In this presentation we will explore emerging discussions on sexual deepfake technology as part of the forthcoming second edition of Gender and Violence: A Companion. Sexual deepfakes – manipulated or fully AI-generated explicit, sexual, or sexualised images or videos typically produced without the consent of the person(s) depicted – present a digital manifestation and extension of gender-based violence. Whilst technological developments began in the late 1990s, the commodification of sexual deepfakes was fully unleashed from 2017 through online platforms. Notably, Reddit played a pivotal role in providing users with a space to exchange digitally altered photos of women whose faces had been swapped onto explicit images. In this presentation, we will situate sexual deepfakes within three core areas. First, technology facilitating deepfake abuse is gendered and inherits misogynistic values; it is thus enabled through the wider culture of gender inequality. Second, as part of the wider continuum of sexual violence and its connection to other forms of gender-based violence including stalking, online harassment, and image-based sexual abuse, sexual deepfakes primarily but not exclusively targets women and their bodily and sexual autonomy. Third, whilst current (public) discourses tend to responsibilise women, the focus should be shifted to other stakeholders, namely perpetrators, technology producers, websites, consumers, criminal justice agents, and policymakers. We will conclude by emphasising the need for acknowledging sexual deepfakes as a form of gender-based violence, its seriousness, and adequate responses and we will recommend improved education and awareness to address sexual deepfakes as an emergent form of gender-based violence.

It is now recognised that the technological advancements that have facilitated exploration in the online space have not been without personal and professional cost. This paper will draw upon empirical evidence, Twitter (X) data, and a wide interdisciplinary corpus to demonstrate how women academics are being routinely silenced when participating in disciplinary discourses, as a response to the often violent abuse that they face online.
This paper uses robust research to assess the true nature of the online gendered harm experienced by women academics. It outlines the multifarious impacts that victimization has on opportunities for scholarship, career development and emotional wellbeing, at a time when universities preparing for the travails of the Research Excellence Framework (REF) – amongst many other demands – require ever increasing public engagement. The pressure to maximise impact, build professional collaborations, and perform successfully in the REF has compelled many academics to increase their online presence. However, my research has shown that this has precipitated an increase in the amount of abusive and threatening communication they receive. Furthermore, there is evidence that many universities have neither the policies or the practical safeguards in place to fulfil their duty of care towards their employees when violent abuse inevitably arrives.
The paper argues that the impact of online abuse on the academy has largely been overlooked, or at best seen as a granular issue. Consequently, women academics are left balancing institutional demands for greater online engagement with their own safety. This dichotomy is actively silencing women’s voices, whilst reinforcing existing gendered inequalities. Failing to recognise this perpetuates gender disparities, fortifying the glass ceiling and threatening hard-won equalities, as women withdraw from the academy, fearing the consequences of engaging online.

In recent years research on the involuntarily celibate or ‘Incel’ community has contributed a small but significant stock of knowledge about toxic varieties of extreme misogyny being shared on lightly regulated online communication boards. Simultaneously, we have witnessed the potential for Incel ideas to find expression in disturbing outbursts of extremist violence. If we are to find a way to tackle the development and dissemination of these ideas, it is imperative that we learn why certain people leave these communities and how they change their views towards women. Essentially, we need to explore what deradicalization might look like for a member of the Incel community. So far, the research in this area has provided a handful of anecdotal accounts of the experiences of former Incels that have left the community and moved on. However, researchers need to focus on building a much more robust body of work in this area. This paper contributes to this research agenda through presenting findings from a piece of research into the ‘Incel Exit’ Reddit forum. The paper uses thematic analysis to highlight certain core themes that feature in these discussions. There is a particular focus on advice given by former Incels to those who are seeking to end their involvement in the community. The paper uses these findings to outline the broad dimensions of a model for Incel deradicalization.

Despite emerging literature in the field of technology facilitated abuse (TFA) indicating a high, international prevalence of perpetration as well as severe social, professional, and health related impacts, it remains unclear how gay and bisexual male victim/survivor of TFA experience it since existing research overwhelmingly focussing on heterosexual female victim/survivor. This paper aims to understand whether TFA victimisation experiences differ between a heterosexual couple and a male same-sex couple, and whether such differences were further impacted by the gender and sexual orientation of the victim in the UK. The study used an anonymous online survey (n=1,000) to compare judgement scores of vignettes that were differentiated by couples (opposite vs. same sex) and victim sex (male vs. female), whilst controlling for beliefs about experiences of TFA. The data derived from Qualtrics online survey indicated that participants reported more lenient judgements of vignettes that depicted same-sex couple, relative to an opposite one, but no main effect of victim sex nor interaction thereof. Moreover, the free text part of the survey endorsed the belief such as heteronormativity and how this can affect the participants judgment on TFA victimisation. Despite the need for large-scale replications of this study to fully model the reported effects in the context of further moderators and covariates, results indicate a need for a deeper understanding as to the impact of TFA on a same-sex relationship on a (inter)national scale. I argue that it is important to use a queer theoretical framework for our understandings of TFA by considering the experiences of LGBTQI+ people. A broader engagement with queer thought and methodology can enhance our understanding of TFA beyond the specific experiences of LGBTQI+ people.