How female candidates faced cyberbullying during DUCSU election
Many consider the Dhaka University Central Students’ Union (DUCSU) election to be a reflection of national politics. For many of the country’s political leaders, the DUCSU election has been the starting point, and its outcomes often influence national political trends. With the national election approaching, this study examines how female candidates in the DUCSU election were subjected to online abuse, hate, and harassment. Their experiences may serve as an early warning for women candidates in the upcoming national polls.
In this article, certain slurs and derogatory expressions directed toward women on social media have been used verbatim without censoring despite their offending nature. This has been done to accurately convey the language and nature of online violence within the research context, ensuring that meaning and context are not distorted.
Several female candidates reported that during the Dhaka University Central Students’ Union (DUCSU) election campaign, they were subjected to gender-based hate speech, personal attacks, character assassination, and sexually harassing remarks on social media. Some were mocked or insulted for their physical appearance, while others faced ridicule and derogatory comments because of their ethnic identity. In some cases, deepfake videos were circulated; others received threats of sexual violence. This research by Dismislab examines the forms of online harassment experienced by female candidates surrounding the DUCSU election.
For the study, five prominent female candidates were selected who had, at various times, publicly shared–through the media or their own social media accounts–their experiences of cyber harassment. They are: Umama Fatema, vice president (VP) candidate from the Swadhin Shikkharthi Oikya (Independent Students’ Unity) panel; Sheikh Tasnim Afroz (Emi), VP candidate from the left-leaning Protirodh Parishad (Resistance Council) panel; Fatima Tasnim Zuma, candidate for the post of Secretary for the Liberation War and Democratic Movements from the Oikkoboddho Shikkharthi Jote (United Students’ Alliance) panel supported by Islami Chhatra Shibir; B. M. Fahmida Alam, candidate from the left-leaning Aparajeyo 71 and Adommo 24 (Invincible 71 and Indomitable 24) alliance; and Hema Chakma, candidate for the member position from the Protirodh Parishad panel.
To examine the nature of harassment directed at these female candidates online, Dismislab conducted searches on Facebook for each candidate’s name on September 4–four days before the DUCSU election–and collected the first 100 posts that appeared. These posts included news reports, campaign materials, opinion polls, and personal remarks or analyses expressing support for or opposition to different panels and candidates. Dismislab then analyzed these posts and the accompanying comments to determine whether they contained elements of hate or hostility. If even a single comment under a post exhibited such content, the entire post was categorized as a “problematic post.” Subsequently, all comments under these posts were collected and analyzed to assess what percentage of comments directed at each candidate were hateful and to identify the specific forms of attacks contained in them. (See details in: Research Methodology below.)
Overall analysis
According to Dismislab’s findings, among the 500 Facebook posts collected about the five candidates, 22 percent (110 posts) contained elements of hate or harassment, either in the post itself or in the comments section. Of the total 13,674 comments under these 22 percent of posts, 24 percent (3,281) were classified as hateful or harassing.
Out of the 110 problematic posts, 16.4 percent contained hate or harassment within the post itself, 80.9 percent had problematic comments only, and 2.7 percent exhibited both problematic posts and comments.
The candidates who faced the highest levels of harassment were Fahmida Alam and Tasnim Afroz Emi. For Fahmida Alam, a candidate from the Aparajeyo 71 and Adommo 24 panel, 39 percent of the 3,983 comments under her posts were identified as hateful. In the case of Tasnim Afroz Emi, the vice president (VP) candidate from the Protirodh Parishad panel, 38 percent of comments contained hate or harassment. The lowest proportion of hateful comments was found for Fatima Tasnim Zuma, the candidate from the Oikkoboddho Shikkharthi Jote panel supported by Islami Chhatra Shibir, with only 4 percent of comments categorized as hate-filled.
