Jon Needham, Director of Safeguarding, Oasis Community Learning
Davidson (2014) argues that the growth in access to internet enabled mobile devices has created new avenues for individuals to communicate, develop relationships and form social networks, and that this has fundamentally altered the way that teenagers navigate the psychosocial tasks of adolescent sexual identity and practice. Published research shows a continued increase in sexting rates within the adolescent population despite being addressed in educational curriculum materials and public awareness campaigns; with the rates of sharing indecent images between teenagers in the United Kingdom rising by over 20% in the last 2 years with the average now sitting at an average of 62% of boys participating in the practice (figure 1 - Needham 2022).
Figure 1: Comparison Sexting Rates
As it is used here, 'sexting’ is an umbrella term. It is intended to include the sending and receiving of sexually explicit images or messages via digital media platforms and mobile communication devices. As Reed et al (2020) observe, ‘sexting’ can vary in a number of significant respects. These include whether participants are ‘active’ senders or ‘passive’ recipients, whether the sexting is aggravated or experimental in nature, and whether the explicit content consists of text, links to pornographic sites, or of images, whether these are photographs, or line drawings (such as explicit anime), and whether they are self-made or made by others. The 2020 United Kingdom Council for Child and Internet Safety (UKCIS) guidance for dealing with sexting among the youth population identifies two simple categories of sext: those that fall within an ‘experimental’ definition; youth self-generated and circulated to another young person who is willing to accept it to further romance, and ‘aggravated’ messages created with malicious intent e.g., in exchange for money or gifts, coercion, cyber-flashing, or to hurt or damage another.
To date, legislation and policy has framed the issue of ‘sexting’ within a deviancy framework, which aligns coercive, unwanted sexting behaviours in adolescence, so called ‘aggravated sexting’ with risk, problematized activities, and behaviours. Whilst ignoring the potential for ‘experimental sexting’ within dating and romantic relationships as part of a healthy form of adolescent sexual self-expression. However, images involved in sexting are dealt in UK law through the Protection of Children Act 1978 and the Criminal Justice Act 1998, where images of those under 18 years old are dealt with as images of child abuse. Therefore, the making of, distribution and storage of such images are dealt with under legislation as child protection issues, even when the images are self-generated and shared within a romantic relationship where both participants may be over the age of consent. The UK legal position remains that participation cannot be consensual, only abusive, and therefore require legal intervention.
A College of Policing briefing note issued in 2016 cautions against the criminalising of those under 18 years old involved in self-generated images or images obtained with consent by other teenagers, calling instead for a proportionate response. This ‘outcome 21’ response allows police forces to resolve crimes considering the ‘appropriate contextual factors in a proportionate and effective way’. This means that whilst a crime has been acknowledged, and the consensually sexting teenager has broken the law it is felt by the Police that formal action against the teenager is not in the public interest. However, where exploitation, coercion, profit, inappropriate sharing, or adult involvement in a sexting incident then a full police investigation and prosecution is called for.
As Dodaj and Sesar (2020) argue, variables relevant to the moral appraisal of particular acts of sexting that need to be considered include intimate relationship status, the desire to initiate or gain intimacy in relationship, demographic variables such as age, sex, gender, and cognitive variables such as personal attitudes towards sexting, perception of self-image, social status, and peer pressure. These variables, among others, matter when defining and attempting to codify laws, write education policy or develop lesson plans regarding sexting.
Four Motivation Options Typology for Boys
If it is accepted that sexting largely occurs within a normative framework of adolescent development, then the likely motivational factors behind the desire to sext need to be explored. Understanding the motivation behind the action of sexting may identify ways in which support to young people can be provided as well as work around prevention, intervention, and relationship education can be developed.
In the analysis of the responses of a research study of 3,739 boys aged 14 to 18 years within a range of English schools, the motivation for their sexting behaviour based on a choice of 13 psychometric properties identified four main motivational factors. Using these four areas a graphical representation of a Four Motivation Options Typology for Boys (4MOTB) can be drawn that shows the interconnected nature of these areas and how policy and process can support intervention (see figure 2).
Figure 2: Four Motivation Options Typology for Boys (4MOTB)
- Sexting to seek validation of body image,
Sexting to show muscular definition, penile aestheticism, scopophilia or as a means of boasting, function as a tool by which adolescents explore and express sexuality. Within a school setting addressing the motivation to sext to gain an understanding of body shape, to seek validation around physical norms or to celebrate muscular development could be most meaningfully addressed through the PHSE curriculum.
