Teen Sexting, Grounds For Expulsion?

[Sensei Payne]

I think with this issue and all the other issues being brought up really shows how sensitive socity has gotten.

America is a sue happy, heart on there sleeve country these days.

Teen Sexting should be handled between the parents and the school itself..we don't need blanket laws that cover it. Calling it child porn is absurd, and a strech, why ruin some kids life.

 

[jks9199]

Are there cases of statutory rape that are merely "youthful exuberance?" Of course. And I have problems with lifetime labeling of kids for status offenses.

But there are plenty of "consensual" statutory rape cases that are anything but innocent. An 18 or 20 year old having sex with a 13 year old? Even if they're "in love", it's not a healthy relationship, and the younger person lacks the maturity to know what's going on.

 

[Twin Fist]

if a teen girl takes a pic of her underage boobs for her BF, she just produced child porn.

if an 18 yr old can get in legal trouble for having it on his phone, she should damn well get in trouble for producing it.

 

[granfire]

Are there cases of statutory rape that are merely "youthful exuberance?" Of course. And I have problems with lifetime labeling of kids for status offenses.

But there are plenty of "consensual" statutory rape cases that are anything but innocent. An 18 or 20 year old having sex with a 13 year old? Even if they're "in love", it's not a healthy relationship, and the younger person lacks the maturity to know what's going on.

I think we are having a big problem defining maturity levels in our no longer children, but far from being adult offspring.
There is on the one hand the deliberate attempt to keep them in the dark.
There is no meaningful sex-ed, or other facts off life. The world they are allowed to see is rose colored. Bad things don't happen.

On the other hand there is also a trend to 'treat them like adults' when they commit 'adult crimes'

So you say a 13 year old has not the maturity....I say that it depends. I think I was pretty mature at 13, my kid is far from it (but I don't mind)
(and then of course the kids not mature enough to have sex, drink, smoke, drive or vote are all over sudden mature enough to go to the big house...)

I think the ultimate responsibility should lay with the parents to give the kids the tools to decide weather or not sex is appropriate.
you can't do that when visible skin (or bush) is taboo all the time, the body parts are 'down there' and some weird ober ego structure makes it only ok when married to make children. It does not jive with the biological blueprint, once the time trigger is activated the body knows how to put those parts to work.

No I do not condone anybody having sex with a 13 year old. But I don't see any real value in lumping 13 yo in the same heap with 16 year olds.

I think the outlines need to be broadened. There needs to be more discretion given in whether or not it actually is a crime.
There is too much of the puritan spirit in that law that is infringing on the personal rights of the involved people. At one point parents have to hope they taught their values and hope for the best, but they can't enforce them any more.

(on a side note, many times those that aim for the very young sex partner do not have any maturity of their own, the child is more their equal than a partner of their own age. Not to excuse it, but as a point to understand the mechanism)

In the US we are sending mixed messages to our girls (or maybe to the boys, about the girls as well)
We do gussy them up to look like little women. I remember a few years back, when I just had become aware of 'Hannah Montana' somebody who I had to assume was at least 18ish, probably older, telling me that - not sure if there was a distinction between the actress and the character - Hannah was hawt...this particular person might have led me on (pull my leg, etc) but in general speaking, there is a tendency to spiff teenies up to look much older than they are (Miley Cyrus was maybe 14 at the time...)

A constant diet of L@@K, but don't dare touch?

I think - and that won't change any time soon - that there is a scary disconnect between the carnal world and the public world. The US, inventors of the Playboy and Hustler, home of the last Puritans...have a much higher incident of teen pregnancy than those liberal places in Europe, that basically thrust pictures of boobies at you at every corner.

Sex is what mature people do. You get more than the 'just say no' to deal with the urges.
And the kids tend to handle the responsibilities well...(in the 9 years at 'high school', averaging totaling 700 students on average I only heard of one girl getting knocked up: not believing in birth control for religious reason...the extra curricular activity, well....you see the point...)

The kids need not more protection, but more exposure. And no, not the media type. but honest to goodness mature exposure.


Now where did this start?

You can't protect the youth by adding more laws.

