THE GENDERED CONSTRUCTION OF “RED FLAGS” AND “GREEN FLAGS” IN TEEN DIGITAL INTIMACIES

Abstract

Digital platforms have become central environments for the negotiation of interpersonal relationships. For young people in particular, social media operate as spaces where emotional exchange, relational communication, and self-presentation intersect. Within this context, the widespread “red flag/green flag” discourse on social media offers a valuable lens through which to examine how teenagers interpret intimate relationships through digital cultures. This phenomenon is part of the broader field of digital intimacies, understood as the ways young people build, negotiate, and maintain relationships online (Albury et al., 2021; Setty & Dobson, 2023).
Theoretical Framework
Digital intimacies constitute a growing interdisciplinary field examining sexuality, gender, and intimate relationships in digitally mediated contexts (Albury et al., 2021; Evans & Ringrose, 2025). Following Hart (2015), digital intimacies can be understood as practices through which intimacy is initiated, performed, and sustained via online interactions.
Existing research shows that young people’s intimate uses of digital media are shaped by gendered and moralized discourses. Much of the literature has focused on risk-oriented topics such as sexting or digital dating abuse, often reproducing public anxieties about youth and sexuality (Dobson et al.,2018; Meehan, 2022). More recent scholarship calls instead for youth-centred and intersectional approaches that attend to everyday relational practices and emotional.
Gender plays a central role in structuring digital intimacies. Heteronormative and postfeminist scripts continue to shape expectations of desire, behaviour, and self-presentation online (Ringrose et al., 2013; Marston, 2022). Young women are often positioned within contradictory demands—to be autonomous yet caring, expressive yet respectable—while young men are more frequently framed as agents of desire and are subject to less moral scrutiny (Berndtsson, 2023). These asymmetries underpin practices of jealousy, emotional labour, and digital surveillance within relationships.
Drawing on feminist media studies (Van Zoonen, 1994) and critical youth research (Bennett & Robards, 2015), we conceptualize red and green flags as symbolic resources through which teenagers negotiate boundaries of care, trust, and control. These meanings emerge at the intersection of gendered cultural scripts and platform affordances such as visibility, persistence, and connectivity. The red flag/green flag discourse thus forms part of the moral grammar of digital intimacy, where care and control are frequently entangled.
The Italian Context
Gender stereotypes remain particularly persistent in Italy compared to other Global North countries (Ragnedda & Budd, 2015). Among Italian teenagers, traditional gender norms continue to shape expectations around emotions, behaviour, and relational roles (Scappini et al., 2023). These dynamics are linked to broader social concerns, including digital dating abuse and ongoing forms of gender-based violence.
Despite this context, Italy lacks comprehensive Relationship and Sex Education (RSE) programmes in schools. This institutional gap leaves peer cultures and social media as key sites where young people learn to interpret intimacy, consent, and care in both offline and online relationships.
Methodology
The study adopts a qualitative and participatory design. Data were collected through six focus groups involving 50 Italian teenagers aged 16–18, with diverse gender identities and sexual orientations. Participants discussed red and green flags in relation to their digital romantic experiences and anonymously wrote examples on colour-coded Post-it notes, which were then grouped and collectively discussed.
Five Young Researchers Groups (YRGs), each composed of around ten teenagers, contributed to the co-design of research tools, data interpretation, and dissemination. This participatory approach ensured that the analysis remained grounded in young people’s perspectives and peer cultures.
The Post-it notes were analysed using qualitative content analysis (Mayring, 2021). Two authors inductively identified thematic categories, while a third author reviewed the coding. Disagreements were resolved through discussion, reaching a minimum inter-coder agreement of 90%.
The analysis addresses four research questions:
1.
How are red and green flags defined by teenagers?
2.
How do red flags vary across relationship stages?
3.
What gendered differences emerge in these interpretations?
4.
What social meanings do red flags acquire among teens?
Findings
Most participants’ narratives were heteronormative, although some LGBTQIA+ perspectives emerged. This article focuses on heterosexual dynamics; further analysis of LGBTQIA+ experiences is ongoing.
Four main categories of red flags were identified: personality traits; digital interaction with others; digital interaction with the partner; and controlling behaviours. Importantly, behaviours were often described as context-dependent, meaning that the absence of a red flag did not automatically constitute a green flag.
Regarding personality traits, girls mainly identified superficiality and immaturity in boys as red flags. In relation to digital interaction with others, non-exclusivity and social overexposure were widely perceived as problematic. Examples included having many followers, following many girls on Instagram (attributed to boys), talking to others while dating, posting for attention, and sharing sexualized images.
IAMCR – International Association for Media and Communication Research
AIECS – Asociación Internacional de Estudios en Comunicación Social
AIERI – Association Internationale des Études et Recherches sur l’Information et la Communication
https://iamcr.org | https://singapore2025.iamcr.org | info@iamcr.org
In the category of digital interaction with the partner, behaviours commonly associated with toxicity—such as jealousy, constant availability, or exclusive attention—were sometimes reframed as green flags signalling care and affection. This highlights the blurred boundary between care and control in teenage digital relationships. Explicit controlling behaviours, such as requesting access to private chats or passwords and monitoring online activity, were consistently identified as red flags and primarily attributed to boys.
Different red flags emerged at different relationship stages. During flirting, superficiality and inconsistency were emphasized, while in established relationships controlling behaviours became more prominent. Finally, the red/green flag format was more actively embraced by girls as a reflective, peer-based practice, whereas boys engaged with it more ironically or defensively.
Discussion and Conclusion
The findings show how the red flag/green flag discourse both reflects and reproduces gendered and heteronormative scripts within Italian teenagers’ digital relationships. While this format supports girls in developing awareness of toxic dynamics, it also reinforces unequal emotional expectations.
Teenagers’ narratives reveal how care and control are closely intertwined in digital intimacy. Jealousy often appears as an ambivalent expression of affection that legitimizes surveillance and power asymmetries. Mediated practices such as constant availability and monitoring become normalized strategies of relationship maintenance, reflecting gendered affective norms. By focusing on everyday interpersonal communication, this study contributes to understanding how gendered inequalities are enacted, normalized, and occasionally challenged through digital practices. Future research will further explore intersectional dynamics, LGBTQIA+ perspectives, and cross-cultural comparisons.