The Etownian >> Opinion
Criminality of underage ‘sexting’ exaggerated
Thursday May 06 2010
“Then I would run my hands down your sides and I would put my tongue on your ...” You get the picture, or, I guess, the “sext.” If you have never sent that kind of message attached to a picture of your butt, I’d like to personally invite you to join the rest of the world in the “sexting” craze. So go get your phone and send something dirty to someone you’ll feel ashamed about later. Come on, everyone else is doing it.Everyone, including eight Susquenita High School students from Duncannon, Pa., is “sexting.” Three girls and five boys, all under the age of 18, are being charged with sexual abuse of children (a felony) and displaying child pornography (a misdemeanor/felony) and could be forced to register as sex offenders.
Double standard? I think so. Why is it okay for a consenting couple who are both 19 to film themselves having sex and show it to all their friends, but it’s not okay for consenting 17-year-olds to take pictures of their “parts” and send them wherever they want?
It’s been argued that sexting is not okay because it’s dangerous. “If you can’t trust who you’re texting or ‘sexting,’ then God knows where your message will end up,” first-year Jenell Abram said. And she’s right; it is dangerous to text explicit or sexual messages to someone you don’t trust for obvious reasons. Your pictures could end up in the wrong hands or on the Internet for the world to see.
But isn’t that the case for all sexting? When a 20-year-old girl texts a picture of her rack to a boyfriend and he posts them online after their nasty break-up, isn’t she just as at risk to be stalked by a creepy-trench-coat-and-horn-rimmed-glasses-wearing-toothless-psycho old man as the 17-year-old is? The only difference is age.
In the one year between 17 and 18, it apparently becomes immensely less dangerous, and young adults become mature enough (in those 365 days) to make the decision to explore their sexuality legally.
“[Sexting] doesn’t always lead to sex. Sometimes it’s a way of constructing sexual identity,” Abram said. Child development experts agree with her.
Libby Bloom and Mary Zember, writers of “Middle Childhood to Middle Adolescent Development: From 8-18,” wrote that research shows that children from the ages of 13 to 18, are developing morally and ethically and are forming intimate relationships in order to establish themselves as sexual people. This means that in high school and the years leading up to it, children are searching for ways to find their sexual identity within the community, a sexual community that we have created for them.
The question here is one of necessity. Is it necessary to not only reprimand these teens for being teens, but also to charge them with felonies and register them as sex offenders for sending pictures of their bums to a few friends?
I say you can’t punish a dog for being a dog, and you can’t punish teenagers exploring their sexual identities for being hormonal teenagers. There is a blunt line between illegal child pornography and consenting minors trying to develop their sexuality.
There is an even larger mystery at work here. How were the pictures, texts and/or videos found on the students’ phones?
Reports said that one of the teens involved confessed to using her phone during class, which was against school policy. The phone was confiscated, and after having shown the images to a number of other faculty and administrators, charges were raised against the students involved in the messaging. How were these messages discovered?
It seems to me that the fourth article of the Bill of Rights states explicitly, “... the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.”
Similarly, in criminal investigations, police officers and other members of authority must obtain not only a search warrant from a judge but also the permission of a parent to search a minor’s cell phone. It would only make sense that a civilian teacher would need probable cause to investigate contents of the students’ phones.
“It’s an invasion of privacy, and unless they had probable cause, they shouldn’t have searched any phone,” Abram said.
What probable cause could have alerted a teacher that a student was “sexting?” It wasn’t as though the student was having an orgasm in class, therefore there was no cause to justify invading a minor’s privacy, nor was there cause to show the images to anyone except the highest school authority.
Needless to say, upon parents’ request, an investigation has been opened to discover why the images were seen by so many teachers. Most likely, those responsible will also be charged with possession of child pornography.
The investigation of the faculty and school administrators is ongoing.
“Sexting” is wildly popular and, for those under the age of 18, a felony. Society shouldn’t condone underage “sexting,” but such individuals certainly shouldn’t condemn for it. Sexual exploration is a natural process for children, and that sexual development is necessary for constructing identity.
If I can send a naked picture of myself to a guy friend, then a 17-year-old should be able to, too. Enough with the hypocrisy. Consensual is consensual no matter the age of the boobs.
The Etownian >> Opinion