My sister was nearly put on the registry when she was 15 for slapping a friends butt in school who had decided she didn’t want to be friends with her anymore but hadn’t exactly communicated it. She chose to communicate that by accusing her of SA.
My sister avoided the registry by a mix of community service and counseling, but I always thought it was wild that she was at risk while under 18.
You aren’t old enough to consent to sex but you are old enough to be charged with sex crimes. Bizarre
I don’t really think it’s bizarre. Sex crimes and consensual sex are two very different things. The issue here is that some people seem to be facing consequences that last a lifetime for ‘crimes’ that seem pretty insignificant. But if someone raped another person you’d expect them to face consequences even if they are underage when committing the offence.
I think it’s pretty reasonable to say that, if someone can’t consent to sex because they’re underdeveloped, they probably also don’t know what they’re actually doing with regards to sex crimes. In that case, yeah, I think charging someone under 18 with a sex crime is bizarre.
Sexting though?
Oh sure, that shouldn’t be considered a sex crime unless an adult is manipulating a child into sending them pics, in which case only the adult should be charged with anything.
Yeah, I remember when everyone was starting to get decent camera phones and then news articles started popping up about high schoolers being picked up by the FBI for producing child porn by sending nudes, and their girlfriend/boyfriend for seeing them. There was a bit of panic, that was then promptly ignored because “it’d never happen to us”.
Can’t imagine how different someones life would be if they were tagged as a sex offender before even turning 18.
“Did you or did you not ride your big wheel within 100 ft of an elementary school? Just answer the question Timmy.”
Pretty sure that’s the biggest reason why zoomers turned into such prudes
I feel completely disconnected… do you mean that zoomers are prude compared to previous generations (I didn’t know that) and that’s because of the fear of getting caught on camera for making saucy jokes/comments?
Essentially, yes. Not wholly due to that, of course, but that’s a powerful push at an impressionable age.
Thank you
Prudes? How so
Gen Z statistically is having much less sex than previous generations. But more importantly, attitudes towards sex are much more negative. Being “ace” is cool. “Consent” has been taken to a ridiculous extreme, to the point that women (it’s always women…note the insidious underlying conservative tones) are seen as unable to consent to sex with men under almost any circumstances.
It’s an unholy union of the misogyny and repressive attitudes of the Right, combined with misandry and cancel culture of the Left. It takes some of the worst parts of both.
Plus it capitalizes on the current “pedophiles around every corner” moral panic.
Look around Lemmy and you’ll see it a lot. Being a normal horny teenager is deeply uncool right now.
Yeah I don’t think this is completely true. I’m not in Gen Z but close enough and I do see that they’re a lot more accepting of a broad spectrum of attitudes toward sex, and that includes asexuality, but I think they’re also quite accepting of people being quite the opposite of that. I think where they get more weirded out and are willing to say so is when people - and because of patriarchy, it’s almost always men, but not always toward women - make sexual comments about real people who aren’t explicitly inviting that. That’s something that has been declining in acceptability over time anyway and Gen Z just more commonly takes it a bit farther, and has a better understanding of consent. But I’ve really never seen this “women aren’t capable of consenting” thing outside of a strawman for people who want to pretend it exists by misinterpreting real criticism.
make sexual comments about real people who aren’t explicitly inviting that
Listen, if cat-calling and unwanted comments go away because of Gen Z, they’ll have my undying gratitude. As it stands I’m just waiting to age into invisibility.
It probably won’t, but I think it will get better.
No one explicitly says it, because then it could be called out as misogyny.
It’s usually dressed up as “men are sexual predators / patriarchy power imbalance / anything cishet and ESPECIALLY cishet male is just uncool / etc”
It’s not an explicit proscriptive thing. It’s just that if you are a sexually liberated straight woman, that’s nebulously Bad.
There’s definitely been a sort of… new flavor of conservatism spring up on the left. I would say it was more mid and late era millennials who started really demanding people fall in line though. Gen-Z just sorta inherited the mess. I expect there to be a rebound effect here soon, as this over-sensitivity/over-accommodation/censorship culture is unworkable long term. We’re monkeys wearing business suits inside a violent exploitive natural world. Everything we do harms someone somewhere.
How do you transfer what you wrote to people having more or less intercourse? Where is the connection?
General social dysfunction leading to people being scared of each other, or just giving up on human interaction because of the risks or frustrations we’re creating.
Without getting a signed legal consent document in advance, how do you as a young person prove that any sex act was consensual? You can’t, usually. This can breed crippling fear of real life encounters.
Can you please link to these statistics? Because I only find news articles on web sites with no statistics either, just various degrees of sensationalism without anything backing up their claims with concrete numbers or how and whom they surveyed.
