Trigger warning: The content of this article may trigger trauma, especially for victims/survivors of sexual violence.
The debate over whether AI will be an opportunity or a threat to women’s bodies is growing louder.
A major challenge posed by the increasing use of AI or Artificial Intelligence is its impact on women’s bodies, namely gender bias in language and inequality. AI is dominated by the language and perspectives of countries with more data, which leads to data colonization.
In feminism, the term feminist approach to technology or cyberfeminism was introduced by Sadie Plant, Director of the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit at the University of Warwick, UK, in 1994. Although women have been active in developing new technologies throughout history, cyberfeminists still view technology as a masculine creation. Therefore, according to Judy Wajcman, professor of sociology at the Australian National University, technology needs to be continuously interrogated and reconceptualized.
Based on this concept, we wanted to find out how AI and cyberfeminism are practiced in the field. We then interviewed and identified five women who were victims of AI and mapped out the problems they faced:
Ayu, Victim of Ex-Boyfriend’s Deepfake
Ayu’s head (not her real name) felt like it was spinning when she read the text message that came in on her phone.
A friend sent her a screenshot of a message on WhatsApp. It contained a photo of Ayu’s face, but with a naked body that was not hers. Underneath the photo was a message that more or less promoted “open BO“.
“My friend asked, ‘This can’t be you, right?'” said Ayu. “She believed me, but she felt she had to let me know that someone had edited my photo like that.”
This incident occurred in February 2025. Panicked and afraid, Ayu rushed to delete the screenshot that had been automatically downloaded to her phone. She assured her friend that it was not her, and that she had no idea who had sent the message.
“Then I also checked with my other friends and family to see if anyone else had received a similar message. It turned out that a few of my friends had also received messages, but not many, just two people. Fortunately, no one in my family received the message,” said Ayu.
She herself did not receive a similar message. Her friends, however, immediately blocked and deleted the message because it made them uncomfortable.
It took Ayu at least a week to calm down, even though she still had to go about her daily life with troubled thoughts and feelings of being threatened. The sixth-semester student at a private university in Bandung also tried to trace the origin of the fake photo. It turned out that the photo manipulation was done and spread by her ex-boyfriend.
The revelation began with Ayu’s suspicion because the photo of her face that was spread had only been sent to that person when they were still in a relationship. Accompanied by her friend, Ayu confronted her ex, who finally claimed it was just a “joke” and apologized.
Read More: Indonesian Academics, Do We Stop Taking Accountability on Research Papers?
The incident traumatized Ayu. However, she admitted that the case was eventually resolved “amicably.” She was reluctant to report it to her family, the university, or the police. Besides fearing that it would drag on, she was also afraid of the stigma and judgment that might follow.
“Honestly, I was scared and traumatized, but I didn’t want to make a big deal out of it. I was more afraid that it would drag on. So for me at that time, the important thing was to confront the perpetrator and talk about the unresolved issues after the breakup, and then not spread the photos and chats any further.”
She continued, “I just wanted to move on. Even though afterward, I felt really uncomfortable because I knew my photos had been edited and used to slander me like that.”
R and Her Child, Victims of AI Manipulation
Ayu is not the only one who has experienced sexual deepfake photo manipulation. This has even happened to minors. As told by R, the mother of a child who was a victim of , to Konde.co. For the past year, R’s days have been filled with scheduled visits to the psychologist and check-ups at the police station, in addition to her daily activities. She has been accompanying her underage child, who was a victim of photo manipulation by a former coworker.
At certain times, she also accompanies her child to police summonses for the investigation process regarding this case.
As a working mother who is also continuing her studies, R has to juggle her time. Konde.co spoke with R on Tuesday evening, November 11, 2025.
“Yes, of course it’s exhausting. What surprises me is that the reported perpetrator has already admitted to doing it. And this was conveyed in front of the investigators. Then there is also the evidence that has been reported, but the process is still so long,” said R.
The legal efforts undertaken by R and her child by reporting to the police did not go smoothly. Her report was initially rejected by investigators at the Women and Children Protection Unit (PPA) of the South Jakarta Metro Police. Meanwhile, the trauma experienced by her child, who was 12 years old at the time of the incident, still lingers, so counselling with a psychologist is still ongoing.
Read More: Arrests at the End of the Day: Arrested While Hanging Out, Allegations of Sexual Harassment
Victims of photo manipulation using artificial intelligence (AI) technology often face long-lasting and significant consequences. They also have to navigate a lengthy and complex legal process in their quest for justice.
This incident began on October 30, 2024. That Wednesday afternoon, R and her child had just finished a counselling session in the South Jakarta Police Station area ( ). When R checked her phone, there were several messages sent by EA (the perpetrator) via the WhatsApp (WA) application.
EA sent messages accompanied by photos of R’s child that had been edited to show her face. The messages contained the child’s face, but the body was that of a naked woman, not the child. The perpetrator used artificial intelligence (AI) technology to make the child look like a 17-year-old girl wearing only underwear.
R was shocked, and even felt her body suddenly “freeze” for 1 minute. R then replied to the message sent by EA, saying that his actions were excessive and inappropriate. She also asked for her child’s photo to be deleted. R then called EA hysterically.
The perpetrator claimed that his actions were merely a prank. EA also engaged in gaslighting—psychological manipulation that makes someone doubt their own reality or feelings—by saying that the photo sent was not R’s child’s face, but R’s own face.
EA used a generative AI (artificial intelligence) photo and video editing application to produce the photo. The perpetrator then sent an email to the application he used and requested that the edited photo not be uploaded or saved on the application’s page or any other page.
Read More: Prabowo-Gibran’s One-Year Report Card From A Gender Perspective
When R asked EA about his motivation and reasons for doing this, he gave inconsistent answers. The perpetrator said he was also surprised when he saw the photo because he thought he had uploaded it at dawn and then in the afternoon the result came out like that.
EA (the perpetrator) was R’s former colleague in the Asian Para Games project. After the project was completed, R remained friends with EA because they shared the same profession as photographers. They often gave each other feedback on their work.
After the incident, R reported the case to the South Jakarta Metro Police two days later, accompanied by a colleague. They were directed to consult with the PPA Unit and the Special Crimes Unit (Krimsus), but in the end, their report was rejected.
“I was accompanied by one of my colleagues at the time. We filed a report, but it was rejected because it seemed that the PPA Unit did not have sufficient knowledge regarding online gender-based violence. So at that time, they were confused about which jurisdiction this fell under,” she explained.
The investigators argued that since the sexual harassment in R’s case did not involve physical contact, it could not be classified as sexual harassment. The same reasoning meant that this case could not be classified as sexual violence either. R tried to continue arguing with the investigators.
She said that if someone had manipulated the image, it could not have been done accidentally; rather, the person had intended to do so. Regardless of the intention, the person had the intention to create the photo. And according to R, this action could be considered a crime because it caused harm.
“Come on, in a book as thick as the Criminal Code, there isn’t a single article that fits this case?” she argued.
However, the investigators remained adamant and insisted that there was no physical contact. The investigators then referred R to the Special Crimes Unit.
Similarly, the investigators at the Special Crimes Unit said that the case did not constitute a criminal offense because there was no evidence of dissemination as stipulated in the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (ITE Law).
Read More: Arrests at the End of the Day: Arrested While Hanging Out, Allegations of Sexual Harassment
R argued again, but to no avail. R vented her frustration at the investigators’ lack of perspective on the victim’s situation.
“Your unit shouldn’t even exist because you don’t help at all, not even when there’s a clear victim. So I think it’s better if your unit doesn’t exist, because it’s just a waste of budget,” she said bluntly.
In the end, R’s report could not be pursued further. She returned home empty-handed and with a broken heart.
Knowing that her child, whom she had always protected so carefully, had experienced something terrible, her heart was broken. However, she still felt hopeful and optimistic about pursuing legal action. The investigators’ response was unexpected, leaving R disappointed and heartbroken once again.
After R reported the case, the perpetrator and his family stalked or monitored her Instagram account. Although they did not do anything, the stalking lasted quite a long time, and R suspected that the perpetrator wanted to monitor the reporting process. Meanwhile, R made her last post on her social media account when her report was rejected by the South Jakarta Metro Police’s Women and Children Protection Unit.
