That’s flat out messed.
It’s hardly “spin the bottle” but I’d agree with the prof that a teen who does it shouldn’t be branded for life with a conviction for kiddie porn.
First off what’s the definition of pornography?
According to Webster pornography is:
1 : the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2 : material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
3 : the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction
Sounds like pornography to me. My question is would a grown man be charged for this? If so than yes, the kids need to be charged.
Besides that what these girls are doing is sad in more ways than one. For one thing they are showing they have no respect for themselves. They are also helping to get these boys addicted to porn. Which well seriously mess their lives up.
Heh. Prof Cumming is the undergraduate director of the humanities department at York U, which i attend. Im seeing him on monday for an advising appointment. interesting.
For the love of G… - distinguendum est!
To equate what’s going on here with adults systematically collecting pornographic pictures of children is just flat-out insane.
That this kind of behavior is hardly MORAL is something we completely agree upon. But to make such a big deal out of THIS kind of case is just 17th century puritanism at its worst.
What next - you want to gather the townsfolk for a witch hunt? :rolleyes:
I just wonder if these kids realize that any digital pictures they send can have a life of their own on the web?
Sometime in the future would my grandaughters want to have their grandaughters exclaiming, “I found a picture online of Granny when she was our age and look what she’s doing!”
:shrug: I know, kids don’t think ahead…
Pornography consist of more than adults looking at pictures of children in suggestive posses. Pornography is also, Playboy, Penthouse and the like. Teens are well aware of sex and many of them are sexually active. No one can deny that. What this professor is doing by saying that this is a healthy way of expressing themselves and that it is not pornography is wrong. This is not a healthy way of expressing yourself and it is pornography. If an adult did the same things that these teens are doing and they were charged for it than yes the teens should also be charged for it.
[FONT=“Arial”]I find it sad someone would even condone such inappropriate behavior. It is completely unacceptable and it only causes problems. In turn, the one who distributes, if caught, may be prosecuted and face charges due to the poor decisions that they have made.[/FONT]
In no way is this admissible…:dts:
Bad behavior among teens has become too accepted. The internet has made it more dangerous and now texting has a downside to it. I do believe these teens will be so embarrassed when they try to move on in adult life and these so called “teen” pictures show up when least expected. Jobs will be lost, opportunities will dry up and well- if they had been told of the dangers early on then perhaps they could have been prevented.
It will follow along the lines of abstinence. Professionals will say it can’t be stopped so let’s accept it as the new normal. Sick, and wrong-that’s what it is.
No arguments there. Child pornography is not the only kind of pornography that exists.
I just don’t see the relevance?
My gut would also be against calling it “healthy”. However, that STILL does not mean that this case should be treated exactly as if it was an adult who had taken advantage of teens. To say that is just plain…yeah, I’m sorry, stupid. No jury outside out the deep “hillbilly-South” is should see it like that, and thank God. Actually, the “hillbilly-South”-jury SHOULDN’T either, but unfortunately probably might…
No. Because one can expect from an adult that she or he do not abuse their position and experience into manipulating teens and kids into pornography.
On the other hand - sending a picture of oneself in a swimsuit or boxers to one’s gf/bf cannot reasonably be compared to the above scenario, and to do so is just plain and simple dumb.
If someone is denied a job because of private pictures from teen years ending up on the internet, then they should sue the company’s behind off. And if there’s any justice at all - they’d win.
SHE’S A WIIIIIITCH!!!
Interesting, you claim to agree that what is happening is wrong but call us witch hunters. :ehh:
Teens get prosecuted as adults quite often. Teens are not children. They may not be full fledged adults but they don’t fall under the category of child either. If an adult would not be prosecuted than prosecuting the teen would be wrong. But if an adult would be prosecuted than yes the teen also needs to be prosecuted.
I agree that sexting is amoral. But I still think that the scenarios are too different to be treated the same! Quite honestly, it’s a variation on the “teens shouldn’t be thinking about sex”-theme, and in THIS case it is a witch hunt, straight out of the puritan 1690’ïes…although I don’t, when push comes to shove, think that anyone will call for their burning. “Just” ruin the rest of their lives.
If what happened was teens taking pictures of other teens and distributing them around, THEN I would be in agreement with you. But wanting to ruin the life of a teenager who sends a dirty picture of themselves to their bf/gf is malicious, and 17th century puritanism at its worst.
No one on this thread has called for the ruination of a teenager’s life. What we have done is simply state the facts. The facts are you break the law you get punished. The professional world as a rule is conservative, this type of behavior is not tolerated. The professional world likes it’s people to be clean cut and conservative in behavior. Sexting hardly falls under that description.
Secondly, how do you know these pictures are not being distributed around to other teens? Chances are high, just based on the basic mind set of a teenager that a number of them are. Teenagers, as a whole, are not known for being the most charitable age group.
But the facts are ALSO that there is quite a bit of leeway in interpreting the law. And when the police have nothing better to do than seek out teens who experiment with their own sexuality, and send a pic of THEMSELVES to their bf/gf, then there are too few real problems.
I maintain: This is a variation on the “teens shouldn’t be thinking about sex!”-chant, and is straight out of 17th century puritanism.
Are ANY age group known to be charitable as a whole?
But you’re not going to be turning the tables on me on this one. I already said that distributing those pictures as an act of revenge, bragging, etc, is an entirely different ballgame than what we’re discussing here. You just ASSUME that this is going on generally in these cases, without any kind of proof.
In other words: I’m not the one that has to prove that they’re not being distributed - you are the one that has to prove that they are. The burden of proof falls on you.