(NSFW)Sharing the wrong kind of photos? See details….

No. Having naked pictures of yourself and sharing them with your (also underage) boyfriend isn’t illegal. The only thing these girls are guilty of is being stupid.

Yes – I have heard that the teens who post and share images of themselves are held accountable for distributing that content. I’ll see if I can find a link.

But the boys are guilty of distributing child porn of their naked girl friends ,but the girls themselves are not?

Here’s an article that references a few cases in the US, and says that at least some of the time the person who took and sent the picture is the one being charged -even if it is of themselves. If the recipient then shares the image, they also get charged.

Here is a recent case in Canada, where the girl was charged and convicted of distributing images of herself.

That’s just stupid. I mean, I think it’s a horrible idea to email naked pictures of yourself to anyone, but a child pornography charge against a minor that sends a dirty picture of herself to a boyfriend? That makes no sense to me.

The girls were just fucking dumb, but those dickhead boys need a bloody good kicking for treating them like a piece of meat, stupid little cunts.

From a secular sense why should anyone bother? They are making hypocrites of themselves. They are children, and children do not know anything about naked pics, or that it is wrong or arousing to boys who are still interested in tad poles, and catching bugs. When they sent the pics to the boys they just forgot to put their clothes on first, it surely was not intentional. The boys only shared the pics to show how stupid the girls were, nothing more.

The more I think about this, the more angry it makes me that girls like this have been convicted of a crime. They sent a picture of themselves to someone they trusted, albeit naively. Imagine how embarrassed and victimized they feel because these boys uploaded their photos to the Internet. Charging them for that would be like charging a rape victim, if you ask me.

There was a case about 4–5 years ago in NJ where 15 year old girls sent pictures of themselves to a 14 year old boy. The girls were charged with distribution of pornography to a minor.
I’m sure someone here can find it.

@livelaughlove21 “That’s just stupid. I mean, I think it’s a horrible idea to email naked pictures of yourself to anyone, but a child pornography charge against a minor that sends a dirty picture of herself to a boyfriend? That makes no sense to me.”

Unfortunately that’s what happens when we let emotion dictate law instead of reason.

Won’t someone please think of the children?!

@Darth_Algar And what’s the “reason” that these girls should be charged with child pornography and potentially have to file as sex offenders for having a naked picture of themselves and sending it to someone they thought they could trust and who was just as underaged as they are? Who exactly did they hurt by doing that, other than themselves (for which they’ve already paid the price)? What good would it do to convict them, since I’ve mentioned the harm it could do? I’d love to hear it.

This is the first time I’ve been accused of letting my emotions rule over reason when it comes to the law. The law is the law, but there’s obviously a reason that this only happens in some cases. Because it’s ridiculous.

@hearkat

You’ve linked to an article about a girl that was convicted for sending naked pictures of another tee – her boyfriend’s ex.

@whitenoise – The Canadian case? I’m sorry, I must have misread it then.

@livelaughlove21

Wow. No offense, but take a breath, carefully re-read and understand what I posted.

@livelaughlove21
I just did a quick search – do it yourself to find a better reference. (I am afraid to even type it into my browser.)
Here is some info on the Federal law on the subject:

“A child is considered to be anyone under 18 years of age, and child pornography refers to any images of a minor engaging in explicitly sexual conduct.

Sexual conduct under the federal statutes includes:
Sexual intercourse (genital genital, oral genital, anal genital, or oral anal, and involving persons of the same or opposite sex)
Bestiality (sex with an animal)
Masturbation
Sadistic or masochistic abuse
Lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person

Displaying pornographic images of individuals who merely appear to be a minor engaged in explicitly sexual activity, even though not a minor, is also illegal. It is against the law to possess or distribute child pornography or visit websites displaying child pornography.”

There you go. If some Asst DA, bucking to be DA, wants to look tough on sex crimes she can easily prosecute a bunch of these using a cookie cutter approach. Two years and 100 sex crime convictions later she is the new DA. Who cares what really happened or the impact it has on people’s lives? She’s doing it to protect the children.

