The Erasure of the Human: The Stalking and Cyberterrorism of Women

Conditions, diseases, the law, careers, crimes. The list could possibly go on forever. What list? You ask. The list of things that mean less, carry less weight, and are taken less seriously when they happen to women than to men. One only needs to quickly peruse the history of medical conditions such as migraines, mental illness, and fibromyalgia to quickly see the “pink bias” in medicine. When women experience symptoms, particularly if they are not visible, they are often not taken seriously or researched in any meaningful way. Women are always already assumed to be overreactors and hysterical (which, by the way, comes from the Greek work hystericus, meaning “of the womb.” Because wombs, of course, are crazy.

While I could talk about any of the categories listed above, I am particularly interested in one area: crime. Specifically, I’m interested in what is referred to as stalking. Below, I will trace the history of stalking, particularly as it relates to women though it absolutely happens to men as well (unfortunately for them, they’ve been victims of a lady’s crime, so they too are left without resources), and the history of terrorism. I have started this research because I want to know why terrorism is one of the most egregious crimes you can commit while stalking is almost never taken seriously, and when it is, it carries very short maximum sentence lengths.

The statute of limitations for most criminal acts is three years, with some notable exceptions of course. For civil issues the statute of limitations is two years, and it’s the same for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress. Terrorism has a statute of limitations of eight years, and that can be suspended at the whim of the federal government. Here is Minnesota, we have one of the most strict stalking statutes, yet the sentences are still fairly short, usually less than two years even for the most egregious cases. And there is very little data on what sentences those who are convicted of terrorism serve, but it seems to range somewhere between mysterious disappearance and life in a hole.

According to the FBI, domestic terrorism has three primary traits: “domestic terrorism” means activities with the following three characteristics:

(1) Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;

(2) Appear intended

(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and

(3) Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

According to the Dictionary of Law Enforcement, “cyberterrorism” means “A form of terrorism which seeks to exploit or attack electronic information systems.”

Notice that while the first definition focuses on human life and human impact, cyberterrorism has completely erased the human impact of terrorism. If the prefix cyber here was consistent with other ways it’s used, some semblance of the conjoining word should be retained. Cybersex is defined as “sexual arousal using computer technology, especially by wearing virtual reality equipment or by exchanging messages with another person via the Internet.” Cyberbullying likewise is defined as “the use of electronic communication to bully a person, typically by sending messages of an intimidating or threatening nature.” While it’s simplistic to say that cyber+word=word on the internet, that is partially true. Yet cyber+terrorism retains nothing of the original meaning of terrorism. Who is being terrorized with cyberterrorism? According to the definition, it’s the information systems being terrorized; seems legit…

So why does this matter? It matters because there are huge numbers of people, especially women, being terrorized online. Stalked, yes; harassed, yes; but terrorized? YES. Let’s look again at the definition of terrorism and see if the harassment of women online fits the bill. Does the harassment and abuse of women online involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law? Yes; it violates the law by stalking, hacking information, posting private information online. Some women have faced swatting, posting online of children’s school addresses, and death threats. All of those are crimes; all of those are dangerous threats to human life. CHECK. Does the harassment and abuse of women online appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping? Yes, yes, and yes. (i) this behavior is attempting to keep women out of the gaming industry and off the internet altogether. (ii) #GG and men’s rights activists have been trying to influence the policies of governments and corporations (see, for example, revenge porn). (iii) this one is a bit trickier. Do folks like GGers want the government to be destroyed? I would argue that they are so focused on the abuse and attack of women that they would burn anything to the ground. The few outsiders fighting for better conditions in the gaming industry (women, that is) who have found themselves in GG’s path regret it (see Dr. Samantha Allen). Does the harassment and abuse of women online (3) Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.? You could argue that this one is where the comparison falls about. BUT NOPE. If the acts cross international waters, you simply have international terrorism instead of domestic terrorism.

So is #GamerGate a terrorist group? Are these women experiencing more than stalking or harassment? I think it’s a resoundingly clear answer. The attacks on women like Anita Sarkeesian are coordinated and meant to complete disrupt and destroy a huge segment of the American population, influencing the way we work, use computers, and are able to live. How is this not one of our highest national security concerns?

Because it’s happening to women. Like medical conditions, crimes don’t count as much when they happen to women. #GamerGate is simply yet another example of how our institutions are set up to ignore problems until they become problems for those in power.