A Game of Dress-up

Whether it be as a Disney princess in grade school, or as a naughty nurse in college, girls have always enjoyed playing "dress-up." However, what happens when a 13-year-old "dresses-up" as an 1p-year-old and initiates a sexual encounter with a man 15 years her senior? Trouble.

In early July, Scott Knight, an Aurora, Oregon man was arrested on charges of statutory rape after a 13-year-old girl talked to authorities. After the two allegedly met on Flirt and supposedly talked through MySpace, they then met in person. Knight claims he asked for ID from the girl and then the rest of the details become muddy.

I came across a MyCrimeSpace blog summary of the incident that stuck to the released information, but the comments on the blog prompted me to start thinking, what makes teenage girls seeks out men like this? According to Justine Cassell & Meg Cramer from Northwestern University’s Center for Technology and Social Behavior (who I quoted in a previous entry) most likely this girl has "a greater tendency for conflict or lack of communication with their parents; high levels of delinquency, including committing assault, vandalism or theft; have a troubled personality due to depression, peer victimization, or [has experienced] a distressing life event." The very first comment asked "what would she gain from setting him up?" A few answers – public attention, "fame" on the news, a book deal, a Lifetime movie even!

I remember being 13 and wanting to be 23, wanting to have an older boyfriend, wanting to be a grown-up; I don’t remember ever thinking that the Internet could be used like this, though. A little part of me is surprised at the lengths this girl would go to in order to make a connection with Knight (finding an internet dating site, getting a fake ID to lie about her age, working to draw in a man who would "fall" for her act) and then a bigger part of me isn’t so taken aback. This girl, rather than turning to her parents (who aren’t mentioned in any story that I can find), she turned to the internet and found adults there.

Is social networking to blame for incidents like this? Probably not. Frivolous Electrical Conversation explains that people blamed promiscuity on the telegraph, the telephone, and even the automobile.

"The telegraph provided users with faster responses to their communication with others, more frequent interactions, and more access to others around the world. It improved access to goods and services, and to knowledge of all sorts. And yet, even while the telegraph (and the internet) led to a revolution in business practices, it also gave rise to new ways to commit crimes, and it was quickly adopted beyond business to the communication needs of everyday people. In the techie magazines of the times (such as Electrical World, the historical parallel to PC Magazine) many authors alluded to a possible loss of a world they idealized, a world threatened by new modes of electrical communication. Media critics of the times described the telegraph as used by 'talkative women' who had 'frivolous electrical conversations' about 'inconsequential personal subjects.' Novels, like the 1879 Wired Love, and other popular culture texts expanded on this theme. The women portrayed in these narratives were näıve and incapable in the face of technical advances, and when they made forays into the world of the telegraph they ended up needing to be rescued, to be protected from technology, in sum. ... technical ignorance was a virtue of 'good' women. The moral was that women's use of men's technology would come to no good end." Justine Cassel & Meg Cramer in High Tech or High Risk: Moral Panics about Girls Online

Sound familiar?

Then we must ask "Who is responsible?" Another commenter later in the list of postings had a very good point; "they are both responsible for their behavior." When does a person become "of age" for their own personal responsibility? Minors are held responsible for murders, being tried as adults in courts when faced with such serious charges, but incidents such as these are brushed off as solely the adult’s fault. Whether the adult blamed is the minor’s parent or the adult in the sexual relationship, it’s rarely the minor’s fault. Should parents be punished for the behavior of their teenagers? "At what point do the girls have to take some responsibility about what happened?" So, I ask you, "Where do we draw the line when playing dress-up?"

Hot Penguin on Penguin Action!

Just trying to get your attention here with that provocative headline. Anne Collier, in her fabulous Safe Kids newsletter, alerted me to the Club Penguin game "Spin the Fish." You can probably guess what it's modeled after -- the good old fashioned "Spin the Bottle" game in which IRL a group of young persons sit in a circle, a bottle is spinned, and the spinner has to kiss the person the bottle is pointing at (or be put into a closet with them for five minutes while everyone else stands outside with their ears pressed to the door). I remember in grade school longing for that bottle to point to Scott Cassidy or David Bowerbank. But I digress...

Not to be thwarted by the lack of real smooching, kids at Club Penguin (around ages 9 and up, from what I gather) are playing this game virtually. See it in "action" here:



Note how the fish doesn't really spin. Note how you can react using emoticons about how you feel about being kissed by someone (too bad we don't know whether these penguins actually know each other offline or not). Note how this is yet another example of how kids will do ANYTHING to express their crushes on someone -- and can also snub certain peers just as easily. For more rules on how to play it "cool" (the unwritten rules of this unofficial game) during Spin the Fish, look here. The point in this blog I found most poignant is that the author commented that "No one asked me because I didn't have my latest style on yet." Apparently it's just as important for a penguin to look hot as it is for a pre-teen...

Experiments in virtual reality

Over the weekend I tried to participate in two different virtual reality type websites. Unfortunately neither were quite the positive experiences I was hoping for.


First I tried out Google's new avatar-driven chat rooms Lively. I spent two hours preparing my avatar (can't go in naked, you know) and then trying to figure out how to get INTO a room. Once I got into a room, my computer slowed down so much that I was going crazy trying to mentally adjust. Instead of trying to chat with people, I started searching rooms. I visited the "Love Sweet Love" room, the "Dating Cafe" and then even took a virtual tour of the Google facilities in the "Lively: Google Room," but I wasn't impressed. Maybe it's because it's too new, but it felt clunky and not quite user-friendly. Maybe teens can deal with that, but tech-savvy adults might be annoyed by the quirks that it still has. I was disappointed that I didn't feel "at home" after setting everything up and removed the program from my computer soon after giving up on it.


Second, I put my big girl panties on and looked into Second Life. I think my experience would have been more positive if my internet provider gave me more bandwidth and my computer went faster, but I made due with what I had. I carefully read the "Big Six" (community standards) and was almost scared that I'd make an accidental mistake and get myself kicked out before I even began - especially when my character first appeared naked! I was pleased to see these rules set out so clearly before being able to join, and wish that I had speed/bandwidth to see if they work!

Second Life's "Big Six" are six behaviors that would result suspension from the site:

1. Intolerance - "The use of derogatory or demeaning language or images in reference to another Resident's race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexual orientation is never allowed in Second Life."

2. Harassment - "Communicating or behaving in a manner which is offensively coarse, intimidating or threatening, constitutes unwelcome sexual advances or requests for sexual favors, or is otherwise likely to cause annoyance or alarm is Harassment."

3. Assault - Most places you can be in Second Life are "Safe," where you cannot shoot, push or shove another resident. I guess this also means there are areas that are "unsafe" where these actions are to be expected?

4. Disclosure - "Sharing personal information about a fellow Resident --including gender, religion, age, marital status, race, sexual preference, and real-world location beyond what is provided by the Resident in the First Life page of their Resident profile is a violation of that Resident's privacy."

5. Indecency - "Content, communication, or behavior which involves intense language or expletives, nudity or sexual content, the depiction of sex or violence, or anything else broadly offensive must be contained within private land in areas rated Mature (M)." When my character showed up nude, I was worried that I'd be kicked off immediately as I couldn't find an "M" anywhere on the page. Good thing it was the introduction page where other new characters continually showed up nude.

