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.
Using children in a sex music video encourages pedophiles. If you don’t see that, you have moral blinders glued on.Yup.
I’m saying the sleaze didn’t commit that crime. I’m not defending him.
I think it’s Conservative to get the facts right.
If nothing else, this thread is showing the moral pit that is Libertarianism.
I’m not going to respond to any of your specific posts because I don’t want to go over the same ground you’ve gone over with others. What would be the point. But I do have to say this: you really are a sick f*.
You and the Pallantine dude, whose screen-name I’m not even going to take the trouble to look up.
A couple of really sick f*s.
You have smeared the parents saying if they'd been paid it would be alright with them. You blamed them for all of this claiming they turned it into police when it was the school. Yeah. You've defended him and blamed EVERYONE but HIM.
They don’t have child pornography on youtube.
We’re talking about a youtube video here. So, by definition, we’re talking about something that isn’t child pornography.
And if child pornography IS on youtube, that’s the story.
You don’t have a smidgeon of a clue what conservatism is, what the Constitution means, or what moral principles are.
Supporting this crap? Good grief, I'm not supporting it! God's honest truth, if it were my kids on that youtube video, I'd want to kick this guy's ass! Does that mean I think he should do 20 years hard time? No. Do I think he's a pedophile? No. He's an idiot. There's a difference. Let's reserve 20 years of cellblock space for the sick bastards out there who are actually diddling kids and filming it, not some twit who epically failed at making a funny youtube video.
Do that to one of my kids and you’ll pray to be put in jail just to be safe from me.That's what I've been thinking the whole time I've been reading this thread.
Keep reading but realize that it could be dangerous for your blood pressure.
There’s more than two.
We’re talking about a youtube video here. So, by definition, we’re talking about something that isn’t child pornography.
And if child pornography IS on youtube, that’s the story.
Interesting...tautology, I believe it is.
Wouldn't you agree, though, that if the lyrics were not dubbed in, had they been sung in front of the children, then there would be a case for chilc pornography?
In which case, did YouTube know the lyrics had been dubbed in when the piece was posted? How did they know?
Just asking...
What a bunch of CR@P.
Why are you pretending you don’t know that this was removed from You Tube? I think it’s Conservative to get the facts right. Why don’t you?
I see you found him.....
Jazz1968 was Zotted.Good. I guess it takes awhile to get to the Zot list, which I'm on.
Was it a state or federal law this sicko violated?
Since you claim you’re all for States Rights, are you still going to say no crime was committed if he violated a state law?
You have no abiliity to think rationally. Numerous people have explained, elucidated, and described.
You don’t get it, either by accident or by choice.
There’s a link to the lyrics in Post 221. When he’d sing an explicit line he’d show a closeup of a child’s face. That is definitely child sexual exploitation.
There wasn’t a posted Zot. His page simply comes up “Error”.
Agree with everything but “that is sexual exploitation”.
There are people here who are entirely unfamiliar with popular culture. On TV. There is some shocking stuff on TV these days. One of the last people to talk about this stuff was Christine O’Donnell, and that was 10 or so years ago.
It sounds like an over the line Whitest Kids sketch.
I’ve seen what I’d consider worse even than this on TV. This didn’t show anything. Not kids but animals, and I think it was on a Demitri Martin sketch show on Comedy Central. It was definitely Comedy Central.
I’m not recommending immersion in popular culture, but what we’re seeing is that younger people are watching the late night shows that you aren’t. And if you haven’t been watching TV since the days of separate beds, things are way different now.
This guy went too far, but reaction shots of kids is a comedy device that is used these days.
And there’s a potential civil case there, just not a criminal one.
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.