Dismislab categorized the hateful and harassing remarks into six distinct types:
- Gender- and sexuality-based slurs and insults
- Insults targeting physical appearance or clothing
- General insults and abusive language
- Ideologically motivated denigration and disparagement
- Stereotype-based or collective insults
- Threats and incitement to violence
The analysis found that each candidate was subjected to different types of hate depending on their personal or social characteristics. However, collectively, the most prevalent category was stereotyping comments–that is, insults based on widely held but oversimplified and often false or negative beliefs about the behavior or traits of a particular group (such as ethnicity, religion, or gender).
For example, candidates affiliated with left-leaning politics were targeted with remarks suggesting that they “do not bathe regularly,” “have body odor,” or “are drug addicts.” These comments echo the entrenched negative stereotypes surrounding leftist political groups. Such stereotype-based remarks accounted for about 32 percent of all hate-related comments.
Next in frequency was gender- and sexuality-based slurs and insults, which accounted for about 31 percent. Examples include gendered epithets such as patita or beshya (Bangla terms used to call a woman a prostitute), whose principal purpose is to defame a woman’s character and demean her. The category also sometimes included expressions that cast doubt on a woman’s gender identity or labeled her as belonging to a “third gender.”
The third-largest category–found in approximately 18 percent of the comments–was general swearing and insulting language. This included comparisons of a person to nonhuman animals, use of obscene words, or insults expressed through a variety of negative epithets. By contrast, about 15 percent of hateful comments were taunts or ridicule directed at a woman’s external and physical characteristics, clothing, hair, makeup, or age—i.e., body-shaming. These remarks demeaned candidates on the basis of their bodies, appearance, or dress.
The remaining two categories–ideologically motivated denigration and threats and incitement to violence–appeared at comparatively low rates: 2.3 percent and 2 percent, respectively. The “ideologically motivated denigration” category includes words and phrases that are not ordinary insults but are used to portray a person, an ideology, or a position in a negative, attacking way. The “threats and incitement to violence” category comprises comments that directly threaten or exhort violence or sexual violence: for example, “I will rape you,” “I will hit you with a shoe,” “I will kill you.” These are not merely hateful statements; they increase the risk of actual violence and create concrete safety threats for the targets of harassment.
Mocked for physical appearance: Umama Fatema
Umama Fatema, who contested for the vice president (VP) position from the Swadhin Shikkharthi Oikya (Independent Students’ Unity) panel in the DUCSU election, was subjected to online ridicule focused on her physical features. Known for her leading role in the July Movement and as a spokesperson for the anti-discremination student movement, she announced her withdrawal from that movement in June 2025. Following the start of her election campaign in the Dhaka University hall councils, she again faced a surge of cyber harassment.
Among the first 100 Facebook posts retrieved through a name search for Umama, 40 posts contained at least one hateful or harassing element, either in the post itself or in the comments below. Analysis of all the comments under these 40 posts revealed that 19 percent included hate speech or sexually harassing remarks.
In addition to hateful comments, there were offensive photo comments, abusive language, and gender-based harassment. The most frequent type of attack against Umama involved insults about her physical appearance or clothing (47%). Examples include remarks such as “Disgusting to look at those teeth 😐,” “What’s wrong with her teeth?” and “Why haven’t you fixed your teeth yet?”
The second most common category comprised gender- and sexuality-based slurs and insults (26%), while general abusive or insulting comments accounted for 16 percent of the total.
On Umama Fatema’s verified Facebook profile, even a post requesting prayers for success in the election drew sexually suggestive and violent comments. Under news reports about her in various media outlets, commenters also left insinuating remarks linking her with male political figures. On one of her own posts, a user wrote: “You want to be VP again? You’re Hasnat Sarjis’s dinner.”
In an interview with Dismislab, Umama said she viewed these attacks not as personal but as part of a broader, shared problem faced by female candidates in general. According to her, after she announced her candidacy, bot accounts began targeting her profile to reduce the reach of her personal Facebook account. Because she was running in an election, she had kept her comment section open, where abusive remarks appeared regularly. “People made demeaning comments about my facial expressions, gestures, and physical appearance–every aspect of me,” she said.
