|
3 years ago ::
Apr 21, 2009 - 9:48AM
#9
|
|
|
The solution is for the government to ignore teenage sexting. Let anyone legally send nude photos of themselves to their boy/girfriends, no matter their age. (Whether parents permit this or not is up to their discretion.) As far as child pornography goes, if an adult who cannot legally be one's sexual partner prompts one to send nude photos, then perhaps there is a basis for a crime. Any judge should carefully consider the context of the case. eudaimonia, Mark
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 20, 2009 - 10:39PM
#8
|
|
|
I'd rather see a naked body than one ripped apart by violence--that's what is truly exploitative and sickening to me. The more shameful, taboo, and forbidden--the more interesting something becomes. Good grief--did you know that Queen Victoria and Prince Albert used to buy each other nude statues and paintings with nudes as gifts? It's like the HUGE flap about the Super Bowl where Janet Jackson's NIPPLE COVER was exposed--not her actual breast nipple--and that was fined and considered much more immoral than pushing alcohol consumption during the game. It's a specialized sweat gland. It doesn't kill people, maim them or incapacitate them. If a minor sends a picture to another minor, it shouldn't be considered a crime. And where are the funds going to come from to enforce and prosecute these "criminals"? Wouldn't they be better used for education?
"You are letting your opinion be colored by facts again."
'When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you."
these are both from my father.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 20, 2009 - 7:00PM
#7
|
|
|
Let's charge God for bringing us into the world nude. For heaven's sake, we need to get over the idea that the body is something to be ashamed of. The more you cover up, the more becomes erotic. In Les Miserables, Marius gets into a snit because a gust of wind blows Cosette's skirt and all the world can see her booted ankle. Kids are attracted by the forbidden--they aren't going to bother with sexting in countries which bare a lot.
I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard was not what I meant...
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 20, 2009 - 2:33PM
#6
|
|
|
While a minor can already be a sexual predator...sending our kids to jail for sending pictures is ridiculous! Under the age of at least 18, these exchanges should not be criminalized--although if there was a way that they could only be forwarded once it would be wonderful. (Of course, it wouldn't take kids that long to find a way around any such block) The predators we are looking for on-line are adults, not children. If someone posts these for the entire world and there is a suicide as in a recent case, there should be a penalty for whoever posted it on-line.But to ruin the next 60 years of someone's life over a picture is over-kill. They are CHILDREN. It should be stressed at home and at school that once you send something like this, you don't know WHO is going to see it. When is child porn harmful? DUH. When it shows children being forced into sexual acts, degraded, abused, enslaved, and used by adults for their own gratification and filmed and exploited. THAT'S child porn. A picture of a breast isn't. It's the modern variation on "You show me yours and I'll show you mine" and since they aren't in actual physical contact it isn't going to go further at least that time. What if the girl cheated and sent a picture of someone else's breast to her boyfriend? Who goes to jail for that? The bigger a deal we make out of it, the more appealing it is going to be to rebel against.
"You are letting your opinion be colored by facts again."
'When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you."
these are both from my father.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 20, 2009 - 12:59PM
#5
|
|
|
RML, I'm going with old and cranky. If we do not show our children that we trust them, they will give us REAL reasons not to. My daughter has an I-Phone. It does everything, internet, pictures, email, etc. Perhaps the dirty old men need to climb out of the gutter for a change. I would MUCH rather my daughter email a picture of her boob to a boy than sit in the back seat of his car and show it to him up close and personal. I think the people with problems with KIDS sexting KIDS are jealous that they can't get any of that action. Leave'em alone! Kids experiment and putting them in jail won't change that.
James Thurber - "It is better to know some of the questions than all of the answers."
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 20, 2009 - 12:40PM
#4
|
|
|
The laws on this stuff are ridiculous. Some commonsense adjustments need to be made. We don't need jail space taken up by 18 year olds trysting/sexting or whatever with their 17 year old girlfriends. That room needs to be freed up for real child predators.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 17, 2009 - 1:46PM
#3
|
|
|
well there is a solution its called talking and LISTENING to teens, EDUCATING them on the laws and in the case of these laws realiseing there is a distinct difference between a relationship when one is 17 and the other 14+ and oen where one is 14+ and the other is well over 20 ........ btw RML your solution would for many kids i've worked with only INCREASE their feelings of alienation from adult society and their parents imparticular, i can understand why as a parent it is appealing but it would create more problems than it would solve. plus it only increases feelings of distrust between children/teens and parents and we all know trust is integral for healthy relationships including relationships with our offspring. The emotionally healthier kids i've worked with have all been upto a point trusted, educated and talked WITH by their parents not talked AT and not treated as if they are distrusted. bx
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 16, 2009 - 1:31PM
#2
|
|
|
The solution to this problem is so simple that I cannot believe parents haven't figured it out. Your child's cellphone should be a PHONE only, no Internet access and no way to send photos. The kids don't need all those extra features! Plus, if they are drivers, their texting function should be disabled to keep them from texting while driving. Why are so many parents so stupid? Or am I just getting old and cranky??
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 15, 2009 - 10:53AM
#1
|
|
|
Have you heard about the Sexting Hypocrisy? It seems there is a movement underway in Vermont to decriminalize consensual sexting between kids who are between 13 and 18 years old. Or to permit teenagers to be in possession of child pornography. Now the justification for this new law is that the teenagers are tried as adults in our legal system.... Stop and think about that for just a moment... A 14 or 15 year old teen girl who takes a picture of her breast and sends it to her boyfriend is charged as a transmitter of child pornography, and is tried as an adult in our legal system. If legally she is an adult in the court system then how can she be a child? If a picture of her breast is "child" porn how can she be an adult? If legally she can not give consent, then how can it be consensual? An 18 year old girl can consensually agree to show her breast to a 13 year old boy... But the same 18 year old girl can not legally agree to show her breast to her 19 year old boyfriend? And this is American justice? Hmm if a 14 year old girl shows images of her breast and vagina to her 17 year old boyfriend it is okay and acceptable? It in no way harms him? But if his 19 year old brother shows him images it harms him? Seems to me we are creating double standards here, we are creating discrimination based on age. It really calls into question just what harm does child pornography actually do? Just at what point can someone consent to something. Just what does consent mean...
|
|
|