6. Disturbing the peace - "Every Resident has the right to live their Second Life."


I was intrigued to see whether these rules were followed within the community. Maybe those readers who are frequent Second Life users can explain it a bit more to me; I'd really like to know more! Also, if there are other online virtual reality "games," that are geared towards teenagers, I'd love to hear about those to see if I can't experiment some more!

Rewriting the Dictionary

Apparently, I am leaving all the "on topic" posts to Sarah, while I vent on issues that are at least somewhat related to this blog. I guess I can get away with it since I started it :-).

Many people ask me how and why I got into this field (broadly speaking, adolescent development, and more narrowly adolescent sexual health, and then of course there is the focus on technology that is supposed to drive this blog). One of the reasons is that I had a crappy adolescence. Another reason is that I am a research nerd, and I get very upset when people ignore established findings and instead go with what they think "feels right." And the majority of our sex education and approach to young people's sexuality dismisses research and educated theory and instead leans towards moral righteousness and panic. Example: I get mad when I hear about abstinence only curricula and policies mandating its implementation because there is no evidence that abstinence until marriage changes young people's sexual behaviors. Another example: I am frustrated with the panic about the alleged dangers of social networking and how they are destroying young people's relationships (though see this article which provides evidence of the benefits of social networking).

So you can imagine how I feel when people take the liberty of changing the definitions of words in order to suit their needs. This is what I read about today. According to the New York Times, Bush has decided that "abortion" means “any of the various procedures — including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.” That definition is completely wrong. According to the medical professions an abortion is "when the fetus is expelled from a woman's uterus" (yes, a "miscarriage" is just a more delicate way of saying "spontaneous abortion"). Here is the key difference: an abortion can only occur if there has been implantation. Bush seems to forget that essential component and instead broadens his own special version of the word to incorporate anything that interferes with a fertilization.

I understand Bush is anti-choice. I understand many people are. That is not what is at issue here with me right now. What I am concerned about is when politicians decide to redefine words in order to suit their own wishes.

Cornfed Citizen Safety

Image by glsims99 via FlickrDr. Kris pointed me in the direction of Net Safe Kansas, a new website based in Kansas looking to protect their state’s Internet users. Maybe it’s a Kansas thing, but apparently Internet users there are ridiculously uneducated and can’t do research for themselves. On top of that, the website creators believe that their oh-so-exiting website will draw children in to read all of their rules. I was bored … what 12-year-old is going to stick around to read these things? (My comments on these "rules" are in italics.)

• Don't believe everything you read online, especially from someone in a chat room. It's extremely easy to lie online and predators will tell you anything to gain your trust. For example the "14-year-old girl" you just met online might actually be a 40-year-old man trying to gain your trust. Or the “14-year-old girl” you just met online might actually be a 160-year-old boy from your neighboring high school fulfilling a dare from his friends.

• Choose a random user name or screen name. Make sure it doesn't reveal your name, age, school, location or interests. For example, the user name "CutieCougar94" might reveal to a predator that this person is likely female, a student at a school with a Cougar mascot and born in 1994." Or people of my generation will think that you’re a cute older woman looking for a younger man and that you quite possibly graduated in 1994.

• Don't respond to messages that are mean or in any way make you feel uncomfortable. It is not your fault if you receive a message like this. Tell your parents right away so they can contact the online service provider. Messages that come to me that make me uncomfortable aren’t always illegal … if it’s not illegal, the online service provider can’t do anything anyway.

• Stick with friends. It's always safer to chat with friends you know in real life. Strangers online are bad news. I was 22, online talking to strangers and met my best friend. Strangers online aren’t always bad news. You can safely meet some incredible people online.

Then they have a “NetSafe Kids Pledge” that made me laugh … and then I felt kinda bad for laughing at the ridiculousness of it … for about 37 seconds.

NetSafe Kids Pledge

1. I will turn off my computer monitor right away and tell a trusted adult if anything makes me feel scared, uncomfortable, or confused. There are TONS of things on the internet that confuse me. If I turned off the monitor every time that happened, I’d never learn anything. (I do understand what they’re getting at, though.)

2. I will tell my parents or guardian if anyone online asks me my name, my address, my telephone number, or the name and location of my school. Or I could just tell them no or ignore them or block them.

3. I will never share personal information such as my address, my telephone number, my parents' or guardian's work address/telephone number, or the name and location of my school without my parents' or guardian's permission. Why would a teenager share their parent’s work number with a stranger online?

4. I will tell my parents or guardian if anyone online asks to meet me in person.

5. I will never meet in person with anyone I have first "met" online without checking with my parents or guardian. If my parents or guardian agrees to the meeting, it will be in a public place and my parents or guardian must come along.

6. I will talk with my parents or guardian so that we can set up rules for going online. The rules will include the time of day I may be online, the length of time I may be online, whom I may communicate with while online, and appropriate areas for me to visit while online. I will not break these rules or access other areas without their permission. Seriously? I was a good kid growing up. Straight-A student, top of the class, blah blah blah, and I wouldn’t have set up rules like this with my parents. Do you know any teenager that has?

7. I will tell a trusted adult if I come across anything that makes me feel scared, uncomfortable, or confused. I will not download anything from anyone without permission from my parents or guardian. Stay away from Wikipedia.

8. I will not use rude or mean language on the Internet. *bites her tongue so she doesn’t say something inappropriate*

9. I will never respond to any messages that are mean or in any way make me feel uncomfortable. If I do get a message like that, I will tell a trusted adult right away so that he or she can contact the online service.

10. I will always remember that people online may not be who they seem. Because I can't see or even hear the person it would be easy for someone to misrepresent himself or herself. For example, someone indicating that "she" is a "12-year-old-girl" could in reality be an older man. Hello stereotypes.


So, it seems that NetSafe Kansas has a good idea … but it almost feels patronizing to go through their website. I am pretty sure that there are Kansan citizens who KNOW better than the website assumes. Also, the fact that their kids & teens pages are still geared towards adults doesn’t make it any more marketable. The bare bones of it might one day be improved, but spreading more “stereotypical” internet information doesn’t help anyone.

What girls do online

Image via WikipediaThis post is a continuation of yesterday's post, moving through Justine Cassel & Meg Cramer's article "High Tech or High Risk: Moral Panics about Girls Online".

We'll first look at some general teens & the internet facts:

- Today's teens spend over six hours a day in front of some form of media ... at least one of those hours is spent in front of a computer.

- 87% of teens are online

- the activity takes place primarily in the home or school

- 50% of US families are connected with broadband

- girls between 12 and 16 are the fastest growing internet users

- boys are more likely to play games online while girls are more likely to send email, use text messaging, read websites about movie stars, get health or dieting information

- 25% of girls online have a blog (go us!)


Then, some more interesting reading:

- "Teenage blog and social networking site users describe their writing s as read only by their peer network, express surprise that the writings are easily findable by others, and comment on the blogs that they feel are comfortable exposing their innermost feelings in these contexts because of their anonymity (even though the same author may give identifying information in a neighboring post).

