Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to say no you can't

105 replies

mydecisionalone · 13/10/2017 14:18

Mumsnetters appear to be great advocates of personal choice and of the word "no" meaning simply that, so I'm hoping you will take the time to read this and stop doing something which far too many people do without, seemingly, caring about the consequences of their actions.

This may appear to be a minor irritant but it is something I feel very strongly about and I know I'm not alone - people posting images of my children on the Internet.

There are many reasons why this shouldn't happen.

A simple Google search will throw up plenty of forum posts, polls, advice, newspaper articles, research etc. If you want to learn more go have a look.

Want to know my reasons for not posting photos of my kids online? I'm not telling you! I'm not being enigmatic or mysterious, they are my kids, my choices and frankly none of your business.

Too often people argue "it's no big deal", "who cares", "I don't see the problem".

That's not good enough. It is a big deal to some people, they do care and just because you don't see the problem doesn't mean there isn't one.

Think about the last time you went to a party/gathering/event and posted pictures on sites such as Facebook afterwards. Did you ask all the parents there if they minded you putting photos that their kids were in online?

Do you use the argument that you've got great privacy settings?
Congratulations, you still shouldn't do it. Not your kids, not your choice.

I don't know your great aunt Mabel or Bob your second cousin. I don't know who they may choose to forward the photo onto and neither do you.

Think I should waste my precious time contacting internet sites to get photos taken down or calling individuals to ask them to remove photos?

Why on earth should I?!?

Not your kids. Not your choice to pop that piccy on Facebook with them in it.

There are kids across this country who, for very real safety reasons, must not be identified or their location alluded to.

Do you know whether that child sat next to your kid at the picnic is one of them? Are you willing to risk a child's safety simply because you want to put a cute photo online?

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
Please think before posting and set some boundaries. Common sense should surely suggest if they aren't your children you don't get to make decisions about them.

If you want to put photos of your children on the Internet then that's your decision but next time crop other people's kids out first.

Don't assume they won't mind or that it's no big deal.
There are lots of people who do mind - very, very much.

We shouldn't need to go to a party and announce to the assembled masses that we don't want you to do it or dress our kids in T-shirts emblazoned with a "no photo" slogan.

I shouldn't have to tell all and sundry not to do it. I shouldn't have to explain why either. They aren't your children so don't do it. Show some respect. Think!

A stranger knocks on your door tonight and asks to take a photo of your children...
Do you let them?

I can't imagine any of you saying yes to that but by posting photos of my children online without my permission you are letting strangers see and store pictures of the things most precious to me in the world and you do not have the right to do that - ever.

Please link this, comment, stick it on social media... Please spread the word that it's not okay to assume your choices are the same as everyone else's.

One person changing their actions might, at the least, save another from being upset or it might, potentially, stop something far, far worse from happening.

Thanks for reading and hopefully thinking.

Sent from my iPad

OP posts:
JeReviens · 13/10/2017 23:31

Madbum

TheClaws · 14/10/2017 01:08

Agreed, I think.

Sent from my couch with my cat’s head up almost up my arse, it would seem

liverbird10 · 14/10/2017 01:18

Yap less and get to the point. Grin

liverbird10 · 14/10/2017 01:19

YANBU BTW, you drama llama!

intergalacticbrexitdisco · 14/10/2017 02:00

I'm really tired and just read that Mumsnetters are great Avocadoes of personal choice. I like that idea, though.

Sent from the bed in the spare room, hiding from DH's snorefest.

designatedSurvivor · 14/10/2017 02:27

Is this one of those strange 'share if you love children' posts from Facebook?

If you've a serious point to make @mydecisionalone, try a second or third draft. You have a terrible writing style.

TheStoic · 14/10/2017 03:55

When people don’t like the message, they’ll attack the messenger.

Who the fuck cares if it was too long. It’s a legitimate position to take and if it was too long for you to grasp, perhaps brush up on your reading skills.

BoomBoomsCousin · 14/10/2017 04:19

I don't post pictures of other people's kids without their permission. But I think it's ridiculous to object to normal pictures if you don't have specific concerns because of a situation particular to you. Just as I think it's ridiculous to object to people posting normal pictures of adults unless there is something specific to be concerned about.

