By Kieran McCartan, Ph.D. & David S. Prescott. LICSW
It almost goes without saying that the online world has
changed dramatically in recent years. Where we once distinguished between the
“real” and “online” worlds, their interaction now compels us to view the
influence of the one on the other. How do we think about the way that we
behave, our actions and interactions ion the online environment? Over the years
we have heard everything from online behaviour is different from offline,
online behaviour is a precursor to offline behaviour, they are all the same behaviours
but in different environments.
This all means that it can be difficult to process and
comprehend online behaviour, especially around sexual harassment, and abuse.
This blog is a product of three stories in the press this week, the first being
the ongoing case of Andrew
Tate for sexual exploitation, trafficking, and misogyny; the second being a
feature piece by Emily
Atack trying to process if she is somehow responsible for the online abuse
she has received on a daily basis; and third being the recent report that
viewing Child Sexual
Exploitation material increased 10 fold over lockdown. Although these three
stories may seem different, they are connected through our attitude and
response to the online environment and the range of sexually abusive interactions
that occur there; interactions that we somehow will not tolerant offline.
The debate over freedom of speech and approaches to
policing it on the internet are frustrating and often circular, ending in a
dead end. It is not our desire to re-ignite them here, but to draw attention to
the fact that abuse is abuse and harm is harm regardless of whether it happens
online or offline. In the past few months, we have seen at least two colleagues
excoriated by people in social media who were either unable, unready, or
unwilling to view their comments in the proper context. In other venues, some
have ended
their lives as a result of online abuses. The medium through which harm
occurs should not lessen the perceived reality of it or the accepted outcomes.
Harm in online and virtual communities is still harm and can result in very
real and tangible impacts on people’s mental health and wellbeing. But time and
again we dismiss this harm as somehow less because it did not happen in person.
What can we do about it?
We need to face up to some stark realities. We can remember
that because something is online does not mean that it’s not real. The virtual
world plays a massive role in the way that we see the actual world and our
attitudes and behaviours. We need to take online harms seriously and hold
platforms and corporations to account even as we support free speech more
generally. A good example of this is in England and Wales where they are trying
to get it put into the new online
harms bill that CEOs
and directors of online companies will be held criminally responsible for harmful
material on their sites that endanger children. This is a significant step
forward, as it promotes accountability and responsibility. Up until now, that accountability
and responsibility has mainly been in the hands of the user rather than the
provider. Additionally, we need to get better in teaching everyone about the
reality of the internet and online environments. For years, we have operated on
the assumption that people should use “common sense,” but this needs to change.
A good example of this is some of the work happening is schools, as a result
of the Andrew Tate case.
We are not saying that we need to ban the internet or close
it down but rather we need to take these harms seriously if we are to prevent
abuse. We need this “moment of clarity” to recognise that its not an aside to
everyday life that its at the heart of everyday life and therefore needs to be
taken seriously, we cannot strive to change the reality of offline, in person
sexual abuse while ignoring the conversations, networks, images and material
available online.
No comments:
Post a Comment