OBJECTIVE. The goal was to assess the extent of unwanted and wanted exposure to online pornography among youth Internet users and associated risk factors.
METHODS. A telephone survey of a nationally representative sample of 1500 youth Internet users aged 10 to 17 years was conducted between March and June 2005.
RESULTS. Forty-two percent of youth Internet users had been exposed to online pornography in the past year. Of those, 66% reported only unwanted exposure. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was used to compare youth with unwanted exposure only or any wanted exposure with those with no exposure. Unwanted exposure was related to only 1 Internet activity, namely, using file-sharing programs to download images. Filtering and blocking software reduced the risk of unwanted exposure, as did attending an Internet safety presentation by law enforcement personnel. Unwanted exposure rates were higher for teens, youth who reported being harassed or sexually solicited online or interpersonally victimized offline, and youth who scored in the borderline or clinically significant range on the Child Behavior Checklist subscale for depression. Wanted exposure rates were higher for teens, boys, and youth who used file-sharing programs to download images, talked online to unknown persons about sex, used the Internet at friends’ homes, or scored in the borderline or clinically significant range on the Child Behavior Checklist subscale for rule-breaking. Depression also could be a risk factor for some youth. Youth who used filtering and blocking software had lower odds of wanted exposure.
CONCLUSIONS. More research concerning the potential impact of Internet pornography on youth is warranted, given the high rate of exposure, the fact that much exposure is unwanted, and the fact that youth with certain vulnerabilities, such as depression, interpersonal victimization, and delinquent tendencies, have more exposure.
Comments
Unwanted Definitions of Pornography
I am troubled by the article in February by Janis Wolak et al. The methodology described is suspect on the basis of the two questions asked of respondents.
The second question does not define "having sex." That is a problem dealing with youth whose understanding of the term may be as varied as adults' ("I did not have sex with that woman" --- Bill Clinton) or may be still wider or narrower.
More problematic is the unwarranted assumption that pornography is entailed by the two questions. Images traditionally exempt from the ambit of pornography, such as those with educational, scientific, medical, or artistic intent or content, have presumably not been eliminated from this study.
Even more problematic is the implication that "pictures of naked people" are as negative in nature or potential effect as any others included in the study. Thousands of years of art (including photography in the last century and a half) would stare back at that in indignant amazement. Furthermore, the last hundred or so years have produced the notable expansion and acceptance of the naturist movement, in which non-sexualized images of nudity are common.
Moreover, it is possible to consider pornography to include images of persons partly or completely clothed. That also underscores the fact that contemporary society does not even agree on the meaning of "naked." The article associates or equates "naked," "sexual," "R-rated," "X-rated," and "pornographic." More attention to these is required.
The article discusses the possibility that images of a certain type have a negative impact on youth in certain categories. While it raises justified concerns, the article also reflects our confused attitudes towards bodies, nudity, and sexuality.
Attempting to improve psychosocial outcomes among youth by addressing questions about Internet images (even if better characterized) is demonstrably inferior to addressing some official attitudes. We could well start by dismantling abstinence-only sex education, which has been shown by at least five leading scientific organizations to be a longstanding failure.
We should also heed the warning of the social historian James Kincaid. On the subject of children's developing sexuality, he notes: "Our culture deals with this inevitability by issuing orders to deny it."
Conflict of Interest:
None declared