However, R did not give up on seeking justice for her child. She then sought a lawyer to represent her case through a recommendation from one of her husband’s staff members. Finally, accompanied by her lawyer, on November 11, 2024, R filed a report with the Cyber Crime Division of the Jakarta Metro Police. The investigators accepted her complaint and filed a report using provisions of the ITE Law to prosecute the perpetrator.
Read More: MBG Must Be Stopped: Poisoning Scandals, Gender Bias, And The Shadow Of The Military
A few days later, R received news that her case had been transferred again to the Special Crimes Unit of the South Jakarta Metro Police. The reason was that the locus of the case was in the South Jakarta Metro Police, so the case was transferred there.
After being handled by the Special Crimes Unit of the South Jakarta Metro Police, R and her child received their first summons. R complied with the summons and appeared accompanied by her legal counsel. The investigators then summoned witnesses and proceeded to summon the reported perpetrator. However, the perpetrator failed to appear three times, citing illness as the reason.
Finally, the suspect complied with the first summons and appeared accompanied by his legal counsel. According to information obtained by R through her legal counsel, during the examination, the suspect admitted to his actions.
“He admitted that he was indeed the one who created (the photo) using AI,” said R.
The investigation process continued with the summoning of expert witnesses. There was a break for some time until October 2025, when R and her child received a second summons, as did the witnesses. She received information from her lawyer that the perpetrator would comply with the second summons in mid-November 2025.
After being accompanied by a lawyer, R felt that the investigation process was going quite well, even though it was very long. According to her, this was very tiring and energy-consuming. Therefore, according to R, it was not surprising that the victim was ultimately reluctant to file a report.
“Even with a lawyer accompanying me, the process is still this exhausting. What about people who may have problems like ours but do not have legal aid services? The process will definitely be longer than this. That may also be what makes people ultimately reluctant to file a report,” she said.
Read More: Leftist Books Are Not Dangerous; What Is Dangerous Is A State That Confiscates Books
R also highlighted the existence of the PPA Unit, which does not employ investigators with empathy and competence. She was not the only one who had an unpleasant experience when filing a report. She said that when she was filing her report, she also witnessed the investigators’ treatment of other victims who were also reporting their cases while R was at the PPA Unit.
One of them was a father who filed a report because his child was a victim of the distribution of intimate content without the consent. The police investigator’s response at that time was that the content was created on a mutual basis. According to him, such a statement was unethical for an investigator to make.
When she came to the PPA Unit, R added that her expectation was to meet investigators who would serve without judging and invalidating the victims. However, despite being called the Women and Children Protection Unit, the investigators did not show any protective behavior.
In addition to undergoing a lengthy investigation process, R also had to accompany her child quite intensively due to the psychological impact she was experiencing. Every Saturday, she had to take her child to a psychologist because she had repeatedly expressed thoughts of ending her life.
This happened when something triggered her child, who would then withdraw, refuse to leave her room, and usually send R a message saying that she was thinking of hurting herself. Therefore, R gave her child a bracelet, and if she had the urge to hurt herself, R would tell her child to pull the bracelet until it hurt. So, to this day, the victim is still under supervision and therapy from a psychologist.
“This adds to our sorrow as parents. We see that this child is deeply affected and highly stressed by this situation,” said R.
Read More: Arrests at the End of the Day: Arrested While Hanging Out, Allegations of Sexual Harassment
She also has to face the same questions that are asked almost every day by the child due to the prolonged legal process.
“Why is that person still roaming freely?”
“Why hasn’t that person been prosecuted?”
For this reason, R regularly monitors her child’s mood and activities. Fortunately, R is close to her child’s friends, so she asks them to inform her if anything happens to her child at school.
R and her husband do the same with the school. They coordinate with the school to inform them if there are things that make the victim sad or hurt.
After the incident, R also restricted her child’s access to social media. This was done because her child had once searched for information about the perpetrator out of curiosity, which then made her angry.
“Why is he still free to meet other girls?” the child protested.
Since then, R has finally started to restrict and block her child’s access to social media.
In addition to having psychological effects, this case also consumed a lot of time because every time there was a summons, her child had to take leave from school. This situation also disrupted academic performance. Similarly, she and her husband had to take leave from work, as did other witnesses involved who also had to take time off from work.
“So, of course, besides causing psychological harm, it also affects time and material aspects,” she explained.
Read More: MBG Must Be Stopped: Poisoning Scandals, Gender Bias, And The Shadow Of The Military
R hopes that the legal process she is pursuing will be resolved fairly for the victim, as her sole purpose is for the victim.
“I have no hidden agenda. And I don’t want to blackmail anyone, I don’t want to negotiate for money as an apology. I don’t want that, I just want my child’s good name to be restored. Because there was concern from the victim that if this photo was spread, people would think that it was really him, ‘I cannot imagine what my future will be like,’ she said.”
“So personally, I hope this case can be resolved as fairly as possible with appropriate punishment for the accused (perpetrator). Especially since the victim has already experienced psychological distress. I hope the perpetrator can be sentenced to the harshest punishment possible,” concluded R.
Citra, Queer Victim of the Domino Effect of Misinformation
That afternoon, Citra (not her real name) had just returned from her university in a city in Sulawesi.
Her head was still filled with discussions with her advisor about her final project. Before Citra could recall anything she might have missed from her conversation with her advisor on the way home, her phone, which wouldn’t stop vibrating, disrupted everything. A call came in from her friend.
“Hey, what’s up?”
“There’s some new gossip,” the voice on the other end joked, but the tone was odd, as if about to deliver bad news.
As soon as she arrived at her boarding house, Citra opened her phone and saw that her Instagram was full of notifications. At first, she didn’t think anything was different. “At that time, I thought they were just normal notifications,” she said softly. But the phone screen kept flashing, displaying a series of messages and Instagram notifications that kept overlapping each other. “When I opened it, it turned out that a lot of people I didn’t know had tagged my account in their stories and sent me direct messages.”
Read More: The Banality Of State Violence, We Urgently Need Police Reform
Citra was shocked and immediately locked her account. But the attack did not stop there. Her notifications were flooded with follow requests, with more than ten new accounts. Some of the names looked strange, random, unfamiliar, and some had no profile photos.
Previously, Citra had been active on social media, talking about gender issues and the rights of the queer community. She often created light educational content, inserting perspectives on diversity and empathy. However, in the virtual world, which is easily inflamed by prejudice, Citra’s good messages became fuel for hatred.
A few days earlier, Citra had posted a story in the form of a short note. In it, she wrote what she considered to be a light-hearted statement, that she was with her queer friends—a group that had always provided her with a safe space. That was all. There was no invitation, no campaign. Just a short sentence and a few emojis.
Citra never imagined that this harmless post would suddenly become a turning point that sparked attacks as the semester break approached.
Soon, anonymous accounts appeared spreading false rumours that Citra had cheated someone. They linked the accusation to her gender identity. These accounts explicitly pointed to Citra as part of the “LGBT community” who were “immoral.” Such narratives spread quickly, especially on the campus where Citra studied.
“They made a story using my photo, with a caption that read something like: ‘Don’t trust this person, she cheats to get money from the LGBT community.’ I was really shocked!” she said tearfully.
“The fake account exaggerated and reinforced the narrative, when in fact I was just writing in my notes,” Citra recalled. “There was no context whatsoever that I was campaigning for anything. It was just like any other note.”
Read More: From Obligation to Right: Rethinking “Sex as Duty” for Muslimah
Within hours, rumours spread among her campus friends. Citra was labelled a lesbian, bisexual, and even a bad influence.
After a long week, the situation worsened when Citra woke up from a heavy sleep. Anonymous accounts began attacking her personal email address with her college domain and even sent spam messages to her advisor.
“I knew my university email was under attack when suddenly there were notifications on my phone, with many people trying to access this email,” she said.
The situation calmed down after Citra withdrew from social media. She stopped posting anything. However, a week later, the harassment returned in a different form. A message containing a link offering further study was sent to her university email address, which had been attacked. The email looked official with a complete address and a clear logo.
