not yet fully possessed the ability and influence to make sociological interventions in the academic, disciplinary, and discursive system. How to make contributions to the “basic law of the digital era” should be something that sociology prepares for before facing the next “crisis.”


The studyunderscores the complexity of links between gender (in)equality and IPVAW inSweden.Despite high gender equality ratings, Sweden shows a high prevalence of intimatepartner violence against women (IPVAW). Suggested factors underlying thisapparent paradox include backlash effects against women's empowerment. Thisstudy explores stories of backlash in interviews with 23 IPVAW survivors inSweden. Thematic analysis identified categories of narrative segments referringto phenomena provoking violence; the victims’  Intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) is a global human rights and publichealth issue, to which one-third of women are estimated to be exposed during theirlives , that is typically perceived as being associated with genderinequality e.g., . AlthougIPVAW can be defined as physically, sexually, psychologically, or economicallycoercive acts against women by their current or former partners , includiDifferent explanatory models for IPVAW place emphasis on various causal factors,such as socioeconomic deprivation  or moreThat said, IPVAW is commonly perceived as being tied to gender inequality e.g.,. The EurThe amelioration hypothesis posits that gender equality mitigates against, andshould therefore be associated with a lower prevalence of, IPVAW. The concept ofbacklash, in turn, links violence to retaliation effects due to redefined powerrelations involving men's (perceived) loss of control, in the context ofadvances towards gender equality e.g., . WhiletEmphasizing the importance of investigating social conditions under whichameliorative and backlash processes occur, Nevertheless, in a study of European countries during 1990–2005, As also noted by Alongside its neighboring Nordic countries, Sweden has been rated as one of themost gender-equal countries in the EU , 2019 anFactors suggested or discussed as potentially explaining this apparent NordicParadox  include The latter suggestion is obviously congruent with the backlash hypothesis positedand tested in international research. The view of the co-existence of highlevels of gender equality and IPVAW as paradoxical is based on the ameliorationhypothesis, and the backlash hypothesis does find some support in Nordicstudies. While such studies suggest that backlash dynamics may indeed be relevant forIPVAW in Sweden, researchers have also repeatedly pointed to a co-existence ofexplanatory models for IPVAW in Sweden e.g., , wheresThis study explores stories of backlash in interviews with 23 women exposed toIPVAW in Sweden, through narrative analysis.This interview study was conducted as part of a larger research project centeredon the Nordic Paradox , and hadThe 23 participants were recruited through an invitation distributed to women'sshelters and municipal support units, posted on Facebook by a women's shelter,and then shared. Some were contacted directly after disclosing experiences ofIPVAW in social media or in a professional context, or through being asked byanother participant. While a couple of the women had worked professionally inthe area of IPVAW, all were recruited on the basis of their personal experiencesof exposure. The invitation letter did not distinguish between cis- andtransgender women. All the shared stories are about violent heterosexualrelationships.The participants were 21–54 years old. Most had been subjected to IPVAW in onerelationship, lasting 1.5–23 years, while a few had been in more than oneviolent partnership. All but one had separated from their violent partner/s, onaverage around six years ago. Eleven of the women had children with theirperpetrators. Many were working professionals, several in managerial positions,some were students, and two were on sick leave. A majority had or were attaininga university education. In the (main) violent relationship, the incomes of thepartners were said to have been fairly equal by eight of the women, while thepartner earned more in nine cases and the woman in six. Their educational levelswere described as similar by 12 women; the woman was more highly educated ineight cases and the partner in three. Around half described themselves, withoutbeing prompted, as being strong or independent.As the study was grounded in an interest towards the Nordic Paradox and theSwedish context, and due to noted tendencies in Sweden towards locating IPVAW inother countries or cultures, and towards understanding IPVAW perpetrated orsuffered by Swedish versus non-Swedish persons as different , the invThe women described a spectrum of degrees and types of violence. All referred tophysical violence, occurring occasionally, continuously, or cyclically,including being kicked, bitten, beaten with fists, pushed down stairs, or thrownout of a moving car. Nine women had received murder threats, and two mentionedmurder attempts. All described psychological violence, including being verballyabused, “brainwashed,” locked in, or stopped from sleeping or eating. Manydescribed sexual violence, economic or material violence, or violence usinginformation technology. Some referred to violence acted out through children orsupport institutions. Most described the violence as having developed gradually,in some cases not until after several years. Some spoke about violencecontinuing after the separation, or as still ongoing. All described violencewhich could be categorized as intimate terrorism , that isThe interviews took place at Lund or Linnaeus University, over the phone, or atthe participant's home. Of the 23 women, 19 were interviewed by the author andfour by Linda Hiltunen, PhD. The interviews lasted 1–2.5 h, and one follow-upinterview was held. After giving informed consent to participation, the womenwere asked initial questions about their life situations. They were then askedto speak about the violent relationship/s: how it (or they) had evolved, whatkind of violence they contained, what the women thought was the cause of thatviolence, and what support she had received. Questions were also asked aboutaspects of gender (in)equality in the violent relationship(s).The interview questions were open, in line with The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim.A basic premise of narrative analysis is that we make sense of our experiencesthrough organizing them into, and conveying, meaningful episodes . AnarraRegarding IPV, narrative analysis has pointed to public stories enabling someaccounts to be more visible than others . NarratiThe overarching theme of backlash was tentatively identified during the initialanalysis of the interview transcripts. The transcripts were then re-read, andnarrative segments relevant to the theme were coded as such. Segments wereselected if they described violence as being provoked or driven by resistance toor challenging of the partner's control or position of superiority in therelationship. Such segments consisted of stories describing specific incidents,or habitual narratives referring to more general patterns . NarratiIt should be noted that (quantitative) research on VAW has made importantdistinctions between relative and absolute measures of status; that is, betweenmeasures of gender equality (men's vs. women's status) and of socioeconomicposition (women's status or men's status) e.g., .MeanwhiThe focus of the study is the content rather than the form of the narratives,that is, the “told” rather than “the telling” . The firThe terms “story” and “narrative” are used interchangeably . The intDue to the sensitive nature of the topic, and in consideration of recommendationsfor ethically sound research on IPV , theintresources, agency,breaking of gender norms and resistance, andthe partner's feeling of subordination. An additionalcategory encompassed stories referring to the societal level because it bothered himterribly that I had an education, it bothered him terribly. (…) Itwas a power game (…) he had to push me down. (IP4)Participants spoke about violence as being triggered by their existing oraspired resources, and a large share of this narrative content concernedIn relation to this, one woman referred to feeling “that I had to make myselfsmaller” (IP 13).income than their partner.