This article presents a new theoretical framework around technology-facilitated domestic abuse (TFDA) in identifying four distinct types of omnipresent behavior. Perpetrators are increasingly drawing upon networked technologies like smartphones, social media, and GPS trackers in monitoring, controlling, and abusing survivors. There is considerable academic literature developing in response to this. While this scholarship is valuable, this article argues that TFDA must be understood as a neoliberal manifestation of patriarchal legacies of misogyny and sexism. A failure to recognize this will serve to prioritize abusers’ freedom to do harm over rights of survivors to be protected from harm.
AriefB.CoopamootooK. P.EmmsM.Van MoorselA. (2014). Sensible privacy: How we can protect domestic violence survivors without facilitating misuse. In 13th Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (pp. 201–204). https://doi.org/10.1145/2665943.2665965
2.
BaymN. K. (2015). Personal connections in the digital age. Polity Press.
3.
BorochowitzD. Y.EisikovitsZ. (2002). To love violently: Strategies for reconciling love and violence. Violence Against Women, 8(4), 476–494. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778010222183170
4.
BumillerK. (2008). In an abusive state: How neoliberalism appropriated the feminist movement against sexual violence. Duke University Press.
5.
ChatterjeeR.DoerflerP.OrgadH.HavronS.PalmerJ.FreedD.LevyK.DellN.McoyD.RistenpartT. (2018). The spyware used in intimate partner violence. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2018.00061
CokerD.MacquoidA. D. (2015). Why opposing hyper-incarceration should be central to the work of the anti-domestic violence movement. University of Miami Race & Social Justice Legal Review, 5, 586–601. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2638902
8.
D’CruzeS.JacksonL. A. (2009). Women, crime and justice in England since 1660. Macmillan.
9.
DimondJ. P.FieslerC.BuckmanA. S. (2011). Domestic violence and information communication technologies. Interacting With Computers, 23(5), 413–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2011.04.006
10.
DobashR. E.DobashR. P. (2015). When men murder women. Oxford University Press.
DouglasH.HarrisB. A.DragiewiczM. (2019). Technology facilitated domestic and family violence: Women’s experiences. British Journal of Criminology, 59(3), 551–570. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azy068
13.
DragiewiczM.BurgessJ.Matamoros-FernándezA.SalterM.SuzorN. P.WoodlockD.HarrisB. (2018). Technology facilitated coercive control: Domestic violence and the competing roles of digital media platforms. Feminist Media Studies, 18(4), 609–625. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1447341
14.
DragiewiczM.HarrisB.WoodlockD.SalterM.EastonH.LynchA.CampbellH.LeachJ.MilneL. (2019). Domestic violence and communication technology: Survivor experiences of intrusion, surveillance, and identity crime. Australian Communications Consumer Action Network. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/131143/
15.
EllisA. (2017). Men, masculinities and violence. Routledge.
16.
Eterovic-SoricB.ChooK. K. R.AshmanH.MubarakS. (2017). Stalking the stalkers—Detecting and deterring stalking behaviours using technology: A review. Computers & Security, 70, 278–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2017.06.008
17.
FraserC.OlsenE.LeeK.SouthworthC.TuckerS. (2010). The new age of stalking: Technological implications for stalking. Juvenile & Family Court Journal, 61(4), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.2010.01051.x
18.
FraserN. (2013). The fortunes of feminism: From women’s liberation to identity politics to anti-capitalism. Verso.
19.
FreedD.PalmerJ.MinchalaD. E.LevyK.RistenpartT.DellN. (2017). Digital technologies and intimate partner violence: A qualitative analysis with multiple stakeholders. Proceedings of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3134681
20.
FreedD.PalmerJ.MinchalaD. E.LevyK.RistenpartT.DellN. (2018). “A Stalker’s Paradise”: How intimate partner abusers exploit technology. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–13). https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174241
21.
GilchristG.RadcliffeP.NotoA. R.D’OliveiraA. F. P. L. (2017). The prevalence and factors associated with ever perpetrating intimate partner violence by men receiving substance use treatment in Brazil and England: A cross-cultural comparison. Drug and Alcohol Review, 36(1), 34–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.12436
GoodmarkL. (2011). A troubled marriage: Domestic violence and the legal system. New York University Press.
24.
HallS.WinlowS. (2018). Ultra-realism. In DekeseredyW. S.DragiewiczM. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of critical criminology (pp. 43–56). Routledge.
25.
HarkinD.MolnarA.VowlesE. (2020). The commodification of mobile phone surveillance: An analysis of the consumer spyware industry. Crime, Media, Culture, 16, 33–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/174165901882056
26.
