This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/06/governments-are-spying-on-our-sexual-lives-will-we-tolerate-it

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Governments are spying on our sexual lives. Will we tolerate it? Governments are spying on our sexual lives. Will we tolerate it?
(6 months later)
The Guardian recently published yet The Guardian recently published yet another disturbing revelation from files supplied by state-surveillance whistleblower Edward Snowden.
another disturbing revelation from files supplied by state-surveillance Co-ordinated by British intelligence service GCHQ as a partner of the Five Eyes alliance of spying nations (which include the USA, Canada, New Zealand and Australia), from 2008 until at least 2012 a surveillance programme named Optic Nerve has been screencapping and storing images of webcam chats from Yahoo’s servers. Snowden’s files reveal the images were harvested in bulk from millions of ordinary Yahoo users who were not suspected of wrongdoing, and were not intelligence targets. In a single six-month period, the agency siphoned webcam images from more than 1.8m global Yahoo user accounts.
whistleblower Edward Snowden. Yahoo is apparently furious. They’ve denied any knowledge of the Optic Nerve programme, accusing the agencies of “a whole new level of violation of our users’ privacy”.
Co-ordinated by British intelligence service But the surprises are not limited to one side. The collected webcam imagery apparently contained “substantial quantities of sexually explicit communications”. With stupendous naiveté, the GCHQ documents declare:
GCHQ as a partner of the Five Eyes alliance of spying nations Unfortunately … it would appear that a surprising number of people use webcam conversations to show intimate parts of their body to the other person... (and) it appears sometimes to be used for broadcasting pornography.
(which include the USA, Canada, New Zealand and Australia), from 2008 until at If the spooks are genuinely surprised that webcams are being used in sexual conversations, they clearly are spending too much time at the office spying on people rather than talking to their friends, reading Cosmopolitan, or, well, using a webcam.
least 2012 a surveillance programme named Optic Nerve has been screencapping As the nature of work, travel and education has globalised, so, too, has the structure of intimate personal relationships. Digital communication technologies have provided a means for adult relationships that are denied the tactility of proximity to establish, at least, audio and visual explicitness in an ongoing intimate dialogue.
and storing images of webcam chats from Yahoo’s servers. Snowden’s files reveal This is no marginal activity, either; recent pieces in glossy magazines have featured burlesque artists advising women how to “spice up” their webcam conversations with sexy outfits and strip routines. Sexual contact webcam is an unremarkable assumption of long distance relationships. Amidst online dating and internet hookup cultures, webcam conversations can also play a role in facilitating early courtship or exploring anonymous pleasures with maximum safety.
the images were harvested in bulk from millions of ordinary Yahoo users who The intrusion of the state’s prying eyes into this particular arena of human intimacy is yet another reason to express the greatest possible civic outrage against “dataveillance”, its agents and sponsors. The Yahoo spying not only compromises each individual whose “intimate parts of their body” that Snowden’s documents reveal have been examined, assessed and collated by government employees, but compromises that powerful and necessary role that privacy – particularly sexual privacy – plays in personal development and individual agency.
were not suspected of wrongdoing, and were not intelligence targets. In a single six-month period, the Who we are and how we function as adults within society is intersectional with the identity we develop as the result of our intimate experiences, the sexual boundaries we choose, and the personas with which we experiment. We are as socially confident as citizens as we are sexually integrated as individuals – and this is precisely why every authoritarian society in history has policed sexual behaviour, from the enforced celibacy of the Catholic Church, to the neo-Puritanism of the American right, to female genital mutilation in patriarchal communities, the Third Reich’s attempt at exterminating LGBTQ people, and Mao’s Little Red Book recommendation to lie back and think of the People’s Republic (but only once a fortnight).
agency siphoned webcam images from more than 1.8m global Yahoo Our intimate conversations, too, exist as parallel societies. The great boon of the webcam for heterosexual women, in particular, is that sexual performance can be negotiated beyond the paradigm of physical presence, or pressure, or real or imagined threat; a woman commences a webcam session confident in the knowledge that she can safely conclude her encounter at any time. This sense of personal control is no doubt one of the reasons that a broader sexual culture has sprung up around webcam use: using it, the adult performance of sexuality appears both expressive and safe and becomes a powerful means of self-realisation that we carry out with us into the wider world.
user accounts. The compromise of this agency by the Five Eyes spies – and the creation of a generation of people who, as Yahoo users, now have the explicit performance of their intimate secrets in government possession – neatly attunes to the tradition of authoritarian sexual oppression.
