Or was that homework for a different online magazine?

This right on the heels of the Polanski article. The Polanski hit hard against a sexual situation involving a young teen. This article hits hard in favor of the rights of even young teens to sexually express themselves. Though it engages in the typical balancing act where a news source gives positive and negative feedback so that no definitive argument can be discerned. As, of course, does the site as a whole by making sure the Polanski article and this were timed to closely coincide with each other.

Our child protective laws are ridiculously, violently draconian. Like a drug addict prostitute who wakes up one day to find religion and turns into the most ruthless born again Baptist, our nation awakened one day to realize that for centuries the lives of certain children were living nighmares, and it became bound and determined this would Never. Happen. Again.

But the laws in place are not functioning as a well-refined net, sweeping away the villains and protecting an innocent populace. They have instead become an out-of-control behmoth, stomping over people and ruining lives where no discernable criminal act can be found. It's like a science fiction movie where the robots assigned to protect and serve have gone haywire and sent humanity scrambling for cover.

Our laws need serious re-consideration. And the terrible thing is, that is highly unlikely to happen.

as a high school teacher i can attest that many high school students are often involved in risky behavior. some more risky than others. as a matter of fact two students were just expelled for improper facebook postings this week. many students don't realize that the internet is open to all, not just them. i hear comments all the time like, "you have a facebook page, that's creepy!" "you have an iphone/you know how to text?"

for some reason, many teens believe that they have a corner on the market when it comes to electronic communication. many don't see past their friends whom they communicate with electronically. therefore they never realize that they have exposed themselves, either literally or figuratively, to the world.

education and accountability are two places to start...

Maybe the problem with our sex-related laws is that they are written by old sedentary people. Sedentary people have a much more difficult time achieving arousal and may be (unconsciously) angry at those who don't have their impotence/frigidity issues. I know that I surely won't ever touch a teenager's cell phone for fear of being accused of possessing kiddie porn.

If you delete the high-dudgeon moralists from among us, this problem ceases to be one.

to even ask that question?

Rather, you should interview the cops who busted them and ask them what the hell they were thinking.

considering the number of teenagers and cellphones in the US...prosecution of "sexting" under porn laws doesn't seem like much of a trend.

If there was a trend, there would be significant numbers of people being prosecuted, with a significant increase in prosecutions over some predetermined time period.

If anything, two instances of prosecution would show that this is NOT a trend...if two instances were statistically significant. Which they probably aren't.

Lawyers, sheriffs, preachers, parents and punks / oh yeah, and school principals.

Maybe I was just born too soon. What's my psycho-therapist's phone number again?

That opening question was bait for commenters, right? Clearly being branded as sex offenders for life, and similar punishment, is what's worse. Not everyone is as hung up on the naked body as some clearly are. There is a difference between a 40 year-old getting a teenager to pose naked, and the teenager choosing to do that themselves to share with a peer. I'm not advocating teens doing that sort of thing or suggesting it is a good idea. Some who take such photos may regret it now or later, but the idea that just having one's naked body seen by others must automatically be horrible is weird. I've seen occasional old photos in family albums with nudity of adults, teens, even kids, and apparently just a generation or two ago mere nudity was not the OMG it must be today.

Clearly the law needs to be adapted, if police and prosecutors cannot manage to use some common sense when considering how to handle these kinds of cases. Just ten years ago I never imagined that there would be an issue that would generate more irrational reactions than the 'drug war', but teen sexuality as far as not just photos but statutory rape charges between two people just slightly on different sides of being 18 years old and such is sometimes so over the top it seems like something from a movie. Like drugs, it seems that calmer, more considered reactions that take context and reality into account would be better for almost everyone. However, since politicians love to take tough stances on crime, drugs, porno, and now especially pedos all "for the children" because they believe it gets votes [and it may], we'll probably only see more of the same. These days it seems like many of our freedoms will continue to be eroded for the sake of the children, meanwhile many young people manage to partake of the very drugs and other illegal and risky behaviors that most adults can't dare risk because grown-ups have too much to lose.

Because all the constant focus on teen sex, not only here but at large, is a real bore. In the media, nobody but the sub-18 crowd has a sex life; certainly no one over 30.

I wrote about this yesterday on my site. The only reason I didn't post it on Open Salon was because the issue had already been covered pretty well in Slate/Newsweek. Anyway, here's the simple version of why this is stupid beyond belief. I have a 17-month old daughter. I certainly would prefer she not send sexually explicit photos of herself to her boyfriend when she's fourteen. But, I'm far more afraid of her being branded as a sex offender, with all the goodies that go along with that (having to register, being forced to live in designated areas, being stigmatized, basically being removed from the fabric of society) for engaging in said adolescent sexual misbehavior. And going after kids for being dumb kids in the name of protecting kids is the pinnacle of illogical.

Scott Mendelson