Abstinence only message goes online

The Office of Public Health and Science's website 4parents.gov has launched a new campaign that encourages parents to talk to their children about remaining abstinent until marriage. The facts offered to parents such as the Birth Control Chart skew towards the negative (e.g., publishing typical use rather than perfect use failure rates), but at least they cite all their sources.

On the site's homepage you can view a Public Service Announcement which says "Tell your kids you want them to wait 'til they're married to have sex." An acknowledgment about sex information online is there too ("So talk to me about sex. 'Cause...It's all over the Internet).

More harm than good?

I was quickly disappointed after I saw a headline that read "Teens learn about sex online" on a South Georgia news channel. After the initial excitement, I was immediately brought back to reality.

There is really no meat to the story. Just quotes from an angry mom with five teens who says she doesn't like the idea of her kids looking up information about sex online. And a shout-out to www.scarleteen.com, which, incidentally, is one of the most progressive sites related to young adult and teen sexuality. Not exactly representative. But then again, maybe that is why South Georgia chose it. Or maybe it was because they have no idea what is going on. Either way, this is not the message I like to see reaching the general population on this topic. Couldn't the newscasters have gone a little more in depth?

Sigh...

Normal vs. Normative

In our never-ending desire to try to figure out if something (especially if it concerns sexuality and/or sexual desire) is "normal," why don't we first check to see whether something is "normative" -- i.e., how typical it is in the general population? Because, you see, if it is "normative," that means a lot of people are doing it -- "normal" or not.

So, what is normative? Visiting web sites with "adult content," that's what. In April of 2007, according to CNN's reporting of comScore Media Metrix statistics, "more than a third of the U.S. Internet audience visited sites that fit into the online "adult" category."

But is it "normal" to do this? Well, if you believe the answer is "yes," that viewing adult content online is not only normal but also non-problematic, then the buck stops here. People like to look at sexual content and there is nothing wrong with that.

However, if you believe the answer is "no," it is not normal to do this, then you need to face the facts -- since it is so normative to look at adult content online, then the "problem" cannot be addressed on an individual level (i.e., through counseling or other therapeutic techniques), but on a societal level -- something this prevalent yet supposedly problematic needs a systemic solution, a new way of thinking.

This CNN article believes that there are problems with this normative behavior. It stresses that the problems lie in the way they impact young women. That young women have come to believe that "unapologetic embracing of sexuality and exhibitionism" is not only the norm, but the way to get attention and approval.

I have commented on this before, but this phenomenon and the way we are addressing it deserve a lot of attention. The research community is depending on psychologists to tell us how internet sexuality is impacting young women. Like this article, most of the information we are gathering is anecdotal and coming from the expert opinions of counselors and therapists, who by nature address problems on an individual level. This perspective is needed, but it is not enough. We need to get at the root of how normative these behaviors are before we tackle a solution.

We need to start seeing internet sexuality as a public health issue.

Guilt by Association

After initial resistance, MySpace has been releasing information on registered sex offenders it has identified and removed from the social-networking Web site to the Attorney Generals of eight states. According to The Washington Post, MySpace has removed about 7,000 profiles, of a total of about 180 million (You can see the effectiveness of this campaign here, in a quick survey that found that five of nine discovered members were still online and actively networking).

Unfortunately, one of those 7,000 profiles belonged to Jessica Davis, a 29-year-old University of Colorado senior. The Wired Blog Network has been following the story of a woman wrongly accused of being a sex offender and having her MySpace account removed from the site. Although MySpace has yet to acknowledge the error, Sentinel, the company that built the sex-offender database, has.

Needless to say this new policy has, to say the least, many limitations and gaps. Will it protect children? As my Magic 8-ball would say "outlook not good."

Debunking the Myths

On May 3, the Congressional Internet Caucus Advisory Committee held a briefing entitled Just the Facts about Online Youth Victimization: Researchers Present the Facts and Debunk Myths.

It's about time.

David Finkelhor, Director of the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire, perhaps provided the most challenging counter example to media portrayals of online victimization. Using the real-life tale of "Jenna" (not her real name), he shows how the 13-year-old girl knew that her new "boyfriend" was 45 when they met online. Nevertheless, she willingly went to the motel room where he was staying and they had sex. When her assailant was apprehended, she didn't want to press charges and stated that she was in love with the much older man.

