Anonymous wrote:Don't be silly. There's plenty of blame to go around for all the guilty. It's not only the girls vs. the boys.

No, sorry, publicly humiliating numerous human beings and placing them in possible danger is not the same as possibly having done something foolish. These boys had plenty of time along the way to realize how wrong what they were doing was, but they did it anyway.
I have yet to see a citation of evidence on record that these pictures were taken with the permission of the girls involved. Whether they were or not, exposing a fellow human being to public humiliation and possible danger is a far worse action.

^^^^PP will not tolerate "blame shifting" to girls.

So it's OK for girls to create pornographic photographs of themselves, but bad if the recipient of the porn uses it as porn.

Maybe it is one of your girls involved and you are afraid. This is the only excuse I can make for your statement.

Anonymous wrote:aw crap I thought this forum was anonymous :-p

Actually if Jeff really wanted to he could find out who you are in general, cops definitely can figure out who you are with a warrant.

Don't be silly. There's plenty of blame to go around for all the guilty. It's not only the girls vs. the boys.

Anonymous wrote:Everyone (especially teenagers) has awkward or embarassing moments. The difference b/t 30 yrs ago and today is that everyone has a camera at the ready to memorialize the moments of bad judgment.

I'd don't know what the girls did voluntarily or not. I do know that exploiting other people for your own popularity or entertainment is far worse than anyone's bad decision about their own modesty or privacy.

I would want to teach my kids that even if someone is foolish, you don't take advantage of that just for sport.

I equate behavior like this with bullying. It's taking advantage of someone's vulnerability to be hurtful. You don't excuse behavior like that and blame it on someone else.

Anonymous wrote:We don't know if the girls were taking pictures and intending to share them with the world. If so, that is a separate discussion from what this sophomore did -- which was basically act as the "gatekeeper" to this dropbox folder.

There is nothing on record indicating that the pictures in this account were taken by the girls themselves. The two boys involved spent their time collecting these pictures into one site and then emailing out links so others could view them. The Post article indicated that there were 52 different folders, with 24 labeled by name.
These boys are old enough that they should know that doing this would be hurtful to these girls and they also should have known that their actions could expose these girls to danger. The site is shut down, but what happens if there are screen shots labeled with names out there on the computers of people with bad intent? It is so easy to find an address nowadays. If my son did something like this, I would let him know that the responsibility for his actions lies with him, and I would not tolerate trying to shift the blame to the girls.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids don't wear watches these days or use alarm clocks. They rely on their cell phones to tell the time and set their alarms.

It's hard to know what should be turned on and what should be turned off, particularly when kids are a year or two from being sent off to live on their own. It was much much easier when all parents had to say was no TV on school nights, or no TV after 10.

My kids have "dumb" phones. Solves a boat-load of potential problems.

It's quite easy to provide your child with an alarm clock. My kids have those, too.

You are the most brilliant DCUM poster of the day. Amazing how simple it is to greatly reduce the risk of devastating teen behavior. But you need to do the hard work of parenting. Most parents are failing their children.

Don't most dumb phones now have a camera, too, and ability to text? I think you can still take a pix and send it via text. The pix aren't as clear,
but I would think it's still possible to do this. You'd have to get the cell phones from like 10 yrs ago to not have a camera on the phone.

Your proposal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids don't wear watches these days or use alarm clocks. They rely on their cell phones to tell the time and set their alarms.

It's hard to know what should be turned on and what should be turned off, particularly when kids are a year or two from being sent off to live on their own. It was much much easier when all parents had to say was no TV on school nights, or no TV after 10.

My kids have "dumb" phones. Solves a boat-load of potential problems.

It's quite easy to provide your child with an alarm clock. My kids have those, too.

You are the most brilliant DCUM poster of the day. Amazing how simple it is to greatly reduce the risk of devastating teen behavior. But you need to do the hard work of parenting. Most parents are failing their children.

Don't most dumb phones now have a camera, too, and ability to text? I think you can still take a pix and send it via text. The pix aren't as clear, but I would think it's still possible to do this. You'd have to get the cell phones from like 10 yrs ago to not have a camera on the phone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids don't wear watches these days or use alarm clocks. They rely on their cell phones to tell the time and set their alarms.

It's hard to know what should be turned on and what should be turned off, particularly when kids are a year or two from being sent off to live on their own. It was much much easier when all parents had to say was no TV on school nights, or no TV after 10.

My kids have "dumb" phones. Solves a boat-load of potential problems.

It's quite easy to provide your child with an alarm clock. My kids have those, too.

