Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Teenagers and the Internet

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 125 posts

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#101

Post by Gormo »

ttt_ wrote: post #23
3pt14159 wrote: post #11

I've had the internet for twenty years (since I was 8) and computer access since I was 3. Most of my friends had access since they were 10 or 11. We turned out fine. Some kids who have poor role models are going to ask for oral sex from boys or girls that like them. This was true 3000 years ago. It is true today. It will be true twenty years from now regardless of what silly idea the person who made the documentary h…

>> Most of my friends had access since they were 10 or 11. We turned out fine. Much akin to "when we were kids we rode in the front seat without seat belts on, we turned out fine", and several other versions of that phrase. I don't think it's a valid argument at all.

> I don't think it's a valid argument at all.

Why not?

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#102

Post by BWStearns »

nissimk wrote: post #77
ta_1378992718 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you are in favor of the current remediation against teenagers that sext, which is generally to bring the recipient up on charges of possession of child pornography and the sender on charges of making and distributing child pornography? Such felony convictions will have far more ramifications that the act itself ever could.

I think if the sender and recipient in your described scenario are consenting then they should not be charged with these laws. That is not the intent of those laws. Even if the recipient is not consenting, the sender should also be charged with some other sort of harassment. But if the recipient forwards or shares the image in any way then they probably should receive the severe distribution charge.

Keep in mind that generally teenagers lack legal agency, and so consent is irrelevant because they cannot exercise consent. Their parents can exercise or choose not to exercise the consent for them and a lot of these cases are parents punishing their children's partner. It's not generally the state going off on some ridiculous spree of hunting down horny teenagers just for shits and giggles.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#103

Post by peterwwillis »

The Internet is not to blame.

"One of the motivators for me making the film was that a friend of my daughter came round to talk to me about a boy she had her eye on and he said she could be his girlfriend if she gave him a blowjob."

How can any rational person believe this is different from 40 years ago? You don't think teenage guys were asking for blowjobs in the 70s?!

The sexual pseudo-revolution changed our society's norms forever, well before the internet, and modern ADULT culture keeps them alive in ways that affect young people. Really, adults should be looking at themselves as the reason for why kids act the way they do.

But what adult would possibly blame themselves for what they can blame on the internet?

"Most of the responsibility has to lie, however, she thinks, with the corporations."

And telephone companies should be held accountable if someone calls you bad words on the phone. Look, there is a certain amount of personal responsibility that parents and our society as a whole have to take on, because no amount of litigiousness will stop people from behaving badly. Social change requires social change.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#104

Post by Gormo »

DanBC wrote: post #47
3pt14159 wrote: post #11

I've had the internet for twenty years (since I was 8) and computer access since I was 3. Most of my friends had access since they were 10 or 11. We turned out fine. Some kids who have poor role models are going to ask for oral sex from boys or girls that like them. This was true 3000 years ago. It is true today. It will be true twenty years from now regardless of what silly idea the person who made the documentary h…

> They arn't children. They are teenagers. Have you ever met a teenager? They're fucking idiotic. That's why we don't let them drink alcohol or vote or get married or have sex or join the army or a bunch of other stuff. > You know those dirty letters you got from your sweetheart when you were 17? Sexting is the same damn thing. No it isn't. A dirty letter is a dirty letter. A photo sent via sms has lasting consequenc…

> Have you ever met a teenager? They're fucking idiotic.

I've met plenty of idiotic adults, and I've met plenty of non-idiotic teenagers.

If "idiocy" is the appropriate criterion for determining how people should be disparately treated by the law, then let's develop a precise definition of "idiotic", so we can directly determine whether someone is an idiot or not, and stop using other, inconsistently correlated variables a proxy.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#105

Post by jaimebuelta »

DanBC wrote: post #47
3pt14159 wrote: post #11

I've had the internet for twenty years (since I was 8) and computer access since I was 3. Most of my friends had access since they were 10 or 11. We turned out fine. Some kids who have poor role models are going to ask for oral sex from boys or girls that like them. This was true 3000 years ago. It is true today. It will be true twenty years from now regardless of what silly idea the person who made the documentary h…

> They arn't children. They are teenagers. Have you ever met a teenager? They're fucking idiotic. That's why we don't let them drink alcohol or vote or get married or have sex or join the army or a bunch of other stuff. > You know those dirty letters you got from your sweetheart when you were 17? Sexting is the same damn thing. No it isn't. A dirty letter is a dirty letter. A photo sent via sms has lasting consequenc…

C'mon... Not every single teenager is idiotic.

Most are clueless, and lacks experience to deal with basic stuff as adults, for sure. But no way all teenagers are idiotic.

Also, everyone makes mistakes. The problem is that one idiotic action can be now recorded and distributed FOREVER.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#106

Post by superuser2 »

simias wrote: post #94
superuser2 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would it have been okay for your parents to wiretap your phone? No? Then why is it okay to demand to read your children's private conversations? I am terrified we're going to have a generation of kids who have no concept of private. Who've never been allowed to speak or be curious about anything their parents wouldn't approve of. Who are used to having to explain conversations and reading to people who were never sup…

My phone? I didn't have a cell phone while growing up, the only phone at home was in the living room. So no wiretapping really needed... And seriously, your parents aren't the NSA. Of course they should do what you are doing and of course you will do what you can so that they don't find out. It doesn't mean having a GPS tracker on you at all times. I stand by my original point: the internet can be a very dangerous pl…

Funny you mention GPS, because lots of parents do exactly that. https://wbillpay.verizonwireless.com/vzw/nos/safeguards/Safe...

