The act of sending naked pictures and sending them via text messages, known as sexting, is a hot button issue in schools today. According to newmedia.org, "4% of cell-owners ages 12 to 17 have sent sexually suggestive images of themselves by phone; 15% of cell owners that age have received “sexts” containing images of someone they know". Kids are taking nude pics of themselves, sending them to a "significant other" and then they're forewording them to their friends. This has become a national concern, even Oprah is addressing this issue.
But let me ask this question, am I supposed to be "outraged"? If you ask me, the fact that only 4% of children have sent suggestive photos of themselves is pretty good! Think about your high school class, do you think 4% of your class were the kind of people from "across the tracks" who are doing shady stuff anyways? Drugs? Rape? Who knows? Even more astounding, the number of teens who have attempted suicide is double the number of teens who have "sexted" themselves.
As usual, the government has been taking steps to address this issue in the most asinine way possible. If I'm a 15 year old boy, and I send a naked picture of my junk to my 15 year old girlfriend, and if Johnny Law finds out, then I can be charged as a sex offender in a court of law under the charge of "distributing child pornography". How insane is that!?
People need to awake to some common sense. Sexting is extremely stupid, and can become a serious issue, but getting our panties in a bunch and attempting label innocent teens as "sex offenders" is never going to solve the issue. Parents need to be sure they are giving cell phones to responsible teens, who aren't going to give in to peer pressure.
Johnny Law, stay out of teenage peer relationships. You just make things worse. But what do you think? Should ol' Johnny be involved in sexting situations?
If I can bring a little class to this board, I say Fuck johnny law.
ReplyDeleteI guess I'm not so sure that it is so insane to charge a minor with "distributing child pornography." I mean that is what it is, isn't it? It may seem a bit harsh, but I feel like the laws might act as a deterrent. Also, you never know who is going to see those pictures after you send them. It is not like the only person who is going to see the underage nudity is another underage person. The law is there to protect the minor in the first place, and I think it is perfectly acceptable.
ReplyDeleteYou are right, I do think that parents need to be more cautious with who they give cell phones to. I think that if there are people who choose to not handle that responsibility of having a phone appropriately, they ought to deal with the consequences.
kids need cell phones with "basic" plan. meaning there needs to be 5 buttons on it with 5 numbers programmed in. one for home, mom/dad cell, siblings, grandma, and one friend. to texting. no picture capabilities. that's it. the parents are paying for it anyway so any kid who complains: well this crappy phone is better than no phone, so shut up.
ReplyDeleteA parent of a 2nd grader and a 3 year old.
I think if Obama starts handing out sex offender titles to every teenager then it will dilute the value of the sex offender title. Then when an actual sex offenders move into your apartment complex you'll just be like "oh snapped a pic of yer junk and sent it to get the lady all bothered, huh?" and the sex offender will respond "er yeah that's it, say got any kids?"
ReplyDeleteNow having said this, will your next post be about what to say to your daughter when you find out half the school has a pic of her saved on their phone? Since you are okay with sexting.
I'm not okay with sexting, I just think its an over hyped issue that has too much of the law dog getting involved, and not enough responsibility landing on the parents who are dumb enough to give their 15 year old kid unlimited texting.
ReplyDelete