 

[MA-Caver]

Agreed Gran, more education than laws.
It becomes I think a problem when parents are trying to do the best they can and their child has sexual indiscretions anyway and so the parents are up in arms and all upset and freaking out and it's gotta be somebody ELSE's fault!
It's funny how through almost every generation that talking sexual matters with your child is an uncomfortable subject for many parents, not all but quite a few. Kids want to learn and if they're not getting it at home or school then they'll by-god find it somewhere, the net or experienced friends or whatever media they can get their hands on.

We do set a double standard with all our advertisements that show sexual things in order to sell a product and I think we fail to make our kids understand to whom those ads are supposed to be directed to.
Ceicei had related a while back a incident where she and her oldest son (then about 12-13) were walking through the mall and past a Victoria's Secret window display and her son asked her about why the lady in the picture was naked? She had to do the explaining. Imagine now if the boy had been walking through the mall on his own and no-one was there to explain the image to him. What is he to think/do with the feelings that are stirred up inside him? Thankfully his mum was able to help him sort it all out.

Agreed a 13 or even 15 year old doesn't have the maturity level to deal with an ... intimate relationship. But sadly they're gonna have 'em anyway. Not all of them thankfully but probably more than anyone cares to admit. The only thing we can hope for is that they learned about protection, learned about appropriate age levels and that no adult tries to take advantage of their curiosity.
The law does need to make it clear as to how wide the under 18 age gap will be before it's considered illegal or wrong. 3 years? 4?
It also needs to be clear as to how to charge a minor for an adult offense. Yes I agree that any nude (provocative) photo of a child is porn. It's definitely wrong when a child sends one to an adult. Yet when a child sends one to another child (bf/gf/hopeful) it's wrong but HOW wrong is it? Is it any more wrong than show me yours and I'll show you mine hiding out in the playhouse in the back yard while mom is taking a nap or cleaning the house? Basically the same thing only virtually. Should the law step in or should parents man-up and take responsibility and handle it according to their values?
I've been busted as a kid doing the "playing house" game and gotten my *** whupped by my dad and grounded and forbidden by the girl's parents to step on the property ever again or to speak to her. The girl? Dunno what her parents did but from the uproar as I was chased out it was probably similar to my punishment. The law never even came into the picture. Both parents talked and mutually agreed on (whatever... was never privy to the details) and that was that. Own up, have any of you been busted playing house/doctor as kids? What were the results?
Now lawyers, cops, judges, counselors/therapists/psychologists, clergy and who knows else are dragged on the scene. If we're really lucky the rest of the country finds out because some reporter got ahold of the story.
Isn't that enough punishment for a teen than having to add a life long black-mark on their record? One that will prevent them from reaching their full potential because nobody will hire them, though they may be naturally gifted in the field of medical research?

Laws need to be clearer, need to be broader and need to be where parents need to assume a majority of the responsibility to correct the child in their error.

 

[granfire]

I think I agree in most points.

just wanting to point out that under current legislation a non provocative shot of an unclothed kid is considered pr0n. that includes that hilarious moment when junior ran across the yard with nothing than the rubber boots and a big grin.

Also that we, as a whole society have come to the conclusion that there is always somebody else to blame for out F***ups.

I think well educated kids (in terms of the way of the world) tend to have the maturity to not engage in sex. Most are too busy doing 'real' things.

But we also have '16 and pregnant' 'Teenage Mom' and such lovely exploits of the mishaps of the immature...
maybe we just lack a lot of life in our lives...too much fake stuff, living through other people?

 

[Blade96]

Yeah i agree more than not. Better put away the sexting. Could get people into much trouble especially with the laws protecting minors.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

A good example of why it is the government's business...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/internet/feds-raid-boys-home-over-4chan-child-porn-post

 

[granfire]

A good example of why it is the government's business...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/internet/feds-raid-boys-home-over-4chan-child-porn-post

well, what WAS that image?

Was that a little girl running around in the back yard or was it something sinister?

