Sexting...

[chanel]

But unfortunately, an 18 or 19 year old kid is considered an adult and HE can be charged even when the pic was unsolicited. There should be SOME consequence for the girl. I'm not sure what would be appropriate, but I am disgusted by people like JB who say "it's not sexual" and it's no big deal. It is a big deal. Reputations are ruined and the internet is forever. Making excuses will only make the problem worse.

Think about this: 18 year old guy dating a 17 year old girl. Or 18 year old guy dating a 16 year old guy. Or 19 year old dating a 17 year old.

Point is, these are the sort of laws that can be abused easily because they are what I like to refer to as a "blanket law." Where those who make the laws have no real care to getting it right, just getting votes.

Other examples: Just about every law put on the books for the "War on Drugs."

All laws are "blanket laws" but often a judge and even a prosecutor has discretion in handing down the punishment. All I can say dogbert is that your girlfriend is going to have to show you her titties in person. No cameras in the bedroom until she's of age, k?
(and even then she might want to think twice) It is beyond dumb...

 

[Modbert]

All laws are "blanket laws" but often a judge and even a prosecutor has discretion in handing down the punishment. All I can say dogbert is that your girlfriend is going to have to show you her titties in person. No cameras in the bedroom until she's of age, k?
(and even then she might want to think twice) It is beyond dumb...

Don't have a girlfriend underage so I don't have to worry about that.

And oh thanks.

Edit: You just reminded me that I turn 19 this week.

 

[dilloduck]

Oh this is ridiculous. Two twelve year olds in their training bras, taking a "curiosity" picture together, and sending it to someone is NOT pornography. It is NOT sexual. Jesus, men need to get it together, if they are going to reduce a woman or child's breasts down to something that is there only for sexual entertainment. Do people FORGET that breasts are used to feed babies??? Or that the average 21 year old guy has larger "breasts" than a 12 year old girl, and YET he is allowed to expose that area of himself in public, to WOMEN even, nipples and all??!!

Even the 16 year old, who might have had a C cup, who fucking knows.. WAS JUST GETTING OUT OF THE SHOWER. Again, she had a towel wrapped around her waist, and only her breasts showed up in the pictures. They're BREASTS, not SEX ORGANS.
People need to stop making mosquito bites into mountains, and breasts into sex organs, is all I have to say. This is getting ridiculous.

Excuse me if I'm being too forward.....if you think breasts aren't sexual...could you show me your tits????
.
[Just kidding]

I hope I've made my point hun.

She can't---she would be attacked by evil men who have witnessed her taboo glands.

 

[JD_2B]

Incidentally, there is a woman close to where I live, who protests topless. She stands on a rock at the beach, screaming about women's rights. She is the reason I thought twice about our current laws on women having to cover up our top halves.

And the more I thought about it, the more I realized- MAN! There are actually a LOT of men out there that have ACTUAL "Breasts" (it is a pathology in men, a medical issue, really), I mean surprisingly a lot, and then the majority of men who don't have actual breasts, still often have more tissue covering their upper front torso area than many young teenagers, and some women, too.
And yet- Even the men who have been diagnosed with actually having breasts, can show their titties on television, in medical shows that focus on cosmetic surgery, for example. Those same shows do not allow a woman's breast nipples to show, but a man's breast nipples are A-ok, it seems. You see FAT dudes mowing their lawns topless, with all ten or twenty pounds of saggy boob tissue just flopping this way and that, and the only issue anyone has about it is that it is considered "freaky" or "gross" when a fat guy has bigger tits than most females.

This is where I have the bulk of the issue. If men and women truly have equal rights, then shouldn't men be wearing the 18 hour bras, as well???

Seriously- this aggravates me all to hell, but it is still fun to cut jokes, hahaha

 

[xotoxi]

The concept that children are charged with child pornography for exploring their own sexuality is disgusting.

What happens if said child sends you the image?

Now you are in possession of child porn.

