Balko on TEH HORRORZ of “sexting”

Radley Balko has a post up at Reason’s Hit & Run wherein he looks at the latest prosecution in the realms of “sexting” (sending nudie pics of yourself (or others) to someone else via cellphone). In 2005, an 18-year-old’s 14-year-old friend asked him to send her a pic (a “sext”?) of his own erect penis, as a joke of sorts. Neither of them took it very seriously – rationally speaking, why would they? – and so, he obliged.

Problem is, he was caught. You can guess what happened next.

Warning to Teens: "'Sexting' Will Ruin Your Life"...

...not because of the dirty pictures themselves, but because of what the hysterical adults will do to you if they find them.

The latest case comes from Iowa, where the state's supreme court just upheld the 2005 conviction and sentence of Jorge Canal. While he was 18, a 14-year-old female friend asked Canal to send her a picture of his penis. Even the Iowa Supreme Court acknowledges that the photo was at her request, that the two weren't romantically involved, and that the whole exchange was intended to be a joke. Nevertheless, it upheld Canal's conviction and sentence, which comes with the requirement that he register as a sex offender, likely for the rest of his life.

Dr. Marty Klein of the Sexual Intelligence blog comments:

All these adults were supposedly attempting to protect Iowa’s young people–by punishing this kid who was fooling around with a pal.

So let’s spend a moment in the real world (which none of these adults seem to inhabit). Which is likely to hurt this 14-year-old girl more—seeing a 2-square-inch photo of a friend’s erect penis, or being the reason that this friend will spend time in jail and decades as a registered sex offender? Her life is now ruined (in addition, of course, to his), because of her criminally negligent parents, criminally ambitious prosecutor, and 12 jury members who failed to protect people who needed justice but received only wrath.

For a fine example of the circular logic behind these laws, consider the defense of them Pat Trueman, counsel to a religious advocacy group called the Alliance Defense Fund, gave to a local TV station:

"This was a serious offense. He was producing obscenity and distributing obscenity, and to a minor at that,"...

"But he also has to register as a sex offender -- and [he] may be on that sex offender registry for a lifetime," Trueman adds. "So if anyone had any doubts, sexting is a very serious crime -- and kids better get to know that."

Sexting isn't a "serious crime" because it causes irreparable damage to the senders and recipients of nude photos. It's a serious crime because Iowa lawmakers, prosecutors, and people like Pat Trueman have decided they want to ruin the lives of kids who engage in it.

Perfectly said. I especially appreciate Dr. Klein’s statements that this ruling punishes both the guy, and the innocent girl who just wanted to share a joke and who now finds herself unwittingly responsible for the guy having the rest of his life ruined. It’s just yet another reason as to why this whole “sexting” hysteria pisses me off. It is, for lack of a more sophisticated term, stupid. Stupid in its disregard for who gets hurt with these accusations and prosecutions being flung like shit from monkeys. Stupid in the way that harmless activities, jokes, and the natural developmental process of children and teens as they begin to explore their budding sexuality, are demonized and criminalized. And, especially, stupid in how these adult morons completely fail to understand that, to put it this way, there is a reason why we have the saying, “Kids these days …”: they aren’t the sweet little cherubs they want them to be.

Wake up, people. Kids these days are not the innocent, helpless, puristic little creatures that so many adults see them as. Most kids discover the joys of porn at about 12-13 years old (if not earlier for many), and by 18, most have already had their first sexual relation(s). Fretting over a guy jokingly sending a pic of his genitals to a 14-year-old girl, who actually asked for the pic to begin with (it’s not like he intimidated her or solicitation her in any way), is simply stupid, and prosecuting him for it is downright insane.

I’ve seen many reports on this horrible “crime”, particularly on some of the occasions where I was bored enough to land my TV set on the Dr. Phil Show, and each time, I found myself disgusted and outraged. No, not at how those impure little boys and girls dared to show each other nudie pics, but rather, at how adamant those law enforcement officials and pearl-clutching parents were in destroying the lives of anyone who partook in this silly and relatively harmless activity. Sure, there are risks of these pics falling into the wrong hands (I mean, other than parents’ or law enforcement officials’ clutches, that is), but quite frankly, any teen who hasn’t yet seen a naked specimen of the opposite sex (or the same one as well) is currently living somewhere under a rock and needs to be dug out, pronto. Either that, or they simply don’t exist. (Apart from fundies. And they don’t count, anyway.)

[/Mini-rant]

(via The Agitator)
Technorati tags: sexting · children · kids · Radley Balko · rants