Comments for en-gb 30 Mon 21 Apr 2014 14:47:22 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at U14717142 This post has been Removed Thu 09 Dec 2010 11:36:48 GMT+1 U14714220 This post has been Removed Mon 06 Dec 2010 14:09:02 GMT+1 tonnyw This post has been Removed Mon 27 Sep 2010 05:10:07 GMT+1 hackerjack It's always been hilarious to me that you can look at a naked 16 year old girl, in fact have sex with one legally, yet if you look at a picture of her it's illegal. Fri 18 Dec 2009 07:46:53 GMT+1 Graphis I was going to add lots of comments, but then found MacBookPro (comment 10) said almost everything for me:)Seriously, when I was a teenager, we indulged in the illicit exchange of what little pornography was available too. The only difference back then is that it was a lot harder to create images of oneself, as the technology wasn't around (pre-Polaroid, even). If it was, we'd have done this too. Raging hormones and sexual curiosity amongst teenagers is not news. Neither is the delight teenagers find in doing 'naughty' things. The only time this should be considered illegal or dangerous if teenagers are "sexting" between themselves and an adult: between themselves is just normal, harmless teenage fun. Get a grip (no pun intended). Thu 17 Dec 2009 00:04:53 GMT+1 _Ewan_ it has to be remembered that those convicted of sexting could end up becoming registered as a sex offenderThe source of the harm here is not from sexting, it's from overzealous prosecutors, abetted by supine media coverage like this that refuses to give any critical thought to these peoples' PR puff. Wed 16 Dec 2009 21:52:49 GMT+1 Pixelvision This is a social issue with little to do with the technology in use. Phones are the medium, but you could say the same sort of thing when the polaroid camera came out. As someone who came here for news about technology, I am left unsatisfied by an article about the activities of teenagers! Wed 16 Dec 2009 20:10:49 GMT+1 MacBookPro This is hilarious!First, there is actual proof that sending sexual messages via any form of long-distance messaging service has been going on since letters existed! And I'm willing to bet everything I own that pictures were being sent since photographs came about too! This, of course, is hardly surprising when you consider the fact that human beings have the natural urge for sex, and rightly so too or we'd all be dead!It raises the question, though... Why all the fear mongering and panic now? It seems to me that the media has just decided to make this the next big moral panic we must all be afraid of, simply because they always need something to blow way out of proportion, and the amount of hyperbole is this article is only further evidence of that.On a more serious point though, I think it's stupid that pictures of a 16 year old are classed as "child porn". At the age of 16, you can live on your own, get married, and even legally have sex... Surely I'm not the only one who thinks its stupid that, with all these rights, 16 year olds can't even take pictures of themselves?Also, I'm curious - because the article didn't make it clear - is 'sexting' between, say, two 16 year olds illegal, or is it only the fact it was distributed further than between those two people that made it illegal?And finally, I don't think telling teenagers to stop doing it will be any use whatsoever. Those things, especially when related to sex, and especially when targeting teenagers, are highly unlikely to have any effect at all. In fact, if anything, it will further encourage teenagers to do it more, because they love being rebellious. Wed 16 Dec 2009 15:40:28 GMT+1 Ian "Four per cent with a mobile phone have sent sexually suggestive nude or nearly nude images of themselves via text"Wow, and I thought we were all concerned that young people were losing the ability to write well. I can't begin to imagine how to describe a sexually explicit image of myself in words. Perhaps we mean MMS here guys. Let's try and keep up with the technology shall we :-) Wed 16 Dec 2009 15:35:41 GMT+1 HardWorkingHobbes Am I the only one who's dissapointed that mobile phones weren't around when I was a teenager? Wed 16 Dec 2009 14:56:04 GMT+1 The_Hess There are a number of issues in this article that raise serious questions."Sexting is, as Wikipedia puts it, a "portmanteau of sex and texting." Or if you like, it is the act of sending sexually explicit messages or photos electronically mainly from one cellphone to another. The Pew Research Centre carried out a study in September involving 