User:Ayoung40/sandbox

Our proposed changes to the existing article on sexting:

Legal Issues: Commentary

Amy Hasinoff, an author from the article “Sexting as Media Production: Rethinking Social Media and Sexuality,” states that “Though educators and policymakers who worry about online predators insist that girls should avoid communicating with strangers online, another set of fears arises about technology’s impact on how girls communicate,” (453). The fear that policy makers are having is that girls are being irresponsible and sending pictures to anyone whom they want attention for: even sexual predators. Hasinoff states also that “There is a problematic disconnect between the law and young people’s use of mobile media: for example, in most US states two 17-year-olds can lawfully engage in consensual sex, but it is illegal for them to photograph their sex acts,” (450). Policy makers are trying to prevent sexual acts from being shared not realizing that this could possibly be a part of their sexual activity.

It seems that many teens are feeling comfortable with their body and being told not to be in risks of sending photos to someone who might possibly leak the photo as well. Another reason for the making of policies to stop sexting from occurring among teenage children is because “In some discussions of sexting, commentators fear that young people’s use of mobile media leads to earlier sex, more sexual activity, and teenage pregnancy,” (453).

Policy makers have more of a fear that the big taboo in America will continue if sexting is a part of teenager’s daily lives. Hasinoff’s statements about policy makers decisions and ways of thinking only focuses on one point of view and not on other issues that might be causing young boys and young girls to actually leak the photos.

The intent for these laws might be good but Hasinoff’s article shows that not always is it a good idea to take something away from sexually experienced teens when this is a way for them to explore their bodies and their comfrotbalility with someone who they put their trust in. Of course, Hasinoff states also that, “Nearly all youth who sext know that the practice is dangerous (Cox Communications, 2009), so these sexting abstinence messages are likely to be as ineffective as abstinence-only sex education programs (Alford, 2007),” (458). Policy makers are trying to prevent sexting from taking place unaware that teenagers are more than aware about what can happen if their picture will be sent to the wrong person.

The issue that seems to be happening isn’t the fact that sexting is around but that sexting isn’t being respected among the youth. Although there are many facts and laws about sexting the most important thing Hasnioff wants everyone to understand that sexting is a part of sexual awakening. This sexual experience helps teens understand sex a bit more without actually having intercourse and can be argued as a safer method. The fear that this is bad is why policy makers continue to make laws to try and stop teens from doing this taboo action. However, it seems like no matter how hard policy makers try to prevent this from happening, it will still occur in today’s society.

In recent discussions about sexting, the risks and negative effects of sexting on youth has emerged as one of the most, if not the most, prominent issues that people consider when weighing its impacts on those who participate in sexting. On the one hand, some view sexting as a harmful activity that exposes youth to “risky” sexual behavior. According to this view, youth should then be protected and prevented from sexting by the law. On the other hand, some argue that sexting may be a safe, fun way for youth to express their sexuality when done with respect and empathy from all participants involved. According to this view, youth are capable of sexting safely and using it in a positive way, so the law should reflect their autonomy and decision-making skills. Overall then, there seems to be a need for more insight about how youth sext—what their behaviors and intentions are when sexting as well as what meaning sexting has for them, if any—in order to gain a more complete understanding of how the law should address sexting and youth.

One study by Kath Albury and Kate Crawford (2012) provides some insight into how sexting is viewed differently by Australian teens and Australian policies about sexting. Albury and Crawford compare the Megan’s Story campaign from ThinkUKnowAustralia, a partnership organization that includes the Australian Federal Police (AFP), the Virtual Global Taskforce, and Microsoft Australia, with responses from Australian teens drawn from interviews asking them about mobile phones and sexting in a separate study. In their article, Albury and Crawford contrast how sexting is depicted in Megan’s Story with how teens are thinking about and using sexting in real time, raising questions about implications for the law and the way people conceptualize youth sexting. Megan’s Story is a video campaign depicting the short story of how the fictional teen Megan sent a sext during the school day to a classmate and how quickly her sext traveled to each person’s phone in her classroom, including her teacher. As her classmates and teacher express disgust and disapproval, Megan is shown breaking down and running out of the room as an adult male voice reads, “Think you know what happens to your images? Who will see them? How they will affect you? Think again.”

