As the features of the transitional phase take shape, a troubling trajectory emerges in the current Syrian context, moving toward the reconfiguration of women's presence in the public sphere and the gradual exclusion of women from it. Following every government decree or news item regarding the infringement or restriction of women's freedoms, their voices rise in rejection of attempts to control their choices. Yet, the moment they criticize such decisions, whether on social media or other available platforms for expression, they are met with various forms of violence. The most prominent of these is "cyber violence," which is manifested in terrifying and threatening comments that do not debate the ideas they criticize, but rather attack them personally and smear their reputations. Sometimes, this escalates to threats against their lives and the safety of their families. This occurs in the absence of any legal deterrent or effective protection mechanisms that criminalize violence against women and limit the violations committed against them.

These decisions and measures targeting women cannot be separated from the policy of the transitional government, whose institutions lack fair female representation, blatantly ignoring UN Resolution 1325. This marginalization is reflected in women's presence in the public sphere, shrinking their space in the cultural and media fields. This coincides with the rise of discourses that reproduce male dominance more acutely. Consequently, the issue is no longer just an administrative procedure, such as the decision to ban Al-Tabarruj —an Islamic term referring to the deliberate display of a woman's beauty, adornment, or physical attractions before men who are not her close relatives (non-mahram men)— under the pretext of regulating professional appearance, or compelling owners of women's clothing stores in some areas to exclusively hire women, let alone the authorities' sponsorship of proselytization campaigns urging the wearing of the niqab. These matters involve the social engineering of women's presence in society and the determination of the forms and patterns of their participation.

This misogynistic political climate, whether enacted through administrative directives or symbolic practices, is rooted in a patriarchal system that redefines the "acceptable woman" and the "problematic woman," dictating who has the right to be present in the public sphere and under what conditions. Thus, women become subjects of control and regulation, rather than independent political actors. The governmental scene does not require much analysis to prove this; all official forms clearly demonstrate that women are absent, and if they do appear in some, their presence is merely symbolic.

Studies indicate that the decline in women's political representation, the rise in their unemployment rates, and the re-promotion of women's domestic role as a social value were prevalent features in the post-fall era of socialist regimes in Eastern Europe. This was confirmed by a study published in Feminist Review (Issue 76 – March 2004), which noted how women were pushed back into stereotypical gender roles, and women's presence in the home was portrayed as a social virtue aimed at restricting their presence in the public sphere. However, this era also served as an opportunity for the struggle of feminist movements in those countries, where women developed capacities in self-organization, demanded new rights, and protested the loss of previous gains. This eventually led to significant legal amendments protecting women from various forms of violence.

Women's participation is a structural condition for equal citizenship and a fundamental pillar of any political project that claims to seek justice and freedom. A state that excludes women from the public sphere or restricts their presence within it merely reshapes patterns of domination using different tools and language, and does not produce a political transition toward a better reality.

Within private Syrian women's and feminist groups, women circulate discussions and opinions that they cannot easily express in the public sphere, due to self-censorship that aligns with social censorship and the boundaries of what can be said or kept hidden. In this private space, personal narratives emerge as a cynical coping mechanism, simultaneously acting as an act of resistance. Through daily life details, these narratives reflect the ability to survive, even if only symbolically; ranging from caring for one's appearance, hair, and makeup to the fear that a loud laugh might provoke punishment and social condemnation!

These daily experiences intersect with the discourse of the authorities, which is entrenched daily through small details bearing significant meaning, intended to cement the stereotypes in which women are meant to be imprisoned within. Examples of this include the speech made by the transitional president, "Ahmed Al-Sharaa" when he and his wife received a group of women at the palace, where most of the conversation revolved around the model of the "patient woman" as a social and moral standard. Furthermore, the Grand Mufti of the Republic spoke of "upcoming challenges," such as the challenge of drafting the constitution and changing laws, particularly the personal status law, and everything related to the "law of God," which must be "above all else," according to his expression. The scene is completed by marches of niqab-wearing women in several areas and their calls for what they term "Sharia-compliant clothing." This is not an expression of individual freedom per se, so much as it turns the woman's body into an instrument of control through concealment, in addition to imposing specific concepts of chastity and "modesty," drawing the boundaries of her appearance in the public sphere, and subsequently establishing further control and guardianship both symbolically and legally.