Finkelhor says it is dangerous and misleading to have adults believe that online predators lie and physically force their victims to be with them. "These are not violent sex crimes. They are criminal seductions that take advantage of common teenage vulnerabilities. The offenders play on teens' desires for romance, adventure, sexual information, understanding."

In other words, this is an old story -- troubled child from broken home is taken advantage of by someone who says he cares. Same tune, different instrument.

You can view, hear, or read the entire presentation online. Plus, the Committee provides access to excellent resources concerning online youth victimization and online youth habits

Caught in the Web

Eight states (Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Mississippi, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio and Pennsylvania) have requested that MySpace turn over the names and other information of any registered sex offenders that are currently using their site. Although, according to CNN, it is not clear as to whether MySpace is directly responding to this request, the largest social networking site did say it was removing known offenders from the site. According to the article MySpace announced in December that it was partnering with Sentinel Tech Holding Corp. to build a database with information on sex offenders in the United States.

Although efforts like these can't hurt, after reading Caught in the Web: Inside the Police Hunt to Rescue Children from Online Predators by Julian Sher, I am skeptical as to how helpful these efforts will really be. Sher, in his reporting of the issue of online child pornography (as opposed to focusing on older persons who try to meet F2F with youth for sexual encounters), brings up to essential points that are often overlooked when policy makers attempt to address the issue of child sexual abuse facilitated by the Internet:

1. For the most part, law enforcement works locally and within a jurisdiction. The Internet knows no geographical bounds and doesn't even stay within national borders. If society truly wants to stop online child sexual exploitation, it is going to have to embark on a serious international coordinated effort. Though Sher outlines steps that have been taken, showing that law enforcement has come along way in just a few years, there is nothing close to clear communication and/or a systematic procedure when dealing with this crime.

2. Child sexual abuse -- even that which begins online -- is still primarily perpetrated by family members or persons the child knows. Yes, strangers can abuse. But it is MUCH more likely that a child is going to be exploited by someone they know, and unfortunately trust.

Although sensationalistic at times (what True Crime book is not guilty of this tone?), Caught in the Web should probably be read -- or at least skimmed -- by anyone trying to "protect our children" from evil online predators. After digesting the information in this book, hopefully they will come away with an understanding of how the internet is a community to which the usual procedures of law enforcement cannot be applied -- especially if you ignore who the primary offenders continue to be.

The Internet is for Porn?

A recent article in The Economist reports that social networking sites may be gaining on the popularity of internet porn. According to the article, 13% of American-based website visits were "pornographic in nature." However, this percentage seems to have declined to a low of around 11% in Februrary 2007. Interestingly enough, this pattern is mirrored by an almost directly proportional increase in the use of social networking sites.

Could it be that people are no longer interested in paying for their adult content, and instead are seeking (or creating) their own -- for free? The correlation is not lost in The Economist: "The growing popularity of social-networking sites is not entirely unrelated to sex."

Here we go again...

Another bill that would require web sites to have warning labels. Though this one would also require such sites to register in a national directory, as reported by CNET news.

The bill, sponsored by two democrats, states that a web site that contains adult content would have to be labeled as "Harmful to Minors" (read Levine's book of the same title to see the irony in choosing this label). These sites would also have to tag themselves with a special code so that they could be filtered and monitored easily. There is no exemption for news outlets in the current legislation.

According to CNET, "Harmful to minors is defined in the legislation as any type of material that appeals to the prurient interest by depicting or describing an actual or simulated sex act--and lacks serious scientific, literary, artistic or political values for minors." This definition is very similar to the one laid out in 1973 by the Supreme Court in Miller v. California which is still the most current legal definition we have for "obscenity."

Note how extreme violence is apparently not even considered as deserving of this label.

This is not the first time, nor the last, that such legislation has been brought up for consideration. So far, the First Amendment has won every time.

Girls Gone Wild or Forced into Insanity?

Girls Gone Wild host and creator Joe Francis remains at large after being found in contempt of court during his trial in which, according to the LA Times, "seven women, filmed on a Florida beach in 2003, say they were "victimized" by Francis' crew by being put in explicit scenes."