Cantseethewoods · 14/10/2017 04:25

YANBU but that ship has sailed unfortunately.

Out2pasture · 14/10/2017 05:59

i'm sorry to hear you have drama in your life.

TidyDancer · 14/10/2017 07:19

Agree with the majority. Any point the OP may have had was lost with the ridiculous waffling and lecturing. I suspect OP was hoping to go viral with the melodramatic ranting. Very odd.

Threenme · 14/10/2017 07:28

Op I would never post pics of your kids, you sound terrifying tbh! Your point is quite valid, however you make it repeatedly over 55 paragraphs so the message is slightly lost!Confused

UserThenLotsOfNumbers · 14/10/2017 07:34

That’s me told then.
Your OP sounds like some nonsense copied and pasted from Facebook ironically enough.

Starryskiesinthesky · 14/10/2017 07:48

TL:DR

Flumplet · 14/10/2017 08:16

If I take a pic of my child or whoever in a public place and I want to post it, regardless of whether your precious offspring are in the background or not, I will post it.

Sent via the medium of interpretive dance 💃

Threenme · 14/10/2017 09:07

TL:DR what's this?

Topseyt · 14/10/2017 10:13

Stoic, I grasped it in the first couple of paragraphs.

Nothing wrong with my reading skills. The rest of the post was a long, waffling and repetitive lecture.

LaurieMarlow · 14/10/2017 10:28

Tldr means 'too long didn't read'

Op, often in life it's not what you say but the way that you say it. And you lost a lot of people there.

Yellowmellowyellow · 14/10/2017 10:37

I think that's ridiculous. It's not 1990 anymore... No one gives a shit about seeing your kid in the back shot of a family picnic. The mafia are not going to track you down.
I understand you may need their identity hidden because of DV or whatever but someone could just as easily walk past and see you in the street could they not??

Sent butt-naked from the chair in my bedroom whilst I muster up the energy to dry my hair

Papafran · 14/10/2017 10:54

But remember for a facebook post to go viral, it seems almost obligatory for it to be about 10,000 words long. Why say something in 1 sentence when you can use 100? Presumably it's like those 'I bet none of you will copy and paste this post about mental health' (usually written by people who have never been supportive about their real friends' MH problem).

BishBoshBashBop · 14/10/2017 11:47

Who the fuck cares if it was too long. It’s a legitimate position to take and if it was too long for you to grasp, perhaps brush up on your reading skills

Nothing wrong with my reading skills.

I hope the OP never goes out in public with their DC. The amount of times they will be caught in CCTV would completely break them.

The OP hasn't been back.

It was deliberetly goady first tine posting OP and probably a journalist looking for an article

Firesuit · 14/10/2017 12:51

I think if internet facial recognition searches are so good that they will identify a child in the background of someone's photo's, then the solution is that they endangered child needs to always wear disguise in public, not that no-one should post pictures of their own child.

Firesuit · 14/10/2017 12:54

I am now curious to find out how good image search is. I kind of assumed that only the CIA has search technology as good as the OP seems to be suggesting. I wonder if the child she is concerned about is a member of the Al Qaeda junior cadet corp.

Rachie1973 · 14/10/2017 12:56

Crikey..... you need more wine.

Sent from the Dark Side

pp2017 · 14/10/2017 13:03

I agree!

I have my social media pretty much locked down (as far as any social media can be) - I don’t come up in google searches, people can’t add me unless they know me personally (ie have my phone number or email address) and I limit who I accept as friends or followers based on whether I know them directly......

This gives me a degree of control over what images of my child can be seen and by who....

How do I know that other people follow the same basic safety rules that I do? I don’t, so I don’t think it’s unreasonable not to want my child’s image on someone else’s social media with me tagged in it!

DS incidentally asked me this morning if friend A who is coming to his 10th birthday party (incl sleepover) can film it and make a YouTube video for his YouTube account - erm, fuck no!!!

Swipe left for the next trending thread