Art Beast
More Art BeastLeave 'Sexters' Alone!
Conor Friedersdorf blogs at True/Slant and The American Scene. Follow him on Twitter at Conor64.
)
So what if teens are sending naked pictures to each other via cellphone? The real problem, Conor Friedersdorf argues, sets in when grownups get involved.
The suicide of a 13-year-old who sent a topless photo of herself to a crush is stoking renewed hysteria about teen "sexting," a misnamed phenomenon that hardly requires text and doesn't involve sex. What actually happens is that hormone-addled adolescents take naked photographs of themselves and send them to a crush via their cellphones or email accounts. Being teens, the images often spread like lunchtime gossip, especially after breakups. If you've got a kid in high school, the odds are quite high that he or she has seen photographs of a naked classmate—according to a recent PEW poll, one in seven teens with cellphones admit receiving naked pictures directly.
Tragic stories that begin with “sexting” are all too frequent when principals, police officers, or district attorneys get involved.
In most cases, teens who conceal their sexting from authority figures suffer negligible adverse consequences; they're hardly the first generation to play "I'll show you mine," and even Verizon's 3G network cannot yet transmit sexually transmitted diseases or pregnancy.
Perversely, however, tragic stories that begin with "sexting" are all too frequent when principals, police officers, or district attorneys get involved. The two known suicides attributed to "sexting" actually resulted from adults who exacerbated, rather than stopped, the abhorrent "slut-shaming" that peers callously directed at girls whose naked photos were spread around school; and authority figures in at least six states charge less troubled teens who send naked pictures of themselves with distributing child pornography! Yes, it is possible to be charged with distribution of child pornography for sending out a photograph of yourself—and to be charged with possessing it when a naked photo sent by your high-school girlfriend is stored on your cellphone. Should technology ever permit humans to download our brains' mental images to a hard drive, every last teenager in America will wind up prohibited from living within 10,000 feet of themselves.
In a nationwide survey, USA Today found a few dozen cases of recent "sexting" prosecutions. "In Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Juvenile Court Judge Thomas O'Malley struggled to figure out what to do with eight teens, ages 14 to 17, caught trading nude cellphone pictures of themselves," the story noted in a summary of one case. "If the 17-year-old who sent the nude photos to an ex-boyfriend were convicted of a child-porn charge, he says, she would be a registered sex offender for 20 years."
Or say you're a 16-year-old high-school football player, and one of the cheerleaders sends an unsolicited photograph of herself naked. Open the attachment and express a willingness to receive a second photo—and how many teenage guys wouldn't?—and you might find a police officer at your door telling you that you're facing a possible five years in prison. A churchgoing New York teen did!
These prosecutions make the sex-offender registry less useful for all of us by wasting resources on harmless kids and diminishing what it means to be listed. That child-pornography laws meant to protect sexually naive teens shouldn't be used to imprison and stigmatize them seems, but apparently isn't, self-evident. So why all the fuss? What's behind this hysteria? Why aren't kids caught "sexting" disciplined in the same way prior generations punished adolescents caught playing doctor, or skinny dipping together, or briefly exposing themselves during truth or dare, or playing strip poker while their parents were out of town?
The flawed legal regime—and the lack of will to reform it—suggests that generations who grew up without the Internet or smart phones are somewhat understandably incapable of making clearheaded judgments about their use. These people mistake "sexting" as different in kind rather than degree from what they did as kids, not realizing that the way adults respond is the most significant difference.
Were I parenting a high-school freshman, I'd certainly advise against "sexting," even absent the legal dangers surrounding it, and punish my kid if he or she did it anyway, just as I would if I caught them playing "I'll show you mine" in the bathroom at the school dance, but I wouldn't take "sexting" as a sign of a hyper-sexualized generation, or a shocking harbinger of promiscuity, or evidence that my kid needs counseling, or imagine that I'd raised a teen bereft of modesty.
YOUR FRIENDS
Joy Behar Was Right
Jeff Shesol is the author of Supreme Power: Franklin Roosevelt vs. The Supreme Court. He is also a founding partner of West Wing Writers, a speechwriting and strategy firm and the author of Mutual Contempt. From 1998 to 2001, Shesol served as a speechwriter to President Bill Clinton. A Rhodes Scholar, he holds degrees in history from Oxford and Brown universities. His comic strip, Thatch, appeared daily in more than 150 newspapers from 1994-1998.
Dragon Tattoo Star Narrowed to Final Four
Gina Piccalo spent a decade at the Los Angeles Times covering Hollywood. She's now a contributing writer for Los Angeles Magazine and her work has appeared in Elle, More and Emmy. She can be found at ginapiccalo.com.
A former editor of Men's Journal, Claire Martin has written for Outside, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times magazine.
Inside Chelsea's Wedding Party
Lynnley Browning is a frequent contributor to the business pages of The New York Times and is a former Moscow-based correspondent for Reuters, where she covered energy and commodities. She grew up in Tulsa, Okla., majored in Slavic Languages and Literatures at Princeton University, and is fluent in Russian. She lives in Hamden, Conn., with her son.
