Abstract
The 21st century has witnessed an emergence of strategies in a variety of fields that promote empathy as a catalyst for change. This paper seeks to understand how, and to what effect these strategies have had on the realisation of women’s human rights. Guthridge et al. previously developed a model of affective empathy for advancing gender equality. The present study aims to understand the practical application of this model, which is based on three identified substrates of empathy: intersubjectivity, multisensory engagement and empathic embodiment. We interviewed 16 experts from eight countries about how their programmes used one or more of these substrates to bring about gender equality or other social justice outcomes. We found that programmes must first consider the context and the conditions of the problem they were targeting. Then, intersubjectivity, multisensory engagement and empathic embodiment were amplified by building a connection through empathising with others; where empathic experiences are achieved through embodiment and supported by ongoing dialogue. Further, we elucidate these seemingly ambiguous elements by providing real-world examples. Now, we must pioneer new ways to test and impart this emerging knowledge through cultural adaptations and intervention evaluations with the ultimate goal of achieving long-term impact on population-based behaviour change strategies, national policy and international human rights implementation for the advancement of women’s human rights.
Introduction
Despite well-meaning and concerted effort by individuals, groups and governments, no country in the world has attained, or is close to attaining, gender equality. By current trajectories, it will take 134 years (or until around 2,159) to achieve gender parity (World Economic Forum, 2024). In a systematic review, Guthridge et al. (2022) examined 30 years of interventions that sought to promote gender equality. They found that in the 78 studies reviewed, most interventions targeted gender inclusion without seeking to change systems or structures of inequality. As many as 50% of interventions that attempted to achieve social change did not achieve their aim. Furthermore, education and awareness-raising strategies (the most common interventions) had only partial beneficial effects. Interventions that sought to promote agency, empowerment, or individual leadership did not bring about the structural changes required to eliminate discrimination against women. Ultimately, it was found that small concessions were granted to women only where considered necessary to maintain peace, while substantial changes were rejected as a means of maintaining patriarchal power. Overall, the key findings from that systematic review cast doubt upon the trajectory of women’s human rights as progressively achieving meaningful change for women and girls (NB. Refers to both ciswomen and transwomen throughout the paper).
Further evidence from the systematic review by Guthridge et al. (2022) suggested the need to address the culture around men’s and boys’ emotions, particularly the fear, hostility, resentment, and jealousy that can arise when gender norms are challenged. The authors argued that empathy can ameliorate these negative emotional responses to change; however, only a small number of interventions in the review included empathic processes or manipulations. Yet Fuchs (2019, p. 7) suggests that discrimination, prejudice, and even genocide can be considered a:
‘Dissociation of empathy’: [which is] the mechanisms of exclusion, [where] excluding, depersonalising and dehumanising ideologies and policies were also able to neutralise or suspend basic empathetic feelings in the perpetrators toward their fellow humans.
Empathic ability facilitates emotions such as shame, guilt, and resentment, but also forgiveness, respect, fairness and gratitude. We therefore still need to learn from changemakers about how they approach achieving social change using affective empathy as core to the proliferation of prosocial behaviour (Yin & Wang, 2023) and the reduction and elimination of discrimination against women.
Discrimination against women cannot be eliminated while discriminatory attitudes and gender-based stereotypes persist. The Convention of the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which seeks to eliminate discrimination against women and enable women to enjoy the full range of human rights on a basis of equality with men, requires a range of measures to be adopted by state parties. Recognising the gendered stereotypes and practices that drive gender inequality, state parties are called on to abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices which constitute discrimination against women (art 2(f)), to modify social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women with a view to eliminating gender-based stereotypes (article 5(a)) and eliminate gender stereotyping in all forms of education (article 10(c)). Despite being essential to the elimination of discrimination against women, the operationalisation of article 5(a) remains poor (R. Stewart et al., 2021). In order to achieve the transformative potential of article 5, we must explore new strategies that target discriminatory mindsets. The conceptional paper by Guthridge et al. (2023) proposed a broad, theoretical, preventive and relational approach to creating and enhancing novel interventions to accelerate gender equality based on affective empathy. In that paper, they described the main elements of affective empathy as intersubjectivity, multisensory engagement, and empathic embodiment. They proposed that their model of affective empathy could have the capacity to operationalise the normative fight against gender stereotypes in line with article 5(a) of CEDAW. Much of their analysis of affective empathy aligns with the works of Thomas Fuchs, who states that in affective empathy (which he refers to as ‘primary empathy’) ‘mutual incorporation implies a reciprocal interaction of two agents in which each body schema extends and embodies the other’ (Fuchs, 2017, p. 33). This implies that through empathy, the limits of our bodies are not trapped within our skin.
In Guthridge et al. (2023), intersubjectivity was defined as the multidirectional and perpetual interaction with others, where it is not the subject of two people, but the relation between them that is important (Michael, 2014). An example of intersubjectivity is found in the immersion of a parent and infant playing together; where their joy is shared rather than divided between them; where they ‘catch’ each other’s emotions and expressions (Fuchs, 2017). When intersubjectivity occurs in unequal relationships, it has the potential for the privileged person to uplift the Other because they see ‘us’ (not ‘them’) in their common humanity. However, in dehumanising someone, we take away their dignity by removing their subjectivity, making it impossible to develop a state of intersubjectivity, and thus, making empathy unachievable.
Multisensory engagement was defined in the model as the perception of information from more than one sense that is typically converted from sensory formats, such as visual or auditory, into a motor format to enable us to understand, predict, and feel what another is feeling (Fabbri-Destro & Rizzolatti, 2008). For example, people with tactile sensitivity have been shown to be more empathic to the sensations of others (Schaefer et al., 2022). This demonstrates that our senses create an enabling environment in which to create empathy, which in turn can lead to equal relations.
Finally, empathic embodiment in the model entailed mirroring of others from an empathic base, primarily the mirroring of postures, gestures, vicarious sensations and pain, as well as moods and emotions (Tanner et al., 2008). As Guthridge et al. (2023) observe:
Mirroring activates neurological processes associated with affective empathy and results in, for example, smiling when another smiles, laughing together with others, crying at another’s tears, grimacing when another expresses pain, or yawning when another yawns.
We witness empathic embodiment in crowds at sporting events, religious gatherings and political rallies that all use vocal synchronicity to reinforce a sense of community or solidarity for a cause that humanises (or otherwise demonises) the Other (Guthridge et al., 2023). From this position, we hypothesise that the extent to which we mimic others is equal to the equality we afford them. Together, these three substrates of affective empathy were theorised to help us feel and understand the experiences of Others. If affective empathy towards women and girls can be enhanced, this might help to promote prosocial behaviours associated with equality.