There is no question about the success this man has had getting young girls (all of age, he insists) to either make out with their friends, flash their boobs, or do something else sexual in order to become the proud owner of a T-shirt or a hat. Then, he turns around and sells those images turning a multi-million dollar profit.

Some say it's genius. Some say it's exploitation. But in a powerful story, also previously published in the LA Times by Claire Hoffman, states that the Internet has had an impact on these girls and their willingness to expose so much for so little: "Francis has aimed his cameras at a generation whose notions of privacy and sexuality are different from any other. Nursed on MySpace profiles and reality television, many young people today are comfortable with being perpetually photographed and having those images posted on the Internet for anyone to see. The boundaries that once contained sexuality have also fallen away. Whether it's 13-year-olds watching a Britney Spears video, 16-year-olds getting their pubic hair waxed to emulate porn stars or 17-year-olds viewing videos of celebrities performing the most intimate acts, youth culture is soaked in sexuality."

Other girls have tried to sue Francis for sexual exploitation. At least one claims he raped her and tells her story in Hoffman's article. Most of these women have received no justice through the court system or anywhere else.

Still think we can shy away from the role the Internet plays in the sexualization of our youth?

More on Teens, Texting, and Relationships

More on that research conducted by Teenage Research Unlimited about how teens are staying in touch with their significant others. According to an article in the Seattle Times, "From 10 p.m. to midnight, almost a third of teens in a relationship call or text 10 to 30 times an hour." Still no word on how many teens that actually is, but the data is a little more informative than when I first mentioned it here and tried to guess about the sample size.

So, as the Seattle Times article states, the incessant communication between young people is becoming more and more subtle. I remember needing to talk to my best friend and my s.o. constantly (usually on the phone after school and sports practice) even if I had just spent most of school with her or him. I remember in college, where I lived dorm style, that I was essentially living with my boyfriend in a dinky little room complete with twin bed and roommate. So the idea of a teen spending almost literally ALL of his or her time with that special someone is not new. It's just been put into stealth mode.

Some Comments on Comments

I am usually excited when the rare comment is posted on my blog. I love to hear what other people are thinking about regarding the same issues that whirl around my head constantly.

What is annoying, however, are spam comments. Those comments that read like the emails that land in my Bulk email folder. Those comments that are placed by a "bot," not a human. Those comments that find my blog probably because I have words like "sex" in it.

Here are some annoying examples:
"Hi.
Pheromones is sexual attractant for men and women, it helps to improve your sexual performance, satisfaction and enjoyment."

"Hi,
erotic sex toys for man and woman, it helps to improve your sexual experience, satisfaction and enjoyment."

These are semi-amusing because of the greeting placed in front of them. It's like there really is a person out there trying to educate us about something relevant to the post.

I wonder how common these comment-bots are. I wonder how often they appear on the blogs scripted by teens and young adults who are likely to type those "trigger" words that these spammers seek out.

And how numb have we become to the idea that there are a bazillion (yes, I counted) products out there advertising that they can improve our sex lives? Does anyone really think these things work?

Let's hope the kids are too smart to fall for them because they probably getting these messages more than I do.

Another Case of Child Pornography

According to Maine's Bangor Daily News, a 15-year-old boy has been charged with downloading child pornography. There is no mention of the age of the children in the photos that were confiscated. Given the fact that the person charged with the crime is a "child" himself, it is possible that he was looking at sexually explicit pictures of persons his own age.

In the article David Finkelhor, director of the Crimes Again Children Research Center is quoted as saying: "A large number of teens have said they have downloaded child porn (ed note: he does not mention the source of this data, but he and his colleagues are those responsible for reports such as the oft-quoted Second Youth Internet Safety Survey). Many do not realize it's criminal. [To them] it's sexual exploration...We also know many kids are taking sexual photos of themselves and friends and sending them to people. That is child pornography production and that's criminal as well."

This may be one of the first times an academic expert has stepped forward in the news to defend a minor's use of not specifically child pornography, but pornography in general.

What's the Right Thing to Do?

Lots of recent coverage on the ethics of reporting about online predators -- most of it having to do with entrapment and vigilantism. Take for example Perverted Justice founder Xavier Von Erck, the man and web site behind NBC's Dateline series, To Catch a Predator. In an Oregon Public Broadcasting story Von Erck claims to dislike children and authority, both of which are integral parts of his outfit. Yet, he willingly takes NBC's money (enough to carry his organization comfortably through the year 2009) to champion the cause of saving children from these bad men he outs -- one even killed himself to avoid arrest. Von Erck shows no remorse and instead complains that the suicide "robbed us of a conviction." Who is the "us" exactly? Society? His organization? Dateline? Unclear.

