Keep Governance and Safeguarding logo in yellow

Keep Governance and Safeguarding

Pornography in Parliament - or in public - is not really the issue

Andy Churcher • April 29, 2022

A societal seismic shift which we've not seen coming, maybe by choice... 

No-one should be watching pornography in professional working spaces, or in public for that matter, and if proven the MP concerned should be removed from office. But outcry about politicians doesn't get to the root of the problem.

UK police data shows there were 73,260 sexual offences where the victim was a child in the year to March 2019[a] and research demonstrates that 67% of girls and young women have experienced sexual harassment from other students at school[b]. The last 30 years has seen consistent and continuing increases in the free availability of pornography, how explicit and extreme it is, and how it is accessed by children.  Children’s views of sex, relationships and consent is being shaped by pornography and whether through a lack of desire to address this growth, or because no-one really saw it coming, it is now part of many people’s lives.

The normalisation of watching pornography (Ofcom reported 49% of the UK adult population visited online adult content in Sept 2020[c]) fuels the sexual objectification of women and girls - as well as men and boys - and while research is inconclusive as to whether exposure to pornography increases the likelihood of perpetrating sexual violence or harassment, much research identifies the role of pornography in perpetrators lives and how it undermines the notion of consent[d,e+f].

The government’s Online Safety Bill is currently going through parliament and, if it becomes law, will expect “providers who publish or place pornographic content on their services will be required to prevent children from accessing that content”[g]. It’s not clear how this will be implemented and whether such regulation will produce sufficient safeguards, I'm not convinced. 

This is not a technology issue in itself, but an omission by us to tackle the growth in availability of pornography and our attitudes towards it. I do not propose pornography is outlawed and I empathise with people who use it – I did as a young man – but we need to realise that our lack of concern about its growth and impact has had and will have a significant impact on our children and society as a whole.

Sources: [a] https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/childsexualabuseinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2019

[b] https://www.girlguiding.org.uk/globalassets/docs-and-resources/research-and-campaigns/girlguiding-research-briefing_girls-experiences-of-sexual-harassment_june2021.pdf

[c] https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research-and-data/internet-and-on-demand-research/online-nation

[d] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/976731/The_Relationship_between_Pornography_use_and_Harmful_Sexual__Behaviours_v1.pdf

[e] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/088626087002002005

[f] https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20367

[g] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-bill-supporting-documents/online-safety-bill-factsheet

By Andy Churcher December 17, 2024
Political ideology should never again be allowed to impact so disastrously on children
By Andy Churcher November 11, 2024
“Injustices are not the exclusive preserve of the unjust; they can be presided over by people who are in all other respects well-meaning and decent.”
By Andy Churcher September 10, 2024
It's been a long time coming... we even took a break in 2022 after Elon Musk bought Twitter. But its increasingly clear that we’ve both grown apart from each other and we can no longer stay together. Don’t get me wrong, from a safeguarding and online safety point of view, I cannot say with confidence that X is any worse than any of the other platforms. The only way social media platforms seem to be able to make the business model work is to avoid large workforces and rely on technology to moderate content. The online safety risks from inappropriate content are now well known. They also all seem committed to having some sort of encryption on their messaging services which, while apparently protecting our privacy, creates worrying space for abusers to communicate with each other and share abusive content. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be a way of doing business in the 21 st century without engaging with social media and so, at the moment at least, engaging with the market on these platforms is an uncomfortable necessity for many people working in safeguarding. However, for Keep Governance and Safeguarding, our relationship with X has moved from uncomfortable to untenable. Keep Governance and Safeguarding operates to reduce the risk of abuse, neglect and exploitation through supporting strategic leaders and safeguarding managers, driving improvement in organisational safeguarding arrangements and creating ways to empower children and adults at risk. Our work to deliver on this mission is guided by our values in which we commit to always being collaborative, knowledgeable, personable, thorough and respectful . As recent actions have shown, it doesn’t seem that Elon Musk and X are working to similar values to ours and I feel increasingly uncomfortable using the platform. Twitter had banned a number of far-right voices but these were lifted by Elon Musk after buying it. If it was just about championing free speech I am not sure I would have had a huge problem with this, but he has himself published provocative, disrespectful and ill-informed posts and commented on, and therefore promoted, some from these previously banned accounts. During the riots which for a week or so erupted in the UK following misinformation spread on social media about the awful murders of children in Stockport in August, Elon Musk shared posts which seem to have little or no basis in the truth. He also made provocative comments on other people’s posts, clearly intended to stoke fires rather than try contributing to a calming of the situation. In one such example, which he later deleted, Elon Musk shared an image on X which promoted a conspiracy theory about the UK building "detainment camps" on the Falkland Islands for rioters as if it were a headline from the Daily Telegraph. He is happy to share ill-informed, antagonistic and inaccurate views with over 197 million followers on X, and is at best agnostic about the consequences of these actions or, at worst, deliberately trying to stoke right-wing opinions to undermine otherwise stable democracies. He has reposted numerous posts which personally attack the leadership in Brazil, a country trying to ban X, demonstrating a huge lack of respect for the legal processes of another country and undermining their leaders with his written attacks. In Australia, where the government are trying to regulate content on social media platforms, their eSafety Commissioner was attacked in posts by Elon Musk which led to her receiving a huge amount of online abuse including death threats. He is also taking a group of major companies to court for boycotting X… surely it is the right of any company to decide what platforms they use to interact with the market. For me, the real problem here is the hugely amplified voice of the owner of a platform. With a large amount of money, he has bought himself the ability to speak directly to many people, and his voice unfortunately reflects values which clearly do not align to those of Keep Governance and Safeguarding. So, we will shortly stop posting our social media updates to X and will be adding Youtube to our suite of socials. I am grateful that as a company in most of our work we have the ability to choose who we work with.
Show More
Share by: