Cynosure

What to do about teens and their dumb naked photos of themselves. - By Dahlia Lithwick - Slate Magazine

snowy

There is a school I know of where this occurred, but with one minor complication--the male student who received the pictures was over 18. Kids were unaware of the implications of "sexting" and the consequences. While it's a harsh consequence to be labeled as a sex offender, there ought to be a harsh consequence, though I'm not this consequence is the right one. We ought to figure out a better way to deal with these cases, and we ought to start talking about it so that kids do know the consequences of such actions.

It's a clear example of cultural lag--the laws haven't yet caught up with the technology.

__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau

telekinetic

If it's even available in 13 years, my daughter's cell will have the camera either not present or disabled.

__________________
twisted no more

braisler

Mosaic makes a good point. Kids questionably need cell phones at all, but they certainly don't need ones with a f'ing camera. Parents need to be responsible and think ahead before giving their kids a phone.

To the original issue, I don't think that labeling as sex offenders is the right course of action. I don't know what is, but sex offender status is already a problem in this country. You get on the same list with pedophile rapists if you take a piss outside at Mardi Gras.

__________________
---
You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.
- Albert Einstein
---

kutulu

One problem with 'sexting' is that people don't have a lot of control over who sends you what. The act of receiving a file shouldn't be a crime. Instead, it should be based on what you did with the file after receiving it that is the deciding factor in whether or not a crime was committed.

The "appropriate" action would be to delete it and inform the sender that what they sent was not appropriate and not to do it again.

telekinetic

Don't get me started on the retardedness of the Sex Offender Registry and how ass backwards some of these crimes are, all (even these child prosecutions) in the name of "protecting the children."

Sex offender registry is retarded because if these people are still dangerous enough to need to alert society, why are they out of jail?

__________________
twisted no more

Cynosure

Consider how this article begins: "Say you're a middle school principal who has just confiscated a cell phone from a 14-year-old boy, only to discover it contains a nude photo of his 13-year-old girlfriend."

See the root of the problem, here?

When I was 18, back in the '80s, I was having sex with my 17-year-old girlfriend; and, yes, we once exchanged Polaroid photos of our individual selves nude, with each other. (Note, however, there was nothing "innocent" about it.) But, hey, at least we were old enough to know that we needed to keep those photos as hidden and safe as possible. (For example, we did not show them to our friends, nor did we keep them lying around for other people to find them, like stuck in between the pages of a school textbook or something like that.)

But nowadays, it's teenagers ages 13-15 engaging in this sort of thing; and, well, there's worlds of difference in maturity and common sense between teenagers ages 13-15 and teenagers ages 17-19.

dippin

I get going after the kids who disseminate the pictures, spreading them beyond the initial intended audience.

But I don't get charging the sender of the picture, or even the recipient if the recipient didnt spread it around. I mean, isn't the whole basis of child pornography laws the idea that even if the teen or child consents to something, they are too young and naive to make that decision? So these kids are being charged with felonies because apparently they are old enough to know better, but not old enough to consent?

I get the need to be thorough, otherwise real child pornographers could use that as a loophole and basically use what looks like self portraits as a cover. But when that clearly is not the case, I think it is a perversion of the system to treat the 14 year old girl who sent a shot of herself topless to a boyfriend the same way as the 35 year old who likes to take pictures of naked 11 year olds...

Halx

None of this should be criminal. We should, however, educate.

Also, that article needs pics.

__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]

vanblah

I think one major problem is context. Is the kid in question an otherwise "good" kid that made a questionable judgment call? Is the kid a "bad" kid on the road to worse problems? Was the kid exploited?

We lump all these people into one category and expect the "law" to deal with it. What we end up doing is creating more people who are ashamed and repressed. We end up creating victims and predators. These kids don't need any kind of legal intervention (unless they were exploited in some way). If the kid is not aware of the possible outcome of this kind of behavior (self-made nude photographs) then there is something wrong. The parents did not do their job.

Do I think that teenagers should be photographing themselves nude? No. However, what's the difference between a 13-15 year-old taking nude photos of themselves and an 18+ year-old? Really ... when it gets down to it ... nothing. They are doing it for the same reasons: attention and "kicks." Unless there is an adult taking the photographs there's really no difference. Maturity? I'm pretty sure that a teenager taking nude photographs is well aware of the possible outcome ... possibly MORESO than an adult--especially, if their parents have been honest with them about sexuality. There is more to the "sex talk" than just the penis and vagina relationship. The sex talk needs to include broken hearts and angry ex-lovers and jealousy. It needs to include love and commitment and devotion. Choices.

