New Legislation Introduced to Senate

The School And Family Education (SAFE) about the Internet Act of 2009 has been introduced to the Senate. It's purpose is to "promote Internet safety education and cybercrime prevention initiatives, and for other purposes." From what I can tell by reading this Act, the education would take place primarily in the schools, but at no cost to the schools. This means seeking federal monies for grants, which means the Feds are going to have to see this as a priority.

One of the things I especially liked about the text of this bill were that they were interested in "peer-driven Internet safety education initiatives." However, the word "evaluation" is nowhere to be found, which makes me nervous.

While I am not holding my breath on this one given the current economic times and other priorities, it is a first step towards recognizing the importance of online safety. It also may be the first time there has been a formal attempt on a national level to suggest that internet safety belongs in school instruction (Virginia has state legislation related to supporting online safety instruction).

Causing Panic Down Under

An uninspiring "study" out of Australia states that more than half of teens lie about their age online. As if teens trying to pass as older than they really are is some new phenomenon (C'mon, readers, when did you get your first fake ID?).

What I find especially disconcerting about this newspaper article is the lead: "TEENS are using the internet to lead double lives..." it states. I mean really -- you read the rest of the article and it simply states that teens lie about their age and use pictures to make them selves look better and more "cool." Is this really something to get in a panic about? I think not.


Interesting note: The study was conducted by a "skin products manufacturer." And we wonder why teens struggle to look better all the time...

Recent reports on teen sexuality and sex education

A month is too long to go without a post, but to be honest during these past couple of weeks I have been thinking less about teens, sex, and the internet and more generally about how young people use the internet to learn, grow, and develop. These thoughts are occupying me as I try to think about how we can best support youth and young adults to become leaders and can the internet help in that goal?

Meanwhile, the latest news on the sexual health of our youth is not good. A recent report published by the Guttmacher Institute states that between 2003-2007, teen contraceptive use declined by 10%, even though rates of sexual activity remained stable. Not surprisingly, the teen birth rate increased 5% between 2005-2007. The authors of the report posit that abstinence-until-marriage sexuality education may deserve part of the blame.

And speaking of sex education, a report out of Canada notes that the sex education there does not match the wants of the teens who receive it. According to the wonderful Cory Silverberg, sex educator extraordinaire, teens reported learning about:

1. HIV/AIDS
2. STIs
3. Pregnancy/birth control.

But they WANTED to hear about:

1. Healthy relationships
2. HIV/AIDS
3. Sexual pleasure

These findings support what I have been witnessing for a long time now -- so-called "comprehensive" sex education is anything but. Sex should not be taught outside of the context of relationship.

I hope to be back writing and pondering how technology fits into all of this soon!

Sexting = Spin the Bottle?

I have a feeling this is going to be all over the news (or maybe just in my head it will be) -- according to UPI, Dr. Peter Cumming, an associate professor at York University, references sexting as a modern day spin the bottle or strip poker.

While I appreciate Dr. Cumming's attempts to normalize the behavior of sexting and place it in developmental context (goodness knows I have tried to do so, too), I think it would be more accurate to say that sexting is like playing spin the bottle or strip poker in front of several cameras. Or maybe even the whole school. Including the cafeteria workers. Because, you never know who is going to get those pictures, do you?

Also, with spin the bottle and strip poker, more than one person is involved. Therefore when young people were getting caught in those cases, they were not alone. In the sexting incidents I am aware of, many involve one young person whose compromising image was sent to his/her (usually her) peers en masse. Big difference to have some friends with you while going through the humiliation, shame -- and potential trouble with the law. Quite another to be the only one.

Actually, I think letting young people tell us the differences and similarities between strip poker and sexting would be very interesting. Could open up a great dialogue about the pros and cons of certain types of sexual experimentation.

Yet while I criticize Cumming's words, I do appreciate this sentiment from him: "What I would say to anyone is to take a deep breath, think in context, and use common sense."

Peer Education

I am a huge fan of peer-to-peer education, so loved seeing this article about how teens are being trained to talk about the dangers of the internet. OK, so I wasn't thrilled about the "danger" framework, but I think the best way to teach internet safety is by having young people do the talking! Thoughts?

Internet and Health

A new way to think about how the internet impacts teen health by Red Orbit:

"Teens that text, drink too much caffeine, play games and surf the internet all night are experiencing difficulty staying alert and functioning the next day."

Although caffeine seems to be the real culprit here, it is interesting to see how the internet not only impacts relationships, school work, and everything else we can think of it also alters/challenges our ways of dealing with time!

