those with experiences sexting, narratives of shame and blame sometimes shaped a belief they may have been better off abstaining, despite, at times, accounts of more pleasurable experiences, suggesting a form of ambivalence in which experiences – of harm and pleasure – bump up against broader social and cultural narratives. Consequently, harmful practices were considered attributable to the actions of individuals rather than shaped by broader contexts. This also meant more visible and socially impactful forms of harm were discussed more than, perhaps, more pervasive and hidden forms of harm, including unwanted sexting. The narrative around which practices require tackling may, therefore, need to shift. Unsolicited image-sharing by boys toward girls is not, for example, well captured in current approaches that emphasise risk and shame. While boys may be at some risk in the peer group, sexting for them did not carry the same ingrained, inherent risk that it did for girls. Emphasising risk is, therefore, less relevant when trying to tackle some gendered practices, including unsolicited image-sharing. Addressing harmful sexting may need to be about duties not to harm rather than individualised notions of risk. Responding to youth sexting: ways forward While participants’ support for abstinence may be reassuring for those seeking to circumscribe youth sexting, the systems of meaning underpinning support for abstinence shaped harmful sexting practices and social shaming processes. Young people perceived themselves to be ‘older and wiser’ now; however, it seemed the learning process involved an internalisation of an individualistic mantra around managing socially constructed risks and harms related to gender and sexuality. The ‘informal’ processes of learning occurring within the peer group are contextualised by a broader educational and legal context that seeks to
those with experiences sexting, narratives of shame and blame sometimes shaped a belief they may have been better off abstaining, despite, at times, accounts of more pleasurable experiences, suggesting a form of ambivalence in which experiences – of harm and pleasure – bump up against broader social and cultural narratives. Consequently, harmful practices were considered attributable to the actions of individuals rather than shaped by broader contexts. This also meant more visible and socially impactful forms of harm were discussed more than, perhaps, more pervasive and hidden forms of harm, including unwanted sexting. The narrative around which practices require tackling may, therefore, need to shift. Unsolicited image-sharing by boys toward girls is not, for example, well captured in current approaches that emphasise risk and shame. While boys may be at some risk in the peer group, sexting for them did not carry the same ingrained, inherent risk that it did for girls. Emphasising risk is, therefore, less relevant when trying to tackle some gendered practices, including unsolicited image-sharing. Addressing harmful sexting may need to be about duties not to harm rather than individualised notions of risk. Responding to youth sexting: ways forward While participants’ support for abstinence may be reassuring for those seeking to circumscribe youth sexting, the systems of meaning underpinning support for abstinence shaped harmful sexting practices and social shaming processes. Young people perceived themselves to be ‘older and wiser’ now; however, it seemed the learning process involved an internalisation of an individualistic mantra around managing socially constructed risks and harms related to gender and sexuality. The ‘informal’ processes of learning occurring within the peer group are contextualised by a broader educational and legal context that seeks to
eThesis%20Emily%20Setty.docx