Kiddie Porn

Two teen girls are charged with trafficking child pornography.

Two girls from Greensburg, who police say are "14 or 15" years old, allegedly sent nude photos to two boys who are slightly older than them (16 or 17) using their cell phones. The photos were discovered in October after one of the youngsters was caught using a cell phone during school hours—a violation of school rules—and had the phone taken away. The photos were discovered at that time—I didn't know teachers could go snooping through your cell phone, either—and turned over to police.

The general argument against child porn is that the child cannot consent to pornographic pictures of themselves being taken, which is valid. But this is going a little too far on a few counts

1) Teachers took the phone from one of the girls and looked through it without her consent (I assume she did not consent to a teacher looking on her phone, one with nude pictures of herself saved). This is a blatant invasion of privacy and, regardless of who is right, the evidence should be thrown out.

2) The girls may need a stern talking to, but you cannot charge them with anything. If they are not old enough to consent to making the porn, then they are not old enough to bare responsibility for it. Conversely, if they are old enough to bare responsibility for it, they are old enough to consent to it.

3) The recipients of the porn were teenagers, as well. Personally, I wouldn't refuse porn from a 15 year old if I were 16; hell, I would have gone out of my way to attain it (and probably tried when I was that age). Besides, there is a big difference (in my book) between a 16 year old looking at "kiddie" porn (I'm not 100% sure the girls should be classified as "children" or "kiddies") and a 50 year old looking at kiddie porn.

Overall, there was no coercion involved in this. More specifically, there was no coercion from a legal adult.

This all, of course, brings up the related question of "when should minors be considered legal adults?" Obviously society has deemed the answer for the average citizen at 18 (and 21 to drink), but this is unfair for many people. There are plenty of responsible, informed citizens under the age of 18 that are not allowed to vote, and even more who are older that have no business stepping foot in a voting booth. Generally, I'd say that people are stupid and that most of them aren't what I'd call 'adults' until they are well into their 40s.

In fact, I'd say that there are an abundance of immature 18 year olds who will sleep with anything that moves. If someone of a similar age group (16-25) picks a 16 year old over an 18 year old, there is a good chance that she (the younger one) is the more mature one. There is also the possibility that the 16 year old is just more likely to 'put out', but that brings me to my next question: what about our genetics?

After puberty, believe it or not, people want to fuck. A lot. There are a plethora of horny teenagers out there. If genetics dictate that an individual is old enough to fornicate, who's to say that they aren't? Historically, marrying a teenagers isn't super outrageous! If two teenagers give in to their horomones is it a crime? It might be if a 50 year old takes advantage of that, but not if a 17 year old does.