Very first Google result links to several studies: https://www.newsweek.com/whats-driving-gen-zs-aversion-sex-opinion-1638228
You do know that Google results are different, for different people, right?
This also all seems to regard the US only, OP made it seem like this was a general trend.
The problem isnt the registries per se, it is that they are extremely poorly administered if children are being put on them. The criteria for adding an individual to such registries needs to be strict and with a reasonably high threshold, so that nobody gets on one for things like pissing outside, or accidental exposure, or minors sexting each other, or for accidentally having a few CSAM images that they had downloaded unwittingly etc
I had some involvement with a local registry some years back, and we only inluded adults who physically offended against minors and with a significant age difference, and adults who were actively and deliberately involved in the production and distribution of copious quantities of CSAM. Most had track records involving multiple offences and multiple victims
What does csam mean?
“Child Sexual Abuse Material”
It’s the new PC term for child porn. It actually is more accurate, to be fair.
It is just a longer term, not better.
The point is that porn is consensual. A child being abused or manipulated into production can’t consent.
The argument is that the use of “porn” implies that it’s as acceptable as regular porn, that it ligitimizes it.
Which is absolutely ridiculous. Only a pedophile would see “child porn” and think it’s just another perfectly acceptable category of porn.
But some SJW think tank probably got a grant and a few professors got published due to this.
My guess is that the churn in PC terms is similar to the way software companies always have to release an “update” or “new feature” even if their product is working perfectly fine: people need promotions, and big initiatives make them look good, and they nope out to another company before the negative effects can be seen, so future employees who are stuck with the stupid unnecessary change get the blame for its failure.
Thank you for educating me. I hate the constant churn of PC terms. It makes communication less effective, doesn’t help the problem in the slightest, and actually hampers solutions. I hope I’m not alone in this.
What you’re doing here is thinking your feelings are facts. You need to back up what you say with facts not feelings. Common sense is a feeling, it’s not an objective truth in the world.
Okay, let’s reverse your logic. Can you point to a study that points to a positive effect of changing “child pornography” to “csam” that would justify the effort of re-educating the public at large to this new terminology? Because if there isn’t, there is no reason to change. It’ll just divert effort away from solving the problem.
You’re assuming that I must take the other position because I called out your position.
They have reasons for theirs, you have reasons for yours.
But here you are again, another post, saying the exact same thing with nothing to back it up other than your feelings.
I was assuming you were arguing in good faith.
You are not alone, but in many spaces, especially those dedicated to fighting child porn, going against the hive mind means being accused of being a pedophile. Even for something as trivial as the term being used.
It’s such a toxic space.
Child Sex Abuse Material
They shouldn’t exist. If someone is a danger to reoffend they shouldn’t be let out of prision in the first place.
They need treatment and rehabilitation, not incarceration for the sake of filling beds
We do the rehabilitation/ treatment thing here. It does not work, at least long term - not surprisingly really given that it is an innate defect of laregly biological origin. The best solution is perhaps not prison per se but some kind of community where they can live somewhat normal lives but are isolated away from children and have filtered net access so there is no possibilty of their reoffending
This is what you get with a justice system focused on punishment, not justice, and a for profit penal system fixated on money not rehabilitation.
Technically everyone is capable of reoffending.
This would be the ideal solution, yes
In my state they put you on the sex offender registry if you get caught pissing outside
To my mind, this sort of thing (no pun intended) waters down the entire meaning of the thing.
We’ll eventually see this period of history as being as extreme with sex crimes as the 80s were with seeing satanic cults everywhere.
With the difference that the huge number of satanic cults people assumed and talked about did not exist.
While the huge number of sexual assaults, rapes and sexual harassment sadly does exist.
I feel people are now starting to care more about putting the lid on it, by various degrees, without there being any real progress in the number of cases. People are “more aware” didn’t really lead to more empathy or more help for sexual abuse survivors. There seems to be a bigger push into the direction “well it’s just a part of life, stop talking about it already”.
I don’t think so, especially considering that we have 8 year olds on sex offender registries which is just retarded.
The problem with rape is that many times its very hard to impossible to prove, especially when time has passed. Sometimes it’s possible with messages sent to and from, sometimes with a rape kit.
But what if there was a rape without witnesses where she was so afraid that she didn’t move, and later je “simply” claims she was a consenting partner?
What if she actually was a consenting partner and then retroactively claimed it was rape?
Things get very muddy and dicey very quickly and we’re still living in a “innocent until proven guilty” society, thankfully, but it does make rape a very complicated subject
Well, what do you propose?
Is it really so hard for you to agree we should start with “not putting 8-year-olds on the sex offender registry”?
I don’t live in a country where something like that is a thing. We don’t have a register for any type of offense.
But the person I asked wrote about rape in general. That’s why I asked. It wasn’t about a register for juvenile offenders.
