Feminist Principles of the Internet: Advocacy Brief on Violence

Principle on Violence

“We call on all internet stakeholders, including internet users, policy makers and the private sector, to address the issue of online harassment and technology-related violence. The attacks, threats, intimidation and policing experienced by women and queers are real, harmful and alarming, and are part of the broader issue of gender-based violence. It is our collective responsibility to address and end this.”

We call on all internet stakeholders, including internet users, policy makers and the private sector, to address the issue of online harassment and technology-related violence. The attacks, threats, intimidation and policing experienced by women and queers are real, harmful and alarming, and are part of the broader issue of gender-based violence. It is our collective responsibility to address and end this.

 

What is technology-facilitated gender-based violence?

Technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV)[1] – such as cyberstalking, online harassment and doxxing, for example – encompasses acts of gender-based violence that are committed, abetted or aggravated, in part or fully, by the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs), such as phones, the internet, social media platforms and email. 

TFGBV has the same roots as other forms of gender-based violence and is part of the same continuum. Online and offline gender-based violence do not happen in vacuums separate from each other, as women and gender-diverse people's lives online intersect frequently and in various complex ways with other areas of their lives, and violence in any one domain can often produce harm across other domains. Also, our relationship with technology, including the use of wearables and “internet of things” (IoT) devices, has today blurred the online-offline borders. This view of a "continuum" is widely held by human rights experts, feminist actors, as well as various United Nations bodies and agencies, for example, the Secretary-General, the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, and UN Women.[2] 

As noted by the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences in 2018, “ICT may be used directly as a tool for making digital threats and inciting gender-based violence, including threats of physical and/or sexual violence, rape, killing, unwanted and harassing online communications, or even the encouragement of others to harm women physically.”[3] 

Gender-based violence (GBV), regardless of the site in which it takes place, is caused by an unequal distribution of power in any society, and is maintained by the systems which grant impunity for those responsible. This is no less true for technology-facilitated GBV. 

Technology-facilitated gender-based violence happens across sites and platforms and has diverse expressions, with many emerging concerns for feminist and women's rights actors. These can include the doxxing and harassment of women in public life and/or women journalists, smear campaigns or disinformation campaigns meant to discredit or incite violence against women human rights defenders and/or gender justice advocates, and the non-consensual sharing of intimate imagery and videos, particularly targeting young women and girls. 

Such forms of online violence often involve the non-consensual access, use, manipulation, and dissemination of private data, information and/or content, and can create a permanent digital record of personal data that can be rapidly distributed widely, but may be extremely difficult to delete from the internet permanently. 

Women human rights defenders, women in public life, such as politicians and women journalists, women from racialised or otherwise minoritised groups, women from criminalised groups, lesbian, bisexual and queer women, trans and gender-diverse people, and outspoken feminist activists are particularly targeted on the basis of their work, their lived realities and their expression, and at times face violent, sexualised and gendered harassment and threats.
 

Who perpetrates technology-facilitated gender-based violence? 

Like with other forms of gender-based violence, TFGBV has structural and systemic roots as well as implications. Often, there is no singular perpetrator, just as there is no singular victim. The prevalence and persistence of all forms of gender-based violence – including those facilitated by technology or taking place online – harm all of us as a society. 

Many systems and actors are responsible for the causes of TFGBV. These can include the obvious and direct perpetrator(s), such as those who seek to attack, target and harass people directly through their actions. At times it could be individuals, or groups of people; it could be religious actors, but could also be secular actors.

However, the web of complicit actors also includes internet/technology corporations who are the owners and designers of technological systems which create conducive environments for this harm, or perpetuate harm – for example, algorithms designed to multiply and amplify controversial, emotional and sensationalist content that can escalate the effects of disinformation, hate speech and extremist content. Corporations design and continue to use these technologies since they create more profit for them and their shareholders, while being fully aware of their detrimental impact on human rights and democracy.[4] 

This system of actors also includes state actors, such as legislators, policy makers and state officials, who may both seek to use these technologies in unethical ways for their own purposes (e.g. to influence the outcome of elections), thus causing or condoning gender-based violence, or collude with corporations to create profit for themselves. State actors often ignore the underlying causes and systemic roots of technology-facilitated gender-based violence, evade accountability, and do not take strong enough action to promote responsibility and accountability of the private sector. 

