https://github.com/IRTF-HRPC/drafts

https://github.com/IRTF-HRPC/drafts/issues/3

Meeting 08/07

12:00 https://meet.jit.si/RFCwrapup
- make an account on github (elo) username Networkswithanattitude / password NWAARFCprotocols
- write a general e-mail/review (or issue) https://github.com/IRTF-HRPC/drafts/issues
- make a new version of the doc with changes, and remarks between [...]


Networks with an attitude comments on draft-feminism.md

Thank you very much for making this effort, and also for your persistent work on it. We concentrated our comments on the file draft-feminism.md and have attached an annotated version with additional comments. Just to remind you, the comments were discussed and prepared by a group of people gathered at [Networks with an attitude](http://constantvzw.org/site/-Networks-with-an-Attitude-.html), a worksession organised by Constant in April 2019.

















Meeting 26/06

09:15 All read and mark potential discussion points
10:00 Go over these points and distribute work: who starts to formulate comments
10:45 See what needs to be done in a distributed way, and by when

20th of July they deliver the text in Montreal. Our comments should be done by Monday 8
So: Everyone extends, clarifies their comments in the coming week 

next meeting: Sunday 7 12:00 (FS and Elo for sure) meet on-line to wrap up + write e-mail with general comments and detailed annotations in-line.
Loren sends mail to signal what we are doing.

11:00 end

-- been discussing, glad to see the new version - will send on the 8th - 
C u SOON 

annotate: underline things that need attention and comment [xxxx]

First impressions of this version
Less painful than last version, others agree. Some good moments.






---

From their e-mail, in April:

> Following the conversation, we just started to work on V1 draft and 
> hopefully will have new contents completed before your meeting. We will 
> really appreciate you feedback so we want to know when you plan to meet 
> again and maybe coordinate a deadline so you can work on it. 
> > As this new version must be submitted before IETF 104, to be held in 
> Montreal between July 20 and 26, our proposal is to work directly on our 
> Github repository https://github.com/IRTF-HRPC/drafts, so if you have 
> any comments or suggestions we can discuss them and add more content or 
> make any adjustments before we submit the V1 oficial version to 
> datatracker.



Version 26/06

--- title: Feminism and protocols abbrev: Feminism docname: draft-guerra-feminism-00 date: 2019-03-11 category: info

ipr: trust200902 area: irtf keyword: Internet-Draft stand_alone: yes pi:
  rfcedstyle: yes
  toc: yes
  tocindent: yes
  sortrefs: yes
  symrefs: yes
  strict: yes
  comments: yes
  inline: yes
  text-list-symbols: -o*+

author: -
       ins: J. Guerra
       name: Juliana Guerra
       organization: Derechos Digitales
       email: juliana@derechosdigitales.org

-
       ins: M. Knodel
       name: Mallory Knodel
       organization: ARTICLE 19
       email: mallory@article19.org

informative:

   RFC8280:

   RFC4949:

   RFC1244:

   RFC2122:

   RFC2310:

   RFC1746:

   RFC1941:

   RFC3694:

   RFC6365:

   RFC7704:

   Comninos:
      title: "A cyber security Agenda for civil society: What is at stake?"
      author:
         - ins: Alex Comninos
      date: 2013
      target: https://www.apc.org/sites/default/files/PRINT_ISSUE_Cyberseguridad_EN.pdf

   Tao:
      title: "The Tao of the IETF."
      author:
         - org: Internet Engineering Task Force
      target: https://www.ietf.org/about/participate/tao

   UNGA:
      title: "The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet."
      author:
         - org: United Nations General Assembly
      date: 2012
      target: https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/LTD/G12/147/10/PDF/G1214710.pdf?OpenElement

   ITU:
      title: "Statisctics. Global, Regional and Country ICT Data."
      author:
         - org: International Telecommunications Union (ITU)
      date: 2018
      target: https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx

