Cross-linguistic Delegitimisation of Women Leaders in Online Political Discourse

This study examines evaluative congurations in hostile digital political discourse targeting women leaders across Spanish and Italian contexts. Through systematic analysis of 2,000 replies to Isabel Díaz Ayuso and Giorgia Meloni on X, we identify culturally distinct evaluative repertoires that function as delegitimization mechanisms. Spanish discourse emphasizes moral sanctioning through Propriety-Normality combinations (59.6% vs. 37.0% Propriety in Italian replies), while Italian discourse foregrounds competence-authenticity challenges through Capacity-Veracity congurations. Logistic regression reveals systematic relationships between evaluative congurations and identity-salient stance markers, with Tenacity (OR = 6.45) and Normality (OR = 3.83) judgements emerging as strongest predictors. The ndings advance theoretical frameworks in stance analysis and Appraisal Theory by demonstrating how evaluative copatterns create compound delegitimizing effects beyond individual category contributions, while revealing persistent cultural inuences on evaluative practice within shared digital environments.