How Do You ALT-CTRL-DEL Hormones?

If I plagiarize myself, will I go blind?

Sorry. I'm recalling my high school days right now, and I'm clearly mashing-up my Creative Writing class with my Morality class.

But why? Why am I recalling my teen years? Why am I worrying about copying myself? And why am I making a dated reference to the consequences of a certain sex act?

Why? Because I recently read a news item about teens and sex, and it reminded me of a similar item I read last year - one I ultimately wrote about. In light of the latest news, I think the topic is worth writing about again, and since my original piece came and went unnoticed, I might cherry-pick some text, or an idea or two, from it. I thought it only fair to let you know I've been down this path before.

I was a teenager in the 1980s, and when the quadrillion raging hormones in my body wanted to see images of naked women, my choices were limited to having friends who could liberate certain literature from their fathers' sock drawers; catching Porky's-esque R-rated movies in theaters; sneaking late-night peeks at Skinemax...er, Cinemax; or finding a mom-and-pop movie rental store with a stocked back room and an ambivalent staff.

Little did I know then that, had I been born a scant 25 years later, I would have had no need to wait for manufacturers of fleshy delights to bring their wares to market. I simply could have had a classmate send me a picture of her nude self straight to my cell phone.

Really.

On January 13, 2009, Bob Stiles of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported on six students from Greensburg Salem High School - three boys and three girls, all minors - who face criminal charges as a result of participating in what is known as "sexting." According to Stiles' report, "sexting" is "...the teen trend of sending nude or semi-nude photos from cell phone to cell phone...."

Sexting. A naughty twist on texting. How clever. You know, I used to worry that when I become elderly, I will be cared for by a generation of slackers. Now I'm afraid I'll be cared for by a generation of horny marketers.

The matter is serious. The girls, who took nude pictures of themselves and sent them to the boys, face a charge of manufacturing, disseminating or possessing child pornography. The boys are charged with possessing child pornography. I have several issues here.

The first issue is legal. As I have made clear in past writings - again with the self-plagiarism - I am not a lawyer, and everything I know about the law, I learned from Hollywood. Assuming everything I can gather from the story is true, either as stated or implied, the girls took their own pictures and willingly sent them to the boys, who received them. Should any of these six kids be criminally charged? I'm not so sure. I certainly don't condone the behavior, but if there was no coercion and no adult involvement, this seems to be a case of monumentally poor judgment, not a case of crime.

Complicating matters, according to another story, if these children are found guilty, while they might not serve any jail time, they could be required to register as sex offenders for a period of 10 years. Again, I don't condone the behavior, but I can't reasonably see a 14-year-old girl or a 16-year-old boy registering as a sex offender until they are out of college. Can you imagine answering to that in a job interview? Stupidity is the crime here, and that punishment seems too harsh.

The second issue concerns the parents of these children. I can speak with greater authority here, as I both presently parent and previously have been parented...and still am, sometimes. (Hi Mom!) Also, I can assure you that I ignore Hollywood when it comes to parenting, other than to add bullet points to my ever-growing "Yeah, Don't Do THAT As a Parent" List, AKA "The Lohan List." Whether the kids don't know any better about such behavior, or if they suffer from low self-esteem and are looking to be accepted socially for what they are willing to do sexually, or even if they are physically and sexually confident beyond their years, the parents of these kids need to do a better job communicating with their children, whether "better job" means "improve communications" or - sadly - "begin communications."

And those communications need to extend beyond right/wrong, or good/bad, or do/don't. In fact, the matter is similar to the abstinence-only vs. sex-education debate because it deals not only with should/shouldn't, but with understanding actions and their potential consequences in the event of a "But if you do..." scenario. Sure, sending a saucy photo is not the same as engaging in physical sexual activity, and no one ever got pregnant or contracted a disease by looking at pictures. But those pictures have the potential for doing even greater harm in both the immediate and distant futures.

Thus, my third issue: the consequences of cyberspace. Yes, these particular photos (as far as we know) were contained to the boys' cell phones. But one reckless or vengeful file transfer puts them on the Internet, which makes them accessible to anyone. What today's parents need to stress to their children, and with the same gravity as pregnancy and disease, is that just as easily as teens voluntarily share with friends or lovers every pore of their skin via the Internet, they unintentionally share the same with the billions of strangers who know how to use a computer - and by "strangers," I don't mean just creepy bad guys or social enemies or incoming underclassmen. Those strangers could be college administrators, military recruiters, prospective employers, and even potential love interests.