Salon's "Hysterical" Quote of Day

According to Politico.com, there was a Congressional hearing on sexting. While some of the testimony report is truly touching and points to the need to address this issue constructively, some speakers were more prone to dramatics, as was the case with Kayla Barclay, Miss Utah 2008.

As quoted on Salon.com's Broadsheet:

"Barclay recalled an early experience in her life, when she tried to log on to her Hotmail e-mail account but accidentally typed 'hotmale' instead. She said that the explicit photo that appeared on her screen sent her screaming away from the computer.

'A picture of a naked man showed up on screen and, at that time, I was so appalled and I ran downstairs in tears to my mother thinking I was going to be in trouble,' she said. 'I did not go onto the Internet for six months after that.'"

Thoughts on this quote? Helpful for Congress to hear it? An overreaction or an understandable feeling?

PS While I am not sure when Barclay committed this typo, I replicated it just now in Google. While indeed there is reference to gay porn and other forms of sexuality, I was not barraged by any images whatsoever. Hmmmmm.

A new "sting" operation

With technology available to almost everyone, in a sense we all can become journalists or investigative reporters. Remember what made the 1991 Rodney King story so compelling was that a bystander was able to film the entire thing -- excessive police force and all. The incident could not be boiled down to a "he said/she said" battle (with the person with less power -- King in this case -- usually losing); there was documentation to support the story for all to see.

Fast-forward to 2009 where pictures and even video can be captured on a phone. Most computers come with webcams, and sites enable people to upload their images --their story (or their version of it) for free.

That is exactly what anti-choice UCLA student Lila Rose did. She and a team of supporters are engaging in a series of stings on Planned Parenthood -- posing as underage girls impregnated by adults and recording what happens. Her videos reveal that sometimes Planned Parenthood staffers ignore the age of the father when discussing pregnancy options, which is illegal as cases of child abuse and/or statutory rape potentially are being discovered. According to the article in the LA Times about Rose, her objective in posting these sting operations is to "undermine legal abortion by showing that Planned Parenthood, the largest provider of abortions in the country, abets sexual exploitation by counseling pregnant minors to lie about the ages of their adult boyfriends."

Anti-choice activists have been accusing Planned Parenthood of failing to report suspected statutory rapes for years. But disseminating the evidence using new media is the new generation's way of doing things. The videos -- five minutes each and accompanied by ominous music and fast cuts heighten the story they tell. Representatives from Planned Parenthood accuse Rose of editing out some key portions of the encounter in order to serve her cause and exacerbate blame.

So, is this journalism? Cause for an investigation? Or just a student project? It remains to be seen. And stories such as this, as well as that of the ill-fated To Catch a Predator, will only become more common as even us common folk are able to tell our stories to the world (or to anyone whom will listen).

Like through this blog.

Don't Call Me Stupid!

Came across this new non-profit organization The Institute for Responsible Online and Cell-Phone Communication (I.R.O.C.²) through a press release (should have seen the warning flags there). According to their website, this organization "is dedicated to educating society about safety, self responsibility, self accountability and the devastating and life altering consequences (emphasis added) that can occur."

They claim to promote online safety through "Digital Responsibility." While I support the idea of acting responsbily online, I am wary of some of their language which seems to be very blaming and alarm-causing. For example, one of the workshops they seem to be promoting highly is called "Sexting is Stupid." The title itself fails to appreciate that some aspects of sexting, while possibly not the best idea ever, are still within the realm of developmentally appropriate (sexual expression, desire to be loved, etc).

I sure hope that organizations like this don't take off. The last thing we need is more fear-promoting, alarmist groups claiming to improve online safety and usage in youth.

The Law is Still Catching Predators -- Just Not on TV

A new report finds that more people are being arrested for sexually soliciting youth online than they were six years ago. However, this is mostly due to "sting" operations, where the number of arrests for soliciting undercover investigators who posed as juveniles increased almost 500%. In contrast, arrests for solicitation of actual children increased 21% from 2000-2006. Although it should be alarming that those crimes involving actual children are increasing, it is important to remember that internet use overall during this time has increased much more than 21%. So, proportionally, these solicitations are on the decline.

According to the report, arrests of online predators comprised only 1% of all sex crimes against minors. By far, the vast majority of sex crimes against minors are within the family or local community -- not by online strangers. On a similar note, the report also noted that there is little to no evidence that minors were being "lured" by adults or found by predators based on personal information they post. Instead, youths were the ones reaching out to people whom they knew to be adults and seeking relationships with them. Unfortunately, some of these adults take advantage of such situations.