Then there is the case of New York Times reporter Kurt Eichenwald. He published a series of articles about Justin Berry, a former child prositute who turned 18 and was currently grooming other children to follow in his footsteps. Berry was groomed himself, starting with an innocent purchase of a Webcam, then being paid to take off his clothes while online, and eventually meeting men face to face for sex. Eichenwald is on trial for allegedly "loaning" Berry $2,000 -- an ethical violation in journalism. Nevertheless, he is still the recpient of a Payne Award, University of Oregon's award for ethics in journalism.

I am not writing to support the actions of online predators. But what happened to trying to apprehend them the old-fashioned way? By arresting them for wrongdoing? I worry about the growing popularity of entrapment, paying off sources, and being rewarded for it. We don't need people like Bernhard Goetz or Batman serving as model citizens.

Alberta: Three years ahead or behind?

According to a study reported by CBC, more than one third of Alberta boys aged 13 to 14 have watched pornography on the internet "too many times to count." This percentage can be loosely compared to the study just published in Pediatrics on US youth which found that about a third of 16-17 year old boys had "wanted exposure" to online porn.

Both the US and Canadian studies found that exposure in girls in the same age categories was 8%. So, similar percentages, just younger age groups.

One possible explanation is that far fewer Canadian youth reported having filtering software on their computers as compared to US youth. In the Canadian study, only 13 per cent of the 8th grade students said they had blocking technology on computers and TVs, whereas over half of the US youth said their computers did.

The authors of both studies cite the need for parent and youth education to stop this behavior.

A Glimmer of Optimism

A couple of weeks ago, Regina Lynn's Sex Drive Column from Wired Magazine put a new spin on online predators -- that, in some perverse way, there could be a benefit to them.

Of course no one is saying that online solicitation is a good thing. But Lynn argues that all the coverage and publicity online predators are getting can be turned into teachable moments by the media and parents. That watching Dateline and visiting Perverted Justice can alert children to the strategies of online predators and also show them that this sort of behavior from adults is NOT OK. That these people really are bad guys who deserve to be confronted.

She also says that sex offenders, by going online to find their victims, are actually making it easier for us to understand their tactics and motives. My favorite quote:
"If we acknowledge that the internet did not create sexual abuse any more than freeways created reckless drivers, we might be able to analyze better why some adults continue to seek sexual contact with minors -- even now that we have the transcripts."

Although Lynn ends her column by saying that it would be fitting if the internet actually helped put an end to sexual abuse, I am not as optimistic. As she does state, the vast majority of sexual abuse takes place within families or among acquaintences. For the most part, the cases (at least those we are aware of) are strangers reaching out. Are there patterns? Perhaps, but it remains to be seen.

In the meantime, putting stranger solicitation into perspective is still the educated way to go.

The hypocrisy in protecting our youth

Are teens old enough to make their own sexual decisions, or do we need to protect them from their sexual desires and experimentation? In Florida, the answer is apparently neither -- they can't engage in their own sexual choices (however misguided) and when they are caught, they are punished like adults who are responsible for their actions. That is essentially what happened when an underage couple took pictures of themselves engaged in "sexual behaviors" and emailed the pictures to the boyfriend's email account. How the police ended up with the photos is unknown, as there is no evidence either teen shared the pictures with anyone but themselves. But the end result is that the teens were arrested and charged with "producing, directing or promoting a photograph featuring the sexual conduct of a child." In other words, they became kiddie porn creators and possessors.

Their lawyer tried to appeal the decision arguing that their fundamental right to privacy was violated by whoever snooped in their emails. No go, said the appeals court, as minors have no right to privacy in this case. The court voted 2-1 in favor of upholding the conviction. In the dissent, Judge Padovano stated that the law ""was designed to protect children from abuse by others, but it was used in this case to punish a child for her own mistake."

Kudos to Anne Collier of NetFamily News for addressing this issue.