Look, we've all been there. We've all done foolish things that we look back on now and laugh about (or cringe over) and bury in the Youthful Indiscretions file. But a key difference between teens of the past vs. teens of today, and the difference with perhaps the greatest significance, is the permanency of cyberspace. Sure, many foolish actions carry no long-term consequences, but cyber-shamelessness can. Pictures on the Internet aren't Polaroids that can be burned after viewing, or tattoos that can be removed or covered, or booze-fueled overindulgences that can be mitigated by sleep and aspirin. They will be there for as long as there is an Internet, so the youthful indiscretion of today can wreak havoc with the opportunity of tomorrow...or 20 years from tomorrow.

Parents need to make sure their kids understand their own cyber-presence. In fact, parents should probably understand their own cyber-presence, too. And it's okay.

No one will go blind Googling themselves.

On Second Thought, Don't Say Cheese

I am the father of two girls who are not yet teens, but the fact that I am still alive to compose this column, considering what I read mere minutes ago and might have to someday deal with as a father of girls who are not yet teens, is not so much a testament to my health as it is confirmation that there is truth to the adage "God protects children and fools." (I would be the latter.)

In a June 4, 2008 story, dateline Hartford, CT, Associated Press reporter Stephanie Reitz opens with the following paragraph:

"Passing notes in study hall or getting your best friend to ask a boy if he likes you or, you know, LIKES you, is so last century. Nowadays, teenagers are snapping naked pictures of themselves on their cell phones and sending them to their boyfriends and girlfriends."

Check please!

The story goes on to describe how incidents like this are occurring in schools across the country; how scorned lovers exact revenge by posting private pictures to the Internet; how this type of behavior complicates law enforcement investigations; and how one enterprising young man attempted to sell DVDs containing photographs he had amassed. Really. Ah, capitalism.

As much as I loathe cliché, this appears to be a chicken-or-egg situation, and it goes something like this:

Chicken: Have teens always been this monumentally stupid, but today's technology affords them the opportunity to showcase their stupidity on a global scale? Or...

Egg: Has technology's convenience and prevalence led teens to a level of apathy so great in scope, it has made them de facto imbeciles?

Reitz writes, "Psychologists said the phenomenon reflects typical teenage hormones and lack of judgment, with technology multiplying the potential for mischief. It also may reflect a teenage penchant for exhibitionism, as demonstrated on MySpace and countless other Web sites and blogs." In the realm of the cliché, the answer is, "The chicken appears to have come first, with the egg helping it to become a bigger chicken." Or something like that. Forgive me. I told you I loathe cliché. Besides, I'm still coming off that near-death experience.

I agree with the psychologists. Teens have always been exhibitionistic hormones on feet, and snapping camera phone pictures in the 21st century is no different than taking digital photos in the '90s, filming "home movies" on VHS in the 80s, taking Polaroids in the '70s, shooting on Super 8 in the '60s, and so on, all the way back to scratching out cave drawings in the Millions-BC. (Oh come on. You know that some cave teen, in an effort to impress his cave buddies, drew two very large circles on a cave wall and grunted, "No really! Her boulders are THIS BIG.")

One key difference between today's situation and the situations of yesteryear, other than sheer convenience, is the ease of access to the photos...by anyone. What today's teens forget, or fail to consider in the first place, is that just as easily as they share with global friends and lovers every pore of their skin via the Internet, they unintentionally share the same with the billions of strangers who know how to use Google. And since they aren't thinking about those strangers, they aren't thinking about who those strangers might be; not just creepy bad guys and vengeful social enemies, but college administrators...military recruiters...prospective employers...and even potential love interests.

Suzy: "Johnny! Why are you dumping me? I thought we were falling in love."

Johnny: "Sorry, baby. But if you show up on websites looking like THAT, I have wonder how many 'hits' you've had, if you catch my drift."

The other key difference between today's and yesterday's scenarios, and the difference with perhaps the greatest significance, is the permanency of cyberspace. Sure, many of today's foolish actions carry no long-term consequences, but cyber-shamelessness can. And pictures on the Internet aren't like juvenile criminal records that are sealed when you turn 18, or tattoos that can be removed or covered, or substance-fueled overindulgences that sleep and aspirin help mitigate. They will be there for as long as there is an Internet, so the youthful indiscretion of today can wreak havoc with the opportunity of tomorrow...or 20 years from tomorrow.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have some old VHS tapes that need erasing.