In the current paper, the model of affective empathy is examined to better understand the use of each of these substrates in practice. This paper takes the next important step beyond theoretical conceptualisation to consider empathy’s practical use by qualitatively ‘testing’ the proposed substrates of affective empathy in vivo in order to optimise the efficacy of our model. Empathy here is defined as ‘the ability to experience affective and cognitive states of another person, while maintaining a distinct self, in order to understand the other’ (Guthridge & Giummarra, 2025, p. 2). Affective empathy is ‘one’s emotional, sensorimotor, and visceral response to the affective state of other (sic)’ (Yu & Chou, 2018, p. 2). The cultural value of empathy was established by Thomas F. Pettigrew and Tropp (2008), who found it to be a strong positive mediator of prosocial behaviours. However, many studies seeking social change have focused on the role of cognitive empathy [defined here as the comprehension of another’s emotional experience (Reniers et al., 2022) by imagining what that person feels (i.e., Theory of Mind) or putting oneself in another’s ‘shoes’ (e.g., perspective taking)], rather than affective empathy. For instance, Lu and McKeown (2018) examined the effects of cognitive empathy on altruistic behaviours towards women as an outgroup using a dictator game. They found that participants with higher empathic concern were more likely to punish a perpetrator than compensate a female victim, but people with higher perspective-taking traits compensated the female victim more than they punished the perpetrator. Similarly, Moss-Racusin et al. (2018) evaluated a video-based intervention and A. Stewart (2014) examined a men’s bystander intervention; both found that cognitive empathy was a viable conduit for strengthening the implementation of women’s human rights. However, no studies appeared to have explored the role of affective empathy (feeling what another is feeling) in reducing gender bias or inequality.
Contextual Social Psychology & Feminist Theory
To understand the use of affective empathy in creating positive change for women and girls, we explored interventions through the lens of contextual social psychology (T.F. Pettigrew, 2021). In this theoretical framework, the effects at the microlevel are modified by mesolevel contextual conditions within macrolevel systems. Contextual social psychology in this sense illustrates how microphenomena, such as emotions, can shape macrostructures, such as patriarchy. Key microlevel characteristics of interest to the current study included empathic traits, empathic leadership, and individual healing. Mesolevel platforms include the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW Committee) review process; primary, secondary and tertiary schools; community groups; parliaments; technological devices and sport. Macrolevel systems are legal, social, cultural and political structures, such as gender norms, the human rights treaty system and affirmative action policies. In this study, we acknowledge that gender equality throughout society (macro) is influenced by the level of confidence and receptiveness (micro) to positive relationships (meso) with women and girls. Affective empathy, in this sense, is a potential microlevel mediator between, for example, anti-discrimination laws and the ‘emotional temperature’ of a community that could influence the realisation of gender equality.
We also acknowledged and applied feminist theory (Butler, 2004; Crenshaw, 1991; de Beauvoir, 1972; Deutsch, 2007) when designing the study, analysing the data and interpreting the findings. This included understanding gender as embodied relational power, the importance of intersectionality in designing and delivering interventions, and the need for feminist resistance in small, yet profound ways. To this end, Simone de Beauvoir (1972, p. 173) wrote that woman is ‘the absolute Other, without reciprocity.’ However, we will argue that through human connection, and thus reciprocal relationships, women cease to be the Other. Butler (2004, p. 1) reasserts this perspective by stating ‘one does not do one’s gender alone.’ As gender is a kind of ‘doing,’ relational power is a perpetual process among individuals and groups that is sometimes physical, but that is more often covert and unconscious (McCarthy & Moon, 2018). A lack of reciprocation entrenches difference and inequality (Dutton et al., 2014).
In feminist theory, the body has always been a primary site for practising personal resistance to sexism and is important to consider this alongside the model of affective empathy. However, in this paper we reject the Cartesian binary of mind-body, and consider embodiment a holistic process; a performance rather than a state (White, 2009). Thus, embodied power is relational, and intersectionality is an engagement with this power, and is therefore an osmotic process of achieving an equilibrium amid power struggles. Here, we hold oppression and empowerment within us, in our mind-body, where the mind and the body are non-dualistic dimensions of one being (Bottici, 2017). Understanding a non-dualist conception of mind-body is particularly important because women’s human rights are often wrongly defined by women’s objectified body, rather than by an objective body of law. By this we mean women’s rights (or lack thereof) are often defined by what women can and cannot do with their body/subject from the shape of their body, to what they wear to cover it, and their rights related to health of their body. Instead, we champion equality based on the rights codified by an objective body of law, such as CEDAW.
Finally, we also consider Crenshaw’s (1989) important feminist work on the compounding effect of discrimination on grounds that intersect with gender. Recent iterations of the women’s movements have sought to address the gendered intersectional experience of race, religion, class, and other markers of identity. Feminisms in this sense encompass the experience of solidarity and resistance aimed at transforming prevailing relational hierarchal power. It is a matter of understanding that gender is diverse and fluid, and that resistance can be small and subtle, yet profound. That is not to say the feminist movements are ineffective or non-transformative, but that a contemporary characterisation of movements challenges our desire for grand-scale revolution. Emancipation can be achieved by resisting commonplace, experiential constructions of gender. The findings of the current research will provide key insights into how ‘undoing gender’ (Deutsch, 2007, p. 122) in social interactions can reduce gender differences, given that gender is created in the to-and-fro of social experiences.
Study Aim & Framework
To address the gap in knowledge about the role of affective empathy in gender equality we sought to learn what experts in social and behaviour change interventions understand about the impact of affective empathy, including its substrates (i.e., intersubjectivity, multisensory engagement, and empathic embodiment) on enhancing social justice or gender equality. The ultimate goal of this study was to contribute new ideas to support the development and implementation of interventions that successfully promote gender equality in all facets of society. We focused on interventions seeking to enhance gender equality, as well as broader social justice programmes that used elements of affective empathy as a means of gaining insight into how change can be achieved via affective empathy. The central research question for the study was: What do experts in social justice say about the use of the substrates of affective empathy (i.e., intersubjectivity, multisensory engagement, and empathic embodiment) in practice as a means of advancing gender equality?
Method
Expert reflections on the achievement of gender equality and social justice were solicited using semi-structured interviews, which is the preferred method for investigating expert perspectives (Hammarberg et al., 2016). The study was conducted in accordance with the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) guidelines (O’Brien et al., 2014; Supplemental Material: Table 1) and was approved by the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee, project number 25783. To protect participants’ privacy, pseudonyms were allocated and organisational names and identifying details were omitted or disguised.
