The Gendered Experiences of Image-based Sexual Abuse

State of the Research and Evidence-based Recommendations

DCU Anti-Bullying Centre

DCU Anti-Bullying Centre is located in Dublin City University’s Institute of Education and is a university recognised national and global centre of excellence in education and research on bullying and online safety. The Centre hosts the UNESCO Chair on Tackling Bullying in Schools and Cyberspace and the International Journal on Bullying Prevention.

The aim of the Centre is to contribute to solving real-world problems of bullying and online safety through collaboration with an extensive community of academic and industry partnerships. Over the past 25 years, staff affiliated with the Centre have undertaken research on school, workplace, and homophobic bullying, as well as many other issues relating to bullying and online safety. The Centre receives funding from the Government of Ireland, the European Commission, the Irish Research Council, the Health Services Executive, Rethink Ireland and industry partners Meta and Vodafone Ireland Foundation.

The Observatory on Cyberbullying, Cyberhate and Online Harassment is a project within DCU Anti-Bullying Centre and was established in 2021 to provide up-to-date research and advice as well as monitor the impact of anticyberbullying laws and regulations. More specifically, the Observatory focuses on researching the prevalence, contours, functions, and psychosocial impacts of cyberbullying, cyberhate, and online harassment. It also aims to explore the impact of laws and regulations on those who engage in or are targeted by cyberbullying, cyberhate, and online harassment.

The Observatory is funded by the Department of Justice following the ratification of the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020 and partly by the Department of Education under the Action Plan on Bullying (2013). The Observatory currently comprises Dr Angela Mazzone (Chair), Dr Maja Brandt Andreasen, Dr Mairéad Foody, Dr Tijana Milosevic, and Prof James O’Higgins Norman.

Executive Summary

The aim of this report is firstly to provide an overview of facets, prevalence and legislation on image-based sexual abuse in Ireland and internationally. Secondly, the report aims to discuss the research into the gendered aspect of experiences of image-based sexual abuse. Thirdly the report provides recommendations based on existing research.

The Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020¹ (Coco’s Law) criminalises the recording, distribution, publishing, or threatening to publish intimate images without consent (Section 2 and 3). In addition to this, the Act criminalises offensive and threatening communications whether they are directed at a person or shared about that person (Section 4).

Consent is central to the terminology of the report which distinguishes between two types of image sharing: consensual and non-consensual sharing of sexual images. Consensual sharing of sexual images² includes self-produced images or texts that are sent to (prospective) sexual partners in order to flirt, arouse or initiate sexual activity (Bianchi et al., 2016; Challenor et al., 2018; Hayes & Dragiewicz, 2018).

Non-consensual sharing of intimate images falls under what this report refers to as image-based sexual abuse. This includes the following types of behaviour: a) taking or creating images without consent – including digitally altered images (known as ‘fake nudes’ or ‘fake porn’), (b) sharing sexual images without consent (including hacked images), (c) threatening to take, create or share sexual images, including sexual extortion (coercing or threatening individuals into sharing sexual images (d) unwanted sexual images, including cyberflashing and unsolicited ‘dick pics’, and (e) unwanted solicitation for sexual images, also referred to as pressured sexting.

The research evidences that women (especially younger women) are disproportionately the targets of image-based sexual abuse (Foody et al., 2021; Ringrose et al., 2021a; Powell et al., 2020). Research finds that norms about gender, masculinity, and femininity among youth dictate the consequences which are experienced differently for boys and girls: Images shared of boys have little to no repercussion while images shared of girls tend to be met by slut shaming and victim blaming. Moreover, while girls could feel pressured into sharing images, boys might feel pressured into soliciting and sharing images of girls as this can function as a way to secure sexual capital, confirm, heterosexual masculinity and create homosocial bonding between male peer groups (Ringrose et al., 2021a; 2021b; 2021c).

