Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to email BBC News and complain they are still using term "child porn" on their news website.

114 replies

kissmyheathenass · 28/01/2015 12:04

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31015347 gary glitter related - ugghh.

I know lots of us find the term 'child porn offensive'. The BBC bends over backwards to avoid language which might offend so why do they think this is acceptable? I am emailing them to point out why they should to rephrase. If anyone else would like to email them, please do!

OP posts:
FreudiansSlipper · 28/01/2015 13:51

What is the issue with calling it what it is

We used to call men that sexual harassed women dirty old men, sexual assault was often passed off as men with wondering hands and sadly we still often view teenage girls as tempting men to do what they should not be doing rather than men choosing to be sexual predators (and women)

I rather we used appropriate language there is no discussion about meaning and there is no claim to being confused which some may try to get away with

LondonRocks · 28/01/2015 13:53

It's bizarre that people don't object to porn being used when juxtaposed with 'child'.

Those who think it's ott, argue the toss with those who work in child protection, as you know so much.

DoraGora · 28/01/2015 13:54

The issues are that one term already has common currency (especially with editors) and formally, the campaign was using faulty logic.

CeartGoLeor · 28/01/2015 14:00

The issue isn't the implication of consent for me, it's that 'child porn' focuses on the sexually arousing impact on the user/viewer, rather than on the sickening brutalisation of the child who is the victim, and should be at the centre of the language used.

I agree that, in a society which increasingly sees pornography as normal, it's trivialising child abuse to call it by a term that suggests it's just another minority taste within a range of adult pornography subsets eg BDSM porn etc.

Increasingly, we even use 'porn' about non-sexual stuff. On Mn, a nice house on Right Move is greeted as 'property porn', people who like squeezing spots are 'sporners' etc. The filmed rape of a baby shouldn't be categorised under that heading.

Chilicosrenegade · 28/01/2015 14:00

No need. Practical experience. Which is why I feel entitled to find this so bloody ridiculous.

If you think the child gives a shit what you call it, dream on. They just want it stopped.

But you all go on feeling useful if you like. This is bullshit.

TooHasty · 28/01/2015 14:02

The term 'Child pornography' could include 'virtual' stuff which wouldn't be child abuse.

DoraGora · 28/01/2015 14:07

I can see why abuse survivors and some others see this chitchat as pointless guff. And I apologise for it. But, societies do need to discuss social issues and work out how to deal with them. That's how societies operate. People who chat aren't the enemy.

SaucyMare · 28/01/2015 14:14

I agree with Chilicos, renaming it will not cause a single person to change their opinion on the acts contained in the thing.

OfaFrenchMind · 28/01/2015 14:18

I think it is a non issue.
Child porn implies it's non consensual because there is "child" in it. It is sufficiently self-explanatory.
Pedophiles are not going to be deterred from making, seeking or watching it because it's worded differently.

Bramshott · 28/01/2015 14:33

I see it's been changed now - well done OP (and others).

SorchaN · 28/01/2015 14:34

I agree that words can be powerful, and that using the right terminology matters. Perhaps part of the difficulty is that 'porn' means different things to different people. To me, it ALWAYS means that someone is being horribly exploited (usually women and/or children). I don't think it's possible for women to give meaningful consent either. But I suppose to users of pornography it means something completely different...

CharliePan · 28/01/2015 14:35

This is a very important issue, ime and imho.
'Pornography' is much more than consent alone. It carries a level of 'glamour', adult, so-called 'sophistication' and a deal-being-done between the parties. When of course non of this is true.

When engaging with abusers they often come up with 'child porn' themselves, as it distances them from the real dynamic, implying 'glamour' etc. It's a similar reason as to why we insist on correct names for body parts - penis, vagina, anus etc - 'front bottom' 'willy' etc allows a distorted position to take - minimising the abuse.
The public are also misled when 'child porn' is used - inform them that it isn't in any way porn - it's "abusive images of children".

