'Sexting' no worse than spin-the-bottle: study

'Sexting' no worse than spin-the-bottle: study

www.physorg.com

Cumming said that to consider labeling a teen a sex offender because of a sexting incident -- a label that will stick for life -- defies common sense.

"It would be very unlikely to see dozens of news stories announcing that some children were caught playing spin-the-bottle, or doctor, or strip poker," he said in his presentation.

"Yet many of the cases brought forward have been on the same level of innocence and experience as those activities. In other words, kids are playing spin-the-bottle online."

(visit the link for the full news article)

Finally somebody with common sense.

While I do agree these young women need to realize the implications of sending a digitally stored picture of themselves into the world, I also do not think they should be made sex offenders because of it. I remember playing seven minutes in heaven when I was thirteen. That was much more involved then any picture could ever be, and guess what, your kids have probably played the same game.

Children make stupid decisions. Thats a fact. I did when I was younger, and I bet all of you did too. Why ruin their lives over it? This is not a child being exploited. This is not somebody being a victim of a sex crime. This is technology replacing the games we as children used to play.

Teach them a lesson in how you cannot erase what is on the internet. Let them see the potential damage it may do to their life in the future. But DO NOT force them into a life with no options to become a better person because you labeled them as a sex offender for merely doing what children do.

www.physorg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I actually completely agree with this analogy of the situation. Sexual abuse legislation is designed to protect children from adult predators and usery, not to punish teenagers from acting out due to their hormones or acting sexual themselves.

[edit on 30-5-2009 by mystiq]

Agreed. Victimless crimes are dumb.

*shrug* Just as you could have an issue with an ex forwarding pictures, you could have the same issue with an ex blabbing about your sex life.

Either way, it's the norm now. I honestly get angry when people call this underage "pornography." It's really not, it's not for money, it's not out on the internet selling girls off as whatever, it's not being forced upon anyone (that I've heard of).

But I could see how older generations could think otherwise.

This is not a victimless crime. Once the photos are out there they can end up on somebody's computer or mobile device which then gets hacked, or the pictures could simply be downloaded by mistake through a p2p program. Photographing children in itself is a psychological threshold that once crossed could very well lead to similar behavior in the future. Rape, especially gang rape, is increasing by astounding rates among this new generation of teenagers and young adults. They don't need the extra motivation.

It's in no way similar to playing Seven Minutes in Heaven.

reply to post by vcwxvwligen


[snip]
2.) What the heck is Seven Minutes in Heaven?

[edit on 30/5/2009 by xxpigxx]


Mod edit-

1b.) Profanity: You will not use profanity in our forums, and will neither post with language or content that is obscene, sexually oriented, or sexually suggestive nor link to sites that contain such content. You will also not use common alternative spellings or net-speak alternative for profane words.

[edit on 2-6-2009 by elevatedone]

reply to post by vcwxvwligen


If a teen uploads the pictures themselves, and they get passed around, they knew it could happen when they chose to upload them. It's kind of like prostitution but it's not for money.

If someone is dumb and put their name and location with their pictures, that's an issue. But generally texting images to other kids isn't a horrible deal, as long as it's a kid who's doing it voluntarily.

People used to do it with poloroids. Now they do it with cell phone and digital cams or webcams.

Originally posted by xxpigxx
reply to post by vcwxvwligen

 

2.) What the heck is Seven Minutes in Heaven?

[edit on 30/5/2009 by xxpigxx]

Yeah! whatta heck is that?

Sound nice though!

You guys really don't know what seven minutes in heaven is?

en.wikipedia.org...

Deeeeeeprived.

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
You guys really don't know what seven minutes in heaven is?

en.wikipedia.org...

Deeeeeeprived.

Aha! flashback 30 years back! We have the same in Europe of course!

I see.

Yes, I was sheltered as a child. That is what happens when your dad was a baptist preacher lol

reply to post by xxpigxx


I can only imagine.
My boyfriend's mom is a deacon and he was able to get away with a lot, but Baptists are different from um.. whatever sect she is?

