Anonymous wrote:I actually know someone whose childhood photo was found on the deep web. She was a teenager when her family was notified. It seriously fucked up her sexual and romantic development, as she struggled with feeling violated and dirty.

I guess that's why I care so much. It's not a theoretical to everyone.

So, how would you prevent this? Never take a picture of anyone? Since your story apparently covers years (childhood photo, teen when found, years of sexual and romantic development to follow), this photo was taken pre-social media explosion. So ...

Yes, it would be upsetting, but the only way to truly prevent it is to never have any digital image of your child on any device connected to the internet. So no, I don't buy that the potential trauma of finding out that an otherwise-innocent photo of my child was viewed in a salacious way by strangers is such a major threat that it is worth what it would take to avoid that.

I post period photos to facebook (maybe once every few months) and I update my privacy settings regularly to likit who can see my posts. The rest of our photos are stored on a share site that is password protected. But I can't control group photos of their soccer game or field trip and I'm not going to alienate my MIL because she posts more often and has little understanding of privacy settings. The steps required for this to have an actual impact on my kid are:
1) A pervert on the internet finds a photo appealing enough to save, caption and share it
2) That person or someone with whom it was shared is caught exchanging these images (sadly, very rare)
3) The image is traced back to my family by authorities
4) My child learns what has happened

I think the guaranteed damage to my child from alienating anyone who attempts to photograph them and from refusing to share images with relatives who would like to build a relationship with my child despite distance just isn't worth the minute possibility that a stray image will actually come back to be harmful to us.

I actually know someone whose childhood photo was found on the deep web. She was a teenager when her family was notified. It seriously fucked up her sexual and romantic development, as she struggled with feeling violated and dirty.

I guess that's why I care so much. It's not a theoretical to everyone.

Anonymous wrote:You wouldn't mind knowing someone was masturbating to pictures of your child? Sharing said picture with other pedophiles? Or masturbating to photos of you? Suuuuuure.

Do I want to think about it? No. But that's just it -- I don't think about it at all unless someone brings it up in a context like this. It's a total non-issue to me, and I think those of you who care so deeply are getting worked up over something that is completely silly to care about. Again, how does it actually hurt me? I seriously don't get it!

FFS, there's a whole set of industries (modeling, film, television, advertising, etc.) built on creating images that make people want to have sex with the people depicted. Do you think every model and actor is some kind of weirdo because he/she doesn't care what happens to his/her sexy pictures?

You wouldn't mind knowing someone was masturbating to pictures of your child? Sharing said picture with other pedophiles? Or masturbating to photos of you? Suuuuuure.

Anonymous wrote:You're sure it doesn't harm your child? So if eight years from now the FBI comes knocking you're sure your child won't be upset to learn they've been victimized like that? So if someone takes long-lens photos of your kid playing at the beach that wouldn't upset you? I don't believe you.

OK, don't believe me. I can't believe the hysteria around PHOTOGRAPHS. These are pictures, not people. They are bits and bytes. I think all of you are worked up over something ridiculous, though I would never say that to my friends who feel this way because I get that it genuinely upsets them. How is it any different if someone sees them and just thinks about it?

If I were famous, or a judge, or had some other reason to think my kids were at risk for kidnapping, that would be different.

You're sure it doesn't harm your child? So if eight years from now the FBI comes knocking you're sure your child won't be upset to learn they've been victimized like that? So if someone takes long-lens photos of your kid playing at the beach that wouldn't upset you? I don't believe you.

1) Smart families and Smart nannies will have clear boundaries surrouding dispersal of photos and any other identifying information

2 Calm the F down. Even if a naked photo of your kid became fodder for some disturbed pedo, that in no way harms your kid. The sad reality is that those who are looking for child pornography or who want to molest children can do so easily. There are many, many exploited children in impoverished nations around the world, and tour rich suburban brats aren't worth the trouble they would cause some stranger on the internet. If you want to take steps that ACTUALLY help protect your kids, talk to them openly and honestly about their bodies and about who should have access to them, be respectful of their limits and teach them to speak assertively. If you want to avoid posting things that can ACTUALLY harm your kid, then please stop posting "I can't believ little Larla May Whitebread is already 5 years old today! Love you, sweetie!" Your kid is way more likely to suffer identity theft than to be kidnapped by a pervert and annually posting her full name, home town and DOB (along with mom's maiden name half the time!) is a stupid risk.

I also have a non-disclosure agreement. However, I am required to take pictures/videos when possible of my charge(s). But I switch the data card from the camera with the one in DB's office. It's up to him to disperse the pictures and videos.

I work for a high profile family and it is in my nondisclosure agreement to never take photographs of their baby much less post or publish them.

Not a problem for me as I have never taken photographs of my charges.

Anonymous wrote:I still find it hard to get worked up about this. It's a photo. How does some creepy guy whacking off to it hurt my kids?

The guy is gross, but it's a photo, not actually my kid.

So you have the right to post a photograph of your own child but your nanny (or neighbor) does not.

I still find it hard to get worked up about this. It's a photo. How does some creepy guy whacking off to it hurt my kids?

The guy is gross, but it's a photo, not actually my kid.

No nanny has the right to post pictures of the children in her care - ever. I say this as a nanny.

In news that should not surprise anyone, those investigating pedophile photo sources on the deep web found that about half of the photos were innocent pictures posted online, made exploitative through captions and titles. IF YOU ARE A NANNY YOU MUST STOP POSTING PHOTOS OF YOUR CHARGES ONLINE. Parents, you should also think twice.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/millions-of-social-media-photos-found-on-child-exploitation-sharing-sites-20150929-gjxe55.html