[It] really deteriorated when I finished University and startedworking and making money, because then I made more money than him.(…) That made him crazy. (…) He would terrorize [me] because of thatmoney. (…) This thing that the woman earns more than the man. Thatdidn’t exist for him. It literally made him see red. (IP20)Some spoke about anger and violence being triggered by them having, orpotentially having, a higher employment. One woman referred to an“acceleration” of violence (IP 21) when she fulfilled work demands, whileanother described being locked inside and thus physically hindered fromgoing to work.He didn’t want me to get any more education because he didn’t want meto be better off economically than him. And that was also why Icouldn’t work. (…) He didn’t let me go there. He locked me inside onthe same day that I was going to start. (…) And finally I couldn’tstay at that job because (…) I had too much absence. And that was …all because of the relationship with him, that he wouldn’t let me goto work. (IP 15)While several participants spoke about violent behavior obstructing theirwork and working conditions, two women referred to violence being triggeredby their independence as triggering violence.If I was too independent and too strong in some way, then (…) then itwas as if he had a need to kind of push me down. (IP11)While increasing restriction of the victim's agency and freedom of movementis a common feature of IPVAW  often noWhen I talked about my job, then he could just scream. (…) If I spokeabout my previous life (…) he became so enraged. (…) Children, work,my previous life, colleagues, anything (…) that didn’t involve him.So everything (…) All of that had to be cut off from my life. I wasonly supposed to be sure to satisfy him and his needs. (IP13)Aspects of independence noted to have provoked violent responses includedhaving opinions or interests, receiving attention from other people,maintaining any relationships other than that with the violent partner, orbeing happy.freedom of movement, through doing or wanting to dothings such as seeing friends or parents, taking a swim, or leaving the house.He wanted me to just be at home and fix things there, cook and staythere (…) Yes. So the more I tried to break loose and become my own,then he became … then everything got worse. (IP17)A few participants spoke about violence erupting when they claimedappearance and behavior, some spoke aboutviolence arising due to digressions from appropriate femininity, through, forexample, being “too straight-forward” (IP 4) or not needing to be cared for.It was important to him, this thing about masculine and feminine. And inhis world there was a sharp border. And you couldn’t really walk acrossit really, but I did, I moved in both. (IP 4)Several participants spoke about violence being triggered by their deviationsfrom traditional or desired gender norms, in ways other than those alreadydiscussed. Regarding I’m not a woman you take care of, because I take care of myself. (…) Hewanted a relationship with a woman he could take care of and be macho. (IP23)He spoke a whole lot outwardly about how proud he was that I have donemilitary service and that I’ve worked as a security guard and that Ihave the position I have and that I make more money than him. But assoon as we got home, inside the doors, then it was … “Do you have tohave short hair?,” “You look like a lesbian,” “Can’t you be a bit morefeminine?” (IP 8)In this context, one woman spoke about tension between her partner's attitudetowards gender norms in public situations and in the private sphere.domestic work, or by their asking orexpecting the partners to contribute in this area.A woman exists to be at and take care of the home—when the hell will youlearn that? (IP 8)Women spoke about violence being provoked by their partners thinking the womendid not do sufficient If you don’t do it (…) then you just get beaten more or hear more that you’reworthless. (IP 5)masculinity threatened, dueto destabilization of his superior status.He has beaten me so many times. Because he was afraid. He was afraid thathe would become a sissy and that I would be the woman with a higherposition than him. (IP 9)Relatedly, one woman spoke in more unspecific terms about her partner beingtriggered by a sense of having his speaking back,resisting violence, drawing a limit,or seeking help.Violence was described as provoked by resistance to the partner's will,authority, or violence, through the women's speaking back to the partner; of “not shutting up” (Int4) or “question[ing] him” (IP 19). Keeping silent was also noted as a way ofalleviating violence.I answered back sometimes, I did. But then I knew it would get seventimes worse. (IP 17)Several women spoke about violence occurring as a result of theirHe admitted to the social services that he pushed me. (…) He said,“Well, but she knows what I’m like and still she wasn’t quiet.” (…)So I guess it was that … I mean, I felt that the violence camebecause I didn’t … I didn’t back off. I never became the silentwoman. (IP 12)The victim's speaking back was also indicated as the cause of violenceattributed by a partner.resisting  violencemore directly.He forced himself on me sexually, he wanted to make me pregnant. ButI went to the women’s clinic. (…) Then they gave me [contraceptive]patches. (…) He saw this, and (…) “You have a patch? Now you’ll see,you damn idiot.” And I tried to say, “But this is my body, this ismy right … I decide.” No, it was impossible to talk. (…) And then hestarted beating me. (IP 22)Some women spoke about violence being provoked by or escalating due to themdrawing a limit orsetting a boundary. In the words of one woman, her partner became physicallyviolent because “he couldn’t handle me putting my foot down … I mean, that Isaid that's enough” (IP 2). The relationship was gender equal in many ways,she added, as long as she did not resist his will.As long as I yielded, it was fine. (IP 2)Some spoke about violence caused by them help-seeking from the police or from neighbors.In a couple of stories, violence was triggered by resistance in the form ofI think he … probably feels very subordinate to women. That thismakes him have to, in some way, defend himself against that all thetime, against the existence of women. (IP 10)Some narrative segments about the causes of violence included references tothe partners’ perceived feelings of subordination or disadvantage, inrelation to the victim, to women in general, or to the victim's family. Oneparticipant used the concept of an “inferiority complex” (IP 23), whileother stories referred to low