Another Teen Boy's Life Ruined over 'Sexting'
May 30th, 2009 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
An 18-year-old boy was dating a 16-year-old girl. She had texted him a naked photo of herself. After they had a fight, he got angry and "sexted" her photo to the people on her contact list. The result? He's a "sex offender," was kicked out of college, and can't get a job.
I think he was a vindictive SOB for sending her photo out like that but it's ludicrous to call him a "sex offender" or anything close.
Watch the Fox news interview with him here.
"));
19 queries. 0.386 seconds.
May 30th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Sigh.
May 30th, 2009 at 11:52 am
i read a story about a high school girl that was vindictive against he ex boyfriend and posted nude photos of him around the school....nothing really was done about it...
May 30th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Another feminist (man bad, woman good) law. Men have more zero-tolerance laws aimed at them than woman.
For example, why is it legal for women to smoke or drink or do drugs when pregnant. This would be a law aimed. Why is that? Oh that's right, the USA is a matriarch. Where women and children rule over men.
May 30th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
chris , i agree with the issue with women there but children are abused badly and stats show more regularly by women however men abuse them also ,
They dont rule over us and we should be focused on helping protecting and nurturing them , I have no issues with fighting for children to come first in our thoughts, heck with our desires for shared parenting and the courts not favouring women at all stages irrespective of suitability is pretty much a focus on children coming first in all our lives.
May 30th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
so why isn't SHE being charged with distrubting child pornography........ c'mon Jeana can't wait to hear you excuse her behavior.....
May 30th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
The "sexting" crackdown is a Rorschach inkblot of a culture in the serious grip of anti-intellectual hysteria over sexuality, especially male sexuality -- a modern day "Chicken Little" fable, but instead of shouting "The sky is falling!" the mantra of these politically correct fear mongers is that "Our children need to be protected from sex fiends!"
How sad that in their zeal to institute zero-tolerance policies, they have checked their common sense along with their coats at the front door. They would just as soon destroy the life of a foolish boy -- who by any reasonable measure is NOT a sex offender -- than apply reason and discernment to his case.
May 30th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
I cant wait to pay more taxes so i can help perpetuate this crap.
May 30th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Mass hysteria knows no boundaries.
The only way to combat mass hysteria..is with the truth..Break the gender feminist / law enforcement misinformation Alliance. This Alliance is a stain on the American constitution.
May 30th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Why isn't she being charged with anything? If it was illegal for him to redistribute the image, it surely was illegal for her both to take the nude image of herself and to distribute it.
What's with the one-sided enforcement? It very much does look like another case of "bad male, victim female" illogic.
May 30th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
There are no excuses. She was stupid for taking and sending that picture. He was stupid for sending it forward. The system is stupid for multiple reasons. One, they have not charged her for being the originator of this porn. Two, for charging him for making a stupid mistake. Three, for taking their zero tolerance policies too far and, as Pierce said, not using common sense. This is basically what I said under the post about “violent artwork”. Zero tolerance policies need to go away, bring back case-by-case and learn some common sense. But, hey, following zero tolerance polices is easier because they are not required to use their brains, they only have to follow the rules.
May 30th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
I do agree his actions were improper, and what it cost him, I would label as cruel and unusual punishment. What I would like to know, with her being 16, why she's not facing charges as well. The law clearly states, in most jurisdictions, that no one shall electronically distribute nude or pornographic photos of anyone under the age of 18. With her sending the photos to him, where is her charge for distribution?
May 30th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Can a 12 year old have sex: yes
Can a 12 year old get an abortion without telling her parents: yes
Can a 12 year old record said sex that caused her to get an abortion:NO that would make her a sex offender
weird world.
May 30th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
Vindictive SOB? Strong language, but then again, he's a powerless kid. Looks to me that the really vindictive SOBs are the ones that are currently charging him.
May 30th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Hey you should have thought about this - before you included govt into your sex lives. They have dictated what is right and what is not. Why cry now when they are enforcing their rules their way?
May 30th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
Someone explain how a man who did not have sex is guilty of a sexual crime.
Right. Right. These are the same legislators that criminalize men with domestic violence laws, yet no violence occurred. The kid "emotionally" sexually attacked her.