 

[JD_2B]

Oh this is ridiculous. Two twelve year olds in their training bras, taking a "curiosity" picture together, and sending it to someone is NOT pornography. It is NOT sexual. Jesus, men need to get it together, if they are going to reduce a woman or child's breasts down to something that is there only for sexual entertainment. Do people FORGET that breasts are used to feed babies??? Or that the average 21 year old guy has larger "breasts" than a 12 year old girl, and YET he is allowed to expose that area of himself in public, to WOMEN even, nipples and all??!!

Even the 16 year old, who might have had a C cup, who fucking knows.. WAS JUST GETTING OUT OF THE SHOWER. Again, she had a towel wrapped around her waist, and only her breasts showed up in the pictures. They're BREASTS, not SEX ORGANS.
People need to stop making mosquito bites into mountains, and breasts into sex organs, is all I have to say. This is getting ridiculous.

Excuse me if I'm being too forward.....if you think breasts aren't sexual...could you show me your tits????
.
[Just kidding]

I hope I've made my point hun.

She can't---she would be attacked by evil men who have witnessed her taboo glands.

LMAO!! I actually considered putting a faceless photo of my own pair on here, just to prove a point, but yea- it's true. American men just don't act nearly as evolved or dignified when they see a woman's bare breasts, as say, European men would. But I can say with ease that I have been to a topless beach, and the people (the men) there are not freaky at all. It is just like a normal beach. People all have nipples, and some have more skin surrounding them than others. Some men have bouncier chests than some women have. It's just not a big deal.

Besides, I really don't understand why teenage sex is so taboo anyways. Fundies claim that teenage sex is entirely immoral, that teen pregnancy is all wrong, and then they wonder why so many teens have abortions to hide the pregnancy from their own fundamentalist families. It's totally a lose-lose situation with teenagers, too, because the time in our lives when pregnancy is the best possibility is during the teen years. It just goes downwards from there.

Maybe we could encourage teens to have SERIOUS relationships, when they start getting involved with SERIOUS sexual curiosity, and give them the go ahead to actually get married, instead of discouraging them from all of the above, by telling them they are "not ready" for the commitment, etc. Let the teenagers decide what they are ready and not ready for. I mean, if a 15 year old is interested in having sex and losing his virginity with his girlfriend, and she with him, then the best thing to do is to discuss sex with the two young adults in an objective, and heartfelt way. Explain to them how losing their virginity is something they cannot take back, and that they should only do something like that if they intend to only have sex with the other person for the rest of their lives, and ideally marry at some point in the near future, with the parents permission.

My son is only 10, he turns 11 this Thursday, but I talk to him about his virginity, and explain to him that the reason why getting married and THEN having sex is so important is because that way your first time will DEFINITELY be the best you have ever had, and you will never have to worry about comparing that experience with someone else. I tell my son how exceptionally great it feels to make love, and that it is the most special kind of moment you can share with another person- it is the closest you will ever get to another individual. He really understands this concept, I think, and he knows that sometimes he will have urges towards girls that he is not dating or in love with, that he will have to suppress. He WANTS to suppress those urges. He wants to wait until he is married, and with someone who he loves and values. (He is the same way about drugs too- We talk about drugs a lot. I told him that I would not kill him if he ever experimented, but I strongly discourage it. I told him that people who do drugs end up in massive pain, when they can't get some of that drug, and that they end up stealing and hurting people to pay for their fix.. He respects me, and listens. He says he will never ever do drugs. We now talk about things people might say to pressure him into it, or trick him, even. He is very well armed against the realities of this world.)

I think that all of this negative talk about sex and sexuality is causing our entire society to not VALUE sex as much. Sex has become so TABOO, that even married people can be treated like freaks, just because they use sex toys or any other enhancements to spice things up, and keep the promise of monogamy alive.

I will never understand, as long as I live, why parents act like such TOOLS when it comes to talking about the "S" word. Your kids are going to do it eventually- isn't it better to arm them with some kind of understanding and positive outlook, before they get involved with it??? =)

Man... I must love to write novels here.. So sorry. =)

 

[JD_2B]

But unfortunately, an 18 or 19 year old kid is considered an adult and HE can be charged even when the pic was unsolicited. There should be SOME consequence for the girl. I'm not sure what would be appropriate, but I am disgusted by people like JB who say "it's not sexual" and it's no big deal. It is a big deal. Reputations are ruined and the internet is forever. Making excuses will only make the problem worse.