   WebFoundation:
      title: "Advancing Women's Rights Online: Gaps and Opportunities in Policy and Research."
      author:
         - org: Web Foundation
      date: 2018
      target: http://webfoundation.org/docs/2018/08/Advancing-Womens-Rights-Online_Gaps-and-Opportunities-in-Policy-and-Research.pdf

   FPI:
      title: "The Feminist Principles of the Internet"
      author:
         - org: Association for Progressive Communications
      target: https://feministinternet.org

   SmKee:
      title: "Imagine a Feminist Internet."
      author:
         - ins: Jac Sm Kee
      date: 2018
      target: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41301-017-0137-2

   WhoseKnowledge:
      title: "Decolonizing the Internet, Summary Report.!
      author:
         - org: Whose Knowledge
      date: 2018
      target: https://whoseknowledge.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/DTI-2018-Summary-Report.pdf

   Arkko:
      title: " Considerations on Internet Consolidation and the Internet Architecture."
      author:
         - ins: J. Arkko
      date: 2018
      target: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-arkko-iab-internet-consolidation

--- abstract

This document aims to describe how internet standards and protocols and its implementations may impact diverse groups and communities. The research on how some protocol can be an enabler for specific human rights while possibly restricting others has been documented in {{RFC8280}}. Similar to how RFC 8280 has taken a human rights perspective on engineering and design choices by internet standardisation, this document uses the framework of feminism to address the opportunities and vulnerabilities embedded within internet protocols for specific, marginalised groups. [rephrased; mention of feminism was missing]

--- middle

# Introduction

This document aims to use a feminist framework to analyse the impacts of internet protocols on society. It is based on [started from?] a document called The Feminist Principles of the Internet, a series of 17 statements with a "gender and sexual rights lens on critical internet-related rights" for the purpose of for example enabling women's rights movements [This is a too narrow interpretation of feminisms] to explore issues related to internet technology.

These Principles, as well as many of the experiences and learnings of the feminist movement in the digital age, have focused on envisioning the need for a feminist engagement with the internet as a necessary action in building a more just society, namely one that recognizes differences across a variety of lived experience and identity. [we propose not to over-use the terms of 'just'. Your reliance on Human Rights does provide you with a stable framework (even if only in the sense of a reference), but the same is not true for what a 'more just internet' would be]

This document must not be understood as a set of rules or recommendations, but as an articulation of key issues with feminist policies and approaches, in order to begin to investigate. That is why this document has two main goals: to identify terminology, both in technical and feminist communities, that can be shared in order to start a dialogue; and to analyze the Feminist Principles based on some of the technical discussions that have been taken into account in the development of protocols. [this is very honest and useful to say]

In the first instance, this document highlights where gender and security related terminology occurs in both technical standards and feminist discourse and distinguish between the two in a meaningful way, in order to find a common understanding of concepts, which allows both the technical and feminist communities to recognize and discuss together how the technical decisions with regard to internet infraestructure, standards and protocols, directly or indirectly may affect internet users around the world.

In the second part, the concepts of internet access and embodiment will be analyzed, in the way they have been comprehensively addressed in the Principles and in relation to some technical concepts such as data minimization, localization, internationalization and transparency, among others. In this part some use cases are collected, focused on the experience of the end users, to understand how the protocols can affect the full participation in the internet of some people, because of their gender, race or class.

## An intersectional perspective

Imagine a highway that connects two big cities, one capable of withstanding heavy traffic at high speeds. Driving there takes experience and expertise, and just a few streets intersect it so as not to hinder traffic. Imagine this highway as a robust body of rights and those who travel along it as people who have traditionally enjoyed these rights.

If someone without enough experience is driving down a road that intersects the highway and wants to get there, that person will be at greater risk of crashing or having an accident. In addition, without a valid license the person will also run the risk of being fined by the traffic authorities. In terms of rights, those intersecting roads are not robust and the risks of accident are forms of discrimination experienced by those who drive on them. What if many small streets intersect at the same point on the highway?