Citra clicked on the link.
“That was my mistake,” she said softly, regretting it. “I thought it was a real email from the university.”
She never imagined the domino effect of misinformation would lead to the loss of her savings.
Inside, there was a link to a Telegram form. The form looked official and convincing, complete with the educational institution’s logo.
Read More: Indonesia’s Deadly Protests: Economic Chaos and Political Frustration
There, someone sent a template of data to be filled out: full name, major, year of enrolment, and bank name. She followed the instructions, unaware that a trap was being set.
“I thought it was a university program because it was sent to my university email. They asked for personal data and bank account details for ‘administrative verification.’ I just filled it out,” she said.
Shortly afterward, the money in her account disappeared. A total of Rp 38 million vanished within minutes.
A few hours later, around 5 a.m., Citra woke up. She opened her phone to check her notifications. On the screen was a message from the mobile banking app—an outgoing transaction of Rp 7,500.
At first, she thought it was just an administrative fee. “But then there were so many transactions,” she said. “Until Rp 38 million was gone that day.”
It was Saturday. No banks were open. She called the call centre, but only received a brief response: wait until business hours. Citra panicked. The money was research funds she had saved up over many years.
In her confusion, she contacted SAFENet again, the organization that had previously helped her deal with online attacks. They guided her to block her accounts, encrypt her emails, and remove the link between her personal accounts and her university email. She was also asked to use cash for the time being, so that no digital transactions remained.
However, the trauma had already taken its toll. For weeks, Citra dared not open social media. She feared every notification meant a new threat. Every unknown call made her heart race.
“I’m exhausted,” she said softly. “Losing the money was hard, but it feels even harder to be attacked because of my identity.”
Months after the incident, Citra tried to become active again on campus. But the anxiety didn’t fade. She began limiting her self-expression, from her clothing and speech to even her name on Zoom.
If she used to write the pronouns she/they after her name, she now removed them. “If I use those, it could immediately become a topic of discussion,” she said.
Read More: Sexism in Student Arrests and Maternal Activism Mothers Defend Their Children’s Struggles
Her unease intensified when her campus released merchandise bearing the slogan “Voice Has No Gender”—the result of an initiative by an anti-sexual violence committee.
The simple campaign was twisted, eventually leading to accusations that the committee was promoting LGBT issues. Comments began to appear, mostly negative, some mocking, some inciting.
In fact, the committee had already issued a clarification that the article was not related to a specific gender campaign, but rather to the principle of equality for victims of violence, that anyone could report regardless of their gender. But on social media, the clarification was quickly overshadowed by ridicule.
“The issue has already been blown out of proportion and many people are upset,” said Citra.
For Citra, the situation felt like an old wound reopening. She had once been part of the organization, and now seeing it under attack brought back past traumas.
On campus, she feels she has to split herself into two: one version that is free outside the academic environment, and another version that is cautious, adapting to avoid being seen as “different.”
“I have two personalities,” she said. “Outside, I can be free, but on campus, I change again. It’s so heavy. Even freedom of dress has to be weighed.”
Read More: Sexism in Student Arrests and Maternal Activism Mothers Defend Their Children’s Struggles
Amid the panic, Citra decided to report the incident to the police.
She tried to file two different reports. The first was related to fake accounts and doxing that exposed her gender identity. The second was about the loss of thirty-eight million rupiah due to a fraudulent link that came through her university email.
For the doxing case, she had already tried to report it through the official police complaint app. But the system didn’t work properly.
She had to go directly to the police station to submit a written report. Upon arriving there, the report was not accepted.
“They said, ‘I don’t think we can help you,’” Citra recalled.
“They said, ‘We can’t provide any assistance to you. Maybe you should learn, or go to a psychologist, or fix your phone.’”
She tried to explain the situation, that the fake account had spread false information about her, that her identity had been publicly humiliated, and that the attack had even reached her university email. But her explanation was ignored.
The staff only asked her to fill out a form and then rejected the report without a clear reason.
Citra returned home feeling frustrated and sad. She not only failed to obtain legal assistance but also felt humiliated.
“And the police officer’s tone was so harsh. He asked, ‘What’s your problem?’ — which made me even more afraid.”
Several weeks later, when the digital fraud that drained her account occurred, she tried to report it again, this time regarding the loss of money.
Read More: Period Pain for Women is Real, How to Deal With It?
Her report was accepted, but after that, there was no further news. She followed up three days later, asking about the progress of her case, but was met with indifference.
“The police were indifferent,” she said. “Like they didn’t want to deal with it. They even felt sorry for me, saying, ‘How could you lose your money?’”
The case then came to a halt. There was no follow-up, no investigation.
She suspected the report was not forwarded because it was considered a “common online scam,” even though it was clearly linked to a previous digital attack.
After that, Citra stopped going to the police station. She had run out of energy. She chose to take another route that she thought would be more helpful by contacting SAFENet.
“I think they’re the only ones who really understand how to help,” she said. “At the police station, it’s like they don’t know what to do.”
Nine months after the worst December of her life, new attacks came in the form of spam calls on WhatsApp and abusive messages on Instagram DMs.
Citra, who participated in the protests in Makassar during August and September, received over twenty calls from unknown numbers, all of which were unfamiliar.
“Luckily, I had ‘silence unknown callers’ enabled,” Citra said. “So they didn’t come through, just showed up in the log.”
She reported each number to WhatsApp, marking them as spam. But there was no response notification. On Instagram, the report was only acknowledged after more than a month.
Read More: The Banality Of State Violence, We Urgently Need Police Reform
It wasn’t until November that she received an official response, a thank-you message for reporting the issue.
“It took forever,” she said. “Imagine, it took a month just to get a response.”
Now, nearly a year after the December 2024 incident, Citra is still trying to recover. She has consulted with a psychologist in Makassar four times.
Slowly, she is learning to reorganize her life, rearrange her digital security, change her passwords, and keep her distance from social media, which once served as her space for expression.
“I’m more cautious now,” she said. “But it feels like I have to keep hiding.”
The attack she experienced highlights how disinformation and digital violence can intersect two issues simultaneously: hatred toward gender identity and economic cybercrime.
In Citra’s case, the two overlap, beginning with small notes about spending time with queer friends and ending with the loss of tens of millions of rupiah and her faith in the legal system.
Despite the bitterness and exhaustion, she maintains the courage to speak out.
“I just want people to know,” she said softly, “that something like this can happen to anyone. And don’t easily believe stories or posts that aren’t clear. Because they could be slander that ruins people’s lives,” she concluded.
Kinah, Journalist Targeted for Reporting
Kinah has been working as a journalist in South Sulawesi for a long time, and most of her coverage has been related to environmental issues involving river dredging, illegal diesel smuggling, and corrupt practices involving officials.
Such news, she said, is almost always followed by pressure, whether direct or indirect.
Every time she writes a critical news story, Kinah prepares herself for the worst. “Actually, almost every piece of critical reporting has an effect,” she said softly. “And most often, it’s slander. Slander related to bribery is the most common.”
“Every time we finish writing a critical news story, the impact is quite significant,” said Kinah. “Especially for me, mentally, it’s quite disturbing.”
She knows that in her region, the risks are not only in the digital world. In her experience, the threats and slander that come after what she calls “critical” reporting often transform into real intimidation.
“The most noticeable was after I wrote a story about illegal solar energy,” she recalled. “The story was published four times. The fourth time, the businessman called me on WhatsApp. He used harsh and rude words and made threats.”
The threats did not stop there. A few hours later, similar messages came in succession via WhatsApp.
“It continued with WhatsApp chats containing quite harsh and threatening words,” she said.
Shortly after, the terror that began on the phone spilled over into the real world.
“The businessman’s henchmen also came directly to my house,” said Kinah. “Luckily, I didn’t meet them. I actually saw their car in front, but because I already knew it was their car, I turned around and went to the police station to ask for protection.”
Read More: From Obligation to Right: Rethinking “Sex as Duty” for Muslimah
She emphasized one thing that remains her conclusion to this day: “What began as digital intimidation threats actually escalated directly into the real world.”