Breasts are NOT sexual. They are NOT sex organs.

Now, if someone's bare chest made it to the internet as a result of sending a picture of them to someone, in fun, then THAT should be punished. That is exploitation, and it doesn't even matter the age of the female, OR male, for it to BE exploitation. The bulk of the problem is NOT with girls taking pictures of themselves, even nude. It is with the guys posting those photos on the internet or via email for other people to see. I never claimed that there is an excuse for exploiting people, whatsoever.

I simply do not think that a person having a picture of ANYONE with their top off, as long as that picture was voluntarily taken and given to that other person, is pornography. They are just BREASTS. Not vaginas, not penises, just BREASTS.

AND the only DIFFERENCE between a "nude" breast photo and a not nude breast photo is a STICKER. If a person puts a plastic sticker over the nipple, it is no longer fucking pornography, by definition. THAT makes NO sense, considering the fact that MEN have nipples too!!

NIPPLES ARE NOT SEX ORGANS. They aren't even BREASTS!!! EVERYONE'S got a pair!! Some people have three!!! I have this little tiny mole looking thing under my left boob, and nobody would ever guess in a million years, besides an OB doc, that it was a third nipple. The fact is, sometimes this nipple shows itself, if my bikini top rides up even a hair, when I lift my arms up in the air. Should that be illegal of me, to wear a bikini, all because I have a little discolored spot under my boob??? NO!!! A breast is what is UNDER the skin, not what the skin and nipple cover. Jesus get over it.

Christ.

 

[xotoxi]

Breasts are NOT sexual.

Tell that to the millions of gallons of spunk that have been wasted over the years by guys looking at or thinking about those non-sexual fat pads.

 

[JD_2B]

Well, that's kinda the thing.. I mean, if we eradicated the "no topless" rule here in the US, the way many European countries have it, the men would NOT be going ga ga all the time over seeing them.. They act like that even when they are covered by fabric, as it is here. What would REALLY change?? nipples?

Honestly, people would get used to it, and they would no longer be the big mystery and CHALLENGE they once were. They really are not all that exciting, I promise you!! =)

 

[FA_Q2]

JD
Jesus, men need to get it together, if they are going to reduce a woman or child's breasts down to something that is there only for sexual entertainment.

This is not about men and women, it is about stupid laws. Please do not bring your man-hating here.

They're BREASTS, not SEX ORGANS.

Yes they are and that is generally accepted. The issue is NOT what they are but WHO and WHY the pictures were taken. It is obvious that the masses of child sexting were NOT taken with any intent on trafficking child pornography; it is a sexual expression and exploration. Not to be encouraged but DEFINITELY should not be illegal.

 

[Father Time]

The concept that children are charged with child pornography for exploring their own sexuality is disgusting.

What happens if said child sends you the image?

Now you are in possession of child porn.

That reminds me of something I read about how child porn is now weaponized information and that some people keep some images around, not for arousal but because they know that if someone views it online it'll go to their cache (or something like that) and can be used against them in court.

Freaky shit.

Oh and I'm glad to see most people disagree with this insanity, now if only we can change the laws.

 

[FA_Q2]

Virtually everyone agrees that this is insane, both here and outside this board. It is generally regarded as a misplacement of the original intent of the law. The weaponization is an interesting point though. I don’t believe a jury would convict someone over a few pic’s in the cache though which ties into this however….

Think about this: 18 year old guy dating a 17 year old girl. Or 18 year old guy dating a 16 year old guy. Or 19 year old dating a 17 year old.

Those laws do exist as well but are almost never prosecuted because there is almost no jury that would convict an 18 year old for having sex with a 17 year old. That is one of the major reasons why there are juries in the first place – sometimes laws are wrong and a jury can issue a not guilty verdict whether or not the law is clearly been broken.

 

[Ipsl]

Why should a child ever be charged with possession of child porn? I mean its not sick for a 14 year old boy to be attracted to a 14 year old girl.

 

[Father Time]

Why should a child ever be charged with possession of child porn? I mean its not sick for a 14 year old boy to be attracted to a 14 year old girl.

If it's professionally made that-adult-just-molested-that-child smut I can think of a few reasons.