Arised in black feminist theory, the concept of intersectionality serves to understand how multiple forms of discrimination overlap [Hill-Collins]. As first pointed by [Crenshaw] in the United States, "Black women can experience discrimination in ways that are both similar to and different from those experienced by white women and Black men", so an intersectional approach should be able to recognize this type of discrimination by transcending the one-way perspective with which the justice system, as well as feminist and anti-racist movements, had traditionally operated.

From this proposal, the concept has meant a paradigm shift both in feminist thinking [Hill-Collins] and movements [Lorde; Davis], and more recently in the design and implementation of public policies [Mason; Hankivsky]. The intersectional approach is not focused on the problem of equality but on difference; discrimination is not analyzed in terms of effective access to rights, but the conditions and capacities that people have to access those rights.

Therefore, an intersectional feminist perspective focuses on social location, the multiple layered identities people live, derived from social relations, history and structures of power through which people can experience both oppression and privilege. These oppressions can be structural and dynamic, determined by gender, race or skin color, class, sexuality, ethnicity, age, language, geographic location, abilities or health conditions, among other factors [Symington].

 The concept _matrix of domination_, introduced by [Hill-Collins] as complementary to _intersectionality_, refers to the way in which the powers that produce and reproduce intersecting oppression are organized. In summary, the concept _intersectionality_ has served to recognize people's different experiences and social locations and with this, the need of a bottom up understanding of discrimination and oppression; in addition, the concept _matrix of domination_ turns the gaze on the context of power -institutional, political, economic and symbolic- in which intersecting oppressions operate.

[see comments in issue #3]

### Internet as a matrix of domination

The gender and sexual rights lens on critical internet-related rights contained in the [Feminist Principles of the Internet] has been built bottom up by the feminist movement, which treats most prominently people who are negatively discriminated against on the basis of their gender and sexuality, but not exclusively. Because the threats to women and queer people, whose bodies and manifestations are already under strong, albeit sometimes invisible, social, cultural and political surveillance, an intersectional feminist analysis makes it possible to recognize how multiple oppressions affect the ways people access, use and participate on the internet [See comments in issue #3. This is the first time 'queer' has been used]

From now on, some of these experiences will be used to identify how the Internet can enable or restrict the possibility of justice and equity among its users. For this purpose, it is useful to understand the internet as a _matrix of domination_ in the sense pointed by [Hill-Collins]: as an institutional, political, symbolic and cultural context where different intersecting oppressions are shaped and reinforced. [We liked this. It helps to understand why you started the document with a chapter on intersectionality]

This document addresses the opportunities and vulnerabilities incorporated into Internet protocols for specific, traditionally discriminated groups, on the assumption that these values are inherent in technological design. [This needs a specification of values to understand that those are inherent not just to technological design, but to society/different dynamics colliding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_determinism] Through the proposed intersectional perspective, a multilevel description of the factors, processes and social structures that affect different experiences on the Internet is presented below and, based on specific cases, an analysis will be made of how the different protocols intervene in the shaping and reinforcement of intersecting oppressions faced by users in different social locations. [Use 'environments' or 'situated position' instead of social location? Maybe highlighting more clearly the situated position of a person as a user accessing the internet, as well as a person at the intersection of social dynamics?]

## Brief history of feminism and the internet

The ways in which feminists have understood, used and mobilised on the internet is significant for a baseline understanding of how internet protocols and feminism intersect. Intersectional feminist action and anaysis can be collected into two strategies: addressing the status quo and creating alternatives. Feminists on the early internet embodied both.

It is important to note here that there has always existed a gender gap in access to the internet, which is exacerbated by global wealth inequality.

Since the 1980s, feminist movements have used the internet to challenge power. Globalisation. Development. Cyberfeminism. Internet governance. [why this list without much development ?] There is a deeper connection to the internet and social justice struggles in which communication becomes the primary strategy to address inequality. Indeed, in "A History Of Feminist Engagement With Development And Digital Technologies" Anita Gurumurthy writes, "the history of the right to communicate reveals the contestation between powerful status quoist forces and those who seek transformative, global change for justice and equality."