self-esteem overall, and to tension betweensuch low self-esteem or a feeling of subordination and an image projected outwardly.It’s possible he didn’t feel he had as much power, and that’s why hehad to use violence, I’m not sure. (…) My self-image was probably abit strange, like I was super strong, like I was the strong one andhe was weak, somehow. I guess that made me think, “I can handlethis.” (IP 11)In one story, feelings of inferiority on the part of the partner wereconsidered in terms of a possibility rather than an actuality, while thewoman's similar feelings were noted to have influenced her perception of the violence.In Sweden in particular, women have a lot of opportunities here. Wecan study, we can educate ourselves, we can have good jobs. And Ithink they see that as a threat, that women can be very independenthere. So they need to have some way of controlling you, because theydon’t know how to do it. And then it becomes through … physicalviolence. (IP 15)Some participants referred to backlash on the societal level, in most casesin response to an interview question about what they thought to be the causeof IPVAW on a general rather than a personal level. Here, participantssometimes referred specifically to Sweden.If you think you should be the person in charge in then … well, ifthe woman doesn’t want to submit to that, then I think there can beviolence, because of that. But I think … in my case, the way I seeit, there was something particular about [name]. (…) I know hisfather also hit. (IP 14)In several cases, narrative segments including backlash on the societal levelencompassed associations with the women's own personal experience. In thissense, the backlash theme represented a point of connection between apersonal and a collective experience . In otheThis indicates critical reflection on backlash dynamics and a co-existence ofperspectives on the causes of IPVAW.While the noted categories reoccurred in the IPVAW narratives, the ways in whichthey appeared in the stories were quite different. The following section,therefore, consists of a closer look at the individual narratives of fiveparticipants.Elise is a university-educated woman whose narrative contains all the notedpersonal-level categories. In this sense, her narrative is quite typical ofor aligned with the overarching concept and theme of backlash as it appearsin the interviews.As long as he could keep me in his little … then, then everything wasfine. So it became, more and more, that I stayed in that little cageto … not upset him. (…) If I was inside that little bubble, we couldlive relatively normally, I think, in manyways.Elise told a story about her relationship with Patrik, both of whom wereidentified as Swedish. The relationship encompassed physical andpsychological violence. At times it was relatively calm, however, providedthat Elise “kept within the frames” by behaving in certain ways, “keepingcalm” or being “this nice little girl” and letting Patrik be in a positionof authority. Alongside the notion of frames, Elise repeatedly used theimage of a cage when talking about the relationship and her adaptation tothe violence.resources, as she spoke about Patrik being provoked byher studying and earning money. Violence was also associated with heragency, expressed through independent opinions andfreedom of movement. In alignment with traditional gendernorms, Elise referred to Patrik wanting her to stay at home.I was supposed to be a classical woman, quite simply, this obedientlittle girl. […] Men should make money. Men should enjoyentertainments. Women should be at home and take care of the kids.[…] He wanted these traditional roles. That’s what it was about …that’s what sums it up.Violence was described as being triggered by Elise'sresistancetoward Patrik, Elise responded that she had not dared to. She added that shesometimes spoke back to him, but that this caused the situation todeteriorate. Furthermore, she did not refer to her partner feelingsubordinate, but connected his violence with low self-esteemand a related need to assert himself.When asked about whether she had exerted any Anne shared a story about her 25-year relationship with Markus. Holding amanagerial position in a male-dominated workplace, Anne described herself asa strong and independent person, and she referred to herself and Markus asSwedish. Her narrative contained psychological and material violence, andphysical violence from which she had visible scars. She related havingstayed in the relationship due to fear of further violence includingmurder.resources, agency,gender norms, or resistance were notpresent in the story. It did, however, feature a power relationship and thepartner's feeling of subordination. The reason whyMarkus used violence, Anne said, was to reclaim a position of power.That’s what I really think this is about, that he took back the powerwhen he became violent. And that’s why I think that he must havethought I had it before. Because the only way to take power over me,that was by behaving in this way.The categories of Instead I … I’m sure he has felt that I was … the big and strong bearin the relationship, which he couldn’t handle and wanted to pulldown. That’s what I think happened.Anne spoke about having realized, despite her fear, that Markus felt smallerthan or inferior to her, and that this was a reason for his violence.Markus's apparently non-violent relationship with a new woman, described aswithdrawn and compliant, was used to support Anne's rendering of theviolence as being due to Markus wanting to be in a position of authority. Hehad wanted, she said, to be the caring but dominant “big and strong bear.”that he wasn’t man enough to take care of me, so then he feltsmaller.This situation, she added, “created an inferiority complex in him,”Thus, Anne's story places emphasis on the man's feeling of subordination,while illustrating that all the categories noted in the thematic analysisdid not need to function as triggers of violence for backlash dynamics to becentral to the IPVAW narrative.Karoline spoke about her 10-year relationship with Tobias, who subjected herto physical, psychological, and sexual violence. Karoline had a well-paidmanagerial job and referred to both herself and Tobias as Swedish.resources, including her job and her education whichwas higher than his, and by her agency, expressed throughher speaking about other aspects of her life and maintaining socialcontacts. In terms of resistance, Karoline noted thatviolence was provoked or escalated when she spoke back to or questionedTobias. Moreover, the story contained a sense ofsubordination on Tobias's part, but as perceived by herrather than him. A sense of being the stronger part in the relationshipcaused feelings that she needed to take care of and be extra sensitivetowards Tobias.I felt that I have to take care of this guy and be careful withhim.Karoline spoke about violence as being triggered by herSince I am perceived as so strong, maybe I scare him a bit. So I haveto become even more kind and even more … like this. But (…) it justgot worse and worse and worse.Karoline spoke about “toning down” her resources and agency to not makeTobias feel insecure, and increasingly limiting her own freedom and socialinteraction to prevent his jealousy, which made her feel sorry for him.Thus, she became “more and more compliant.”I have my own theory that many strong women get in trouble, becausethey think precisely like this. (…) “No one can do this to me,because I’m too strong.” (…) We are too