IMO the sexting laws are a double-edged sword; I mean, prior to such laws, there were cases of underaged girls who had sent out naked pictures of themselves to boyfriends/potential boyfriends who happened to be18/19 and then, when the dude(s) forwarded the pics to their friends, they were charged with distribution of child pornography and branded as sex offenders for life, whereas the girls got off scot-free. I don't profess to know what the cutoff ages for coercion/solicitation/distribution ought to be, and surely, 11 is very young, but I do agree that those who distribute pornographic photos of themselves should be held liable as those who seek them.
Didn't say that. And not necessarily in favor of minors or even young people being labeled as a sex offender for distributing photos of themselves or others. That would depend on the context of each case. But neither do I think minors of either sex who choose to disseminate pornographic photos of themselves should not be held culpable.
I have both sons and daughters, thankfully, now adults. But both sexes were/are equally vulnerable to temptations, and frankly, stupid mistakes. I just think there should be consequences meted out according to the severity/frequency of the offense. Again, context is everything in such cases. I do not know how old was the man the father called the cops about, but if I were that father, I would have continued the conversation/pursued charges against the alleged offender via A LAWYER even IF my daughter could possibly be charged with disseminating pornographic photos of herself, as she'd likely not do it again. Could possibly save her from becoming an Only Fans spectacle later on.
Yes, it falls under sexting laws. Sexting
IMO the sexting laws are a double-edged sword; I mean, prior to such laws, there were cases of underaged girls who had sent out naked pictures of themselves to boyfriends/potential boyfriends who happened to be18/19 and then, when the dude(s) forwarded the pics to their friends, they were charged with distribution of child pornography and branded as sex offenders for life, whereas the girls got off scot-free. I don't profess to know what the cutoff ages for coercion/solicitation/distribution ought to be, and surely, 11 is very young, but I do agree that those who distribute pornographic photos of themselves should be held liable as those who seek them.
Didn't say that. And not necessarily in favor of minors or even young people being labeled as a sex offender for distributing photos of themselves or others. That would depend on the context of each case. But neither do I think minors of either sex who choose to disseminate pornographic photos of themselves should not be held culpable.
I have both sons and daughters, thankfully, now adults. But both sexes were/are equally vulnerable to temptations, and frankly, stupid mistakes. I just think there should be consequences meted out according to the severity/frequency of the offense. Again, context is everything in such cases. I do not know how old was the man the father called the cops about, but if I were that father, I would have continued the conversation/pursued charges against the alleged offender via A LAWYER even IF my daughter could possibly be charged with disseminating pornographic photos of herself, as she'd likely not do it again. Could possibly save her from becoming an Only Fans spectacle later on.