Albury and Crawford draw attention to how this ad is portrayed as a morality tale and evokes the risk management model of sexual violence prevention education, which presents women as inherently at risk of sexual violence but simultaneously held responsible for preventing it. Viewers are meant to consume the ad as a cautionary tale against sexting. However, the accompany Teacher’s Discussion Guide visible only to members of the ThinkUKnow website states that the video is meant to encourage discussions about peer and relationship pressure, the consequences of creating and sharing something in a digital format, and the role of bystanders, gender stereotypes, and sexual discrimination. Interestingly, Albury and Crawford point out that the ad neglects to communicate that Australian law classifies all sexual images of people under eighteen as child pornography and that all parties involved the creation and distribution of Megan’s sext in the video could be potentially identified as sex offenders.

But while Australian law views youth under eighteen as unable to give consent to the creation and distribution of sexual images and ThinkUKnowAustralia depicts youth as in danger of sexting, actual responses from youth interviewed about sexting reveal that youth are becoming conscious of the importance of consent, developing an ethics around sexting, and using sexting for many different purposes. Researchers found that youth use sexting in a variety of contexts with many different groups of people, including friends, family, coworkers, and intimate partners. Sexting is as an activity is limited to the context of flirting or sexual relationships but rather used also as a joke among friends and for opportunities to bond with coworkers and even family members. When asked about images that are shared without consent, teens found the scenario funny, disturbing, or both. Most of those interviewed expressed disapproval of circulating images without consent and expressed concern about breaches of trust in intimate relationships, rather than the act of recording the images itself. Teens described sexting as a way of staying connected to partners abroad or as a unique form of erotica and cited memories of using sexting as a bonding activity among friends, family, and coworkers, revealing a little acknowledged diversity in how sexting is used among youth.

Albury and Crawford suggest that an implication of these findings then is that greater attention to the many contexts and meanings of sexting for teens as well as how teens are developing an ethics of consent around sexting will be important when considering how the state and other institutions should address sexting among youth. Many have long assumed that sexting is an inherently harmful practice for youth and that youth must be shielded from sexting. But new knowledge about teens’ lived experiences with sexting suggest that teens are capable of sexting safely, revealing a gap between Australian law and the lives of youth. Albury and Crawford call for the promotion of ethical models of sexual communication and laws that respond to the realities of young people.

Albury, Kath, and Kate Crawford. "Sexting, Consent and Young People's Ethics: Beyond Megan's Story." Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 26.3 (2012): n. pag. Web. 21 Nov. 2014. .

Relationships

Most literature available on the effects of sexting in adult romantic relationships emphasizes the negative impacts it can have on relationships. When considering the role of sexting in adult lives, most thoughts turn to high profile events highlighting the problems that sexting poses as researchers often have difficulty keeping up with changing technology and its impact on individuals, families, and couples. In a study exploring the motivations behind sexting in adult romantic relationships, Parker, et al. (2012), examine the role technology plays in adult romantic relationships. Drawing on other research, Parker, et. al describe how technology has increased sexual behavior in the past due to the anonymity, convenience, and escape—also known as the ACE model—it offers couples. But sexting does not always provide anonymity, raising the question of why people might choose to sext. In addition, Parker, et. al explain that culturally, “sex” has traditionally meant “intercourse,” reducing other sexual behaviors as less valid forms of sexual expression, although many different sexual behavior can contribute to relationship satisfaction. Researchers can then ask again why adults might choose to sext.

Parker, et. al mention Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT), which suggests that the more partners feel safe and accepted in their relationship, the more likely they will be to have a satisfying sexual relationship, to suggest that couples who are more secure in their relationship might feel comfortable enough to sext as a means of fulfilling the need for a satisfying sexual relationship. In a study asking couples how they sext and why they sext, Parker, et. al find that couples who choose to sext do so to build intimacy as well as for pleasure. In this study, couples who are dating, living together, or married were asked to rate their texts according to a scale of “least sexual” and “most sexual” texts and list the reasons why they sent each text. The results show that sexting was a way for couples to feel more connected throughout the day and to satisfy sexual needs. Parker et. al suggest that clinical implications of this study might be that sexting could provide an intimacy-building function for intervention in marriage therapy.

Parker, Trent S., Kristyn M. Blackburn, Martha S. Perry, and Jillian M. Hawks. "Sexting as an Intervention: Relationship Satisfaction and Motivation Considerations." The American Journal of Family Therapy 41.1 (2012): n. pag. Web. 21 Nov. 2014. .

