Teen blogging

Adam, over at A Violently Executed Blog, unearthed this little gem: Citizens for Literary Standards in Schools: Blue Valley Blogs. It is apparently a listing of weblogs and blogrings that the "Citizens" find questionable. All these blogs appear to be authored by area teenagers. Sayeth the "Citizens" [hyperlinks in original]:

Q: Why can blogging be so dangerous?

A: Blogrings are electronic neighborhoods. Would you allow your kids to run unrestricted in a neighborhood full of lies, profanity, occultism, pornography, sex shops, and perverts? Of course not. We move into real neighborhoods that we consider the most beautiful, safe, and best environments to raise our families. Yet, for some reason, some parents neither monitor nor question the electronic neighborhoods that their kids spend hours in every night through the Internet.

Imagine your most intimate thoughts as a teen -- your hopes, dreams, details of a date, a crush, a fight with your boyfriend, the loneliness of never having a boyfriend, your frustration over a test or teacher, or the struggles your dad is facing because he got laid off. Imagine the things you might have written in a private diary stuffed under your bed. Now imagine sharing that information with every stranger in your school, neighborhood, registered Johnson County sexual predators, and even the world! Welcome to the world of teen blogging.

Because teens are quick to reveal personal details about themselves and their friends on blog sites (personal details compromise about 90% of the blog postings), teens are also the most vulnerable to sexual predators or other individuals or groups who use type of personal information to manipulate and harm them.

Kacie Woody was a 13-year-old middle student in Greenbrier, Arkansas who began talking with "Dave" after they met in a Yahoo chat room for Christian teens. On December 3, 2002, Kacie was home alone while her father worked the night shift as a police officer. She received a phone call from Dave. What Kacie did not know was that Dave was 47, not 18. He traveled from his home in San Diego to Kacie's home in Arkansas, planning for this specific night. As he spoke with her on the phone, he stood right outside, holding a rag soaked with chloroform. Kacie was abducted, sexually abused, and killed. Teen blogs such as xanga provide a sexual predator exactly what he needs to plot his next crime. [snip]

They fail to note the obvious, namely that the Kacie Woody case had nothing to do with blogging. Furthermore, I don't believe I've ever encountered a weblog, by anyone, that contained the sort of information a criminal would need to plan a crime against that person. A far more realistic risk is that a person's boss (or high-school principal) will discover something he or she doesn't like and take some sort of retaliatory action. (The other thing about that final part that is really out of line is the simple statement of the man's age, as if the fact that he was 47 years old is proof enough that he was a psycho. That, however, is another topic.)

In any case, I suspect the whole sexual predator issue is simply a red herring, as it often is. I took the liberty of following some of the links on the "Citizen's" list, and arrived at xmiss_vietx's Xanga Site. The author of this blog is a 17-year-old girl. Here is a brief sample of her writing:

HAPPY HALLOWEEN everyone! damn wat a sucky halloween i'm havin this year! well saturday i went to a halloween party down in westport and that was a lot of fun! got drunk off my ass haha...my first college party with college ppl...saw a FINE ass asian guy..black n korean and i don't remember his name ne more haha o well! gosh i can't wait to leave for freakin college..

There are also pictures of her and her friends, and a whole mess of links to other blogs. And, just to give xmiss_vietx all due credit, I'll quote this as well, from that same blog entry:

well got my progress report card...all A's and one freakin B in physics! i'm sooooo mad! she is such a baddddddddd teacher.....i have an A in my honors pre-cal class but i don't have an A in PHYSICS? omg!

Complaining because she didn't get straight A's on her report card? I have to admit, I think that's pretty cute. And I can relate to the physics teacher thing--my own high-school physics teacher was really, really bad, and physics can be challenging. Note that she's also taking pre-calculus for honors. She seems to be a lot like I was, at that age--a very good student, with a thirst for independence and self-determination. She clearly wants to get on with things, to have some freedom from what she knows is undue interference from the adults in her life. We all felt this way when we were 17. The only thing she's doing differently from older generations is writing about it on a public website. As are a whole lot of other teenagers.

