NetFamilyNews.orgWe’re in quite a fix, we parents, over this “sexting” phenomenon. On the one hand, sexting “is causing growing concern among parents,” HealthDay cites a University of Michigan survey as finding. On the other, “the real problem sets in when grownups get involved,” writes DailyBeast.com columnist Conor Friedersdorf, pointing to the evidence: “In most cases, teens who conceal their sexting from authority figures suffer negligible adverse consequences…. Perversely, however, tragic stories that begin with ‘sexting’ are all too frequent when principals, police officers, or district attorneys get involved. The two known suicides attributed to ‘sexting’ actually resulted from adults who exacerbated, rather than stopped, the abhorrent ‘slut-shaming’ that peers callously directed at girls whose naked photos were spread around school; and authority figures in at least six states charge less troubled teens who send naked pictures of themselves with distributing child pornography!” [And I can't resist quoting where Friedersdorf goes with this child-porn-law point: "Should technology ever permit humans to download our brains' mental images to a hard drive, every last teenager in America will wind up prohibited from living within 10,000 feet of themselves" – but maybe quite a few adults too, no?]
I think he’s right. Whether or not you agree that sexting can sometimes be digitally exacerbated normative adolescent behavior, I hope you agree that adults need to tread very lightly or at least carefully in these situations, with child-pornography law a factor (see ConnectSafely’s tips). But forget about school policy and law enforcement for a second and just think about parenting: Certainly we need to apply our values to our parenting and, if those values call for it, try to mitigate the sexualized media environment surrounding us all, but it’s best to spread that teaching and parenting out over time and not allow ourselves to be so shocked by what we’re seeing as to react in ways that send kids into determined resistance, “underground” online, where our values probably don’t have much influence at all.
Cornell University assistant professor Sahara Byrne, while presenting a survey of parents and kids about online-safety strategies at the Harvard Berkman Center last week, found all kinds of evidence that “the more angry kids are, the more they’re going to try to restore their freedom” – or assert it. That’s why sudden changes in parenting style like overreaction or anger, banning technology (which to a teen can be like banning a whole social life), or suddenly installing monitoring software can have unintended, sometimes risky effects and workarounds.
So we’re not really in such a fix, fellow parents. We just need to be mindful of the concerns we have and channel them wisely. Trying to make our children avoid risk altogether can be riskier than being consistent about “our family’s values,” letting them do developmentally appropriate adolescent risk assessment, and being there for them when stuff comes up. I love how parent and media professor Henry Jenkins says it – that we need to “watch their backs rather than snoop over their shoulders.”
Related links
3 Comments
I saw an article online where the students response to a sexting presentation by law enforcement was primarily to ask questions about the work arounds (how to sext without violating the law!!!)
This is exactly what happens when a drug prevention program focuses on bringing law enforcement or the judiical sector in to speak about the legal consequences of drug use. Kids are not impressed by the legal consequences!!!! Help them to understand the physical (drugs) emotional, social/relational and reputational consequences and you might get somewhere.
Anne, Great post. Although I don't really get the Jenkins quote: "Watch their back, not over their shoulders."
I'm thinking either too literally, too metaphorically, or too much about it to get it.
Thanks for your comment, John. Does it help to say that I think constantly watching over a kid's shoulder is along the lines of helicopter parenting, which to me is a sign of authoritarian or hard-power as opposed to soft-power parenting.
6 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
[...] than 1,000 Americans “distributed across gender, age, income and location.” [See also "Soft power works better: Parenting social Web users."] // Share| Permalink Post a comment — Trackback URI RSS 2.0 feed for these comments [...]
[...] and appear to be less likely to seek out trouble online (for more on Byrne’s research, see “Soft power works better: Parenting social Web users”; also along those lines: “Parenting & the digital drama overload”). // Share| [...]
[...] – and a lot of conversation. [See also this about parenting amid the digital drama overload and "soft power" parenting.] // Share| Permalink Post a comment — Trackback URI RSS 2.0 feed for these comments [...]
[...] Why “soft power” parenting (and school discipline) works a lot better in the new media environment // Share| Permalink Post a comment — Trackback URI RSS 2.0 feed for these comments This entry (permalink) was posted on Monday, August 30, 2010, at 8:28 pm by Anne. Filed in Web 2.0, filtering, monitoring, monitoring software, parental controls and tagged AOL, filtering, monitoring, parental controls, reputation protection. [...]
[...] (they used the term “well-rounded parental control,” but there’s (see “Soft-power parenting works better,” linking to Cornell University professor Sahara Byrne’s study on parenting new-media [...]
[...] Taking a highly authoritarian approach to social tech use and viewing it in a categorical way is actually the easy way out for parents now. It’s also ineffective. Not that parents could ever honestly operate from a place of “I know all,” but in an age of proliferating small social devices, apps, hot spots (including friends’ houses), discipline workarounds, and information pouring in from a near infinite number of sources besides Mom and Dad, much less so. “Just say no” works less than ever (see “Soft-power parenting works better”). [...]
Leave a comment