This report concludes that while legislation and criminal justice is significant for regulating and penalising image-based sexual abuse, it is crucial to introduce education and prevention programs in order to fully address the issue. The report recommends securing proper emotional, psychological and legal supports for those who have been harmed and wish to seek help or report the abuse. Most significantly, the report refers to research-based evidence that teaching consent and training school staff in the Social, Personal and Health Education (SPHE) lessons in schools is crucial for preventing image-based sexual abuse and providing the education that youth want, need, and which will make them feel safe enough to disclose and report (Ringrose et al., 2021a).

Aim of the Report

The present report has three main aims:

• To provide an overview of the facets, prevalence and legislation on image-based sexual abuse in Ireland and internationally
• To discuss the research into the gendered aspect of experiences of image-based sexual abuse
• To provide recommendations based on existing research

While the Observatory takes a broad approach to the issues of cyberbullying, cyberhate, and online harassment, this report focuses specifically on image-based sexual abuse and the gendered aspect of this. Image-based sexual abuse (what in legal terms is referred to as non-consensual sharing of intimate images and sometimes colloquially as ‘revenge porn’) includes a variety of experiences of having an image (nude, semi-nude, intimate sexual moment) shared online to one or multiple people without giving consent and without having any control over the image. This is particularly a problem for young girls (Foody et al., 2021; Ringrose et al., 2021a; Powell et al., 2020) (although, it is worth pointing out that there have also been male targets) and has now been criminalised under Coco’s Law. While intimate images are also shared consensually between sexual partners and might be beneficial in terms of sexual expression, non-consensual sharing (and other aspects of image-based sexual abuse) can have serious consequences for the targets.

This report provides contemporary and up-to-date research into the experiences and prevalence of image-based sexual abuse followed by a discussion on how this phenomenon is gendered. The report concludes by offering research-based recommendations for how to tackle image-based abuse – both legally but also via educational programmes.

Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images

It is important to note that conceptually two types of image sharing exist in online spaces: consensual and non-consensual sharing of intimate images. In other words, consent is essential to understanding how they differ. The non-consensual sharing of intimate images – referred to here as image-based sexual abuse, is discussed in the section below (‘Image-Based Sexual Abuse). A problematic conflation of the two concepts, what Hasinoff (2015) refers to as the “erasing of consent” tends to occur in media discourse as well as prevention programmes that tend to advice against engaging in consensual sharing of sexual images. Uniformly condemning all types of image-sharing as harmful might also be a result of the criminalisation of sexting for anyone under the age of 17⁹. Consensual sharing of intimate images is usually referred to as (consensual) ‘sexting’ (Ringrose et al., 2021a). This includes self-produced images, text or emojis that are sent to sexual partners or to prospective sexual partners in order to flirt, arouse or initiate sexual activity (Bianchi et al., 2016; Challenor et al., 2018; Hayes & Dragiewicz, 2018; Patchin & Hinduja, 2020). Sexting is increasingly used by adolescents as a way of flirting or signalling interest in the other person and as a means of initiating sexual activity (Bianchi et al., 2016). Researchers document how the consensual exchange of sexts in private can be a way for adolescent to express their sexuality and form intimacy (Burkett, 2015; Patchin & Hinduja, 2020; Villacampa, 2017).

A recent report published by NACOS (2021) showed that 8% of children (6% of boys and 9% of girls) aged 11-17 received a sexual message, image or video in the past 12 months, with older children receiving such content more often (15% of children aged 15-17 reported receiving sexual images, videos or text). Of those receiving such content, 68% reported that this happened on social media. In terms of receiving unwanted requests for a naked image of themselves, 4% of boys and 6% of girls reported receiving such requests either once or a few times in the past year. Most of those receiving unwanted requests were in the upper age range (10% of children aged 15-17 received such requests). A recent study in Ireland (Foody et al. 2021) among a sample of 848 adolescents aged 15-18 reported higher figures in terms of sexual image sharing among young people. The study found that 44.4% of the participants had frequently been asked to send a naked image of themselves (12.1% had been asked once), 16.9% had frequently sent a naked image of themselves (6.9% had sent an image once) and 22.1% had frequently received a sexually explicit image of someone else after having asked for it (8.2% had received an image once). The survey showed that girls were more likely to be asked to send a sexual image than boys (29.3% of the girls and 15.2% of the boys), while boys and girls reported being equally active when it comes to sending images (8 and 8.9%). Fifteen point two percent (15.2%) of the boys and 6.2% of the girls had frequently received a sexual image after having asked for it. The differences between this study and the NACOS survey could be attributable to the different timeframes investigated in the two survey studies. The Foody and colleagues study (2021) assessed young people’s involvement in sexual-image sharing in their lifetime, whereas the NACOS survey assessed sexual-image sharing in the past year.

