He astutely points out:
This is what boggles my mind about the moral crusaders. While we can all agree that child pornography and child prostitution are horrid practices, how does adding in a lot of flotsam and jetsam help track it down and end it? How does criminalizing those practices among consenting adults or older teenagers help? I swear, these adults who obsess over this subject and see it everywhere are the true perverts. They have a twisted fixation on their child (and by extension, all others) that goes beyond parental care and they project it onto the rest of us, who actually couldn't give two shits about their little brat.Arresting these kids for the creation, possession, or distribution of child pornography is a perversion of the law. It turns the 15-year-old who poses into both a victim and a perpetrator (what kind of law does that?). It defines a stupid boyfriend as a snarling predator.
And by watering down the definition of “child pornography,” it undermines our attempts to reduce the actual sexual exploitation of children, and to catch and treat those who would really harm our kids. Real child pornography is a record of child abuse. “Sexting” is a record of adolescent hijinks. Lumping the two together reflects adult anxiety about young people’s sexuality, not a sophisticated understanding of it.
And what about the supposed “dangers” of “sexting”? School counselors, police, even Bill O’Reilly all agree that kids’ lives could be ruined—by insane laws making them lifetime criminals, not by any actual harm. “These photos will be on the internet forever,” we’re warned—yes, and quickly forgotten. And in twenty years, everyone’s physician, accountant, and local sheriff will have nude photos of themselves somewhere on the web. Welcome to the 21st century.
Ironically, the campaign against “sexting” holds kids to a higher standard of judgment than adults. With adults, we generally don’t criminalize poor judgment unless it involves coercion or demonstrable harm. If you take nude photos of your wife, and send them to her friends the day after your divorce, she can call you a bastard (which you would be), but she can’t sue you. She certainly can’t get you on a sex offender registry that lumps you in with rapists and child molesters. But that’s what angry adults like Cynthia Logan want.
Stop. Think. Think again. And again. THEN react.
2 comments:
Marty Klein simply WINS.
And, to rephrase what I said at my own blog on this matter:
And in the meantime, while politicians and “social experts” and “Internet security experts” prattle on about the dangers of teens and young adults getting access to “sexting” and how we must, must, MUST stop this proliferation of PORNOGRAPHY before we have orgies in high school halls….old fashioned sex hatred and bullying and slut-shaming will continue to run amok. And more young women like Jessie Logan will face the full wrath of our sex negative culture that says that they are worthy of being exploited for profits, but unworthy of decency and respect as human beings.
Once again, our anti-sex myopia targets innocents while allowing the real perpetrators to go free....if not join in the ensuing riot.
Will we ever learn???
Anthony
What's funny is that people who actually think this will lead to an overly sexual HS population obviously do not remember their time in high school. Or they're in denial of what has ALWAYS happened whenever a bunch of hormonal teenagers are forcibly thrown in a single (or group) of buildings for about 8 hours a day, five days a week.
Post a Comment