@Darth_Algar If I’m misinterpreting your point, perhaps you can tell me what it was. Rereading your response didn’t help.

@LuckyGuy I wonder what it means to “appear to be a minor” and who decides whether or not it appears that way in the first place. That’s rhetorical, of course, because the law is known for being fairly vague.

@livelaughlove21

I think what @Darth_Algar means is that filing ”...a child pornography charge against a minor that sends a dirty picture of herself to a boyfriend?” is the result of letting ”...emotion dictate law instead of reason”.

I.e., Darth wasn’t suggesting that you were being emotionally unreasonable, but instead was supporting your point.

@Brian1946 Ah, good call. Yeah, I didn’t get that out of his response at all. My mistake if you’re right.

@livelaughlove21 “Appear to be a minor” – I am so not going to look that up but I’m sure there is a definition that more than a few lawyers and prosecutors booked many hours against.
Do pigtails and long white striped socks count? School uniforms?
There are many Asst. DA to DA notches to be had in this area so I don’t expect it to go away soon.

I think we’re in agreement that it is wrong to distribute sexual images of minors, yes? So the judicial system is faced with that problem.

I first encountered it back around 2005 or ‘06, when picture phones and MMS were still pretty new, and my son was in High School. On his phone, I found photos that girls had sent of themselves topless, and later one of a girl fingering herself. These were 14–15 year old girls. My first thoughts were, where are their parents and where did they learn such behavior? Then I wondered, how do I as the parent of a son, teach him that this is unacceptable – how do you convince a teenage boy to say “no” to girls that are sexually aggressive (yes, the girls were much more aggressive then the boys in the early teen years) when it had been all over the news not too long before that our own President did not say “no”?

Clearly, the parents are NOT teaching their kids or monitoring their activities; besides which, teens aren’t often too concerned with what their parents say, as opposed to what is ‘cool’ among their peers. Thus, it behooves the powers that be to do their civic duty to stop this behavior. What are their options? Would a public service campaign make a difference? By taking a hard stance, they convey the stronger message that our laws and culture believe that minors should not be engaging in sexual activity. Someone has to be held accountable – but who? It makes sense for it to be the person who distributes the images.

By having a few cases handled this way, the public is aware of this behavior, so hopefully more guardians will pay closer attention to what their kids are doing; and hopefully the kids will see that having a conviction is a bad thing – even if they can’t comprehend that sending naked or sexual images of themselves (or others) is bad.

How else do any of you think society or government could handle this better, since individual families have clearly not been preventing their kids from doing this? Do you think it should be the responsibility of the schools, since they have already been left to pick up the slack where families are failing to teach – such as bullying, other sex ed, resisting alcohol and drugs, etc.? I’m just curious what those of you who believe this is too strong a legal stance would do if you were responsible for every citizen in your state.

@LuckyGuy “I’m sure there is a definition that more than a few lawyers and prosecutors booked many hours against.”

I seriously doubt it. The law hasn’t defined a lot of the language used in law books. “Excessive,” for example, when it comes to many different crimes. The criminal justice system is highly based on discretion – if the powers that be find that the girl appears to be underage, then it must be true. This is why there are only a few cases where the girl whose picture was distributed was charged.

@hearkat I think kids need to be taught at an early age that they are responsible for their own actions. If the girls took pictures of themselves and are embarrassed – tough. They did it. Tell their parents. If the boys forwarded the pictures every female in school should treat them as pariahs and through social media make sure they go to their graves without the chance of putting their pee-pee in a girl’s wet thing. Sorry for the technical term.
Parents are paying the bill for those phones. How about canceling it for a month?
So,... did you tell the parents? If not, you (and a DA) missed a golden opportunity. The law firm of Shyster & Shyster would have gladly sued them for the pain and suffering and irreparable damage those images caused your son.

@Brian1946

Bingo.

@LuckyGuy – I agree that kids should be taught and supervised at home, and I did my best to do those things with my son – which was how I found those pictures. But the fact of the matter is that many parents aren’t hands-on the way kids really need them to be – so I was asking what is a society to do when families don’t do their jobs?