Some people will say that the pictures might fall into the wrong hands or be spread all over the internet by "immature" friends or jilted lovers.

Wait a minute ... there are ENTIRE websites devoted to just that sort of thing (for photographs of adults). There are websites devoted to adults being "exploited" not just jilted lovers posting nude photos of their ex-lovers (even non-consensual photographs). I don't think it has much to do with maturity.

Teenagers are sexual beings ... hell, my daughter is 7 and she's starting to explore (and has been for a few years now). They are going to do whatever they can to experiment with that sexuality.

This latest media generated craze (sexting) is just another diversion in a long line of diversions. It has more to do with protecting parents from having to deal with their rapidly maturing children than protecting the children themselves.

Again, I'm at work so my thoughts might seem a little random as I keep getting interrupted. I apologize.

Lucifer

So the principal who confiscates the phone and sees the pics of the 13 year old girl, can he be then charged with viewing child pornography?

__________________
I am a brother to dragons, and a companion to owls.
- Job 30:29

1123, 6536, 5321

filtherton

If the kids get charged, then I hope so. Why is the principal looking at the kid's pics?

genuinegirly

I'm pretty sure that checking a cell phone's pictures would be considered an invasion of privacy.

__________________
"Sometimes I have to remember that things are brought to me for a reason, either for my own lessons or for the benefit of others." Cynthetiq

"violence is no more or less real than non-violence." roachboy

PonyPotato

Some people are dumb enough to make a nude photo the screensaver/background on their phone or computer.

Just saying.

__________________
"Without passion man is a mere latent force and possibility, like the flint which awaits the shock of the iron before it can give forth its spark."
— Henri-Frédéric Amiel

Zeraph

It's stupid. Our bodies are natural and while I wouldn't want my imaginary kid doing it, it ain't right to punish it like that. Sickos are out there, they always will be, but pictures of kids don't create them.

Daniel_

A guy at work does this (he's over age, but still proves how people think). He has a naked shot of his GF as his phone wallpaper.

I've not met her, but when I do, I'm wondering if I should mention that she's got a cute vagina.

And teens are stupider than 20-somethings, generally.

__________________

╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗
Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air,
And deep beneath the rolling waves,
In labyrinths of Coral Caves,
The Echo of a distant time
Comes willowing across the sand;
And everthing is Green and Submarine
╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

Xerxys

WTF!!! America, please stop labelling kids as "sex offenders." DO you know what a sex offender is?!?!?! Really one may not be able to get a job because he has the same status as a paedophille or rapist?! It's just not the same.

snowy

Typically what happens in these kinds of cases is that girl sends boy nude pic on his cell phone, sometime later they break up, and then boy flashes said pic of nude girl around school. THAT is when the principal typically ends up looking at pictures on a phone, and they're fully justified in doing so.

And just so you know, "privacy" as adults enjoy it does not exist in public school.

__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau

World's King

Snowy... That still doesn't give anyone the right to go through the kid's phones.

__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown

telekinetic

FTFY...and the problem suddenly solves itself!

__________________
twisted no more

Xerxys

I see why kids should not have their "privacy". That's just stupid. I dont know why y'all don't cane their asses!! I also dont see whty they have cell f'kn phones!! Also stupid, I do see the method of judgement and punishment is over it!! Kids should be punished for this kind of behaviour, .....but not like this, not like this for the love of god!!

World's King

Not even the parents have the right.



Isn't anything allowed to be private.

__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown

snowy

No, it doesn't, but that's the way it is. The standards are different. The Supreme Court says that public schools can search and seize so long as there is "reasonable suspicion", not probable cause. Again, there is cultural lag here--searching cell phones has yet to be legally challenged, and so it is presumed that the standard for other searches (lockers, backpacks, etc) applies.

My general advice to kids is to leave the phone at home. Most schools won't allow a cell phone anyways, so why take it on campus? At the school I work at, so much as seeing a cell phone out during school hours is grounds for confiscation. By leaving it at home, kids can protect their privacy, keep it from getting stolen, and keep it from being a distraction during the school day. Unfortunately, students tend to see cell phones as their "lifeline."

__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau

PonyPotato

If parents can be held responsible for their children's actions/debts (and they CAN), then they have the right to go through their kid's stuff (probably bought by parents anyway) to ensure that their children are not participating in illegal activities.

