The Cyber Violence Crisis - why are women still the primary victims?

by christina Warner, barrister, Goldsmith chambers

social media platforms and the internet have created means of free expression on an unprecedented scale in both volume and pace of content. Where there once had been media gatekeeping mechanisms1 there now stands little in the way of people remaining anonymous whilst conveying their most brutal criticism or explicit threat in the absence of any moral, and arguably legal consequence. but the victims of gender-based cyber violence have been found to disproportionately be women and girls. According to a 2021 study from the economist Intelligence Unit,2 38% of women have reported personal experiences with online violence. but this is not a recent issue. the issue has extended beyond one demographic and into both public commentary and private intrusion. the VAWG (Violence Against Women and Girls) Helpdesk research report cites hacking, impersonation, surveillance/tracking, harassment/spamming (either by an individual or group), recruitment into violent situations (e.g. trafficking), and malicious distribution of defamatory and illegal materials (e.g. revenge porn)3 as examples of cyber violence encountered by women and girls. most recently, digital tools have also created further means of abuse with the likes of ‘deep fakes’ or the production of non-consensual sexual images giving perpetrators the opportunity to create and circulate harmful content against the victim.

Increasing trends

According to research by the social

science computer review, a study of online content concluded that there is substantially more online hate directed towards women than there is towards men including insults, threats, revenge porn, and cyber stalking with prevalence rates varying from 23% to 53%.5

the same was found in an experiment using fake male and female usernames in a chat room. While users with female names received on average 100 sexually explicit or threatening messages daily, men only received 3.5 such messages on average per day.6 but, the impact of online abuse rarely remains online with victims reporting that the abuse affects their ability to work, socialise and their self-esteem7 and in some cases having long-lasting effects on their mental health often resulting in an increased likelihood of depression and anxiety disorders. Other social and economic impacts have been found by way of withdrawal from the public debate, costs incurred for seeking legal and healthcare assistance, labour market impacts in terms of lower presence at work, risks of job loss or lower productivity, and reduced quality of life due to poor mental health itself.8

Numerous high profile cases both in the UK and the Us such as the online harrassment of robin William’s daughter shortly after his death in 2014 and the suicide of tV presenter, caroline Flack in February 2020 highlighted the impact of online bullying and harassment and the dire consequences which can result.

but the figures represented may only reflect a fraction of what is taking place, with conclusions being drawn that the data is limited due to underreporting. Underreporting is also reflected in victims’ lack of awareness that cyber violence is taking place and a lack of understanding or knowledge as to what to do to manage the situation.9 the concern being that cyber violence will be minimised, and more worryingly, legitimised entirely, leaving victims to deal with the mental consequences alone.

One of the most relevant arguments has been the need for consistency in the definition of violence in the collection of research and statistics in order to accurately assess the issue. As concerns of the evolving forms of cyber violence grows so too, must the definition of violence and hate crime itself. this being particularly pertinent where the victim and perpetrator are known to each other in the context of possible domestic abuse, with the european Institute of Global equality warning not to think of cyber violence as a separate phenomenon to real-world forms of violence, with perpetrators blurring the lines of online and offline violence and aggression towards victims. Generally, the term ‘cyber VAWG’ is used to capture the different ways that the internet and information and communication technologies exacerbate and magnify acts of violence against women and girls.

Change in policies

campaigns towards challenging and managing online abuse and cyber violence (not only aimed at women) have increased with the likes of Facebook and twitter responding with greater filtering of messages and adapting notification settings. but whilst the budapest, Istanbul and Lanzarote conventions of the council of europe help to address cybercrime and prevent and combat violence against women and children, including cyber violence, arguments have been made that social media platforms themselves are doing little to address the issues.

campaigners lobbying for companies to review their approach and in turn, their policies on the issue of online violence against women and girls was highlighted by Amnesty International in 2018, labelling twitter as “toxic” and accusing twitter of failing to respect women’s rights online,10 providing the threats of sexual violence that had been made against scottish First minister, Nicola sturgeon earlier that year as an example of the seriousness and urgency of the issue. more recently, in July 2021, Facebook, Google, twitter and tiktok signed a pledge to remedy persistent weaknesses in their approach to tackling online gender-based violence. the pledge, led by the World Wide Web Foundation (WWWF), was announced during the global forum for gender equality convened by UN Women in Paris.11

moves towards ensuring policy changes have focused on factors most likely to make a victim vulnerable to gender-based cyber violence. these have included young women and adolescent girls, those who are in abusive relationships whilst offline (including victims of intimate partner and in-person violence), those of bAme communities, those of diverse sexualities or gender identity, those living with disabilities and women in public office or in the public domain.12 but as the 2021 study from the economist Intelligence Unit13 found, most efforts to address the issue of online gender-based violence focuses on post-experience responses rather than prevention. but with more people showcasing their personal lives online as well as the increase in reports of partners sharing intimate photos, the scope for online abuse is wide-ranging. From social media platforms enabling abuse on a public level to texts and direct messages intended for the victim to receive privately, the manner in which cyber violence and online abuse manifests, is as diverse as those who encounter it. the contents and widespread circulation of social media reinforces existing forms of violence against women and undoubtedly, also creates new tools to threaten women and inflict harm, both off and online.14

the scope and reach of cyber violence will evolve as technology develops and so too will the need remain for policies and legislation to promptly follow suit. this being particularly critical within the framework of the definition of cyber violence and hate speech against women and girls by the UN and eU as well as on national, societal and academic levels, if victims are to remain protected. Again, this proposal will only address the issue after the fact rather than dealing with the root causes of cyber violence. educational and industry drives towards encouraging women and girls to become involved in the male-dominated technology and computing sectors may be a start to tackling the issue on a practical level but may prove to be more a remedial step rather than a preventative measure.

but greater and deeply-entrenched issues such as societal and domestic gender inequality and misogyny are clearly reflected in the statistics of women and girl victims and the content being created by perpetrators. Whilst this is allowed to continue, by a lack of addressing the causes, so too will the discriminatory norms designed to limit victims’ potential.

1Process of Gate Keeping in media: From Old trend to New, shabir, safdar and mumtaz,. January 2015, mediterranean Journal of social sciences, Vol. 6 No. 1 s1 (2015): January 2015. 2measuring the prevalence of online violence against women <https://onlineviolencewomen.eiu.com/> 3Nature and Prevalence of cyber Violence against Women and Girls, Dr erika Fraser and Laura martineau-searle,. No 211, 08 October 2018. 4silencing Women? Gender and Online Harassment, marjan Nadim and Audun Fladmoe,. social science computer review 2021, Vol. 39(2) 245-258. 5cyber violence and hate speech online against women, european Parliament, Policy Department for citizens’ rights and constitutional Affairs, september 2018 < https://www.europarl.europa.eu/ regData/etudes/stUD/2018/604979/IPOL_ stU(2018)604979_eN.pdf> 6Ibid 4 7House of commons science and technology committee Impact of social media and screen-use on young people’s health Fourteenth report of session 2017–19, 29 January 2019 8Ibid 5 9Home Office, Policy paper, tackling violence against women and girls strategy, 26 July 2021. 10<https://www.amnesty.org/en/ latest/research/2018/03/online-violence-against-women-chapter-1/> 11UN Women, Press release: < https://www. unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2021/7/ press-release-generation-equality-forum-concludes-with-commitments-and-global-acceleration-plan> 12Ibid 3 13Ibid 2 14WHO, Violence Against Women, 9 march 2021 <https://www.who.int/news-room/ fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women>