ChildSafeNet

Tech-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV) is an extension of gender-based violence, rooted in gender inequalities, power imbalances, and discrimination.

Technology does not create the violence. It facilitates and amplifies it.

What distinguishes TFGBV from other forms of GBV is how digital systems intensify harm:

1. Scale: Technology enables violence to affect a large number of people simultaneously.

2. Speed: Technology allows violence to occur rapidly, making timely intervention difficult.

3. Anonymity: Technology provides anonymity, making perpetrators harder to identify and hold accountable.

4. Permanence: Technology ensures abusive content remains accessible online indefinitely and can resurface over time.

5. Cross-border Reach: Technology allows violence to transcend geographical boundaries, while protections remain limited.

The consequences are severe.

For many, abuse continued after relationships ended. Monitoring, threats, pressure to share passwords, and the non-consensual sharing of intimate images were used to control, intimidate, and silence.

TFGBV harms mental health, education, social participation, and future opportunities. It isolates young people, damages reputations, and reinforces inequality.

Children and adolescents face heightened risk due to limited power, weak protections, and restricted access to safe reporting and support. For those facing intersecting discrimination, including LGBTQIA+ young people, harm often remains hidden and disclosure can carry serious risks.

Awareness alone is not enough.

We need laws that reflect digital realities, survivor-centred support systems, trained teachers and police, clear and safe reporting pathways for adolescents, and real accountability from technology companies.

Safety must be built into digital platforms by design, not added after harm occurs.

Addressing TFGBV is not only about technical fixes or parental controls. It requires confronting gender inequality, power imbalances, and patriarchy, and fulfilling obligations to protect children and young people.

Illustration: ChildSafeNet

A recent jury verdict in Los Angeles found Meta and YouTube liable for “addictive” design features, such as infinite scroll and algorithmic recommendations, that ensnared a young user and caused significant mental health harm.

According to a Psychology Today article, design matters.

Children are not only drawn in by how platforms are built. They are also drawn in by what these spaces provide.

• A need to understand who they are

• A need to belong

• A need to be seen

Psychological insights point to a deeper reality. For many children and young people, social media has become central to the process of self-making.

• Exploring Identity:

Children encounter new ideas, values, and ways of living beyond their immediate surroundings.

• Finding Community:

They connect with like-minded peers, often finding support and validation that may be missing offline.

• Generating Visibility:

They share their stories, seek recognition, and build a sense of presence in the world.

This is what makes disengagement so difficult.

For many, logging off does not just mean losing a platform. It can feel like losing a space where their identity is forming and being affirmed.

This is also why simple restrictions often fall short. In some cases, they push children towards more hidden, less safe, or less regulated spaces.

If we are serious about protecting children, we need to move beyond a narrow focus on “addiction”.

✅ Hold platforms accountable for harmful design

✅ Build safer, more inclusive offline environments

✅ Support children in developing identity, confidence, and belonging beyond screens

✅ Listen to children and understand what draws them online in the first place

Because the question is not only why children stay online.

Read More: Why Are We So Dependent on Social Media?, Psychology Today: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/our-new-discontents/202604/why-are-we-so-dependent-on-social-media

Illustration: AI-generated by ChildSafeNet

91% of identified CSAM victims are pre-pubescent children aged 3 to 13, it points to a pattern of harm that is both deliberate and deeply concerning.

These cases reflect targetted exploitation of young children, often involving abuse within trusted environments, where children have limited ability to recognise, resist, or report what is happening.

The fact that 98% of identified victims are female also tells an important story. It aligns with broader patterns of gendered sexual violence, where girls are disproportionately targeted. But it would be a mistake to read this as a complete picture of victimisation.

Evidence from multiple studies shows that boys who experience sexual abuse are far less likely to be identified in datasets like these. This is not because they are unaffected. It is because their experiences are less likely to be named, disclosed, or recorded.

Several factors contribute to this:

* Stigma and social norms: Expectations around masculinity often discourage boys from speaking about abuse or even recognising themselves as victims.

* Different grooming dynamics: Perpetrators may use tactics that rely on secrecy, normalisation, or manipulation of trust in ways that are harder to detect.

* Lower self-identification: Boys may not interpret what they experience as abuse, especially when it is framed as “consensual”, a “game”, or part of a relationship.

* Systemic blind spots: Reporting mechanisms, awareness campaigns, and even professional responses have historically focused more on girls, leaving gaps in identification and support for boys.

As a result, the data risks reinforcing a partial narrative: that harm is overwhelmingly directed at girls, when in reality it may also be affecting boys in ways that remain largely invisible.

The INHOPE Annual Report 2025 does more than present numbers. It invites a closer look at what lies behind them: who is being seen, who is not, and why.

Read the INHOPE Annual Report 2025: https://ow.ly/5sct50YGo3x