- "Teens' use of instant messaging, e-mailing, game playing and website creation are key ways by which they grow into adults who manage, produce, and consume technology intelligently on an everyday basis."

- "... the current panic over girls being online is not new ... the result of moral panic has been a restriction on girls' use of technology."

- "Girls in particular may thrive online where they may be more likely to rise to positions of authority than in the physical world, more likely to be able to explore alternate identities without the dangers associated with venturing outside of their homes alone, more likely to be able to safely explore their budding sexuality, and more likely to openly demonstrate technological prowess, without the social dangers associated with the term "geek." (I'm a geek. I embrace it.)

- "With luck, there will be a single difference between the moral panic surrounding the telegraph and the telephone, and that surrounding the internet: that we will come to recognize young women as more likely to be empowered by technology than damaged by it."

Frivolous electrical conversation

irdImage via WikipediaI truly believe that most teens know what they're doing when they begin playing online. They don't get into a chat room, end up on a pornographic site, or visit with strangers without knowing they've done it. However, the media explosion of shows like To Catch A Predator and news headlines reading "Man has sex with girl he met on MySpace" has made it seem as though teens use the internet without knowing what they could get into. After 23 pages of "High Tech or High Risk: Moral Panics about Girls Online" (authors Justine Cassell & Meg Cramer from Northwestern University's Center for Technology and Social Behavior), I wanted to go and hug these women. Finally a well-written, easy-too-read article that I agreed with!

First, some general statements from Cassel & Cramer that I think always need repeating:
- "... family members and friends ... are still the most frequent perpetrators of child sexual abuse."

- "... offenses against children ... numbers have been diminishing ... since the advent of the internet."

- "... the majority of these sexual solicitations ... were not from adult predators, but instead came from other youth."

- "Often, children who do begin online relationships with an abuser fit a particular profile ... 'a greater tendency for conflict or lack of communication with their parents; high levels of delinquency, including committing assault, vandalism or theft; have a troubled personality due to depression, peer victimization, or a distressing life event.'"


Second, some statements regarding the history of "moral panic" with "the compromised virtue of young girls"

- "... the panic over young girls at risk from communication technologies is not new rhetoric in America. There has been a recurring moral panic throughout history, not just over real threats of technological danger, but also over the compromised virtue of young girls, parental loss of control in the face of a seductive machine, and the debate over whether women can ever be high tech without being in jeopardy."

- This is later addressed as the scares the telegraph (yes, the telegraph was apparently scary) created; "Media critics of the time desicribed the telegraph as used by 'talkative women' who had 'frivolous electrical conversations' about inconsequential personal subjects.'" Stories written during telegraph-time were morality tales expressing the opinion that "women's use of men's technology would come to no good end."

- Even the telephone was lambasted for it's use. "Despite companies' efforts to direct how th telephone was used, women nevertheless cultivated their own purposes or 'delinquent activities' as they were thought of - primarily social interaction."

- "... the politics of both the Victorian era and the early twentieth century - of rapid modernization and technical advancements - has many parallels with today's societal response to the advent of the internet."

- With regards to the definition of moral panic "the media relies on bias, exaggeration and distortion to manufacture news." If you read the first four quotes I pulled from the article, you can see how the media exaggerates what studies actually say.

Third, tomorrow: "What girls do online."

Gender Role Reversal

I can't find much on this story from the Shreveport Times (Louisiana), but a 39-year-old female teacher has been arrested on cyberstalking charges for posing as a 14-year-old girl and harassing a 14-year-old boy through MySpace. According to the brief article, there is no evidence that the teacher and boy ever met face-to-face.

I think this is worth noting because we spend so much time worrying about girls as victims that we need reminders that boys can also be subject to such things. Outside of the extremely bizarre case of Mary Kay Letourneau and her former student and now husband, Vili Fualaau, this issue has been a completely non-issue but remains a lingering question: "Is a sexual relationship with a young male and significantly older female harmful?" There is all sorts of research on the negative effects of younger females partnering with older males (higher rates of pregnancy, sexual coercion, drug use...) but there is NOTHING on the opposite. I've looked. And wondered as a result. Which means that I am challenged by my own stereotypes and assumptions. I think that this large an age gap at this developmental time cannot be healthy. But is there evidence? That remains to be seen.

To Catch a Predator Settles and Finishes

Though refusing to disclose the amount, NBC has settled a lawsuit filed by the family of a man who committed suicide when confronted with cameras for “To Catch a Predator.” Mr. Conradt, an ADA from Texas, had allegedly engaged in sexually explicit online chats with someone he believed was underage, but actually was and adult volunteer for Perverted Justice, a group dedicated to entrapping potential child sexual predators. The group was a paid consultant for NBC in the “Predator” series.

According to the New York Times, the volunteer masquerading as a child arranged to meet with Conradt as part of "Predator" sting facilitated by a local police department. Quoting the times, "Conradt did not show up at the bait house, so the local police, encouraged by NBC (according to the lawsuit), decided to arrest him at his home. As the police and camera crews entered the home, Mr. Conradt shot himself in the head."

According to the sister, Patricia Conradt, a police officer at the scene of the shooting said “That’ll make good TV.” The LA Times reports that the Texas DA's office "declined to pursue the more than 20 cases related to the “Predator” sting operation related to this case, citing problems with the evidence gathered."

There is no talk of continuing the series at this point.

Back to that dirty bedroom

I have a Facebook account, and I have a cre8Buzz account, and neither of these make me feel as dirty as my MySpace account does. I don’t know why – they are all essentially copies of one another. Dr. Kris sent me a fantastic Venture Beat article about Why Facebook is now the number one social network in the world, and why this matters that absolutely validates my feelings.

Eric Eldon is able to sum my feelings up in half a sentence "MySpace is more of a place for people to live out their fantasy lives online ..." while Facebook is more a site where you're required to share "factual information" because otherwise, your friends from across the hallway Freshman year are going to call you out. Eldon writes about the lack of networks creating opportunity for you to create a whole new you unlinke the networking connections created through Facebook.

Reading through the comments on Eldon's article made me think about words, too. How long ago did "friend" become an actual verb? Do you think that usage will ever be integrated into the dictionary? If you wanna friend The Virtual Mystery Tour's dirty MySpace profile* head over here and add us!

While Eldon's article then goes into specific numbers of hits, global growth and advertising dollars, the rest of the article doesn't do much for me; however, it's so very nice to hear yet another blogger vent about how dirty MySpace can really be.


*Dear Perverts who found The Virtual Mystery Tour's blog but were actually searching for a "dirty MySpace profile,"
I apologize. We actually have a very clean MySpace profile.
Trying not to laugh at your Google-fu,
Sarah

Everyone in the Pool!

Not actually related to sexuality, but I found this simultaneously hilarious and unsettling. According to the Sydney Herald (which, yes, is from Australia), teens in the UK are using social networking sites along with Google Maps to locate pools in the area that would be perfect to crash. Want a pool party? Seems as though not having a pool is no longer an obstacle to this dream. According to The Herald, people are coming home from work only to see beer cans littering their poolside, and some have even caught the youth in the act of catching some rays in their yard.