After the incident, Kinah stopped writing for a while. But six months later, she returned to the field. “I don’t think it’s over yet,” she said. “Yesterday, I wrote about the illegal solar power that hasn’t been exposed.”
This time, she was more cautious. She went undercover during her reporting trips, didn’t carry any conspicuous equipment, and only used her cell phone camera. But the feeling of unease didn’t go away.
“Six months later, I wrote again, and it turned out that I felt I was being followed by several cars on my way home from the reporting location,” said Kinah. “So I stopped writing again, and to this day I have never resumed.”
Before the illegal solar case, Kinah had also experienced something similar when covering river dredging by a village head.
“He also made harsh and rude remarks via WhatsApp and chat,” she said. The case eventually ended up in court, and the village head was imprisoned.
In the world she navigates, the line between news and danger is so thin. Even in cases without physical violence, pressure still arises in the form of defamation.
“The slander is more about bribery,” said Kinah. “Because when we finish writing a controversial news story, we meet again with the source, and that’s where it often comes across to the public as if there was a transaction.”
The slander spread quickly by word of mouth, even reaching the police, who then confirmed it directly with Kinah.
“So, as I said, if anyone intends to confirm this with me directly, I will answer. But if it’s just rumours from people out there that haven’t been confirmed to me, I’ll just ignore it.”
Read More: Indonesia’s Deadly Protests: Economic Chaos and Political Frustration
“Recently, the information reached the police. “So the police confirmed it to me, but not in the form of an official report, just an implied confirmation that they had received information about a certain transaction. Of course I denied it, it’s not true,” she explained.
This defamation, in Kinah’s experience, is more than just a rumour. The manipulation of information has become a tool to pressure female journalists who dare to challenge local power structures.
The threats Kinah faced should have been sufficient grounds for an official report. But she chose another path.
“Never, sir,” she said when asked if she had ever reported it. “Including the last case (stalking), I actually went to the police station just to ask for protection, not to report it.”
There is a strong reason behind this, based on Kinah’s experiences during her reporting involving the police.
“I even told the police, ‘I want to trust the police, but I have to ask for protection here.’ Because the police also know that their backing is them.”
She recounted one experience that reinforced her belief.
“Before the threat occurred, there was indeed money given to me by the businessman, and one of the police intelligence officers told me that there was money for me from the businessman,” she said.
Read More: Sexism in Student Arrests and Maternal Activism Mothers Defend Their Children’s Struggles
“But I still said that I wouldn’t accept it, and I asked for the money to be returned. So it’s clear, it seems very clear that there is backing from the police.”
What was most surprising, Kinah said, was when she was actually introduced to the solar businessman by the police themselves.
“I was once introduced to the businessman by the police as well,” she said. “I even complained because I wasn’t informed that the businessman would be there. It turned out that he was there when I arrived.”
In that room, there were only four people: herself, the police, the businessman, and a friend of the businessman. She complained about the meeting.
“I complained to the head of the criminal investigation unit after the meeting,” she said. “‘Why did the police dare to introduce me to the mafia?’ I said that. Clearly, I was introduced to the mafia, and it was the police who did it.”
After that, she said, the police apologized.
“But I said, ‘If I ever want to write about this, I can write that I was once brought together by the police with the solar mafia,’” she concluded.
In such a situation, the editorial office became the only place where she felt safe.
“Oh yes, regarding what I experienced yesterday, I immediately reported it at the time of the incident,” said Kinah. “A few minutes later, I reported it via WhatsApp, then I went directly to the office as well.”
In addition to direct threats, Kinah also experienced digital violence in the form of repeated violations on social media platforms, particularly Facebook.
Read More: Sexism in Student Arrests and Maternal Activism Mothers Defend Their Children’s Struggles
She never actively debated or responded to comments there, but used her Facebook account as a monitoring tool.
“I use Facebook mainly to monitor information, because many people still use Facebook as a platform to express their opinions,” she said.
But even in that space, she was not spared from harassment.
“Even though I have set my Facebook so that I can only tag people once I accept them,” she said. “But it turns out that there are still some posts that can tag my account even though I haven’t accepted them, automatically.”
She has reported it to Facebook. However, the result was nil. “In my opinion, the reason why there seems to be no change is because the same account keeps reappearing. Even though I have blocked it and so on, it reappears,” she said.
Student, Victim of AI Manipulation
Recently, there was another case of AI-based pornography production carried out by CR, a law student at Diponegoro University in Semarang, Central Java. According to the information revealed, the perpetrator edited the faces of his victims using AI, which he then uploaded to social media. The number of victims is estimated to be in the dozens, but only some of them have pursued legal action so far. Some of them are teachers, students, and alumni of SMAN 11 Semarang.
This case came to light around early October 2025 when a student found a nude photo of an alumnus of SMAN 11 Semarang on an X account. He informed the victim about it. The victim was shocked to find that her photo had been altered and misused. It turned out that she was not the only victim, but there were several others. Some of the victims then tried to find out who owned the account.
This investigation was revealed by an X account. After they were fairly certain that the account owner was CR, an alumnus of SMAN 11, they also found that most of the victims knew each other and also knew CR.
The victims were afraid of being ostracized by those around them even though the photos and videos were manipulated. Therefore, they hoped that CR would receive social sanctions. The victims’ friends then went to CR’s house. When his cell phone was opened, it turned out that CR had 10 email accounts containing photos and videos manipulated by AI. CR then made a statement letter signed with a stamp.
Read More: ‘What I Inherited, What I Refused’ Reflections About Overcoming Misogyny
The statement contained an admission that CR was the owner of the X account that spread the manipulated photos/videos. He also promised to delete the account within the period specified in the statement, namely October 7 to October 10, 2025.
The statement was made by the perpetrator after the victim’s friends visited his home and checked his phone. Source: special.
The X account post revealing CR’s actions went viral. CR then admitted to his actions in a video uploaded to the official Instagram account of SMAN 11 Semarang on October 13, 2025. He apologized to the victims (alumni, students, and teachers of SMAN 11 Semarang) whose faces had been edited using AI.
One of the victims’ legal team members, Reza Alfiawan Pratama, told Konde.co on Friday, November 14, 2025, that the suspect’s motive was reportedly for personal satisfaction.
“His targets were his close friends, so there might have been unmet expectations in terms of sexuality. And eventually, he found AI that allowed him to explore and then develop further,” he explained.
CR created the sexually explicit photos and videos using artificial intelligence (AI) or deepfake technology. Reza explained that the photos and videos of the victims were taken secretly and without their consent from their Instagram accounts. Additionally, some may have been taken from high school graduation photos accessible to students of the same grade.
Read More: Period Pain for Women is Real, How to Deal With It?
The photos and videos were then edited using AI technology. The faces in the photos and videos were edited by combining them with photos and videos of other people’s bodies. As a result, some of the figures in the photos and videos were naked. There were also photos that were edited with offensive text added to them.
Not only did CR edit sexually explicit photos and videos, but he also uploaded them to his X account. The photos and videos were captioned “Semanse Scandal.” Around 30 victims had their photos uploaded to X, but only some of them appointed Reza and his team as their legal representatives.
“There are 30 victims. However, only 18 of them have appointed us as their legal representatives. Among them, one is still attending SMA 11. Some are outside SMA 11, and some are alumni of SMA 11,” he said.
When this case went viral, Reza’s teammate, Bagas Wahyu Jati, who is an alumnus of SMAN 11, felt compelled to help the victims. There were also other alumni who reported the case to Bagas. Together with his team, Bagas then took action, opening a call centre for victims who needed legal assistance on October 17, 2025. The victims and their parents contacted Reza and his team one by one, with 18 people eventually appointing them as their legal representatives.
Of the 18 victims, two were minors: one was a student at SMAN 11 and the other was a student at another high school. The remaining 16 were female university students.
The victims who had appointed Reza and his team initially intended to report the case to the police. However, before the report was filed, the Central Java Regional Police’s Cyber Crime Unit had already conducted a cyber patrol and proactively handled the case. Moreover, this case was a public offense, not a complaint offense.
