Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Teens' nude photos get unexpected results
Boston Globe ^ | 10 December 2008 | Irene Sege

Posted on 12/10/2008 11:26:19 AM PST by Fractal Trader

The high school in Salem, N.H., was abuzz last month as a photograph of a topless 15-year-old girl was sent from cellphone to cellphone.

School staff intervened, and by the time they met with students in assemblies the next day they had discovered another compromising cellphone photo, this one of an eighth-grade girl. They soon found two more photos of naked or nearly naked girls on students' phones. Two weeks later, a similar incident occurred at nearby Sanborn Regional High School. The photograph in question was of a teenage boy.

A report being released today shows that these were not isolated incidents but part of a national trend. One-fifth of teenagers surveyed have sent or posted nude or seminude pictures or videos of themselves, usually to a boyfriend or girlfriend, and almost a third have received such images, according to "Sex and Tech," a new study by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unwanted Pregnancy and CosmoGirl.com.

Among young adults (ages 20-26), the numbers are higher: One-third said they have posted or sent racy images of themselves, and almost half have received them. TRU, a company that specializes in youth research, conducted the survey online with 1,280 teenagers and young adults selected from its database of research participants.

A spokesman for the National Campaign, a nonprofit group that advocates for sex education and access to contraceptives, said he is concerned about the link between what happens online and what happens in real life.

"What young people report is that this sort of online behavior contributes to a casual hookup culture," said Bill Albert, the group's chief program officer. "The overwhelming majority of teens and young adults don't do this, but when you get numbers like 20 percent and higher for young adults, that passes the threshhold of concern."

(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; clintonlegacy; culturewar; hollyweird; pornification; sexpositiveagenda; sexualizingchildren; teens; teensex; tru; unwantedpregnancy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-153 next last
To: FreedomNotSafety
While we are banning cell phones and guns I guess we should also ban dietary fat, fast cars, alcohol, and cigarettes.

There are alleged conservatives on this website that advocate those very things.
81 posted on 12/10/2008 12:24:20 PM PST by JamesP81 (I shall give their President the same respect they gave mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade

You said — “However, if someone sends them such a picture unsolicited and they immediately delete it, then they haven’t comitted a crime.”

Well, I’ve heard of some law enforcement agencies scouring drives (or virtual drives) to scavenge up deleted items. If they find something that was there and deleted, I’ve heard they can charge the person. That seems sort of crazy, actually...


82 posted on 12/10/2008 12:24:37 PM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: DaveyB
Better idea have a strict no public school policy and keep the socialist out of child raising!

Hear, hear!
83 posted on 12/10/2008 12:26:39 PM PST by JamesP81 (I shall give their President the same respect they gave mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: FrankR
There is no need under the sun for a kid to have a cell phone at school.

Thanks for opining about my kid, but frankly, I want my kid to have the cell phone on her person whenever she is not under my roof.

My kid. My call. You go ahead and do whatever you want for yours.

84 posted on 12/10/2008 12:26:50 PM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FreedomNotSafety

You said — “Back in the day, so I would occasionally hear, there would be a girl or two that would expose herself if the boys begged hard enough. Then the stories and rumors would fly but no proof of course just imaginations filling in the blanks.”

Yeah, I remember some crotchety old man that I used to mow a lawn for... talking to me one day (he was sort of weird...) telling me about some neighborhood kids and what “they were doing” in an old garage across the street, taking off their clothes and stuff (you know..., like real young kids like 10 or so...). I never did figure out if he was making it up or not.

I was just about that age, too, myself, going around mowing neighborhood lawns... LOL...


85 posted on 12/10/2008 12:27:43 PM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler
Well, I’ve heard of some law enforcement agencies scouring drives (or virtual drives) to scavenge up deleted items. If they find something that was there and deleted, I’ve heard they can charge the person. That seems sort of crazy, actually...

The only real power govt has is to prosecute criminals. This is just one more step in making everyone criminals.
86 posted on 12/10/2008 12:30:02 PM PST by JamesP81 (I shall give their President the same respect they gave mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Fractal Trader

The cheerleaders parents must be so proud.....


87 posted on 12/10/2008 12:31:36 PM PST by Badeye (There are no 'great moments' in Moderate Political History. Only losses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade; r9etb
There have been kids prosecuted for sending pictures of themselves out over the internet (despite what I think is a good argument that the laws were not meant to prosecute the actual, underage subject of such pictures).