See the ValleyWag for an excellent illustration of how this might look.

While I see this as very clever on the young person's part, this really gets to the idea that none of us are really private anymore thanks to the internet. Even if you don't go online often -- or really, even if you have never even been on the WWW, that doesn't mean your information isn't readily available at the click of a button. Another reason to ego surf to see what people can learn about you.

Slimming; get drunk on super absorbency**

Safe for Down There
fingers (clean & short nails)
penises*
vibrators*
dildos*
cucumbers*
electric toothbrushes*

Not Safe for Down There
Sharpie markers
safety pins
a French baguette
hamsters
vodka soaked tampons

You may have just read that second list and laughed, but that last non-safe for down there isn't as ridiculous as it seems. Thanks to a few personal blogs that I read, I learned about a new fad; slimming. From what I can surmise (thank you YouTube), slimming is the vaginal or anal insertion of a vodka-soaked tampon in order to get drunk. ShamelesslySassy's blog post first caught my eye, and then I read about Slacker-Moms-R-Us' personal experience learning of this new trend on a school field trip.

I am not surprised that teens are looking for new ways to hide drinking from their parents. This has been happening for generations. I am, however, surprised to think that teens are willing to endure the burning that a vodka-infused tampon must elicit. I'm highly interested in learning more about the actual physical dangers that putting a tampon soaked in vodka can have on a woman's vagina/vaginal opening and/or the anus. It can't be good.

Parents, if you notice that your daughter is suddenly going through more tampons than normal, or that your son is very willing to hang out in the feminine product aisle, you might want to start asking some pretty personal questions.



*safest with a condom
*Thank you Mommy Is Moody for the fabulous title

More on online safety

One of my high school graduation gifts was a brand new computer. I didn’t have to share it with anyone, and I could download as much music as I wanted to – without using all Dad’s memory. However, with that new computer came new responsibilities; keeping myself safe while online (and not filling the hard drive with music before I even moved away to college). My parents were pretty oblivious to the dangers of being online, and were quite surprised when they realized that I could easily spend a few hours chatting (using ICQ … that dates me) with people I had never met in person.

Do you know a graduate who got a laptop? Do you know how to help them be safe online? Here are some tips for keeping both youth and adults safe while using the internet:
• Get a free email account; Gmail, Hotmail and Yahoo all have easily created emails
• Select a gender-neutral username and email; anything overly feminine or sexual may attract unwanted attention
• If you’re using an IM client (Gmail, Yahoo, AIM), block or ignore unwanted users who may be talking to you
• Don’t let others draw you into online conflict; ignoring harassment, rather than defending yourself may not seem like the best thing to do, but by responding, you’re letting that harasser know that they’ve touched a nerve.
• Only “say” online what you would actually say to someone’s face; words travel quickly and you need to be able to stand behind your words.
• Don’t share personal information: your full name, your address, your phone number, any credit card information or even identifying details about yourself. I know this is hard (I even have a hard time doing it here), but it’s worth it in the end!
• When opening emails, use caution – attachments can be dangerous – only open them from those you know.
• Remember that if you’re uncomfortable in a chat room (forum/message board/etc), you can leave.
• A specific tip for parents: watch what your children are doing. If they’re home alone a lot, and you’re worried about their internet use, you can password protect things to prevent their over-surfing. Watch the history with regards to their internet use, and remind them that you’re checking in on them.

The internet doesn’t have to be a scary place; it can be made incredibly safe, if you’re willing to put forth the effort!

On a completely different note: Happy National Ice Tea Month, Turkey Lover’s Months, Fresh Fruit & Vegetables Month, Papaya Month, Dairy Month all along with Internet Safety Month!

Utah -- Land of Ignorance

The CDC just released its School Health Profiles, which outline the rates different states teach various health issues, including topics concerning HIV, STD, and pregnancy prevention. Alarming to me is the fact that less than one-fourth of schools across the country (out of the 36 states surveyed) teach youth how to use a condom. But Utah takes the cake -- only ONE PERCENT of schools teach condom usage there. Ugh. Virginia also has an embarrassingly low rate of 7.7%.

Kudos to New York where over half (59%) of school teach their students how to use condoms.

Are you in an online relationship? A research opportunity

This is an announcement I am passing along. This research is being conducted by a good friend of mine who can be trusted. She is a therapist who understands the need for confidentiality. She teaches a class on Sex and the Internet, and takes this issue very seriously (but has fun with it).

---Pasted Text Below---

I am conducting a study for my doctoral dissertation at Widener University, looking at characteristics of individuals who are involved in online romantic relationships with people they have never met face-to-face. I will be comparing people for whom these relationships are their primary romantic involvement, with people for whom these relationships are an addition to an off-line committed relationship.

If you have been or if you know of anyone who is involved in one of these online relationships (or has been involved in one), would you be so kind as to pass along this link to my study survey? http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/?p=WEB227TRXU5ZS2

This is a completely anonymous survey, and no data can be traced to any particular individual.

I appreciate any help you can give me in acquiring participants for this research!

Warmly,

Landi

Yolanda Turner
Assistant Professor, Psychology
Eastern University
St. Davids, Pa., 19087

The dangers of MySpace

Last weekend, I traveled four hours in a mom-van to Wildhorse Canyon, to participate in a young adult church retreat. Over lunch on Saturday, the table of eight talked about what we were doing in school (most of the 320 people that went were students), and what we eventually wanted to do. Since I am in school, am an intern (Hi Dr. Kris!) and am working part-time, I had a lot to say. As I mentioned that I work with how the internet is affecting teens’ sexuality, faces around the table began to turn inside out. As a member of one of the many left-leaning Christian churches in our gorgeous Pacific Northwest city, I was surprised by the reaction of a girl directly across the table from me.

Breathlessly, she almost shouted “the church doesn’t approve of the use of MySpace … by anyone!” and I couldn’t help but laugh. I played devil’s advocate (while at church camp! Oh no!) and asked her to show me in the Bible where that was mentioned “we are a Bible-based church, aren’t we?” I didn’t really mean to embarrass her, but I did, and she didn’t say too much to me the rest of lunch. Oops! Not the way to get conversations going, Sarah.

Another girl eventually started talking to me (while no one was watching … she couldn’t be associated with one of those* girls) about why she believed MySpace was dangerous. “You have a profile on there, and then perverts can find you and stalk you!” I was a little more tactful in explaining to her that you can have a private account; set up controls, keep strangers out (know my last name? only then can we be friends) and that you don’t have to branch out from your main circle of friends if you don’t want to. I think I know 95% of my friends list from in-person relationships.

I was able to talk to another guy at the table about how MySpace is creating positive opportunities for non-profit outreaches. He didn’t realize the positivity that could come from responsible MySpace use, and I felt really great being able to explain this stuff to these kids**. I offered not only the Virtual Mystery Tour’s MySpace address to them, but also my personal address as starting points if any of them ever got over their fear of "all the perverts". And we’ll see if they ever make eye contact with me at church again.