Referring to similar harassment faced by two female candidates from Islami Chhatra Shibir and female candidates from the Bangladesh Jatiyatabadi Chhatra Dal (BNP’s student wing), Umama asserted that these attacks were not isolated incidents but coordinated efforts. She claimed that even foreign bot accounts were used in a planned manner to reduce the visibility of her Facebook profile.
Umama further stated that she received no significant assistance from the university authorities, administration, or Facebook in addressing the harassment. “Most of the time,” she said, “it’s simply ignored.”
The most targeted with hate comments: Fahmida Alam
B. M. Fahmida Alam, candidate for Secretary of Liberation War and Democratic Movements from the Aparajeyo 71 and Adommo 24 panel, was found to be the most frequent target of hateful comments. During the DUCSU election, this left-leaning candidate legally challenged the nomination of S. M. Farhad, the general secretary (GS) candidate from the Oikkoboddho Shikkharthi Jote panel, which was supported by Islami Chhatra Shibir. In response, she became the target of extreme online sexual violence, including threats of “gang rape.”
Following media reports about Fahmida’s writ petition, a wave of hateful propaganda spread against her on social media. The hostility reached such an alarming level that a student named Ali Hossain posted on Facebook calling for a “gang rape procession” against her. The university administration later suspended Ali Hossain for six months.
According to Dismislab’s analysis, 19 percent of the posts about Fahmida contained hate or harassment either in the post itself or in its comments. Examination of the comments under these posts revealed that 39 percent were hateful or harassing in nature.
The majority of the hate directed at Fahmida Alam involved gender- and sexuality-based insults as well as other forms of abusive language. Many comments mocked her short hair and questioned her gender identity. Examples included: “Where’s your hair? Are you a boy or a girl?”, “Is that a woman or a man?”, and “Is that a son or a daughter?”
In a video report published by the Daily Samakal, Fahmida explained her legal challenge against S. M. Farhad’s nomination. The Facebook comments beneath that video contained obscene and slanderous language. One comment read: “Uttara residential hotel’s…” (offensive expression truncated). Fahmida’s short hair also made her a target of gender-based harassment, with some commenters writing that it was hard to tell whether she was “a man or a third-gender person.” Similar hateful comments appeared beneath another interview of hers published by Banglanews24.com. One user wrote: “She looks just like a man.” Another commented: “Give the Shahbagis a bath with soap.”
Speaking to The Business Standard about her experience of cyber harassment, Fahmida said, “At the time of filing the writ petition, the attacks were not limited to cyber abuse. I was threatened and subjected to various forms of inhumane behavior simply because I am a woman.” She added, “What if a male candidate had filed that petition? For women, such attacks tend to be more organized and relentless. Since that incident, I’ve been living in fear–these threats are no longer confined to the online space. I now worry about facing actual physical assault.”
Victim of character assassination and deepfake abuse: Fatima Tasnim Zuma
Fatima Tasnim Zuma, who contested and won in the DUCSU election from the Oikkoboddho Shikkharthi Jote (United Students’ Alliance) panel supported by Islami Chhatra Shibir, was subjected to severe cyber harassment during her campaign due to her political affiliation. In addition to facing threats of gang rape, she also became the target of AI-generated deepfake images created to defame her character.
According to Dismislab’s analysis, among the 100 Facebook posts related to Zuma, 15 posts contained various negative comments. However, when all comments under these posts were analyzed, hate speech or sexually suggestive remarks were found to be the lowest among all five candidates–just 4 percent.
These attacks were not confined to her political ideology or statements; they directly targeted her identity as a woman. The most common form of abuse against her was gender- and sexuality-based insults (66%). In one comment under a post from the Oikkoboddho Shikkharthi Jote page, she was described as “the dancing girl of the brothel and Sadiq Kayem Farhad’s dinner.”
