Association for Progressive Communications Input: Situating Feminist, Global South Approach to Researching Technology Facilitated Gender Based Violence

By Hija Kamran and Namita Aavriti (Association for Progressive Communications)

As digital spaces expand across the Global South and beyond, they are not socially neutral, rather they reflect and amplify the same inequalities, power imbalances, and norms that shape offline life. Since 2006, the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) has documented and analysed how those inequalities are reproduced online, labelling the resulting harms under the term technology-facilitated gender based violence (TFGBV). With work spanning initiatives like the Feminist Internet Research Network (FIRN) — a multi-country global network of researchers studying and documenting the impact of TFGBV on communities; Take Back The Tech (TBTT) — a global campaign organising movements to take control of technology to end gender based violence; GenderIT — a global feminist publication for critical analysis on gender, sexuality and technology; and a Framework on Gender-responsive Cybersecurity Policy, among others, APC has built both the empirical basis and conceptual framework that position TFGBV as a systemic threat to democracy and human rights.

TFGBV describes a broader set of harms mediated or facilitated by information and communication technologies (ICTs), from cyber harassment, doxxing, non-consensual intimate images, to deepfakes, cyber stalking, gendered disinformation, surveillance, and targeted attacks on women and gender-diverse people. And in light of the advancement in technology with AI that adds another layer of manipulation and disinformation to existing forms of TFGBV, the nature and impact of the violence has significantly increased. This impact can be seen not only in online contexts, but also in offline realities as well. 

The shift from offline to online, and increasingly to hybrid digital-physical abuse, means that TFGBV must be central to achieving meaningful gender justice, civil protection and democratic participation. APC has done deep, cross-regional analysis of TFGBV forms, drivers, and structural context. FIRN has worked with feminist researchers, collectives, and civil society across Asia, Africa, SWANA, and Latin America, combining quantitative surveys with qualitative content analysis, interviews, and focus groups to map patterns of abuse.

The findings have been consistent, and established that with the evolution of technology, TFGBV is constantly evolving and is consistent across geographies. For example, our latest research in Tajikistan found that 64% of women and girls have experienced TFGBV, much of which is intimate partner surveillance, monitoring of devices, and social media control. Another research conducted in South Africa documented the experience of a non-binary person who describes repeated blocking of an abuser only for them to create new accounts, followed by stalking that turned physical — a critical example of online harassment transforming into offline threats. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, our research found that women report self-censorship and disconnecting altogether from online spaces after facing threats or witnessing violent backlash when posting about social and political realities. These country-specific accounts show that TFGBV is sustained, patterned, and deeply rooted in gendered power dynamics.

APC’s research also demonstrates the role of structural and institutional factors like digital infrastructure controlled by powerful, profit driven companies from the global North, content moderation by global platforms with limited accountability, state practices like internet shutdowns, and legislative and policy framework that are often inadequate or even harmful.

In its submission to the UN Human Rights Council, APC argues that online GBV undermines women’s and gender diverse people’s right to self-determination, privacy, and freedom of expression, because corporate platforms treat the internet as a market rather than a shared public good.

Corporate content moderation has repeatedly failed to recognise or address the continuum between online abuse and offline violence. Platform algorithms and business models are also structured around engagement rather than user safety and dignity, profiting from outrage, discrimination, and hate speech, while forcing users to rely on superficial mechanisms like blocking, muting, reactive takedowns, after harm has already occurred. We have noted that this approach is ineffective to prevent violence, and often perpetuates a culture of impunity by ignoring the ways misogyny, hate, harassment, and disinformation are systematically weaponised against women, LGBTQIA+ communities, and activists. As mentioned in the primer by AWID, “Big Tech exercises its corporate power to further impoverish marginalised women in the Global South while co-opting the language of gender equality.”

Geopolitical realities also contribute significantly to digital violence, with APC’s documentation from Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Palestine revealing that in conflict zones and authoritarian contexts, the risks of such violence multiply as surveillance, censorship, disinformation, and tech-enabled repression converge to silent dissent, attack defenders, and repress marginalised communities.

However, our research shows that despite growing evidence and urgency, existing legal and policy frameworks, where they exist, are often inadequate, fragmented, or even counterproductive. Many frameworks, though well-intentioned, treat women as vulnerable victims rather than as rights-holders, undermining their autonomy and control. TFGBV is also often framed under broad cybercrime laws that lack clear definitions and criminalise legitimate expression, particularly of women, LGBTQIA+ individuals and others. Further, legislation addressing GBV, platform and data governance remains siloed, leaving gaps that allow TFGBV to go unaddressed, especially as technology advances. When laws are relevant, enforcement is often affected by lack of technological, gender-sensitive, or cross-border capacity, with survivors frequently facing patriarchal bias, victim-blaming, or outright disbelief when attempting to report abuse. Finally, policy making processes rarely include survivors, feminist movements, or civil society with lived experiences and expertise. 

Given this reality, APC advances a holistic, feminist, and intersectional approach to tech governance which situates TFGBV not as an afterthought or in isolation but as a structural threat to freedom of expression, civic participation, gender justice, and democracy. This includes investing in digital safety at the organisational and community level, while pushing for holistic understanding of the relational and community-based nature of safety; creating and convening safe spaces for exchange, co-learning, and sharing strategies on addressing TFGBV, including individual and collective safety practices; and advocating for flexible funding that sustains ongoing work and makes it possible to establish emergency or relocation funds for activists at risk. APC also advocates for a fundamental shift in how online spaces are governed, for platforms to be held accountable for the harms they enable, regulatory frameworks to recognise online abuse as human rights violations, and digital governance to prioritise safety, privacy, and inclusion, without undermining human rights.
------------------------

The views and opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of the TED Secretariat or any of the entities they represent.