Meanings of Bodily and Sexual Expression in Youth Sexting Culture: Young Women’s Negotiation of Gendered Risks and Harms

Abstract

The present paper explores how young people construct gendered social meanings and cultural norms surrounding sexual and bodily expression in youth sexting culture. Previous research suggests youth sexting is a gendered phenomenon in which young men are able to seek social capital through sexting, whereas young women are subject to social shaming and harassment. Drawing upon findings from group and one-to-one interviews with 41 young people aged 14-18, I show how constructs of risk, shame, and responsibility operated along gendered lines. Young people attributed agency and legitimacy to young men's sexual practices, whereas young women were disempowered, denied legitimacy, and tasked with managing gendered risks of harm in youth sexting culture. I discuss how young women negotiated and navigated risk and shame and, in some instances, made space for safe, pleasurable sexting experiences despite and within these narratives. The accounts of two young women, who shared experiences sexting and social shaming, are presented to show some of the ways young women make sense of social meanings and cultural norms on individual and interpersonal levels. I conclude that challenging gendered harm requires a (re)legitimisation of feminine sexuality and bodily expression away from narratives of risk and shame.

They don’t even think about what the girl might think about it’: students’ views on sexting, gender inequalities and power relations in school

“…Similar findings were reported by Setty (2019), suggesting that risk, shame and blame operate within youth sexting culture to the disadvantage of young females. In another interview study, Setty (2020) explores the meaning of, and norms surrounding, young men's sexting practices.…”

“…A number of studies have also pointed out the gendered nature of sexting (Bindesbøl Holm Johansen, Pedersen, & Tjørnhøj-Thomsen, 2019); (Burén & Lunde, 2018;Cooper et al, 2016;Lippman & Campbell, 2014;Ringrose & Harvey, 2015;Ringrose, Harvey, Gill, & Livingstone, 2013;Setty, 2019;Van Ouytsel, Van Gool, Walrave, Ponnet, & Peeters, 2017;Van Ouytsel, Walrave, & Van Gool, 2014;Walker, Sanci, & Temple-Smith, 2013). Sexting has also been found to occur as a result of social pressure, primarily on girls, as an online extension of the sexual harassment that some female students experience at school (Van Ouytsel et al, 2014).…”

A Rights-Based Approach to Youth Sexting: Challenging Risk, Shame, and the Denial of Rights to Bodily and Sexual Expression Within Youth Digital Sexual Culture

“…As stated above, the majority of participants were concerned about the potential for unauthorised distribution of personal sexual images. The designation of sexting as potentially shameful, more so for young women but also for some young men (Setty 2018a(Setty , 2019, meant that exposure could be "embarrassing" (Gary, 15, M). While this risk was normalised and taken-for-granted (Setty 2018b), it was apparent that unauthorised distribution is the result of decisions taken by individuals.…”

Only sluts love sexting: youth, sexual norms and non-consensual sharing of digital sexual images

“…4 A similar advice was also given by the Dutch police in 2018, who called upon youth to 'stop sexting'. 5 Such advices not only limit young people's sexual freedom, but also encourage victim-blaming in case of incidents, by placing responsibility for (preventing) the distribution of the images with the (potential) victim rather than (potential) perpetrators, as has been demonstrated by scholars in their analyses of young people's sexting narratives (Burkett, 2015;Salter, 2016;Setty, 2019b), media representations of sexting (Crofts, Lee, McGovern, & Milivojevic, 2015;McGovern & Lee, 2018), sex(ting) education (Dobson & Ringrose, 2016;Salter, Crofts, & Lee, 2013), legal responses to nonconsensual image sharing (K. Walker & Sleath, 2017), and teachers' and pupils' responses to a case of non-consensual image sharing in their school (Krebbekx, 2018, pp. 63-81).…”