The Coulter Wars
Conor Friedersdorf blogs at True/Slant and The American Scene. Follow him on Twitter at Conor64.
Mark Levin's Big Lie
Conor Friedersdorf blogs at True/Slant and The American Scene. Follow him on Twitter at Conor64.
Immigration Policy Gone Loco
Conor Friedersdorf blogs at True/Slant and The American Scene. Follow him on Twitter at Conor64.
rufustfirefly
Check out the Texts From Last Night website to see where many of these teens are heading.
larryblair
jealous!
doug-c
I agree whole-heartedly with the author of this article. I grew up in a very strict and religious family. Anything sexual before marriage was evil. Once I asked them why. Their answer? Some gibberish garbage about the Bible. Males get a surge of testosterone in their teens and early 20s. Sex is natural.
Kids should be educated. Not bullied or pitied by adults.
JalapenoBob
What these teenagers do not understand is that there are many professions, such as teaching, in which these low-res pictures can and will always be an issue. It will not be other people their own age in the human resources office that are trying to reduce that stack of resumes down to a manageable five-to-ten resumes to submit to the hiring manager. Currently, they research prospective employees on the social networking sites, the credit bureaus (with no regard to whether checking the prospect's credit report is legal or not), medical records (which it is not legal to check) and the data agregators. Negative information from any of these sources will move a resume to the discard stack. Hiring a new employee is big deal for most companies, and they want to get it right, by their standards, each and every time. Companies invest time and training in each employee and having to lose one due to resignation or termination is expensive, both in money and lost productivity. Life isn't fair - live with it.
UltimateFitz
@doug-c - Nobody cares how you were raised.
Now, back to the article. The FEDERAL LAW that possessing and transmitting underage pornography is illegal. Just because kids learn a newer way to break the law doesn't mean it still isn't against the law or shouldn't be against the law.
Bring back pagers!
UpperRight90
Yeah, that's brilliant, then the teens could use all of the pay phones that are still around. Better yet, the kids should use smoke signals to communicate with one another.
This user is no longer registered.
pclayton
I for one don't understand why it is so important for kids to communicate their naked photos with each other. Exactly what is the purpose of this if not to (hopefully) really hook up and then spread the STDs and unwanted pregnancies around. The act of sending naked pictures of yourself may not be dangerous but it certainly can't lead to anything positive and productive...maybe reproductive. Is that what you would want your kids advertising? How old are you anyway?
Aemsere
@Ultimate - It's not the fact that kids learned a newer way to break the law, that means that it shouldn't be against the law. It's the fact that the law wasn't meant to cover this, but inevitably, because of the way it's structured, it does.
@Article - I have to agree with the basic premise of this article, that is, that the kids should not get in adult troubles over this.
A part of me still considers it a problem: Child Pornography (defined as a naked picture of an adolescent) is currently considered an illicit good, because that way the police to track down and condemn Child Porn trading rings that fuel the production of child porn through abuse.
And it's a basic principle that justice is blind - everybody must be held up to the law without considering who they are and their specific circumstances. It may sound harsh, but it's the only thing that protects minorities, groups and religions from laws that specifically target them, and that protection is necessary for our other fundamental freedoms to make sense.
In other words, the district attorneys are doing their jobs just fine; and even an activist supreme court cannot make an exception here. Both judges and DA's have principles and duties to uphold, the bad guys are those who fashioned the apparently draconian laws in the first place. Of course, they didn't realize they were draconian at the time...so that leaves us with no-one to blame except for human fallibility.
That also means that there's only one way to solve this problem: A law amendment.
The law will have to be fashioned such that it allows teens to sext each other, but it still remains criminal to redistribute it amongst adults. It could be done like this:
§1 Child pornography, defined as media containing nudity of a person below the age of 18, is illegal to posses
§2 Unless the person possessing it can explain, beyond reasonable doubt, how he or she was within 4 years of age of the nude person in the subject media at the time he or she received it.
§3 Indiscriminately making the media available is a criminal offense, but first time offenders who didn't know any better can get off scott free.
There, all done. Problem is, in conservative America, an amendment such as that one will never be acceptable, at least not for the next 20 years.
UltimateFitz
It's all fun and games until your daughter's tits are on every kid in towns cell phone.
But more importantly, real child predators are laughing their asses off at you guys.
pclayton
Exactly, Fitz. And I too wonder about pedophiles accessing these photos and using them to start their own portfolios. The laws are actually attempting to protect hormone-crazed kids from themselves. Don't forget, adolescents are still the responsibility of their parents until age 18 in most states, so it's none of his business what parents feel is proper behavior for their kids. He's not the one whose 15-year-old daughter could announce she is pregnant or has an STD. I find it pretty disgusting and a sign that your kids are unduly distracted with sex and up to no good if they want to post naked photos of themselves in a public place. Friedersdorf should think about this type of repercussion while extolling the infringement of photo freedom that adolescents feel entitled to. Of course, this is a male perspective so it isn't surprising.