It's like a party game. It was popular when I was around 12. But once you got older things obviously got better because you could avoid the whole game excuse part.

reply to post by ravenshadow13


No it's not. There's a way to hack people's phones. Heck you can even guess the security question for the password. That's what kids seem to be ignorant about. Kids as well as ignorant adults put too much trust in machines, and yet have no idea how the operate.

In the words of the Virgin Mary...Come again? BULL#. Our culture is de-evolving to the point kindergartners will be taught sex ed. One simple question....Where in the hell are the parents?

Why on earth can't children act like children anymore?

It's not the fact that kids are sexting, it's WHEN an adult get sent a picture of a naked child and then gets in big trouble with the law.

Tech savvy or not, you have no control of the pictures once they are out on the net and could be used for anything from dating sites to compilations of child pornography.

So why do it?

Originally posted by mystiq
I actually completely agree with this analogy of the situation. Sexual abuse legislation is designed to protect children from adult predators and usery, not to punish teenagers from acting out due to their hormones or acting sexual themselves.

[edit on 30-5-2009 by mystiq]

Oh I see. So you must then believe that date rape or rape committed by a teen is acceptable and should not be prosecuted because the teen is simply acting on their hormones? Yes, that makes total sense. :shk:

[edit on 31-5-2009 by sos37]

Originally posted by sos37
Oh I see. So you must then believe that date rape or rape committed by a teen is acceptable and should not be prosecuted because the teen is simply acting on their hormones? Yes, that makes total sense. :shk:

[edit on 31-5-2009 by sos37]

Oh come on, don't be so melodramatic. Of course the poster doesn't think that's the case.

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by mystiq
I actually completely agree with this analogy of the situation. Sexual abuse legislation is designed to protect children from adult predators and usery, not to punish teenagers from acting out due to their hormones or acting sexual themselves.

[edit on 30-5-2009 by mystiq]

Oh I see. So you must then believe that date rape or rape committed by a teen is acceptable and should not be prosecuted because the teen is simply acting on their hormones? Yes, that makes total sense. :shk:

[edit on 31-5-2009 by sos37]

I dont see how you can compare teens sending around pictures WILLINGLY with the UNWILLING rape of a teen. Seriously?

When I was thirteen or so when we first got a computer and web cams became the big thing you would constantly see this kind of thing. As a teen going into teen chat rooms it was almost guaranteed somebody in there was showing something they shouldn't. And yes it was two teens just being teens. The whole you show me, I'll show you deal. And before that, kids were doing it in person.

It almost seems like we strive to ruin our childrens lives. Lets find any way possible to completely ruin any future they have for just being kids. This isnt a case of teens making photography albums of hundreds of nude pictures to be sent out to everybody and their mother. This is one picture usually, sent to a boyfriend or significant other willingly. I really wonder what else we are going to make up and charge them with in the future.

reply to post by deadline527


While I agree with the study, I find it amazingly humorous that the guy's last name is Cumming.

Whatever happened to parents letting their kids actually experience life and learn how to grow up? Why do we have to be so obsessed with every little thing these days. Hell most kids aren't even *allowed* to play outside without supervision these days. *bleh*

Edited to add the following:

Yes, it is differant in that everything now is index, cataloged, distributed, recorded, reindexed, redistributed, and finally dumped in a landfillt to rot away until someone decides to pick it up. That is the way it is now. So let's get our children to learn and understand that, rather than hide them from it only to have then walk off the cliff unknowingly when they get into adulthood. If my teenage girl takes a non-nude picture of herself in the shower and sends it to her boyfriend, I would explain to her that by doing that she is risking everyone on the damned internet seeing that pic. I wouldn't panic or charge her boyfriend with possesion of child porn. I want her to know the risks and make good decisions bassed on it. But you cannot correct a mistake until it is made.

[edit on 5-31-2009 by rogerstigers]