You are the most brilliant DCUM poster of the day. Amazing how simple it is to greatly reduce the risk of devastating teen behavior. But you need to do the hard work of parenting. Most parents are failing their children[i].

Rather full of yourself, I'd imagine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you post on social media, you have no reasonable expectation to control what the recipient does with that post/pic/info. Zero. None. Nada. And if you're not reminding your kids of that fact at every opportunity, then you are doing them a tremendous disservice.

Yep. Find every opportunity to say it to your kids.

"There is no privacy on the internet.
There is no privacy on the internet!"

DH? I'm shocked at how many pps don't seem to get it.

If you post on social media, you have no reasonable expectation to control what the recipient does with that post/pic/info. Zero. None. Nada. And if you're not reminding your kids of that fact at every opportunity, then you are doing them a tremendous disservice.

If you post on social media, you have no reasonable expectation to control what the recipient does with that post/pic/info. Zero. None. Nada. And if you're not reminding your kids of that fact at every opportunity, then you are doing them a tremendous disservice.

If you post on social media, you have no reasonable expectation to control what the recipient does with that post/pic/info. Zero. None. Nada. And if you're not reminding your kids of that fact at every opportunity, then you are doing them a tremendous disservice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids don't wear watches these days or use alarm clocks. They rely on their cell phones to tell the time and set their alarms.

It's hard to know what should be turned on and what should be turned off, particularly when kids are a year or two from being sent off to live on their own. It was much much easier when all parents had to say was no TV on school nights, or no TV after 10.

My kids have "dumb" phones. Solves a boat-load of potential problems.

It's quite easy to provide your child with an alarm clock. My kids have those, too.

You are the most brilliant DCUM poster of the day. Amazing how simple it is to greatly reduce the risk of devastating teen behavior. But you need to do the hard work of parenting. Most parents are failing their children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was recently at a barbecue where a little girl got humped by a dog. The little girl didn't realize what was happening -- she thought the dog was "hugging" her. The men -- MEN -- stood around making comments about how it's a shame this wasn't recorded and put on social media because it would go viral. They were fucking admiring the dog.

Men are foul. I don't blame the girls here. I blame the boy, and if the senior is 18, I hope this follows him around for the rest of his life.

You don't blame the girls here? So if they voluntarily took nude pictures of themselves and then shared it with someone else that's fine with you? No blame there? That's why girls will continue to make idiotic decisions. It doesn't matter if they didn't intend wide distribution, sharing a nude pic with even one person is unacceptable "foul" behavior. Where are their morals? The only blameless people in this scenario would be any girls who did not voluntarily pose for the pictures. The others have equal culpability as the boys. Stop giving them a pass.

To answer your questions in bolded (which is more than I should because you're deflecting my point):

1) No, I don't blame the girls here.

2) Even if a girl took a selfie or posed individually, what they did was not criminal nor hurtful to others. One could argue it was poor judgment, fine. But it was still a private gesture if shared with "someone else" -- not the world. There is also a big difference between personal expression (the sharing of one photograph) and outright exploitation (the compilation of photographs with the intent of mass distribution for purposes of objectification and/or humiliation).

3) So, no. The word "blame" does not belong in the same sentence as "the girls."

Do you also believe that women invite rape by how they dress?

An underage girl who takes a sexually explicit photo of herself and sends it to her boyfriend is guilty of distributing child pornography, and the boyfriend is guilty of possession of child pornography.

And no, you cannot argue that it's poor judgment. It IS poor judgment, full stop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even the idea of this makes me sick. My friends and I in high school (mid to late 80s) were so innocent and wholesome in comparison to kids today. Of course, some teens we knew were having sex, but I seriously doubt any of them were creating porn and distributing it.

+1000 These McLean high school students have no excuses. They caused "intentional" harm. They knew better. Cruel stuff.

In my Fairfax County High school in the mid- to late 80s, one tenth grade girl had a friend take nude photos of her for her boyfriend. They dropped them off at a one-hour photo place (remember those?), which, unluckily for them, employed a student from the same school. That student made an extra copy, maybe more, and circulated them around the school.

So it's not just "kids these days." Kids were just as dumb and just as malicious back then. The only difference is that every one of them has a camera in his back pocket that can send a photo instantly to anyone else, so it's much easier for photos to be circulated beyond their intended audience.

aw crap I thought this forum was anonymous :-p

Anonymous wrote:If you post on social media, you have no reasonable expectation to control what the recipient does with that post/pic/info. Zero. None. Nada. And if you're not reminding your kids of that fact at every opportunity, then you are doing them a tremendous disservice.

Yep. Find every opportunity to say it to your kids. "There is no privacy on the internet."

There is no privacy on the internet!