“The Central Java Regional Police’s Cyber Crime Investigation Unit conducts cyber patrols, and at that time, they discovered a criminal act allegedly committed by CR. Finally, CR was summoned, as were the other parties. To date, CR has been detained and is awaiting P21, with the case files transferred to the prosecutor’s office and proceeding to trial,” explained Reza.
Read More: Indonesia’s Deadly Protests: Economic Chaos and Political Frustration
According to Reza, there have been no significant obstacles in the investigation process. Therefore, his party appreciates the performance of the Central Java Regional Police’s Cyber Crime Investigation Unit, which has been working optimally since the beginning of the process. The police detained CR under the Pornography Law and the ITE Law.
So far, Reza and his team have no objections to the articles used by investigators to charge the perpetrator. Moreover, the police have stated that CR’s actions have fulfilled the objective and subjective elements.
The investigation process in this case can be said to have proceeded fairly quickly. This was also acknowledged by Reza, who said that there were no significant obstacles during the investigation process. According to Reza, apart from going viral and attracting public attention, AI cases such as this are a new phenomenon in terms of the legal position in responding to technological developments.
He believes that so far, existing legal regulations are sufficient to address the needs of victims and technological developments. However, it is important to remember that technology continues to evolve, and technological developments will inevitably give rise to new crimes.
Reza said that the victims were initially sad and shocked, and some even suffered trauma. There were victims who received news that photos of themselves that had been manipulated with AI were circulating on X, so they were afraid to leave their homes and meet people.
Read More: Sexism in Student Arrests and Maternal Activism Mothers Defend Their Children’s Struggles
However, after the legal process began and there was some progress, with the Central Java Police’s Cybercrime Division designating CR as a suspect and eventually arresting him on November 13, 2025, Reza explained that the victims gradually regained their spirits and began to recover from their trauma.
According to Reza, the victims’ decision to pursue legal action is both an act of resistance and a preventive measure to ensure similar cases do not recur.
“This is also a form of resistance against online gender-based violence (KBGO). So that other men do not act like CR did. Because there may be other CRs out there. If no action is taken, this kind of thing will definitely happen again,” said Reza.
According to Reza, the victims have also resumed their normal activities because they are still pursuing their education, so they must continue their studies and lectures. He added that they hope the perpetrator (CR) will receive the punishment according to the applicable regulations and that it will serve as a deterrent.
This process is also hoped to serve as a warning to other men not to commit similar acts, as there are consequences that must be borne, namely punishment in accordance with the law.
Motives and Patterns of Deepfake
In an era where AI or artificial intelligence is increasingly accessible, the online space, once seen as a means of expression, social networking, and even women’s empowerment, has now become a new field of vulnerability.
Women not only face threats such as verbal or physical abuse, but also threats created through digital manipulation: photos and videos edited with deepfake technology, identity theft, and the creation of false narratives that include the victim’s personal data; all of which are carried out through digital platforms, making it difficult for victims to distinguish between reality and fabrication.
Based on records from the National Commission on Violence Against Women, gender-based violence occurring in the online sphere (KBGO) has experienced a significant increase. In the 2024 CATAHU report, there were 445,502 cases of violence against women in general, an increase of around 9.77% compared to the previous year.
Of that number, it was revealed that cases occurring online rose by 40.8% in forms such as online threats, cyber sexual harassment, malicious distribution, digital sexual exploitation, privacy violations, and fraud. Previously, data from 2022 showed that there were 1,721 reported cases of gender-based violence in cyberspace. This figure represents an 83% increase compared to 2020.
All of this shows that women in Indonesia are now not only vulnerable to familiar forms of violence, but also to new techniques that utilize technology, which can damage their reputation, mental health, and security. On the other hand, victims may never be aware that they have been targeted.
AI technology opens new avenues for perpetrators to increase the scale of their attacks. Photo or video manipulation, data theft and fabrication, and the creation of false narratives are some of the increasingly common methods used.
Read More: ‘What I Inherited, What I Refused’ Reflections About Overcoming Misogyny
Research and legal studies reveal that even though there are laws such as Law Number 12 of 2022 concerning Sexual Violence Crimes (TPKS Law) and the ITE Law, regulations that specifically address deepfake crimes or the misuse of AI against women are still considered inadequate.
One pattern that has emerged is that women’s profile photos on social media or dating apps are “scraped” by perpetrators. Usually, the perpetrators are former partners, social media friends, or even unknown strangers. These photos are then edited using AI models to make them appear in compromising situations, such as sexual content or false statements, and then distributed. The impact can include extortion (sextortion), the distribution of non-consensual intimate imagery, or the creation of false narratives that portray the victim as the perpetrator, witness, or target of embarrassing rumours.
Another example is personal data collected through leaks or engineering. Such as full name, place/date of birth, address, and even photos. This data is then used to create fake identities, bank accounts or online loans, or hoax narratives that include the victim’s name and photo. As a result, women who are victims often find themselves in a situation where they have to prove that the photo/video is not real, that the data used does not belong to them or was never given by them, while their reputation has already been exposed to the public.
Said Niam, a public lawyer at LBH APIK Jakarta, stated that threats of spreading NCII content or Non-Consensual Dissemination of Intimate Images, and sexual demands have been among the cases reported to LBH APIK Jakarta in recent times.
“As for the forms it takes, threats to disseminate sexually explicit content are often made by perpetrators to victims,” Said explained to Konde.co on Wednesday, November 19, 2025.
“Whether the perpetrator’s motive is material gain, financial extortion, or sexual relations. ‘If you don’t want your relationship to be exposed, then you must have sexual relations with me first,’ that sort of thing.
Dissemination also often occurs without threats and is carried out by both strangers and people close to the victim. In addition, there is also a power relationship between the perpetrator and the victim, for example when the perpetrator is the victim’s husband or boyfriend.
“Then there is also the dissemination or misuse of personal data. Personal data, for example, about relationships or dating. Then after that, it is used for borrowing, whether it is for a (loan) application or whatever.”
Meanwhile, Said noted that LBH APIK Jakarta has been receiving and handling reports of cases involving the manipulation or misinformation of personal data since 2021.
“During the pandemic, we handled cases related to that. And (manipulation and misinformation) were often carried out by online lenders,” he said. “And we investigated several times at that time, indeed because of the online lending industry. At that time, there was almost a mass crackdown on illegal online lending. It seems that one of the perpetrators has been revealed by the police.”
Read More: Indonesia’s Deadly Protests: Economic Chaos and Political Frustration
The pandemic situation, which has led to widespread layoffs and a surge in unemployment, has caused many people to try to cope with the economic conditions by borrowing money through online loans. On the other hand, women experience far greater vulnerability because their photos are often manipulated into sexual content if they default on payments or have arrears.
“Then the threat is no longer just about spreading the information. If the victim is a man, they are labelled as a thief or a criminal, or something like that. Embezzling funds or something, because they don’t want to pay back the loan and so on, and everyone is punished,” said Said. However, the threats against female victims are different. Findings by LBH APIK Jakarta in 2021-2022 show that there has been manipulation of victims’ faces in the form of nude content or other sexually explicit content. The victims’ real faces are ‘pasted’ onto bodies that do not belong to them. However, Said cannot confirm whether this manipulation uses deepfake technology or not.
Furthermore, global studies show that in gender-based manipulation, women and girls are particularly vulnerable targets. A report by Sensity AI states that deepfake cases have increased by 550% since 2019, and most of the targets are women and children.
Although not all cases are published in detail due to victim privacy and investigation confidentiality, some local data provide a clear picture of the scale and intensity of the attacks.
Deepfake cases such as those involving Ayu, R’s child, and a student at SMAN 11 Semarang are just a small fraction of the reported cases. There is a trend of increasing cases of KBGO from 2020 to 2024 in terms of both number and form, as reported by LBH APIK Jakarta.
This situation is in line with the results of research published by the Oxford Internet Institute at the University of Oxford, as stated by Alia Yofira, a researcher at Purplecode Collective. The study found that every year, more and more AI-based applications are emerging that can be easily accessed by users or the public to produce deepfakes.
Read More: Is Our Public Transportation Gender Responsive and Inclusive? Konde.co Research Results (1)
Easy access enables widespread use of these applications, thereby increasing the risk of online gender-based violence, including deepfakes.
