Towards freedom of consensual representation online

From IFF Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Session Description

The session is a moment to discuss the need for girls and women in general to be safe online and exercise their sexuality in a violence free environnement. this session will ideally introuce freedom of expression fellow to the struggle of ICT related violence against women in Africa.

Towards freedom of consensual representation online
Presenter/s Francoise Mukuku Mwamba malale
Bio/s Françoise Mukuku MM. is congolese and independent consultant evolving at the Amazon Consultancy office based in Kinshasa, in Democratic Republic of Congo (RDC) and works mainly in the Great Lakes Region and Central Africa (Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Tanzania, Central African Republic, Chad, Gabon and Republic of Congo). She is specialized in Research, Communication, Organizational Management, monitoring and evaluation, advocacy and Events Management. She holds 10 years’ experience as a journalist and manager of communication for several international humanitarian organizations. Engaged activist of women’s right, she uniformly organises trainings in Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights, Agency and Voice and is passionate particularly on the intersections that exist between development, human rights and social justice.
Language French , English

Session Comments

[[Category:French, English]

Session Notes

Speaker: Francoise Mukuku Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

Works with a gender and technology organization

Do a lot of gender analysis around issues of technology

English is her 4th language

Consensual - to what degree do you have control over your presence online, specifically involving nudity

Why this session?

ICT related VAW advocate (Violence against women)

- online harassment - grooming - cyberbullying - misogynist discourse - NCII (non consensual intimate images) - etc

Freedom of expression

- Freedom for media online

- Open knowledge (open data, open access, open content)

- Internet rights in general

Example: When someone sends a nude picture to a partner, but don’t expect it to be distributed

Responses from the public/policymakers

- Women and girls put themselves at risk - “blame the victim"

- Need for protection for women and girls - “revenge porn" is not porn, it’s violence against women - “child porn” is not porn, it’s violence against children

   - However policy makers speak about banning porn instead

- Need to protect internet users from unwanted sexual messages

- Morality issues (most in patriarchal society? Facebook safety)

- Etc

What they are missing

- Women are not girls

- Women and girls have agency

   - Women who were filmed naked playing in the rain against their will were killed by their family as an honor killing
   - When women places image of herself breastfeeding online - this is consensual presentation - there is agency. There’s a message behind it

- They do it from a different perspective and all of them are worth consideration

   - example of women sharing their photos of Brazilian waxing online
   - Also Femen protest group - use nudity for political expression
       - Amna SBOUI aka Amina femen - felt Femen didn’t include Muslim issues
       - She was jailed for tagging the wall of a cemetery - a law which was never enforced (dated back to 18th century)
       - Book Il Mio Corpo
   - Posting personal sex videos to public site
   - “Freedom of consensual representation”

Cases of Nudity Ban

- Some social media banning nudity

- Facebook - pieces of art, including well know art, breastfeeding pictures, etc

- Youtube - video of woman giving birth in her bathroom - tho intent was to show women can birth safely at home in case of an emergency. Facebook banned due to the nudity.

- Nudity ban in San Francisco

Importance of allowing consensual presentation of nudity (in contrast to nonconsensual sharing of images)