strong for our own good,because we tighten our fist in our pocket and just, “No, I willstruggle a bit more.”Relatedly, Karoline noted that strong women may be particularly vulnerable to IPVAW.While this narrative contained many of the noted categories, then, itdeviated somewhat from a story about an authoritative man lashing back dueto loss of power, as Karoline saw herself as the stronger partner. Thisaffected her acceptance of, and the development of, the violence.Karin is a university-trained professional, whose relationship with Samuelhad contained sexual, psychological, and physical violence causing her PTSDand remaining physical injuries. Karin identified Samuel and herself asSwedish. She called herself “a very strong and fairly independent person,”and Samuel “a prominent, eloquent feminist guy.”resistance, Karin spoke of a consistentcompromising of her boundaries. With reference to a form of “terror,” shedescribed how Samuel not only did not respect her assertions of limits butmet them with an intensified breaking of them. This pattern was particularlyemphasized in the context of their sexual practice but was repeated in otherspheres of life. In a rare instance of more assertive resistance at the timeof their separation, Karin broke a material object as a way of“straightening myself,” after having “walked with my spine very subdued forsuch a very long time.” She spoke with regret of this act as she linked itto continued and repeated violence and control.Regarding agency, Karin's narrative deviates from the moretypical story as she was not socially isolated. On the contrary, she spokeof Samuel having encouraged her to engage with other people, but then usingthis as “an excuse for himself to then subject me to violence.” Regardinggender norms, Karin referred to Samuel's guiltyconscience over any shortcomings in the area of a gender-equal division ofdomestic work as a driving force for his violence.His bad conscience led to aggression. (…) So a whole lot was abouthim not getting a guilty conscience (…) cleaning in secret, and,like, pretending I hadn’t done anything (…) Because I knew that if Ihad (…) then there would be some kind of very strange form ofpunishment.Concerning I know he felt bad about being a white upper middle-class manhimself, in a way, and that he wanted to go out and defend allpeople … at the same time that he (…) With the pretext of going outto defend everyone he also violated me, because he also had to keepme weak, in a way.Relatedly, the driving forces for Samuel's violence were described as beinginterwoven with his identity as a feminist:the shame of getting turned on by hurting some for real (…) at thesame time that you’re the kindest feminist guyever.When asked about what caused the violence, Karin pointed towards shame overthe discrepancy between the way Samuel presented himself and the way he behaved,subordinate orinferior to women, and that this contributed to his violence.Karin added that Samuel probably felt Backlash dynamics are present in Karin's story, as her resistance to violentcontrol and boundary crossings were met with more violence. The disjunctionbetween Samuel's feminist principles and Karin's own experiences made itdifficult for her to understand the violence and receive support, however.Meanwhile, Samuel's identification as a feminist was described asintermingled with guilt and shame, which became driving forces for furtherviolence.Sofie, a university student, told her story about a relationship with Arif,which contained murder threats and psychological, sexual, economic, andmaterial violence, as well as physical violence which started when she waspregnant. Sofie referred to herself as Swedish, and to Arif as havingimmigrated from a non-European country.resources,including her job and her will to attain a higher education, and itescalated when she tried to practice resistance or did notfulfil gender norms. However, her narrative did not onlyconcern Arif's violence, but was in large share focused on experiencessubsequent to her disclosure of the violence to a midwife and then to thepolice. Due to concern for the newborn child, Sofie and her baby were takeninto custody, where her mental health and parental ability were investigated.It almost felt like I had been punished for reporting him to thepolice and telling the midwife about my problems. (…) It was reallydemeaning.In Sofie's story, violence was sparked by her That was my greatest fear, losing her. Because that’s what theythreatened me with, repeatedly. (…) I was really really sad, reallyshocked by … how they worked, that they don’t have knowledge aboutintimate partner violence (…), how violence affects you and … howthat can affect your parental ability temporarily. (…) It reallyfelt like I was punished for making the report.Sofie spoke about having been moved around “like a parcel” to different carehomes, with her child, unable to make decisions about their situation andfeeling criticized and blamed for the violence by care personnel. She wasalso facing the possibility of losing custody of her child.Sofie's story speaks not only of backlash dynamics in a violent relationship,then, but of feeling punished and threatened, and having her agency severelylimited, by support institutions after resisting IPVAW through seekinghelp.resources or independent agency, by herbreaking with traditional gender norms, by herresistance to violence and control, or by the partner'sfeeling of subordination. In addition, some women's narratives pointedto backlash dynamics at the societal level, often associating thesewith the women's own experiences of IPVAW but sometimes separating them frompersonal causative factors. This indicates critical reflection about and aco-existence of perspectives on the causes of IPVAW.This study explored stories of backlash in interviews with 23 women exposed to IPVAWin Sweden, through thematic and case-centered narrative analysis. Narrative segmentscoded under the theme of backlash were found in 20 of the interviews. These referredto violence as being triggered by the woman's existing or claimedThese findings are in line with research pointing to backlash dynamics associatedwith economic or educational resources in Sweden and Norway . They alResearchers have discussed how such norms can create relationship dynamics slidingtowards and into IPVAW and its normalization in Sweden .These iWhile the thematic analysis identified patterns in how the theme of backlash wasexpressed in the stories, the case-centered analysis pointed to diversities amongthem. Elise's story included all the thematic categories and was in that sense amore typical story, furthermore inviting cross-national comparison by sharing theuse of the cage metaphor with While showing that all the noted categories need not be present for the backlashtheme to be of relevance in an IPVAW narrative, Anne posited the partner's feelingof subordination as a central causative factor. This category was also important inKaroline's story, but with reference to Karoline's perception of herself as thestronger partner in the relationship. This self-perceived strength contributed tothe unfolding of the violence. Relatedly, Such difficulties have been observed by researchers noting that while IPVAW victimsin Sweden often resist identifying themselves as such, particular resistance can beseen among women who are educated or self-identify as strong . RelatedKarin's narrative, even more so than Karoline's, shows that IPVAW perpetrators andrelationships do not all