Reflexivity Statement
The authors are white, tertiary educated, middle-class, heterosexual, cisgender women aged 45 and above with interests in gender, equality, and social justice. We monitored and discussed our responses to the study data and what we knew about the experts or their programmes to reduce the potential for implicit biases to influence the analyses. Potential biases included the belief that women are more empathic than men, and therefore will have greater understanding of empathic approaches to achieving gender equality; and that grassroots activists, policy advocates, and tertiary academics would have responses that differed according to diverse socio-educational experiences. We were mindful that interviews may have been influenced by Global North-South power dynamics.
Participants and Recruitment
Recruitment of participants occurred from the 5th of August 2020 to the 5th of October 2020. We sought experts who worked in gender equality or in the development, implementation, or evaluation of interventions or campaigns designed to create social or behaviour change that used at least one element of affective empathy (intersubjectivity, multisensory engagement, empathic embodiment). We included experts beyond the women’s sector, such as persons engaged in diverse programmes in technology, risk management, and sport. Interviews were conducted at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic when employment was precarious and interventions were withdrawn, which significantly curtailed our sample size. Eligible participants were aged at least 18 years and spoke English. It was not an inclusion criterion that the interventions or campaigns were delivered in English. We used purposive sampling to ensure maximum variation in sector, location, setting, and the potential use of empathy-based strategies. Experts were identified from wide internet, listserv, and publication searches. Some experts were previously known to the authors. Eligible experts were invited to participate by email; those who agreed gave written consent via email prior to the interviews, and verbally before commencing the interview. Participants were aware that we sought to understand the role of empathy in advancing gender equality. There was no risk of harm to participants beyond inconvenience. While participants did not directly benefit from the research, social benefit may include greater understanding of how to create a more equal world and reduce discrimination against women.
Procedure
We developed an interview guide that included the following key questions: ‘What role does empathy play in [your initiative]?,’‘What advice would you give to others thinking about integrating empathy into their work?’ and ‘What challenges have you faced when promoting empathic attitudes and behaviours?’ The interviewer (first author) asked further questions to encourage elaboration on the elements of affective empathy relevant to each programme. The rationale for these questions was to guide the participant in identifying how they use empathy (or a substrate of empathy), what they have learnt in the process, and what knowledge they can impart about using empathy. This included both the beneficial and adverse effects of its use, and how it can be adapted to different cultural contexts. The interview guide was reviewed after each interview to refine the questions and explore emerging topics. Participants were offered the option of being interviewed via phone, WhatsApp, or Zoom. Interviews were audio recorded, with permission, and fully transcribed. Participants were given the opportunity to review and amend their transcripts before analysis to ensure that their views were accurately represented.
Data Analysis
The transcripts were organised in NVivo (2023) and analysed thematically using a reflexive approach with a contextual social psychology orientation to capture patterns in the data for interpretation (Braun & Clarke, 2006, 2021, 2022, 2023). Familiarity with the data was gained through the interview transcription and re-reading process. Codes were developed inductively by the first author. All authors then reviewed, discussed, and revised the codes into themes until agreement was reached on the thematic hierarchy. Themes were defined and graphically illustrated (Figure 1) with reflection on how the themes interact with the three substrates of empathy (i.e., intersubjectivity, multisensory engagement and empathic embodiment). Exemplary quotations for each theme were identified after analyses.
The elements of affective empathy used to achieve gender equality under the right conditions, and cognisant of the context and the need for dialogue.
Given the application of a previously proposed model of affective empathy (Guthridge et al., 2023), in the final phase of analysis we applied the five stages of framework analysis (J. Ritchie et al., 2013; J Ritchie and Spencer, 2002) to the experts’ perspectives on affective empathy and its substrates. Framework analysis identifies, describes, and interprets patterns in an iterative way within a phenomenon of interest by using the organised structure of both inductive and deductive analyses (Goldsmith, 2021). Framework analysis was chosen to examine experts’ understanding of the use of the elements of affective empathy in their programmes because this method enabled us to interrogate and refine the structure and content of the existing model of affective empathy as described by Guthridge et al. (2023) and apply it to our findings in this study.
Results and Discussion
Participant Characteristics
Sixteen experts (14 women, 2 men) were interviewed, 13 by Zoom, two by phone, and one by WhatsApp. The length of interviews ranged from 31 to 63 min. Eight experts were based in Australia (seven from Melbourne, Victoria, and one from remote New South Wales), two were from the USA, and there was one each from the United Kingdom, Canada, Iraq, Nepal, Malaysia, and Spain. Seven experts were affiliated with non-government organisations (NGOs), three were academics, two were from the technology industry, one was a former parliamentarian, and one was a former member of the CEDAW Committee. Two experts were from the same NGO; their views, although independent, were consistent. Ten participants took up the offer to amend their transcripts; revisions varied from minor to major. The final draft of the manuscript was sent to participants for comment.
Intervention Characteristics
Interventions that used intersubjectivity were social media campaigns and Indigenous Australian ‘yarning circles.’ Interventions that used multisensory engagement were social impact games and sports interventions. Empathic embodiment interventions included sensory deprivation experiences and virtual reality experiences. The interventions, their inferred goals, and what experts believed helped them to achieve their goals are summarised in Table 1. Organisational or individual goals were inferred from a combination of answers to the interview questions and each organisation’s website information and associated publications. Overall, participants reported that they believed that working in solidarity, reflecting, healing, sharing stories, rebuilding relationships/lives and women’s leadership were key to achieving gender equality.
Type of Intervention Associated With Participants, and What They Believed Helped Them Achieve Their Goals.
Note. CEDAW = Convention of the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women; NGO = non-government organisation; VR = virtual reality.
Not a pseudonym (with permission).
After discussion, the authors filtered down the themes to one key reflection on the role of empathy from one expert, and four major themes that arose across experts that illustrate the key concepts that must be considered when promoting gender equality. The reasoning behind using the reflection from one expert (in addition to the themes) was due to that expert’s singular mission to advance empathy intentionally and explicitly in their programmes, while other participants incorporated empathy in a more passive, unconscious and indirect way. Consequently, the expert who deliberately used empathy as an agent of change shared highly relevant and very specific evidence about the benefits/detriments of empathy that did not arise in the same way from the other experts. Therefore, we begin by heeding Mary’s (NGO representative) reflections on empathy before describing each theme in turn.