Bottom line is that online predation remains a rare occurrence. Minors are more often abused by someone close to them (either a family or local community member), and when they are sexually involved with someone online, it is someone whom they already know to be an adult, and actively have formed a relationship with.

Age of Consent and the Internet

An interesting non-case in Oklahoma -- two 16-year-old girls, one from Hawaii, one from New York, each flew to Oklahoma to meet a man they communicated with online (note: these girls are both at the age of consent according to the state laws of HI and NY). But since the girls traveled willingly, and they are "of age" according to these particular state laws, there is no crime. But the man bought the plane tickets, so the FBI got involved, based on laws that prohibit "transporting teenagers across state lines for the purpose of sex," and potential kidnapping charges.

While I appreciate that there are sex trafficking and kidnapping laws in the United States, this might be a situation that is best left to the families, not the legal system.

Tragedy with a lesson

This horrible incident lets us know that it can be adults, not simply youth, who take risks online. According to the Daily News, 47-year-old George Weber was stabbed to death by a "troubled" 16-year-old after the latter responded to Weber's craigslist post seeking "rough sex."

I was hesitant to post this for a couple of reasons:
(1) First, what happened here was truly awful and to use it as an example might not be the best idea. But unfortunately, I think it takes something this drastic to have it make the news in the first place.
(2) This incident might be more about the dangers that can result from feeling ashamed of one's sexuality than about online risks. I certainly don't know all the specifics here, but it could be that if this man was more comfortable with his sexual desires, and society did not portray his preferences ("rough" sex) as taboo, he could have found a safer way to express them.

But I ultimately made the decision to see if any readers out there have any comments on this and how it might contribute to the dialogue related to online safety.

Thoughtful, yet inaccurate, article

Textual Misconduct: What to do about teens and their dumb naked photos of themselves, by Dahlia Lithwick and featured both on Slate and in Newsweek, addresses the now extremely hot topic of sexting and child pornography. Like many others including myself, she recommends that minors who send sexually explicit photos of themselves NOT be charged with child pornography distribution and their hapless friends should not be guilty of receiving and possessing it. Yet, while researching for this piece, Lithwick discovered that when such cases do result in criminal charges "prosecutors have charged the senders of smutty photos, the recipients of smutty photos, those who save the smutty photos, and [/or] the hapless forwarders of smutty photos" -- it just depends on the jurisdiction! Such inconsistencies surely provide an example of how the law is not really equipped to handle this phenomenon.

Despite my overall affinity towards this article, I did want to point out a sensationalizing misrepresentation of the recent survey conducted by The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy -- according to "Textual Misconduct," this survey has "one teen in five reporting he or she has sent or posted naked photos of himself or herself." In actuality, the survey reports that one in five teens have posted a "nude or semi-nude [emphasis added] pictures or videos of themselves. Big difference, because in the latter example, a boy would say "yes" to this question if he has a picture of himself shirtless at the beach -- a gal might say yes if she has posted a photo of her scantily clad (but not naked). These latter examples of pictures may be problematic, but they do not qualify as child pornography. And thus, the law would not be applicable.

While I hope to see more intelligent dialogue on this topic, I really hope it will be accurate.

More Scandals in Club Penguin!

I adore this post on Net Family News, written by "undercover mom" Sharon Duke Estroff. I love it because it is simple, to the point, and therefore quite powerful.

She tells a story of forbidden love between two penguins that can't be rivaled even by the last Bachelor series. Posing as just a regular old character in Club Penguin, a social world for kids (designed for 6-14 year olds according to the site), Estroff finds herself in the midst of a huge singles scene. She's hanging out in a virtual pizza parlor with a swanky penguin named "Cowboy217," who offers to take her back to his place. There, at his pad, they play Truth or Dare, and the CP version of spin the bottle (Spin the Lava). Then, they kiss. And when Cowboy feels the moment is right, he asks for her flipper in marriage. Why do I get the feeling she is not the only one?

Poor Estroff doesn't know what to do. For she, too, is already taken (a married mother of four IRL, according to her post). But, her heart wins out and she accepts. End scene.

What's the messagage here? Well, there are several. One is simple -- kids will experiment sexually no matter where you put them. You may be shocked by this scenario (which according to Estroff is very common in CP), but when you consider the "real world" games of "I'll show you mine if you show me yours," as well as the same Truth or Dare and Spin the Bottle games mentioned above, most people shouldn't be all that surprised. Unless they forgot what they were doing in elementary school and junior high...