Research into consensual image-sharing practices among adolescents show how they are negotiated differently across genders and sexualities with different consequences for boys and girls. Receiving sexual images tends to be a positive experience for boys and research has shown how it will often be a way for them to affirm their masculinity and bond with their male peers (Casas et al., 2019; Harvey & Ringrose, 2016). However, research points to how girls, who are open about sending or receiving intimate sexual images might be branded as slutty (Naezer & van Oosterhout, 2021; Ravn et al., 2019; Ringrose et al., 2013).

Research shows that consensual image-sharing is more common among LGBTQ youth compared to heterosexual and cis-gendered youth (Gámez-Guadix et al., 2015; Gámez-Guadix & de Santisteban, 2018; Van Ouytsel et al., 2020). This might reflect the fact that LGBTQ youth tend to use social media more frequently than heterosexual and cis-gendered youth and highlight the ways in which social media can function as a safe space to avoid offline discrimination. Young gay and bisexual men in particular engage more in consensual sexting than their heterosexual counterparts (Bauermeister et al., 2014). Research also shows that LGB people are more accepting of consensual sexting as a part of the sexual and romantic lives (Hertlein et al., 2015).

Image-Based Sexual Abuse

Non-consensual taking and sharing of sexual images is a violation of sexual autonomy and researchers thus refer to this phenomenon as image-based sexual abuse (McGlynn et al., 2019) or image-based sexual harassment and abuse (Ringrose et al., 2021a).

Image-based sexual abuse refers to (a) taking or creating images¹⁰ without consent, including voyeurism and ‘upskirting’ (taking images of an individual’s pubic area underneath their clothing in public (McGlynn et al., 2017) and the creation of ‘fake nude’ images or ‘fakeporn’ (digitally altering a person’s image to make it sexual or pornographic (Henry et al., 2018)), (b) sharing sexual images without consent (including hacking a device or account and sharing the person’s private images), (c) threatening to take, create or share sexual images, including sexual extortion (often known as ‘sextortion’ which refers to the practice of coercing individuals (often children, young people and women) into creating and sharing intimate images using threats and force, including blackmail (McGlynn et al., 2019)), (d) unwanted sexual images, including cyberflashing (distributing unsolicited images – usually of a penis – via digital technologies such as Airdrop, social media platforms, dating platforms and video conferencing platforms, e.g., ‘Zoom bombing’) (Marcotte et al., 2020; McGlynn & Johnson, 2020; Ricciardelli & Adorjan, 2019; Ringrose et al., 2021a) and unsolicited ‘dick pics’ (the unsolicited digital distribution of penis images to an individual); (e) unwanted solicitation for sexual images, also referred to as pressured sexting (the often repeated requests for sexual images by peers – overwhelmingly requests by men and boys exerting pressure on girls (Kernsmith et al., 2018; Lippman & Campbell, 2014; Ringrose et al., 2012; Van Ouytsel et al., 2017).

Gendered Experiences of Image-Based Sexual Abuse

There are significant gendered differences in the experiences of image-based sexual abuse, both in terms of prevalence, in terms of the type of abuse, and in terms of the impact on the wellbeing of the target.