HarrisB. A. (2018). Spacelessness, spatiality and intimate partner violence. In Fitz-GibbonK.WalklateS.McCullochJ.MaherJ. M. (Eds.), Intimate partner violence, risk and security: Securing women’s lives in a global world (pp. 52–70). Routledge.
27.
HarrisB. A.WoodlockD. (2019). Digital coercive control: Insights from two landmark domestic violence studies. British Journal of Criminology, 59(3), 530–550. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azy052
28.
HightowerE. (2017). An exploratory study of personality factors related to psychological abuse and gaslighting [Doctoral dissertation]. William James College.
29.
HM Government. (2019a). Online harms white paper. Home Office.
30.
HM Government. (2019b). Transforming the response to domestic abuse consultation response and draft bill. Home Office.
31.
HorleyS. (2017). Power and Control: Why charming men make dangerous lovers. Penguin.
32.
KellyL. (1988). Surviving sexual violence. Polity Press.
KrebsC.BreidingM. J.BrowneA.WarnerT. (2011). The association between different types of intimate partner violence experienced by women. Journal of Family Violence, 26(6), 487–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-011-9383-3
35.
LauJ.ZimmermanB.SchaubF. (2018). Alexa, are you listening? Privacy perceptions, concerns and privacy-seeking behaviors with smart speakers. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 2, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274371
36.
LeitaoR. (2019). Anticipating smart home security and privacy threats with survivors of intimate partner abuse. In Designing Interactive Systems (DIS) Conference (pp. 527–539). https://doi.org/10.1145/3322276.3322366
Lopez-NeiraI.PatelT.ParkinS.DanezisG.TanczerL. (2019). “Internet of things”: How abuse is getting smarter. Safe—The Domestic Abuse Quarterly, 63, 22–26. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3350615
39.
MarkwickK.BickerdikeA.Wilson-EveredE.ZeleznikowJ. (2019). Technology and family violence in the context of post-separated parenting. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Family Violence, 40(1), 143–162. https://doi.org/10.1002/anzf.1350
40.
MatthewsT.O’LearyK.TurnerA.SleeperM.WoelferJ. P.SheltonM.ManthorneC.ChurchillE. F.ConsolvoS. (2017). Stories from survivors: Privacy & security practices when coping with intimate partner abuse. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2189–2201). https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025875
41.
MeltonH. C. (2007). Stalking in the context of intimate partner abuse: In the victims’ words. Feminist Criminology, 2(4), 347–363. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085107306517
42.
MessnerS. F.ThomeH.RosenfeldR. (2008). Institutions, anomie, and violent crime: Clarifying and elaborating institutional-anomie theory. International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 2(2), 163–181. https://doi.org/10.4119/UNIBI/ijcv.35
43.
Monckton-SmithJ. (2010). Relating rape and murder: Narratives of sex, death and gender. Palgrave Macmillan
44.
Monckton-SmithJ. (2012). Murder, gender and the media: Narratives of dangerous love. Palgrave Macmillan.
45.
Monckton-SmithJ. (2019). Intimate partner femicide: Using Foucauldian analysis to track an eight-stage progression to homicide. Violence Against Women, 26(11), 1267–1285 https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801219863876
46.
Monckton-SmithJ.WilliamsA.MullaneF. (2014). Domestic abuse, homicide and gender: Strategies for policy and practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
47.
PainR. (2014). Everyday terrorism: Connecting domestic violence and global terrorism. Progress in Human Geography, 38(4), 531–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132513512231
48.
ParsonsP.MolnarA.DalekJ.KnockelJ.KenyonM.HaseltonB.KhooC.DeibertR. (2019). The predator in your pocket: A multidisciplinary assessment of the stalkerware application industry. University of Toronto.
49.
PenceE.PaymarM. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth model. Springer.
SalterM.CroftsT. (2015). Responding to revenge porn: Challenging online legal impunity.’ In CornellaL.TarrantS. (Eds.), New views on pornography: Sexuality, politics, and the law (pp. 233–256). Praeger.
55.
StarkE. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. Oxford University Press.
TolmieJ. R. (2018). Coercive control: To criminalize or not to criminalize?Criminology & Criminal Justice, 18(1), 50–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895817746712
59.
Van ValkenburghS. P. (2018). Digesting the Red Pill: Masculinity and neoliberalism in the manosphere. Men and Masculinities. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X18816118
60.
WinlowS. (2014). Trauma, guilt and the unconscious: Some theoretical notes on violent subjectivity. The Sociological Review, 62(2), 32–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.12190
