Farrah Abraham Sparks Outrage for Sexualizing 10-year-old Daughter on Social Media

Farrah Abraham Sparks Outrage for Sexualizing 10-year-old Daughter on Social Media September 9, 2019

Farrah Abraham is putting her 10-year-old daughter Sophia to work. Since being fired from Teen Mom OG by MTV, Farrah Abraham appears to be focusing her energy on turning her child into an influencer.

On Instagram and YouTube, Sophia Abraham is selling merchandise, hosting toy reviews, and strutting the stage at fashion shows. At only ten years old, her Instagram account has more than 700,000 followers, and her YouTube channel has over 17,000 subscribers.

Her videos are a range of daily vlogs, toy, and product reviews. However, YouTube’s community guidelines state children under age 13 cannot have channels. To set up a Google account, an individual must be at least 13-years old. With Sophia Abraham only 10-year-old, she is breaking community guidelines.

On Instagram, Sophia Abraham uploads photos and videos to her over 700,000 followers. In one of her most recent videos, she appears in only a sports bra and leather pants. Her mother seems to be filming her while Sophia shares information about her new merchandise. The video sparked outrage toward Farrah that she was sexualizing her pre-teen daughter.

Sophia Abraham Instagram

The video prompted hundreds of comments from concerned followers about Sophia appearing in only a bra.

When she isn’t uploading content, Farrah shuttles her young daughter to fan ‘meet and greets,’ fashion shows, and film festivals. In the past two weeks, the mother and daughter have been in Italy, France, and New York City. All the while, Sophia appears in photos in full makeup and hair and dressed like an adult.

Sophia Abraham Instagram

Noticeably absent in all of images and videos are other children. Sophia is almost always surrounded by adults and in adult environments.

A recent trip to France left social media speechless as Farrah and Sophia stripped down into bikinis and pranced around the Eiffel Tower.

Fans and “haters” are starting to think that Farrah could be grooming her daughter for nefarious purposes or attempting to sexualize the young girl.

With Sophia working around the clock, there seems to be little time for school. However, Farrah insists her daughter is enrolled in online education. Is Farrah Abraham pushing her daughter into the spotlight and ignoring child labor laws? Are social media platforms aware that a 10-year-old is working for her mother? What is the responsibility of a parent to keep their children safe online?

Farrah Abraham appears to have her sights set on making her daughter the next big influencer without because she’s stealing her daughter’s childhood. However, the bigger question is why are platforms allowing a 10-year-old to upload content despite being underage?

Check out my recent video on Farrah’s plans to make Sophia famous.

*Katie Joy is a columnist and hosts Without A Crystal Ball on Patheos Non-Religious Channel. She writes articles related to trending topics and crime on her column.

Communicate with Katie on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube.

Watch her daily lives on YouTube

Buy Katie Joy a cup of Coffee. 

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Individuals wishing to help Katie with her expenses can become patrons. Patrons gain exclusive access to stories, new projects, and future books.




"@ Katie Joy,Yes you are a terrorist.You should be handled accordingly."

It’s Time to Admit That Anti-Vaxxers ..."
"Any doctor promoting the "anti-vax" line should have his license pulled immediately, and permanently."

It’s Time to Admit That Anti-Vaxxers ..."
"Some more "good christians" get what they deserve."

Christian Reality Stars Facing 30 Years ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • B.A.

    This woman is sick! Someone call CPS.

  • Jezebel’sOlderSister

    Farrah is obviously trying for Mother-of-the-Year award. :/ Someone needs to protect Sophia from her mother.

  • A+ parenting! /s

  • Freodin

    Two things…
    First: parents pushing their children into some sort of “career” is nothing new. It is a horrible practice, but without changing a lot of the legal and social systems around parenting, there’s not a lot we can do.
    Second: the images of the girl. As with the “career” thing, it is highly questionable whether having your child pose as/like an adult is a good thing.
    But “sexualizing”? These images? Like the wonderfully “censored” image with the Eifel Tower? If that is “sexualizing”, I have to ask the critics: what the heck is wrong with you?

  • Friend

    I see what you are saying, but the world has many former child stars who were targeted1 and expoited1. If pushback from social media can return a few youngsters to the obscurity that children deserve, and protect kids we have never heard of, perhaps that is a good thing. While it might seem prudish to raise an eyebrow over swimwear1 at the Eiffel Tower, the mother decided to dress herself and her child that way specifically to get noticed.

    Although I don’t know where you live or how many children you have, there is substantial concern about pervs1 online these days. The pics in question might be OK in a printed family album, but online unfortunately they might attract stalkers1 now and stay in circulation for decades. A 10-year-old has no idea how she will feel about these images in future.

    Many parents have stepped back from posting photos and video of their kids online. Sometimes the children demand this. Sometimes the parents deliberately ask, “OK if I post this?” and teach the children to make deliberate choices about what becomes available for random people to view.

  • Freodin

    Oh, I agree with most of what you wrote here. This whole “social media” thing is still very new, on a societal timeframe, and we all still have to learn what kind of consequences it has and how to deal with it.
    Protecting children in this regard, when even most adults have difficulties with the problems that may arise… this seems to be a very good idea.

    Also, the problem with parents pushing their children into “fame”. It doesn’t matter if that is child movie stars, beauty pageants or the internet. It might seem all fun and games, but it can so easily get exploitative.

    But, as I see it, the problem of “sexualization” comes from two sides. There will always be the creeps who get off of anything imaginable… but if you start to censor all of these things, then it becomes you who sexualize them. You are then telling other people what is or isn’t sexual… based on your worldview.
    A 10-year-old might not have an idea how she will feel about these images in the future… but if she thinks this is “sexual”, I wonder where she got that notion?

  • Friend

    Great reply, thanks. Two reactions from me. If the girl thinks this is sexu@1 right now, she got that idea from her mother and people around her. I once babysat for a woman who called her baby daughter “1sexy1” when changing her diaper.

    I was really writing about the future, though: at age 17 or 25 or 30, what will this child think of images posted when she was 10? I know parents who hung huge 1nude1 portraits of their children in the front hall of their home.

  • Freodin

    I think I am on the safe side when I say that at the age of 17, 25, 30, this child will be embarrased by the image. But that doesn’t mean it is “sexual”. I know that I am embarrased by a lot of photos of my child-self, fully dressed.

  • Friend

    Good points, nice chat. 🙂

  • Richard Sanderson

    A bit dodgy.

    Not quite as sexualized as “Desmond is Amazing” however.

    Did I just make you “skeptics” uncomfortable?

  • Friend

    Believe it or not, people online can view different child stars differently. People can worry about Child Star A but not Child Star B, and vice versa. Or they can worry about both kids. Or neither one.

    Nuance. It’s just amazing. Available round the clock, free of charge, no shipping or tax. No restocking fee either, although most of us would do well to keep it once it comes our way.

  • Jim Jones

    No, we still mock you.

  • Richard Sanderson

    Got an example, fash?