Overall, women and girls are more likely than men and boys to be the targets of image-based sexual abuse. A recent study in Ireland (Foody et al., 2021) among 15-18 year-olds showed that girls are more likely to be asked to send a sexual image than boys (29.3% of the girls and 15.2% of the boys) while boys and girls report being equally active participants when it comes to sending images (8 and 8.9%). Girls were much more likely to receive an unsolicited sexual image than boys (21.9% vs. 7.5%). Furthermore, a 2021 UK study of 336 13-18-year-olds showed that 37% of the girls had received an unwanted sexual image and 32% had received an unwanted “dick pic”¹¹. In comparison, 20% of the boys had received an unwanted sexual image and only 5% had received an unwanted “dick pic”. While half of the recipients received images from youth senders (56.6%), 43.4% received images from adult senders where 90.6% of these were strangers. Unwanted sexual images are thus significantly more likely to be sent by either adult strangers or youth known to the targets.

Another aspect of image-based sexual abuse is the unwanted solicitation for sexual images – also known as pressurised sexting (Ringrose et al., 2021c). The 2021 UK survey revealed that 41% of the girls had been asked to send a sexual image compared to 17.5% of the boys. Furthermore, of those youth who had been asked to send a sexual image, 44% of the girls said they either agreed or strongly agreed that they felt pressured, while 45% of the boys disagreed or strongly disagreed to feeling any pressure and only 12% strongly agreed that they felt pressured. The researchers found that the pressure of pressurised sexting can work in two ways; while girls are pressured into sharing intimate images, the boys also feel pressured to receive sexual images from girls as these function as sexual capital, confirming boys’ heterosexual masculinity as well as creating homosocial bonding among male peer groups (Ringrose et al., 2021a). Interestingly, a 2021 study conducted in Sweden among 14-15 year-old boys who experienced receiving unsolicited sexual images showed that heteronormativity and traditional notions of masculinity prevent boys from talking about the sharing of sexual images and from identifying these experiences as abusive (Hunehäll Berndtsson 2021).

Recent research from England has investigated the experiences of teenage girls receiving unsolicited ‘dick pics’. This research explores the difference for girls aged 11-18 years between receiving images from unknown adults and boys in school who they know (Ringrose et al., 2021b). The researchers found a sexual double standard where girls were not able to leverage dick pics for status the way boys could use girls’ nude images for social capital because girls tended to be shamed for being the recipients of dick pics. The researchers found that the transactional idea behind sending an unsolicited sexual image in order to get one in return, is founded in a cis-gendered and heteronormative masculinity in which heterosexuality is assumed and confirmed via the homosocial bonding of exchanging sexual images of girls.

While most of the research is focused on youth and adolescents, a large 2020 study across the UK, Australia and New Zealand surveyed 16-64-year-olds (n=6,109). This study found that younger adults (20-29) are more likely to be targets of image-based sexual abuse. Furthermore, sexual diverse groups (LGB+) were more likely than heterosexual respondents to have experienced some form of image-based sexual abuse (56.4% vs. 35.4%).

International Initiatives to Tackle Image-Based Sexual Abuse

With the introduction of Coco’s Law, Ireland currently has the most severe criminal sanctions for online abuse in the European Union (Pogatchnik, 2020). Researchers behind the recent reports, (mentioned above) on image-based sexual abuse in the UK, Australia and New Zealand point out the ways in which the laws in the respective countries are insufficient. What follows is an overview of how the laws in those countries – as well as other English-speaking countries such as the United States and Canada – encompass (or do not) the various aspects of image-based sexual abuse:

Australia, New Zealand, Canada, England¹³ Wales and Scotland have all criminalised the sharing of sexual images without consent, however in England, Wales and New Zealand this behaviour is criminalised only if it can be proven that the perpetrator did so with the intention to cause distress. The United States have laws in place in most states that to some extent criminalise either the non-consensual creation or sharing of intimate images. These laws are quite varied across the different states. The creation of sexual images without consent is similarly illegal across these countries, however the law in England only criminalises the creation of sexual images of children – but not of grownups. Since 2016, ‘upskirting’ (taking an image up a person’s skirt without their consent) has become illegal in England and Wales but only if the motivation is sexual gratification or to cause distress. Furthermore, only Scotland and some US states have criminalised the sending of unwanted sexual images while the unwanted solicitation for sexual images remains legal in all countries. The threat to share sexual images is only criminalised in Scotland and Australia. Any other forms of non-consensual creation of sexual images (such as ‘fake ‘nude’ images and ‘fake porn’) are not covered by the law in any of the countries (Ringrose et al., 2021a).