But since we're only talking nude photos ... I have no idea.

 

[JD_2B]

JD
Jesus, men need to get it together, if they are going to reduce a woman or child's breasts down to something that is there only for sexual entertainment.

This is not about men and women, it is about stupid laws. Please do not bring your man-hating here.

Actually you should thank me for being against anyone who man-hates enough to try to make the possession of a self portrait of a topless girl, or a young lady in her bra, something sexual or criminal. However, it is not generally women who go ape shit when they see breasts. Do you know how many pairs of bouncy bare nipples I saw running around the local lake today? If those nipples belonged to females, the men around the lake would be acting more like a bunch of sex crazed animals, than they were with the bare chested men running around. The comment was not based on man hating, so please do not make it out to be a man hating comment. The fact is, men COULD do themselves a favor and stop acting like exposed breasts are some sort of a fucking prelude to a peep show. It is really immature and although not all men do this, it is true that many more do. It is a sociological certainty that the vast majority of men consider breasts to be a turn on. Well, a woman's face, legs, even feet and hands, can be a turn on as well. It's not like we are going to accept being forced to cover those parts up, also, just because men are attracted. Again, that is not fucking MAN hating, you ass, it is just saying that these men can learn to get a fucking grip on themselves long enough to realize that looking at a woman or young girl with bare breasts is neither an invitation for sex. If women all went topless for a week, I swear, men would seriously just get USED to it, quickly. It is just not that big of a deal.

They're BREASTS, not SEX ORGANS.

Yes they are and that is generally accepted. The issue is NOT what they are but WHO and WHY the pictures were taken. It is obvious that the masses of child sexting were NOT taken with any intent on trafficking child pornography; it is a sexual expression and exploration. Not to be encouraged but DEFINITELY should not be illegal.

I do not agree that it is anyone's business as to who the pictures are of, or why they were taken. They are just breasts. Who gives a damn.

 

[FA_Q2]

JD
Jesus, men need to get it together, if they are going to reduce a woman or child's breasts down to something that is there only for sexual entertainment.

This is not about men and women, it is about stupid laws. Please do not bring your man-hating here.

Actually you should thank me for being against anyone who man-hates enough to try to make the possession of a self portrait of a topless girl, or a young lady in her bra, something sexual or criminal. However, it is not generally women who go ape shit when they see breasts. Do you know how many pairs of bouncy bare nipples I saw running around the local lake today? If those nipples belonged to females, the men around the lake would be acting more like a bunch of sex crazed animals, than they were with the bare chested men running around. The comment was not based on man hating, so please do not make it out to be a man hating comment. The fact is, men COULD do themselves a favor and stop acting like exposed breasts are some sort of a fucking prelude to a peep show. It is really immature and although not all men do this, it is true that many more do. It is a sociological certainty that the vast majority of men consider breasts to be a turn on. Well, a woman's face, legs, even feet and hands, can be a turn on as well. It's not like we are going to accept being forced to cover those parts up, also, just because men are attracted. Again, that is not fucking MAN hating, you ass, it is just saying that these men can learn to get a fucking grip on themselves long enough to realize that looking at a woman or young girl with bare breasts is neither an invitation for sex. If women all went topless for a week, I swear, men would seriously just get USED to it, quickly. It is just not that big of a deal.

It is man hating. It is not only men that get upset at the exposure of tits. Women get just as upset. I actually agree that Europe has the right idea here though. It is a big deal because of the taboos placed on it in society. However, it is not just tits that are openly displayed in public there; it is the whole body to include both sexes. Even then, people are still required to cover up and public indecency is still a crime. I can also tell you that as a man, the amount of tits will not diminish their allure. That is just the way it works biologically speaking.

They're BREASTS, not SEX ORGANS.

Yes they are and that is generally accepted. The issue is NOT what they are but WHO and WHY the pictures were taken. It is obvious that the masses of child sexting were NOT taken with any intent on trafficking child pornography; it is a sexual expression and exploration. Not to be encouraged but DEFINITELY should not be illegal.

I do not agree that it is anyone's business as to who the pictures are of, or why they were taken. They are just breasts. Who gives a damn.

