I’m just so pleased to welcome Dr.Emma Rush to my blog today. Associate Lecturer in Ethics and Philosophy at Charles Sturt University, Emma is to be commended for kicking off the debate on the sexualisation of children in this country, as lead author of Corporate Paedophilia: Sexualisation of children in Australia and Letting Children Be Children: Stopping the sexualisation of children in Australia, the discussion papers published by the Australia Institute in 2006. Emma also wrote the chapter ‘What Are the Risks of Premature Sexualisation for Children?’ in Getting Real: Challenging the Sexualisation of Girls. Emma makes a compelling case for Government to get involved because of industry failure to act and also asks: what’s happened to the review of the Senate inquiry recommendations that was supposed to take place last year?
Time for government to set standards preventing child sexualisation
It’s great to see bi-partisan concern about the sexualisation of children. I commend those MPs who spoke up for children’s interests in the House of Representatives this week on a Notice of Motion introduced by South Australian Labor MP Amanda Rishworth.
The issue is not about banning little girls from putting on mummy’s lipstick or playing with Barbies – activities Jane Caro claimed critics of sexualisation were wanting to ban, on ABC’s PM program Tuesday night.
It goes well beyond playing dress-ups. There is substantial evidence that sexualisation harms children: it promotes body image concerns, eating disorders, and gender stereotyping. Premature sexualisation also erases the line between who is and is not sexually mature, and as such, may increase the risk of child sexual abuse by undermining the important social norm that children are sexually unavailable. (See: APA TSG 2007. Report of the American Psychological Association Taskforce on the Sexualisation of Girls). So how can we stop the sexualisation of children? The 2008 Senate Inquiry into the Sexualisation of Children in the Contemporary Media Environment concluded that “the onus is on broadcasters, publishers, advertisers, retailers and manufacturers to take account of these community concerns [about the sexualisation of children]”. It recommended some actions these industry bodies could take, including:
- That broadcasters review their classification of music videos specifically with regard to sexualising imagery;
- That publishers consider providing reader advice, based on the Office of Film and Literature Classification systems of classifications and consumer advice, on magazine covers indicating the presence of material that may be inappropriate for children;
- That the effectiveness of the Australian Association of National Advertisers’ Code for Advertising and Marketing Communications to Children, introduced in April 2008, be reviewed by the Senate in December 2009;
- That the Advertising Standards Bureau consider adopting a process of pre-vetting advertisements either (a) at the request of the advertiser where they are concerned that the content of the material may be pushing the boundaries of the codes or (b) where an advertiser or agency has regularly produced advertising material that has been the subject of complaints; and
- That the Advertising Standards Board rigorously apply standards for billboards and outdoor advertising to more closely reflect community concern about the appropriateness of sexually explicit material and the inability of parents to restrict exposure of children to such material.
Importantly, the Senate Inquiry also recommended a review of these recommendations which was supposed to have taken place in December 2009.. The review was to ensure that positive action was indeed being taken by industry bodies in the interests of the health and welfare of Australian children.
As of February 2010, this review hasn’t happened and the sexualisation of children continues apace.
Some industry bodies have implemented minor changes since the Senate Inquiry, but this minimal response has not yet come close to addressing the scale of the problem. Industry was warned, has had its chance to voluntarily self-regulate, and has conspicuously failed to act at the level required. Of course, it’s not altogether surprising that the industries that profit from the sexualisation of children are not backing off by themselves. Why would they? It’s a competitive market. It is now clearly up to the government to take the lead, on behalf of Australian children.
But what can government do?
- It could start by conducting the now overdue December 2009 review of industry’s response to the Senate Inquiry recommendations, which would put clearly on the public record the failure of industry self-regulation to promote children’s interests.
- It needs to recognise that what is happening today is sexualisation ‘by a thousand cuts’. One sexualised billboard, one television show or advertisement, one internet site, one toy, one child’s magazine: none of these alone cause the problem of child sexualisation. It is the combination of many sexualised billboards, television shows, advertisements, internet sites, toys, magazines, and so on that cause child sexualisation.
