This page is referenced by:

• 1 2022-06-15T14:09:19-07:00 Sexual Moral Panics and the Construction of Innocence 7 plain 2022-06-16T15:46:39-07:00 Sex educators, whether they identify their work as peer-led or professional, have experienced TikTok’s failure to delineate the difference between educational content and pornography firsthand, with many documenting their difficulty navigating the platform on the site itself. TikTok’s community guidelines on “Adult nudity and sexual activities”are firmly and clearly anti-pornography and anti-sex work, and as a result anti-sex education. TikTok’s conflation of pornography and sex ed invites us to question why this association is so common and how it is rooted in histories of moral panics.
  
  I understand moral panics relating to sexuality and innocence as an extension of the construction of both youth innocence and white feminine innocence. The historical positioning of white women as innocent, vulnerable, and weak infantilizes white women, characterizing them in similar ways to children. The characterization of white femininity as inherently childlike and innocent influences the narrative of white slavery and sexual violence against white women at the hands of men of color, particularly Black men. Julietta Hua describes the hypervisibility of certain cultural narratives about r*pe with ties to colonial violence, narratives that support the construction of Black, Indigenous, and Brown men as a threat to all women. “Rescue narratives revolve around the presumed weakness of women, whether Native or European and the moral superiority of white men” (Hua, 2011). The narrative that white men are saviors for women who regardless of race need rescuing naturalizes gendered expectations that femininity is inherently passive and that victims of sexual violence are universally women. This universal woman/victim is also framed as always an innocent person– someone who has been harmed by no fault of their own and is therefore deserving of protection. “This makes it difficult to see, let alone prosecute rape, among criminalized populations—for instance, the rape of prisoners, undocumented persons, sex workers, and the homeless and transient, as well as in cases where alleged perpetrators are associated with law enforcement” (Hua, 2011). Like the feminine victim, (white) children are seen as inherently innocent and in need of protection. This base assumption is relied on in discourses on what is safe and in policies such as SESTA/FOSTA and the more recent EARN IT Act, which claims to aim to protect young people from Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM). It is difficult, if not impossible, to argue against policies disguised as protecting the safety of children without being demonized or viewed as a threat to children’s safety yourself. The terms used to frame legislation and public debates are set up in such a way that if you question these constructions it is as though you are arguing against protecting children from violence and abuse.  This is a powerful tool held by lawmakers, religious organizations, and other influential moral authorities that disallows conversations that are critical of legislation created in the interest of child safety. Thus, discussion of how laws such as FOSTA, SESTA, and the EARN IT Act are harming sex workers’ free speech, and are disrupting access to sex education, is swiftly and easily shut down by morally conservative arguments that privilege childhood innocence as a form of safety above all else. Particularly since TikTok is aimed toward a younger audience, such longstanding arguments about sexuality in relation to youth and innocence become crucial to understanding how TikTok deploys safety in its own media ecosystem.