You misunderstand what I was getting at here. It matters who took the picture (adult or child) and why it was taken (sexual exploration/send to boyfriend or for pornography reasons). That is what is important. I believe even a child should be prosecuted if they were taking the pictures and distributing them as porn.

Lets be clear here, if the picture of the child getting out of the shower was taken and distributed by an adult then he/she would defiantly need to be prosecuted even if they are just tits and the rest was covered up.

 

[JD_2B]

It is man hating. It is not only men that get upset at the exposure of tits. Women get just as upset. I actually agree that Europe has the right idea here though. It is a big deal because of the taboos placed on it in society. However, it is not just tits that are openly displayed in public there; it is the whole body to include both sexes. Even then, people are still required to cover up and public indecency is still a crime. I can also tell you that as a man, the amount of tits will not diminish their allure. That is just the way it works biologically speaking.

So what?? What is the danger involved with exposing certain body parts?? Just because you find something to be sexy (and I find mens chests to be just as hot, myself, not that you would understand that) doesnt mean that someone else should have to cover it up. Even having ankles showing is considered taboo for muslims, but you don't see us forcing everyone to cover their ankles and legs just because some people might get upset over it. That is just the way it works, in America.

I do not agree that it is anyone's business as to who the pictures are of, or why they were taken. They are just breasts. Who gives a damn.

You misunderstand what I was getting at here. It matters who took the picture (adult or child) and why it was taken (sexual exploration/send to boyfriend or for pornography reasons). That is what is important. I believe even a child should be prosecuted if they were taking the pictures and distributing them as porn.

You are talking about breasts... Breasts being bare in an image do not make the image pornographic. A picture of a girl stepping out of the shower is not PORN, even if she was completely naked.

Lets be clear here, if the picture of the child getting out of the shower was taken and distributed by an adult then he/she would defiantly need to be prosecuted even if they are just tits and the rest was covered up.

WHY?? There is nothing sexual about taking a shower. Why not prosecute book authors for child sexual abuse, for the way they show images of bare breasts and penises and vaginas as well. YOU are making a showering teenager's picture sexual.. Have some self control.

 

[Ipsl]

I don't think "babies first bath pictures" are porn, nor do I believe a child/ minor should be charged with child porn for having his girlfriend or some equally young girl taking pictures of herself. I do say that if I or any other adult was in possession of those pictures of a 14 year old IS child porn.

Breast are sexually arousing because its wired into men for propagation. Larger breast means the woman is able to produce more milk and is potentially more fertile. So while I don't think a woman should HAVE to wear clothes, but than she also shouldn't get surprised when some sick-o tries to rape her.

 

[Father Time]

I don't think "babies first bath pictures" are porn, nor do I believe a child/ minor should be charged with child porn for having his girlfriend or some equally young girl taking pictures of herself. I do say that if I or any other adult was in possession of those pictures of a 14 year old IS child porn.

Breast are sexually arousing because its wired into men for propagation. Larger breast means the woman is able to produce more milk and is potentially more fertile. So while I don't think a woman should HAVE to wear clothes, but than she also shouldn't get surprised when some sick-o tries to rape her.

That's stupid, that's like saying if you drive around in a fancy car you no longer get to complain about being robbed.

Besides you can find cases of women being raped while wearing burkhas

 

[Ipsl]

I don't think "babies first bath pictures" are porn, nor do I believe a child/ minor should be charged with child porn for having his girlfriend or some equally young girl taking pictures of herself. I do say that if I or any other adult was in possession of those pictures of a 14 year old IS child porn.

Breast are sexually arousing because its wired into men for propagation. Larger breast means the woman is able to produce more milk and is potentially more fertile. So while I don't think a woman should HAVE to wear clothes, but than she also shouldn't get surprised when some sick-o tries to rape her.

That's stupid, that's like saying if you drive around in a fancy car you no longer get to complain about being robbed.

Besides you can find cases of women being raped while wearing burkhas

Though I know that I, as young man who choses to dress the way I do, I'm perceived as suspect by police. Is it right? No. Is it reality? Yes. She can say she was victimized and rightfully so. In the same breath though I would also assert that there are sick people out there.