New section: Benefits

Parker, Blackburn, Perry, and Hawks conducted a study to focus on the effects of sexting on relationship satisfaction and the conditions under which sexting occurs in adult romantic relationships. A sample of 86 participants was recruited through social networking websites. 44 of these participants were married or living together, and the other 42 were in dating relationships. Results of the study showed that couples who scored higher on the consensus scale were more likely to have sexted. A prime motivator of sexting behaviors was found to be hedonism, the pursuit of pleasure. When sexting is brought up in modern literature, much of the conversation is focused on problems associated with the behavior. However, what is actually known about sexting' s impacts on families, couples, and individuals is nearly obsolete. Thus, clinicians are highly curious about how couples utilize sexting to promote their relationship. It also incites questions about the relational circumstances under which couples are likely to sext—questions which this study attempts to answer. Under "Technology and Sexuality, the authors discuss the increasing role of technology on various types of sexual interactions. As such, because internet infidelity is largely comparable to infidelity, there is an emphasis on the draw that internet sexuality has for individuals: anonymity, convenience, and escape.  While sexting can offer convenience and escape (i.e., widely accessible alternative reality), it does not always provide anonymity.

Kindred and Roper (2004) explored college students' use of instant messaging and found that participants mostly used instant messaging to communicate with and maintain platonic connections. For many, these connections are not solely limited to electronic communication. Jin and Park (2010) studied how texting, and other cell phone usage, is related to loneliness and in-person communication. They found that loneliness was tied to lower frequencies of face-to-face interactions (as compared to cell phone usage). They also found that regular face-to-face interactions lead to higher cell phone usage. Thus, it is evident from these studies that texting is not necessarily a replacement for communication but can actually supplement in-person interactions in maintaining connections and relationships. It is important to understand that sexuality is expressed across a wide range of behaviors and interactions, and in "Relationships and Sexuality" it is mentioned that sexuality is an important component of satisfaction within a romantic relationship (Kisler & Christopher, 2008; Sprecher, 2002).

Because relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction are so intertwined, neither one causes the other--in fact, both appear to be in concordance with one another (Byers, 2005). Furthermore, relationship satisfaction is related to numerous sexual constructs, such as frequency of sex, desire, and sexual behaviors (Santtila et al., 2008). Because the cultural concept of sex tends to mean intercourse (Doan, 2004), there exists the potential for reduction of other forms of sexual behavior, such as sexting, as less important or less valid in terms of sexual expression. But sexual action besides intercourse can contribute to relationship satisfaction. The authors assert that which sexual practices to execute are to be, and should be, determined by the comfort level of the couple. Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT) particularly suggests that couples who feel more safe and accepted in their relationship are more likely to have a satisfying sexual relationship (Greenberg & Johnson,1988). When partners move towards a more secure attachment style, this increases their relationship satisfaction, comfort ability with their sexuality, openness to sexual exploration, and enjoyment of different types of sexual activities (Feeney & Noller, 2004). Furthermore, the study has found that young adult couples in loving, long-term relationships are more likely to explore a variety of sexual behaviors than those who are not in love.

The Discourses of Sexting

As technology rapidly develops and influences the way people communicate and interact with each other, so have various techniques and methods of doing so. Nicola Döring, the author of, “Consensual sexting among adolescents: Risk prevention through abstinence education or safer sexting?” did research and analysis on arguments, discourse and research surrounding the topic of sexting and offered her own conclusions on the state of this practice. According to Döring, sexting is the private exchange of self-produced sexual images via cell phone or the internet (1). It has become of strong prevalence with the rise of camera phones, and especially smartphones, and after reviewing all 50 sexting papers in the PsycINFO and PubMed databases published between 2009 and 2013 regarding their coverage of the risks and/or opportunities associated with sexting, Döring has found that that the arguments, discourse and research surrounding this topic have tended to look at sexting as a risky behavior that is mostly associated with sexual objectification and violence, to risky sexual behavior, and to negative consequences like bullying by peers and criminal prosecution under child pornography laws with 79% of these papers sharing the sentiment with this discourse of deviance (1). Döring analyzes a discourse of normalcy and attempts to bring light to the perspective, especially considering sexting will always be something of prevalence as long as we’re in an era of technology that allows people to express their sexuality and sexual desires in such a way.

Discourse of Deviance

Discourse of Normalcy The two sections above are where I still need to expand on. I’ll have way more done by 5 but this is just what I have up to this point. I’ll continue to update so by the time it’s ready to be submitted and hopefully it will be included in the draft submission

GWS 202 Proposed 5 Edits New subheading ====Sex Education Through Family Relationships==== Amy T. Schalet's book Not Under My Roof examines the role of family relationships in sex education by detailing differences between Dutch and American parents. Schalet shows that American and Dutch parents have differing views on teenage sexuality as well as differing views of individualism that inform their regulation of teenage sexuality.

Under ===Morality=== Jessica Fields has noted that while sex education techniques may vary, sex education itself seeks to regulate teenage sexuality and ensure that teens make what are considered correct sexual choices.