At the same time, feminists were using the internet to create feminist spaces. ['spaces', not 'space' to prevent universalism]

Author Feminista Jones argues in "Reclaiming Our Space: How Black Feminists Are Changing the World from the Tweets to the Streets" that the feminist alternative spaces have become mainstream and are leading analysis and critique of the status quo, a merging and strengthening of the two strategies that emerge from this particular historical framing. [adding the dates of these articles they are referencing could make this clearer. Reconnect this history to its intersectional perspective; careful with Global South without defining/making it precise. The text sometimes ignores the tensions within communities and sees just a mass of "marginalised people", for instance: talking about cyberfeminism without acknowledging its very white centred initial approach just after mentioning intersectionality is problematic]

Given these myriad expressions of feminism online and feminist movement building online, one thread is perhaps most instructive to this exercise, which we use as the basis for this document: Feminist Principles of the Internet. More about the nature of the complex community that created the Feminist Principles of the Internet can be found at feministinternet.org. The principles, drafted and revised by hundreds of feminists mostly in the global south, highlight historical feminist themes for the digital age in its main categories: access, movements, economy, expression and embodiment.

# Expression as a framework of understanding

With the popularization of the internet, the freedom of expression of both women and other gender identities traditionally marginalized from public life and social acceptance (whom we refer to as queer) [2nd use of queer here + definition; queer as a term is better defined not by being oppressed but by its authentic character such as the wide and encompassing understanding of genders, sexualities and identities] has been greatly enhanced. In contexts where women do not have their rights fully guaranteed,  where women are blocked from excercising freedom of expression otherwise or where sexual and gender diversity are socially condemned, the Web has served to meet, organize and resist. [Maybe: 'where women are blocked from excercising freedom of expression otherwise or where sexual and gender diversity are socially condemned, the Web has sometimes served to meet, to organize and resist.' This sentence still feels a little bit too much like if this was a simple victory march.]

By adding content in formats like text, audio and video, these groups have been able to connect with each other, as well as open spaces for discussion and visibility of topics that previously seemed vetoed. The web has become a space for activism, reclamation and protest against injustice and gender inequality. It has allowed the construction of international networks of solidarity, support and mobilization, and with this, the strengthening of feminism and other movements that fight for equal rights and for a fair recognition of difference.

The political expression of gender has not been limited to voices, but has made use of the body and its representation. However, the use of body as a form of political expression on the internet implies a series of risks and vulnerabilities for the people involved in these movements, especially if they do not understand how internet technology works [? further explanation. How this leads to the next sentense and what quality of internet technology these people are missing or dont understand]. In this sense, it is important to recognize that freedom of expression on the internet, and in general its use, is determined by gender, along with other social, economic, political and cultural conditions. [please be careful about blurring vulnerability by tech experience with vulnerability by gender - one doesn't necessarily follow the other. Maybe this could be a moment to talk about the risk of being represented, as a source of web-based physical violence? Another issue where online and offline are inseparable - see issue #3]

Where women and queer people have traditionally been marginalized, their participation in the internet is rejected through different forms of violence by other users, as well as institutions, platforms and governments. But the effects of these violences, which are nothing more than [which can be seen partially as] extensions of the traditional violence that these groups and individuals face in social life, increase to the extent that there is not enough technical knowledge to neutralize them [This last part seems like a judgement lacking optimism and ignoring the work of many communities who educate and develop tools. Can it be more specific to avoid this trap? Some answers found in the 'safety' section below], and this is the case of most people who struggle for the recognition of their gender difference.

These "use cases" must be known within the IETF, in order to join efforts for the elimination of online gender-based violence, which today seems to be a rule in digital environments. In order to identify ways and strategies to contribute to this purpose, we review below the ways in which both _safety_ and _gender_ have been approached in IETF rfcs and drafts. The following sections consist of a preliminary analysis of the terms used in the IETF drafts and RFCs archive.

By filtering from specific terms, the analysis consists of identifying patterns and regularities in the contexts in which these terms are used. For example, if they are used as an example in "use cases" or if they are part of a technical explanation, and if they are normally accompanied by other terms. The analysis presented is only an initial revision that must be completed and synthesized.

