THE GENDERED DIMENSIONS OF AI-DRIVEN SECURITY

Authors

  • Muskan Moazzam
  • Haris Bilal Malik

Keywords:

AI Security, Gender Bias, Feminist International Relation's Theory, Cybersecurity, Surveillance

Abstract

This chapter is a critical analysis of the implications of AI-based security systems on gender and power. It states that so-called neutral technologies in fact carry and enhance the previous prejudices. In all parts of the world, AI is employed in national defense, and domestic surveillance, but it remains a reflection of the values and the blind spots of the developers. Algorithms and policies tend to be quite militarized and state-focused in the security sphere, disregarding the daily requirements of women and the marginalized populations. We integrate feminist international relations theory and new work on AI and cybersecurity to demonstrate that the existing systems do not often pose the question of “whose security is at stake”? or “if the security of the most vulnerable groups is ensured?” Facial-recognition technology, as an example, is much less effective with women and dark skinned individuals. Females are the disproportionate victims of online harassment and doxxing. Even protective measures, such as CCTV in women’s shelters, frequently become new avenues on which abuse of surveillance is exercised. The Global South particularly is affected by this issue, as the gendered digital inequalities and imported, uniform (“one-size fits all”) cyber policies exacerbate underlying actual disparities in the offline world. Using an intersectional feminist lens, we argue that “security” must be redefined as empowerment rather than control. Co-created policies should embed inclusion, dignity, transparency, and accountability into AI and cyber-governance. Practical principles include gender‐aware threat models, diverse decision-making teams, South-South collaboration, and proactive digital inclusion. We conclude that feminist approaches do not weaken security; they strengthen it by making systems more just, humane, and resilient to the needs of those historically at risk.

References

Association for Progressive Communications. (2020). Technology-facilitated gender-based violence: Making rights and realities visible. Association for Progressive Communications.

Barocas, S., & Selbst, A. D. (2016). Big data's disparate impact. California Law Review, 104(3), 671–732.

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim code. Polity Press.

Bolukbasi, T., Chang, K.-W., Zou, J. Y., Saligrama, V., & Kalai, A. T. (2016). Man is to computer programmer as woman is to homemaker? Debiasing word embeddings. In D. D. Lee, M. Sugiyama, U. Luxburg, I. Guyon, & R. Garnett (Eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (Vol. 29). Curran Associates.

Brown, D., & Pytlak, A. (2020). Why gender matters in international cyber security. Women's International League for Peace and Freedom & Association for Progressive Communications.

Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. In Proceedings of Machine Learning Research (Vol. 81, pp. 77–91).

Cockburn, C. (2004). The continuum of violence: A gender perspective on war and peace. Women's Studies International Forum, 27(1), 24–29.

Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139–167.

Crawford, K. (2021). Atlas of AI: Power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. Yale University Press.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.

Enloe, C. (2014). Bananas, beaches and bases: Making feminist sense of international politics (2nd ed.). University of California Press.

Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin's Press.

European Commission. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Publications Office of the European Union.

Ferl, A.-K., & Perras, C. (2024). Beyond the code: Unveiling gender dynamics in AI and cybersecurity for international security (PRIF Spotlight No. 2/2024). Peace Research Institute Frankfurt.

GSMA. (2024). The mobile gender gap report 2024. GSMA.

Hudson, H. (2005). 'Doing' security as though humans matter: A feminist perspective on gender and the politics of human security. Security Dialogue, 36(2), 155–174.

International Telecommunication Union. (2023). Facts and figures 2023. International Telecommunication Union.

ISC². (2023). 2023 cybersecurity workforce study. ISC².

National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2023). Artificial intelligence risk management framework (AI RMF 1.0) (NIST AI 100-1). U.S. Department of Commerce.

Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York University Press.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2022). The right to privacy in the digital age. United Nations.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). OECD principles on artificial intelligence. OECD Publishing.

Privacy International. (2021). Safe cities or surveillance cities? The impact of surveillance technologies on women and marginalized communities. Privacy International.

Richardson, R., Schultz, J., & Crawford, K. (2019). Dirty data, bad predictions: How civil rights violations impact police data, predictive policing systems, and justice. New York University Law Review Online, 94, 192–233.

Scharre, P. (2018). Army of none: Autonomous weapons and the future of war. W. W. Norton.

Sjoberg, L. (Ed.). (2010). Gender and international security: Feminist perspectives. Routledge.

Thompson, L., & Clement, R. (2019). Defining feminist foreign policy. International Center for Research on Women.

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2023). Digital economy report 2023. United Nations.

United Nations Development Programme. (1994). Human development report 1994: New dimensions of human security. Oxford University Press.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2021). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. UNESCO.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2024). Challenging systematic prejudices: An investigation into bias against women and girls in large language models. UNESCO.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2022). Global trends: Forced displacement in 2022. UNHCR.

United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. (2023). Gender perspectives in international cyber policy. UNIDIR.

United Nations Security Council. (2000). Resolution 1325 (2000): Women, peace and security. United Nations.

UN Women. (2023). Technology-facilitated violence against women: Global perspectives and policy responses. UN Women.

World Bank. (2023). World development report 2023: Migrants, refugees, and societies. World Bank.

Downloads

Published

2026-07-30

How to Cite

Moazzam, M., & Malik, H. B. (2026). THE GENDERED DIMENSIONS OF AI-DRIVEN SECURITY. Cyberpolitik Journal, 11(21), 2-19. Retrieved from http://cyberpolitikjournal.org/index.php/main/article/view/275

Issue

Section

Research Articles