The greater the fear of women's liberation and self-assertion in decision-making positions, the more their bodies are subjected to control; in dressing, movement, voice, and political representation. Consequently, women's and feminist participation remains limited and restricted. The danger goes beyond the content of decrees and laws restricting women's rights, extending to the transitional government's approach in managing its decisions. It follows what is known in authority studies as the management of "Deliberate or Strategic Ambiguity." This means that a decision is issued in a clear and strict format under penalty of accountability. If angry reactions that affect the situation emerge, a cycle of unofficial denials, media downplaying, reinterpretation, and explanation begins, without actually cancelling or amending the decision. Ultimately, the blurring and lack of clarity serve to absorb public anger, while the decision remains effectively in force on the ground. Its application is left to the discretion of employees and officials, who may be either lenient or strict. rather than the authorities bearing their political and legal responsibilities.

All these practices are not random; they embody the dominant patriarchal discourse of the authorities, which expands to affect the personal freedoms of every individual, not just women. They evoke the concept of "biopower" proposed by the French philosopher Michel Foucault. Power is not content with managing the political sphere; it intervenes in regulating daily life, bodies, and moral standards. It exercises its hegemony through soft tools and moralistic discourses that claim to protect society and its values. In reality, however, it works to normalize the authorities’ control, subjugate individuals, and reshape their lives according to its ideological system, resulting in the imposition of a single acceptable model and the exclusion of any alternative.

Reshaping a new collective consciousness suitable for the transitional government's misogynistic discourse requires manipulating the public narrative and combating dissenting voices. Here, social media plays a pivotal role, where a justificatory discourse escalates on the pages of the authorities' supporters, both men and women, in an attempt to legitimize the oppressive decisions and practices being gradually introduced. Alternatively, they downplay them, considering them "necessary regulation" or a "secondary detail" compared to the "blood that has been and is being shed for the sake of building the new state."

On the other hand, thousands of fake accounts are active in trivializing any critical discourse. Cyber violence and attacks on the right to expression and personal freedoms escalate, particularly against female activists. This places them under the guillotine of "morality" tailored by the authorities, exposing them to danger and immense pressure that has prevented or limited their participation in public life. This is especially true following the spread of the phenomenon of kidnapping women, particularly from minority sects, and the violence targeting their communities.

It has become easy to practice slander and moral defamation against any woman who exposes the authorities' violations, criticizes their corruption, or speaks out about arbitrary detention and other violations. She is not answered with political arguments or logical debate; rather, she is attacked on her morals within a classic exclusion process aimed at silencing female and feminist voices without the need for direct repression. This has escalated to the point that many feminist activists have been forced into self-censorship, and perhaps silence.

These practices against women cannot be separated from the discursive structure of the authorities and their patriarchal mentality. They reproduce this mentality in society by reinforcing a moral system based on the discourse of "chastity and modesty" as tools for social control under moral pretences.

Everyone knows that the concepts of chastity and honour among the vast majority of Syrian social groups are tied to the woman's body, attaching "family honour" to it. Historically, this has burdened women with an unfair symbolic weight for which they have paid the price in conflicts, where their bodies are turned into battlegrounds and sites of revenge against the "other" or the enemy. Thus, "chastity" transforms from a societal moral value into a pretext for blaming the victim instead of protecting her and holding the perpetrators accountable.

The matter becomes even more dangerous with the emergence of the "model for women" according to the standards of male dominance, which allows for the exclusion of those who differ, the "troublemakers," from this model. Consequently, obedience and submission transform into a political virtue, and the legitimacy of women's presence is measured by their compliance with standards imposed upon them, rather than by their competence or independent stances.

What the supporters of the transitional authority fail to realize is that they, or at least members of their families, are directly or indirectly harmed by the curtailment of women's employment opportunities, the reduction of their professional presence, and the restrictions affecting their daily lives. Despite the doubts beginning to surface in some loyalist circles regarding the impact of the authorities' policies on women, families, and Syrian society in general, it is not yet clear whether these fears are truly capable of transforming into an organized, collective political consciousness that contributes to producing a new discourse that safeguards rights and freedoms in society and confronts the authorities' encroachment upon them.

Preserving what remains of women's presence in the public sphere will not be achieved without an explicit confrontation with patriarchal structures in all fields, and a commitment from the relevant state actors involved in the Syrian file to pressure the transitional authority to respect human rights in general, and women's rights in particular, by adhering to relevant international agreements and resolutions. The experiences of other states and societies confirm that the rollback of women's gains and individual rights does not happen all at once, but rather through cumulative steps that are downplayed or met with silence and adaptation, until they become a reality from which it is difficult to escape. Therefore, preventing this from happening is the real challenge facing female activists in Syria, especially those who consider themselves part of the Syrian feminist movement.

Complaining in closed rooms and private spaces is useless. There must be active participation that confronts exclusion and creates new forms of solidarity, refusing to leave courageous women to fight these battles alone. Reclaiming the public sphere and preserving women's gains require boldly confronting hegemony and possessing a feminist discourse that insists on presenting women as independent actors and rights-holders, not merely obedient followers of what the authorities dictate.