The ‘case-by-case’ approach to regulation which is currently used by both government regulation and industry self-regulation will not work for this issue. We need an integrated regulatory approach covering all relevant industries, with the expertise of child health and welfare professionals structured into the regulation process, and regulation enforceable by law.
The evidence of the past 18 months of minimal response by industry shows that the market culture around this issue will not shift without stronger government initiative.
Industry will squeal at the prospect of such regulation, of course – it always does. But our society is financially richer than almost any other society in recorded history. Regulating against the sexualisation of children might cause a blip in profit margins in some places, but it is hardly going to destroy the economy as we know it. We must hold this firmly in mind as we meet industry resistance, and ask, loudly and clearly: What is all our wealth worth, if the market eats our children?
See also: Child sexualisation is no game, Emma Rush, On Line Opinion and From one worried mother, a passionate call to arms…It’s time to stop the fashion industry dressing girls like this.
Now in its second printing!
February 10th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
It’s staggering how greatly Jane Caro has confused the issue. Talk about erecting a straw Barbie to knock down. Thank you Emma for clarifying the real issues here.
February 10th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
This blog was both enlightening yet troubling.
My concerns are these;
Dr Rush demonstrates the apparent need for the Government to act now and probes a question regarding the review from the Industries response to the Senate Inquiry.
I am confused regarding the delay in this? There are studies which show the desperate need to act immediately, there are many professionals whom are concerned, and there are documents, and books now written on the subject (the sexualisation of children) …so why the delay? Why dismiss the concerns impacting children of this nation? Why dismiss professional recommendations regarding this?
Industry using a self –regulative system doesn’t work, this is evident. One just needs to look around and see so many degrading and filthy images to bounce one’s eyes from daily. I personally feel inundated with the images and the like I am exposed to – never mind children.
Dr Rush spoke about a thousand cuts. It feels like that. I have flesh wounds and deep cuts from different angles;
• At the gym, I am unable to work- out without the large screens with imagery of sex- absorbed music video’s
• I am in the local ‘cheapie’ store with my nephew and there is an image of a pen called the ‘Climax Pen’ – including a photo of a woman on top of a man. This has recorded audio to accompany it.
• I drive to work and pass many billboards, a sex shop and fill my car up with fuel and am exposed to porn images on the stands
• I go Christmas shopping and see images in Roger David, and the insulting slogans on t-shirts on stands outside Supre.
• I sit in the Osteo’s waiting room and see the flaws of Jen Hawkins for us all to see (tongue in cheek!)
• I watched Nemo a while back with my mates children, and a ad came on with a man pushing a woman up against lockers in a sexually aggressive manner – this was for a show later that evening. But Nemo was still on!
And this is just part of a typical week of my life.
Our government believes there is no rush for a review of the Senate Inquiry regarding this issue? I disagree.
Thank You Dr Rush. What else can the average person do?
February 10th, 2010 at 5:49 pm
Radio stations need to included in this. As a parent I have to turn off the tax payer funded radio station when driving in the car. In fact I have switched it off all together because they cover topics like rape, graphic details of sexual crimes and the like. I just don’t want to explain this to my 6 year old. The ABC told their audience is for 35 – 40 year olds. Whatever happened to it being a free to air information and normal radio content for all?
Please it time we say enough is enough with our tax dollars being used to promote inappropriate material when mothers are driving in the car or even at home with small babies.
February 10th, 2010 at 5:50 pm
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/ad-firm-pulls-racy-sexpo-billboard-20100205-nguv.html
Good news on sex billboards, Ipswich sexpo billboard pulled from Ipswich billbaord, read the full story
February 10th, 2010 at 9:10 pm
Excellent article Emma.
The non-action on the recommendations from the senate inquiry is truly astonishing….let alone the fact that we still haven’t seen the promised review.
Labor Government policy states that they will “work towards developing strategies to prevent and reduce the damage being caused by the increased sexualisation of children in the media and popular culture.”
So…what are they doing??
Acting on recommendations and reviewing the inquiry are imperative first steps!
Kids Free 2B Kids calls on the Government to take action in line with their policy.
Chapter 7: Securing an inclusive future for all Australians.