Really though, I was surprised to see such a different reaction to MySpace from people somewhat near my age group. Rather than experimenting with the internet, these 18- and 19-year-old students were acting like my mom; afraid that a misspelled word in Google would yield such wild pornography she'd never be the same. It makes me wonder whether the media is being “effective” in their campaign to scare the younger generation away from the internet. Time will tell. Until then I’ll be searching Leviticus for “If thine daughter maketh a MySpace account, sell her to the Canaanites.”



*aka – one who not only has a personal MySpace account, but also accesses another for school credit
**I later found out my table was mostly college Freshmen … almost a decade younger than me.

The Child Pornography Coverage Gets Smarter

This AP article has been making the rounds in all the major papers. It's about the same old, same old. Young persons taking nekked pics of themselves and then getting into trouble for it. Major trouble, that is. As in "charged with a felony for child pornography distribution" trouble. I've talked about this before, but I think it is one of the most important issues related to teen sexuality online for a number of reasons. One, it embodies the whole idea that teens are seeking approval and needing attention/to feel special. Two, it shows that teens trust each other (I honestly don't think they believe their pics are going to be plastered over the internet when they send one provocative photo to their (hopeful) sweetie). Three, this phenomenon shows that although youth are acting in similar ways as they always have (see One and Two), technology does make things different and the consequences are more serious as a result. Technology makes things not only move faster but also causes the consequences to be more widespread and permanent.

This is where I think this particular article, unlike many of the others I have read, starts to get smarter. Excerpts:
"It's often so spur of the moment that they're not thinking about where those images might end up"
"I think they just do it to impress their boyfriends. When he breaks up, he 'vents,' in his words, by posting them. He apparently didn't think there was anything wrong with it. He didn't know it was illegal."

These are comments coming from law enforcement. Before, quotes from this perspective were more along the lines of "how can they be so stupid," and "what they are doing is illegal." Now, of course my POV on these folk was only derived from previous quotes, but in these I hear a better understanding of not only the issue, but also how we might hope to tackle it. It's going to be a long time before we manage to incorporate technology into our sex education programs (heck, our programs are barely surviving as it is), but the cry for it is getting louder.

A Glimmer of Intelligence

I have had a lot of contact with the media in my life. I tend to research about timely and "sexy" topics, and that draws the attention of journalists. And, as you all know, I love to talk and philosophize about things that I really care about. So, put me on a phone with a media person who is trained to let someone blather away until they say something stupid or incriminating and you have a really bad combination from my POV...

But I have to say that for the first time I actually have been quoted somewhere and don't sound like a complete moron. Of course, the writer spelled my name wrong, so Googling this will be hard in the future, but hey. I am making strides. I can actually sound articulate sometimes! See?

This is an issue that I really struggle with intellectually and emotionally. No, I don't think it is a good idea for 12-year-olds to go around seducing older guys (or v.v., for that matter). Especially 28-year-old older guys. Blech. But when we seek to blame someone or something, where to point fingers? I am reluctant to blame parents here. I tend to blame the media, which really is a reflection of our society and cultural values. So, I guess I just blame America.

For as long as I can remember (which would be when I was that age) I have known the longing to have someone find me attractive. I also, when I was a bit older than this (summer after 7th grade), was courted by a college student and felt that I was the sexiest girl in the world because of it. I know how this 12-year-old felt on some level: validated, pretty, loved, desired. But my college boy and I did not have sex. We went out to diiner, kissed, and flirted and stared a lot, but that is as far as it went physically. So, I don't know how this 12 year old felt when she sought to have sex -- and did -- with a man more than twice her age. But I can imagine.

How do we get young persons to realize that the older guys who respond to them are sort of losers? It's a question that plagues me, educators, and parents everywhere. Problem is, I still don't see Seth as a lame-ass for being with me way back then. And I don't see me as damaged in any way by being with him (for three summers, I may add. It was a silly little romance that actually lasted for a bit). Maybe that is part of my problem. I can't find a solution until I realize that what happened to me is the very thing that as an adult I want to prevent, but as part of my memories is one of the best times of my life.

I told you to clean your room!

Taking risky opportunities in youthful content: teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression from New Media & Society (2008 SAGE Publications) has finally "scientifically" addressed my 4-year-old statement; "MySpaces are the virtual dirty bedroom of today's online teenagers."

Interviews of 16 teenagers (high school sophomore, juniors & seniors) conducted resulted in clarifications like "I think layouts really show like who you are. So look at the rainbow in that. I think that would make you sound very, like bubbly … I like to have different ones ... it’s different likes, different fashion, different feelings on that day." Like changing outfits, changing MySpace backgrounds shows a sense of who the owner may be; however teenagers are aware that profiles can be "just a front."

Interviews brought about an interesting discussion regarding the social differences between MySpace and Facebook. The elaborate layouts available on MySpace seem to be geared towards a younger crowd, while the older social networkers are drawn to the clean, white, everyone-has-the-same layout of Facebook. "This isn’t to show off my personality. I’m not trying to say, oh, I love purple or I love hearts … It’s more just like talking to three friends and, seeing as my friends know me, there’s no real need for me to advertise my personality."

Another interesting point Livingstone brings up is that idea that younger teens use their MySpace pages to create an elaborate identity with hundreds, sometimes even thousands of friends and classmates while older teens are using their pages to make authentic friendships and solid relationships. "Adult onlookers have been puzzled by youthful peer practices," states Sonia Livingstone (author of the article Dr. Kris sent me), and I’d love to sit down and talk with her, because I’m starting to be puzzled by these "youthful peer practices." However, this isn’t a new phenomenon.

My Grandpa Lloyd couldn’t (and still doesn't) understand why my dad had to have "The Long Hair." ("Girls wear rubber bands in their hair! Why do you want to go out with hair like that?") My Dad doesn’t get why I added seven extra earring holes to my body. ("If God had meant for you to have a ring in your nose, don't you think you'd have been born that way?") I don’t understand how teenagers can share so much information on their hot pink & green, flashing hearts & flowers MySpace page. Call me an old lady, but I’d be happier if teens kept more of their personal information private and cleaned up those dirty bedrooms!

Classroom Surfing

Slightly OT, but highly relevant to my career and generally related to this board. A recent NY Times blog post about college students surfing the net during class caught my eye. Written by Yale law professor Ian Ayres, it addresses the issue as to whether students should be allowed to browse online while in a lecture class. It's a tough topic, but one that I have been forced to think about and form opinions on, as it is relevant to my own classroom experiences.

Personally, I allow internet browsing, under certain circumstances. I see it as identical to sleeping, doing the crossword puzzle, or day dreaming in class. No, the student is not going to learn as much if they are not paying attention, but that is not my responsibility. It's theirs. If they want a good grade, surfing is not going to get them one.

Here is where I start to put limits on the surfing: if it is distracting other students. In the same way I ask students to stop talking during lecture, or when I wake up a student who is snoring, I do ask students to stop playing on their computers if what they are doing is distracting either other students or, frankly, me. And I tell them why I am asking. I literally stop lecture and ask them to cut it out because it is distracting. They usually do and often come down and apologize after class. And I accept the gesture.

