Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

An epidemic of child pornography

  1. Feb 17, 2009 #1

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    According to this survey by http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/sextech/PDF/SexTech_Summary.pdf [Broken], about 45% of teenage kids distribute or at least receive child pornography (implied from the fact that ony 55% of teenagers have never sent or received sexually suggestive material about their friends) - just another bizarre twist stemming from cell phones equipped with cameras.

    Among whatever other scary things go along with sending nude photos of themselves to a friend, not really knowing where those photos will end up, is that they're all sex offenders and could wind up having to register as sex offenders for decades (Textual misconduct).

    Kind of ironic that a teenager sending a nude photo of themselves over their cell phone could be arrested and found guilty of distributing child pornography under laws intended to protect teenagers from being exploited by child pornography.

    We need a new slogan similar to the old anti-drug slogans - Don't push send!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 17, 2009 #2

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    And we need to ban mirrors in bathrooms.
     
  4. Feb 17, 2009 #3
    Reminds me of ....

    http://www.testriffic.com/resultfiles/3287060228_simpsons_hmed_4p.hmedium.jpg [Broken]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  5. Feb 17, 2009 #4

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

  6. Feb 17, 2009 #5
    Aw man! I was gonna travel to London in some weeks.
     
  7. Feb 17, 2009 #6
    Hey Bob -- Reminder: you can't have your wingman cell phone over any pics of the baby in the bathtub (when it finally arrives)!
     
  8. Feb 17, 2009 #7
    gotta wonder, when these kids mature and are in power, will they decriminalize their former behaviour, or ride the wave of shock and appall ?
     
  9. Feb 17, 2009 #8

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Well the current US and UK government were left wing students in the 60s and 70s - noticed their attitudes to drugs and bombing 3rd world countries?
     
  10. Feb 17, 2009 #9
    you're right, we're all doomed. :frown:
     
  11. Feb 17, 2009 #10
    This is actually very common. Several cheerleaders in my old highschool are involved in a lawsuit with the school because they (along with like 50 other girls) had naked pictures circulating about the student body and were removed from the cheer team.

    To be honest this should be the last of your worries about teen bahavior...

    I believe it has to be sexually explicit to be labeled as child porn though.
     
  12. Feb 17, 2009 #11

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Not any more in the UK.
    s49 of the Coroners and Justice Bill, makes illegal the possession of "prohibited images of children" - they don't have to be obscene and they don't have to be images.
    Any representation of anyone under 18, or made to look as if they are under 18 (even a stick figure or the London olympics logo http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/artblog/2007/jun/05/howlisasimpsontooktheolym) counts.

    It's a further offence if the image was made for sexual purposes.

    Even a frame from a film, like the PG rated Simpson movie comes under the law if you take it out of the film as a separate image.
     
  13. Feb 17, 2009 #12
    So you can be prosecuted if you had home movies of your baby that contained nudity?

    I believe it must be sexually explicit in the US at least; the lawsuit with my school had nothing to do with child porn in particularly as it wasn't sexually explicit.
     
  14. Feb 17, 2009 #13

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    It's a bit unclear with the new laws in the UK. Nobody has defined what a prohibited image means! Obscene can just mean, you would be arrested if you went out like that - so topless would do.

    There are stories regularly of some celebrity being reported to the police by the local photo store when they dropped their baby pictures in - and presumably there are lots more cases where you don't hear because they aren't famous.
    And whatever you do don't try and get the baby photo printed on a birthday cake http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3559912/Baby-photos-that-fall-foul-of-the-PC-police.html

    It's even more ridiculous in the UK where the age of consent is 16 and you can get married at 16. So you can 'know' (biblically) your 16 year old wife but if she drew a cartoon self-portrait of herself topless, she would be a sex offender! Under the old law you were allowed to take photos of each other but it was an offence to publish them, now creating or possession of an image is an offence.
     
  15. Feb 17, 2009 #14
    Lol RootX.
     
  16. Feb 18, 2009 #15

    Mk

    User Avatar

    This is nothing more than a consequence of more pervasive and capable electronic communication methods. Every teenager today is walking around with some kind of device that can communicate globally by text, photo, audio, and soon video. Most teenagers know they can't trust just anybody well with photos, it's mostly the high school sluts that do it and the photos get out because they are more liberal with showing off their sexuality.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  17. Feb 18, 2009 #16
    a while back I attempted to find a lesbian friend of mine on myspace. since I could only remember her first name, which is rather common, I searched for lesbians of her age in the area she lived. I was mildly suprised at the vast number of fake looking profiles that supposedly belonged to young lesbian women who vehemently warned off men from any sort of contact and said they were interested in meeting hot young girls to share pictures with.
     
  18. Feb 19, 2009 #17

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    You do have to be careful online.
    A friend of mine was dating an FBI agent online - when they finally met up he turned out to be an underage girl!
     
  19. Feb 19, 2009 #18
    She must be really smart to fool an overage man.
    I thought it's pretty easy to estimate one's age from how (s)he thinks.
     
  20. Feb 19, 2009 #19

    Borek

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    In most cases that means underestimate. Thinking hurts.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: An epidemic of child pornography
  1. Pornography (Replies: 18)

  2. Child Care (Replies: 26)

  3. The obesity epidemic (Replies: 184)

  4. Child prodigies (Replies: 4)

Loading...