look the same, and that the presence of feminism does notnecessarily safeguard against the exercise of power and IPVAW. In Karin's story, thediscord between the partner's feminist identity and his violent actions blended withguilt and shame, which became driving forces for further violence. Correspondingreferences to discrepancy between IPVAW perpetrators’ principles and actions , andto Studies of how IPVAW perpetrators in Sweden make sense of their violence haveidentified patterns of blaming particular circumstances, including the victim orsomething other than the real self, such as alcohol, neurochemistry, or loss ofcontrol . Such paSofie's story spoke not only of backlash dynamics in her violent relationship, butalso of feeling punished or threatened by societal organizations after havingreported the violence. This corresponds with research pointing to some IPVAWvictims’ experiences of revictimization through contact with legal, healthcare, orsocial service organizations in Sweden , or of spartner's feeling of subordination or disadvantage, asperceived by the women. That is in line with feelings of powerlessness long havingbeen posited as an important factor behind men's violence against women in Sweden or “showing some attitude, instead of beingsubordinate” (IP 19), the partner left. In one interview narrative, which wasone of the few containing no content coded under backlash, the woman noted thatthe relationship provided “no space” (IP 3) for resisting violence. In another,the woman spoke about hardly having considered resisting violence or makingclaims for gender equality, as her partner had the power “one hundred percentall the time” (IP 7). Thus, these narratives were less about backlash and moreabout violent partners’ authority remaining unchallenged.When speaking about causes of violence, only one narrative referred to speakingback to or questioning the partner's authority as the sole trigger. All otherstories contained other causative factors. Many spoke of jealousy or dynamics ofpower and control, not coded under the theme of backlash as there was no mentionof violence being triggered by resistance to that power or control. Aside fromthis, and in line with previous research showing a co-existence of structuraland individual-level explanatory factors in IPVAW victims' accounts , many spAlongside references to other causative factors, and also in accordance withprevious findings , severalThis presence of both victim-blaming and backlash in the narratives is noteworthyas these themes do quite different things, in terms of constructing identitiesand encouraging actions . With reThe act of narration in an interview situation is an active sense-making process,involving the narrator and the interviewer , as wellBy focusing on IPVAW, this study can be said to align with a dominant publicstory about IPV  as sometWhile the socioeconomic status of the participants differed, it is possible thatthey were more socioeconomically privileged than IPVAW victims in Swedenoverall. This could mean that they were more likely to experience violence dueto backlash dynamics .Finally, this qualitative study cannot shed light on the extent to which the highlevels of IPVAW in Sweden  can be eIn line with the amelioration hypothesis, high IPVAW prevalence rates in Sweden andneighboring Nordic countries  have beeMeanwhile, in international research on VAW, the amelioration hypothesis has longbeen accompanied by the backlash hypothesis—a co-existence that has also been termedparadoxical . From thWhile a combination of causal factors is surely of relevance to IPVAW , focusinIn conclusion, this study suggests that IPVAW research, policy, and practice shouldremain attentive to the potentially complex impacts of gender-related power dynamicson IPVAW causation, and to their importance for addressing and preventing IPVAW inSweden and elsewhere.


The present research explored parenting, stress, and resilience experiences among 16 Belgian, lesbian, first-time parental couples with donor-conceived children aged 3–72 months. In each couple, both mothers participated in a conjoint, semi-structured interview focused on their parenthood desire; the impact of stigmatization and social support from families of origin, friends, and institutions; and couple and family resources. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s reflective thematic analysis. Four themes were identified: (1) “The precious baby”: Realizing the parenthood project; (2) “Can we show ourselves in public without prying eyes?”: Family social visibility; (3) “It’s complicated!”: Parental legal recognition and role imbalance; and (4) “How can we handle this?”: Family resilience. The themes indicated that the child’s donor conception, the parents’ coming out, the non-gestational mother’s role, the legal obstacles encountered, and the need to find a balance between the two mothers in childcare tasks generated stress and required mothers to develop resilience strategies. The results suggest several potential areas for mental health practitioners to explore in clinical contexts when supporting intended lesbian mothers in their transition to parenthood through donor insemination. Despite the increase in research on lesbian and gay parenthood ,2,3,4,5,The parental couple has to deal with the acceptance of a new member  into the system and must redefine and re-adjust the dyad to form a triad. Further developmental family tasks include parental coordination in child-rearing, management of financial and household tasks, and the realignment of relations with extended family members . Accordingly, the transition to parenthood marks a new identity for the romantic couple that affects not only the romantic relationship, but also the overlapping parental system . FurtherGiven societal changes in family formation and the proliferation of more inclusive paths to parenthood, according to Carter and McGoldrick , the famNonetheless, in 2017, the National Consultative Ethics Committee (CCNE) reported that only eight European countries had legalized donor insemination for lesbian couples . In all other countries, lesbian couples were forced to go abroad to conceive, facing medical, legal, and psychological difficulties with respect to access to medical centers, ethical and moral arguments against donor insemination, and homonegativity from practitioners . In 2022The present study was conducted in Belgium, which was pioneering in its recognition of coparent adoption in 2006, aimed at reducing parenthood inequalities for sexual minority couples through donor insemination. According to the law on adoption among same-sex parents, the non-gestational mother in a female parented couple had to adopt her child in order for her to be legally recognized as a mother, a decision that legally established a disparity between different-gender couples who recurred to donor insemination and lesbian couples who went through the same procedure. In 2014, a new law was enacted, allowing from 2015 the lesbian non-gestational mother to be legally recognized even before the child’s birth, in force of a joint parenthood project with her partner. This law promotes a “dual filiation kinship” in female-parented couples who recur to donor insemination, in an effort to preserve the child’s interests. Since then, the recognition of the non-gestational mother in Belgium has become automatic in the case of the lesbian couple being legally married when the child is born; otherwise, a recognition practice has to be issued with