This has not really been an issue yet, but I would also tell students I do not want them to surf in a seminar-type class where participation is crucial and respect for fellow students comes first. Surf all you want when I am talking. I am getting paid to do this, and I have enough tough skin to not take the behavior personally. But when a student is brave enough to express an opinion, that person deserves attention and respect. Blow me off all you want -- your grade will suffer, and that is the consequence. Do not blow off your colleagues. That is not OK. Ever.

Sometimes, however, a computer in the classroom is a good thing. People ask questions I can't answer (gasp!). Then there is some research-data-computer-addicted person there to save the day (see this Doonesbury comic also referenced by Ayres). We all just need to make sure that the answer provided is from a reliable source. I use this teachable moment to talk about why we would trust the answer being provided by the site. Students don't think about the quality of their references often enough. This helps them think about polishing that skill.

Bottom line is that students have always come to class and then never paid attention. If you can't deal with that fact -- don't teach. But we also need to consider how the method of not paying attention is affecting the rest of the students. Because they are who comes first. Build rules around that and I bet your classroom environment will be conducive to learning. Just not everyone will take you up on it.

A rose by any other name

When you visit sex education sites, do you expect to get that "warm-fuzzy" feeling? Planned Parenthood Columbia Willamette wants teenagers to feel just that, so they've started a new campaign: Take Care Down There. With skits & songs ranging from I didn't spew ("you can get a sexually transmitted infection ... even if you don't spew!") to Threesome ("you two have been makin' some intercourse, haven't you?") to the Down There Song, Planned Parenthood Columbia Willamette hopes to warmly welcome teenagers to their website to learn about sexual education. The Down There Song even surprised me - there were names for sexual organs that I had never heard of.

While I was entertained by the videos, I was plagued with the question; "will teens think this is too cheesy?" and "Is this as ridiculous as it seems to me?" and we want to know what you think about the site! Take a look at the videos, listen to the song, and let us know what you think? Beware though, the song is catchy and you may find yourself humming the tune all day long! Very few other bloggers have written about this new campaign, so we want to know what YOU think! Is this site TOO immature for teens? Share your honest opinion with us - we really want to know!



Another Planned Parenthood entry by the Virtual Mystery Tour can be found here.

Sexiest Grandma Retiring

AP wires report that Sue Johanson, the 70-something host of "Talk Sex with Sue Johanson," is going to retire. Her last show will air this Sunday on Oxygen, after six full seasons of frank, unabashed information about sexual positions, desire, technique, and fantasy. Sigh. We will miss you, Sue!

The good news is -- older broadcasts will be made available on Oxygen's web site.

Thank goddess for the internet.

Six Degrees of Separation

My 12-year-old niece has a MySpace that is somewhat typical of her age group. From what I can see, she says she’s older than she is so she can even have a MySpace, her about me reads like a text message ("and no1 else controls me...i don't blame any1 4 something stupid that i did... i take responsibility 4 my own actions") and her only blog entry is titled "oh life sucks!".

She’s atypical in one sense that I’ve complimented her mother on: she has no clear pictures of herself on her page. I recognize her in a few of the tiny pictures that she has up (because I’ve known her since she was born), but these would not be pervert fodder.

Looking at her friend’s pages I saw a much more typical teen MySpace page – a bright flashy background, dozens of pictures of themselves and their friends, and comments about how much they "luv" one another. For the majority of her immediate friends, their profiles were locked, so I couldn’t see much though. Encouraging, right?

Then I started looking at her friends’ friends, I was confused – 14 year olds with a Playboy background, flirty-looking photographs, and sometimes comments that made me blush.

A third step away from my niece blew me away. I found a 16 year old girl with the main picture of herself a full body shot of her in a bra & underwear with the main tagline "CoMe ON iN lIck Me LiKe A LoLlY PoP!!" This girl’s profile wasn’t pirvate so I was able to look at the photographs on her page. She had poses of herself that I wouldn’t let a professional photographer catch me in. Next to her "Me" album, she had a "my famz" album with over a dozen pictures of her toddler cousins. Talk about a juxtaposition.

MySpace pages are like a teenager's messy bedroom. It’s a place where they can freely (for the most part) express who they are – or who they’d like to be, but what does it mean for them when they leave their bedroom door open to strangers?

Different Ways to Express Oneself

Quick question -- what percent of teens do you think write just for the heck of it (not because they "have to" for school)?

Answer: A whopping 93% of teens say they write "for their own pleasure" according to a recent report by Pew Internet and American Life. That number astounded me. Given that 25% of adults haven't even read a book in the past year, I would have guessed that the number of teens writing -- creating their own texts -- would have been a lot lower. It's a reason to celebrate, IMO.

And what makes this finding even more astounding is that teens do NOT consider IMs, texts, and posting comments on social networking sites as "real writing." So there. Teens are actually putting pen to paper (or, more likely, fingers to keyboard) and laying out their thoughts. And, as Richard Sterling, director of the National Writing Project stated in a news article: "When teens are given a chance to write extensively, their writing improves dramatically

The downside is that sometimes the lines between electronic writing and schoolwork do blur. Over half (2/3 even) of teens say they use some form of electronic communication shorthand in their academic assignments, such as improper caps, shortcuts (ex: I used IMO above), and emoticons.

As a college instructor myself, I do not appreciate the use of the first two shorthands in my students' work. It is important that they know proper usage of capitalization and punctuation. As for the latter -- the use of emoticons -- I am a little less apprehensive. It's very difficult to convey the emotion one is feeling in a writing assignment. And let's face it, we aren't all going to be remembered as literary greats. So why not sneak it a smiley or frown-face so that the reader is assured of the intent of tone? In fact, I use emoticons when I grade papers to let the student know how I am feeling; maybe that is why I defend the practice ;-).

I like this study. It shows that teens enjoy writing, especially when they can use their writing to help express themselves and address things they care about. It's a glimmer of optimism among news that too often reports on the demise of teen character and the failure of our educational system.

@--->----

How Do I Love Thee? I Better Not Say...

CNET news reports that charges of "of aggravated harassment and endangering the welfare of a child" against 18-year-old Isaiah Rodriguez have been dropped. He was accused of this behavior because he left a series of messages professing his undying devotion to a 14-year-old girl on her MySpace page.

According to CNET, the harassing words in question were: "I love you;" "we need to be together;" I will see you every day;" and "I will never stop trying to talk to you."

Ruling in favor of Rodriguez, Judge Michael Gerstein stated:
" The words "we need to be together;" "I will never stop talking to you;" and "I love you" are not threats, but appear to be merely the symptoms of unrequited love--the same hopeless affection that, among countless others, Dante felt for Beatrice; Don Quixote for Dulcinea; Cyrano for Roxane; Quasimodo for Esmeralda; Young Werner for Lotte; Jay Gatsby for Daisy Buchanan; and that Charlie Brown felt for the Little Red Haired Girl. While these romances do not usually end well for the pursuing party, the People have cited neither statute nor case law that might punish the communication of unrequited love, even if such is undesired."