800 teens. It found that 30% of 17-year-olds who have phones have received sexting photos or messages."Firstly, there is a distinct difference between sending pictures and simply sending a dirty text. A dirty message to a boy/girlfriend is not going to cause a great deal of harm on either side, even if the relationship ends. An explicit picture on the otherhand has far greater implications, as seen in cases where a relationship has ended and the picture then distributed. Also, when did Wikipedia become a solid basis for journalistic evidence!?!"It certainly seems that the problem is taking on a life of its own and that while it may seem like a harmless activity among some young people, it has to be remembered that those convicted of sexting could end up becoming registered as a sex offender."Does this not seem a trifle excessive except in a few specific cases? Swapping some explicit images with a partner becomes a criminal offence that could end your life before you reach your twenties? Yes, if a 19 year old sends images to pre teens, then there is a problem, but a 16 and 18 year old? The couple could be less than 2 years apart in age, not a problem, and yet if the letter of the law is followed then a life destroying sentence is possible.In my opinion, sexting is just a way of using technology to satisfy something that has been around for thousands of years. Perhaps instead of alienating teenagers (and, yes, I am a teenager) with finger wagging, there should be greater education, and a far more level discussion, with views from both sides. Wed 16 Dec 2009 14:46:53 GMT+1 cping500 There is a problem with this story. The Pew Research 0rganisation reports on US teenagers and most of the story refers to the including the section on the sex offenders register which refers specifically to Florida yet nowhere does it say this. I think even the Daily Mail would have managed to say this even if in small print right at the end of the story. Wed 16 Dec 2009 13:35:10 GMT+1 mpkisr I think it's probably fair to say that most kids who send 'sexts' are also sexually active. Personally I don't particularly see the difference between the two; after all, on a 'base' level pornography is sex - it is just a means of sexual gratification without actually engaging in the act. So my question is this: why are people up in arms that kids might be sending explicit pictures of themselves to each other, when perhaps the real issue is that kids are become sexually active at ever-younger ages. 'Sexting' is obviously a way of exploring your own sexuality. Clearly I appreciate the issues with these pictures possibly be classed as child pornography should they find their way into the wrong hands, but I don't think we should be clamping down on 'sexts'. We've come so far in recent years in finally becoming a bit more open about sex and discussing sex with younger people that I just don't want to see any legislation which once again might try to suppress sexual development. Wed 16 Dec 2009 11:36:32 GMT+1 Aidy I suppose the moral of the story is that when you're sending your phone back under the Distance Selling Regulations cooling-off period, to check it doesn't contain child pornography first. Wed 16 Dec 2009 11:24:45 GMT+1 Nathan Woods "If your kid hasn't taken a (suggestive) picture and shared it with somebody else, in all likelihood they've seen one, they may have possession of one or they may be sending them around." - Parry AftabYou've got to love the scare-mongering and blatant ignoring of the statistics..."Four per cent [of 12-17 year olds] with a mobile phone have sent sexually suggestive nude or nearly nude images of themselves via text and 15% say they have been on the end of receiving such material."Even if you assume no overlap among those who send such messages and those who receive them, that still only accounts for 19% of 12-17 year olds with mobile phones (somewhere between 58% and 83% of the population of 12-17 year olds) being involved in any aspect of this. I'd like the think the phrase 'in all likelihood' should be reserved for situations when it is more likely that something is the case than it not being the case. Wed 16 Dec 2009 11:07:23 GMT+1 calmandhope I'm not sure that this is a huge surprise to be honest, I'm half expecting this to be spun though as if this is the first generation who have discovered their libido. Wed 16 Dec 2009 09:53:01 GMT+1 PlatinumPlatypus Rule number one for anyone who might engage in such a practice. 'Nothing above the neck' Wed 16 Dec 2009 09:02:46 GMT+1