A 17 year-old Virginia teenager who is under investigation for sending a consensual sext to his 15-year-old girlfriend may be forced to have an erection in front of police as evidence in the case. The boy, who the Washington Post will not identify for privacy reasons, is being charged with two felonies — one for possession of child pornography (sexts from his girlfriend) and one for manufacturing child pornography (taking video of himself). He faces time in prison, as well as permanent placement on the sex offender registry. Police have already taken photos of the boy’s genitals as a part of their investigation, his lawyer told the Post. But they want to bring the teen to the hospital and inject him with something that will force an erection, to compare his erect penis to that in the video found on his phone.
I understand that sexting is silly, stupid, and in some cases illegal. Modern technology makes it surprisingly easy for people to do things without considering the ramifications, which in the case of sexting might ultimately involve being placed on a sex offender registry. Virginia, being a red state, is distressingly uptight when it comes to issues of sex and sexuality. That’s bad enough, but in the case of the unnamed 17-year-old boy, it could end up putting him permanently on the state’s sex offender registry. At least 20 states have criminalized sexually explicit messages between teens- Virginia included. In effect, these states are criminalizing sexual behavior- however benign- among teens. The wisdom behind this seems to be less important than the desire to teach children to repress and be ashamed of their sexuality. After all, you can’t really claim to be a good, God-fearing, Christian adult unless you’ve developed some adult hangups when it comes to sex.
Part of the effort to associate shame with sexuality is official behavior that’s at best silly and at worst unconstitutional. Criminalizing the expression of sexuality among teens sends the message that sex is dirty, bad, and nasty…best done only in the missionary position and only for procreation. Branding a teenager for life as a sexual predator seems nothing if not overkill…and just plain mean. Then again, what better way to send the message that sexuality is something to fear and repress?
The police investigating their case finally came to their senses and said they wouldn’t force the 17-year-old boy to have an erection for their benefit. Perhaps it was the realization that even minor children have rights under the 4th Amendment and that “unreasonable search and seizure” doesn’t begin to describe what the police were planning.
There is a perception that sexting has dangerous implications for young people. There are actual risks when it is used for cyberbullying, but teens actually overall report positive experiences sexting, and there is no indication that it leads to more “deviant” behavior. Meanwhile, the amount of manipulative sexting is on the decline.
When it comes to sex and sexuality-related issues, our culture is heavily invested in teaching children that sex is dirty and shameful- “Good girls don’t.” Too often, adults teach a version of sexuality infused with their own fears and prejudices, with the result that children grow up learning to repress sexual feelings and urges instead of dealing appropriately with them. Perhaps if parents and other adults could learn to teach children without employing shame and fear, the need for police to consider violating the 4th Amendment rights of a teenage boy would diminish.
And perhaps the police would do well to remember that the 4th Amendment isn’t optional.