So for those good reasons, at least, the BBC and others need to step up. Anyone working in this field will indicate the same. And have done now for about 20 years.

KnittedJimmyChoos · 28/01/2015 14:40

To me, it ALWAYS means that someone is being horribly exploited (usually women and/or children)

Really? So when people say "come and look at this property porn" or "sporn porn" you feel houses and sporn are being horribly exploited?

Kbear · 28/01/2015 14:47

It's been changed - well done MN and well done OP

rinabean · 28/01/2015 14:50

Porn doesn't imply consent. Porn implies trafficked women, underage girls, threats of physical violence off camera, feeding addictions, rape & sexual assault. Porn is a disgusting word. The trend of calling things "property porn" is equally disgusting.

I don't actually see the big difference between a disgusting man wanting to look at pictures of a 7 year old girl being raped versus a 14 year old girl. Or a 25 year old woman. Yes it does seem worse, perhaps because she is even less able to defend herself, and someone somewhere had even more of a responsibility to protect her from this. What he did is still wrong though. He's still scum.

CharliePan · 28/01/2015 14:59

yes the 'call anything porn' trend is really nasty and unpleasant.

DoraGora · 28/01/2015 15:02

Slight digression. charliepan I didn't understand the erroneous belief of some people that (traditional adult porn) is somehow sophisticated. Do real people believe that?

DoraGora · 28/01/2015 15:04

I suspect property porn, etc, is formed by the need to create soundbites and by the fact that English is shrinking. People now find Victorian or Edwardian English hard going.

MrsHerculePoirot · 28/01/2015 15:05

If it isn't important why do all professionals working in this area make a point of it at all conferences? They often make a point of it when being interviewed as well. Every single conference about online abuse I have been to for the last 10 years has made the point at the start of the conference about the terminology used. As professionals working with both offenders and abused children I respect their opinions massively. Of course most people on MN wouldn't read 'child porn' and think it was OK, but there are people out there that minimise the images, that minimise those that just view them rather than make them or participate in activities.

As someone above said, I don't know why you wouldn't think it isn't an issue tbh.

CharliePan · 28/01/2015 15:15

Dora - yes, I believe so, that lots people see adult pornography as a mark of being 'sophisticated', sexually a bit 'daring' and mature etc.

SaucyMare · 28/01/2015 15:19

If it isn't important why do all professionals working in this area make a point of it at all conferences?
because they think it is important it is their job to try to work out solutions, not every idea they have will work, or in fact be sensible.

It is the same logic that make people think words are more important than intent.

If you know someone didn't mean to offend but they used the word they were taught was the polite as a child, and you take offense then you are the proffesionally offended.

DoraGora · 28/01/2015 15:34

OK, charliepan. I'll start a new thread, then, because it's a diversion. I can't believe it.

simontowers2 · 28/01/2015 15:35

If it isn't important why do all professionals working in this area make a point of it at all conferences?

Because the vast majorty of people attending such conferences are pen-pushing, public sector types who can think of nothing better to do with their time than split hairs over terminology, many of of these "professionals" being so far up their own self-important arses that they remain completely oblivious of the the fact that the new terms they come up with are often less helpful than the ones they have replaced; and the vast majorty of the public are not actually as thick as these "professionals" seem to think they are.

CharliePan · 28/01/2015 15:39

I don't understand what you are meaning by 'it's a diversion' - from what please?

simon it's a shame you haven't read the thread and the importance of using the correct language to establish 'responsibility-taking' for abusive actions. And you do seem rather bitter over something. Is it something to do with the thread?

TheComfortOfStrangers · 28/01/2015 15:44

I think it's important too. We all know that it does not and cannot involve consent - children can't give consent - and is therefore abusive and illegal.

But the phrase "child porn" is distasteful to me because it almost seems like an affectionate nickname, the way the word 'pornography' has been shortened and softened to 'porn', somehow minimising the content; and making it sound less serious and more comfy, a bit like the pics of boobs your uncle used to look at.

It should always be called "Child Abuse".