Cyberfeminism reframes digital violence as a struggle over participation and power.
BUENOS AIRES, ARGENTINA
Argentine writer and lawyer Ana Correa has presented Cyberfeminism: The Time for Action, arguing that the promise of digital democratization has been undermined by harassment, coordinated hostility and the concentration of technological power. Her central warning extends beyond gender representation: decisions capable of transforming humanity are increasingly being made by a small group of billionaire technology leaders.
Correa recalled how social networks initially allowed movements such as the Arab Spring, Spain’s indignados and international feminist campaigns to organize outside traditional political structures. Digital platforms amplified voices historically excluded from public debate and helped mobilize support for figures such as Pakistani activist Malala Yousafzai. Yet the same infrastructure later became an effective channel for intimidation and silencing.
The author maintains that women who publicly defend rights are especially vulnerable. The problem is not limited to the number of hostile messages they receive, but includes sexualized threats and attacks directed at their identities, families and physical safety. Such aggression can force targeted women to withdraw from public conversations while warning others about the potential consequences of speaking openly.
Correa also connects online misogyny with anti-feminist and anti-diversity narratives that turn minority groups, migrants and women’s movements into political scapegoats. Some campaigns may be coordinated, while others grow through “rage bait”—content deliberately designed to provoke outrage and increase engagement. Platform business models can therefore reward the emotional conditions that make harassment more visible and profitable.
Artificial intelligence intensifies this concern because its models, safety rules and commercial priorities are largely determined by powerful private companies. Correa argues that merely placing more women inside existing hierarchies would be insufficient. What matters is incorporating people who defend rights and can challenge the assumptions embedded in technological design, military applications and automated decision-making.
Her proposal calls for international regulation capable of moving AI governance beyond corporate self-regulation and fragmented national laws. The difficult question is how to create global rules without allowing governments to convert protection into censorship or letting companies shape standards around their own interests. Cyberfeminism, in this formulation, is not simply about women using technology. It asks who designs digital systems, who benefits from them, who is exposed to their risks and who is permitted to influence their future.
Technology reflects the power of those who shape it.