This user is no longer registered.
upsidedownzebra
Most of today's teens are skanks? They are actually people that make choices, kinda like us when we were younger.
owenband
I find "sexting" to be immoral and will eventually lead to the decline and fall of western civilization. I suggest all female teenagers submit their nude photos to me for pre-publication
review. Also, can someone sent me a couple hundred boxes of Kleenex and hand lotion?
This user is no longer registered.
pclayton
I truly hope you are being facetious....
mbgillil
Those who cannot recognize blatant sarcasm shouldn't attempt to use words like "facetious".
trudylou
Child pornography laws exist to protect children. Sending nude pictures of yourself as an adult is legal so it's perverse to exploit child pornography laws to prosecute the children the laws were aimed to protect.
I have teenagers and have heard about some of this activity. Because it's so public and you quickly lose control, kids need to be really well educated about this and there need to school and family rules against it but it isn't for law enforcement. A 7th grade boy was expelled from my daughter's school for sending a photo of himself, along with some other inappropriate behavior. He really creeped out the kids, maybe because he is so young. I wonder how the kids would have responded if it were high school.
NYUnotable
As a sophomore in college, I grew up with the "sexting" phenomenon in my high school. Sure, I've seen naked pictures on cell phones. I giggled and then didn't really think much of it. Today's overprotective parents are far too concerned with the possibility that their children are not as innocent as they think. Have I ever "sexted" (a term that isn't used by anyone under the age of 30, no matter what the writers of the TV show "Glee" think)? No. Would I? Probably not. I was raised to respect myself and my body, and to think before doing anything stupid. But will this really be the downfall of today's youth? Certainly not. Let these kids experiment with their sexualities. Once they get caught sending these messages and experience the bad consequences, they'll never do it again.
pclayton
NYU:
Sometimes experiments blow up in your face.
shalimar1
Have to laugh at you, dude. I'm guessing that you currently have no children of your own at this time. While, as parents, we know the reality of life and we do remember our own childhoods, we do attempt to instill in our kids our views on morality, our values and our sense of responsibility. Until you have kids, you are only guessing as to how you're going to react to certain situations. I believe you will be singing an entirely different song when it's your precious daughter showing her boobies to the school at large. Yes, you will be reminded, when you look at your innocent daughter's face, of the things you thought and did back in high school. Boys' antics, so amusing to you now (wink wink nudge nudge), will suddenly be not so funny when it applies to your child. Leave sexters alone? Not when you're underage. You'll learn.
pclayton
@shalimar1
It would seem that Friedersdorf's attitude is one that appeals to males and teenaged girls who endeavor to be like their sleazy teenaged idols and are only too willing to comply, thus he feels "who's getting hurt here and everyone's having a good time (no touching)." This would be great preparation for a young person who wants to work in the sex industry and I don't see it as harmless fun. Somehow, Friedersdorf's theory comes across like a dirty young man who would negatively influence the behavior of minors if the world were his cupcake.
Katethedem
The problem is the pictures get around. It may start with peer to peer and then it winds up in the hands of a pedophile. It is risky behavior that should not be looked on a kids will be kids.
LoveOurChildrenUSA
You cannot possibly blame grown ups for this teen's suicide. She committed suicide because she was bullied by her classmates and another nearby school when her boyfriend passed the semi-nude photos on to everyone. Did a grown up force the boyfriend to pass around the photos? Did a grown up bully her to the point of suicide. Wait until you have kids and then tell us that this is all the fault of grown ups!
Ross Ellis
Founder and Chief Executive Officer
Love Our Children USA
fpliving
How sadly often is it that suppressed, repressed and oppressive adults inflict their own festered ire from a sex-life gone dead on their kids who might actually think their sexuality is a cause for exploration and celebration.
http://fullpermissionliving.blogspot.com/
Derida
This is not about the RULE OF LAW this is about developing yet another INDUSTRY for the legal profession- Kids breaking puritanical rules are now felons. A 5 year old draws a cowboy with a gun and you need a lawyer to get him or her back into kindergarten the price tag- 20k. A teen tells a 'dirty joke' on his facebook- he gets kicked out of 7th grade- price tag 50K. What a glorious industry- dragging kids through the courts-parents are hostages and the schools filled with overzealous scatterbrains demand purity. Imagine going into the background of these lawyers and teachers- good grief- talk about rule breaking. This is absolutely sickening. The more lawyers we graduate the more new revenue sources. Pretty soon newborns will need legal representation for peeing on health care workers!
svivar9087
The more you give in, the more they will want. At this age
your choice as a parent will result in the adult they will become
pclayton
Exactly. Apparently, this author has no kids (certainly no teenaged daughters.)
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.