## Safety

For the last years, there has been criticism of the way in which digital security accompaniments, advice and training are developed for people who are not directly involved in the development of information technology. It is worth mentioning that digital security, unlike cybersecurity, is more geared towards internet users {{Comninos}}. Some of these criticisms refer to the fact that the approach to digital security is centred on tools and not on usage practices, and "attacks", "adversaries" or "enemies" in a generic way, without recognising the specific contexts in which different information protection needs are generated.


In {{RFC4949}} _safety_ is defined as "the property of a system being free from risk of causing harm (especially physical harm) to its system entities", which is compared to _security_ as the "system condition in which system resources are free from unauthorized access and from unauthorized or accidental change, destruction, or loss". But _safety_ has traditionally, especially in the early years of the IETF, been referred to human activities {{RFC1244}}, {{RFC2122}}, {{RFC2310}} and human rights {{RFC1746}}, {{RFC1941}}, {{RFC3694}}.

## Gender

As IETF is centered on "identifying, and proposing solutions to, pressing operational and technical problems in the Internet" and as according to the Tao of the IETF, "we believe in rough consensus and running code", it is not supposed to concentrate on the particular characteristics of internet users, but on the proper functioning of the systems {{Tao}}. In addition, due to the characteristics of the type of technologies that are designed in the IETF, many times the the "use cases" or implementations refer to the way in which companies arrange the infrastructure for their clients, not necessarily to the way internet users interact with that infrastructure.
[We liked this, it is in a way saying: infrastructure is always situated and embodied] 

In this sense, it seems not within the mandate of the IETF to imagine the particular needs of users' gender, race or ethnicity. However, in the drafts and RFCs archive there appear subjects with gender as well as supposedly universal entities that sometimes represent concrete functions of the systems, and other times the voluntary actions of the operators. As a first step in imagining possible gender considerations when designing internet protocols, below is a very brief description of how gender appears in IETF documents. This is also a very preliminary analysis, which could later be complimented and added to the search for entities with cultural and phenotypic characteristics that could make them vulnerable on the internet.

# Access

Internet access is recognized as a human right {{UNGA}}, but its effective guarantee depends on different and unequal social, cultural, economic and political conditions. In 2018, barely half of the world's population has access to the internet and in 88% of countries, men have more access than women {{ITU}}. Geographical location, age, educational and income level, as well as gender, significantly determine how people access to the internet {{WebFoundation}}.

The Feminist Principles of the Internet {{FPI}} enphasizes that access must be to a universal, acceptable, affordable, unconditional, open, meaningful and equal internet, which guarantees rights rather than restricts them. As some bodies have always been subject to social and cultural surveillance and violence because of their gender and sexuallity, their access to internet is not satisfied with connected devices, but with safety and useful digital enviroments {{SmKee}}.

In this sense, access must be considered in several dimensions, in addition to internet access as a possibility of being connected:

## Access to information

Information in one's own language is the first condition, as pointed out with the concept of 'Localization' {{RFC8280}}, referred to the act of tailoring an application for a different language, script, or culture, and involves not only changing the language interaction but also other relevant changes, such as display of numbers, dates, currency, and so on.

But it is also necessary to be able to access relevant information, related for example to sexual and reproductive health and rights, [politics of] pleasure, [if you mean sex work here, feel free to say it?] safe abortion, access to justice, and LGBTIQ+ issues. Some goverments and ISPs block pages with this content or monitor online activity by sexual and gender related terminology. Therefore the considerations for anticensorship internet infrastructure technologies also consider, and can possibly alleviate, a gendered component to using the internet.

