Safety as a Grand Challenge in Pervasive Computing: Using Feminist Epistemologies to Shift the Paradigm From Security to Safety

Strohmayer, Angelika; Bellini, Rosanna; Slupska, Julia

doi:10.1109/mprv.2022.3182222

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…10 Feminist thinkers describe how conventional security threat modeling that focuses on digital access in isolation can neglect broader questions about safety and justice for marginalized people. 11 A similar question of focus arises in legal privacy scholarship. Privacy is sometimes described as having a "dead body problem": many privacy violations lack harms that are readily cognizable as such, making it difficult to address and prevent them through tort law.…”

Section: Siloes and Dead B Odiesmentioning

confidence: 90%

Digital Security and Reproductive Rights: Lessons for Feminist Cyberlaw

Meister,

Levy

2024

Feminist Cyberlaw

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Siloes and Dead B Odiesmentioning

confidence: 90%

Digital Security and Reproductive Rights: Lessons for Feminist Cyberlaw

Meister,

Levy

2024

Feminist Cyberlaw

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There is an opportunity to create bridges between different forms of professional assistance, such as victim services that provide technological support, or criminal justice referral networks such as those creating by problem solving courts (Miller et al, 2020). Additionally, technology partnerships to prevent the spread of TFA (Henry et al, 2020; National Network to end Domestic Violence [NNEDV], 2017) as well as hands-on technical assistance for survivors (Strohmayer et al, 2021; Zou et al, 2021) will continue to be part of the solution (see toolkit options at Technology Safety & Privacy Resources, NNEDV).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

U.S. Young Adults’ Professional Help-Seeking in Response to Technology-Facilitated Abuse

Mumford

Rothman

Maitra

et al. 2022

J Interpers Violence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Widespread access to an increasing number of technology-enhanced communications channels multiplies the potential for abusive interactions (i.e., technology-facilitated abuse [TFA]). Practitioners will be better prepared to respond to the problem of TFA if more is known about how commonly victims seek help, and from whom. Through a cross-sectional, U.S. nationally representative survey of n = 1,215 young adults aged 18 to 35, respondents completed the TFA scale of the Cyber-Abuse Research Initiative. We calculated the percentage of TFA survivors who sought help for their most damaging experience of TFA, and used logistic regression to model help-seeking for health services, victim services, technological assistance, and/or criminal justice/legal assistance. For each help source, we examined risk markers including sociodemographic characteristics, online activity, the number of different forms of TFA experience, and the perpetrator’s relationship to the victim. Use of a broader range of social media sites/platforms, and several indicators of more severe TFA experiences, predicted help-seeking from health services, victim services, and justice/legal assistance. Young adults who identified the TFA perpetrator as a current or ex-intimate partner were less likely than other survivors to seek two forms of help: technological assistance and/or criminal justice/legal assistance. Survivors who self-identified as Black were more likely than White survivors to seek victim services. Professionals who support survivors of interpersonal aggression may use these results to enhance their screening protocols and form cross-disciplinary partnerships to address the harms associated with TFA.

show abstract

“…These include influencing elections (e.g., [13]) and organised social media attacks, or LGBTQI+ support for both (digital and physical) safety [25,30], women's experiences online outside of Western perspectives [35,37], vulnerable populations in the global south [7,[57][58][59], and people living with stigmatized conditions [17]. More examples include cyberstalking, and stigmatised topics such as domestic violence/intimate partner violence [64,70], and algorithmic harms [68].…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%