Sext Ed: Obscenity versus Free Speech in Our Schools discusses the growing trend of adolescent sexting (the act of sending a sexually explicit photo to another via text message) and highlights how it relates to prohibitions on child pornography and the protection of free speech. Everyone is familiar with a cell phones ability to send and receive picture messages; however, many fail to realize the consequences that adolescents may face for participating in something that is arguably normal behavior. These penalties, as the authors illustrate, may unduly haunt adolescents for the rest of their lives. Using substantial legal analysis, the authors impressively support their ethical position that noncommercial and consensual adolescent-to-adolescent sexting is normal juvenile behavior and protected speech. In chapter one, ‘‘Introduction,’’ the authors explain how the cell phone craze has affected the lives of children, especially beginning in middle school. They explain that, since 2006, texting has become the primary method of communication among adolescents. Use of texting surpasses the use of telephone calls, instant messaging, and social networking sites. Given the advancement of technology in cell phones, students have started to take advantage of the camera function in order to send sexually explicit nude or partial nude photographs to each other via text message—an act known as sexting. The authors show the legal and moral issues that arise when the criminal justice system investigates and prosecutes adolescents in possession of these photographs as it would the possession of child pornography. They argue that injustice lies in the fact that ‘‘’[a] child pornography conviction—which could come from sending a racy photo of yourself or receiving said photo from a girlfriend or boyfriend—carries far heavier penalties than most hands-on sexual offenses’’ (Oluwole et al. 2013, p. 4). The authors conclude that the law has not kept up with technology. Chapter two, ‘‘The Sexting Portrait: The Numbers and the Human Stories,’’ provides an analytical look at sexting among adolescents by assessing relevant statistics and then by portraying the legal consequences. Studies show that the sexting phenomena is ubiquitous across both age and gender, and that many adolescents have both sent and received sexts (see Oluwole et al. 2013, p. 13). Sexting not only is prevalent among specific adolescent circles but also is predominantly a nationwide dilemma. Multiple states have charged youth (both boys and girls alike) with felonies, including but not limited to disseminating child pornography, possession of child pornography with intent to distribute, and child exploitation— requiring the children to register as sex offenders for the rest of their lives. This is in contrast with various states’ age of legal consent for sexual activity. The authors raise the question, ‘‘does it make sense and comport with notions of fairness for students to be able to legally engage in sexual relations, yet be criminally penalized for sexting?’’ (Oluwole et al. 2013, p. 15). ‘‘Child Pornography and Obscenity Statutes,’’ the third chapter, discusses numerous cases in which juveniles are charged with child pornography and obscenity statutes. The authors inspect the Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA), which details what the federal government considers to be sexual exploitation of a minor. The argument lies with the title of the CPPA subsection (‘‘the exploitation of children’’) under which some juveniles have been charged. Is a noncommercial, consensual adolescent-toadolescent sext an exploitation? The authors suggest that these federal and state statutory sections appear, at first Z. Shapiro (&) Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA e-mail: zshapiro@indiana.edu
Read full abstract
Feb 28, 2014
Open Access