Young Australians
69. ‘Labor will place a particular focus on young people’s health needs, including physical and mental health, drug and alcohol education, the promotion of positive body image and a healthy lifestyle. Labor will work towards developing strategies to prevent and reduce the damage being caused by the increased sexualisation of children in the media and popular culture.”
February 10th, 2010 at 10:44 pm
Great article Emma! I find this part incredibly helpful:
“It needs to recognise that what is happening today is sexualisation ‘by a thousand cuts’. One sexualised billboard, one television show or advertisement, one internet site, one toy, one child’s magazine: none of these alone cause the problem of child sexualisation. It is the combination of many sexualised billboards, television shows, advertisements, internet sites, toys, magazines, and so on that cause child sexualisation. ”
This helps me to respond to those who claim “it’s just a shirt/billboard/toy.” Actually it’s just all of them!
February 11th, 2010 at 8:46 am
Emma, in your research paper Corporate Paedophilia October 2006 http://www.apo.org.au/research/corporate-paedophilia-sexualisation-children-australia
You clearly address areas regarding the sexualisation of children, the methods in which children are sexualised, you challenged the dangers of advertisements, magazines, and television. You clearly state the risks of physical, psychological and the sexual harm on children.
You then go on to highlight the need for sustained public debate, the need for a reliable funding base to support a coalition of child -focused organisations and the need for more research. (to name but a few areas).
My question (I do have many!), but my one question is Why has nothing been done at a government level?. I agree with the bloggers above regarding their concerns, and don’t understand why nothing much has changed?
I understand since the writing of Corporate Paedophilia, there has been one change evident. That being, there are now individuals, organisations, NGO, groups and the like who are rising up and saying enough is enough.
Good on them, it’s important that we get stronger in addressing this area. But where is the governments backing regarding this important issue?
I appreciate and value your work Emma, and good on you Melinda for getting people of great strength and reputation informing us deeper on these issues.
February 11th, 2010 at 7:00 pm
Hi,
I note your comments regarding the damge to young girls’ body image via premature sexualisation etc and agree with thenm.
Can I assume that this blog is also 100% behind the abolition of clitoridectomies being practised on young girls who live in this country, though they are not always performed in this country?
Can you imagine the effect on your body image and sexuality that results from having your clitoris and labia chopped off? Not to mention the shock and medical complications that result from these “operations”.
A few hundred of these girls have appeared at the Royal Women’s hospital per year for treatment. Does this blog support these women and girls too?
I hope so.
February 11th, 2010 at 8:09 pm
JJ, what person in their right mind wouldn’t support the abolition of clitoridectomies?
February 11th, 2010 at 9:19 pm
Yes JJ, you can assume that this blog is 100 percent behind eliminating FGM. Have only been blogging since Dec and haven’t yet covered every human rights violation known to women and girls, however definately feel strong on this – tweeted on it a few days ago actually. I would be interested in any further info you might have re RWH treating women and girls who have been violated in this way. I have also long suspected girls have been sent out of the country for these procedures (as has been documented in UK) and would like to secure any evidence for this here. MTR
February 12th, 2010 at 9:00 am
Mel & Emma -
I really appreciate this post. I would love to see bipartisan legislation passed in Australia, UK, and the USA. Our children deserve better.
My company (Pigtail Pals) aims to reclaim girlhood for our daughters. Emma, the following comment is what fuels me to get up and do what I do: “Premature sexualisation also erases the line between who is and is not sexually mature, and as such, may increase the risk of child sexual abuse by undermining the important social norm that children are sexually unavailable.”
Thanks to both you Ladies! Excellent work!
February 14th, 2010 at 5:31 pm
Hi all,
Thanks for your comments! Just a quick response to both Rick and Deb above who both questioned why the government was taking so long to act. My experience is that while politicians are usually well-motivated, they are also exceptionally busy. This means that the issues that get acted on are usually the ones that they receive most pressure about (as is sometimes said, ‘it’s the squeaky wheel that gets the grease’). Although we do have strong evidence and expert opinion in our favour, we need to keep the pressure on politicians to ensure they act.
Emma
September 8th, 2010 at 4:35 pm
…
Which is some inspirational things. Never knew that opinions could possibly be this varied. Thank you for all the enthusiasm to offer such helpful data right here….