[tapland]

It's also important to have clear distinctions between things that are questionable but not harmful, and that the kids feel that they can sound the alarm when things are really wrong.

There are a lot of pictures and words that are inappropriate and shouldn't be in kids games. But it's really important to convey that there is a difference between that, and even pictures of feet, to pictures of you nude or pictures with your face in them.

I met people from chatrooms some 16 years ago when I was 14, with friends, at a public space and my friends parents knew the place well and knew when and where we were going. Was a fun double date. A lot of people I know would not tell any adult and lie about where they are going to avoid shame and anger.

[b_tterc_p]

I feel like most people would put pictures of children’s feet in the absolutely not ok bucket

[tapland]

If you feel that it's in the same bucket as sending full frontal nudes with identifiable face, that's your decision to make as a parent.

Your kids are going to send pictures to other people.

[b_tterc_p]

I’m not sure how you imagine communicating such things to a child. Do you have a flip chart with full frontal nudes in red and feet pictures in orange? It’s not like there’s anything more prohibitive than “absolutely not ok”. Both are beyond that. Your argument sounds like needing to clarify that Fentanyl is worse than heroin, and that if I don’t make it clear that fentanyl is worse, they’re going to do both?

If you can prevent either, you should prevent both.

[tapland]

It seems unlikely that your child knows about every fetish adults have, and if they happen to send pictures of their feet to someone they have not done anything bad, they have not broken any unspoken general rule, there isn't a lot saying that is a thing you shouldn't do or any obvious signs as to why it would be bad. It hasn't exposed them in a dangerous way, but they have been victims to an adult going online and asking children for feet pictures to satisfy themselves.

Your reply implies that the child has been taught why it's just as bad to send a picture of their feet as of their hair as of their ankle as of their entire body as of anything. Or that they have parents who wouln't agree to them doing things that seem totally reasonable to them, and just freak out without any explanation.

Children are taught what nudity is very early. They aren't taught people's weird kinks. The difference between the two cases I mentioned is much greater than that between fentanyl and heroin. Both are not ok, but they are not even close in terms of possible adverse effects. You can't judge everything assuming the child has knowledge of the intentions of the abuser online. If your child sends the pictures because 'it's just feet, it can't hurt me' that's a much better reason, even though the child hasn't finished developing it's brain than 'my dad doesn't want me to send any pictures'.