Yahoo is apparently furious. They’ve denied Five Eyes is, of course, perfectly metaphoric for the Panopticon – a prison designed by Jeremy Bentham on the principle that prisoners aware they were constantly under surveillance would eventually just presume surveillance and therefore automatically police themselves. Philosopher Michel Foucault employed the Panopticon in his book Discipline and Punish as an analogy of state power: and as we now must consider the potential oversight of the state as we reach for the webcam button to talk to our overseas boyfriends, Foucault’s explanation of “the function of discipline as an apparatus of power” is something that could and should be on our minds.
any knowledge of the Optic Nerve programme, accusing the agencies of “a whole new Governments have explained the violation of their electorate’s privacy as a necessary abrogation of civic rights in the fight against global terrorism. But with Snowden’s revelations proving the Obama administration’s own January 2014 review findings that not “a single instance” in which electronic eavesdropping “made a concrete difference in the outcome of a terrorism investigation”, it is time to remind ourselves that Americans alone are 4,706 times more likely to drink themselves to death than be killed by terrorists.
level of violation of our users’ privacy”. As citizens of a sexually violated democracy, far more important than the war against terror is the fight against our own governments to turn off the data taps.
But the surprises are not limited to one side.
The collected webcam imagery apparently
contained “substantial quantities of sexually explicit
communications”. With stupendous naiveté, the GCHQ documents declare:
Unfortunately … it would appear that a surprising number of
people use webcam conversations to show intimate parts of their body to the
other person... (and) it appears sometimes to be used for
broadcasting pornography.
If the spooks are genuinely surprised
that webcams are being used in sexual conversations, they clearly are spending
too much time at the office spying on people rather than talking to their
friends, reading Cosmopolitan, or, well, using a webcam.
As the nature of
work, travel and education has globalised, so, too, has the structure of
intimate personal relationships. Digital communication technologies have
provided a means for adult relationships that are denied the tactility of
proximity to establish, at least, audio and visual explicitness in an ongoing
intimate dialogue.
This is no marginal activity, either; recent pieces in
glossy magazines have featured burlesque artists advising women how to
“spice up” their webcam conversations with sexy outfits and strip
routines. Sexual contact webcam is an unremarkable assumption of long distance
relationships. Amidst online dating and internet hookup cultures, webcam
conversations can also play a role in facilitating early courtship or exploring
anonymous pleasures with maximum safety.
The intrusion of the state’s prying eyes into
this particular arena of human intimacy is yet another reason to express the
greatest possible civic outrage against “dataveillance”, its agents
and sponsors. The Yahoo spying not only compromises each individual whose
“intimate parts of their body” that Snowden’s documents reveal have
been examined, assessed and collated by government employees, but compromises
that powerful and necessary role that privacy – particularly sexual privacy – plays in personal development and individual agency.
Who we are and how we
function as adults within society is intersectional with the identity we
develop as the result of our intimate experiences, the sexual boundaries we
choose, and the personas with which we experiment. We are as socially confident
as citizens as we are sexually integrated as individuals – and this is
precisely why every authoritarian society in history has policed sexual
behaviour, from the enforced celibacy of the Catholic Church, to the
neo-Puritanism of the American right, to female genital mutilation in patriarchal communities, the Third Reich’s attempt at exterminating LGBTQ
people, and Mao’s Little Red Book recommendation to lie back and think of the
People’s Republic (but only once a fortnight).
Our intimate conversations, too, exist as
parallel societies. The great boon of the webcam for heterosexual
women, in particular, is that sexual performance can be negotiated beyond the
paradigm of physical presence, or pressure, or real or imagined threat; a woman
commences a webcam session confident in the knowledge that she can safely
conclude her encounter at any time. This sense of personal control is no doubt
one of the reasons that a broader sexual culture has sprung up around webcam
use: using it, the adult performance of sexuality appears both expressive and safe and becomes a powerful means of
self-realisation that we carry out with us into the wider world.
The compromise of this agency by the Five
Eyes spies – and the creation of a generation of people who, as Yahoo
users, now have the explicit performance of their intimate secrets in
government possession – neatly attunes to the tradition of authoritarian sexual
oppression.
Five Eyes is, of course, perfectly metaphoric for the Panopticon – a prison designed by Jeremy Bentham on the principle
that prisoners aware they were constantly under surveillance would eventually
just presume surveillance and therefore automatically police themselves.
Philosopher Michel Foucault employed the Panopticon in his book Discipline and
Punish as an analogy of state power: and as we now must consider the potential
oversight of the state as we reach for the webcam button to talk to our
overseas boyfriends, Foucault’s explanation of “the function of discipline as an apparatus of
power” is something that could and should be on
our minds.
Governments have explained the violation of their electorate’s privacy as a
necessary abrogation of civic rights in the fight against global terrorism. But
with Snowden’s revelations proving the Obama administration’s own January 2014
review findings that not “a single instance” in which electronic
eavesdropping “made a concrete difference in the outcome of a terrorism
investigation”, it is time to remind ourselves that Americans alone are
4,706 times more likely to drink themselves to death than be killed by
terrorists.
As citizens of a sexually violated democracy, far more important
than the war against terror is the fight against our own governments to turn
off the data taps.