“Send Nude!”. On social networks, these two English words (“send a nude!”) have become an extremely popular humorous expression. Beyond the joke, it is also a marker of a fairly widespread practice in the population: “sexting”, i.e. the sending or receiving of sexually explicit messages or photographs through cell phone or other digital devices.
Sexting is the subject of a growing number of studies focusing primarily on adolescents, because of the associated risks they face – coercion, harassment and sexual assault – and the legal implications of producing, distributing and possessing sexually explicit images of minors. But we are seeing the emergence of more and more studies concerning adults. According to this work, sexting is a common practice: in Western countries, about one in two adults has already sent or received a sext. Far from stigmatizing as a process, research points to the need to differentiate between sexting as an activity of consensual sexual expression in the context of a romantic relationship, and that which is the result or consequence of manipulation or manipulation. a coercion.
Cyberflashing to seduce, intimidate or kiss
Among these coercive practices, we find cyberflashing, “a form of image-based sexual abuse, the non-consensual sending of nude or sexually explicit material through digital technologies, including text messages and social media apps”. This use, a consequence of the disinhibition of individuals in online interactions, is unfortunately quite common. A survey of 2,000 adult women in the UK shows that 41% of respondents have already received a man’s genitals (“dick pic”) without their consent. Nevertheless, the term cyberflashing encompasses all sending of sexually explicit content, whether by men or women.
But what drives cyberflashers to send non-consensual sexual content? Several reasons are given. The first is affirmation: the expression of behavior that attempts to invite flirtation or strategically solicit the exchange of sexual favors. Some cyberflashers believe that sending sexual content can increase their chances of starting a relationship and obtaining the same favors in return.
The second reason is non-affirmation, which is the expression of deviant behavior intended to embarrass or intimidate the recipient. From this perspective, unwanted sexual content then makes it possible to exercise power or control over the recipient and to instill fear and insecurity in online communications. This sexually deviant behavior involves a disregard for the recipient’s feelings: lack of empathy, risk-taking, selfishness, and interpersonal hostility are characteristic of cyberflashers who cite non-affirmation as the reason.
Among cyberflashers, more women than men?
A study recently published in the scientific journal Computer in Human Behavior attempts to better explain this practice, its reasons and the factors that predict it. Researchers surveyed 816 Canadian college students between the ages of 16 and 60 using a cyberflashing questionnaire. The results reveal that 41.8% of respondents have sent an unsolicited sexual image to someone else at least once. For the entire sample, this concerns 30.4% of men and 46.4% of women; 43.3% heterosexual and 35.2% LGBTQIA+. We therefore observe that gender does not significantly predict cyberflashing behaviors when we consider all non-consensual sexual content, and not only the genitals.
Among people who have sent sexual content at least once without the recipient’s prior consent, the most frequent reason given is the search for a partner (64.3%), followed by the search for personal and sexual gratification (44, 4%), being in the spirit of exchanging sexual content (44.7%) and exercising power or control (14.7%). A more detailed analysis of the results shows that women are more likely than men to cite the “search for a partner” and the “search for personal and sexual gratifications”.
For the authors, this result can be explained in particular by the pressures that weigh on women in our society, and in particular the valuation of their appearance. These representations would push them to seek social validation from men by sending sexualized images despite all the risks they incur, such as cyberbullying and revenge porn. [diffuser publiquement des images sexuellement explicites d’un individu sans son accord, NDLR]. They seem to give in, in part, to a sexual self-objectification of their bodies in order to find a partner. The results also show quite consistently that those who choose the reason “exercise power or control over the recipient” jointly exhibit a tendency to have more antisocial behaviors, lack of empathy and impulsivity.
Cyberflashers, repack the equipment!
What about cyber flashes? A few studies provide a better understanding of the effects of receiving unwanted sexual images or messages. Another study published in 2022 in Computers in Human Behavior thus shows that cyberflashers lack lucidity when it comes to predicting the reactions of cyberflashes. According to this work, 76.1% of these cyberflashed people experience ambivalent feelings and 51.4% negative reactions (disgust, anger, insecurity, fear). These negative feelings can be even more exacerbated in women who receive “dick pics”: they feel scared, attacked, uncomfortable and out of control. On the other hand, 74.6% of cyberflashers expect flirtatious behavior and 82% do not even imagine negative reactions.
In France, article 624-2 of the Penal Code punished the sending of “dick pic” without consent by a fine of 750 euros, which can be increased to 1,500 euros when the victim is a minor. There are also digital tools under development, especially at Meta (ex-Facebook), aimed at blocking unsolicited sexual content. But it is very likely that their effectiveness is limited due to the biases present in the artificial intelligences of image recognition.
Be that as it may, we can agree that what is at stake in cyberflashing goes beyond the legal or technological question. This is a problem of consent education and also a manifestation of the sexism experienced by women. The first reflex could be to ask digital mediators to raise awareness of cyberflashing. But we cannot attribute to them the burden of solving all the dysfunctions of our society. Education about consent and equality between men and women must begin in the family environment, then continue in the school and professional environment. And if we had to raise awareness of cyberflashing in all its forms, the watchword would be: “Don’t do this without the consent of your recipient”.
* Séverine Erhel is a lecturer in cognitive psychology at Rennes 2