Kids send dirty pictures to each other

[cougjunkie]

I just wanted to know what you guys thought of this, a very good friend of mine is a jr high counselor in Utah county.

Last week 3 girls at the school took some pictures of themselves in an inappropriate manner (we are talking very very explicit, porno explicit) on their cell phones and sent them to a boy at the school. Well this boy forwarded the pictures to his friends and they ended up getting in to the hands of a teacher and they were all caught.

The girls were all put on probation (which is basically a slap on the wrist) the boy that recieved the pictures and forwarded them was suspended for 4 days. The other boys that recieved them from their friend were also put on probation.

Why is the kid that recieved the pictures suspended when the girls that started the whole thing were not? I know its not right but what 14 year old boy would not forward those pictures to his friends?

I feel like if a boy sent an explicit picture of himself to some girls the consequences woudl have been outrageous probably expulsion and possibly criminal charges.

[Detroitdad]

Originally Posted by cougjunkie

I just wanted to know what you guys thought of this, a very good friend of mine is a jr high counselor in Utah county.

Last week 3 girls at the school took some pictures of themselves in an inappropriate manner (we are talking very very explicit, porno explicit) on their cell phones and sent them to a boy at the school. Well this boy forwarded the pictures to his friends and they ended up getting in to the hands of a teacher and they were all caught.

The girls were all put on probation (which is basically a slap on the wrist) the boy that recieved the pictures and forwarded them was suspended for 4 days. The other boys that recieved them from their friend were also put on probation.

Why is the kid that recieved the pictures suspended when the girls that started the whole thing were not? I know its not right but what 14 year old boy would not forward those pictures to his friends?

I feel like if a boy sent an explicit picture of himself to some girls the consequences woudl have been outrageous probably expulsion and possibly criminal charges.

I think that you are probably correct that the measures taken against a boy would be much more severe with criminal charges and possibly even being put in a mental hospital.

[marsupial]

I agree that there is a double-standard. However, I assume the girls were not at school when they took the pictures and sent them to the boy, so really how can the school discipline them then? But if the boy was looking at the pictures during school and sending them to his friends at school, then school has authority to do something. Since they are all minors, I don't know what kind of criminal charges would be filed, but I am not a lawyer and obviously I don't know the full details.

In any case, stories like these make me sick. It seems like teenage girls are getting even more desperate in their attempts to win the affections of teenage boys and losing their dignity in the process.

[cougjunkie]

Originally Posted by marsupial

I agree that there is a double-standard. However, I assume the girls were not at school when they took the pictures and sent them to the boy, so really how can the school discipline them then? But if the boy was looking at the pictures during school and sending them to his friends at school, then school has authority to do something. Since they are all minors, I don't know what kind of criminal charges would be filed, but I am not a lawyer and obviously I don't know the full details.

In any case, stories like these make me sick. It seems like teenage girls are getting even more desperate in their attempts to win the affections of teenage boys and losing their dignity in the process.

I didnt really think of that, you make a good point about where the incident occurred. I asked my friend if he was surprised when he found out who was involved and he told me that he was shocked, he said certain girls in the school you can just tell they are on the fast track to failure, he said these girls all three of them were straight A students, they were all 9th graders and enrolled in Seminary, he said they are kind of popular. He was very surprised by it.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by marsupial

I agree that there is a double-standard. However, I assume the girls were not at school when they took the pictures and sent them to the boy, so really how can the school discipline them then? But if the boy was looking at the pictures during school and sending them to his friends at school, then school has authority to do something. Since they are all minors, I don't know what kind of criminal charges would be filed, but I am not a lawyer and obviously I don't know the full details.

In any case, stories like these make me sick. It seems like teenage girls are getting even more desperate in their attempts to win the affections of teenage boys and losing their dignity in the process.

Legally speaking (how else would I speak?) I don't think it makes a difference from the school's standpoint where they were taken as opposed to where they were viewed. If they had sent him a bomb, I doubt it would matter where they built it. On the other hand, there may be some issue about whether they intended it to go to him at school or somewhere else, or whether it was reasonably foreseeable that he would recieve it at school. Bottom line, I think the school could have easily justified being much harder on the girls.