The registry and minors being added to it is the topic of the OP and every comment that follows. Your supposed ignorance of the concept was exhausted as an excuse already.
Some day we’ll look at all this and laugh just as we do with that “Satanic Panic”
We can add the anti-vaping nutjobs to that list too.
Anyone screaming “think of the children!” should always be viewed with suspicion.
What’s any of this got to do with not liking vaping?
All research shows vaping to be essentially harmless, especially compared with cigarettes. But governments and private interests are pushing to get it banned, taxed, and are otherwise attacking it. All because it “harms children”.
At its most basic it’s water vapour. You know the one thing you’re not supposed to get in your lungs… water. And you can’t exactly trust what certain research shows, it’s too early in the lifespan of vaping to truly know it’s ramifications. Cigarettes used to have research having then saying they were good for you.
At the end of the day though, what’s the fucking point of vaping other than to be another addictive substance for those on the bottom to be beholden to, like an addict tax keeping their take home income as low as possible. It’s just not something the world needs, so why defend it? Have you got the addict equivalent of buyers bias or something?
Edit: okay I’ll concede on the water vapour thing. Still don’t want chemicals in my lungs past that though.
Also to say something else on vapes… I’m fine with it being a stepping stone to get people off cigarettes. The only issue with that is that it’s much more accessible to puff on a vape at any point in the day (as long as it has charge) too the point where someone might actually end up using it way more and at a more concentrated level than what they’d do with cigarettes. It’s not great.
I dont know if water is the one thing I shouldn’t get in my lungs
take pudding for example
Its not water vapor, nor is it dangerous to inhale water vapor. Vaping is not safe, but you don’t make a very good argument as to why. The person you’re responding too is also partially correct although they are wrong that vaping is completely harmless. People are often led to believe its more harmful that it truly is because health problems relating to black market marijuana cartridges were falsely attributed to normal vapes.
It’s not water vapor. It’s mainly propylene glycol and vegetable glycerin, plus flavorings and (optionally) nicotine.
Neverminding that it’s not just water vapor, fog and humidity are also water vapor, and yet we breathe them every day. The substance itself isn’t really the issue. Now, it being hot water vapor, at a higher concentration, and carrying more things than just water vapor, you have some points to stand on.
Harm reduction is also a very real thing. Sure , vaping is another thing for people to be addicted to. People are going to be addicted, almost everyone to something. I’d rather myself or anyone right now be addicted to vapes than cigs, because it’s LESS harmful, at least according to the current consensus. Of COURSE I’d people just not be addicted but that’s a looooong way off. Stepping stones are good things.
You know the one thing you’re not supposed to get in your lungs… water.
What the fuck lol that’s not how anything works
You’ve never breathed humid air before? That’s water vapor
And you can’t exactly trust what certain research shows
WAKE UP SHEEPLE
There’s water vapor in your lungs right now
They are either working for a vape company or so hopelessly addicted they can’t admit negatives.
It’s actually propylene glycol vapor and vegetable glycerin vapor.
Your lungs need water to function and also u don’t vape water vapour the fact you said that shows that u haven’t researched any of this indepthly.
Nicotine still has negative health effects, even without tar. It is not harmless. We’ve also had multiple waves of badly manufactured carts with lead contamination, chemicals known to cause lung damage, etc. It harms everyone who vapes. And everyone whose face they blow vape into. But, it at least far less obnoxious than actual cigarettes.
the bathroom at work smells much better after a vaper has used it as opposed to the guy that smokes ciggies. not even good cigs either, they smell old and crusty
No matter how good it smells, the second-hand vape makes my nose and throat burn, and makes me cough.
is someone blowing it directly in your face? vape smoke dissipates pretty quickly
Nicotine still has negative health effects
At a similar level to caffeine. Less than Marijuana and much less than alcohol. Essentially harmless.
We’ve also had multiple waves of badly manufactured carts with lead contamination, chemicals known to cause lung damage, etc.
Maybe standards regulation is the answer instead of banning? But anyway, it’s a small minority of carts that are poorly made like this.
Which bullshit and we need to fix that. I remember listening to a podcast about the woman who help create that after her son was taken. She says she regrets the program and wish she never created it because of shit like this.
The problem is that saying that you want to get rid of the registry, it’s people looking at you funny and automatically assuming that you must be some kind of creep if you have a problem with “punishing creeps”
That list isn’t going anywhere unless you educate people on just how strict the rules are for people on the list and how lenient the rules are for getting people on to the list.
Relevant stand up from Gianmarco Soresi:
https://youtube.com/shorts/jcXK-sPqsL0?si=TbKCSu5EFWIX_JMg
Sorry for the shorts link, was the easiest to find quickly for just this segment.