The way the law is worded: nekked = pr0n, no exceptions.

and this is not sexting either...soooo, no, I suppose when you share an image with a few millions of your best friends, you have to watch out a little more.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

and this is not sexting either...soooo, no, I suppose when you share an image with a few millions of your best friends, you have to watch out a little more.

My point is, some girl sends a nasty photo of herself to her boyfriend, who happens to be a guy like this one...

 

[granfire]

My point is, some girl sends a nasty photo of herself to her boyfriend, who happens to be a guy like this one...

well, again, that's what education is for. Heck, even Disney channel does it: The internet is forever, once you hit 'send' on an image it left your control.

publicly sharing a pic a girl send him makes him a creep, but not a sexual predator.

however:
it only said a picture of a prepubescent girl. Pretty much all there is to it, by the letter of the law, but really does not tell one a lot about how serious the 'crime' was...especially considering they broke down the door.

We all agree, the real molestors are the scum of the earth (and that is insulting scum!) but current law tars 'offenders' with way to broad a brush.

maybe the pictures were truly disturbing, can't tell (though I have seen a couple of images on 4chan, it is possible)



(and then of course there will be the follow up, the DA requesting the 15 yo to be tried as adult...<sarcasm>)

 

[Twin Fist]

and BAM, someone is on the sex offenders list that shouldnt be.................

 

[MA-Caver]

Quotes from the article that deserves it's own thread... but disturbing none the less as it's related (closely) to the OP...

The DHS are jack-booted thugs. They will break down a door now for any reason. Remember the woman who defaulted on her student loan? I do.

One thing you have to be careful is "SPAM" mail or going to these game sites. There was one man in San Diego that was arrested for visiting and posting to Child Porn websites, but is was because he was given a trojan that allowed pedophiles to use his desktop as a proxy server and for storage. He got off, because upon examination of his computers activity - he was visiting sights at a rate of 200 a minute. And the guy using it was in Vaunatua- and DHS could do nothing to him.

And what is with the battering ram crap. Someday they are going to batter into a house and it will be booby trapped in such a way they are going to have the entire team killed. That is just intimidation tactics and usually unnecessary. Really, how many times have you heard of "desperate pornographers" shooting it out with authorities. Or desperate "student loan defaulters"? They want to keep you in line.

The people who use kiddy porn are real deviants- there is no doubt about it. But with computers and the internet, I wouldn't put it past some people, even those in our government to "dump" incriminating evidence on the desktop systems of those they hate - it would be better than "killing" them.

What is really strange about the attitudes toward Child Porn is the complete inconsistency that the law is enforced. Franco Zeferellis "Romeo and Juliet. Olivia Hussey and the boy who played Romeo have a love scene where they both are nude. Leonard Whiting was 16 and the Olivia Hussey was 14 at the time. That under US Law is Child Pornography. It can stream from Netflix if you want to see it. And then there is "Hounddog" where Dakota Fanning is underage, but plays a 12 year old that is raped. There is a wonderful Dutch Movie about a romantic relationship between a 12 year old boy and a Canadian soldier.

I don't approve of all of it - even Zeferelli's Romeo and Juliet. But it just shows how hypocritical the powers that be are."

A 15 year old definitely knew what they were doing when they posted the pics. That the site reported it is a good thing ... that the DHS/FBI's methodology of making the arrest and seizure is something else entirely. Bashing down doors and pointing weapons at everyone? Why not a simple knock and holding up a warrant and badge and say... "hey we got a court-order to enter the premises and to seize what we believe to be child porn"... nice and simple and no-one gets hurt. Like the guy said... how many times have you read about desperate pornographers shooting it out?
Sure it's a crime and sure it needs to be treated as such but HOW it's treated.

Wonders if they paid for the busted door/frame?

I guess I'm a deviant by law because I own a copy of Zeferelli's Romeo and Juliet, you can see Hussey's breast/nipple and Whiting's bare butt -- guess it doesn't matter that it's a fleeting shot does it? ... looks like I'm having a DVD BBQ of that one disk (probably should do a couple others) because I have a movie with a naked underage couple in it. Sigh.

 

[granfire]

they don't even have to pay for the door when they get the wrong house.....