## Usage of technology

Beyond content, access implies the possibility to use, which means code, design, adapt and critically and sustainably use ICTs. As almost 75% of connected individuals are placed in the Global South {{WhoseKnowledge}}, technology is developped mainly in rich countries where student quotas and jobs are filled mainly by men [talking about the "global south" referencing to nationality and ethnicity but  ending with a gender-related remark specific for Europe/USA may be a perspective too wide?],

The concept of 'Internationalization' {{rfc6365}} refers to the practice of making protocols, standards, and implementations usable in different languages. This is a first step to democratize the development of technology, allowing its implementation in non-English-speaking countries.

However, there is still a long way to go in terms of inclusion of more diverse populations [simply say 'inclusive' instead of 'more diverse'?], in the spaces of technology development and definition of protocoles and standards for the internet infrastructure {{rfc7704}}.  The presence of gendered subjects in the IETF RFCs and drafts archive demonstrates stereotyped male and feminine roles [instead: 'gender(ed) roles and therefore reproduce stereotypes']. On the other hand, the generalized mention of agents - as universal subjects - in those documents, ignores the existence of other corporealities, which includes non binary identities or with a marked physical difference.

Building and engineering critical internet technology is a component of 'usage'. There are challenge the cultures of sexism and discrimination in all spaces, some of which can be found in existing RFCs [draft-terminology, others].

# Economy

## Free and open source

The digital gender gap has relegated women and other marginalized groups to be internet users, adding content for the benefit of the platform itself but without a deep understanding of how these platforms work. Promoting transparency {{RFC8280}} and simplifying technical terminology is necessary to bridge this gap. This requires shared terminology upon which technology is created to enable experimentation and values exchange. Not only that, but documenting, promoting, disseminating, and sharing knowledge about technology is at the heart of the long-standing free software community's ethos. 
This aligns with a feminist approach to technology. [As previously mentioned, the assumptions regarding the potential lack of knowledge of women* is problematic. It is important to higlight that the digital gender gap is the product of the intersection between gender and many components such as income inequality, education access, geography etc.]
 
Given the established community of "free software", it is important to note that freedom is not freedom for everyone, always. It is important to identify different dimensions of freedom and how it is expressed in different contexts.
 [It is not very clear what "freedom" refers to here. It is indeed correct to mention that, even though free and open source software might be a valid response to tackle the gender gap, the free software community, by its lack of wider inclusion, is not always able to fulfill its promises]

## Power and centralisation

A feminist approach to technology requires a strong critique of capitalist power, centralisation of services and the logic of vertical integration while holding nuance for the tensions between trust, reliability and diversity. Centralisation of services is a current discussion in the IETF that should be informed by feminist critique of capitalist structures {{Arkko}}. [The connection between feminisms and critique of capitalism is made a bit fast; and is not true for all feminisms either. You could either make a reference to Silvia Federici's work for example (Re-enchanting the World: Feminism and the Politics of the Commons. Oakland, CA: Kairos/PM Press, 2018.) or otherwise replace 'capitalist power' by 'patriarchy']

# Networked

## Freedom of assocation

Given the shrinking of civic space offline, the internet provides a global public space, albeit one that relies on private infrastructure {{tenOever}}. For social causes that push for equality, it is therefore critical that the internet be maintained as a space for alignment, protest, dissent and escape. In the scope of this document, this is a call to maintain and enable the creation of spaces for sustained feminist movement building. Elements of freedom of assocation as explained in the UDHR {{}} include individual and collective rights to privacy and anonymity, as discussed in more detail below. At the same time, the internet provides new and novel ways for communities to come together across borders and without limits of geolocation. However this positive aspect of internet communications is threatened by centralised systems of control and cooptation, specifically surveillance and other online repression.

Association of system architectures is a concept that overlaps neatly with the ideals of real-world associations of organisations and communities. "The ultimate model of P2P is a completely decentralized system, which is more resistant to speech regulation, immune to single points of failure and have a higher performance and scalability {{tenOever}}. " [ Even though it is essential to present the alternative of P2P, it might be as important to mention its pitfalls too and not present it as the magic remedy.]