- Sexting to influence social status,
Sexting to boost social prestige and gain popularity within a peer group where sexting is perceived as ‘jokes and banter’ between friends can be used as a means to maintain the male hegemony within the social construct of masculinity. Sexting to gain social status and standing with a peer group could be addressed through a strong academy behaviour policy that identifies what would be seen as acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.
- Sexting to initiate sex or enhance romance,
Sexting may be a tool to aid masturbation, antecedental to intercourse or to initiate a new romantic relationship script. It can also be seen as a means of validating romance by showing commitment to a relationship by placing a degree of trust in that other person. Sexting can be seen as a safer sex alternative to intercourse and could serve as a substitute on grounds of faith, belief, or abstinence. For those couples separated by long distance or those in isolation, sexting can represent an expression of sexual contact. The management of these incidents should be addressed within a framework of the RSE curriculum.
- Sexting with intent to harm,
In some cases, this practice may not demonstrate a motivation to intentionally harm the other person, but as a demonstration of one partner putting their needs ahead of the other, rather than an act of deliberate subjugation. However, sexting with the intention to cause harm falls into three main categories; to share images as a means to exert social dominance; to coerce images from a partner against their will or, to exhort sexual content with criminal intent. To gather sexual information or content for extortion, or intentionally harm a person must be viewed as forms of sexual harassment and sexual violence and should be investigated by the police and dealt with through the legal process of child protection and prosecution of the perpetrators regardless of their age.
Any intervention delivered needs to be cognisant of the potential for multiple motivational factors and that behaviours can shift subtly into a situation that has the potential to harm one or both parties involved. Therefore, the assessment and intervention should be dynamic so as to meet need. Within a safeguarding assessment the issues surrounding each sexting incident should be undertaken to ensure that any aggravated situations are addressed. Where there are no safeguarding concerns then the 4MOTB model advocates addressing an incident through policy, curriculum-based intervention and as part of relationship advice and support.
Conclusion
A teenagers’ nascent cognitive maturity enables them to reflect on their sexuality and behaviours and is a crucial phase in the development of sexual identity and agency. The current model of response used within UK schools is broadly grounded in a typology that is based on the content of an image rather than its motivation. It is proposed that the 4MOTB Typology calls for intervention based around a motivational taxonomy and directs intervention through health education, behaviour management and curriculum content as well as a child protection response to harm.
Integrating sext education into discussions around the use of technology and the ethics of de-normalising the role of sexting, as well as promoting safety strategies moves the issue away from a fear-based curriculum. Similar to ‘safe sex’ health education programmes, safer sexting practice around consent to send, refusal to share, awareness of recipient, and appropriate content should be taught alongside the concepts of e-safety and digital privacy.
In a study by Jørgensen et al (2018) young people themselves asked for lessons based on the reality of life, and this was echoed by Katz and El Asam (2019) who reported that young people wanted education that delivered "concrete help and advice to cope with real life situations”. Indeed, an academy that does not have a comprehensive, fully inclusive approach to sex and relationship education may be putting their pupils at increased risk.
References
College of Policing (2016), ‘Briefing Note: Police Action in response to youth produced sexual imagery (‘sexting’)’, College of Policing, 1, 1-11
Davidson, J. (2014) ‘Sexting gender and teens’, Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Dodaj, A., Sesar, K. (2020). ‘Sexting categories’. Mediterranean Journal of Clinical Psychology. 8, 2.
HM Government. (1987). Protection of Children Act. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/37 Accessed 26/01/23.
HM Government. (2008). Criminal Justice Act. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/4/section/69 Accessed 26/01/23.
Jørgensen, C. Weckesser, A. Turner, J. Wade, A. (2018) ‘Young people’s views on sexting education and support needs: findings and recommendations form a UK-based study’, Sex Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2018.1475283
Katz, A. El Asam, A. (2019) ‘In their own words: The digital lives of school children’. The Cyber Survey, Internet Matters.Org, London
Needham, J. (2021), ‘Sending Nudes: Intent and Risk Associated with ‘Sexting’ as Understood by Gay Adolescent Boys’, Sexuality & Culture, 25, 2 396-416
UKCIS, (2020), ‘Sharing nudes and semi-nudes Advice for education settings working with children and young people responding to incidents and safeguarding children and young people’, UK Council for Internet Safety, HM Government Publications
The CST Blog welcomes perspectives from a diverse range of guest contributors. The opinions expressed in blogs are the views of the author(s), and should not be read as CST guidance or CST’s position.
You may also be interested in:
- Safeguarding at scale, a CST Bridge to the Future whitepaper
- CST Trust Safeguarding Professional Community
