Posted on 02/21/2011 10:29:38 AM PST by Gena Bukin
Regardless of whether a judge or jury finds Evan Emory guilty of a sex offense for creating a lewd video with schoolchildren in the background, the case has highlighted a cultural divide between the so-called Millennial Generation and pretty much everyone else.
Many of the Millennials — mostly young adults without children — wonder what all the fuss is about. So Emory made a video with Ravenna elementary children in the background looking surprised and smiling a lot. They say since Emory sang a harmless “Lunch Lady Land” song to the children during his actual performance and subbed in lyrics with sexually graphic references afterward, before posting the video to YouTube, that no harm was done.
These Millennials see the video as a joke and comedy, and even if some admit the video was in bad taste, they believe no crime was committed. This kind of thing is on comedy shows and MTV all the time, they reason. And it’s certainly on YouTube, the social networking site that allows anyone to post a video of almost any kind for the entire world to see.
They are outraged that Emory, who was a good student himself at Ravenna and never got into any trouble, is facing a 20-year felony charge of manufacturing child sexually abusive material. They can’t fathom that Emory, if convicted, is facing the possibility of having to be on the sex offender registry the rest of his life when he didn’t actually “expose” the children to anything.
Then there is the opposite spectrum — those who are horrified that someone would find humor in using children as a backdrop for a sexually explicit song. Whether the children actually heard the lyrics or not is beside the point, they reason, because it was the children’s innocent faces that were shown smiling and giggling when Emory’s nasty words were heard by hundreds and perhaps thousands of people before the video was removed from YouTube.
The parents of the children on the video are especially horrified, and as a parent, I can’t blame them. It would make me sick to my stomach to see one of my children placed in a situation like that. Many of them think the charges fit the crime, though it’s pretty clear that a 20-year felony for something like this is way over the top.
Still, the Muskegon County Prosecutor’s office wants to make an example out of Emory so they went after the “big” charge. And Ravenna Superintendent John VanLoon probably echoed the sentiments of many folks when he said: “If you think that’s something funny, you really need to review and look at your personal values.”
Which brings up a bigger challenge in this age of technology. There was a time when you could limit the kind of garbage kids are exposed to — a time when TV programming didn’t allow even partial nudity and there weren’t hundreds of cable channels from which to choose, smart phones, the Internet and social media. Today there is no place to hide and despite the best efforts of parents, kids are influenced by all these contraptions they can access almost anywhere, anytime.
According to Wikipedia, the Millennials have been shaped by the rise of instant communication technologies and are “peer-oriented.” Reality TV, MTV, YouTube and the like have helped to desensitize teens and young adults to the difference between right and wrong.
Many young folks seek the instant gratification and star quality so prevalent in society today. And they seek it without considering the consequences.
Which, at least, might explain the cultural divide this case has highlighted — even if it doesn’t provide a good way to fix it.
Go to Post 221 and read the lyrics. It also lists the expressions on the closeups of the 6 year olds faces. There is no excuse for this.
You keep using “fine”. I’m using the word illegal. Or, actionable. And this isn’t illegal, but it may be actionable.
You might not be familiar with the legal system, but most of you who are libelling those of us who understand that editing together video of a guy saying sick things (and look there, I used the word “sick” - so, not “fine”) are certainly old, so I’ll remind you of something that you might remember, the OJ case.
OJ did not go to jail for a crime. There was a trial about that.
OJ did get sued for the same thing, and lost. There was a different trial about that.
So, Criminal and Civil are different, and there are different ways to make those who are wronged “whole”. I’m not sure what the tort is, but off the top of my head false light invasion of privacy maybe.
Looks like you missed a few posts. Sexual exploitation of children most certainly IS illegal.
Maybe you’re missing this.
They weren’t there when he said the bad things.
Ok, I said “will haunt”. They won’t remain children, and those videos don’t stay in one place. They will be available on the internet forever. The names will also be easily available.
You're missing it. He showed closeups of their faces and dubbed in sexually explicit words. That is sexual exploitation. He made it appear that children were reacting to his sexual verbiage.
You didn't answer posts 221 and 236. What are your responses?
Jazz1968 was Zotted.
Right. They either sign the release or they don’t.
I’m not sure where “sell their children into the sex trade” comes from.
And you called me filthy to suggest that a market in child actors exists.
You see, all the kids did was sit there. they were filmed reacting to the Adam Sandler song “Lunch Lady Land”. Paid actors could’ve done that, and the choices to participate or not to participate could be made.
There is a lot of stuff on TV that you’d consider a terrible crime.
You are telling everyone that they have no clue about what’s out there, and yet you call YouTube minor.
YouTube isn’t minor. It’s huge.
Such foul language to be using in defense of a child predator.
Conservatism is fiscal conservatism AND social conservatism AND strong national defense. Without ANY of these three elements conservatism fails.Worth repeating.
Youtube has porn now?
Representing children as sexual objects and enjoying sexual content is dangerous. This kind of thing isn’t a joke and it isn’t funny. It portrays children incorrectly.Yup.
Look at the defenders of this vulgar explicit trash. And they defend using unknowing innocent 6 year olds.
You are ridiculous. Apparently you have no clue about how this goes. It’s gone on YouTube? Do you have any idea how many times things like this get downloaded before they can be removed? This cretin’s fans have copies, and they’ve posted them to their websites. It will go on and on. Nothing is ever completely removed from the internet.
You read the lyrics? And you still defend the dog but attack those defending innocent kids? That takes a lot nerve.
It’s scary that some don’t get that.
My, my. So it should be legal, just not “fine and dandy”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.