## Internet governance

While there is no agreement regarding the ability of the internet to negatively or positively impact on social behaviors, or shape desirable practices {{RFC8280}} [This remark does not feel very necessary. The need for an inclusive internet internet is a different problematic that the effect internet has on people], more women and diverse populations' participation in technical development and decision-making spaces will lead to greater possibilities for ICTs to reflect greater inclusiveness and enable less risky and harmful interactions {{RFC7704}}.
  
It is critical for groups who represent civil society interests, social change and the larger public interest to [be able to] challenge processes and institutions that govern the internet. This requires the inclusion of more feminists and queers at the decision-making table, which can be achieved through democratic policy making. Greater effect will be possible through diffuse ownership of and power in global and local networks.

# Embodiment

Most of the threats women* and non binary people face on line, occur on the user levels of application and content. Most adversaries are other users, but also include institutions, platforms and governments.

For a long time, perhaps since the internet became popular, its use ceased to be a functional matter and became emotional [ Various uses appeared on top of the functional use]. The access to chat rooms to connected with people at huge distances, the possibility of having personal e-mails, the appearance of social networks to share music, photos and then video, determined not only the social use of a new tool but also the configuration of digital sensitivities, understood by some as sensory extensions of the body.

The internet connections embedded have also meant a radical transformation in the way people access the internet. Much more, considering that today most internet connections, especially in the global south, are mobile connections. People build their own public digital identities, use private communications to disseminate information, explore their sexuality in text, image and video, share their initmity with others. In internet-connected devices, it has become much easier for leisure and work to mix, which implies different risks for users.

Sharing personal information, and often sensitive data, through platforms that are synchronized with email accounts and other platforms where information considered non-sensitive is published, implies losing control over such information. Much more, considering that each platform hosts the information of its users according to their own terms and conditions in the treatment of data. For women and other groups marginalized by race or gender, these risks are greater.

Just as the internet connection can be considered an extension of the body, social problems such as discrimination and exclusion have been projected into the digital environment-- sometimes intensified, sometimes reconfigured. And once again, women, queers, racialized people are the most vulnerable. Most of the threats they face on line, occur in the user level. Most of their "adversaries" are other users, who also act at the user level, with technical or social skills that threaten participation and expressions. Institutions, platforms and governments who are adversarial have great advantage.

At this point, what level of autonomy do these people have as internet users? [what is the connection between autonomy and discrimination? The link between the paragraph and the question is not very clear]
 
## Online violence

The security considerations to counter online violence are critical. There is opportunity in a connected world for those who would perpetuate violence against women and other marginalised groups through the use of internet-enabled technologies, from the home to the prison.

Privacy is a critical component of security for populations at risk. The control of information is linked to privacy. Where some would like privacy in order to live privately, others need privacy in order to access information and circumvent censorship and surveillance. The protection of privacy is critical for those at risk to prevent victimisation through extortion, doxxing, and myriad other threats. Lack of privacy leads to risks such as stalking, monitoring and persistent harrassment.

While making public otherwise private details about a person can consitute a form of abuse, the converse is also a risk: Being erased from society or having one's online identity controlled by another is a form of control and manipulation. Censorship, misinformation and coersion may constitute violence online. Other forms of non-consensual manipulation of online content includes platform "real name policies", sharing of intimate images and sexual abuse, spreading false accusations, flamming and other tactics.

Key to mitigating these threats is the element of consent. [Consent is not the only way, the notion of consent does not make much sense in certain cases (such as theft identity)]

## Consent

Some elements of consent online include but are not limited to the following list of issues, which should be elaborated on:

 * Data protection
        * Exposure of personal data
 * Culture, design, policies and terms of service of internet platforms
 * Agency lies in informed decisions
        * Real name policies
 * Public versus private information
        * Dissemination of personal or intimate information
        * Exposure of intimacy
        * Unauthorized use of photos

## Anonymity

While anonymity is never just about technical issues but users protection activities, it becomes more necessary to strenghten the design and functionality of networks, by default. There are several considerations for internet infrastructure related to enabling anonymity for online users. This is particularly important for marginalised groups and can be ennumerated, and expanded upon, thusly:

 * Right to anonymity
 * Enables other rights like freedom of expression
        * Censorship
        * Defamation, descredit
        * Affectations to expression channels
 * Breaking social taboos and heteronormativity
        * Hate Speech, discriminatory expressions
 * Discrimination and safety from discrimination

## Privacy and data

While mentioned at the intersection of previous issues outlined above, this section is particularly critical for women, queers and marginalised populations who are already at greater risk of control and surveillance:

 * Right to privacy
 * Data protection
 * Profit models
 * Surveillance and patriarchy by states, individuals, private sector, etc. Those that enable surveillance, eg spouseware.