As far as the phone, I guess houses with one central telephone aren't really what I'm talking about, so much as Bye Bye Birdie "The Telephone Hour"-type situations. Teenage girls in the 50s and 60s were able to talk about boys, criticize authority figures, and generally be themselves and develop as their own people using technology without supervision or censorship. You probably didn't have that experience, but my parents did, and it would have been creepy and invasive then for their parents to demand to be part of those conversations, just like it's creepy and invasive now.

The NSA is (ostensibly) only looking for terrorist plots. Your parents are looking for criticism, attitude, impure thoughts, differing political beliefs, ingratitude, and a whole bunch of other things that are part of being a young human being. There is no question in my mind that given the choice, I'd take the NSA.

You know what else is a dangerous place filled with strangers? School. Sidewalks. Libraries. Not just strangers, but dangerous ideas. College. Especially college. At some point kids have to learn to navigate those things independently, lest they self-destruct the moment the leash is removed. Not as 5-year-olds, sure, but definitely by 16/17 (depending on maturity, of course).

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#107

Post by superuser2 »

refurb wrote: post #97
superuser2 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Some kids who have poor role models are going to ask for oral sex from boys or girls that like them. In some cultures, healthy and loving relationships between teenagers are beautiful. The emotional drama that follows - which advocates for infantilization use to say teenagers cannot be trusted to handle relationships - is part of growing up and learning to be a person. The idea that this is wrong, idiotic, deserving…

The religious right? That makes no sense. It's the religious right that often encourages marriage at a young age. I've never heard of members of the religious right "shaming" teenage dating.

The religious right encourages abstinence-only education, discourages contraception, and absolutely does not want teenagers in dating relationships or having sex for pleasure. They want them to move from supervised, limited, nonsexual courtships to child-producing marriages as quickly as possible.

Also the less extreme religious right that I see recognizes the need not to be pregnant in college, and wants the whole process moved into early 20s rather than teens.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#108

Post by gbog »

dictum wrote: post #56
nissimk wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very upset that this is the top comment on here. 14 year old teenagers are definitely children and they do need to be protected by law from predators. Just because they are old enough to have children of their own doesn't make them adults. Is not OK for sites or individuals to be collecting sexual images of children and distributing them. Also, to all you folks on here saying that this is all fear mongering to ta…

> the recent cultural shift with the prevalence of handheld computing has a lot of negative side effects and we need to rethink the norms One possible rethinking of the norms would be to worry less about teenagers, letting them sext if that's their thing, and advising them to not let societal abuse (e.g. bullying) get to them. Scenario: a teenager sends a nude picture to a friend and the picture becomes public. Possi…

On the other getting abused when a nude pic is leaked can be seen as a defense from our societies, which are completely schizophrenic: sexual behavior is everywhere (like in this new ass dance) and the body is cleansed from any sign of naturality (e.g. removing pubic hair). It's like with death: a lot of blood in games and movies, but no more blood in real.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#109

Post by jaimebuelta »

shortlived wrote: post #34
msluyter wrote: post #27

Given the absence of real data (as in, studies that demonstrate conclusively that watching too much online porn has certain downsides), it's not surprising that a lot of comments are resorting to anecdotal reasoning of the form: "Well, I use the internet and I'm ok..." Nonetheless, I think it's worth entertaining the hypothesis that in many ways the internet is like candy for your brain, and constant exposure might h…

Do we need real data to know that too much porn is a bad thing? > The problem is that these are the same sorts of arguments > that have been deployed in the face of every technological > advance I agree and at the risk of sounding like my parents, I think the internet is different. Never before has their been a technology so all encompassing and so powerful (and dangerous). If I wanted to look at pictures of girls wh…

I think Internet makes an interesting system, as hardcore porn is easily available (really easily), while talking about sex (specially with teenagers/kids) is a huge taboo, and no one knows how to deal properly with sex education (understood as a broad subject)

I think most of the people understands that Rambo is not a good example of a real life soldier, or High School is not similar to Howarts. Equally, I think most of the people understands that porn is not a good representation of real life (nor romantic comedies a good representation of real life relationships, which is also another interesting example of arts influencing life, but I digress). Of course, if we don't discuss those issues with a more realistic approach, I guess there are some people that can miss the point and get bad assumptions and expectations.

Re: Teenagers and the Internet

#110

Post by mimiflynn »

3pt14159 wrote: post #53
nissimk wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very upset that this is the top comment on here. 14 year old teenagers are definitely children and they do need to be protected by law from predators. Just because they are old enough to have children of their own doesn't make them adults. Is not OK for sites or individuals to be collecting sexual images of children and distributing them. Also, to all you folks on here saying that this is all fear mongering to ta…

Just to be 100% crystal clear: I think teenagers still make mistakes and I do not support photos of them being in general circulation in any form. I am upset at a boyfriend getting charged with CP possession when his girlfriends parents find out that they are sexting. I also am against photos of teenagers getting distributed, but some teenagers look for teenage porn, and it shouldn't be as big of an offence as actual…

you might want to add this as an edit to your original comment. Its getting lost over here.
Post reply on HN