Coco’s Law does cover threats to share images and is thus more comprehensive than the laws in both the UK (with the exception of Scotland), New Zealand and the United States. However, Coco’s Law only covers some aspects of imagebased sexual abuse. The Act does not cover the creation of ‘fake ‘nude’ images and ‘fake porn’, nor does it address the sending of unwanted sexual images and the unwanted solicitation for sexual images.

Research-Based Recommendations

References

Aikenhead, M. (2021). Revenge Pornography and Rape Culture in Canada’s Nonconsensual Distribution Case Law. In J. Bailey, A. Flynn, & N. Henry (Eds.), The Emerald International Handbook of Technology-Facilitated Violence and Abuse (pp. 533-553). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83982-848-520211039

Bauermeister, J. A., Yeagley, E., Meanley, S., & Pingel, E. S. (2014). Sexting Among Young Men Who Have Sex With Men: Results From a National Survey. Journal of Adolescent Health, 54(5), 606-611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.10.013

Bianchi, D., Morelli, M., Baiocco, R., & Chirumbolo, A. (2016). Psychometric properties of the Sexting Motivations Questionnaire for adolescents and young adults. RASSEGNA DI PSICOLOGIA, XXXV, 5-18. https://doi.org/10.4558/8067-01

Bowden, E. (2020, February 19). Cyberflashing on trains ‘largely unreported’ despite rise incidents. YahooNews. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/cyberflashing-trains-largely-unreported-00010…
CQGkQU2EeD-84AyL4DcfD6KNnHzVxWyy2

Burkett, M. (2015). Sex(t) Talk: A Qualitative Analysis of Young Adults’ Negotiations of the Pleasures and Perils of Sexting. Sexuality and Culture,
19(4), 835-863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-015-9295-0

Casas, J. A., Ojeda, M., Elipe, P., & Del Rey, R. (2019). Exploring which factors contribute to teens’ participation in sexting. Computers in Human Behavior, 100, 60-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.06.010

Challenor, L., Foody, M., & O’Higgins Norman, J. (2018). An observation and analysis of profiles among adolescents on the Yellow application. Pastoral Care
in Education, 36(4), 286-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643944.2018.1528623

Coyne, E. (2020, December 1). Law which bans online harassment will be known as Coco’s Law. Independent.ie.

Dobson, A. S., & Ringrose, J. (2016). Sext education: pedagogies of sex, gender and shame in the schoolyards of Tagged and Exposed. Sex Education, 16(1), 8-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2015.1050486

Dunphy, L. (2021, February 13). Coco’s Law: “Long after we’re gone, her name will still be there.” Irish Examiner.

Finn, Christina. (2021, December 23). Justice Minister says ‘stark’ findings shows one in 20 have had intimate images shared online. Thejournal.ie. https://www.thejournal.ie/helen-mcentee-cocos-law-5638704-Dec2021/

Foody, M., Mazzone, A., Laffan, D. A., Loftsson, M., & O’Higgins Norman, J. (2021). “It’s not just sexy pics”: An investigation into sexting behaviour and behavioural problems in adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 117, 106662. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106662

Gámez-Guadix, M., Almendros, C., Borrajo, E., & Calvete, E. (2015). Prevalence and Association of Sexting and Online Sexual Victimization Among Spanish Adults. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 12(2), 145-154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-015-0186-9

Gámez-Guadix, M., & de Santisteban, P. (2018). “Sex Pics?”: Longitudinal Predictors of Sexting Among Adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 63(5), 608-614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.05.032

Harvey, L., & Ringrose, J. (2016). Children, sexuality and sexualization. In Children, sexuality and sexualization.