The defense also could have cited Helen Fisher's work on love as evidence that we don't know what the heck we are doing when we first fall in love:


But it does beg the question, at what point does/should age difference matter here? If the guy was 50, not 18, would the charges still be dropped? What if the two youth were both 14? Technically, the age gap from 14 to 18 is statutory rape territory. Though apparently no physical contact took place, it is somewhat surprising to me that age was not discussed more in this article.

Cyberexhibitionism

While in a game’s uncensored chat room last night, a couple began chatting. Rather than asking one another how their weekend had been, they began to talk explicitly about pouring melted chocolate over each other, licking it off, and then … well I’ll give you three guesses where the rest of the conversation went. The couple were told to "get a room" as their conversation escalated, but instead told the dissenter to "mute" them or to "go find your own room if this bothers you ... it’s uncensored chat!" I play in uncensored rooms to see these kinds of interactions; I am intrigued by what makes a person want to share details of their sex life with strangers. Is it narcissism? Do they actually want the attention conversations like this create?

Online narcissism runs rampant. The multitude of social networking sites, blogging platforms, role-playing games and chat rooms allow material that a person doesn’t even share with his or her closest friend to be hung on the laundry line for all to see. Not only is the material there to see, but it’s meant to be looked at and talked about. As a member of the first generation who has essentially always had the internet, I am rarely surprised at what people share online. However, the cyberexhibitionist conversation I read last night was one of those surprises.

Why would this couple refuse to move their very provocative (and somewhat "alternative") conversation to private chat? Did they want all of us reading about what they would do if they had white chocolate AND dark chocolate on their hands? Maybe they’re online exhibitionists. I don’t know whether the chatters were getting off from sharing their conversation with the public, but it made me wonder about the prevalence of online exhibitionism. This "cyberexhibitionism," a term coined by Charles Sykes in his book The End of Privacy: The Attack on Personal Rights at Home, at Work, On-Line and in Court, is a new word for a relatively old deed.

Although I was witness to adult cyberexhibitionism, most people know that online exhibitionism exists for teens as well (visit MySpace and look at teens' pictures – cyberexhibitionism at its finest!). Teen chat rooms are oftentimes uncensored and while it’s been a long time since I spent any time in one, I’m positive that this kind of talk occurs. Is this another way for teens to learn about sex online? Is it a healthy way for teens to learn about sex? Have you ever been an unintended audience to cyberexhibitionists? Did it bother you to see such uncensored talk of sexual acts in public forums?

Stay Tuned for Exciting News!

I'm off to the Adolescent Sexuality Conference in Seaside, OR. I hope to update you on the latest thoughts, ideas, and inspirations when I return!

Interesting (scary?) Thought

I was chatting with a student who is also a mother of a 4-year-old. As we were walking to the bus, she commented on how she was nervous about the role the internet is going to play in her child's life. After all, she didn't have computers growing up. What should she expect?

Then, she said something that I found very powerful. She said that there was no sense in her prohibiting computer use once he gets a little older because "by the time he is old enough to surf unsupervised, he will be able to hold his computer in his hand. I can't see what he will be doing!"

Wow. She's probably right. We have no idea where technology is going to take us. I mean, iPhones and other devices already have internet capabilities. It's going to be mainstream in no time.

Bottom line is, we can't focus on restricting access. We need to focus on teaching young persons how to use technology smartly and respectfully. Integrating this education into schools is going to be essential.

Become the Bimbo you always wanted to be!

There has been quite the stir about a intriguing website; MissBimbo. Geared toward the “tween” set, this site allows users of any age (although the creator states that it is geared towards nine- to 16-year-olds) to create their own “Bimbo.” Remember those Tamagotchi toys that everyone had a few years ago? This site has been likened to a perverted (both literally & figuratively) online version of those toys.

200,000 girls have created their own “Bimbo” they spend about 20 minutes a day playing Sudoku, buying new clothes and even hooking up with fake boys. The site also allows you to “face-off” with other “Bimbos” doing challenges. Doing these things earns you “Bimbo dollars” and “Bimbo Attitude points” which up your status on the website so that you can “stop at nothing to become the reigning bimbo!”

I tried to sign up (who doesn’t want a naked virtual character to babysit, earn money for & dress in “clubbing clothes”?) and was fully registered before receiving an email: “due to unforeseen worldwide interest in Miss Bimbo we have had difficulty in maintaining our game in the manner players have been accustomed.” No publicity is bad publicity? What happens when it shuts down your website? I may keep an eye on this to see if I can eventually join.

Different areas of the game encourage you to do certain actions:
“Accidentally forget to wear underwear – two days of guaranteed publicity!”
Level 7: “After you broke up with your boyfriend you went on an eating binge! Now it’s time to diet … your target weight is less than 132lbs.”
Level 9: “Have a nip & tuck operation for a brand new face. You’ve found work as a plus-sized model. To gain those vivacious curves, you need to weigh more than 154lbs.”
Level 11: “Bigger is better! Have a breast operation.”

These action requests are what cause comments such as those from Dee Dawson, a medical director of Rhodes Farm Clinic in England “This is as lethal as pro-anorexia websites. A lot of children will get caught up with the extremely damaging & appalling messages.” Beat chief executive Susan Ringwood agrees saying that “the website could make girls believe that weight & body size manipulation [are] acceptable.” I grew up playing Pac-Man and have yet to eat a bunch of dots after chasing them around in a dark maze. I also played a game where Bugs Bunny used ether to kill zombies and I’ve never had the urge to knock someone out with the anesthetic.

I really don’t know whether to laugh at the site & the hubbub about it, or to be disturbed by the site & encouraged by the outrage towards it. Maybe one day I’ll be able to virtually “bag [my] billionaire boyfriend” to earn mucho “mula”.

Do you think that a “Himbo” version would ever be released? Why or why not?

Public vs. Private

NPR's All Things Considered discussed teen's use of the internet (social networking in particular) and their feelings on privacy. The new stats: 93% of 12-17 year-olds are online and most log on every day. More numbers to remind us this is the new way of doing things.

Mary Madden, a Senior Researcher at Pew Internet and American Life, was the expert and introduced me to a new phrase: "self literacy." Though I am not sure if it is that much different that "self-awareness" in the age of technology, I think it captures an essential aspect of online activity. That we all need to be aware of what information people can find out about us by simply surfing the 'net. She states that although most teens are "savvy about their privacy," by restricting access to their information to their friends only, sometimes a person's friend list can number in the hundreds which is not so "private" after all. She suggests that everyone Google their name in order to find out what others can learn about you.

The part that struck me most was that parents and their kids could do this together. Each could Google their name and see what comes up. That was a little creepy to me. That whole realization that this concept has been around long enough that parents and their teens can air their dirty laundry to each other in front of a screen. All this, Madden states, is going to force us into a culture that has to be more forgiving of our "personal leftover data gone bad."

No more hemming and hawing when your kid asks you if you inhaled...

Sniff sniff

This is sort of creepy. The London Times reports on a new Facebook/mobile phone application that gives people an electronic map showing the location of their friends. Called Sniff, for Social Network Integrated Friend Finder, it works by having the registered phone send a signal to nearby base stations. Then "positioning software performs a triangulation calculation on the information from the base stations and converts it into a geographical location." Just like on Without a Trace!