State actors are also complicit in the perpetuation of gender-based violence when they fail to address gender discrimination and inequality through their public policies and public services. 

 

What is the impact of technology-facilitated gender-based violence? 

The impact of TFGBV is material and diverse, and can lead to severe consequences online and offline. Not only can such practices affect the physical and mental health and well-being of those targeted, often generating fear, shame, anxiety, depression, as well as economic and professional damage; in addition, TFGBV can sometimes escalate to physical violence, and cause an increased risk to physical safety and security. All people have the right to live free from violence and the fear of violence. 

Moreover, this violence creates a hostile digital environment, deterring women, girls and gender-diverse people from participating in civic space and public life. This contributes to a chilling effect on expression, debate and dissent, and restricts the right to participation and freedom of expression for many diverse people. 

 

The importance of anonymity online

While it would be simplistic to not recognize the threat of anonymity, when it provides particular challenges in identifying perpetrators of violent and harmful content online, the right to anonymity is an essential facet of privacy in the online context, especially for feminist and gender-diverse people and activists. The ability to be anonymous online has fulfilled an important function for women and others at risk of discrimination because it has allowed them to seek information, find solidarity and support and share opinions without fear of being “found out”. In particular, individuals such as those who face discrimination and persecution based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, and/or those experiencing gender-based violence, may be forced to rely on encryption and anonymity in order to circumvent restrictions and exercise the rights to freedom of expression, including the right to to seek, receive and impart information. A lack of default anonymity and encryption in online spaces can heighten risk of online GBV.

While it would be simplistic to not recognise the threat of anonymity, when it provides particular challenges in identifying perpetrators of violent and harmful content online, the right to anonymity is an essential facet of privacy in the online context, especially for feminist and gender-diverse people and activists. The ability to be anonymous online has fulfilled an important function for women and others at risk of discrimination because it has allowed them to seek information, find solidarity and support and share opinions without fear of being “found out”. In particular, individuals such as those who face discrimination and persecution based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, and/or those experiencing gender-based violence, may be forced to rely on encryption and anonymity in order to circumvent restrictions and exercise the rights to freedom of expression, including the right to to seek, receive and impart information. A lack of default anonymity and encryption in online spaces can heighten the risk of technology-facilitated gender-based violence.
 

Do existing laws and policies adequately address this issue?

Often, states' approach to addressing TFGBV is overly punitive and highly individualised. This means that governments create legal provisions to punish individual actors for their actions online through targeted surveillance or accessing their data with corporations' help. This approach ignores the reality that the very systems we are navigating daily online are designed to amplify hate speech, gendered disinformation, misogynistic, homophobic and transphobic disinformation, etc. – and even profit in doing so.[5] 

This approach often puts sexual and gender-diverse persons, artists, activists, sex educators, sex workers and others at heightened risk, since many laws and policies of this nature are designed to target sexual expression, because many operate with the notion that all sexual expression is inherently harmful to women and children. These laws and policies ignore the root causes of GBV, and do not consider consent and rights. 

State and private actors often narrow the scope of technology-facilitated GBV to an issue of "content moderation". This ignores all the other systemic causes of GBV, which happen at various stages along the chain, such as in the design and maintenance of tech platforms, their governance through law and policy, etc. 

The moderation of online content is then in the hands of private intermediaries, including tech corporations, which often operate across jurisdictions and therefore, in ambiguous legal territory. 

Corporations and related intermediaries are rarely transparent and participatory in developing policies, and often deploy moderation through outsourcing this work to vast networks of underpaid human moderators in the global South. Decisions regarding moderation or, more broadly, the governance of these technologies are made by a handful of individuals, rather than through participatory and democratic processes. Not being able to participate in making the decisions which shape and influence their lives also exacerbates women’s and gender-diverse people's vulnerability to GBV. 