Overarching Reflection on Empathy by Mary
Mary was a member of an NGO that consciously and actively used empathy as the main driver behind their work. Mary began by reflecting that:
I had realised that the missing thread in so much misery and violence and cruelty was empathy. And whether it was as simple as childhood bullying, whether it was as serious as the Holocaust, whether it was domestic violence, child abuse, neglect, my feeling was working in all those areas of suffering that I had realised that the common denominator that was missing was empathy; that there were no monsters. (Mary, NGO representative)
According to Mary, achieving gender equality included changing the behaviours of perpetrators of violence, harassment, discrimination, and sexism. From her perspective, empathy could overcome gendered forms of discrimination without constructing false dichotomies between perpetrators and victims. Rather than being adversarial or litigious in overcoming inequalities, which is a common and valid method, Mary advocated for the use of strategies that support the development of empathy throughout childhood, such as through the macrolevel change enabled through population health programmes offered in instructional classrooms.
Empathy is a process that can be expressed or suppressed both by nature and by nurture (Decety & Jackson, 2006). Mary found through her work that it is the relationship between an infant and their parent in the first year of life where ‘empathy blooms or fades.’ This indicates that teaching empathy to adults or adolescents may be developmentally too late, although not impossible or completely ineffective. In this context, it was recognised that there is more than one kind of empathy, and Mary highlighted that it may be easier to train individuals in cognitive empathy, but that it is affective empathy that ‘makes us human.’
Affective empathy is hard to teach. In fact, Mary highlighted that ‘empathy cannot be taught, but it can be caught. And it’s caught in those moments where you make yourself vulnerable and connected with the Other.’ The idea of ‘catching’ empathy was illustrated through the notion of emotional contagion or mirroring as a key component of empathic embodiment (Elfenbein, 2014). Choosing not to empathise may protect you from embodied pain, but to not feel pain is to not be human (Mary, NGO representative). Other psychological factors can also impede empathy, such as greed, arrogance, entitlement, fear, anger, shame, and guilt (Guthridge et al., 2022). Alternatively, immersion in awe, gratitude, or love can create human connections that accelerate the progress towards gender equality.
With these reflections in mind, we now consider four themes as patterns of shared meaning amongst experts (Braun & Clarke, 2021). The themes were: connection, embodiment, experience and dialogue. These themes, and their subthemes are summarised in Table 2. We discuss each in turn.
Overall Themes & Subthemes Derived From the Thematic Analysis.
Themes
Theme: Connection
The first theme to consider is human connection built for the purpose of creating equality between humans (Figure 1). This connection starts the moment we are born. It is established through shared feelings experienced via the senses. In contemporary society, connection may also be established through digitally mediated spaces, such as hashtags and virtual reality.
Intersubjectivity (one substrate of affective empathy) is the precursor to connection. Intersubjectivity is not an exchange of facts, but of feelings (Hanna, 1996). As gender is relational, intersubjectivity is the conduit that mediates this relational process. Or as Yaghoubi-Notash et al. (2019, p. 305) state in summarising Judith Butler: gender is ‘constructed performatively,’ and this performance is enacted and re-enacted through the performing bodies/subjectivities via interaction where gender/subject becomes social embodiment, or in our case, becomes the enactment of equality or inequality. The changing nature of gender/body/subject is defined by the changing nature of agentic and non-agentic power/relations. The height of agentic power impacts dialogic possibilities (i.e., the possibilities of human rights expression) because if the parties are not equal, dialogue is unachievable. But through negotiation and renegotiation in constructions or performances of gender we can achieve equality. Or as Simone de Beauvoir declares ‘one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman’ (Butler, 1998).
Sponsorship, mentoring and constructive conversation are meso interventions that can establish a foundation for intersubjectivity between parties, but they do not ensure a connection that leads to reconciliation (Alice, NGO representative) or a change in narrative (Binsa, activist). Our participants highlighted that by connecting to others we begin to understand them. It generally feels good to connect, as Mary (NGO representative) stated:
It’s a human connection that is palpable, and when you have that, you have the beginnings of a productive, collaborative, equitable relationship. And I think one of the things we overlook about empathy is that it is a great equity builder.
Building a connection for the purpose of equity is about being responsive to other people’s needs, where emotions are the connective tissue. Ulaan (academic) also referred to the role of connection when building solidarity that transcends identity politics. The ability to connect starts to develop the moment a child is born (or even before birth) through the attachment to their primary caregivers, and is generalised through socialisation, which are meso processes (Ho et al., 2020). A secure attachment is an antecedent to empathy; however, empathy also reciprocally influences attachment (Xu et al., 2022). Mary extrapolated on this point by stating that:
Children develop the capacity to connect to others through their feelings, not through their skin colour, not through their hijab, not through their culture, but through their feelings.
This connection is developed via the senses (Di Plinio et al., 2022). For infants, it is initiated through touch. Although touch alone may create a connection, it is not sufficient to elicit affective empathy.
Empathy must be nurtured beyond infancy. In modern digital spaces, we need something to link the spaces between us. Hashtags have arisen as a way to connect geographically disparate people, and their ideas globally, which can mobilise collective power (Bridget, academic). Trending hashtags become worldwide news and enable individuals to become part of something that is bigger than themselves (Bridget, academic). Hashtags were considered to be a means of ‘casting your vote’ on an issue (Bridget, academic). Bridget argued that it is democracy in motion as hashtags bear witness to discrimination against women. Although Ulaan (academic) poignantly highlighted that there is a hierarchy even among women’s rights advocates when she questioned: ‘Who gets the privilege of being that credible witness?’
The #ShePersisted hashtag had macro real world impact as more women were elected to office after this online activism (Bridget, academic). While you cannot argue causation between #ShePersisted and the election results, you cannot ignore the correlation between hashtags and advances in gender justice (Bridget, academic). For example, the #MeToo movement resulted in macro-level prosecutions of sexual harassment perpetrators. Bridget stated: ‘I have seen more change out of that hashtag [#MeToo] than anything else I can remember in 43 years.’
How we connect with others, and how others connect with us, radically influences our experience of gender. Virtual reality is another powerful medium that creates emotional connections as it allows one to interact from a first-person perspective. But for there to be empathy, there first must be interactivity (Massimo, technology expert). There must be some element of engagement with outgroups (‘in regards to lessons around empathy and behaviour change it’s important to put people in an environment that’s interactive’). Virtual reality unlocks this potential to feel what another is feeling; as a meso place where one can resonate with others (Barbot & Kaufman, 2020). It also enables people to be ‘doing gender’ (Deutsch, 2007, p. 122) rather than being gendered. It is affective empathy that can bridge this gap caused by disconnections. However, people in society cannot reconnect unless collectives empathise through embodied practices and experiences.