From these two cases, it is clear that the use of generative artificial intelligence technology, which can produce photos or videos that are almost perfect and difficult to distinguish from the original, has a tremendous impact on the lives of victims. This is especially true for women, girls, and marginalized groups.
The term deepfake is used to describe the phenomenon of using generative AI to manipulate photos, videos, and audio of women non-consensually and usually in a sexual manner. This technology works by recognizing a person’s facial or voice patterns and then “attaching” those patterns to the face or voice of another person with high precision.
The reported cases of deepfakes are essentially the tip of the iceberg, as they reveal only a small fraction of the actual cases.
From the existing cases, the production patterns used by perpetrators are quite diverse. Starting from using AI conversation features in messaging applications, there are also those who use AI-based photo/video editing applications or AI-based voice editing applications.
As mentioned earlier, the emergence of generative AI-based applications that are easily accessible to users has become fertile ground for practices of online gender-based violence (KBGO), including deepfakes. According to Alia, this vulnerability is rooted in our society, which is still patriarchal and misogynistic.
PurpleCode categorizes photo/video manipulation as part of online gender-based violence (KBGO), one of whose characteristics is the existence of a gender power dynamic between the perpetrator and the victim.
Regarding the perpetrator’s motives, Alia explains that if the perpetrator is someone known to the victim (such as a partner in a relationship), the perpetrator’s motivation is related to that relationship. For example, not wanting to be broken up with, wanting to obtain sexual favours/sextortion, etc.
As for anonymous perpetrators, what often happens is extortion (wanting to obtain compensation in the form of money). However, it is possible that both anonymous and non-anonymous perpetrators commit various forms of GBV.
Read More: Introducing Mary Wollstonecraft, the ‘Mother’ of First-Wave Feminism
A similar statement was made by the Commissioner of the National Commission on Violence Against Women, Chatarina Pancer Istiyani. According to her, perpetrators of KBGO, including deepfakes, are sometimes known to the victim and sometimes unknown or strangers (anonymous). In cases where the motive is to humiliate the victim, the perpetrator is usually someone known to the victim. Conversely, in cases where the motive is exploitation or extortion, the perpetrator is not necessarily known to the victim.
Meanwhile, the distribution pattern usually involves social media, as in the case of SMAN 11 Semarang. It can also use personal communication channels such as WhatsApp, as in the case experienced by R.
A similar case also went viral on social media in 2023. One of the viral threads related to the spread of manipulated pornography (deepfake porn) and non-consensual intimate images (NCII) was posted by Indah G. on her Twitter account @itsindahg.
“WARNING: There’s another Google Form for revenge porn/NCII + deepfake porn being circulated online,” Indah tweeted on her Twitter account on Saturday (June 24, 2023).
Speaking to Konde.co on Saturday, July 1, 2023, Indah explained, “My friend (S) posted it on her Close Friends Story on IG, and our other mutual friend (P) sent me a WhatsApp message around 9 AM saying, ‘hey did you see what (S) posted? (My friend (S) posted it on her Close Friends Story on IG, and our other mutual friend (P) sent me a WhatsApp message around 9 AM saying, ‘Hey, have you seen what (S) posted?’)”
When a woman’s identity, face, or personal data is misused, the effects go far beyond a “viral hoax.” The first impact is psychological: victims experience shame, fear, anxiety, and sometimes depression. This is especially true when the spread of false content or narratives involves the victim’s social circle or workplace and educational environment. Victims also risk losing their jobs, being excluded from their social or professional circles, or being blackmailed.
Then, there is the risk to reputation: when edited photos or videos are spread, victims may be considered guilty or involved in something they never did. False narratives are easily believed by parties outside the victim’s circle because the visuals appear realistic and the data looks “authentic.” In reality, the manipulation has been carried out using AI. The process of clarifying or removing content is time-consuming and emotionally costly; digital platforms are often slow to respond to reports, or victims may not even know how to request the removal of content that has gone viral.
Read More: From Obligation to Right: Rethinking “Sex as Duty” for Muslimah
Furthermore, there are often physical or personal security threats: perpetrators can use the manipulated results to intimidate victims. For example, threatening to spread more content unless the victim pays money or does something. Victims can become targets of doxing (disclosure of personal data) or online or real-life stalking. This is especially true because women who are perceived as “open” online (including social media posts) become easy targets in data theft and manipulation schemes.
AI Becomes the Face of Violence Against Women
In the last five years, AI technology has facilitated the emergence of new patterns of disinformation that work through visual, audio, and automated narrative engineering.
Konde.co’s research on 115 women and various genders and sexualities, conducted from November 3-10, 2025, shows how women are increasingly encountering digital manipulation generated by artificial intelligence. Survey data shows that 46.09 percent of respondents often encounter AI-based fake content, while 27.83 percent occasionally see it. Only 3.48 percent claim to have never been exposed to this kind of manipulation.
Not only that, 86.96 percent of respondents admitted to having directly seen AI-based fake content that attacks women or vulnerable groups based on religious identity, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or region of origin. This means that AI-based disinformation is now part of a pattern of systematic digital violence against women.
Public attitudes toward this content are mixed. Most respondents stated that they would not share content if they knew it was AI-generated, but 38.26 percent would still share it as long as they believed the information to be “valid.” Meanwhile, 6.09 percent would share it unconditionally.
However, the level of concern among respondents is very high, with 68.70 percent very concerned and 26.96 percent concerned. The public’s assessment of the government’s preparedness is also largely negative, with 56.52 percent rating the government’s AI policies as poor and 29.57 percent as very poor.
When asked to assess the impact of AI on women, 46.96 percent of respondents considered this technology to bring more harm than good; only 5.22 percent saw its benefits as more dominant, while 46.09 percent said the impact was balanced.
Their experiences clarify the reasons behind these assessments. Qualitative findings from research by Konde.co cite deepfakes and face manipulation as fairly common patterns of digital violence. The spread of such content even occurs through chain messages, as revealed by the following respondent: “My friend’s photo was altered to be obscene and spread in a chain message.”
Experience and Observations on False Information Targeting Women or Minorities Based on AI
| Experience and Observations on False Information Based on AI | Specific theme | Description | Example of quote from respondent |
| Visual manipulation and sexualization with AI | a. Deepfake or manipulation of women’s faces | A woman’s face is replaced or pasted onto another person’s body, usually to create an exploitative sexual image. | “The face in the indecent image is edited to be her face.” / “Someone whose photo has been made to appear naked.” |
| b. AI-generated indecent photos or videos | AI is used to create fake pornographic content, which is often distributed on social media. | “There are obscene and vulgar images that turn out to be edited by AI.” / “I’ve seen photos of women edited by AI to be naked.” | |
| c. Celebrity/ actress face manipulation | Public figures are targets of visual exploitation through AI. | “The actress I like had her photos edited to show her without clothes.” | |
| d. Distribution on public platforms | AI-generated content is distributed on TikTok, messaging groups, or other platforms without permission. | “On TikTok, change the image to something obscene.” / “My friend’s photo was changed to something obscene and distributed in a chain message.” | |
| Voice cloning / impersonation | a. Voices are faked to deceive or threaten | AI is used to imitate the victim’s voice in scams or threats. | “There was someone else who used my voice to call my parents and say that I had been kidnapped.” |
| b. Recording of voice/ face without permission | The perpetrator recorded the victim’s face/voice via video call and then used it. | “He recorded my voice and face when I answered the video call. It was only a few seconds, but I was scared.” | |
| c. Suspicious automated audio/ telemarketing | Automatic voice technology is used for conversations or spam that make victims uncomfortable. | “An unknown number called repeatedly, with the same female voice like telemarketing.” | |
| Digital identity fraud and misuse | a. Use of photos for fraud | The victim’s visual identity (photo) was used to deceive others. | “My mother’s photo was used as the profile photo of a WhatsApp account to borrow money.” |
| b. Account or bank account hacking | Digital attacks cause economic losses | “I was once scammed and suffered an economic loss of 38 million rupiah when my account was hacked.” | |
| c. Other AI-based fraud methods | A type of fraud that uses AI content or digital manipulation. | “My friend was once a victim of digital fraud involving cash on delivery packages.” | |
| Misuse of images for commercial or political purposes | a. Manipulation for unauthorized advertising | A person’s photo/video is used for advertising without a contract or permission. | “I’ve seen videos of people being edited to advertise products even though there was no agreement whatsoever.” |
| b. Political manipulation | Victims’ faces were used in certain political content without permission. | “My face was used to support a certain party figure, so I couldn’t register with the General Elections Commission.” | |
| Digital violence against female lecturers or public figures | Influential women’s photos edited inappropriately | Gender-based digital violence against female figures in the public sphere | “A junior student edited a photo of a female lecturer to make it obscene, and it caused a huge uproar.” |
| AI-based defamation and libel | a. Manipulating content to damage reputation | AI is used to cause slander, misunderstanding, or damage reputation. | “The photo was manipulated and distributed without permission to damage reputation.” / “Slander or defamation.” |
| b. Deepfake with fabricated narration | The use of AI to create false narratives that make it seem like someone did something they didn’t. | “My friend was falsely accused of being in an intimate photo with someone, but it was the result of AI misuse.” | |
| Emotional reactions and psychological impact | a. Fear and trauma | Victims feel unsafe, ashamed, or traumatized by digital attacks. | “I was scared and felt threatened even though it was only recorded for a few seconds.” / “My friend was severely traumatized after her deepfake photo was circulated.” |
| b. Feeling irritated and losing control | The victim felt aggrieved because she could not control the use of her image. | “I was annoyed because my face was included in political content.” | |
| Manipulation of News Coverage | Disaster hoaxes or fake news | Respondents associate natural disaster hoaxes with AI | “My friend received information about a house being swept away by a flood, but it turned out to be a hoax.” |
Other responses indicate the prevalence of voice spoofing and unauthorized recording: “Someone once used my voice to call my parents and say that I had been kidnapped,” and “He recorded my voice and face when I answered a video call. It was only a few seconds, but I was scared.”