In reality what has happened is that legislators assumed that underage teenagers would be moral enough not to send naked pictures of themselves to others. I probably would have made the same assumption. In hindsight that is a mistake and there is now a gap in the law. The problem is, how do you update the law to change the situation? If an underage teen with a grudge can send her teacher an email with a naked picture and get him put away, that doesn't seem right, but if he is in possession of the picture, it doesn't seem right either. Underage kids possessing naked pictures of their peers doesn't seem so bad until fathers get a hold of them (realistically, women can probably get away with possessing any amount of child porn).

So what is the answer? Let things continue on a case-by-case basis until our populace is used to the idea of underage teens media-messaging nudie-photos of themselves to each other? Trying to stamp out the practice by prosecuting those who do?

88 posted on 12/10/2008 12:31:56 PM PST by dan1123 (Liberals sell it as "speech which is hateful" but it's really "speech I hate".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade
Oh, I can see you're going to be one of those....ok,

Well, people in the past didn't have cell phones, whether they needed them or not. Just because we made do without a specific technology in the past is not an argument against that technology."
<
Your initial argument wasn't one of "technology", it was one of having to be in constant contact with your kid. Try to focus.


When I was in high school back in the early 90's and my phone broke down on a road in rural Michigan, I had to walk a mile, at night in January, to get to a phone booth to call my parents and a tow truck. Given the choice of having my son or daughter do that or use a cell phone, I know which option I prefer."

High school...in the 90's? Jeez. My KIDS granduated in the 80's. And, you're losing focus again...the intial argument was about kids having cellphones in schools, not driving down a lonely road in Michigan. I think kids having cellphones are great in that situation is great, but it is - after all - a very different situation. Don't you think other people have had similar situations where their cars were stalled...after all, cars in the 90's were much more reliable than in the 60's...but we somehow managed to make it.


Jamming devices are illegal under Federal law.

Jeez, are we going to split hairs all day to try to get to a freakin' point. I know it's illegal, but I said SHOULD BE. You must have been playing with your cellphone and missed that part.


Why, other than your personal preference?"

Because you wouldn't want 300 different cellphones with 300 different ringtones going off all day in the hallway...THINK!
89 posted on 12/10/2008 12:31:59 PM PST by FrankR (“Turtle up”, economically, for the duration of the 0bamanation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler
Well, I’ve heard of some law enforcement agencies scouring drives (or virtual drives) to scavenge up deleted items. If they find something that was there and deleted, I’ve heard they can charge the person. That seems sort of crazy, actually...

They'd have to be looking at a person's hard drive for a specific reason and with a warrant, like If the person was on the e-mail distribution list of a child pornographer.

Prosecutors who do this stuff are good at it- a poker buddy of mine is a Federal prosecutor who goes after child pornographers. The point he made to me is that they never find someone with just one picture or video- when they find this type of stuff after executing a search warrant, they find hundreds, if not thousands, of videos and pictures. It's tough to argue that you did not receive the stuff intentionally.

The worst is that they'll see the same child victim in pictures and videos over the course of years from a very young age to their teen years, in some cases. They just don't have any way to track the kid down. They can arrest the guys with pictures of the kids, but they can't find the victims.

90 posted on 12/10/2008 12:32:00 PM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Travis T. OJustice

Back in my day it was not uncommon to take nude pictures of girls on an old black & white Polaroid instant camera, I remember seeing shoe boxes filled with them. Nothing has changed but the technology people have been gazing at nudes since caveman drawings and I don’t see any thing to impede progress in the future.

Personally I can’t wait for the invention of holodecks, no guilt,t disease or commitments whatsoever, truly zip-less sex.


91 posted on 12/10/2008 12:32:21 PM PST by DoingTheFrenchMistake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81

You said — “The only real power govt has is to prosecute criminals. This is just one more step in making everyone criminals.”

In general the overzealous prosecution of way too many laws makes everyone lose respect for the law and makes the entire society become more lawless. So, being too aggressive can work against the authorities, because many figure once they’ve broken a stupid law here and there, then what does it matter to break a few more — and then..., so it goes... everyone starts to become “lawless.”