the local authority even before the birth of her child or within the first year after birth . Thus, lIn their research on lesbian mothers with young, donor-conceived children in the Netherlands, Bos and colleagues  found thIf societal stigma is internalized by lesbian and gay intended parents, it can challenge or even delay their journey to parenthood. In a study by Fossoul and colleagues , half ofHowever, Bos and colleagues  showed tSexual stigma refers to the negative regard, inferior status, and relative powerlessness that society accords to individuals associated with non-heterosexual behaviors, identities, relationships, and communities . When a In this vein, Bos and Gartrell  highlighOf further relevance is that, when lesbian couples overcome stigma and initiate their parenthood project, other stressors may emerge, relating to the psychological, temporal, and financial costs of donor insemination procedures, as well as the potentially multiple attempts needed for the intended gestational mother to conceive . Such difficulties often result in sudden disillusionment, which intended mothers must manage and recover from, in order to persevere in their project . AdditioCoping strategies describe a set of cognitive and behavioral efforts aimed at controlling, reducing, or tolerating internal or external demands that threaten or exceed one’s resources . Most auSome lesbian mother families use a number of adaptive strategies to maintain equity in their transition to parenthood, including choosing names for each mother and dividing work and parenting roles ,36. IndeWhen lesbian couples become parents, their contact with the LGBTQ+ community (and particularly community members who are not parents) is likely to decrease . In the In a study on the strategies used by sexual minority parents to protect their children from stigmatization, Gross  found thLesbian mothers have been found to make significant efforts to prepare their child for stigmatization and questions from peers, and to help their child internalize a sense of legitimization about their family composition ,47,48. MThe present study aimed at describing the experiences of lesbian mothers through donor insemination, focusing on their sources of stress and discrimination and their strategies of resilience.A total of 16 Belgian, lesbian, first-time parental couples  with donor-conceived children  participated. Thirteen couples were legally married, while the remaining three were unmarried. The inclusion criteria were: (a) identifying as a cisgender lesbian woman, (b) being in a lesbian couple, (c) having a child conceived through donor insemination, and (d) residing in Belgium. Participants were recruited through snowball sampling techniques .The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Université Libre de Bruxelles. Mothers provided informed consent to participate and did not receive any compensation. In each parental couple, mothers took part in a joint semi-structured interview at home, between January 2017 and January 2019. The research questions were: When and how did you become a couple? When and how did you plan to become parents? How did you experience your transition to parenthood? How did your families of origin, friends, and colleagues react to your decision to become parents? Did you experience any sources of stress and support during your transition to parenthood? Interviews lasted, on average, 40–60 min, and were audio recorded and transcribed.Data analysis followed the principles of reflexive thematic analysis (TA)—a subtype of thematic analysis that emphasizes researcher subjectivity and reflexivity ,54. The Most of the collected data refer to the lesbian mothers’ experiences during their transition to parenthood and the initial months following their child’s birth. Four themes were identified: (1) “The precious baby”: Realizing the parenthood project; (2) “Can we show ourselves in public without prying eyes?”: Family social visibility; (3) “It’s complicated!”: Parental legal recognition and role imbalance; and (4) “How can we handle this?”: Family resilience.The first theme, “The precious baby”, reflects childbirth as the realization of the mothers’ plans for and journey towards parenthood, including their identification of which partner would be the gestational parent, their transition from being a couple to becoming parents, and their reconnection with their families of origin. In the words of Manon : “I have had the desire for a child since I knew that women could have them. It was inconceivable for me not to have a child”.After the birth, the baby is at the center of the family and becomes a priority. “As our center of interest”, Constance  described, “I don’t really have any part away from her. The little baby is all”. Louise  added, “She knows very well that she is the center of interest and that everyone revolves around her. She understands that very well”. The theme may also suggest renewed ties with the mothers’ families of origin, following the couple’s reconciliation with parents and grandparents. As reported by Alicia : “He’s the mascot, he’s the focal point of the family, he’s tightened everything up, he’s adored by everyone, but you’ll see he’s cute! This pride in having this child, I think that in addition to being an adorable child, it’s part of a symbol, even if I did not make a child for a symbol”.The second theme pertains to negative judgment towards the lesbian mother family, in the form of microaggressions, marginalization, and a lack of understanding. Once their child was born, some mothers found it difficult to expose themselves in public, due to indiscretion from the general public. For instance, while walking, some mothers were questioned about which one of them was truly the baby’s mother. Their answer—some form of “Beh, both of us”—would often result in astonished looks. To avoid any awkward feeling of unease, some mothers would simply avoid confrontation or exposure, making efforts towards invisibility, instead. The approach of Héloïse , “to live happily, let’s stay hidden”, seemed justifiable and was practiced by some couples.Additionally, many of the mothers reported encountering gratuitous insults, often on social networks. Victoria  was dismayed when she discovered some heinous comments left in response to articles about sexual minority parenting: “I always wonder about these people who spend their lives answering on forums, because here, on the other hand, I have already read some very violent stuff! If there is an article on same-sex parenting, this is where you see the comments!”As lesbian mother families are not yet fully recognized in the eyes of society, many of the mothers felt that they were not perceived as normal families, and this increased their internalized heteronormativity. “I did not choose at all to fall in love with Pascaline ”, said Hélène . She continued: “To choose, I was with a boy, and I would have preferred to continue. It would have been much easier. Afterwards, I have no regrets, but I want to say that it would have been easier. Now, we know that we are not the norm. We know that it challenges”.The third theme refers to the mothers’ lack of legal recognition of parental rights prior to the change in law recognizing the dual filiation kinship for children born in lesbian mother families through donor insemination. In the previous legal context, the non-gestational mother, when unmarried and not the adoptive parent, had no rights and no obligations towards the child, leading to