Under news reports from various media outlets, commenters wrote equally demeaning remarks such as “Shibir’s dinner,” “Shibir’s maid,” “Jashir’s sex slave,” and “the Shibir version of Mia Khalifa” (referring to a pornographic actress). These remarks were part of a deliberate attempt to degrade and sexually humiliate Zuma in the public sphere.
Online harassment has also become a serious source of personal anxiety for Fatima Tasnim Zuma. In an interview with Dismislab, she said, “If someone threatens me with gang rape online or threatens my family, of course that affects me personally. I feel unsafe.” The threats became so severe, she recounted, that her parents were forced to leave their village and move to Dhaka before the DUCSU election out of fear for her safety.
The attacks took on a new dimension when artificial intelligence (AI) was used to circulate manipulated images of her. Dismislab’s analysis of comments also revealed the spread of such edited pictures. Zuma said, “They made deepfakes of me. They even created obscene videos merging my face with those of my colleagues. For people who don’t understand AI, I have no way to convince them that those videos aren’t real.”
Zuma believes these attacks were not isolated incidents but rather part of a “coordinated campaign.” In her words, “Everyone belongs to different political panels, but when they attack me, they become united. They’re very deliberate about who says what.”
She also stated that she received no institutional or legal protection. According to Zuma, the university administration avoided responsibility, claiming the matter was beyond its jurisdiction. The general diary (GD) she filed with the police saw no progress, and even after reporting the manipulated images to Facebook and Meta, she said they were not removed.
Zuma further alleged that her calls for all political panels to unite against cyberbullying went unanswered. “Being subjected to this abuse is deeply traumatizing for us,” she said. “But others aren’t interested in taking a stand because avoiding it serves their political interests.”
Targeted for ethnic identity: Hema Chakma
In the DUCSU and hall council elections, seven left-leaning student organizations united to form the Protirodh Parishad (Resistance Council). Hema Chakma, a candidate from this panel, was elected as a central executive member.
According to Dismislab’s analysis, Hema was particularly targeted online for multiple reasons: being a woman, her ethnic identity, her previous position as a subcultural secretary in the Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL), and her involvement in left-wing politics. Additionally, she became a topic of heated discussion on social media after posting a controversial comment about Fatima Tasnim Zuma, the Liberation War and Democratic Movements Secretary candidate from the Oikkoboddho Shikkharthi Jote panel.
Among the 100 Facebook posts analyzed about Hema Chakma, 21 percent contained various forms of hateful remarks. Further analysis of the comments under those posts revealed that 17 percent were classified as hate speech.
Like the other candidates, Hema Chakma also faced sexual harassment and gender-based hate speech online. In the comments under a video report by ATN Bangla News, one user wrote: “You shout so loudly–are you, in the end, the Bengalis’ dinner for the night?”
Hema herself has spoken publicly about the online attacks she has faced. In a post on her verified Facebook profile, she mentioned that since announcing her candidacy, she had been receiving abusive messages, obscene texts, and derogatory remarks in her inbox. In an interview with Dismislab, she said, “The kinds of insults usually directed at women are being thrown at me. They’re even making memes about me.”
Speaking about her experience of online insecurity, Hema said, “I feel unsafe online. My comment privacy was public before, but I’ve now changed it to friends-only. I’ve also received death threats–messages saying things like, ‘Wherever I find you, I’ll ruin you.’ I can’t always have someone accompany me; I often have to move around alone. That’s what worries me the most.”
In Hema Chakma’s case, ethnic identity emerged as a major trigger for targeted abuse. Many of the comments directed at her contained explicitly ethnic and xenophobic attacks. For example: “This girl supports hill terrorists and hates Bengalis and the army.” Others wrote, “They are anti-national,” or “These tribal people are traitors; if the government fails to control them, it will have to pay the price.”
Hema believes that her ethnic background intensified the harassment many times over. In her words: “Because I’m a girl from the hills, the harassment becomes even more severe. Whenever I take part in any movement, I’m immediately branded a traitor or a rebel.” What she found most distressing, however, was receiving a direct ethnic and sexual threat from another Dhaka University student.
