The Problem with ‘Revenge Porn’

By Aiza Nadeem

‘Revenge Porn’ has been popularised to describe instances of someone releasing images and videos taken of or by another without their consent. In most cases, this occurs at the end of a relationship where the partner with malicious intent releases the images or videos to hurt the victim.

The phenomenon is a manifestation of patriarchy in the cyber realm as it punishes, generally women, for exercising their sexuality and freedom. The circulation of ‘revenge porn’ intends to inhibit the positive relationship between women and sexual freedom while restricting access to online spaces. It is a form of violence or threatened violence against the victim as the release of such content presents a real danger to them. It thus serves as an effective social control against women’s autonomy.

However, calling such sharing ‘revenge porn’ is wrong and damaging to the victims of the act. ‘Revenge’ suggests victims have erred in some manner resulting in the perpetrators seeking action against them, which only furthers rape culture and patriarchal narratives. There has been no original crime committed for which revenge must be sought — this culture of victim-blaming needs to end. This is also why it is difficult for non-consensual image release to be recognized as a legitimate issue. Too often, the label ascribes responsibility to the creator and ignores the gender-based violence which frames the act.

By attaching the label of pornography to non-consensually shared images or videos, we are conflating content produced by consenting porn actors to that made for private viewing by victims. The issue raised here is also how consent in pornography is a murky subject. Non-consent is a fantasy popular in mainstream porn. It is difficult to distinguish between fantasy and reality and distinguish content produced by consenting participants. Indeed, releasing content without an individual’s consent is upheld by an entire industry that valorizes non-consent.

The label of pornography carries further connotations of content produced for entertainment purposes, which images and videos released without the consent of individuals are certainly not.

Women’s bodily autonomy disregarded is a phenomenon firmly rooted in hetero-patriarchial culture. With the label of entertainment, we feed a culture that views women’s bodies as existing to please the male gaze.

Targeting women by releasing explicit images and videos has become a weapon in the conflict in Myanmar. It continues the rich tradition of women’s bodies being exploited in times of war. Both anti-coup activists and military sympathizers have been attacked in these so-called ‘social punishments’. If the political views of the two opponents do not align, they are targetted using their explicit photos to garner control using sexuality. Since the beginning of the conflict, women targeted by these campaigns have had their pictures, videos, and even home addresses released to sites dedicated to these ‘punishments’.

As the conflict demonstrates, ‘revenge porn’ does not do justice to the complex factors at play that motivates people to violate women’s autonomy in such a manner. It is a violent manifestation of patriarchy that punishes women for assuming control and knows how to target them. Additionally, from a legislative angle, revenge porn can oversimplify crimes that extend beyond what it conveys. ‘Revenge Porn’ is traditionally seen as content shared by a partner once a relationship has ended, but non-consensual sharing is not limited to that. Our legislation needs to be conscious of this too.

On our part, continued usage of the term ‘revenge porn’ reinforces a culture that blames rather than focuses on the perpetrator’s actions. The release of such images is a crime abuse. Our language needs to shift to that which recognizes this; unlearning such notions are required to hold people accountable for their actions and make safer spaces for women