Another message is more developmental. This scene, to me, is relatively normative for kids who are going through puberty (OK, except for the marriage part -- still not sure about that Penguin custom? Can't they just go out or be each other's sweeties?). But the site says it is for kids between 6-14 years old! Since when did we ever think an age grouping that large was a good idea? I am wondering what would happen if a 6-year-old was propositioned by Cowboy. Would the child on the other side of the online penguin even know what was going on? And, if so, would there be any psychological confusion or harm?

I think these are questions we need to consider as people of ALL ages venture into virtual worlds. And to do that, we are going to have to acknowledge that we are sexual beings throughout our lifespan (yes, even small children have some essence of sexuality) -- and a computer screen might not only not slow that down, it might actually speed it up.

Internet: Friend or Foe?

A brief editorial Coming of Age on the Internet by the Association for Psychological Science challenges the still-prevalent notion that the internet is more about isolation than connection. It looks back into the internet dark ages (read: mid to late 90s) to recall how initial studies on the phenomenon focused on how spending time online detracted from "real" relationships and sent our youth into cyber isolation.

Has our mindset changed 10-15 years later? Given that in the United States, online communication among young persons is pretty much universal (up to 97% according to Pew), researchers might have been forced into doing so, but are indeed looking more at the positives. According to the editorial, more recent research findings indicate that online networking is associated with greater happiness and well-being; surfing alone does not have such benefits, and may be related to some psychological risks. This finding isn't any different than face-to-face findings which show that socially connected people are happier.

Is this just evidence that the internet doesn't create problems, but is simply an example of how current human interactions work?

To Friend or not to Friend Your Child?

Let me be honest -- I have no children. I only have memories of what my life was like as a teenager. Now that my disclaimer is out of the way...

With the emergence of Facebook as "the" social networking site for both youth and older adults, the arbitrary division between the world of young people (formerly MySpace or the internet in general) and their parents (formerly the tangible earth or AOL) is narrowing. We are witnessing the winnowing away of a different sort of digital divide. So what does this mean? It means that there are times where I notice my friends (the adult kind) are friends with their children on Facebook. Not friends as in "I am here watching you -- be careful!" but friends as in "hey, let's watch a movie tonight."

I find this a little odd. Probably because I never had that sort of relationship with my parents, so it's hard for me to understand how someone could small talk and just sort of hang out with theirs. But, from the couple of examples I see online, it seems to be working. But what do I know? I am not friends with that teenager's friends and I don't really see what else is going on on the walls of Facebook...

Which brings me to this blog on Plugged in Parent entitled Parental faux pas on Facebook. When I first read it, with its basic rules for parents on Facebook, I thought to myself, duh! What parent wouldn't know not to avoid friending their friends (that's just weird)? Don't parents know not to comment on everything their child writes in their status update (that's annoying)?

Then I realized that parents might NOT know those things. Why? Because they might not realize the basic nettiquette of Facebook and online interactions in general! I was lucky enough to become part of the online social scene relatively early (was on Friendster in the 90s, was IM'ing back then too with up to 10 windows open at once), so I need to remember that not everyone who is "old" like me understands the not-so-basic rules of the online world. They will become intuitive enough, but right now they are like those bizarre exceptions to the spelling rules you learned in grade school "i before e except after c..."

So thank you Plugged in Parent Sharon Miller Cindrich for sharing some of the basic rules so we can all live happily under the same URL.

Placing "sexting" in context

Salon puts a contemplative spin on the issue of "sexting" (the act of sending X-rated pictures electronically). It opens with the media-typical shock stories of young persons sending naked pictures of each other and then getting charged with child pornography. But, after the attention-getting scheme, it spends time deconstructing the issue more critically, posing some of the most difficult questions we need to consider:

1. Should people under 18 be charged with child pornography if they are willingly sending a picture of themselves to someone else who is happy to receive it? Does it matter if both parties are under 18 (or the legal age of consent in their state of residence), or should the age difference between the two be taken into consideration as in statutory rape?

2. Do the laws related to child pornography need to change given that the initial taking of the picture was likely not, in and of itself, a traumatic event? At this point, much of the argument against child pornography is that the experience of it being created is a traumatic event. This doesn't seem to be the case in these situations...As Amy Adler, a law professor at New York University, states"Child porn law was founded on a very different vision of what the major threat was."