Explaining why she did not seek legal recourse, Hema said, “In this country, seeking justice means breaking a convention. How many times can I go?” While her fellow activists provided moral support, she said she received no institutional assistance.
On her decision not to pursue formal remedies, Hema remarked: “I didn’t seek redress because here, when you demand justice, you’re repeatedly pushed back. The university issued strict directives against cyberbullying, yet it continues. If I file a complaint now, there won’t be justice; instead, my campaign will suffer. I didn’t get any help from the administration. In Bangladesh’s context, facing these kinds of attacks is our fate.”
Targeted for leftist affiliation: Sheikh Tasnim Afroz (Emi)
Sheikh Tasnim Afroz (Emi) contested in this year’s DUCSU election as the vice president (VP) candidate from the Protirodh Parishad (Resistance Council) panel. She had previously served as the VP of Shamsunnahar Hall Students’ Union in the 2019 DUCSU election. On August 12, 2025, Emi announced her candidacy for the DUCSU election through a post on her Facebook profile. Soon afterward, she began facing cyber harassment–targeted both at her as a woman and because of her association with left-wing politics.
According to Dismislab’s analysis, 15 percent of the posts related to Emi contained hateful remarks. When all comments under those posts were examined, 38 percent were found to include hate speech or harassing content.
Most of these negative comments stemmed from prejudice against leftist politics. The remarks reflected long-standing stereotypes that portray leftists as unclean, drug users, or socially deviant. Examples included statements such as “A bunch of junkies” and “Look at the state of them under the influence of weed 🙄.”
These comments not only mocked her political affiliation but also reinforced broader social stigmas surrounding leftist activists, amplifying both ideological and gender-based hostility against Emi.
Emi also faced age-related ridicule and sexually explicit abuse online. Many commenters mocked her by implying that she was older than typical student candidates, calling her “Nani” (grandmother), “Khalamma” (aunt), or “Mother of the students.”
She was also subjected to sexually suggestive and degrading comments. On a post about her shared by the Facebook page Rajshahi University News24, one user wrote: “She used to be the food of the Chhatra League.” Another commented: “She’s blown a fuse–from too much plugging in.” Under a Facebook post by Prothom Alo, multiple users left sexually harassing remarks. One wrote: “A woman from Chandrima Udyan looking for clients,” while another added: “Has she escaped from a hotel or come from Daulatdia brothel?”
Speaking to Prothom Alo about these cyber attacks, Emi said: “I’m facing a lot of harassment online, people are hurling absurd insults. Some right-wing organizations are attacking in particularly vile ways, calling us ‘Shahbagis.’ Altogether, I’d say there really isn’t a good environment for female candidates in any political organization.”
In an interview with The Business Standard, she emphasized that the attacks were not limited to her alone: “About eleven women from our panel are being harassed. Those who are indigenous are targeted because of their ethnicity, and they’re also attacked simply for being women.”
Research methodology
This study analyzed the nature of social media attacks targeting five female candidates who contested in the DUCSU election and had, at various times, publicly reported incidents of cyber harassment in the media or on Facebook. On September 4, researchers conducted Facebook searches using each candidate’s name and collected the first 100 public posts made between July 29 (the date when the election schedule was announced) and September 4. In total, 500 public posts were gathered.
These posts included content shared by news outlets under the candidates’ names, as well as posts from public pages and profiles. Each post’s comment section was reviewed, and any post containing at least one instance of hate or harassment was marked as a “problematic post.” From these, 13,000 comments were collected. Every comment was analyzed to determine what percentage of comments targeting each candidate contained hateful or harassing content.
For the purpose of this study, harassment was defined as including sexist or gender-based remarks, sexual innuendo or threats of violence, mockery of physical features or appearance, ethnic or religious insults, and derogatory or demeaning labeling. Only publicly visible content was included in the analysis, and all relevant screenshots and post links were archived for record-keeping and verification.
