International Solutions to Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence

After a photoshopped picture of an 18-year-old woman and her boyfriend was posted on a fake social media account, four men killed her, reportedly for bringing “shame to her family by posing for pictures with a boy.”

Two in every five women will experience technology-facilitated gender-based violence. Up to 85 percent of women and girls will witness such violence being perpetrated against another woman. These rates are higher among female politicians, journalists, and activists, as well as individuals experiencing other forms of discrimination.

The United Nations Population Fund––the United Nations’ sexual and reproductive health agency––defines technology-facilitated gender-based violence as any act of violence “committed, assisted, aggravated, and amplified in part or fully” by technology. Forms of technology-facilitated gender-based violence include doxing––or publishing personal or damaging information about an individual online, such as the individual’s address or contact information––harassing or stalking, and posting or threatening to post fake or real sexual images or videos of an individual.

The harms of technology-facilitated gender-based violence extend into the real world. Twenty percent of women globally report experiencing offline attacks in connection to online violence. Victims of doxing often experience stalking, physical attacks, or sexual assault as a result of the perpetrator obtaining doxed information. Technology-facilitated gender-based violence can also impact the victim’s mental health, force the victim to change or take down her social media accounts, negatively impact the victim’s educational or employment opportunities, and harm the victim’s social relationships.

In addition to its immediate harms, scholars warn that technology-facilitated gender-based violence also creates a chilling effect that causes women to participate less in online spaces. One survey found that in 33 countries, one in five young women stopped engaging in current affairs because of concerns about online violence.

Instances of digital violence have increased as the digital landscape continues to evolve. To address the pervasiveness of technology-facilitated gender-based violence, advocates emphasize the importance of creating international and national regulatory frameworks.

On the international level, the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) recognizes that gender-based violence is a form of discrimination against women. In 2017, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women adopted General Recommendation Number 35, which incorporated gender-based violence occurring online into the CEDAW framework. State parties to the CEDAW must take “all appropriate measures” to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women, including technology-facilitated gender-based violence.

Despite the requirements of the CEDAW concerning technology-facilitated gender-based violence, there remains little international agreement on which terminology, definitions, or regulatory frameworks should be implemented to address the problem. These inconsistencies and the novel forms of technology-facilitated gender-based violence arising from technological advances have led many scholars to warn that current national laws are insufficient to address and prevent the full spectrum of technology-facilitated gender-based violence.

In this week’s Saturday Seminar, scholars highlight the harms of technology-facilitated gender-based violence and propose national and international regulatory solutions:

• In an article in Journalism, Itai Zviyita of Namibia’s Triumphant College and Admire Mare of South Africa’s University of Johannesburg argue that the digitization of newsrooms and journalism has led to an increase in online gender-based violence against female journalists. Zviyita and Mare find that online “trolls and wicked actors” target female journalists, which negatively impacts their professional duties. Zviyita and Mare acknowledge that female journalists are able to block these bad actors and call out their behavior online. Zviyita and Mare argue, however, that the responsibility should not fall exclusively on the victims of online gender-based violence. Instead, Zviyita and Mare propose that countries strengthen institutional and legislative mechanisms to ensure the safety of female journalists.
• In an article in Trauma, Violence, and Abuse, Vaiddehi Bansal of NORC at the University of Chicago and several coauthors find that as technology advances, so does violence and harassment against women online. The Bansal team discovered that intersectionality plays a large role in this harassment, as most abuse is targeted at young women or female members of minority groups. Bansal and her coauthors argue that due to constantly changing behaviors, a lack of definitional clarity, and severe underreporting, online gender-based violence occurs more often than current figures show. The Bansal team contends that a solution can only be achieved through collective action from government authorities, law enforcement officers, non-governmental organizations, and technology companies.
• The CEDAW is a strong, authoritative framework that should be used to regulate technology-facilitated gender-based violence, argues Rangita de Silva de Alwis of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School in an article in La Revue des Juristes de Sciences Po. De Silva warns that the advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) and deepfake technology has increased instances of technology-facilitated gender-based violence. International human rights activists, urges de Silva, should name deepfakes and AI-generated media in revised CEDAW gender-based violence laws. The Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women––which recognizes gender-based violence as a manifestation of historical power imbalances––should also be used as a conceptual framework for understanding biases that AI algorithms––another mechanism for online violence––perpetuate, de Silva contends.
• Although international lawmakers are working toward addressing technology-facilitated gender-based violence, Kristine Baekgaard of the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace, and Security argues in a recent report that preventing this harm will require a more comprehensive approach. Baekgaard urges regulators to integrate technology-facilitated gender-based violence into existing regulatory frameworks that address other forms of gender-based violence. Digital violence is an extension of existing barriers to gender equality rather than a new issue, Baekgaard contends. Baekgaard advocates increasing government funding in efforts to address the harms of technology-facilitated gender-based violence. In addition to legal integration at the national level, Baekgaard proposes that international coalitions should lobby private sector technology companies to ensure industry regulatory standards properly address the risk of online violence.
• In a recent article in the Sosyal Mucit Academic Review, Ayşe Güneş of Türkiye’s Cankiri Karatekin University argues that the CEDAW and the Istanbul Convention prohibit technology-facilitated gender-based violence. The Istanbul Convention first introduced the digital aspect of violence against women, Güneş explains. The CEDAW, Güneş adds, categorizes online violence as a form of discrimination against women and a human rights violation. Güneş cites several provisions from both conventions that apply to technology-facilitated gender-based violence, including the inclusion of digital stalking in Article 34 of the Istanbul Convention. Güneş concludes that although the CEDAW and Istanbul Convention prohibit technology-facilitated gender-based violence, the recommendations are soft-law No effective international legal framework exists to regulate online violence, Güneş contends.
• In a recent report for the Columbia SIPA Institute of Global Politics, Nina Jankowicz of the American Sunlight Project and several coauthors argue that although the public and private sectors must work together to combat technology-facilitated gender-based violence, self-regulation efforts are lacking and warrant federal legislation to protect women. The Jankowicz team suggests several steps for regulators to take to protect women online. They propose that governments enact oversight mechanisms to monitor data related to online abuse. The Jankowicz team urges Congress to pass legislation that includes civil and criminal penalties for the circulation of non-consensual deepfake pornography. The Jankowicz team concludes that governments should implement training on technology-facilitated gender-based violence for law enforcement and enact policies that support survivors.