Theme: Embodiment
The second theme is embodiment (Figure 1), a physical expression of equality. While embodiment is generally not used in awareness raising or community education on women’s human rights, it can provide the impetus for changing beliefs and behaviours through the amplification of the visceral experience in the learning environment. Embodiment has both ancient and modern legacies. However, care must be taken when encouraging embodiment given that it can be misapplied, culminating in harmful behaviour, as we shall document below.
Embodiment is the process of taking-in or feeling-in the experiences of others (Knox, 2013). Embodiment can be expressed through facial, behavioural, or verbal communication (Jospe et al., 2018). Here, embodiment becomes empathic embodiment when inhabiting another leads to feeling what another feels. In this space, we must recognise that we cannot escape our own emotional responses, and what we feel is inextricably linked to how others feel. Given that our emotions are subjective in this way, we must recognise that we all have different reactions to the same visceral experiences (Odessa, NGO representative). But without empathy in embodiment, distrust can arise between people or communities instead of harmony (Binsa, activist).
Odessa (NGO representative) highlighted that embodiment is not commonly used in traditional learning strategies, but emphasised that it can elicit a kind of domino effect: as the body shifts, the mind shifts, and consequently, gender norms shift. The enduring effects of affective empathy occur because of the visceral whole-of-body experience that is not typical in strategies like gender awareness training (Vachhani & Pullen, 2019). It is this holistic and non-dualistic mind-body realignment where equality can manifest. Achieving visceral experiences through embodiment expedite and consolidate learning (Odessa, NGO representative). In this sense, embodiment is an unparalleled pedagogical device for programmes and initiatives focused on enhancing gender equity and social justice.
Using embodiment of others’ experiences as a tool for social change is not a new idea (Matich et al., 2019). For instance, Binsa (activist) talked about the concept of embodiment in the ancient Nepali philosophy of Miteri. Miteri is the ‘concept of mutual love and respect beyond the ties of blood and marriage’ (Paudel, 2018, p. 147). It is a process of kinship that transcends ethnicity, caste, religion, and gender. It allows gender relations to flourish beyond existing hierarchical divisions. Binsa described the resonating effects of Miteri as she mirrors others’ behaviours and integrates herself into their world as she conducts her work:
I share the kitchen, I share the bed, I share their work, I share their excitement. I share their happiness, this is a very powerful tool to do the job… So this is so much harmony. And it’s a kind of empowerment, a kind of emotional intelligence, it’s a very, very powerful tool.
The contextual power differential between NGOs and the people with whom they work causes a lack of equality between parties, and this can cause mistrust that consequently breaks human connection (Binsa, activist), common in the divide between Global North and Global South bodies. Through mirroring feelings, however, power is shared and differentials, such as socioeconomic status, become less influential. Binsa noted, however, that approaches like Miteri are very difficult to achieve as they require ‘passion, patience, and a unique character.’
In relation to embodiment used to address social justice challenges, Connor (NGO representative) stated:
We try to make [the campaign] fun and enjoyable for participants to encourage more people to do the challenge. But I think that probably detracts from how closely it would reflect the actual experience of living below the poverty line, so that might also be a weakness.
Campaigns that use an embodied experience have been criticised as offensive, voyeuristic, and as fetishising the disadvantaged (Zarzycka, 2016). Edensor and Falconer (2015, p. 604) describe these challenges as within the ‘experience economy’ as they exploit the ‘tourist gaze.’ In these campaigns, participants do not necessarily feel they become the disadvantaged or marginalised, but rather experience a brief and superficial (yet important) glimpse into another’s multidimensional life. According to Claudia (NGO representative), these types of campaigns were reported to sometimes lead to White Saviour and Founder’s Syndrome.
One programme that appeared to include an embodiment-like social challenge, but did not meet the requirements of empathic embodiment, involved all ages and genders dressing up as school girls to raise funds to support girls’ education. One might assume that to dress up as a girl is experiential embodiment, but if there is no genuine emotional connection back to the actual girls that the act seeks to emulate, dressing up does not provide a genuine momentary experience of what it is to be a girl. Moreover, it was recognised that dressing as a girl cannot elicit an understanding of the broader systemic drivers of inequity, just as using a wheelchair for a day does not give insight into the systemic barriers of living with a disability. Embodiment is an internal process. While girls in the Global South may wear a school dress as a source of pride (Siobhan, NGO representative: ‘to convey the sense of pride that girls feel when they pull on their school uniform in the morning’), Global North fundraisers may wear a school dress because ‘they think it’s really fun’ (Claudia, NGO representative), and therefore distort the mirroring experience of empathy. Siobhan (NGO representative) explains the problem:
I think the concept of the school dress itself is a very gender normative and outdated symbol of girls’ education. … I think that campaign will need to be updated to make sure the symbol of education stays appropriate and relevant.
While the campaign delivered significant funding for girls’ education, it may not necessarily deliver equality through empathy (and this was not their aim). In terms of gender equality, we may say ‘womanness’ cannot be ‘tried on.’ To this, Ioannidis (2019, p. 217) says: ‘the only way we can know the other is by creating something together.’
Theme: Experience
The third theme identified was experience (Figure 1). Rather than reading or viewing educational sessions on women’s human rights, to be effective, learning must be experiential and emotionally provocative in order to change beliefs and behaviours. Video games and virtual reality are well suited at curating these types of experiences, but do have some drawbacks.
Multisensory experiences must be more than perception of light and sound in order to shift inequalities. It may also have to be spiritual, wise and true in order to generate an affective response (Alice, NGO representative). Experts suggested that the emotional impact derived from an experience, including experiences linked to affective empathy, was key to bringing about social change. As Massimo (technology expert) suggested, experiencing something is very different to reading about it, or seeing it. A shared meso emotional experience only offers a glimpse into another’s existence, but is no less a valuable glimpse despite being singular and fleeting.
In this context, we were reminded that virtual reality is partly designed to change the way people feel, and therefore it is a powerful tool for behaviour change (Foxman et al., 2021). As little as 3 minutes in a virtual reality experience can create observable behaviour change (Massimo, technology expert). In these experiences, Massimo emphasised the need for interactivity to explore all of the dimensions of equality and inequality. Virtual reality has a powerful and absorbing effect that is difficult to replicate in two-dimensional media as it engages most of the senses. In this respect, pairing two senses boosts one sense in a process known as multimodal reinforcement (Medina, 2014) that can enhance the learning experience. As Andrejevic and Volcic (2020) stated the full spectrum of sensory experiences enhance users understanding of each other in ways that are difficult to capture in speech and writing. Lucienne (NGO representative) clarified this point by contrasting the experience of watching videos with playing video games:
It’s part of a continuum of traditional linear media experiences where, often as a viewer, it’s a passive “lean back” experience and you’re watching the story unfold in linear real time. And in a video game it’s a “lean forward” experience. It’s an active experience where the players have a sense of agency they can interact with the game whether it’s through sight, sound, (and in) some cases touch because of the haptics that are built into certain systems.