Period.

__________________
"Without passion man is a mere latent force and possibility, like the flint which awaits the shock of the iron before it can give forth its spark."
— Henri-Frédéric Amiel

MSD

Protecting kids from predatory adults is one thing, but kids sending nude pics to each other is "playing doctor" for the 21st century. There's little to no harm in consensual sexual experimentation between adolescents. Kids need to learn that actions have consequences, and they need to be educated rather than branded for it.

World's King

If the kids are participating in something illegal then the parents have already failed...

__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown

shakran

So what you are suggesting is that the parents are not allowed to monitor their childrens' activities due to privacy concerns, but it's still mom and dad's fault when the kids do something that the parents don't know about. . .

World's King

No. It's up to the parents to teach their children the difference from right and wrong. If the child is raised properly there will never be an occasion where the parents would have to violate the child's privacy.

__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown

inBOIL

Children make mistakes. Sometimes the only way to discover those mistakes is to violate their privacy. No child is going to get everything right the first time; parenting isn't about preventing kids from making mistakes, it's about correcting them when the inevitable mistakes occur.

A mistake like sending naked pictures of yourself is best corrected by parents, not the schools or courts.

__________________
And you believe Bush and the liberals and divorced parents and gays and blacks and the Christian right and fossil fuels and Xbox are all to blame, meanwhile you yourselves create an ad where your kid hits you in the head with a baseball and you don't understand the message that the problem is you.

Zeraph

I dunno, I think parents have the right to violate their kid's privacy, but no one else.

vanblah

I think we are probably misusing the word "violate." Parents have a responsibility to their children to follow up and check on their behavior. This must be done with respect though. If you repeatedly violate the trust your child has in you they will find better ways to hide their behavior rather than correct it.

EDIT: In fact, as they get older they'll find better ways to avoid getting into trouble anyway. Hopefully, the parent(s) have done a decent job at teaching the child how to behave ... whatever "behave" actually means within a particular society.

Cynosure

What, have you never heard of teenage rebellion?



You know, where a teenager goes against what they were taught by their parents, and does their own thing and/or gives into peer/cultural pressure, even if they know (or at least, they were taught) that it's self-destructive.

World's King

Actually yes. I was a teenager once. But no. I actually respected my parents.


Yes, I did drugs, drank, fucked, ditched school and did all those things associated with teenage rebellion. But I never gave my parents a reason to spy on me or go through my stuff when I wasn't home. They knew what I was doing.

__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown

Cynosure

So, what, your parents knew about your drinking, drug use, and playing hooky, when you were a teenager, but they overlooked it? Because, why, they trusted you?

World's King

Actually... yes.




Now I must tell you that my parents were hippies. And yes, I'm stereotyping.

__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown

Charlatan

I violate my kid's "privacy" all the time. My 14-year-old son's Facebook, Myspace and internet use is open to my snooping whenever I feel like it. He is also only allowed to use the computer in the living room where we can look over his shoulder at anytime. His mobile phone is subject to the same rules.

As I see it, his actions on the Internet are no different than what he would do if he was hanging out with his friends and you can be sure I would be checking out who he was hanging out with. I have to ask, would you trust your 10 or 12 year old to go hang out at a club unsupervised?

I don't plan on being this way past his 16th or 17th birthday. I think it is important to provide guidelines and expectations and then follow up on them.

I should also add that we talk about online saftey and smarts... just like talking to your kids about street smarts.

I want to give him as much information about things as possible, I want him to be able to look after himself and take responsibility for his actions online the same way I expect him to do this in meatspace.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

World's King

I understand the point of keeping an eye on your kids and your kid's actions. On and off the internet.


But I don't have kids... So I guess my opinion is pointless.

__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown

Xerxys

I LOL'd out loud. You actually think you can raise ANY child properly so as not to ever have to discipline them ever?! I'm a good kid, I work, have a job, get a hair cut ... I attribute all this to discipline. One way or another, they will make mistakes, and you must let them know, one way or another,

"YOU MUST NOT CROSS THE ROAD LIKE THAT EVER, DO YOU HEAR ME!!"

World's King

So you laughed out loud... out loud... ? That's impressive.

__________________
heavy is the head that wears the crown

Glory's Sun

I wouldn't say pointless.. just different. I remember before I had kids I had this whole list of stuff that I would never do as a parent..

yeah that all changes when you're holding a little person who is dependent on you for survival and training..