Although in the article Useful Networks, the American company behind Sniff, swears that only people who give active permission could be electronically tracked by the service, I remain unconvinced. Parents with power over their children, partners with abusive relationships, can all use this technology to stalk or harass. I am especially concerned about teens in unhealthy relationships all too easily succumbing to this.

On a lighter note, this sentence cracks me up: "Users can specify who can and can not sniff them, or whether they are open to be sniffed by anyone on the network."

Sounds like a good day at the park for my dog.

Teens creating "adult" content

I have been wondering about teens who write fanfiction and more specifically whether teens write stories that are rated "mature" for sexual content. This interest stems from my overall interest in how the internet impacts sexuality and sexual development and also from the fact that when I was young I was an avid fan of several TV shows (and starstuck by the leads) that were popular back then. I can't help but wonder how large a role fandom would have played in my life had Television Without Pity existed when I was a kid.

From a research standpoint I have taken a very strategic approach to this question through triangulation. I study the impact of the internet on teen sexuality while also investigating adult-authored erotic fanfiction. Eventually, I tell myself, it will be "safe" to actually take a systematic look at how teens use fanfiction to express their sexuality -- or at the very least write about sex. But today I simply decided to take a little sneak peek to answer the simple question: Do teens write sexually explicit material and publish it online?

Answer: Of course they do.

In about 15 minutes of exploring a popular fanfiction site, I read one story about Draco giving Harry a blow job and another featuring two characters on the OC having wild sex after a party (red lingerie included). Both stories were allegedly written by 17-year-old women (pictures and "about me" statements included in their bios help validate their claims).

So, what to make of this? Not sure. Should we cringe at the very idea that teens are writing stories that they are banned from purchasing? Or should we celebrate the fact that they are expressing themselves sexually in a relatively safe environment? I mean, you can't get pregnant or an STD from writing sexy stories now, can you? And at least they are not sending naked pictures of themselves, a crime with potentially serious consequences.

It will be a long while before anyone really pays attention to this phenomenon. But when they do, you can bet adults will be upset. Adults are always upset when they hear stories about teens expressing their sexuality -- never mind their sexual desire. And writing fanfiction is all about desire. I just hope that when people realize this is going on, that there are many worse things out there that can actually cause harm.

Children "harming" themselves

Another story about youth sending naked pictures of themselves to each other through their cell phones. This one is a little different because it involves middle school students (6th and 7th graders) instead of the usual "barely legal" kids that are getting caught. The charge against them was also interesting; each of the four youth (two boys, two girls) were charged with possessing "material harmful to minors," a misdemeanor. Though much better than slapping these young persons with child pornography charges (a felony subject to resulting in sex offender registration), the phrasing of the law is rather striking here. Images of their bodies are harmful to themselves? Or, taken in a more adolescent egocentric way "a picture of my body can cause harm to my friend? I didn't think I looked that bad..."

I understand when laws are in place to prevent such picture sharing when the goal is to protect youth from the potential mass distribution of a photo they only meant their current sweetie/crush/lust object to see. But to charge them with possessing a picture that would harm them in some way? That to me seems a bit odd, disconcerting, and potentially backfiring:
"Why was I arrested, officer?"
"Because you had in your possession some pictures that can cause you harm."
"But that's a picture of my girlfriend. I think she is beautiful. I dig her."
OR
"You mean that a picture of me naked might mess someone up?"

You can see where unhealthy lessons about sexuality and body image can easily be the take home messages here.

Big Surprise: Single Women Have Sex, Too!

As a single woman, a media update from Guttmacher landed in my inbox today and elicited a "Hello Captain Obvious!" reaction from me; "Single Women Have Sex Too". According to the census, there are over 1.3 million single women in the United States. The Guttmacher Institute acknowledges that these women are having sex, but are being unfairly educated with “abstinence-only” education. Something isn’t right here. Teenagers are having sex, single people are having sex, married people are having sex, but schools are still not educating people. I don't understand. (Well, when I think about politics, I understand, but it still makes very little sense to me.)

“For the majority of adult women, living without a partner does not mean living without sex,” says study author Laura Lindberg. “Yet policymakers continue to promote policies that fly in the face of reality. By neglecting to teach our youth how to protect themselves against unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, we leave them ill prepared to become sexually healthy adults.”

While the topic, at first, seems distant from our regular discussions, I would be curious to see more research done on how the internet is doing the sexual educating that schools aren't. I will be excited to see, later in my life, whether or not the single women of the next generation will be having safer sex due to their internet education.

Lindberg probably puts it best with that last quoted line - if our teenagers don't learn how to have safe sex, how are future adults going to know how?

To emphasize or de-emphasize danger?

In a battle of the experts, Dr. Amy Tiemann takes issue with David Pogue's New York Times article How Dangerous is the Internet for Children? His answer: not very. Her answer: there are still risks! Of course, both are right. But I still side with Pogue.

Pogue may have gone overboard by writing "I could not find a single example of a preteen getting abducted and murdered by an Internet predator," because Tiemann rebuts with an example of a 13-year-old who was abducted and killed, balking at the idea of an arbitrary age cutoff. Still going to her tragic example's memory page, one still cannot determine the important factor: Did this young girl willingly go off with this man? Sure, the parents state that they knew their daughter would never go off with a man she didn't know and without telling her family, but, do we really know that was the case? Of course this young girl did not ask to be murdered. She wanted only good to come out of her online friendship. But I hesitate to say that a child will ALWAYS tell their parents EVERYTHING.

A horrible story? Yes. But again, we need to ask: How typical is it? The answer, by investigating news stories and research remains the same -- highly unlikely. As Pogue states "The tales of pedophiles luring children out of their homes are like plane crashes: they happen extremely rarely, but when they do, they make headlines everywhere."

It's the nature of the beast: media cover sensational stories and we respond viscerally to them. But the same way I still plan to get on an airplane tomorrow, so should parents allow their children to explore the internet. Should we use precautions? Heck yes. I fasten my seatbelt, fly on professional airlines, and listen to the safety warnings. Internet users can benefit from similar safety precautions. But let's not prevent the journeys they will take from happening at all.

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.

Right and Wrong Ways to "Catch a Predator"

According to Reuters, the US Federal Courts will continue to hear the case dealing with the $100 million lawsuit against NBC. NBC's series, "To Catch a Predator" is being blamed for the suicide of a former Texas prosecutor who was caught up in its popular sting strategy.

Assistant district attorney Louis Conradt shot himself in November 2006 after police officers came to his home in Terrell, Texas, accompanied by an NBC news crew planning to film his arrest for the television show. Conradt was allegedly expecting to meet up with a 13-year-old boy he believed he was communicating with online.

The tension is over the issue of entrapment. Critics of To Catch a Predator say the show does not report news, but rather makes news by luring people into illegal activities they normally would not do. Supporters say this show has done a great service keeping potential child molestors away from our children. The results of the hearing seemed to side with the critics "a reasonable jury could find that NBC crossed the line from responsible journalism to irresponsible and reckless intrusion into law enforcement."