fear over a loss of parental rights. As reported by Elodie : “Alice  had absolutely no rights at all. From the moment the child was born, she had nothing more to say. It was quite complicated for us, and it worried me a bit. There was a long journey for my partner to legally become a mother to her daughter”.The mothers wanted to live as two mothers, without hierarchy or distinction, and with equal parental rights. They did not want to be ousted from their family, confronted with the judgments of others, discriminated against, or subjected to endless administrative red tape. They also wished to avoid legal obligations to adopt the child from the “other mother”, in order to be officially recognized in the eyes of the law and others. Likewise, they did not want to feel apart from and left out of their family. However, the non-gestational mother did not have the same legal status in parental recognition compared to the gestational mother, and for many of the non-gestational mothers, fear, waiting, stress, and apprehension manifested in an emotional roller coaster. “The most stressful thing”, said Marie , “was learning from the administrative employee that I was not her mother!” Pauline  likewise reported, “But that too, anxiety. We went to the town to get the identity card. I saw my wife whitening in fear that they would tell us that I was the mom and she was no longer the mom!”Some of the mothers remembered feeling non-existent or unrecognized by authorities during simple procedures such as the registration of their child with the municipality. One can only imagine the heartbreaking feeling that Alice  must have experienced when, at one of these appointments, the clerk responsible for the administrative task spoke only to the woman who was registered as the “mother” of the child: “They only spoke to you because I didn’t exist”, said Alice.This concern extended even further when the mothers considered the risk that the gestational mother could die and the child could be taken away from the other  mother and placed with another family. Such thinking could generate intense anxiety for both mothers. Indeed, Valentine  raised the fact that even being in a civil partnership “would not change anything” and concluded that “it is an aberration”. For some mothers, this phase of administrative and legal procedures surrounding the non-genetic mother’s adoption of the child was experienced as “the only, the real difficulty”.The fourth theme illustrates anti-stigmatization strategies and resources to increase family resilience by seeking social and family support and preparing for potential insults. Commonly, the mothers used humor and self-deprecation as weapons to evade difficult and unpleasant social situations and reinforce the couple’s complicity, as explained by Pascaline , who used humor to defuse vulgar remarks. In a similar vein, Hélène  ironically reported that, while filling in administrative papers, she retorted to the employee who asked her the name of the child’s father: “Brad Pitt!”With the aim of strengthening couple cohesion and harmony, the mothers widely practiced task sharing. As Mila  explained, “We always do everything together”. Likewise, Elodie  insisted that she could count on her partner, under all circumstances, to avoid feeling overwhelmed: “If all is not ready, it does not matter, because Alice manages”. A balanced sharing of tasks and parental roles was very common within these couples, constituting a powerful internal family resource. In Lea’s  words, “There is one who is going to get Camille up and dress her, while the other goes down to prepare lunch. She does the housework while I go to bathe”. Likewise, Jennifer  reported, “Me, I choose her clothes because Adèle can’t match”. Adele  added: “Jennifer was breastfeeding her, so I was the one giving her the bath to have something intimate, just the two of us. And if not, well we are really interchangeable”.An additional heavy and significant factor for the mothers was criticism about the lack of a male figure, as they did not want their child to suffer from a lack of a father. To overcome this, some mothers  wanted their child to be surrounded by male individuals. Adrianne  explained that she and her coparent wanted a man  who was close to their family circle to play a significant role in their child’s life. They believed that, as long as he was a good influence on the child, and was involved during the child’s development, they would make him an integral part of the family.Another aspect raised by the mothers related to their terms of address. In this regard, Hélène  explained that she did not hesitate to show her children photos that clarified who she and her partner were: “That’s mum and mum, because you have two mums”. Pauline  and her partner opted for “mum” and “mamour”, while Pascaline and Hélène  preferred to use “mama” and “babou”. Some mothers used more normative terms, such as “the two mothers” or “mum” and “mum”. In the mothers’ view, all of these strategies helped their child(ren) decide what to call them.Such naming strategies also served to educate teachers and other families at school. However, the mothers were also particularly attentive to the choice of their child’s school, a decision that, in some cases, was made even before the child’s birth. The mothers felt that openness and communication were important principles to pass on. Their careful consideration of schools related to their awareness that many difficulties could be experienced at school, such as stigmatization, micro-aggressions, and harassment. Thus, many mothers directly questioned and confronted school principals before selecting a school. As Pauline  described, “Whether it’s at school, in relation to teachers and all that, well, when we talk about it, they know that we have been through certain things, so we can both go to a meeting and there is no problem”. Likewise, Marie  reported, “And at school, I think that, from the start, I went to find the teacher and I said to her ‘There you go, I just wanted to explain a little situation to you’. So there you are, I was telling her, we explained to her, ‘Well there you go, Nora has a mother, a babou, two ladies, two persons, two ladies, two women! Who… well uh… who have a baby girl’. And then she changed schools”.The choice of school could also be made according to the recommendations of family members and friends. In many cases, this allowed children to have bonds  both inside and outside of the school, thus strengthening their relational networks. Some mothers also enrolled their child in the same school as their cousins, seeking to reduce their child’s feelings of loneliness. Indeed, for Adrianne , the decision to put her child in the same school as her cousins constituted a relief, by telling herself that “the transition would perhaps be easier”. Finally, some mothers enrolled their child in a school where the teacher was known, in order to minimize the risk of parent–teacher disagreement.However, the mothers were aware that they would not always have all of the answers to their child’s questions, and this was an additional source of stress. Mila  explained that her greatest fear was an inability to find the right words and the right explanation to reassure her child at the right time: “They’re going to break my heart because I won’t get an answer. We can imagine, we cannot foresee all the questions, it is more for me these tests that await us”.To prevent this situation, some mothers engaged in a process of