This kid's career and social life is mostly over, before it even started. He's now in the feminist's criminal & rehab system, designed to keep people with sociology and psychology and legal degrees employed- filled with monitoring, tracking, "assessment", "experts" and court appointments.
Like a popular feminist leader said, "it's better that ten innocent men are incarcerated than only one guilty man suffer."
May 30th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
DSA im sorry but that is crud ... the vote is nothing to do with it the issue isnt with all its with the fact that those with a raidcal view poisoned a large enough bloc to do damage, there are to many fair decent women who want total equality who care about men and boys as well as women and girls to deny them or to wish that we had denied them is just wrong we think like that and we are as bad as those who pushed us to the place where the MRM movement and places like this need to exist.
Im sorry but your wrong man.
May 30th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
it doesn't look good for men in the years ahead....gov't and courts favor women, less and less men in college....and with obama in the white house re-opening the office for women...
May 30th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
i would'nt call him a vindictive sob....women do crap that all the time....ask a woman and she'll tell you
May 30th, 2009 at 8:01 pm
That just makes those women vindictive bitches, it doesn't excuse this boy (though he does not deserve wha he's getting).
May 30th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
Isn't it a perverted world.
In Aus over the past year we have seen outrage over a couple of soft focus images of a young girl in a photographers exhibit. You couldn't actually see any naughty bits but that didn't stop even Prime Minister Rudd from joining in the pile on.
Meanwhile my local library will lend The Boy, by Germaine Greer, to anybody. This "work" is a cover to cover compilation of images of naked boys and adolescents including close ups of genitalia. The author's stated motivation is to "position young boys as legitimate objects of female lust". Schoolkids can look at or even borrow this "work". As yet it has spurred no pile on.
Meanwhile any of these images viewed on the internet would make one liable to child porn charges.
May 30th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
Feminists do not care if a sex or violence law is about criminal behavior. They only care that the law criminalizes a male.
May 30th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
when will men start organizing and complaining....its the only way law makers and the loosers in politics will listen....at this point they only listen to political correctness and womens groups
May 31st, 2009 at 9:12 am
He may be a vindictive SOB, but exactly how did he get a hold of HER contact list?
May 31st, 2009 at 9:58 am
DCR says "so why isn't SHE being charged with distrubting child pornography"
Jean B says "The system is stupid for multiple reasons. One, they have not charged her for being the originator of this porn."
I believe we debated this point about a year ago, but the answer is simple. For the very same reason we don't charge people with murder if they attempt suicide. The criminal law is not primarily concerned with what individuals do to themselves. It is mainly concerned with harmful actions by others.
If a minor chooses to expose themselves or take photos of themselves or whatever, there is no issue. But if another party becomes involved in commissioning such activity or reproducing images, then it's a whole different kettle o' fish. Comprende.
Alternatively DCR and JeanB, if you are both merely making an ironic statement about the logical endpoint of increasingly irrational policies, then I see your point.
May 31st, 2009 at 1:35 pm
This case is another case of females not being held to the same standards as males. I bet if he had sent a nude photo of himself as a 16 year old to an 18 year old girl he would be charged with manufacturing child porn. That poor kid is finished.
May 31st, 2009 at 2:21 pm
i don't think hes all that vindictive if you put into context of the dating game...his age....and what women do to men.....heck even commercials show women destroying men's property because they are angry
May 31st, 2009 at 3:35 pm
He is not vindictive. And even if he most definitely is not an SOB (why insult his mother?). Think someone went overboard trying to attack a big bad man who was being bad, because a poor little girl got hurt. Keep doing this - its like drinking alcohol and driving/hauling a "Don't drink and drive" sign off a cliff. Funny and counterproductive.
May 31st, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Along with alcohol and cigarettes, clearly women should be prohibited from having cell phones with cameras on them.
It's for their own good. We're just trying to keep her from being traumatized.
Here's your burka. Sorry, it only comes in burlap.
May 31st, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Who pays the salaries of the prosecutors and court personnel who are so busy hacking away at the lives of these kids who have engaged in these silly, insulting trivialities?
Oh right. We do.
Anyone in favor of cutting some state government spending?
May 31st, 2009 at 5:21 pm
"Anyone in favor of cutting some state government spending?"
