Ds1&2 and victim blaming

[TheSmurfsAreHere]

So I was talking to both DC (Y7 &8) about a talk they've both had on cyber bullying and sharing indecent photos.
They were telling me how they were told to never share photos of themselves naked. It was all about protecting yourself.

And then I asked what would happen if one WAS sharing such a photo and it was then put in the internet/Facebook etc...
Overwhelming answer was 'well they weren't supposed to send that photo of them naked so it's their fault'

For me, it smacks of victim blaming not dissimilar to 'she walked in an unlit street and was raped. That's her fault as she shouldn't have been on her own' type of argument.

I couldn't make then understand that not protecting yourself properly didn't make you responsible. The person responsible was still and always the one who did share the photo, rape, whatever. And that they also broken the trust of the person.

So my question is, what could I say to make it clearer to them? Examples maybe?

What Sparrowhawk said.

Sparrowhawk I thought it was illegal for a child to pass photos of themselves to another person (child), as it would be classed as making and distributing indecent images of children (I don't know if that's the right phrase).

You're right re sexual images of children. But ethically I think sparrow is spot on. I imagine the police wouldn't necessarily care about young people sending pictures unless there was a suggestion of non consent, exploitation or coercion.

It's not against the law for anybody to privately share photos of themselves. If someone groomed them to do that, or forced them, then of course that person who groomed/forced them would have committed an offence.

Is this info wrong/out of date?

www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/keeping-children-safe/sexting/

'However, as of January 2016 in England and Wales, if a young person is found creating or sharing images, the police can choose to record that a crime has been committed but that taking formal action isn't in the public interest.'

Notice this bit ^. I actually thought they'd properly updated the law, but clearly they haven't, they're just choosing to pretend the law doesn't exist. So, the law says that it's illegal for children to take and send picture of their own body but in practice making it a crime for children to photograph their own body is ridiculous and it can't actually be prosecuted.

What is definitely illegal is revenge porn - the use of images of others without their consent to humiliate them.

Ah ok, that makes sense.

I think it's a mistake to approach it as a property crime.

It isn't. It's a terrible breach of trust, nothing like stealing a bike. It's a deliberate public humiliation of someone else, no-one is humiliated by having their bike stolen.

I would maybe ask them to think about a situation where one of their friends had told them something really personal and intimate, something that they didn't want to or feel they could, share with anyone else, but needed to share with them. Like their parent had cancer, or they'd been raped, or their father who they'd said was working on an oil rig, was actually in prison.

And then they fall out with that friend and stop being friends with them. Would they have the right to tell someone that friend's secret? Or do they recognise what utter shits they'd be if they did? If no, then you've got a big problem. If yes, you've got a starting point for discussion.

It is the child sending a nude photo of themselves who is breaking the law, not the child receiving it (no one can help what is sent to them). If the receiving child then shares it further, then they are guilty of a crime.

Sparrowhawk no its not ok. If some 15 year old lad starts sending dick pics to the girls in his class then it could be classed as bullying and/or sexual harassment. You don't have any right to inflict pics of your naked body on other people.

I think you misunderstood Sparrow's point about "sharing" photos. If you send unsolicited photos I agree that's harassment.

Yes, sorry, sharing with consent is different but still massively unwise when you are basically a kid dealing with other kids.

Yes of course sending someone unsolicited pictures of a sexual nature is harassment. But a 15 year old girl sending a picture of her breasts to her boyfriend would not be committing a crime in any real sense of the word

Agreed

I was coming back to say what you've said askbasil, ask them op if they would share a secret or even a personal letter some one wrote to them, it's the same thing; not yours to share.

I think people understand it when you frame it like that mikado, because it takes the sexual element out. It also makes it sex-neutral, becuase betrayal could be of a boy or a girl.

I agree with whoever said that the reason people don't have that view when it comes to naked photos, is purely and simply misogyny and judgementalism about female sexuality.

Perhaps it has to be their own privacy and personal issue under question for them to understand the violation of trust. Otherwise its too abstract.

Child writes something about their feelings about XYZ. Pick some real XYZ they might consider "private" and customise accordingly. Maybe fear or pet/family member illness/dying or friendship issue or insecurity - whatever makes sense for that kid.

Say they showed it to someone they trusted at the time but then later drifted away from being friends with. Most kids have had this experience.

Whose fault is it if the other person reads it out to everyone in the school for a laugh?

If a friend told them a secret,would it be OK to post it on Facebook?

If one of their friends did this to another friend, would they judge the person with the secret or the blabber?

Feelings/blabber/rumours are very vague, however, nudity is straightforward. Also its pretty much against the rules in the most of social media.

I would maybe ask them to think about a situation where one of their friends had told them something really personal and intimate, something that they didn't want to or feel they could, share with anyone else, but needed to share with them. Like their parent had cancer, or they'd been raped, or their father who they'd said was working on an oil rig, was actually in prison

And then they fall out with that friend and stop being friends with them. Would they have the right to tell someone that friend's secret? Or do they recognise what utter shits they'd be if they did? If no, then you've got a big problem. If yes, you've got a starting point for discussion

That is a better analogy.

The property analogy is only useful to show how ridiculous the comparison is; people who are the victims of theft are not criticised for being victims.

On the contrary I've seen court reports where the judge has gone out of their way to criticise thefts from very drunk people- stuff like " instead of coming to the victim's assistance you chose to steal from them"

Sounds like you already lost them. At 11 and definitely at 13 they can for sure tell what is right and wrong.

Have you asked if they would share a photo someone sent them? Either they were the intended sole recipient or someone was sharing with them and they just pass it on so to speak.

I think you could say the only bit of the sharing they have any control over is the bit where they take a pic and send to someone else.
So if they don't want their picture shared safest option is not to send a pic, next safest is to be sure they trust the person they send it to etc etc
But the person who shares it is at fault for sharing

How weird! I could have sworn that was on the other thread and when I clicked back the text was still there after posting! That was for another thread, I'll report and get MNHQ to delete.