The Web is a facet of technology that has become ubiquitous to human kind. It is a big infrastructure well-suited for sharing information and media. It is also a medium of communication guaranteed by the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (Article 19).
The Web is a reflection of man – complicated, complex, convoluted. And as an invention of man, it has a lot of uses, from the sublime to the divine, from the mundane to the inhumane.
Violence can be defined as “any act of aggression and abuse which causes or intends to cause injury, in some cases criminal, or harm to persons, and (to a lesser extent) animals or property” (Wikipedia). The Internet in general and the Web in particular are simple tools to violate other’s rights and persons. How simple can it be? All you need is twenty Philippine pesos.
Probably the simplest form of violence inflicted against women using the Web is pornography. The prevalence of this violence is due to the fact that “(Internet pornography) allows people to view pornography (essentially) anonymously in the comfort and privacy of their homes. It also allows access to pornography by people whose access is otherwise restricted for legal or social reasons” (Wikipedia). This makes the violence more criminal, more foul; it is pornography in a large scale.
True, that most of these are for-pay services. False, that it is a valid excuse. A complex Google search will generate results that will show FREE pornographic materials available online.
For a simple signup, a perverted user can join Web groups and browse pornographic materials for free. Or an email-based group, perhaps. The point is that exploitation is not always equal to financial return.
The problem is serious. For one, the victims are getting younger; exploitation and loss of innocence is not limited to the primary victims.
Unfortunately, despite getting paid for using their bodies for satisfying other’s carnal desires, women are victims in whatever way you look at it. And there can be no justification for exploiting unwilling victims of this violence.
What can be done?
—
What can YOU do?
1. commit: commit yourself to 16 days of blogging about violence against women and technology.
2. _email:_Email ideas@takebackthetech.net, with your blog address and name/handle/nick if you want to sign up as a Ka-BLOGger, if possible, before 25 November. f you don’t have a blog yet, this will be a great place to start! Email us, and we’ll send you links on how to start your own blog
3. identify: make it known by putting a takebackthetech icon on your blog — create your own or grab a few icons from our Campaign Tools and Materials.
4. post: post something about the how you think violence against women connects with information communications technology? have a story? heard something quirky? snap a picture? think this is serious? doesn’t make much sense? anything at all! just commit one post a day from 25 nov to 10 dec on thinking about violence against women
5. tag it: use “takebackthetech” to tag your posts;
6. link back: send in your bloglinks and we’ll rss your posts to the campaign website throughout the 16 days.
7. expand: widen the campaign to your readers by linking your blog to the campaign site.
technorati tags: takebackthetech
While your argument has some merit the potential for govenmental abuse is worse. The extense use of filtering technology against, say, “pornography” would likely block your posting which uses: “pornography” -7 times, “pornographic” -twice, “violance” -7 times, “free” -3 times, “younger” -once and “woman” -3 times. Filtering technology would interpret this blog as a “free site that includes pronographic images of violance against younger women.” Hmmmm.
The better way to prosecute “child pornography” is to support the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC)(http://www.missingkids.com) and to pressure your local law enforcement agencies to prioritize leads when received, before the records evaporate into hyperspace.
Both autocratic and democratic governments fear the freedoms that the Interent offer.
NetRightsAdvocates.com
Hi thanks for dropping by.
I believe that my argument does not suggest what you are saying. I understand companies doing Web filtering, but governments doing it is unacceptable; it is simply not their duty.