Diving now to why men go easier on women.......well there I just already said it all. Men are hard on men. Women are infinitely harder on each other than men are on each other or than women are on men. Men are lend a sympathetic ear to things that would make other women say PUH-LEASE!! Men instinctively want to protect women. I think, in my amatuer opinion, that this is why men get it harder in the church than women do. I think the Priesthood issue is a post-hoc rationalization, but what do I know. Well, I know this: if women were put in these decision making positions, suddenly women would find that things had gotten tougher for them and men would find that things had eased up somewhat.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Legally speaking (how else would I speak?) I don't think it makes a difference from the school's standpoint where they were taken as opposed to where they were viewed. If they had sent him a bomb, I doubt it would matter where they built it. On the other hand, there may be some issue about whether they intended it to go to him at school or somewhere else, or whether it was reasonably foreseeable that he would recieve it at school. Bottom line, I think the school could have easily justified being much harder on the girls.

Diving now to why men go easier on women.......well there I just already said it all. Men are hard on men. Women are infinitely harder on each other than men are on each other or than women are on men. Men are lend a sympathetic ear to things that would make other women say PUH-LEASE!! Men instinctively want to protect women. I think, in my amatuer opinion, that this is why men get it harder in the church than women do. I think the Priesthood issue is a post-hoc rationalization, but what do I know. Well, I know this: if women were put in these decision making positions, suddenly women would find that things had gotten tougher for them and men would find that things had eased up somewhat.

I don't know. I agree, given the theological disparity in authority, the Church overcompensates, but I disagree that women would go easier on women. From what I've regretably seen in a limited number of divorce cases, sympathy for men is limited and in short supply. Women tend to hate men but not vice versa. Obviously that is an overgeneralization but a woman's affections cools easily.

[marsupial]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Legally speaking (how else would I speak?) I don't think it makes a difference from the school's standpoint where they were taken as opposed to where they were viewed. If they had sent him a bomb, I doubt it would matter where they built it. On the other hand, there may be some issue about whether they intended it to go to him at school or somewhere else, or whether it was reasonably foreseeable that he would recieve it at school. Bottom line, I think the school could have easily justified being much harder on the girls.

A bomb is illegal. Naughty photos are not. So, a school has authority over a student's actions when they are not at school and it is not a school day? So, could they get suspended for having sex at Squaw Peak on a Saturday night?

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by marsupial

A bomb is illegal. Naughty photos are not. So, a school has authority over a student's actions when they are not at school and it is not a school day? So, could they get suspended for having sex at Squaw Peak on a Saturday night?

In a sexual situation is a woman ever accountable for anything? You seem intent to avoid this.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

In a sexual situation is a woman ever accountable for anything? You seem intent to avoid this.

Are you talking about the church or in society or what? Marsupial is correct in that women carrying and raising the child is more significant accountablity than men ever receive, if you're talking about in society. Rape is a seperate issue, but rape is nearly 100% of the time a male on female crime. Do you mean the church? Yes, women are accountable for sexual sin in the church. Is that really a big problem in the church, that women don't take accountability for sexual sin? Even the reasonable people like Archaea and UtahDan are off in this thread.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Are you talking about the church or in society or what? Marsupial is correct in that women carrying and raising the child is more significant accountablity than men ever receive, if you're talking about in society. Rape is a seperate issue, but rape is nearly 100% of the time a male on female crime. Do you mean the church? Yes, women are accountable for sexual sin in the church. Is that really a big problem in the church, that women don't take accountability for sexual sin? Even the reasonable people like Archaea and UtahDan are off in this thread.

I actually don't believe we should slam members for illicit sexual activity but rather we should work with them, perhaps reducing activity in terms of callings or sacrament, but the work should be done lovingly and not out of spite. The actions of slamming the priesthood holder while coddling the women seems pedantic and wrong-headed.