Many states do not have a holistic legal framework to address and prevent GBV, including technology-facilitated GBV, creating multiple barriers in access to justice for victims, and a culture of impunity for the system of perpetrators of violence. Where specialised legal frameworks do exist, these tend to have the wrong emphasis, or law enforcement officials and other legal and regulatory mechanisms are not always trained, sensitised or equipped to implement them, due to a general lack of adequate political will, capacity, and a general misconception that technology-facilitated GBV is not a serious human rights violation. 

These heavy-handed and punitivist responses are even more unsuitable when we verify that these same states fail to put in place consistent and robust frameworks – laws, policies and practices – to promote gender equality, including through the provision of public services. So states fail or ignore their obligations in relation to women and gender-diverse people’s rights and then divert accountability to individuals, washing their hands of addressing systematic and structural discrimination. 

 

Is technology facilitated gender-based violence covered by international human rights norms and standards?

Yes, TFGBV is recognised and addressed by international rights norms and standards. State obligations to protect women's right to live free from violence, and to combat all forms of discrimination against women, including gender-based violence, are outlined in international and regional instruments including the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. 

In addition to human rights law, important international reports, standards and commitments also refer to a pledge from states to address gender-based violence, such as reports and resolutions from the Human Rights Council, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the Commission on the Status of Women, among others.

 

Have international human rights bodies addressed this issue?

UN bodies and human rights mechanisms have brought attention to the issue of TFGBV, including through resolutions, treaty body general comments and concluding observations, and Special Procedures reports and statements. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) has expressed concern to state parties regarding this practice and has issued recommendations in its concluding observations on redressing the issue. For example, in line with their commitments under the Convention, CEDAW has recommended that state parties:

• Adopt a national action plan on addressing violence against women and include specific measures to address all forms of violence, including the emerging violence that women experience online.[6] 
• Implement a zero-tolerance policy in all schools on violence and harassment , including cyberbullying and online gender-based violence, that incorporates counselling services, awareness-raising efforts and effective reporting mechanisms.[7] 
• Review and amend legislation in order to provide an adequate civil remedy to victims of cyber violence.[8] 

In addition, in its General Recommendation No.35 (2017) on gender-based violence against women, the Committee recommended that state parties encourage:

• Adopt a national action plan on addressing violence against women and include specific measures to address all forms of violence, including the emerging violence that women experience online (CEDAW, Concluding Observations on Venezuela (CEDAW/C/VEN/CO/7-8, 2014), para. 19)

[T]he creation or strengthening of self-regulatory mechanisms by media organizations, including online or social media organizations, aimed at the elimination of gender stereotypes relating to women and men, or to specific groups of women, and addressing gender-based violence against women that takes place through their services and platforms.[9] 

There are also numerous UN Special Procedures reports and statements which address this issue. For example, the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression dedicated her report to the General Assembly in 2021 to the topic of gender justice and freedom of expression, in which she substantially addressed the issue of technology-facilitated gender-based violence, and even noted the launch of the Feminist Principles of the Internet.[10] The Special Rapporteur also noted that women’s right to freedom of expression must be protected while addressing issues of misogynistic hate speech and other forms of gender-based violence online.[11] 

The UN Human Rights Council has also drawn particular attention to violence against women and girls in digital contexts through its consensus resolution 38/5, calling on all states to take measures to prevent and respond to online violence, including through:

Ensuring that women and girls are able to exercise the right to freedom of opinion and expression online and offline without discrimination, and do not experience violence or threats of violence while exercising this right.[12] 

Other resolutions addressing issues such as human rights and the internet, privacy and emerging technologies have also addressed the impact of technology on the safety of women and girls. 

 

What are the responsibilities of states and other stakeholders to address this issue?

States have a duty to exercise due diligence to prevent, investigate, prosecute and substantially address acts of gender-based violence, including those committed online or facilitated by technology, and to ensure access to justice and remedy, and accountability for all responsible actors. 