documentation, information gathering, reading, and consulting specialists to obtain all of the necessary information. This strategy allowed them to form a global vision of their situation with hindsight, engaging in a search for meaning to arm themselves for difficult questions their child may ask about the family. As Hélène  described, “Yes, books on same-sex parenting. We also have a book, The Mystery of Baby Seeds, for example. It will explain a bit of where they come from. Because we are very clear, also to say that this baby was not made just between us. There was a gift, from a man”. Likewise, Mila  reported, “But we think it’s important because we say to ourselves that there shouldn’t be a lot of studying. We tried to learn, to read, to prepare for that and we really struggled to find documentation. I may have found five pounds at all broken. And these are always very concrete testimonies”.One of the main questions that occupied mothers’ minds was the question of when they should tell their child about their origins. Was there an ideal age? Hélène  presented a book that suggested that the ideal time was the child’s seventh birthday, as this was associated with the onset of the “age of reason”, or the formation of rational thought. However, as mentioned, most mothers had started talking to their child about the family situation, to some degree, on a day-to-day basis. It was not uncommon for the mothers to consult child psychologists for guidance and outside support in these efforts, as Adrianne  noted: “Maybe we thought we would try to see a child psychologist to chat with him a little bit and see what he thought about it, which was better for the kid not to unsettle him”.All of these ways of coping were aimed at countering heteronormativity and homophobic stigma. The adoption of these strategies seemed to reinforce the mothers’ sense of parenting competence and family balance, while helping to reduce their anxiety around the fact that their family deviated from the norm. Their central mission was to establish stability and safety in their environment, in order to convey security to their child and protect them from potential stigmatization from the outside world.The present study aimed at shedding light on the various stressors and coping strategies experienced by lesbian mothers through donor insemination in the Belgian context. The results indicated that, even if the lesbian couples went through the steps reported by Carter and McGoldrick  for explMoreover, couples also had to prepare themselves to deal with extrafamilial and intrafamilial questions, doubts, and a lack of understanding about their decision to have a child. The mothers perceived these further steps as stressors that they would not have to face if they were a “traditional” heterosexual parent family, and that had a significant detrimental effect on their mental health . A furthFrom a clinical perspective, some of the most interesting results of the present study describe the mothers’ strategies and coping methods for managing stress and stigmatization. Although stigmatization and heteronormativity played significant roles in the mothers’ lives, they had various strategies to alleviate the stress that these caused. One such strategy was summarized by the phrase “to live happily, let’s stay hidden”, indicating that some mothers preferred to avoid public visibility as a lesbian mother family, in order to enjoy a quiet family life. Of note, numerous studies have investigated the themes of coming out and the public visibility of sexual minority people in various contexts, highlighting that hiding strategies significantly correlate with lower levels of mental health .However, in the present study, “coming out” referred not to sexual identity, but to family life. This could be hidden in only a few scenarios, such as meeting with strangers; in other situations , it was not possible for the mothers to hide the nature of their parental relationships to the child. In these situations, many mothers reported episodes of discrimination and stigmatization, since they could not avoid others’ opinions of what a family should look like. Most of the mothers’ personal concerns about being discriminated against (or seeing their children discriminated against) were connected to these places, suggesting that further preventive actions should be undertaken to educate professionals in such contexts to better interact with non-traditional families. In this vein, future studies should investigate the consequences of strategies of social invisibility or visibility, especially on children’s self-esteem and internal representations of their family, over the long term.A further interesting factor that the mothers perceived as a stressor concerned their child’s potential questions about their origins and genetic make-up, as well as why they have such a family and why they must face episodes of discrimination and marginalization. The mothers’ concerns underlined their need for better professional support; while they hoped to find answers to their child’s questions in articles and from practitioners, their efforts were often frustrated. Some of their doubts and worries associated with potential questions and stigmatization from either their children or their inner social circles may have been linked to internalized homophobia, as reported by previous studies. That is, they may have questioned themselves and their parenting skills due to an internalized idea that their sexual orientation made them less capable of raising and caring for their children . Overall, in clinical work with lesbian mothers and their children, it may be helpful to consider that internalized homophobia may intertwine with, and inherently reflect, external negative views on family structures that differ from the traditional, cisgender, mother–father model. In this regard, news media have a central role as they may tend towards demonization, titillation, or constructions of their parenting model as a seduction-based breakdown of some traditional family ideal . This exThe current study presents some limitations. The first one refers to the sample size and the convenience nature of the sample which recruited members of LGBT+ associations and the authors’ acquaintances; these factors do not allow for generalizability of our results. Lastly, data were collected within a national sample and the mothers’ experiences and thoughts may not be representative of lesbian mothers living outside of Belgium or of those who went through donor insemination in this country later, with a different social and legal context.The present study highlighted not only the stressors that lesbian mother families face, but also the resources and coping strategies that lesbian mothers deploy to deal with the obstacles they meet in their transition to parenthood. In doing so, this study contributes to advanced research into the psychology of sexual orientations, in the face of prejudices and stereotyping against sexual minority people that still pervade modern societies ,65, as wOf note, the present study focused on the experiences of lesbian mothers, and many of the mothers may have focused their attention on the situation they were experiencing at that time . In this regard, future studies should seek to investigate the resources and strategies that lesbian mothers enact during the first steps of their transition to parenthood . While previous studies have focused on the salient transitions that characterize intended lesbian mothers ,15,18, t