92 posted on 12/10/2008 12:32:56 PM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: RgnRepublic
"This is why I don’t allow my daughter to have a cell phone with a camera in it."

I would think you'd just teach your daughter not to take nude pictures of herself and send them to the boys...

93 posted on 12/10/2008 12:33:32 PM PST by Hatteras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hatteras

so who would you want her to send them to???????


94 posted on 12/10/2008 12:34:26 PM PST by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: FreedomNotSafety

You speak a mouthful, sir.

This thread is ample demonstration for just how easy it is to get to a place where you ban the ‘thing’ because people use it in a bad way. As you say, the logic here is just as easily applied to guns, cars, food, phones, etc., etc.


95 posted on 12/10/2008 12:34:36 PM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy
Freepers are the first ones to scream about guns and SUVs being blamed for things, yet one can hear them screaming about cellphones causing shenanigans. SHENANIGANS will happen, if the flesh is willing, irrespective of technology.

I saw this in the left-lane passing thread. Apparently even conservatives are not immune to wanting their pet-peeves made illegal. I actually like the kids' cell-phone that has a mommy-button and a daddy-button and that's it. No cameras, no texting, no calling friends while at school or out. If it's an emergency, they can call mommy or daddy and that's it.

96 posted on 12/10/2008 12:39:28 PM PST by dan1123 (Liberals sell it as "speech which is hateful" but it's really "speech I hate".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: FrankR
Your initial argument wasn't one of "technology", it was one of having to be in constant contact with your kid. Try to focus.

I was making a more general point. The fact that kids did not have cell phones in schools in the past doesn't really answer the question of whether they should have them now.

Don't you think other people have had similar situations where their cars were stalled...after all, cars in the 90's were much more reliable than in the 60's...but we somehow managed to make it.

I suppose. But, there is simply no downside to kids have access to cell phones at all times. You never know when emergencies are going to pop up.

Jeez, are we going to split hairs all day to try to get to a freakin' point. I know it's illegal, but I said SHOULD BE.

Why? Because you don't like cell phones?

Because you wouldn't want 300 different cellphones with 300 different ringtones going off all day in the hallway...THINK!

So, just have a rule that all cell phones have to be on silent or vibrate and give detention to any kid who violates the rule. Kids and parents stay in contact, and your delicate ears don't get offended.

97 posted on 12/10/2008 12:40:49 PM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: dmz
"My kid. My call. You go ahead and do whatever you want for yours. "

What is it with you people reading an opinion. I am not a congressman, or any other form of government, lawmaker, or rule enforcer. I just happen to think that cellphones have no place in the classroom.

If you are so insecure with your parenting skills that you need a "leash" attached at all times, that's your problem...not mine.
98 posted on 12/10/2008 12:41:06 PM PST by FrankR (“Turtle up”, economically, for the duration of the 0bamanation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: STONEWALLS
".....if only white table cloth restaurants felt that way....also lecture classes...I really liked this: "

Ain't it the truth! ALL restaurants would be fine with me.
99 posted on 12/10/2008 12:42:16 PM PST by FrankR (“Turtle up”, economically, for the duration of the 0bamanation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade

If a guy is in the practice of collecting those kinds of pictures, then I can see that he would have a whole bunch of them. But, in some Free Republic articles (I don’t know..., around a month or two ago...) there was mentioned some guy who had a computer in for repair and the technician spotted a picture on his hard drive. The police were called and they looked through the drive and found something like six or seven of them. So, the guy was prosecuted.

I guess someone could say he didn’t have time to collect as many as he wanted to... LOL... but, at the same time, perhaps there are those who have one or two or five or six, etc.

Then again, there is the issue about family pictures (that I mentioned in an earlier posting). I’m not sure where they draw the line, because certain pictures are okay, while others are not. I guess it would be easy enough to prove whether someone was in the family (for family pictures), but..., it’s okay for people to even have strangers’ pictures of things like family nudist places or even some printed material by certain professional photographers that put it out for art.

I don’t think there should be problems for families and their own personal photos, as I remember the day, a long many years ago, when people did have photos of little kids running around without anything on, and they would all laugh about it... :-)

Nowadays, it seems to be very dangerous for even stupid little things like that.


100 posted on 12/10/2008 12:42:49 PM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-153 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson