Mapping sexual rights activists and groups in internet governance

Developed for APC by Serene Lim and Angela M. Kuga Thas of KRYSS Network

About this learning activity

image-1605640472202.png

This learning activity is one of two suggested deepening activities on “Sexuality and internet governance”. This is the second of the two deepening activities, and should ideally follow the first. This activity is designed to get participants to examine more closely the link between social capital and internet governance, and to critically assess to what extent “support” has actually advanced sexuality rights in internet governance and through what kind of framing. 


Learning objectives

  1. To demonstrate the link between social capital and internet governance (by looking more closely at the multistakeholder approach, the power/influence that each stakeholder has, and the men in internet governance who claim they are feminists).
  2. To impart understanding on the intersectionality between internet rights and sexuality rights.

Who is this activity for?

Participants of all levels of experience.

Time required

1.5 hours

Resources needed


Mechanics

Individual reflection or group reflection if they come from the same organisation.

Get participants to locate themselves as sexuality rights activists and groups in internet governance, based on the following questions:

Get participants to identify online movements related to sexuality rights.

Then, based on these movements, divide them based on an issue they are most familiar with or by country to work in groups of 4 (maximum) to think about why the issue of sexuality rights has not advanced in internet governance, looking specifically at what kind of social capital they have access to in relation to movements, mobilisation or initiatives that they have been involved in online or taken online, and allies. 

Examples:


Discussion and sharing

Reflections


Facilitator’s preparation notes

The idea is to get participants to recognise their social capital but also to recognise the limitations of their social capital, and to further think about which framing works better with allies and supporters of sexuality rights who are not necessarily fully invested in promoting the issue of sexuality and sexuality rights in internet governance. It would help if the facilitator is familiar with some case studies that relate to participants (if the profiles of participants are known beforehand, i.e. which countries they come from, etc.).


Additional resources

Freedom of expression, the role of intermediaries, and misogynist hate speech: Security in exchange for rights?
http://gigx.events.apc.org/2015/07/21/freedom-of-expression-the-role-of-intermediaries-and-misogynist-hate-speech-security-in-exchange-for-rights/

Turning from Tumblr: Where is sex positivity on the internet going?
https://genderit.org/feminist-talk/turning-tumblr-where-sex-positivity-internet-going 

Gender and internet governance
https://afrisig.org/recommended-materials/gender-and-internet-governance/


Revision #1
Created 25 July 2023 04:40:41 by Kira
Updated 25 July 2023 04:50:24 by Kira