States should provide measures for redress and reparation as an effective, efficient and meaningful way of aiding victims of violence online and ensuring that justice is achieved. Such measures should include forms of restitution, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition, combining measures that are symbolic and material, individual and collective, depending on the circumstances and the preferences of the victim.

States should provide redress and reparation as an effective, efficient and meaningful way of aiding victims of violence online and ensuring that justice is achieved. Such measures should include forms of restitution, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition, combining measures that are symbolic, material, individual and collective, depending on the circumstances and the preferences of the victim.

States should take steps to implement the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women in her 2018 report on online violence,13 including by acting in accordance with the principle of due diligence to enact new laws and measures to prohibit new emerging forms of online gender-based violence, as well as to ensure that regulations on internet intermediaries respect the international human rights framework, and do not prioritise "user engagement" – and therefore, profit – over rights.

Additionally, states should ensure that legal frameworks adequately protect women and gender-diverse people's freedom of expression (including political, religious and sexual expression), privacy, and freedom from violence. Any restrictions to freedom of expression as a response to gender-based violence must be necessary and proportionate, should not be overly broad or vague in terms of what speech is restricted, and should not over penalise (whether referring to criminal sentencing or responses which restrict internet or platform access).

Morality and obscenity as rationale for protecting women, children and other communities affected by injustice must not be the basis for any legislative reform or new law in matters of gender-based violence online. Any law must foreground rights to bodily autonomy, self-determination, freedom of expression and participation in public life and civic space. 

States should also provide training for the judiciary, lawyers, police and all other law enforcement officials and frontline workers to ensure their ability to investigate and prosecute perpetrators, and foster public trust in obtaining justice for cases of TFGBV, in conjunction with broader sensitisation on addressing gender-based violence.

The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights are clear in relation to companies’ obligation to respect human rights. Business enterprises should not cause or contribute to adverse impacts on women’s human rights and should address such impacts when they occur. They should also take adequate measures to prevent or mitigate adverse impacts on women’s human rights that are directly linked to their operations, products or services by their business relationships. Business enterprises should integrate a gender perspective and guidance in all policies and processes put in place to implement all aspects of their responsibility to respect human rights under the Guiding Principles, namely, making a policy commitment, conducting human rights due diligence and remediating any adverse human rights impacts caused or contributed to.

Human rights bodies and mechanisms should also be encouraged to include online and technology-related gender-based violence as relevant to their mandates in their work, research, missions, reports, communications and recommendations, providing guidance to states and other stakeholders in addressing this issue.

We have compiled a listing of selected annotations regarding TFGBV from international and regional agreements and statements to support you in your policy advocacy endeavours. See here.

                                                                                                                    

FPI Policy Brief on Violence

Download here

Annotations

Download here

                                                                                                                    

About the Feminist Principles of the Internet (FPIs)

The Feminist Principles of the Internet (FPIs) are a number of principles which articulate an evolving set of concerns in relation to the internet and human rights, with a special focus on how gender and sexuality are located in diverse communities' experiences of the internet. They were drafted over a series of feminist gatherings. The first of these was called "Imagine a Feminist Internet", and took place in Malaysia in April 2014. The meeting was organised by the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) and brought together 50 activists and advocates working in the fields of sexual rights, women’s rights and gender equality, violence against women/gender-based violence, and digital rights. The meeting was designed as an adapted open space where topics were identified, prioritised and discussed collectively.

A group of volunteers from the meeting drafted version 1.0 of the FPIs. This was subsequently brought to different workshops and events, local and global, and then to a second "Imagine a Feminist Internet" meeting in July 2015, where a new group of 40 activists discussed, elaborated on and revised the FPIs. The new version was published on the feminist internet website in August 2016, where anyone can expand the principles by contributing resources, commenting, or offering localised translations.

Currently there are 17 principles, organised into five clusters: Access, Movements, Economy, Expression and Embodiment. A new cluster on Care and the Environment is planned for 2022. Together, they aim to provide a framework for movements working to advance gender justice and human rights, to articulate and explore issues related to technology through a feminist lens.

Frequently Asked Questions 
Get in touch with us at feministinternet@apc.org