In the realm of the internet, the phenomenon of cyber stalking is fairly new and there is a blurred line in what constitutes it. Cyber stalking (similar to offline stalking) stems from the power, control and anger which may have been triggered by the victim’s actions or inactions (Ahlgrim, 2015).
In terms of cyber stalking cases, there is a pattern where stalkers behave in a dramatic fashion. This could potentially be because the stalkers are not in a physical proximity to their victims and their ease of concealing their identity on the Internet (Ménard & Pincus, 2012). Interestingly enough, studies constantly found females to be the victims of cyber stalking, whilst males to be the stalkers. However, when it comes to the differences between female and male stalkers, the level of violence imposed were similar (Finkelhor, 2014).
According to Yadav and Srivastava (2014), there is a category of cyber stalkers, ranging from the rejected stalker to predatory stalker.
In my own experience, the rejected stalker is quite popular, where the person would begin to stalk their victim — their ex-partner. If you’re someone who’s recently had a fallout with your partner, you’d be most likely guilty of this. This is almost a norm of the internet, where you would see an abundance of memes and such relating to this. This type of stalking may seem harmless, however there have been instances where it would reach extremes such as the stalker becoming apprehended. Because as a matter of fact, it still constitutes as stalking (Yadav & Srivastava, 2014). This is where the limitations of cyber stalking lie.
And of course, we have cases such as the predatory stalker. This is something which the community is becoming aware of, especially when parents are beginning to advise their children of such people online. This is when the person would stalk in a premeditated scheme to attack their victim, focusing on a sexual attack. Predatory stalkers seem to focus on victims whom are minors and oblivious to the dangers of the internet (Yadav & Srivastava, 2014). With up to 10 million children having open access to the Internet merely in the United States, the Internet is a cyber playground for paedophilic predatory stalkers. According to Barbor (2017), 1 in 5 children of the United States are solicited for sex on the Internet.
Following this notion, cyber stalking has evidently reached a peak. There is an infamous website called wwww.payback.com, which allows the stalker to send anonymous emails through the site. It purposely conceals and protects the stalker’s name and personal information and allows them to embark on their own personal vendettas (Pittaro, 2007). I’m sure many of us have been wronged, in instances where we would want some sort of revenge. The ease of websites such as this can easily lure an individual into cyber stalking.
It is safe to say the Internet is imbedded into every aspect of our lives, thus the opportunity to victimise is almost inevitably increasing.
References
1. Ahlgrim, B. (2015). Cyber Stalking: Impact of Gender, Cyber Stalker-Victim Relationship, and Proximity (Master Thesis). Retrieved from https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Cyber_Stalking.html?id=sD7CDAEACAAJ&redir_esc=y
2. Barbor, M. (2017, October 25). Cyberstalking: 1 in 5 US Children Solicited for Sex Online. Medscape. Retrieved from https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/887592
3. Finkelhor, D. (2014). Commentary: Cause For Alarm? Youth & Internet Risk Research — A Commentary on Livingstone & Smith. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55(6), 655–658.
4. Ménard, K., & Pincus, A. (2012). Predicting Overt and Cyber Stalking Perpetration by Male & Female College Students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(11), 2183–2207.
5. Pittaro, M. (2007). Cyber Stalking: An Analysis of Online Harassment and Intimidation. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 1(2), 180–197.
6. Yadav, S., & Srivastava, A. (2014). Cyber Stalking: A Nuisance to the Information Technology. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science, 5(8), 98–100.
