Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Dear Lars Von Trier | R.I.P. Helm: Good Things Have Happe… »

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Sex Sext and Sensibility

Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:58 AM

Finally someone is talking sense—someone besides me—about sexting:

Youths exchanging nude photos of themselves over cellphones, known as "sexting," should not face child pornography charges, as some have in the United States, a humanities conference heard Tuesday. Peter Cumming, an associate professor at York University in Toronto, presented a paper on children's sexuality at the 78th Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences defending the practice as a modern variation on "playing doctor or spin-the-bottle."

"Technology does change things, and there can be very serious consequences" Cumming said. "But that obscures the fact that children and young people are sexual beings who have explored their sexuality in all times, and all cultures and all places.

"A distinction has to be made between nudity and child porn," he added.

Twenty percent of American teenagers, according to a study cited in the article, have "engaged in sexting." I think that estimate is low. But let's run with it: unless we're prepared to accept that one out of every five American teenagers is unindicted child pornographer and unregistered sex offender then we've got to stop treating sexting like a crime. It's not a crime. It is, like the man said, a modern variation of spin-the-bottle. Sexting can, unfortunately, wind up on a kid's permanent record—that is, photos can wind up online for ever and ever and ever, unlike a teenage game of spin-the-bottle, the memory of which can be obliterated with time and distance and alcohol.

Comments (19) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

I would so be in jail right now if I had a cell phone that could send pics when I was in highschool...

Posted by Tina on May 27, 2009 at 10:03 AM

I used to send pix of my dick to random friends when I was drunk. I thought it was hilarious. Oh yeah, it was.

Posted by Mr. Poe on May 27, 2009 at 10:03 AM

Any cute women out there who want to send me naked pictures, it's OK with me.

Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty

on May 27, 2009 at 10:19 AM

It's Toronto. That's in Canada.

They're not prudes like Yanks are.

Posted by Will in Seattle

on May 27, 2009 at 10:29 AM

once i sexted my texticles

Posted by m@tt on May 27, 2009 at 10:34 AM

Anyone who runs a website with nude kids on it is still a criminal as is anyone who views such images. For this reason it's incorrect to say that the images will follow you forever.

Posted by kresblamania

on May 27, 2009 at 10:38 AM

The fun part isn't the images on their friends' cell phones; it when they inevitably end up on porn websites. Forever and ever. There are porn sites that actively troll social sites for racy updates, when they then repost on "getting back at my cheating girlfriend" type sites.

Posted by Fnarf

on May 27, 2009 at 10:50 AM

"It's Toronto. That's in Canada."

Gosh, thanks -- we were all wondering about that.

Posted by Irena on May 27, 2009 at 10:51 AM

Can someone PLEASE make a joke about this man's last name?

Posted by TeaHag on May 27, 2009 at 10:53 AM

So if teen sexters are child pornographers, does that mean that a couple high school sophomores having sex with each other makes them pedophiles?

Posted by Bonefish on May 27, 2009 at 11:08 AM

I think we should start a "war on sexting"

Posted by Urgutha Forka on May 27, 2009 at 11:14 AM

Professor Dick Orgasm could not be reached for comment.

Posted by Seattle Mike on May 27, 2009 at 11:14 AM

Yeah, let's change the law so that 'sexting' is prosecuted like indecent exposure or disorderly conduct.

The overarching problem is, how do we get kids to stop doing dumb shit that'll have permanent consequences? Not just sending naked pictures to their friends. Drunk driving, tattoos, unprotected sex, MySpace, etc. I don't think anybody's got a good handle on that.

Posted by Greg on May 27, 2009 at 11:15 AM

No Greg, let's educate kids on the clever and prudent use of technology, and not criminalize anything they do that doesn't hurt others.

Having an arrest record hurts children, much more so than an embarrassing photo that leaks out.

If you were being sarcastic, I apologize. If you weren't, WTF?

Posted by BombasticMO

on May 27, 2009 at 11:29 AM

I disagree that being arrested for indecent exposure is more damaging, long-term, than having underage naked pictures out there on the internet forever. Plus, having to appear in front of a judge and pay a fine is a fairly effective lesson in what is not a prudent use of technology.

Posted by Greg on May 27, 2009 at 1:31 PM

@10 in some states fortunately yes. Young men who are minors, having consensual sex with their minor girlfriends, have been prosecuted and imprisoned for statutory rape.

That's the problem with one-size-fits-all, no tolerance laws intended to "protect the children".

Posted by Westside forever on May 27, 2009 at 2:27 PM

@5
You sent a nude pic of yourself to your testicles? You must have an interesting relationship with them...

Posted by Har har on May 27, 2009 at 3:06 PM

I am glad someone is talking sense about the phenomenon of kids sending naked pics. But I don't think there's nearly enough outrage at the prosecutors who decided to interpret the law the way they did.

The law is designed to punish adults distributing pictures of minors whose consent is legally invalid. Prosecutors, who have all kinds of options as to which cases to prosecute and which not to, who chose to put teenage girls on a sex offender registry for sending pictures of their own tits, these fuckers are a menace to civic sanity. They have made a flaming ass of the law, and if they have careers after that, well, maybe it's not worse than the incarceration of nonviolent drug offenders, but it's pretty fucking shitty, and in a similar ballpark.

Posted by Luke Baggins