Introduction
This work is based on the article by (Barbosa et al. 2024), which highlights the need to deeply address, both theoretically and empirically, the various levels of violence against women. These include the institutional level, the individual level, and the victim level, where the dichotomy between vulnerability and resilience is examined.
The article emphasizes the importance of delving into this last aspect, as well as the role of youth education as a key tool in eradicating gender-based violence. Therefore, the objective of this analysis is to contribute to the reflection on these catalysts and highlight the need to develop effective strategies to combat gender-based violence in educational institutions.
A first point that we wish to explore in this commentary is about Resilience and vulnerability as antecedent factors of violence, in the article it is highlights that women's resilience, understood in terms of economic, educational, and emotional autonomy, can trigger violent reactions from aggressors.
This dynamic has been widely documented by (Faludi 2006), who defines backlash as a hostile reaction to the progress achieved by women in both the public and private spheres. This phenomenon manifests through strategies ranging from denying the need for structural changes to justifying violence through narratives that blame victims or minimize gender-based violence (Braithwaite, 2013; Restrepo et al., 2022). Given this scenario, it is imperative to design strategies that counteract the effects of backlash. In this regard, strengthening support networks among women and participating in feminist collectives are key mechanisms for resisting these reactions (Viswanathan, 2021; Cerva Cerna, 2020).
Additionally, it is essential to develop educational arguments that make visible the hidden forms of discrimination and setbacks in terms of rights. It is also crucial to discern which confrontations are strategic, avoiding unnecessary exhaustion in fruitless debates and focusing efforts on educational actions, such as workshops and conferences, that promote democratic values and tools for social change (VicHealth, 2018).
Despite preventive efforts, it is undeniable that a significant percentage of women have experienced violence, leading to severe consequences for their mental health, including the development of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (Karataş et al., 2020).
At this point, university education stands out as a key strategy for preventing gender-based violence (Vázquez et al., 2021), making it necessary to thoroughly examine the most effective methodologies in this context.
These changes could be accompanied by critical and ethical pedagogies that promote self-awareness through feeling, thinking, and acting; that strengthen debate and stimulate critical imagination, new ways of relating, and caring for each other in classrooms and other spaces within and outside the university (Chapa Romero et al., 2022).
(McNaughton Reyes et al. 2021), conducted a systematic review of dating violence prevention programs, a public health and human rights issue. Their findings emphasized the need to expand these programs to low-resource contexts. These programs should include education on healthy relationships, gender equity, conflict resolution, and access to community violence support services.
In this context, higher education institutions play a pivotal role in addressing gender-based violence—not only by implementing regulations, but also by fostering an organizational culture that actively promotes equity and ensures comprehensive support for victims.
It is imperative for universities to establish specialized psychological intervention protocols to assist students who are victims of sexual violence, considering the impact of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder on their emotional wellbeing and academic performance (Gamboa, 2019).
These protocols should be based on scientific evidence and a gender-sensitive approach that includes psychoeducation on power hierarchies, gender roles, and re-victimization processes. In this regard, Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy has demonstrated significant effectiveness in treating PTSD (Cohen and Mannarino, 1988). It is also recommended to design strategies that ensure women's access to these treatments, as financial and time constraints often hinder adherence. In this context, telepsychology emerges as a viable alternative to expand coverage and accessibility to psychological care (Domínguez-Rodríguez and De la Rosa-Gómez, 2021).
Finally, it is important to involve the community in the design, development, and implementation of effective strategies. In this regard, research has documented the role of organizations composed of university women from various sectors (students, academics, and workers) in driving necessary changes to prevent, address, investigate, sanction, repair, and eradicate gender-based violence in universities (Cerva Cerna, 2020; Chapa Romero et al., 2022).
Discussion
To effectively address gender-based violence in university settings, it is essential to consider not only individual cases but also the institutional and social responses that perpetuate such violence. Therefore, it is necessary to approach this issue from a gender perspective that allows for the analysis of power relations, normative discourses, and institutional practices that sustain it.
An important point to consider within this expanded framework is the role of violence perpetrated by women in academic environments. Psychological harassment, social exclusion, and the reinforcement of patriarchal norms by female peers or authority figures are forms of violence that often remain invisible. It is crucial to underscore that these dynamics are not separate from patriarchal structural violence; in many cases, they are actually reinforced by it. For example, the high level of competitiveness among women—arising from contexts in which they must work twice as hard as men to receive recognition (Correa et al., 2025)—along with the low representation of women among faculty and students, and the persistence of hegemonic masculinities, create conditions that facilitate such forms of aggression (Barbosa et al., 2024). These types of violence hinder the empowerment and wellbeing of other women. Recognizing their existence is essential for developing more comprehensive prevention strategies and building truly inclusive and equitable academic environments.
Another critical aspect to address is the role of bystanders—students, faculty, and administrative staff—who, despite witnessing or being aware of incidents of gender-based violence, often remain passive or unsure of how to intervene. Such inaction weakens victim protection and contributes to the normalization of violence. The implementation of bystander intervention programs, in both in-person and online formats, has been shown to significantly improve self-efficacy, willingness, and actual intervention behaviors among students and faculty (Jouriles et al., 2016; Kettrey and Marx, 2019; Coker et al., 2019), thereby contributing to a reduction in gender-based violence. Furthermore, training sessions targeted at faculty and staff have strengthened institutional awareness, vocabulary on the subject, and intervention capabilities (McMahon et al., 2021). Incorporating this approach is key to fostering a culture of shared responsibility and active prevention within educational institutions.
In conclusion, eradicating gender-based violence in higher education requires visibility of its multiple forms and actors, as well as the development of mechanisms that ensure non-repetition, access to justice, and the reconstruction of both individual and collective life projects for those who have experienced violence (Chapa Romero et al., 2022).
