Fandom + internet = new lows

Here's another example that supports my belief that the internet does not really offer up anything new when it comes to youth expressing their sexuality, instead simply repackages old phenomena -- albeit sometimes in an amplified format:

Teens in Mexico are allegedly auctioning off their virginity in order to score Justin Bieber tickets. This horrifies me in many ways. The obvious one: Justin Bieber. Really? The second one: the concept that sex is seen primarily as a commodity. Auctioning off one's virginity is not a new idea, but what I don't like is that there are so many messages nowadays that stress sex as a product more than an experience people share with each other. This concept can be seen in both the abstinence-until-marriage movement as well as the "pornification" of youth today. The third one: That the news would choose to cover this idea, which in and of itself glamorizes the situation. I guess I'm to blame now, too, since I am calling attention to it by writing about it. My bad.

Give Them Credit, Give Them Support

A recent article in the New York Times appears to uncover how the internet is impacting middle school romances. Through interviews with some young New Yorkers (note the limited representation), it attempts to reveal how sexting and easy access to porn are shaping how these youth relate to each other, their bodies, and their friends.

I always find these articles fascinating, and usually respect their content -- the Times often tackles an issue related to youth development more in-depth and responsibly than most other news outlets. And for that I am grateful.

However, this time the article goes a little too far in the alarmist direction for my taste. First, let's take the illustrations. Though clearly meant to show what girls are doing these days, they do little more than glamorize the very pictures is admonishes. Second, the article quotes the "statistic" that the average age of first exposure to online porn is 11 -- and doesn't cite the source. Probably because that statistic has long ago been criticized as being total bunk by highly reputable sources.

But mostly, this article bothers me because it simply presents problems (scandals, even) without offering any solutions. Yes, it may be true (we don't have evidence, but it does make sense to believe) that higher access to pornography might create an inaccurate sense of what actual sex is supposed to be like -- but what should we do about it? Can we have intelligent conversations with girls AND boys about how pornography depicts unrealistic expectations of sex in a classroom? At an after school program? Among family members? And yes -- oftentimes the content of cyberbullying focuses on sexual rumor (just like gossip and bathroom wall graffiti in earlier times) -- so why can't we incorporate lessons on cyberbullying in a sex education classroom? And where is the dialog about healthy relationships? It's missing from most of our lives.

To the author's credit, the article does portray girls as having common sense to assess what is right and wrong to do both online and with a boyfriend, and as having a great deal of strength to fight the pressure they feel to sexualize themselves in ways they do not feel comfortable. So, let's give these savvy youth a chance to educate themselves further and critically analyze today's influences on their sex lives so that they embody healthy messages about their own sexual expression and relationships, and pass them on to their peers and partners.

CORRECTION: I misattributed this article to the NYT -- It's actually from New York Magazine. Big difference, and I apologize for the error. It does help explain the tone of the article, though!

Pornography Support to Effect Planned Parenthood Funding

Conservative, pro-life government officials like Steve King* of Iowa and Joseph Pitts* of Pennsylvania are asking for federal funding to be pulled from a Planned Parenthood subsidiary – the website TeenWire - as it recently posted an article which seems to promotes teen use of pornography. According to Planned Parenthood’s 2005-2006 Annual Report, they received approximately $305 million in federal funding, and when there are no federal programs out there which promote comprehensive sexuality education (teaching about abstinence and contraception), representatives are apt to frown upon monies being used for that purpose.

Unfortunately, even for this free-sexuality-expression supporter, the issue isn’t black and white. While I support the encouragement of masturbation and outercourse for teens in relationships looking for sexual gratification, backing underage pornography viewing is dangerous territory. TeenWire’s piece on Birth Control Choices For Teens encourage "safer" sex with by suggesting using fantasy in relationships: "many couples can read or watch sexy stories or pictures together. They can also share or act out sexy fantasies. People do it in person, on the phone, surfing the Internet, or through e-mail or instant messaging."

Another advice piece, Porn vs. Reality, reminds readers of the site (which is geared to "to provide medically accurate sexual health information for teens on the Internet") that it is illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to view pornography. However, TeenWire also acknowledges that not everyone follows the rules and then provides a pseudo-warning; "people have different ideas of what is arousing, and there are many different kinds of porn that appeal to people's different interests."

Akin to abstinence-plus sexuality education, this "warning" acknowledges that just because teens are told not to do something doesn’t mean that all of them are going to obey (and that they should be careful looking for porn as they might come across something they don’t want to see). TeenWire offers a disclaimer or sorts for those that are unwilling to follow the rules; but does this promote more underage pornography viewing? Opponents to broad sexuality education argue that teaching teens about sex leads to more sex; but what do you think? Does teaching teens about pornography lead them to use more pornography?

A link to the original article that prompted this entry.
Dr. Karen Rayne helps a teenager at her church buy a vibrator.
Reproductive Health Reality Check addresses the defunding of Planned Parenthood’s preventative health care measures.


*Specific representative names found on this article.

If You Can't Beat Them...

The New York Times reports that the Penthouse Media Group invested $500 million in social networking sites by purchasing Various Inc. Must be due to the fact that while traffic to social networking sites has increased lately, visitors to pornographic sites have declined.

Although Various owns the SN site adultfriendfinder (not suitable for work), a site for swingers, it also owns Big Church, whose motto is "Bringing people together in love and faith." Both sites are now owned by Penthouse.

"Lads in Pubs," or Kids in the Cafeteria?

A press release by Juniper Research predicts that: "The mobile adult content market is forecast
to grow from its 2006 level of $1.4 billion to over $3.3 billion by 2011." However, the majority of that share is going to come from Europe and Asia, where the more "well-developed" markets reside.

According to Bruce Gibson, Research Director at Juniper Research: " The mobile channel will provide a different way of presenting adult content to traditional delivery channels and will reach new audiences. Mobile is about fun and instant gratification. I think the biggest opportunity is at the casual and "softer" end of the adult market - lads in pubs sharing a video clip after a few pints and people looking for a bit of fun when they have spare time to kill."

Hmmm. "New audiences?" "Spare time to kill?" If that doesn't scream teenager, I don't know what does.

99% Pure

According to a study commssioned by the US government, about 1% of sites indexed by Google are sexually explicit. They also found that the strictist Internet filters block 91% of this content while the more lenient ones (that also allow for educational material related to sex to be searched) block about 40%.

The study also debunked the notion that porn or other sex related material is the most commonly searched topics: their study found that less than two percent of searches pertained to sexually related content.

So, are we making a lot of fuss over nothing? Maybe, maybe not. No matter what, parents are going to be concerned about the content that their children encounter. And the 2005 report by Crimes Against Children found that one-third of youth online saw sexual material they did not want to see, compared to one-fourth in 2000.

But how many youth are seeing sexual material that they wanted to see? Or how much of the unwanted sexual material was seen because they were trying to look up information related to sex and simply used the "wrong" words in their queries? We will never know unless we ask.

I am glad that researchers are asking about youth exposure to sexual content. It's also great that they are asking about relationships formed online, and experiences of sexual solicitation. However, we need to know more about purposeful searching for sexual information. Not just sexual health information -- we do know a little bit about teens' searching habits when it comes to looking for information about STDs and pregnancy -- but information about sex, what it is, and what is it like. Without healthy role models and examples of the actual experience of sex, youth will seek out the information and we have no idea what the results and the effects of those results are.

There is no easy solution here. I don't know how we are going to solve the problem of children asking questions and having easy access to all sort of inaccurate answers. But until we start to grasp the extent of the issue, we can't even begin to ask the right questions that will lead us to sensible solutions.