The experience industry of video games and virtual reality may be critical media for eliciting micro behaviour change, even in developing countries where smartphones and the internet are becoming more accessible (Irom, 2018). Lucienne (NGO representative) highlighted that to play through video games you have to buy into the beliefs of that environment, including stereotypes and stigmas associated with the subjects or avatars, such as women or girls. In a prosocial game, you may need to abide by the rules of gender equality to progress through the game, and this forces users to understand the perspective of women, laying the foundation for changing harmful beliefs and behaviours. However, Ulaan (academic) noted that ‘there’s a kind of economy of empathy sometimes created, and also being disembodied from experience.’ It is true that empathy has become a buzzword with both social and political currency, but if it is inextricably connected to a visceral or embodied experience it may more effectively create real-world macro transformations.
Overall, the findings point towards experiential learning being critical, but insufficient to create gender equality. The experience has to be connected to something tangible. In this way, experiential learning cycles through experience, reflection and action (Abe, 2011). Odessa (NGO representative) reiterated that the experience must be anchored to a cognitive process, otherwise it loses its power. She suggested that, in her programme, everyone leaves affected by the experience, but if they subsequently talk about that experience, ‘if it’s anchored to a deeper conversation or a learning initiative, … that’s where you get the transformational shift that’s more sustainable.’
Theme: Dialogue
In addition to the three themes of connection, embodiment and experience described above, changemakers reported that effective interventions must also include intercorporeal dialogue, which is a meso process, in order to sustain micro behaviour change or macro social change (Figure 1). Without the cognitive component of dialogue, the other themes are almost redundant. For instance, Odessa (NGO representative) noted that without a dialogic process, the themes of connection, embodiment and experience have limited effect. Therefore, it is not only through affective empathy but also through a process of dialogue that social justice programmes can enhance gender equality. Fuchs (2017) describes dialogue as ‘musical memory for the rhythm and dynamics that are subliminally present in interactions with others.’ He goes on to say:
Restitution of empathy between victims and perpetrators of the genocide [is achieved through] intercorporeal, face-to-face contact in an open dialogue as a crucial element in these difficult processes which may allow the perpetrators to regain access to their suppressed feelings of primary empathy. (Fuchs, 2019, p. 10)
In this context, the experience forces you to feel, but the dialogue forces you to think through connections experienced in embodiment. van Dijke et al. (2019, p. 5) stated: ‘empathy may lead to self-righteousness unless grounded in dialogue.’
Similar to the preceding themes, dialogue has been used throughout the Ages in both formal and informal ways with success. Dialogue was epitomised in the Indigenous Australian practice of ‘yarning circles’ (Patti, legal service). To ‘yarn’ is to be both intimate and informal in dialogue (Radke, 2018). It is antithetical to formal structures, such as the Constructive Dialogue in the CEDAW review process. CEDAW is the international treaty that seeks to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women, and the Constructive Dialogue is part of the formalised process by which state parties report periodically on their implementation of CEDAW in order to effect macro change for women and girls. The Constructive Dialogue is the principal means by which United Nations treaty bodies facilitate implementation of state party obligations. In contrast, yarning circles are truth-telling through storytelling at a meso level (Alice, NGO representative). They are underpinned by critical reflection, sharing, and social support (Alice, NGO representative). Yarning circles can be both therapeutic and confrontational (Carlson, 2004). Power is balanced among the yarning circle participants by not only ‘listening to hear’ (Alice, NGO representative), but also sharing a sensory or emotive experience through a variety of means, such as through song and dance (Patti, legal service).
Further, dialogue is a way of sharing through ancient methods and new innovative techniques, extending into contemporary online environments. For instance, hashtags can elevate interpersonal conversations into mainstream media, social media and global protests (Bridget, academic). Hashtags enable people to be part of a global conversation and can rapidly create macrosocial change in communities. Amplifying dialogue as a feminist rallying cry via hashtags can bring us closer to social change, as Bridget (academic) explained:
In the quest for gender equality, I think it is the chorus of voices that matters. … It’s the chorus of voices that can silence the trolls and make sure that the mainstream message is heard.
In a democracy, community voices do matter. But the use of dialogue to achieve social change can still be characterised as a ‘talkfest’ if there is no connection to an embodied experience (Kristina, academic).
The Framework of Affective Empathy for Gender Equality
The abovementioned thematic analysis uncovered connection, embodiment, experience and dialogue as catalysts of change. We now consider these themes through the lens of framework analysis (J. Ritchie et al., 2013; J. Ritchie & Spencer, 2002) to update the original model of affective empathy described by Guthridge et al. (2023).
Connection
The theme linking intersubjectivity and multisensory engagement is our ability to connect to one another (Figure 1). Connection is a confluence of intersubjectivity and multisensory engagement because it involves at least two people who are typically connected via the senses in a mesolevel process. Connection does not exist between a passive recipient and a neocolonial benevolent dictator (Patti, legal service). Instead, we must rely on each other to change discriminatory narratives. In this sense, it is not about teaching knowledge, it is about sharing knowledge (Claudia, NGO representative). We connect to one another through feelings via the senses at a microlevel of change (Mary, NGO representative). Sexism breaks these human connections; however, reconnection can be healing (Alice, NGO representative: ‘the reconnection to culture is what leads healing forward’).
Embodiment
In the overlap between empathic embodiment and intersubjectivity is the theme of embodiment, which is the mind-body shift required to achieve gender equality that changemakers suggested involves both a mental and physical journey (Odessa, NGO representative: ‘it has a whole body shift that you don’t get with a whole lot of other learning elements’). Embodiment is the combination of intersubjectivity and empathic embodiment because it is the mind-body merging of individuals in a co-present event. As empathic embodiment enables both personal growth and social change (Odessa, NGO representative), it also invites us to be part of the Other. Embodiment then is the process of learning body language in concert with traditional learning techniques. Yet Ulaan (academic) remarked, ‘we don’t know whose bodies, and what kind of embodiment are related to them.’ This sentiment calls into question who is treated equally, and how and when that treatment is conveyed. If equality is not conveyed via the body, we may well question the existence and efficacy of such incorporeal equality.