## Memory

One's consent and control of the information that is available to them and about them online is a key aspect of being a fully empowered individual and community in the digital age. There are several considerations that deserve deeper inspection, such as: [There are several issues that deserve deeper consideration in the design and further development of Internet protocols, such as:]

 * Right to be forgotten
 * Control over personal history and memory on the internet
 * Access all our personal data and information online
 * Delete forever

# References not yet referenced

In plain sight, on sexuality, rights and the internet in India, Nepal and Sri Lanka https://www.genderit.org/articles/plain-sight-sexuality-rights-and-internet-india-nepal-and-sri-lanka

Human Rights and Internet Protocols: Comparing Processes and Principles https://www.apc.org/sites/default/files/ISSUE_human_rights_2.pdf

Principles of Unity for Infraestructuras Feministas https://pad.kefir.red/p/infraestucturas-feministas Feminist

Principles of the Internet https://feministinternet.org 

The UX Guide to Getting Consent https://iapp.org/resources/article/the-ux-guide-to-getting-consent

From steel to skin https://fermentos.kefir.red/english/aco-pele 

Responsible Data https://responsibledata.io

Impact for what and for whom? Digital technologies and feminist movement building internet https://www.genderit.org/feminist-talk/impact-what-and-whom-digital-technologies-and-feminist-movement-building

Design Justice https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1J3ZWBgxe0QFQ8OmUr-QzE6Be8k_sI7XF0VWu4wfMIVM/edit#slide=id.gcad8d6cb9_0_198

Design Action Collective Points of Unity https://designaction.org/about/points-of-unity

CODING RIGHTS; INTERNETLAB. Violências de gênero na internet: diagnóstico, soluções e desafios. Contribuição conjunta do Brasil para a relatora especial da ONU sobre violência contra a mulher. São Paulo, 
2017. https://www.codingrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Relatorio_ViolenciaGenero_v061.pdf

Barrera, L. y Rodríguez, C. La violencia en línea contra las mujeres en México. Informe para la Relatora sobre Violencia contra las Mujeres Ms. Dubravka Šimonović. 2017. 
https://luchadoras.mx/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Informe_ViolenciaEnLineaMexico_InternetEsNuestra.pdf

Sephard, N. Big Data and Sexual Surveillance. APC issue papers. 2016. https://www.apc.org/sites/default/files/BigDataSexualSurveillance_0_0.pdf

# Security Considerations

As this document concerns a research document, there are no security considerations.

# IANA Considerations

This document has no actions for IANA.


**

Collins, P. H. (2000). Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, consciousness and the politics of empowerment. Second Edition (2nd ed.). New York, London: Routledge.

Crenshaw, K. (2018). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics [1989]. In K. T. Bartlett & R. Kennedy (Eds.), Feminist Legal Theory (1st ed., pp. 57–80; By K. Bartlett). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429500480-5

Hankivsky, O. (2014). Intersectionality 101. The Institute for Intersectionality Research & Policy, SFU. Retrieved from http://vawforum-cwr.ca/sites/default/files/attachments/intersectionallity_101.pdf

Mason, C. N. (2010). Leading at the Intersections: An Introduction to the Intersectional Approach Model for Policy & Social Change. Women of Color Policy Network.

Symington, A. (2004). Intersectionality: a Tool for Gender and Economic Justice. Retrieved from https://www.awid.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/intersectionality_a_tool_for_gender_and_economic_justice.pdf