Sparking Debate

US district court judge Sam Sparks threw out a case filed on behalf of a 13-year-old girl who claims she was sexually assaulted by a 19-year-0old man she met on MySpace. The Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996, which states that operators of Internet services are not to be considered the publishers of its content was cited in the decision to stop the lawsuit. The CDA is worded such that those in charge of Web 2.0-like sites are not legally liable for the words of those who use their services. In a sense, CDA allows MySpace to clear itself from blame from both the solicitations of the 19 year old as well as the fabrications of the 13-year-old, whom the potential defendant claimed she said she was 18 on her page.

Cyber-Stalking and Teens

A study put out by a Teenage Research Unlimited, a for-profit research and marketing company, and funded by the Liz Claiborne Company found that teens are obsessive about keeping track of their significant others by using technology. Yahoo News reports that survey findings include the statistic that almost one-quarter of teens surveyed who were currently in a relationship stated that they had received hourly text messages or phone calls to check up on them between midnight and 5 a.m (just how late do these kids stay up?). This amounts to 46 teens, based on the fact that 615 13 to 18 year olds were surveyed and 30% of them claimed to be in a relationship at the time (can't find this currently, but I know I read it USA Today notes that 382 of the sample, 62%, had ever been in a relationship). One out of six (n=30) said they had received messages 10 or more times an hour overnight.

In addition, over one-third of teens who had been in a relationship said a boyfriend or girlfriend had harassed them with text messages. In addition, one out of every four said their significant other had used a cell phone, e-mail, blog or Web chat to insult them (of course, this finding begs the question, what percentage of teens are insulted by their partners overall?).

Yes, I am picking apart the methodology and the sample size, but I am glad this sort of thing is being looked at. And it is all going to a very good cause. Liz Claiborne has launched www.loveisrepect.org as a resource for teens to use if they feel they are in an abusive relationship and want to talk to someone about it 24/7.

Technology can be both the good and bad guy in this case.

Teens do it on purpose, you know

The University of New Hampshire's Crimes Against Children Research Center has finally revealed the other side of the coin. Known for its work in documenting sexual solicitation and unwanted exposure to sexual material online, UNH has published a study in Pediatrics that found that forty-two percent of Internet users aged 10 to 17 surveyed said they had seen online pornography in the past year. Of those, 66 percent said they did not want to view the images and had not sought them out.

Which means, that 34% of them either did want to view the images or did seek them out. That's a sizable minority. More than one-third of 16- and 17-year-old boys surveyed said outright that they had intentionally visited X-rated sites in the past year.

By the way, online pornography was defined in the study as images of naked people or people having sex. So, we are not automatically talking hard-core here. More like Playboy online.

When I get my hands on the actual survey, I'll share more. I am curious to know how many girls are intentionally looking up porn. The coverage of the story doesn't say. Stay tuned.

Oh, Canada

According to WebProNews, a study conducted by Microsoft Canada revealed that teens are relatively trusting of online friends. Study highlights include:

• 70% of surveyed teens believed that the information they put online and sent to friends would be private.
• Of this 70%, 37% of females and 22% of males had emailed a picture of themselves to somebody else on the internet.
  
• 25 per cent of children would feel safe getting together with a person they have only met online and talked to for "a long time" online.

Of course, Canada and the US are not the same, so maybe we can't draw similar conclusions about American youth. But the questions asked were interesting, and show that adults may not be truly understanding the complexity of the issue of teen social networking. Teens know not to talk to strangers. And for the most part kids don't pay attention to sudden solicitations and probably can smell trouble in cyberspace (note: this study also revealed that 96 per cent of parents have spoken with their children about dangers to be aware of online). But what we may not be grasping is the fact that teens can run into problems by running with the "wrong crowd" online -- just like they do in the physical world.

Normally, I shy away from fear based posts -- there are more than enough of those. However, I think this is simply a case of believing that parents should try to get a handle on who their children are spending time with. Most parents want to know if their kid is hanging out with someone who is "trouble." As researchers, we know that peer behavior is a strong predictor of and influence on a youth's behavior. So know who your kid is hanging with online the same way you would want to know who is hosting the party and who is going to be there. Because although your child's new online friend is probably not one of those predators from Dateline, he or she could be a bully, heartbreaker or manipulator. Are those the type of friends you want your child meeting or sending pictures to?