Experience
In the overlap between multisensory engagement and empathic embodiment is experience. Experience is the combination of multisensory engagement and empathic embodiment because it is a mind-body process facilitated by the senses. Multisensory engagement can include acts of art, song, or dance, but it can also mean depriving one sense in order to enhance another (Odessa, NGO representative). Shared emotions can be delivered through a joint experience, and it is within this emotional experience where programmes drive beneficial outcomes.
Dialogue
Importantly, nearly all changemakers spoke about how connection, embodiment and experience must be anchored to a cognitive mesolevel process of dialogue to truly catalyse lasting change. Empathy at its most fundamental is a simple, prosaic dialogue, and dialogue is a process that underpins all other processes in our model, and therefore sits in the outer layer of the model (Figure 1). Dialogue facilitates the building of trust between parties in order for reflection to precipitate action and to lead to transformative change. For instance, Katherine (risk management) stated that:
Stakeholder fatigue is “you bring to me bullshit”, and I’ve never seen stakeholder fatigue when they are genuinely structured well for engagement, and you’re genuinely taking their views seriously, and are able to work with you on a solution.
Finally, two prerequisites were identified for designing interventions that seek to promote gender equality: context and conditions.
Context
In order to achieve the goal of gender equality, experts told us that context matters and that we must be cognisant of power dynamics when designing programmes to effectively propagate gender equality. This includes being aware of everyone’s relative power (Katherine, risk management). Power is often considered masculine, but feminine empowerment is shared through reciprocal relational practice (Byrne, 2020). Katherine (risk management) reiterated that traditionally powerful people believe in their power to influence, and we need to recalibrate this power in order to shift gender norms. When ‘turning the tables’ we effectively level power hierarchies and redistribute control by making the disempowered more powerful, and vice versa (Odessa, NGO representative). For people who are typically disempowered, the assumption is that they cannot change their environment no matter what they do, and this can lead to frustration, impede negotiations and, in the end, stymie change (Claudia, NGO representative).
Empathic leadership was an important feature of working within the setting of power dynamics. For instance, Abia (former parliamentarian) stated that power and position do not constitute true leadership, and that without empathic leadership, change is rudderless, and therefore less effective. While empathic leadership includes leaders responding to followers’ emotional needs, it can also be counterproductive by cultivating antisocial empathy (Guthridge et al., 2020). Jian (2021) noted in this respect that empathic leadership practice is not controlling or manipulating, but motivated by the ethics of generosity, care, and responsibility. The context of power dynamics at the macrolevel described here are in line with existing feminist theory and praxis, but several other fertile conditions are required before gender equality can be seeded.
Conditions
Several fundamental conditions and established benchmarks from feminist discourse were highlighted by the changemakers as integral for achieving egalitarianism. Conditions included that projects or campaigns must be community-led, accessible, and age and culturally appropriate. Legal architecture, and a population approach were necessary in order to achieve macrolevel social change. The duration of the project or campaign, however, was less important. For example, some programmes comprising a single 2 to 3 hr workshop led to profound effects (Odessa, NGO representative), but a 2 to 3 min virtual reality experience could also be life changing (Massimo, technology expert).
Ultimately, we found that the three original elements of affective empathy (intersubjectivity, multisensory engagement and empathic embodiment) were refined and extended in this study. While some participants reflected on the limits of intersubjectivity by questioning how we give and receive empathy in situations where we are not physically present (for example, in online platforms), Curran and Chuang (2023) confirmed intersubjectivity does not have to be in-person to be effective. This was discussed by Ulaan (academic):
That’s how we would normally conceptualise empathy, as something that is appended to subjectivities, and it’s an intersubjective idea, but of course in… digitally mediated spaces we see that empathy cannot function in the classic definitional sense.
Some participants also hypothesised the potential dystopian use of multisensory technological devices that could convey hyperreal or artificial empathy (for example, the use of ‘deep fakes’) (Massimo, technology expert). However, most participants envisaged a positive contribution of multisensory engagement in the advancement of women’s human rights. While some considered the potential ineffectiveness of empathic embodiment because it is hard to achieve, others saw it as an antidote to negative manifestations of empathy, such as voluntourism (Claudia, NGO representative). These adverse effects related to intersubjectivity, multisensory engagement and empathic embodiment were resolved by the inclusion of connection, embodiment and experience in the model of affective empathy. The re-designed model (Figure 1) is strengthened by the increased accuracy and completeness of the mechanisms that support the elimination of discrimination against women, and contribute to the burgeoning feminist praxis of affective empathy in advancing gender equality.
Finally, to provide examples of how our model of affective empathy can be used, we first consider infants under 2 years old who are gaining self-other distinction and beginning to imitate. At this age, the focus should be on developing a secure attachment to form the basis of empathy so that the foundations for equal relationships in the future can be established. For older infants who are beginning to develop empathic concern and prosocial behaviours, toys that encourage role play of healthy relationships build on the foundations of secure attachment. For children 2 years and above who are starting to imagine others’ perspectives, television or social media videos/reels could encourage daily practice of mirroring through play as a means of establishing relational equality between people. As our empathic abilities mature, knowledge and understanding of equality can start to be taught in experiential ways. And finally, as our moral reasoning curates over the years, we can continue to practise empathy in order to achieve equality via such mechanisms as the gamification of mirroring facial and bodily expressions through rewards and achievements. Furthermore, these potential interventions covering a life course suggest that our model may be validated, adaptable and scalable in practical ways that can also be evaluated empirically.
General Discussion
According to Fuchs and Koch (2014, p. 1):
There is a growing body of research indicating that bodily sensation and behaviour strongly influences one’s emotional reaction toward certain situations or objects… Motion and emotion are thus intrinsically connected: one is moved by movement (perception; impression; affection) and moved to move (action; expression; emotion).
If emotions are feelings of bodily change that motivate behaviours, then if we change our bodily expression, we may change our feelings towards stereotypes, discriminatory beliefs, and gender bias, and thus change our harmful behaviour. Fuchs and Koch (2014, pp. 1–2) go on to say:
In the past decades a growing body of research on embodiment has demonstrated that not only bodily sensations, but also bodily postures, gestures and expressions are inherent components of emotional experience and tacitly influence the evaluation of persons, objects and situations… When individuals adopt or produce emotion-specific postures, facial expressions or gestures, (a) they tend to experience the associated emotions, and (b) their behaviour and also their preferences, judgement and attitudes toward objects or persons are thereby tacitly influenced.
