The Castrophic Results of Sexting
Has a girl ever sent nude photos of herself to her boyfriend? Yes, countless young boys and girls across the United States have sent nude photos to each other; however, these children are being charged with multiple counts of child-pornography for this act called sexting. An article called “Teens, Nude Photos and the Law” written by Dahlia Lithwick explains the act of child sexting and the laws surrounding child sexting. Lithwick is a senior editor at Slate magazine and a contributing editor at Newsweek magazine. Lithwick also explains how both the government and children’s parents can prevent this disaster. Children sexting and inequitable charges against them is becoming a problem. I agree with Lithwick that child sexting has resulted to senseless children being charged by the law, pressured girls being penalized unequally in the courts, and uneducated children making mistakes on the internet.
The function of sexting is creating, taking, or transferring nude pictures via the internet. A recent study, created by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, says that “One teenager in five reported having sent or posted naked photos of themselves” (Lithwick par. 2). According to the law, all teens are charged with child pornography whether they are the forwarder, receiver, or sender. Lithwick believes teens should not be on the registered sex offender list for an extended amount of time just because they are too stupid to know that their childish behaviors result in a criminal offense. Lithwick argues that most teens, who are found guilty to child porngraphy charges, are not sexual predators. Lastly, members of the judicial process need to realize that a permanent criminal record should not be given along with the virtual shame a person will have for the rest of their life. Sexting has become a child pornography epidemic, because people of the law believe that teens should be convicted with child pornography for the act of sexting.
Lithwick accurately points out the issue that children everywhere are being indicted for child-porn crimes from the act of senseless sexting. Lithwick explains, “Child-pornography laws intended to protect children should not be used to prosecute and then label children as sex offenders” (Lithwick par. 5). This means the laws surrounding child-pornongrapy were created to punish adults involved in the crime, not children sexting each other. I find this statement completely valid. For example, a 43 year old man sending large amounts of child-porn to every corner of the world, should not be charged the same as a 14 year old girl sending a nude picture of herself to her boyfriend. Both are not morally right, but the 43 year old man knows plenty well what he is doing is a crime, a 14 year old girl does not.
Lithwick also argues that girls are being hit the hardest, as they are being charged with manufacturing, possessing, and sharing child-porn. Lithwick says, “If the girls are the real victims, why are we treating them more harshly than the boys?” (Lithwick par. 6). Girls are seen as targets of the child-porn epidemic, as they’re pressured to take nude photos, so why are they punished even more? In today’s world, a large amount of girls feel they’re expected to send risque photos to their boyfriend. This is a sad but truthful statement. A respectful decline from a girl can result in anger and harsh words from her boyfriend. A girl believes in order to keep her boyfriend happy, she has to send naked photos of herself.
Lastly, Lithwick truthfully points out that children are making ignorant decisions on the world wide web. Lithwick explains, “Parents need to remind their teens that a dumb moment can last a lifetime in cyberspace” (Lithwick par. 7). I agree that this is a serious issue, and children need to be taught repeatedly that one mistake can create permanent results on the internet. Technology has connected every part of our daily lives to the internet, and people are constantly posting, checking-in, or sharing; however, it only takes one mistake to ruin a person’s life. One racist post on Facebook could deny a person to the college of his or her dreams. One harassing message could get a person fired from his or her job. One naked picture of a person’s self could get him or her convicted and humiliated. The point is that children need to be aware of their actions.
I agree with Lithwick that teen sexting has caused illogical children be criminalized by the law, intimated females be charged unequally in the courts, and uneducated kids make faults on the internet. The article by Dahlia Lithwick called “Teens, Nude Photos and the Law” discusses the trend of sexting among teens and the crimes surrounding them with the law. Lithwick also gives a solution to the problem that children need to be taught internet safety, but the government needs to understand children are young and reckless.
The function of sexting is creating, taking, or transferring nude pictures via the internet. A recent study, created by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, says that “One teenager in five reported having sent or posted naked photos of themselves” (Lithwick par. 2). According to the law, all teens are charged with child pornography whether they are the forwarder, receiver, or sender. Lithwick believes teens should not be on the registered sex offender list for an extended amount of time just because they are too stupid to know that their childish behaviors result in a criminal offense. Lithwick argues that most teens, who are found guilty to child porngraphy charges, are not sexual predators. Lastly, members of the judicial process need to realize that a permanent criminal record should not be given along with the virtual shame a person will have for the rest of their life. Sexting has become a child pornography epidemic, because people of the law believe that teens should be convicted with child pornography for the act of sexting.
Lithwick accurately points out the issue that children everywhere are being indicted for child-porn crimes from the act of senseless sexting. Lithwick explains, “Child-pornography laws intended to protect children should not be used to prosecute and then label children as sex offenders” (Lithwick par. 5). This means the laws surrounding child-pornongrapy were created to punish adults involved in the crime, not children sexting each other. I find this statement completely valid. For example, a 43 year old man sending large amounts of child-porn to every corner of the world, should not be charged the same as a 14 year old girl sending a nude picture of herself to her boyfriend. Both are not morally right, but the 43 year old man knows plenty well what he is doing is a crime, a 14 year old girl does not.
Lithwick also argues that girls are being hit the hardest, as they are being charged with manufacturing, possessing, and sharing child-porn. Lithwick says, “If the girls are the real victims, why are we treating them more harshly than the boys?” (Lithwick par. 6). Girls are seen as targets of the child-porn epidemic, as they’re pressured to take nude photos, so why are they punished even more? In today’s world, a large amount of girls feel they’re expected to send risque photos to their boyfriend. This is a sad but truthful statement. A respectful decline from a girl can result in anger and harsh words from her boyfriend. A girl believes in order to keep her boyfriend happy, she has to send naked photos of herself.
Lastly, Lithwick truthfully points out that children are making ignorant decisions on the world wide web. Lithwick explains, “Parents need to remind their teens that a dumb moment can last a lifetime in cyberspace” (Lithwick par. 7). I agree that this is a serious issue, and children need to be taught repeatedly that one mistake can create permanent results on the internet. Technology has connected every part of our daily lives to the internet, and people are constantly posting, checking-in, or sharing; however, it only takes one mistake to ruin a person’s life. One racist post on Facebook could deny a person to the college of his or her dreams. One harassing message could get a person fired from his or her job. One naked picture of a person’s self could get him or her convicted and humiliated. The point is that children need to be aware of their actions.
I agree with Lithwick that teen sexting has caused illogical children be criminalized by the law, intimated females be charged unequally in the courts, and uneducated kids make faults on the internet. The article by Dahlia Lithwick called “Teens, Nude Photos and the Law” discusses the trend of sexting among teens and the crimes surrounding them with the law. Lithwick also gives a solution to the problem that children need to be taught internet safety, but the government needs to understand children are young and reckless.
Works cited
Lithwick, Dahlia. “Teens, Nude Photos and the Law.” Newsweek, 23 Feb. 2009.