The UN’s 16-Day Campaign focusing on digital violence against women has faced growing criticism from those who consider it one-sided, incomplete, and inattentive to cultural foundations and to the role both genders play in the creation of online violence.
The United Nations’ Approach to Digital Violence
From 25 November to 10 December, the world once again witnesses the UN’s 16 Days of Activism to “End Violence Against Women.” This year, the campaign is held under the slogan: “UNiTE to End Digital Violence Against Women and Girls.“
But an important question that is rarely raised is this: Is digital violence truly the one-directional, women-centered issue the UN describes it to be? Or, by flipping the narrative, is only part of reality being acknowledged while the rest is ignored?
There is no doubt that this global campaign highlights the importance of digital safety. Yet the remedy it proposes is often incomplete, politicized, and shaped by a predominantly Western feminist discourse—one that not only stands apart from Iran’s cultural and religious context but, by ignoring women’s role in the breakdown of boundaries, actually paves the way for further digital violence.
Digital Violence or Ignoring Its Origins?
The United Nations speaks of a “human-rights emergency,” yet it never addresses the main source of this harm:
The collapse of boundaries, the encouragement of sexual display, and the normalization of provocative behavior in the digital sphere.
In Islam, in the Abrahamic traditions, and even in the simplest social customs across the world, modesty and boundaries are considered shields that protect societal well-being.
These boundaries are not limitations; they are forms of protection.
But international campaigns, instead of acknowledging these foundations, rebrand sexual provocation, self-display, digital nudity, and erotic performance as forms of “choice” and “freedom”—and then complain about the rise of digital violence.
Can one build a house with windows left uncovered and then expect passersby not to look inside?
Modesty Is Not “My Choice”; It Is a Social Choice
In the Persian-language online space today, we see women who appear modestly dressed yet purposely provocative—women who contribute significantly to creating conditions for digital violence.
This uncomfortable truth has no place in UN campaigns. Why?
Because acknowledging it would unravel a large part of the global feminist narrative.
Digital immodesty, the economy of “attention,” and exhibitionism have become tools for gaining followers, advertising, and income.
But who are the real victims of this trend?
The very same women whom the campaign claims to defend.
Caught in a ruthless competition to be seen, women may unintentionally turn themselves into the target of unhealthy gazes, online harassers, and opportunists. Yet the global campaign, without referencing this central dynamic, places all blame solely on men and social structures.
Male Victims: A Reality the Campaign Ignores
In this year’s campaign, only women and girls are labeled as “victims.”
Yet today’s society clearly witnesses another form of harm:
Digital violence against men.
From sexual accusations, emotional threats, identity manipulation, and emotional-sexual blackmail, to reputation destruction—these are all part of the silent realities of the online world.
But since such experiences have no place in the global discourse, they simply remain unseen.
The notion that victims of digital space are always women is a media myth—not a social reality.
When the Bedroom Weakens, the Streets and Cyberspace Become Polluted
Studies from family courts show: whenever marital relationships weaken, the desire for self-display and compensating for emotional-sexual deficiencies in public and digital spaces increases.
This simple but crucial truth is never addressed in UN campaigns—because in Western discourse, the family as a moral foundation has been largely removed.
A campaign that ignores family and modesty cannot offer a meaningful blueprint for digital safety.
Domestic Policymakers: Set Fear Aside
Numerous official and unofficial reports show that digital and real-world immodesty, when not met with firm responses, erodes social security.
Yet many officials, out of fear of media backlash or pressure from certain groups, refrain from enforcing boundary-establishing laws.
The result?
Cyberspace has become an ecosystem for “digital wolves”—a place where women and men, children and teenagers, are all exposed to provocation and harm.
As long as sexual exhibitionism online remains free, low-cost, and even rewarded,
no law and no campaign can guarantee digital safety.
The Iranian Muslim Woman Must Abandon Hesitation
The Iranian Muslim woman is the true victim of these contradictions:
On one side, she is portrayed as merely a “victim,” and on the other, she is encouraged toward exhibitionism, immodesty, and crossing the boundaries of hijab and modesty.
But the truth is clear: a woman’s security begins with a return to boundaries—not with Western feminist prescriptions.
The Iranian woman must understand: freedom without boundaries is a tool for making her vulnerable, not empowered.
Digital violence is a serious issue.
But the UN’s proposed framework is incomplete, biased, and built upon a discourse incompatible with Iranian-Islamic culture.
For genuine confrontation with this violence, we must:
- Restore boundaries
- Strengthen the family
- Halt sexual exhibitionism
- Enforce boundary-creating laws firmly
- And view both women and men as potential victims of digital violence
Violence against women must end;
violence against men must end as well.
And the starting point for both is one principle:
A return to boundaries.
From: Fars