Hasinoff, A. A. (2015). Sexting Panic: Rethinking Criminalization, Privacy, and Consent. University of Illinois Press.

Hayes, R. M., & Dragiewicz, M. (2018). Unsolicited dick pics: Erotica, exhibitionism or entitlement? Women’s Studies International Forum, 71, 114-120. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2018.07.001

Henry, N., Powell, A., & Flynn, A. (2018, March 1). AI can now create fake porn, making revenge porn even more complicated. The Conversation.

Hertlein, K. M., Shadid, C., & Steelman, S. M. (2015). Exploring Perceptions of Acceptability of Sexting in Same-Sex, Bisexual, Heterosexual Relationships and Communities. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy, 14(4), 342-357. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332691.2014.960547

Hunehäll Berndtsson, K. (2021) “Something You Just Don’t Talk About”: An Analysis of Teenage Boys’ Experiences of Non-Consensual Sexting in Lower Secondary School. The Journal of Men’s Studies. doi:10.1177/10608265211042794

Johnson, M., Mishna, F., Okumu, M., Daciuk, J. (2018). Non-Consensual Sharing of Sexts: Behaviours and Attitudes of Canadian Youth.

Kernsmith, P. D., Victor, B. G., & Smith-Darden, J. P. (2018). Online, Offline, and Over the Line: Coercive Sexting Among Adolescent Dating Partners. Youth &
Society, 50(7), 891-904. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X18764040

Lima, C. (2021, October 26). A whistleblower’s power: Key takeaways from the Facebook Papers. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/10/25/what-are-the-facebook-papers/

Lippman, J. R., & Campbell, S. W. (2014). Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t…If You’re a Girl: Relational and Normative Contexts of Adolescent Sexting in the United States. Journal of Children and Media, 8(4), 371-386. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2014.923009

Marcotte, A. S., Gesselman, A. N., Fisher, H. E., & Garcia, J. R. (2020). Women’s and Men’s Reactions to Receiving Unsolicited Genital Images from Men. Journal of Sex Research, 58(4), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2020.1779171

McGlynn, C., & Johnson, K. (2020). Criminalising Cyberflashing: Options for Law Reform. The Journal of Criminal Law, 85(3), 171-188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022018320972306

McGlynn, C., Rackley, E., & Houghton, R. (2017). Beyond ‘Revenge Porn’: The Continuum of Image-Based Sexual Abuse. Feminist Legal Studies, 25(1), 25-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-017-9343-2

McGlynn, C., Rackley, E., & Johnson, K. (2019). Shattering Lives and Myths: A Report on Image-Based Sexual Abuse. National Advisory Council for Online Safety (2021). Report of a National Survey of Children, their Parents and Adults regarding Online Safety. https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/1f19b-report-of-a-national-survey-of-…

Naezer, M., & van Oosterhout, L. (2021). Only sluts love sexting: youth, sexual norms and non-consensual sharing of digital sexual images. Journal of Gender Studies, 30(1), 79-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2020.1799767

Patchin, J. W. & Hinduja, S. (2020). It is Time to Teach Safe Sexting. Journal of Adolescent Health, 66(2), 140-143.

Pogatchnik, S. (2020, December 17). Ireland brings in tough laws on revenge porn and online bullying. Politico.

Powell, A., Scott, A., Flynn, A., & Henry, N. (2020). Image-based sexual abuse: An international study of victims and perpetrators. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35166.59209

Ravn, S., Coffey, J., & Roberts, S. (2019). The currency of images: risk, value and gendered power dynamics in young men’s accounts of sexting. Feminist Media Studies, 21(2), 315-331. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2019.1642229

Ricciardelli, R. (Rose), & Adorjan, M. (2019). ‘If a girl’s photo gets sent around, that’s a way bigger deal than if a guy’s photo gets sent around’: gender, sexting, and the teenage years. Journal of Gender Studies, 28(5), 563-577. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2018.1560245

Ringrose, J., Gill, R., Livingstone, S., & Harvey, L. (2012). A qualitative study of children, young people and “sexting”: a report prepared for the NSPCC. National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children.