I did not know either of the girls. The first time I just lectured my son that it is not right for him to treat girls like they treat them in music videos, and that he wouldn’t want men treating me that way. The second time I found out the girl’s name, but there were two listings in our town with that last name, so I didn’t know which was hers and I just let it go. He got another lecture, just as he did when I found out that a girl had her cousin drive her to our house so she could give my son a blowjob. “It’s not a big deal, mom” was the reply – if the girls are willing to go to the trouble just to service a boy, how can I explain to him that it is a big deal and expect him to say no? Perhaps if there had been a strong male figure in his life that could have spoken to him it may have had a better impact. Again, the PotUS couldn’t say no – so how can you ask a teenage boy to say no? I continued to monitor his phone and AIM conversations, and to talk to him whenever I found anything that concerned me. He’s legal now and won’t mess with jailbait, thankfully; and he knows that he is fully responsible for birth control. He has a couple friends that already have kids and I know he wants no part in that.

@LuckyGuy Displaying pornographic images of individuals who merely appear to be a minor engaged in explicitly sexual activity, even though not a minor, is also illegal
WOW, I mean, wow…..so as a movie producer I could hire a child actor to play a sociopath bent on murdering people like in The Good Son 20th Century Fox, 1993, or a movie like it and be OK and legal, even if I show a boy blow another boy away in the face with a shotgun, but if I hired an actress that looked like a minor and had her in a scene where she has a tryst with her volleyball coach, the bedroom scene, even if there are just bodies under the sheets in the right positions it would be illegal?

@hearkat (yes, the girls were much more aggressive then the boys in the early teen years)
Oh no, teen girls are too ignorant to know anything about sex, especially enough to even be aggressive. If their object of sexual conquest for some reason is over 18yr the law agrees they are incapable of being sexually aggressive, they are just too stupid sexually to do so.~~

By taking a hard stance, they convey the stronger message that our laws and culture believe that minors should not be engaging in sexual activity. Someone has to be held accountable – but who? It makes sense for it to be the person who distributes the images.
All parties involved. Sex is a drink you can’t have until it has cured in the vat long enough. Just as driving, selling insurance, working in a coal mine, you have to wait until you reach the minimum age to participate legally.

How else do any of you think society or government could handle this better, since individual families have clearly not been preventing their kids from doing this?
If enough people lose a finger playing with a bear trap, those who still have fingers will think twice before doing it. However, I would opt to suspend to bar them from getting their driver’s license until they are 25yr, not driving I feel will be more of a deterrent than incarceration.

@Hypocrisy_Central – Thanks for using the ~~

A little of topic, but I think there is sometimes a double standard when it comes to underage sex (and etc.) when both parties are underage. I think there is often an expectation that the male has a higher level of responsibility to protect the female and to make good decisions.

@hearkat You wrote: “I found out that a girl had her cousin drive her to our house so she could give my son a blowjob.” And I’m guessing she wasn’t 17.
There is virtually no way a teenage boy can resist that. Please tell him the rules for sex offenses in your state. It is too easy to have his life ruined by the actions of an underage predator. Yes, I know… sexist… he is the predator… taking advantage… blah, blah, blah… But it simply is not true all the time. The girl can be a long time reader of GL magazine (GirlsLife) with articles like “50 ways to get his interest” 20 tips to catch his eye “30 best tips for your lips”
Our family has seen it in action. Tragic.

@Hypocrisy_Central You wrote: “so as a movie producer I could hire a child actor to play a sociopath bent on murdering people like in The Good Son 20th Century Fox, 1993, or a movie like it and be OK and legal, but… ” Apparently so. And not just illegal for you. It is illegal for it to be on anyone else’s computer!
In fact if the person you hired actually killed someone the penalty would be more short lived.
~~ We must protect the children.~~

@LuckyGuy – They were both under 16 at the time. As I said, he is now a legal adult and has no interest in jailbait. This was early in the development of the technology – he was 16 when the iPhone first came out.

@hearkat There are also laws for ages below 15 and I think there is another break point at 12. Ugh.
I am so glad my 30+ year old sons waited until they we married at least 2 years before they had sex.~