Sex & Social Media – Problems With Child Pronography Laws Around The World

Yesterday (well, earlier today), I did an entry about the “stupid” of someone starting a kickstarter and garnering THOUSANDS of dollars to, make a potato salad. Don’t get me wrong, I do not really see anything wrong with that person, nor what they did.
My biggest beef was with, the supporters. Those that contributed the thousands of dollars, FOR A SHOUT OUT (apparently he will say your name out loud while making the salad). This is even worse then those that donate to a social media injustice story with no research (at least the money will, presumably, be helping someone in need).

Having checked my Youtube feed for new content tonight, the first 2 videos on the list from The Young Turks and The Amazing Atheist (respectively), were titled with variations of  “Cops Want To Photograph Kids Erect Penis”. TJ’s video can be found HERE, and the TYT commentary HERE .
Watching those 2 left me in a state of “What the FUCK?!”. Then further down the list, I find this OTHER ONE (also from TYT).

Watching the first 2 was bad enough. But the 3ed one made the situation, so much worse. Apparently in the US these days, consent does not mean a thing under the law.

In one case, you have a group of boys who apparently have evidence of committing a sexual crime against a girl. Not only that, they are basically shaming her in the realm of social media. If we take the other 2 videos as a sign of how the system works, then it should be open and shut. Forget the “Child Porn” element, and consider it as evidence. And so the boys should be easily held accountable for their actions.

And yet, no. The authorities in question have apparently yet to entertain the idea.

Now move on to the first 2 vids. A young couple doing what young couples do, in the age of the Internet (I may not agree with it being my old age of 26, but even I have to admit that TJ is right. Teenagers like to FUCK!). There was apparently multiple nudes going both ways, so there was OBVIOUSLY consent.

But then the party ends when the mother finds out. I can’t blame her (really) for having objections to the “Objectionable”  material on the phone, but I don’t like how the first reaction was to go to police, thus opening up this can of worms.
Then comes the possession and production of child pornography charges. This is an idiotic thing to be charging EITHER of the couple with, but the blatant sexism in the laying of the said charges in this case (guy gets charged, but not the girl, even though the information was flowing BOTH ways!) makes it all the more infuriating.
But the most horendous aspect of this (where “consent” is tied in), is how far the authorities are willing to go to “prove” their fucking STUPID case for later prosecution. Apparently they have already photographed the boys penis, but they want to get a photo of it erect (for comparison to the images obtained from the couples devices). Getting the “erection” shot apparently requires the administration of some drug (via needle).

Think about that.

In one case, the authorities seemingly have an open and shut case of sexual assault, yet are apparently not charging the sexual predators. In the other case, the authorities are not only falsely labeling someone as a predator, but are PREDATORS THEMSELVES in gathering “evidence” for their case.

Apparently, consent means nothing. It means nothing for the poor girl being shamed by her attackers (and who knows how many others online). And it obviously means nothing for the male in the other case (either in the message string that initiated the charges in the first place, OR the methodology of getting evidence).

This illustrates not only a serious problem within our society itself, within the way that authorities handle these cases, but also of the wording of the laws, when it comes to Bullying AND Child Pornography.

And this isn’t just a United States issue either, I have seen it in Canada to (and its probably the same elsewhere).

Usually something very notable happens involving either of the 2 above noted problems, and there is massive public outrage, so lawmakers hurriedly pass a “hash” law, which appeases the masses. While intended to put a stop to child predators and the like, these laws are often times written in a very rigid fashion. For example, the law says that you can be charged for MANUFACTURING or DISTRIBUTING the said material, with little (if any) guidelines of interpretation.
While the problem of this is not immediately obvious, there are more and more cases that are bringing this to light (including this one). Laws that were  intended  to protect the  innocent from the unimaginable, are increasingly being hijacked due to their loose wording.

In my opinion, an effective law, is a law that follows the idea of “consent”.

Sexual predators uploading, trading or downloading child pornography are obviously guilty in this case. If a person shares an image of themselves with another person , then there is consent (unless the receiver does not wish to receive such images, in which case the sender is guilty of at least harassment). A couple sharing photographs with one another, is obviously consent based. But anything that moves out from the consented parties to 3ed parties without the consent of one of the other(s) parties, makes one guilty.

I think the biggest question we have to ponder, is if it it necessary to include the “Child Pornography” tag on images traded between minors. Where is the line?

The same has to be done, if one is going to take on bullying (or cyber-bullying) at the federal level. Make the wording firm, but pointed. Assume that some will bend the law in order to fit their own agenda, and draft it as such. And allow flexibility, so that you do not end up with ridiculous results  at the hand of a “by the book” group of authorities or judge.

And most importantly, EDUCATE.

Make the young think twice before sending a pornographic photograph to ANYONE that they know. Teach them a lesson that seems to be lost on generation facebook, THE INTERNET IS FOREVER.

Once you hit send, its gone. Out of your control.

The receiver may never do anything bad with the content. But consider, what if they do? What would be the ramification of that material, being spread around your social circle, community, class, or far beyond? Could this come back to bite you in 10 or 20 years, if you take up a prominent career path?

This post begun on an angry note, but concluded in almost, a positive note.

The way the laws are being hijacked, is stupid. But it can be fixed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.