Ringrose, J., & Harvey, L. (2015). Boobs, back-off, six packs and bits: Mediated body parts, gendered reward, and sexual shame in teens’ sexting images. Continuum, 29(2), 205-217. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304312.2015.1022952

Ringrose, J., Harvey, L., Gill, R., & Livingstone, S. (2013). Teen girls, sexual double standards and “sexting”: Gendered value in digital image exchange. Feminist Theory, 14(3), 305-323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700113499853

Ringrose, J., Regehr, K., & Milne, B. (2021a). Understanding and Combatting Youth Experiences of Image-Based Sexual Harassment and Abuse.

Ringrose, J., Regehr, K., & Whitehead, S. (2021b). Teen Girls’ Experiences Negotiating the Ubiquitous Dick Pic: Sexual Double Standards and the Normalization of Image Based Sexual Harassment. Sex Roles, 85(9), 558-576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-021-01236-3

Ringrose, J., Regehr, K., & Whitehead, S. (2021c). ‘Wanna trade?’:Cisheteronormative homosocial masculinity and the normalization of abuse in youth digital sexual image exchange. Journal of Gender Studies, 00(00), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2021.1947206

Sciacca, B., Mazzone, A., Norman, J. O., & Foody, M. (2021). Blame and responsibility in the context of youth produced sexual imagery: The role of teacher empathy and rape myth acceptance. Teaching and Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103354

Setty, E. (2019). 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. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 1(4), 298-311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-019-00050-6

Strohmaier, H., Murphy, M. & DeMatteo, D. (2014). Youth Sexting: Prevalence Rates, Driving Motivations, and the Deterrent Effect of Legal Consequences. Sex Res Soc Policy 11, 245-255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-014-0162-9

The Department of Education and Skills. (2013). Action Plan On Bullying: Report of the Anti-Bullying Working Group to the Minister for Education and Skills.

Van Ouytsel, J., Van Gool, E., Walrave, M., Ponnet, K., & Peeters, E. (2017). Sexting: adolescents’ perceptions of the applications used for, motives for, and consequences of sexting. Journal of Youth Studies, 20(4), 446-470. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2016.1241865

Van Ouytsel, J., Walrave, M., & Ponnet, K. (2020). An Exploratory Study of Transactional Sexting Among High School Students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 66(4), 510-513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.11.300

Villacampa, C. (2017). Teen sexting: Prevalence, characteristics and legal treatment. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 49, 10-21. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2017.01.002

Wells, G. Horwitz, J. and & Seetharaman, D. (2021, September 14). Facebook knows company is toxic for teen girls, company documents show. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-instagram-is-toxic-for-teen-girls-company-documents-show-11631620739?mod=hp_lead_pos7&mod=article_inline

¹irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2020/act/32/enacted/en/print

²Often referred to as ‘sexting’, but for the purpose of this report, referred to as consensual sharing of sexual images.

³https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2020/act/32/enacted/en/print

⁴https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/ebe58-national-advisory-council-for-o…

⁵Hotline.ie works at the intersection of online service providers, civil society and law enforcement working together to ensure that child online sexual materials are promptly removed at source and that the children in the imagery can be identified and protected.

⁶https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32011L0093

⁷https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2017/act/2/enacted/en/html

⁸https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/d8e4c-online-safety-and-media-regulat…

⁹It is illegal to send and share sexual images of anyone under the age of 17 – even if a person under 17 sends an image of themselves, under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998.

¹⁰Images encompasses all forms of visual content, e.g. photographs, videos, chats, live videos.

¹¹While dick pics are the most common unwanted sexual image, other body parts can feature in sexual images, for example a naked torso.

¹²It’s significant to note that such numbers might be lower when people self-report.

¹³The laws differ across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, thus no general law applies across all of the UK.