Violência de gênero e a exposição de imagens íntimas na internet: a jurisprudência do TJ/AL acerca da pornografia de vingança

Abstract

This work aimed to analyze the practice of non-consensual dissemination of intimate images, discussing the characterization of this behavior as a product of contemporary gender violence with roots and consequences explained from the perspective of gender inequality inherent to the Western patriarchal model. Material was collected from the judgments of the Court of Justice of Alagoas in order to verify the position of second instance judges regarding litigated cases and the judicial treatment given to the victims, assessing to what extent the arguments used to support the opinions of the rapporteurs highlight gender violence and/or produce revictimization of women within the judiciary. The resulting judgments were examined using Norman Fairclough's Critical Discourse Analysis methodology to locate the objective and subjective elements of the text of the delivered opinions and to identify the variants of understanding and interpretation of the argumentative language used, based on a critical view of the profiles of the agents who communicate these discourses and of the social scenario in which they are found. The analyzed results demonstrate that the local Judiciary presents itself as minimally updated and coherent regarding the need for legal adequacy to judge behaviors typical of technological advances in the realm of revenge pornography. The justifications of the collected judgments express a tendency of the judges to avoid subjective elements in their argumentation, which consequently contributes to the neutralization of sexist discourses in the opinions. This result can and should be used as a benchmark for the posture of the Court of Justice of Alagoas; however, this conclusion must be seen as a sign of mild evolution of the Alagoas judiciary, still far from being an adequate and effective legal response to the crime of revenge pornography and its consequences.