3. Should someone under 18 be charged with possession of child pornography if they didn't know they were going to get the picture of their naked classmate? This is a very likely scenario and, in my opinion, those who unknowingly find themselves in possession of illegal material are not likely to tell an adult about it if they fear being charged.

4. Is sexting creating a whole new way of sexual expression, or are teens simply repeating old ways of sexual expression, but immortalizing it using the technology? The author of the Salon article reminisces about standing in front of the mirror and mimicking "porn poses." The big difference now, of course, is that the mirror is now a camera. And the implications are much bigger. But is the activity itself that different? Hard to say.

5. How much is our "porned culture" to blame? Should there be more media restrictions on Girls Gone Wild commercials, for example, or should free speech dominate as it has in the past?

These questions are critical to examine if we are going to progress on this issue. And including teens in on the conversations will help researchers, policy makers, and parents best understand how to handle this issue.

How cool is "That's Not Cool?"

There's a new website -- That's Not Cool -- sponsored by The Family Violence Prevention Fun, Ad Council, and the Office on Violence Against Women. It features pretty humorous, but somewhat cheesy, videos about "digital boundaries" -- cyberstalking, sending nude pics (sexting), and other issues related to romantic relationships going digital. I really like this term, and hope to see more of it as adults begin to appreciate this issue.

One feature, "Pressure Pic Problem," features the dilemma an apple (yes, a piece of fruit) faces when his friends pear and banana want him to get his gal orange to send nekked pics of herself. It's interactive, sort of like a choose your own adventure game, so you can see how different situations play out.

Then there is guest video "What if?" created by YouTube celeb Brandon Hardesty. It discusses the difficult question "who to turn to" when faced with such pressures. And when I checked it out, it already had over 66,000 views!

All the videos I watched were silly more than funny, making me wonder who they will appeal to (get it? Appeal? See Pressure Pic and you will appreciate my lovely pun...). But I guess if they get anyone's attention it is a good start to the conversation about how to set limits on communication in an era where we expect instantaneous responses and to be able to be up-to-date on EVERYONE'S business at the click of a button.

Sexual Bullying

Once again, I can turn to the UK for progressive thinking on issues that matter to me -- for example, they have been way ahead of the US in terms of developing curricula on cyberbullying and the grooming techniques of online predators. Now, they are starting to acknowledge that bullying using sexual content deserves specific mention. The BBC published an article on "sexual bullying," which they simply define as "anything from sexualised name-calling to spreading rumours about someone's sexual behaviour, to criminal offences such as assault and rape." A UK-based online news site noted that 3500 students were expelled from school for sexual misconduct and that teachers were among the victims. Although this coverage on sexual bullying does not reference the internet specifically, I think it is an important step to separately consider bullying of a sexual nature from other types of harassment.

The BBC article focuses on a very basic survey of 273 11-19 year-olds (this is a PDF of the results in their entirety). While the sample size is too small and age range too large to really make anything of it, its presence makes me optimistic that more attention will be paid to it in the future. And maybe sexual bullying online will also begin to get notice. I have complained about the lack of connection between cyberbullying and sexuality before. Perhaps this connection will be made more often at least across the pond, if not here.

Fear-based Spin

Although I have an earlier blog post about the Internet Safety Technical Task Force report, I came across an article that I must vent over.

To recap, the ISTTF report was published as an official statement of the Task Force regarding their opinions and recommendations regarding online safety for minors, and how to approach this issue going forward. Their main points were (see pages 4 & 5 of the Executive Summary):
1. The use of the internet by adults to abduct minors is very rare. Adult predation cases that incorporated the internet typically involved "post-pubescent youth who were aware that they were meeting an adult male for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity." Random abduction is essentially unheard of.
2. "Bullying and harassment, most often by peers, are the most frequent threats that minors
face, both online and offline." In other words, researchers, policy makers, and other concerned adults should focus on bullying, not predators, when striving to improve online safety.
3. "The Internet increases the availability of harmful, problematic and illegal content, but does
not always increase minors’ exposure."

So, imagine my dismay when I see an article whose headline reads: "Study Proves American Teens are at Serious Risk." This article cries: "Abuse, bullying, hatred and pornography crowd the internet; and no where are they more prevalent, or more dangerous, than on sites geared towards teens." Huh? Did I miss something here?

Unfortunately, I did not. For this is no article, but a press release disguised as news written to promote an online safety service. Too bad the author of the release didn't see the Task Force recommendation that the Attorneys General NOT "endorse any one technology or set of technologies to protect minors online." (p. 6).

Hopefully parents and other adults will notice and act accordingly.