Revenge Porn Isn’t About Images: It’s About Control

[InstituteofSocialStudiesTrust]

Revenge Porn Isn’t About Images: It’s About Control

By - Shipra

Intimate relationships often begin with hope, of trust, companionship, respect, and a shared life ahead. Nobody imagines that someone they once loved would one day weaponise their private moments against them. Yet for thousands of women in India, especially in heterosexual relationships, the end of a relationship doesn’t just bring heartbreak. It brings threats, humiliation, extortion, and the constant fear that their most private, consensual moments may be turned into a public spectacle.

When intimate images or videos are shared without consent, it is commonly known as revenge porn. More accurately, it is Non-Consensual Intimate Imagery (NCII), one of the most widespread forms of digital gender-based violence.

What NCII Really Is

In NCII, the survivor’s real or morphed images are shared publicly or used as a weapon: “Do what I say, or I’ll leak these.” Deepfake technology has made this violence even easier and more terrifying, as was evidenced in number of deepfake videos that circulated of Indian actresses recently. Patriarchy, which punishes women for desire and autonomy, acts as fertile ground for this abuse. The internet, with its anonymity and instant virality, further enables perpetrators. And weak legal protections mean survivors are often left to defend themselves alone.

The moment an NCII case surfaces, public scrutiny shifts almost instantly from the offender to the survivor. According to NCRP, online crimes against women rose 118.4%, from 22,188 cases in 2020 to 48,475 in 2024. The problem is not disappearing, it is exploding – and response to tackle it is slow and patchy.

Society: The Biggest Enabler of NCII

One does not need research to know that society is brutally insensitive toward survivors. Instead of questioning the perpetrator who violated someone’s privacy, the interrogation is directed towards the woman:

• Why did she take those pictures?

• Why was she in a non-marital relationship?

• Why did she trust him?

• What else did she expect?

The violent act becomes secondary. The woman’s “choices” become the crime, smattering her agency into pieces.

Her private life is dissected in newsrooms and online chatrooms. Strangers rummage through her past decisions as if searching for evidence to justify her trauma. Years of hard work, her career, relationships, identity, are overshadowed by a single violation she never consented to.

The same society that loudly talks about “culture” uses it to shame her. Survivors become cautionary tales, not victims deserving of empathy. Their right to live freely becomes the “mistake” they are punished for.

The Internet Never Forgets, And That’s Part of the Trauma

In a recent case, the Madras High Court ordered the complete removal of leaked intimate content involving a lawyer. But within days, the material resurfaced on nearly 30 new websites.

This is the brutal truth: once uploaded, erasure is never absolute. Survivors know this. That knowledge becomes a second wound, a lifelong fear that their past can be weaponised anytime, anywhere. Healing becomes almost impossible when the threat is perpetual.

NCII as Blackmail

NCII isn’t always about public release, it is used to control women. Many are coerced into staying in abusive relationships or fulfilling demands to avoid the leak.

A 2022 ISST study with young women from low-income communities in Delhi revealed chilling stories. One respondent shared how a stranger threatened to create fake nude images of her using her social media pictures and upload them with her phone number. Girls often depended on male friends for protection because approaching authorities felt riskier than staying silent.

Silence becomes a survival strategy in a society that refuses to stand with survivors. A major barrier is the information gap, many girls don’t know where to go, whom to report to, or whether they will be believed.

Legal Provisions in India: Progress, But Not Enough

Despite its prevalence, India still has no dedicated NCII law.

Neither the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) nor the Information Technology Act explicitly define or penalise NCII. Courts use a patchwork of provisions, Sections 66E, 67, 67A of the IT Act; Rule 3(2)(b) of the IT Rules; and Sections 77, 294, and 296 of BNS. But these laws do not capture the intent, harm, or permanence inherent in NCII. The Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act provides the “Right to Erasure,” but again, it does not criminalise NCII.

Recent judicial interventions, especially by the Madras High Court, have been progressive in ordering swift takedowns and protecting victim identity.

The 2025 SOP: A Step Forward

In November 2025, MeitY introduced a Standard Operating Procedure to Curtail NCII, mandating:

• takedown within 24 hours of reporting

• multiple reporting avenues (OSCs, in-apps, 1930 helpline, online portals)

• mandatory deployment of hash-matching and crawler technologies by digital platforms

• coordination with Sahyog (MHA-I4C), DoT, and a secure hash bank

• intermediary accountability

• capacity building for law enforcement, prosecutors, and the judiciary

States like Kerala (CyberDome) and Telangana (Women Safety Wing Cyber Module) are also taking proactive steps.

However, the absence of a specific NCII law reflects an outdated perception, that digital violence is somehow “less real.” But in a world where online and offline lives are intertwined, digital abuse destroys reputations, livelihoods, and mental health.

Intermediaries must not be allowed to evade responsibility under provisions like Section 79 of the IT Act. Re-uploads and virality should trigger automatic liability.

Beyond Law: Changing Culture Is Non-Negotiable

Legal reforms alone cannot solve a problem so deeply rooted in misogyny. We need open conversations, in homes, classrooms, workplaces, and media, about consent, bodily autonomy, digital ethics, dignity, healthy relationships and responsible bystander behaviour among others.

We must build a shared understanding that NCII is not a reflection of a woman’s worth. It reflects the perpetrator’s violence. Even passive viewing of NCII is participation in harm. Each click fuels trauma. Women are more than their bodies, and their bodies are not repositories of family honour. Until we dismantle the cultural systems that shame survivors and protect perpetrators, NCII will remain a tool of control, not merely a technological problem, but a deeply social one.

It’s Time to Choose the Society We Want. Revenge porn is not about images. It is about power, punishment, and control. Technology may enable it, but society sustains it. If we want a better future, we must change both.