Misuse of digital identity is also common, especially for fraud; “My mother’s photo was used as a WhatsApp profile photo to borrow money”—to account hacking: “I was once scammed and suffered an economic loss of 38 million through my hacked account.”
AI technology is even used for political and commercial manipulation. One respondent wrote, “My face was used to support a certain political party figure, so I couldn’t register with the General Elections Commission,” while another reported the misuse of their face in advertisements without consent: “I once saw a video of someone edited to advertise a product even though there was no agreement whatsoever.” Digital violence against female public figures also frequently occurs: “A junior student edited a photo of a lecturer to make it indecent, and it caused a huge uproar.”
Read More: “Long Live Indonesian Women!” Gazing into the Realities of Women Workers’ Rights
Victims’ efforts to seek justice have so far encountered many obstacles, as experienced by R. In contrast, the case of SMAN 11 Semarang, with its rapid investigation process, can be considered an exception. This is because very few cases of KBGO, including deepfake cases, have proceeded to trial or even a verdict.
Data from LBH APIK shows that out of 350 KBGO cases received by LBH APIK Jakarta, none have reached a verdict. These cases are generally processed using the ITE Law. This situation was also experienced by R, who reported her case to the PPA Unit from the start but was rejected by the investigators.
Regarding the follow-up of reports to law enforcement officials, Said Niam said that LBH APIK’s principle is to handle cases based on the needs and expectations of the victims. What often happens is that victims simply hope to meet with the perpetrator so that they can apologize and delete the content on their devices.
Said mentioned that there are several considerations from victims regarding their reluctance to report to the police. These include psychological health, time, money, and emotional considerations. In addition, if the case drags on, the victim’s work may be hampered due to the need for summons and so on.
“Not to mention that the main reason is usually because the victim feels socially ashamed. Their photos have been spread, maybe even edited and so on. But socially, of course, psychologically, it certainly hits them hard, so sometimes they don’t want to report it to the police.”
Nevertheless, there are also those who are furious and choose to file a report with the police. “But so far, most cases are still stalled at the police station,” said Said.
Legal proceedings tend to occur when the perpetrator is unknown, said Said, such as in social media cases. Lack of knowledge about the perpetrator often becomes a reason for the police to delay handling the case. In fact, technically, investigations into the perpetrator can be conducted in various ways. For example, by checking the coordinates on their social media, their IP address, and so on.
On the other hand, case R shows that even at the initial stage of reporting, victims can be eliminated from seeking justice because investigators lack a gender and victim perspective. This issue of investigators has also been highlighted by the National Commission on Violence Against Women.
There are structural problems within the police force that affect the quality of investigators in conducting investigations and inquiries into cases of KBGO. For example, there is a lack of synchronization between the Cyber Unit and the Women and Children Protection Unit (PPA) that handles KSBE and KBGO cases. As stated by Chatarina and Said Niam, the limited existence of Digital Forensics Units at the provincial level due to high costs limits access to reporting and investigating KBGO cases.
Read More: International Women’s Day 2025: A Call to Action to Accelerate Progress towards Gender Equality
Reports made at the PPA unit are processed using digital forensic tools from the Cyber Unit. However, Said said that the police currently only have eight digital forensic units, and even those are only in a few large provincial police headquarters. This means that these tools are not available at the district and sub-district police levels.
“This is also one of the weaknesses and challenges itself,” he said.
Meanwhile, efforts to increase human resource capacity in the police force are also concentrated in the provincial police headquarters. As a result, the number of investigators with the knowledge and experience to handle KBGO cases is limited. However, it is the investigators at the district police and police station levels who handle most of the reports. Not to mention that Indonesia is an archipelago and far from the provincial police headquarters.
In terms of regulations, Indonesia already has instruments such as the TPKS Law, the ITE Law, and the personal data protection law, although implementation is still in the development stage. The TPKS Law also regulates a new type of sexual violence, namely electronic-based sexual violence (KSBE). This can be considered a good breakthrough because for the first time Indonesia has legally recognized the existence of KBGO.
However, legal studies show that regulations specifically addressing deepfake crimes or the misuse of AI against women are still very limited. Determining perpetrators, digital forensic evidence, tracking algorithms and AI models used; all of these still face major obstacles.
The LBH APIK Jakarta report (2025) emphasizes that not all types of KBGO are recognized as KSBE in the TPKS Law. CATAHU Komnas Perempuan 2024 notes that of the 1,791 KBGO cases received by Komnas Perempuan, only 40% (717) of the cases met the elements of KSBE so that they could be reported under the TPKS Law.
Meanwhile, law enforcement in the field is still hampered by the lack of investigators with expertise in digital forensics or AI manipulation. At the digital platform level, victim reporting mechanisms are often not responsive enough to AI-manipulated content because it is often considered “normal controversy” or “common hoaxes” rather than a specific category of gender-based violence. In addition, victims are often afraid to report due to social stigma, lack of trust in the legal process, or fear of victim-blaming. This is compounded by the fact that many law enforcement officials still lack a gender perspective and a victim-centered perspective.
The tendency of investigators to direct victims to use the ITE Law in cases of GBV, as experienced by R and in the handling of the SMAN 11 case, shows that the perspective of law enforcement officials regarding GBV is still not in favor of female victims.
Read More: From Obligation to Right: Rethinking “Sex as Duty” for Muslimah
The use of the ITE Law often hinders female victims from accessing justice. This is because investigations in cyber units are generally conducted by male investigators in open rooms.
LBH APIK Jakarta also noted that the forensic examination stage also requires the confiscation of the victim’s gadget. The confiscation of the victim’s gadget will have an impact on hindering the activities of female victims. Another experience that should not be overlooked in the use of the ITE Law in cases of KBGO is the lack of ongoing victim recovery.
Meanwhile, based on SAFENet’s evaluation, although Indonesia already has an adequate legal framework such as the TPKS Law for the t of cyber gender-based violence cases, its implementation is still far from adequate.
Nenden Sekar Arum, Director of SAFEnet, emphasized that the problem lies not in the absence of regulations, but in the weak enforcement in the field.