Statements
Author contributions
DD-S: Conceptualization, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. CG-D-B: Writing – review & editing. AC-R: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. LF-P: Conceptualization, Visualization, Writing – original draft. ADR-G: Supervision, Visualization, Writing – original draft.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. This work was funded by Postdoctoral Stay of Incidence 2022, from the “Consejo Nacional de Humanidades Ciencia y tecnología” (CONAHCYT).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. AI was used to verify the translation.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
Barbosa A. D. S. Romani-Dias M. Veludo-de-Oliveira T. (2024). Catalysts of violence against women students: the role of the university, aggressors, and victims. Front. Psychol.15:1360192. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1360192
2
Braithwaite A. (2013). Politics of/and backlash. J. Int. Women's Stud.5:19. Available online at: https://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol5/iss5/2
3
Cerva Cerna D. (2020). Activismo feminista en las universidades mexicanas: la impronta política de las colectivas de estudiantes ante la violencia contra las mujeres. Revista de la educación superior49, 137–155. 10.36857/resu.2020.194.1128
4
Chapa Romero A. C. Cadena Alvear I. Almanza Avendaño A. M. Gómez San Luis A. H. (2022). Violencia de género en la universidad: percepciones, actitudes y conocimientos desde la voz del estudiantado. Revista Guillermo de Ockham20, 77–91. 10.21500/22563202.5648
5
Cohen J. Mannarino A. (1988). Psychological symptoms in sexually abused girls. Child Abuse Negl.12, 571–577. 10.1016/0145-2134(88)90074-9
6
Coker A. L. Bush H. M. Brancato C. J. Clear E. R. Recktenwald E. A. (2019). Bystander program effectiveness to reduce violence acceptance: RCT in high schools. J. Fam. Violence. 34, 153–164. 10.1007/s10896-018-9961-8
7
Correa A. Glas M. Opara J. (2025). Females in higher education and leadership: insights from a multi-method approach. Front. Educ.9:1485395. 10.3389/feduc.2024.1485395
8
Domínguez-Rodríguez A. De la Rosa-Gómez A. (2021). A perspective on how user-centered design could improve the impact of self-applied psychological interventions in low- or middle-income countries in Latin America. Front. Digit. Health. 4:866155. 10.3389/fdgth.2022.866155
9
Faludi S. (2006). Blacklash: The Undeclared War Against American Women. Three Rivers Press: New York.
10
Gamboa F. (2019). Acoso sexual en la Universidad de protocolos y protocolos. Nómadas51, 211–221. 10.30578/nomadas.n51a12
11
Jouriles E. N. Krauss A. Vu N. L. McDonald R. (2016). Take care: a brief, online bystander intervention to prevent dating violence among college students. J. Interpers. Violence31, 1007–1025. 10.1177/0886260514564064
12
Karataş R. Altinöz A Eşsizoglu A. (2020). Post-traumatic stress disorder and related factors among female victims of sexual assault required to attend a University Hospital in Turkey: a cross-sectional cohort study. Crim. Behav. Ment. Health30, 79–94. 10.1002/cbm.2145
13
Kettrey H. H. Marx R. A. (2019). The effects of bystander programs on the prevention of sexual assault across college campuses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Youth Adolesc.48:221. 10.1007/s10964-018-0927-1
14
McMahon S. Steiner J. J. Snyder S. Banyard V. L. (2021). Comprehensive prevention of campus sexual violence: expanding who is invited to the table. Trauma Violence Abuse.22, 843–855. 10.1177/1524838019883275
15
McNaughton Reyes H. L. Graham L. M. Chen M. S. Baron D. Gibbs A. Groves A. K. et al . (2021). Adolescent dating violence prevention programmes: a global systematic review of evaluation studies. Lancet. 5 223–232. 10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30276-5
16
Restrepo A. Montoya N. Zuluaga L. (2022). Typologies of intimate partner violence against women in five latin-american countries: a latent class analysis. Int. J. Public Health67:1604000. 10.3389/ijph.2022.1604000
17
Vázquez R. López G. y Torres S. . (2021). La violencia de género en las instituciones de educación superior: nelementos para el estado de conocimiento. Rev. Latinoam. Estud. Educ. 51, 299–326. 10.48102/rlee.2021.51.2.382
18
VicHealth (2018). (En)countering Resistance: Strategies to Respond to Resistance to Gender Equality Initiatives.Victorian Health Promotion Foundation: Melbourne.
19
Viswanathan R. (2021). Learning from practice: Resistance and Backlash to Preventing Violence Against Women and Girls. United Nations Trust Fund to End Violence Against Women. Available online at: https://bit.ly/3GVuAXA (Accessed June 7, 2025).
Summary
Keywords
university context, violence against women, women vulnerability, women strength, victims and aggressors, gender equality, quality education
Citation
Díaz-Sosa DM, Guillén-Díaz-Barriga C, Chapa-Romero AC, Flores-Plata LA and De la Rosa-Gómez A (2025) Commentary: Catalysts of violence against women students: the role of the university, aggressors, and victims. Front. Psychol. 16:1595955. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1595955
Received
18 March 2025
Accepted
23 July 2025
Published
19 August 2025
Volume
16 - 2025
Edited by
Colleen M. Berryessa, Rutgers University, Newark, United States
Reviewed by
Deíse Camargo Maito, UEMG - Universidade do Estado de Minas Gerais - unidade Ituiutaba, Brazil
Fazla Fayaz, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom
Updates
Copyright
© 2025 Díaz-Sosa, Guillén-Díaz-Barriga, Chapa-Romero, Flores-Plata and De la Rosa-Gómez.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Dulce María Díaz-Sosa psc.dulce.diaz@gmail.com
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.