Hello HQ please can we chat about a particular phrase

[ADoggyDogWorld]

Mumsnet's Talk Guidelines | Mumsnet

Please would you consider adding the phrase 'child porn/ child pornography' to the proscribed list.

Thoughts?

Erroll-oh completely agree its abusive behaviour but don't want to minimise the effect on those victims of child abuse.

Strongly agree with this. The word porn has become acceptable.

Look at food porn or property porn etc etc

What happens to children is never acceptable.

I've been campaigning this amongst friends for years. Never thought about asking Mumsnet to make it a banned term.

Great idea OP. 100% behind you.

We need to reinforce the fact it's illegal, unacceptable, abuse, exploitation because otherwise you end up with people (men) thinking it's ok.

As in I had an ex-friend who though it was ok to "use" this material as apparently it "stopped people abusing children" (this ex-friend didn't use, but was his opinions of those who did). I had to point out there was a real life victim.

Words matter. This is one of those that really matter.

Another vote for this. Pornography implies consent (obviously I know that in some cases it isn't consensual) and that can't be the case with children. Images of child sexual abuse is far more accurate.

I hadn't given this any thought, had no idea that these weren't the words to use but actually, you're right OP (and all other posters who've said this). It's the word 'porn' that is abjectly wrong.

I support you also, OP.

I also strongly agree with TheDefiant about the use of the word 'porn' in relation to food, property and any other attention-seeking nonsense. I've always thought that people who tacked that word on were thick-witted and, they really are.

Lack of vocabulary doesn't mean that you need to mis-appropriate something that is so negatively loaded.

Supported.

Thank you for this - I have learnt something really valuable today, and I am grateful for it, as I would not have wanted to unwittingly cause offence or distress to anyone.

I fully support this. But also I agree there needs to be an explanation why the term is no longer to be used - it's clear that many posters simply don't understand why it's so offensive.

Also here to show support.

I find it absolutely disgusting to hear those words together. It's a child suffering. Mentally and physically. It's life changing. It's soul destroying. Calling it CP is too neutral/accepting(?!) of a way to call something that is so abhorrent. It's sickening abuse and should be highlighted as such. I find it so disrespectful to the children to call it pornography. They didn't consent to being put into that situation.

I fully support the OP

I agree with this.
I don't want people shamed for using what they thought was the correct term but more education would be good.

Just adding my support here. 'Child porn' was an awful phrase when it was widely used but we should all know much better now and there are no excuses to still be using it.

Support the general intention wholeheartedly, but it will need to be borne in mind that it is still the term in legislation and the name of the offence in some jurisdictions. When discussing news reports etc the term used by police/courts will be used in the press and therefore also here.

... in which case, we lead the charge then!

Somebody has to take a stand and start using better words, don't they?

Perhaps we should go further, and ask MNHQ to make this one of their campaigns.

I couldn’t agree more. Those phrases are sickening.

This to be honest, possibly with Mumsnet contacting the poster privately to suggest a change of phrase. There's too much focus these days on actual words used and not enough on intent.
(Though I detest the phrase 'kiddie porn' as that really does make it sound acceptable and all rather jolly)

Support the general intention wholeheartedly, but it will need to be borne in mind that it is still the term in legislation and the name of the offence in some jurisdictions. When discussing news reports etc the term used by police/courts will be used in the press and therefore also here.
Perhaps in situations where that's how the offence is reported, MNHQ could add a message to the thread saying that the CP term is not a phrase they allow on their site because it downplays the abusive nature of the harm done to children, and give examples of terms that more appropriately outline the offence.

it's akin to the term,
child prostitute.
i think everyone understands now why that is a contradiction in terms.
but not longer ago, was commonly used, esp by police, social workers etc.

I don't think the term 'pornography' implies consent. It just means material designed to cause sexual arousal.

I think this is a great idea. Mumsnet is holding the line on child safeguarding in many ways by allowing discussions to take place in other parts of the site which are verboten elsewhere, so leading a campaign that educates people to recognise the harm done to children when safeguarding fails and they fall into predators' hands is absolutely consistent with the brand.

Thank you all for your further thoughts and opinions. Lots to think about.

Thanks for raising it. Yesterday I happened on a thread where someone's husband had googled "<name of schoolgirl character> porn" ... omg, the ridiculous excuses posters were coming up with how this could be anything other than problematic.

I'm glad you raised it OP.

On a thread recently I was surprised how many posters felt it was acceptable to discuss girls being involved in sex work or having certain "lifestyles".

Thankfully they were a minority and a lot of posters challenged it by pointing out that children do not engage in sex work and are not choosing to life a "lifestyle". They are being groomed and abused.

Afternoon, everyone. Thanks for your thoughts on this subject. We've talked about it at length here.

While broadly we agree that terms such as 'child pornography' are pretty unacceptable, we aren't sure that we can totally outlaw it at this stage. It seems like the world has a lot of catching up to do still where this is concerned so it doesn't quite make the grade for our proscribed list, which is actually very small indeed.

Where we would expect any right-thinking member of society to know that the n-word, for example, is not something that is acceptable to use anywhere, we think perhaps not nearly so many people understand why the terms discussed here are unacceptable just yet. To simply delete every use of them or even replace them, we suspect won't help with any understanding of that.

We think what may work is if, whenever a term like this is spotted, other posters explained why use of these terms is offensive to victims of CSA, and which terms should be used instead, that might actually make a difference. Historically we have found that posters tend to be more amenable to having an issue like this explained to them by another Mumsnetter and it usually seems to have a greater effect than simply being deleted by MNHQ. A deletion is not always seen and is often simply viewed as 'a slap on the wrist for rule-breaking', and we would rather posters moved on with some understanding of the problem than simply felt 'told off'.

We have seen exactly this in action on this thread, where several posters have left with an understanding of an issue they hadn't previously seen and knowing which terms to use in future - and hopefully they will pass that knowledge on to others as well.

We're not ruling out 'banning' these terms at a later date - we just think that we need to first get to a point where the majority of people understand the problem with it first.

Thank you for the considered reply, I do appreciate it, Hebe.

I have been touched by how many posters engaged with this thread.

Thank you all.