Legislation must discourage teenage sexting

Legislation does not address the problem

Ori Etzion

Although it seems unfair for a teen with bad judgment to be registered as a sex offender for sexting, the implementation is effectively not deterring the teen sexting. To fix this issue, the problem itself should be tackled from a moral standpoint .

According to director at the Massachusetts Aggression Reduction Center, Elizabeth Englander, both social and legal consequences to teenage sexting are not as readily apparent.

In fact, criminal prosecutions generally are focused on more “aggravating circumstances” such as adult-to-teen sexting. Because of the minimal legal threat, lessening the crime for teen-to-teen sexting would render useless.

The natural rise of ignorance among teens in a rapidly advancing technology-centered social setting has lent the value in youthful dating to be artificially virtualized and psychologically unhealthy.

This October, a comprehensive study published in online journal “Pediatrics” concludes sexting was a significant precursor of adolescent sexual activities.

Although some may not see this as a problem, normalizing sexting as the “first base” of youth relationships errodes the entire concept of dating and replaces it with an unpredictable virtual environment for attraction. As a result, getting to truly know someone is replaced by sending a few kinky Snapchats or texts that not only hold no deeper value but can be easily shared with others.

Overall, because of the aimless “hook-up nature” of teen sexting, to even consider lessening the perceived legal consequences, it should be mandated in health classes, students be taught the utter stupidity of using technology to advance their sexual desires.

Sexting isn’t just some new teen fad

Laws punish teens for natural behavior

Noa Grossman

Sexual exploration is both normal and healthy for adolescents, and it has been so since before any psychology existed to explain why.

Sexting is simply a modern form of sexual exploration, brought on by a technology-oriented society. Because of the ease at which this technology allows for sharing, posting and favoriting, sexting has been given a negative connotation.

In the state of Minnesota, anyone who distributes or possesses a sexually explicit image of a minor may be prosecuted under the state’s child pornography laws, according to state legislation.

A minor who receives a sext from another minor, under any circumstances, can potentially face jail time, fines and the need to register as a sex offender.

Currently, 20 states have laws in place regarding underage sexting. These laws serve to separate sexting from child pornography and outline less-harsh legal ramifications for first time offenders.

Although these laws are successful in looking at sexting as less serious crime, they make no distinction based on circumstance.

These laws criminalize natural behavior by not differentiating sexting between two teens in a committed relationship from sexting involving someone in a pressurized situation where a photo or text was later distributed.

It is also unhelpful to define sexting as a crime when 54 percent of students surveyed admit to sexting, according to a study by Drexel University.

This ‘trend’ is too common to criminalize. Instead of locking kids up for sexual experimentation, the law should outline and define what constitutes as crossing the line when it comes to sexting.