Me! Doesn't mean I am for letting federal govt spending.. that must go too.
May 31st, 2009 at 11:12 pm
OK not on this site but . . . the woman scorned thing is OK everywhere else, so why not a man scorned?!? Everyone has a "You go girl!" attitude when a woman does something similar, I would bet that they would even emasculate him by making comments about size . . .
Goose and gander thing . . hey women want equal rights, right?
b
June 1st, 2009 at 3:19 am
It is ridiculous that he should be placed on a sex offenders register and have his life derailed over this.
While he was legally in the wrong, the response to these types of incidents is ridiculously excessive.
June 1st, 2009 at 3:37 am
punishment does not fit the crime here.
June 1st, 2009 at 9:50 am
Nick said : Alternatively DCR and JeanB, if you are both merely making an ironic statement about the logical endpoint of increasingly irrational policies, then I see your point.
oh it was dripping with irony and sarcasm.....laws may be gender neutral on the books but in practice anything but - and I defy ANY lawyer to show me different.
June 1st, 2009 at 2:59 pm
I went on a "girls weekend" with some friends and we went to the small town pub in the evening. It was pretty wild when we got there, people had been drinking alot. There were a group on 30-something guys having a great time, probably on a "guys weekend". One of them stripped down and mooned the crowd (front and back sides) from the dance floor. Everyone in the pub laughed (thankfully). If ANY of the women in there had decided it was offensive, he could now officially be a SEX OFFENDER. That is how easy it is for men and boys to have their lives ruined, by making one foolish mistake, which is all this boy did.
June 1st, 2009 at 4:58 pm
2ndwife - but gender feminists, school administrators and others in positions of power like to say, while they're ruining someone's life over a stupid and harmless prank, that we have to provide a deterrent to anyone else, so the extreme punishment serves a greater purpose, blah blah blah, because it might, somewhere, stop some rapist /child molester/ stalker/ peeping tom/ terrorist from doing whatever vaguely related act, and that's what's really important.
Of course, we can't hold women to that same standard, because it's important that women are always and only victims. We have to understand the pathology of what would compel this young woman to do this. Unless, of course, she was just expressing her sexuality, then when SHE it did, it was ok, but what HE did is still evil and yukky. Cause it is, and if you don't accept that answer, then you're a rape-apologist, narrow minded misogynist right wing home schooled retard, who's never married parents are still related.
June 1st, 2009 at 7:40 pm
35
2ndwife too Says:
June 1st, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Yep, it happens all the time, men get arrested for exactly what you said and women do not . . . it is amazing.
b
June 1st, 2009 at 7:42 pm
It also amazes me that men get arrested all the time for mooning and women can walk around anywhere with a thong on that exposes their entire buttock
b
June 1st, 2009 at 11:48 pm
DCR, Nowhere did I suggest that the laws are gender-neutral in matters like this. You couldn't deal with the points in dispute, so instead you have knocked over a straw man.
Of course if the roles were reversed and the girl decided to distribute photos of the boy it is far less likely that the girl would be punished for it.
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:04 am
There are many many many guys on sex offender registries that did nothing sexual to anyone.
This is why that false rape accusers should have to register as sex offenders.
They do a trillion times the damage that a lot of these guys do.
When people say that false accusers shouldn't be on sex offender registries because they didn't commit a sex offense....well neither have like half of the guys on the sex offender registry.
It's a life sentence for a lot of these stupid "crimes" ....not even killing people gets a life sentence.
My parents saw an "accident" where a drunk lady KILLED two guys. She will serve less than 1 year in jail and its a MISDEMEANOR so when she gets out there is no long term consequences.
But if a guy mooned her his life would be forever ruined.
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:28 pm
I just read the article to my 18 year old son. I want him to see what can happen to him for doing something stupid which results in stupidity such as this young man becoming a registered sex offender. I hate to open my son to the real world,,,,, were being a male means watch your back!
June 3rd, 2009 at 10:41 pm
Dear Sirs: I think the "law" that turns a sexter into a felon is a law that in and of itself...constitutes... CHILD ABUSE! But govts. can't "abuse" children, ever, can they, (--although they do so everyday!)?