We found that the social, economic and political context of power, and the underlying conditions of egalitarianism are well established in feminist theory and praxis, and are accommodated in a broad range of programmes seeking to achieve social justice. Based on the findings from the present research, targeting gender equality using empathy may generate macro change through meso processes that build a connection to a transformative and empathic experience that is fundamentally supported by embodiment and that is embedded in commonplace dialogue. In this way, advocacy will transcend oral and written interventions to focus on the use of relational skills. For instance, micro behaviours (such as empathy) enacted among meso groups (such as schools), supported by macrolevel law reform will reinforce gender equality through all levels of society, and pave the way for the structural changes required to bring about gender equality.
Co-created implementation of the present findings through translating, contextualising and adapting the concepts depicted in Figure 1 to local contexts is required. Our study included participants from Australia, the USA, the United Kingdom, Canada, Iraq, Nepal, Malaysia, and Spain, and cultural variations such as Indigenous ‘yarning circles’ and the teachings of Miteri. We therefore have confidence that the model is adaptable. Furthermore, while human rights and human rights discourse are steeped in western legal traditions, our model also echoes ancient wisdom; becoming what Merry Engle (1996, p. 68) states is ‘a vernacular law rather than transnational imperial law.’ Here, a new language of rights is being articulated that transcends the hegemony of the state, redefines power as embodied and horizontal, and imbues life and humanity into the law. In other words, our model of affective empathy can be understood as a declaration of what should be a non-derogable right to rights realisation. In this way, we ‘appropriated legal forms and symbols in an effort to harness the power and legitimacy of law in a movement of resistance’ (Merry Engle, 1996, p. 76). In this context, we see empathy as a benevolent Trojan Horse to justice.
To improve gender equality we must also integrate strategies used in advocacy and grassroots activism through to high-level government and NGO campaigns and policy reform. In high resource settings (although with limited reach) one could also explore virtual or augmented reality as tools for catalysing behaviour change. Virtual reality has been described as an ‘empathy machine’ (Andrejevic & Volcic, 2020, p. 295). Jaron Lanier, a virtual reality pioneer, discovered that humans are highly adaptable to virtual bodies (Linscott, 2019). In this way, virtual reality provides exciting possibilities with respect to our revised model of affective empathy because ‘VR [virtual reality] does not merely make users feel – it also changes who they are’ (Shin, 2018, p. 66). However, it is not known how sustainable the effects of embodiment are on prejudice reduction (Farmer & Maister, 2017), including gender-based discrimination and inequality. Furthermore, some claim that using virtual reality as an educational nudge to promote empathy and equality is unethical because it is based on the deception that you momentarily become someone you are not (Lara & Rueda, 2021). We argue, however, that it is not a deception to try novel experiences that provide the opportunity to learn and grow as humans and as humanity. Even if the intervention were unsuccessful and the participant continued to lack empathy, it is not unethical to attempt something new or counterintuitive. However, we do not know if there are long-term psychological impacts for participants who fail to become more empathic, and this needs to be explored. Moreover, it may not precipitate social change given virtual reality’s individualistic modality. Therefore, if we use VR-based strategies we will still need other multi-level strategies to create greater impact and benefit for women and girls.
Limitations
The limited contexts from which the participants were recruited means that the findings may not be generalisable to all social and cultural settings. Furthermore, as the study relied on interviews the efficacy of the model is not known and causal conclusions cannot be drawn. In this respect, empirical studies are required. While experts who participated in the present study have shed valuable light on how they use empathy to tackle complex problems, further research with other experts from diverse fields could illuminate the applications of empathy even further. During some interviews there were language barriers because the interviews were conducted in English, which was not the preferred language for some participants. Moreover, as the sample did not represent all potential interventions across all settings around the world, especially in Africa and Latin America, the findings may not apply to those settings, weakening the model’s potential adaptability.
More broadly, empathy itself has limitations. It is value-laden, potentially self-sacrificing, effortful, layered, difficult to sustain (as a process that ebbs and flows), can be unpredictable (as it is easier to empathise with some people and not others) and may require a ‘two-way street’ that is open, intimate and vulnerable (Goldberg, 2011). For these reasons, the effectiveness of the model may be reduced in practice. However, empathy does build bridges of understanding between people, and people like to be understood. Empathy invokes shared feelings that may lead to shared beliefs, like beliefs in equality. The novel approaches used to achieve gender equality in this study offer new visions capable of accelerating the realisation of women’s human rights both locally and globally and warrant further empirical validation in future studies. We cannot, however, draw causal conclusions from the opinions of our research participants and deduce change at the micro, meso, or macrolevel without further empirical evidence.
Conclusion
We found that the context, conditions, and catalysts for change aimed at achieving gender equality were vital foundations for the success of gender equality and social justice strategies. The recognition of the context of social, economic, and political power, and the conditions of egalitarianism are well established in feminist discourse and were not refuted by the present findings. However, the combination of catalysts for change found in this study are less defined as a framework in existing literature, suggesting that reimagined ideas and potential new ways of working may be crystallising in the sector that is endemic to the 21st century. As Andrejevic and Volcic (2020, p. 301) stated:
No matter how convincingly someone’s sensory experience might be replicated, there is always an unbridgeable gap for empathy to cover: that is the other’s history, experience and relations, their subjectivity.
We found that in addition to the three original substrates of affective empathy (intersubjectivity, multisensory engagement, and empathic embodiment) important processes of connection, embodiment, experience, and dialogue are key drivers of micro, meso, and macro change. Now, we must pioneer new ways to test and impart this embodied knowledge through experiential learning and community dialogue for the sake of advancing gender equality together.
Supplemental Material
sj-docx-1-sgo-10.1177_21582440261433211 – Supplemental material for The Role of Affective Empathy in Eliminating Discrimination Against Women: A Qualitative Investigation
Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-sgo-10.1177_21582440261433211 for The Role of Affective Empathy in Eliminating Discrimination Against Women: A Qualitative Investigation by Michaela Guthridge, Melita J Giummarra, Tania Penovic and Maggie Kirkman in SAGE Open
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
We thank Steven Hendry for his assistance in generating our graphics.
Ethical Considerations
The Human Research Ethics Review Committee at Monash University approved our interviews (approval: 25783) on 4 August 2020. Respondents gave written consent for review and signature before starting interviews.
Author Contributions
Guthridge, Michaela (M IntDev): Conceptualisation, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, writing – original draft preparation, review and editing. Giummarra, Melita, J. (PhD): Methodology, supervision, formal analysis, writing – review and editing. Penovic, Tania (PhD): Methodology, supervision, writing – review and editing. Maggie Kirkman (PhD): Methodology, supervision, writing – review and editing.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Michaela Guthridge was supported by a Monash University Research Training Programme (RTP) stipend.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data is available upon request.
Supplemental Material
Supplemental material for this article is available online.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
