In general, many things on social media make us sick. Despite it, those still exist. Though it’s subjective, the perception of content differs for everyone. Items that are common and normalized may be disastrous for those who are represented in those. One of them is a depiction of children on Instagram. Particularly children from marginalized groups. Instagram is filled with pictures taken of children at traffic lights and roadsides from closed-window cars.
Children, be it coming from any strata of society, are vulnerable. Numbers and their analysis have repeatedly proved that when it comes to child sexual abuse, the strata of society they come from or their geographical location doesn’t differ. This piece is particularly about children from marginalized groups.
Making pictures of children available in the public domain have legal consequences. It is punishable by law if one objects to photographs taken and posted without consent. This consent about children primarily lies with their parents/caretakers/teachers, though how we perceive consent is another topic of discussion in India. There’s hardly anything in India that is done with prior consent. Adults themselves lack the clarity and integrity to maintain so that we can imagine the situation of children.
What do social media influencers do? Why do they do this? Who is going to tell them the gravity of this practice? I have no expertise or say on it. But as a social work professional, there are things that I can share. Confidentiality is one of the prime social work principles. As my social capital is primarily built around the same group, I see people routinely posting pictures of children from their field works, projects, sightseeing locations, etc. It contains development professionals, social workers, professionals from educational projects, CSR project officials, etc.
The culture of showing off doing good to someone might be helping them, but it is in no way helping the children. Why mainly talk about children from marginalized groups? Because they lack social security, which children from well-to-do families have access to. Their lives are already complicated, with so much to be endured. We don’t need to add another layer of vulnerability to them by exposing them to the public domain for a couple of hundreds of likes (or more).
These pictures mainly show off the quality of life one lives by sacrificing more significant opportunities. Romanticizing your work around children makes me feel sick. I would say don’t sacrifice anything and do your job with high-paying agencies instead exposing these children. Don’t act like a messiah like the one in ‘Article 15’. Those children might do well without even your photoshoots. To which socio-economic groups do these children belong? It’s not a hard guess. While we carry layers of identities based on our social location and still get abused, discriminated against, and exploited as adults, we can imagine the relativity of children’s experiences. Or maybe we can’t even imagine. Just search on google simple terms relating to child sexual abuse and see it yourself. It is so easy to click pictures of and with children from a marginalized group. Would you dare to click a photo of a 10-year-old child in a shopping mall while he\she walking with their parents? Would you dare to click a random picture with a group of students from a convent or some international school on their own premises?
The elite-savarna population adopted this self-acclaimed title of saviours that they were going to emerge and take the vulnerable out of their misery in not new for India. If they are genuinely going to do it, cut the photoshoot part. It might get you foreign grants and fellowships, but children would still struggle in their slums. You would be off to your flight to attend a UN meeting on child welfare, and the child you posted pictures of and with would-be still dreaming of their tomorrow’s lunch or school fees.
The sheer contradiction of the lives we live is difficult to understand. One afternoon you post pictures with children from slums that you visited for an hour with well-written and emotional captions. The next day, we see you taking multiple vodka shots at some high-end pub that you forgot to count. This example is representational. I know these are personal choices, and I have no say in how they live. But it is in the public domain, and it’s damn difficult for me to understand how one shifts through these two extreme mindsets. It’s for sure that one can’t live in both of them at the same time, so one must be permanent, and one could be temporary. That’s where my dilemma lies.
You can pose with children from some low-laying aspirational district government schools because you know you might not be here tomorrow. You have a choice. This is a choice you made that you can revert back to at any point. This is a choice you take so much pride in, and it helps you stay in the utopia that you are part of the change. First, social change is not a joke or a one-two-year thing. It takes a whole generation to make sure something has changed. For example, it’s an achievement for NGOs working on education if one of their 20 children goes out to finish his/her graduation. See the probability and time engaged. It takes at least 15 years of work for one generation. And does this education solve their livelihood questions? Another big question.
I worked with children in all my field works. Being a counselling major, and thanks to my faculties, I developed some sensitivity while working around children. Also, being a photography enthusiast, I endured a long chain of discussions among their caretakers, parents, and guardians. After all those discussions and working with children, something fundamental has changed in me.
Keep children out of your social media for their sake, your sake, and the law’s sake. Even if you go unnoticed, remember that you are not a messiah, so don’t make it more difficult for them than it is already. Children from marginalized groups are not your Instagram trophies.