Privacy, messaging, and tech: One man's dystopia is another woman's reality

A Margaret Atwood moment

For thousands of years, women have used informal networks to support each other. The modern twist is that technology is upping the ante in a cat-and-mouse game around personal freedom, government control, and surveillance.

I’ve been thinking about how women can access and build safer networks, the kind that don’t depend on platforms that profit from user data, encourage and tolerate misogyny, or cave under political pressure.

My curiosity led me to a local meetup, part of PubKey’s collab with the Human Rights Foundation, about decentralized social media. The topic was Nostr, a censorship-resistant protocol (kind of like a set of rules), similar in function to X but designed to give users more control and to avoid centralized control or censorship.

It was a long session, but interesting. Knowing how valuable worst-case scenario planning can be when the worst case happens, I asked about what proactive measures vulnerable populations might take to build connections in anticipation of a potential government crackdown (at around 1:25)

The speaker reframed my question in the context of a “dystopian” future, as if to distance it from the presentation's main topic (which, if you remember, was human rights, surveillance, and tech).

And he used the word “dystopian” again when I followed up after the talk.

I guess he doesn’t know any women in Texas. Or immigrant children, either.

For the record, when I pointed out that pockets of what he calls a dystopian future actually exist today in Texas (and other states following its lead), several women in the audience chimed in with “exactly”. It was a Margaret Atwood moment.

Privacy-focused alternatives for messaging and social media

Signal is a messaging app known for higher levels of privacy and security than texting or social media messaging. It secures messages and calls (using end-to-end encryption) and stores almost no user data. Users should know that there are apps that may enable access to Signal messages stored on phones.

WhatsApp is very popular, especially in India, Brazil, Mexico, and other countries. It built a large following, in part, because of its privacy features. When I lived in Mexico, all transactions to rent an apartment (except for signing the lease) took place over WhatsApp. However, WhatsApp is now owned by Meta (Facebook) and collects some metadata. Think of it this way - we can trust WhatsApp about as much as we trust Facebook.

Telegram is also popular outside the US and with the Web3 crowd. It’s not known to be as tamper-resistant as Signal; its advantage is that you can host huge messaging groups - up to 200,000 members, much more than Signal or WhatsApp communities.

Beyond messaging, what about social media? BlueSky is a social media platform that emphasizes transparency and user control. Bluesky Social is structured as a Public Benefit Corporation (PBC), primarily owned by its CEO, Jay Graber, the leadership team, and employees, rather than being controlled by a single large corporation. As a PBC, BlueSky prioritizes public benefit and user privacy over corporate profit motives. I haven’t explored it in depth yet, but I’m very curious.

Are you a woman who uses Signal or BlueSky? If so, I’d love to learn more about your experience. Just send me a DM and we’ll connect.

Thank you for reading.

Join us on Instagram.

Disclaimer:

All material in this publication has been prepared for informational purposes only and should not be interpreted as professional or financial advice. Please seek independent legal, financial, tax, or other advice specific to your particular situation. All opinions, unless otherwise noted, are the author’s own.