How did conspiracy theories about Brigitte Macron originate and spread online?
Executive summary
Conspiracy claims that Brigitte Macron was born male originated at least as far back as 2021 and were amplified over years by fringe commentators, far‑right outlets and social accounts; they prompted criminal cyberbullying prosecutions in France and a separate Delaware defamation suit by the Macrons against Candace Owens after she widely promoted the theory in 2024–25 [1] [2]. High‑visibility reposting (including an X post that drew tens of millions of views) and coordination among repeat promoters expanded the story internationally and turned it into a sustained online harassment campaign that French prosecutors and courts have treated as actionable [3] [4] [2].
1. How the rumor began: a pattern, not a single origin
Reporting traces the earliest widely noted spike in the claim to 2021 when a self‑described journalist circulated the allegation that Brigitte Macron had been assigned male at birth; that narrative then persisted and mutated online rather than arising from a single verifiable document or official source [4] [1]. France 24 and other outlets describe the story as “fake news” with “all the ingredients of an effective conspiracy theory,” noting it fits into a broader pattern of “transvestigation” attacks used against prominent women [1].
2. Who amplified it: influencers, fringe journalists and cross‑border echo chambers
The conspiracy was amplified by a mix of far‑right figures and attention‑seeking media personalities; in particular, Candace Owens repackaged the theory for a large US audience in 2024–25 and produced video series and posts that promoted the claim to her millions of followers, while French actors such as Xavier Poussard have been singled out as persistent promoters domestically [5] [4]. Analysts quoted by Euronews and other outlets say the theory “went international” when major foreign influencers picked it up, creating a transatlantic feedback loop [4].
3. Mechanics of spread: platform virality and repackaging
The spread relied on platform dynamics: provocative headlines and multimedia content, reposting on X (formerly Twitter) and YouTube, and recycled “scoops” from actors who repeatedly invented new variations to keep attention flowing. One X post by Owens reportedly reached over 40 million views, illustrating how a few high‑reach posts can rapidly globalize a fringe claim [3] [4]. France 24’s reporting highlights how the rumor’s “ingredients” — visual scrutiny, age differences in a high‑profile couple, and prior distrust of elites — made it especially sharable [1].
4. Legal and institutional pushback: criminal trials and defamation suits
French prosecutors treated the campaign as criminal harassment: ten people faced trial in France for online "cyberbullying" tied to the gender‑identity claims, with arrests and court proceedings described in international reporting [2] [6]. Separately, the Macrons filed a 22‑count defamation suit in Delaware against Candace Owens, asserting a “relentless year‑long campaign of defamation” and seeking discovery and damages tied to the online amplification [5] [7].
5. Human impact and public testimony
Coverage and court testimony emphasize tangible harm: Brigitte Macron’s daughter testified that the rumors forced her mother to monitor clothing and posture and caused deterioration in her health, while media outlets report the campaign targeted family members and even led to harassment of grandchildren — details prosecutors used to justify criminal charges [6] [5]. Journalists and researchers framed this as classic online harassment evolving into a real‑world toll on a public figure [8].
6. Why the theory stuck: cognitive and political drivers
Commentators cite several drivers: the salience of an unusual public relationship (age difference and how the couple met), the visual‑obsessive nature of “transvestigation” attacks on public women, and political motives from far‑right circles seeking to delegitimize Emmanuel Macron by attacking his spouse — a strategy seen in other countries as well [1] [8]. Conspiracy researchers argue the story’s emotional hooks and repeated recycling by attention‑seeking promoters made it resilient even when specific claims were debunked [1].
7. Counterclaims, fact‑checking and remaining disputes
Major outlets and fact‑checkers characterize the assassination allegation Owens later promoted as without evidence; fact‑checking programs flagged her posts as conspiracy‑driven and unsubstantiated, and reporting notes that multiple proponents later retracted or downplayed earlier claims during legal processes [3] [4]. At the same time, some fringe outlets continue to allege administrative errors (for example, contested claims about tax‑registry entries) — but these narratives are reported as part of the disinformation ecosystem rather than confirmed facts [9] [10].
8. What the coverage leaves unanswered
Available sources document the pathway from fringe claim to international harassment and legal response but do not provide a single definitive “smoking gun” originator or a full mapping of private coordination networks; they emphasize patterns of amplification and the consequences rather than exposing a fully traceable supply chain of actors [1] [2]. Journalistic and judicial records do, however, converge on one clear point: the rumor moved from domestic fringe channels into global visibility through high‑reach reposting and created legal and human consequences that courts are now adjudicating [4] [2].