“Usually, the first response from the police is, ‘Oh, we don’t have the technology to prove it,’ and so on. That’s usually the case with KBGO. So, this is why we need to continue to push for the implementation of regulations in the field, enforcement. Even though there is the TPKS Law, its utilization is still very minimal when it comes to online gender-based violence,” said Nenden.
In practice, victims are also often caught in overlapping regulations. SAFEnet researcher Shinta Ressmy described how the design of case handling in the field is still oriented towards punishment, not victim protection.
“If, for example, victims are covered by the ITE Law, it still cannot restore them because under the TPKS Law, we can see that victims can obtain the right to be forgotten. But under the ITE Law, victims will not obtain this right. In fact, in practice, the perpetrator can report the victim again for defamation,” said Shinta.
“And often, defamation cases are processed more quickly than sexual violence cases,” Shinta lamented.
In fact, according to SAFEnet, non-material losses such as psychological and reputational damage should be recognized as part of legal reform . This was conveyed by Nabillah Saputri, a volunteer from SAFEnet, when interviewed by Konde.co (11/11).
“If it’s said that there is no loss, in fact, many legal experts have stated that psychological losses can be measured, including through financial audits, to determine whether the victim has suffered financial losses or not,” she explained.
All three agreed that the implementation of protection that truly prioritizes victims must be a priority, including psychological support, the complete removal of content, and digital rehabilitation.
“What is actually important to push for is the implementation of protection regulations for victims. Another thing is the protection and recovery mechanisms for victims,” criticized Nenden.
Platform and Government Responsibility
Deepfakes against women actually fall under the category of disinformation. This is because faces and voices are classified as personal data under Law Number 27 of 2022 concerning Personal Data Protection (PDP Law). Specifically, faces and voices are classified as biometric data, which is part of specific personal data.
By placing deepfakes within the framework of disinformation, according to Alia Yofira, efforts to address deepfake cases can also utilize the legal framework for disinformation.
“Manipulated photos are false information and have an impact on the victims. So, in addition to using the existing TPKS legal framework or the ITE Law, we should also be able to use legal frameworks related to ‘disinformation’. Unfortunately, the articles on disinformation in Indonesian law are very problematic,” said Alia.
Alia further explained that regulations related to disinformation are mostly regulated in the ITE Law. We can take the example of the article on false news that disturbs the public. What has happened so far is that this article has mostly been used by people in power to silence certain expressions. So, in its implementation, the false news article is very political and selective in its use.
In addition, from a human rights perspective, the criminalization of disinformation—in the context of information that is “only” false—is fundamentally disproportionate to the impact caused by this article. Therefore, in several countries, efforts are being made to decriminalize the disinformation article. This means that criminal penalties will no longer be used to deal with situations of disinformation.
The question then arises: if not criminal penalties, what can we regulate in the ITE Law?
Referring to a number of countries, Alia explained that many regulations related to disinformation target the accountability of platforms holistically.
“So, it is not reactive when there is disinformation, and the steps taken are takedowns, platform shutdowns, or the like. Instead, the approach taken is preventive,” said Alia.
Platforms must have a prior impact assessment. Then, if there is disinformation, there must be transparency regarding the recommendation system used by the platform to recommend content on social media.
This is because, as Alia explained, what often increases the virality of disinformation content, including manipulated photos/videos and manipulated personal data, is actually social media algorithms that connect people who are considered to have an interest in such content. For example, content that sexualizes women and the like.
“So the approach is not just takedown. Although takedown in the context of online gender-based violence is still needed,” she said.
However, at the same time, Alia emphasized that we also need to have preventive measures in place. For example, when content is uploaded, it does not immediately go viral, so that victims can request takedowns. Unfortunately, these approaches are not yet included in the current ITE Law, which still uses a criminalization approach.
So far, requests for takedowns of certain content are still very difficult to carry out. This is because regulations or rights related to takedowns are only regulated in the TPKS Law. So, for the first time, KBGO is regulated in the TPKS law. That way, there is a legal basis. Based on the criminalization of KBGO, victims are then given rights.
These rights are regulated in more detail in the latest Government Regulation related to the implementation of the TPKS Law. One of the articles regulates the right to delete KSBE content. Because this regulation is still new, its implementation is still ongoing.
However, there is currently a lot of confusion as to whether we must first report the case to the police in order to exercise this right. Only then will there be legal recognition that we are victims of KSBE. After that, we can obtain our rights. But this is not actually the case. Regardless of whether the victim wants to report it to the police or not, this right should be given to the victim.
In addition to the TPKS Law, we can also use the Personal Data Protection Law (PDP) for deepfake cases. The PDP Law regulates the right to delete and the right to restrict the processing of personal data. We can use these rights when photos or videos that have been manipulated with AI technology are disseminated on social media. This is because we have the right to delete our personal data.
However, similar to the TPKS Law, the implementation of the PDP Law is also very difficult. Alia explained that this situation is due to the fact that the implementing regulations, namely the government regulations, have not been ratified. In addition, the institution that oversees the implementation of the PDP Law, namely the Personal Data Protection Agency, has not yet been established.
“It has been more than two years since the deadline for establishing this agency, but it still does not exist,” said Alia.
An important point regarding platform responsibility is the need for preventive regulations. Alia emphasized that this prevention must be systemic because KBGO and disinformation are systemic problems.
“There must be regulations that target the accountability of platforms more broadly. Likewise, the right to takedown is not enough if it only regulates takedowns. It must be complemented by many other things,” she explained.
For example, the obligation to employ content moderators who can speak Indonesian. According to Alia, this is important because many content moderator positions are filled by foreigners who do not understand the Indonesian context. Moreover, a lot of disinformation uses local languages.
“Languages such as lonte and so on, if the content moderators are not Indonesian, they probably won’t be able to understand the nuances and context. So this is also important to regulate. Content moderators must be able to speak Indonesian and understand the context related to Indonesia,” she explained.
According to Alia, the reluctance of platforms to take preventive measures despite the emergence of many cases cannot be separated from the business model of the platforms themselves. This is because social media profits from high engagement.
Therefore, platforms have no incentive to implement such measures. For this reason, Alia believes it is important to enforce legal obligations that compel platforms to be aware of the legal consequences of non-compliance with these regulations.
Konde.co has attempted to contact the digital platforms Meta and Google to request information regarding their policies in anticipating KBGO and KSBE, but no response has been received as of the publication of this article.
Said Niam himself said that he does not really question the presence of AI technology in general. According to him, technology from time to time certainly has its good and bad sides. The most important thing is to set limits and regulations on the potential misuse of this technology. For example, photo and video manipulation can already be considered a criminal offense that must be dealt with firmly by law instead of being a case that can be mediated.
“Photo manipulation and photo editing cannot be considered simple cases or cases that can be mediated. But this is a serious criminal case.”
Konde.co has also contacted the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs (Komdigi) regarding gender-based security in the digital space, but the relevant parties have only agreed to an interview request for the following week.
A series of critiques and evaluations emphasize that the challenges of KBGO are not only about technology, but also politics, ethics, and partisanship. Without responsive law enforcement, adequate capacity of officials, strong victim recovery mechanisms, and equitable digital literacy, women will continue to be vulnerable in the digital space.
For the digital space to once again become a safe and equitable space, synergy between the state, digital platforms, civil society, and the victims themselves is imperative. Technology should not be a source of new vulnerabilities, but rather a tool to strengthen women’s rights, dignity, and agency in controlling their narratives and identities.
(This coverage is part of a Special Edition of the #StopMisoginiTeknologi series, a collaboration between Konde.co and Kabar Makassar, supported by BBC Media Action.)
(Translator: Theresia Pratiwi Elingsetyo Sanubari)
Anita Dhewy, Luthfi Maulana Adhari, dan Salsabila Putri Pertiwi
Republikasi artikel ini, klik tombol di bawah
Let's share!
latest news
latest news
popular
Yuk, Menulis di Konde.co
Kami memanggil kamu yang peduli dengan penguatan narasi yang berperspektif perempuan dan kelompok marjinal di media untuk menulis di Konde.co. Dengan mengirim tulisan ke Konde.co, kamu juga turut mendukung jurnalisme publik Konde.co bisa terus hidup.