It's obvious that xmiss_vietx is no slouch in the brains and scholarship department. Based on this and some of the pictures she posts, I'd estimate that she's a very fine individual, who her parents and teachers have every reason to be proud of. Would they be proud of the writing on her blog, though, both the teenspeak writing style and the things she writes about? That, perhaps, is a more pertinent point than overblown fears about sexual predators. Note in the first quote how she writes about getting drunk on Halloween. Her writing is sprinkled with profanity, and bears virtually no resemblance to the "proper" English she's undoubtedly required to use in school. She doesn't hesitate to criticize the adults in her life, often with vehemence. Could a core objection here be one of simple propriety? A bunch of overly conservative adults, objecting to teenagers who write embarrassing things on the internet? xmiss_vietx gives her mother both barrels on her blog, and all her friends have probably read that post. So all her friends know she gets pissed off at her mother sometimes. That could be embarrassing to the mother, right? The mother who is not expected to be reading this weblog? And yet, can any of us honestly say that it would be any different if weblogs were not involved? She would still be critical of her mother, and all her friends would still be privy to that information. The objection is based on the fact that, thanks to her weblog, there is now a public record of xmiss_vietx's objections. Teenagers have never before had access to something like this: an uncensored public voice. They can now go "on the record," in their own words, and it smells of power. Adults with authoritarian tendencies are going to be strongly inclined to object.

Embarrassment and propriety aren't the only issues, either. Referring again to xmiss_vietx's writing about getting drunk on Halloween, this is precisely the sort of thing that adults do not want teenagers to be writing about. Adults are very touchy about the vision of reality that they insist teenagers be exposed to--they carefully craft an image of the way the world is supposed to be, and then firmly squelch anything that might threaten that image. This is why teenagers are so often "protected" from "harmful" content and "harmful" influences--often with the full force of the law. It's not that young people don't already know about this stuff, it's because adults want to minimize the influence of these things as much as possible--they want to minimize the social proof surrounding these activities. The problem is that it never works--if they succeed in eliminating social proof at all (an idea which I am highly skeptical of), it is merely replaced with scarcity, which is actually a more powerful motivator. Applying this to biological drives is especially stupid, since these aren't even based on social proof in the first place--teenagers will never, ever lose their interest in sex. No social incitement whatsoever is needed to spark what is a powerful and very fundamental human biological need. It is simply there, as an inherant property of being young and human (although it won't surprise me at all to someday see a type of "medication" designed to eliminate the sex drive of teenagers...for their own "protection," of course). Other issues (e.g. drinking, smoking) are more obviously reinforced with social proof, but, invariably, people will tend to be attracted to things they can't have, or to things they know they're not supposed to have. This is the principle of scarcity at work. Combine this with the natural rebelliousness of young people, and a very powerful attraction is created. This is simply a fact. It is how human beings' brains work, and cannot be changed, no matter how many rules are instituted or how much censorship is applied. The issue with blogging is that the very existence of teen bloggers makes it much more difficult for adults to suppress the truth, namely that teenagers do drink, they have sex, they do drugs, they often take risks that appear flatly stupid to older people. Exposing these truths, acknowledging them, acts to reduce the power of both the scarcity principle and rebellion against authority. We are left with social proof, but now that the truth is being told, this can easily be juxtaposed against actual evidence of harm. Furthermore, since people can openly discuss these things, they can also discuss the actual harm, in a frank and open way, which lends social proof to the anti-drug, anti-drinking, etc. viewpoints. Having social proof supporting both sides of the argument will create an atmosphere of balance, in which young people will be able to make informed, intelligent decisions. How can adults who care about their children, or their students, not want this?

Blogging, of course, is not totally free of repercussions. xmiss_vietx has pictures of herself on her blog, for example. This is something I would never dream of doing myself--I am just too paranoid, and I have more at stake than her. There's also a legitimate concern that what she writes on her blog will have consequences in the future--some potential employer or manager who happens to be a total nutjob (like one of these "Citizens for Literary Standards in Schools" people) might take offense at the content. Once you put something out on the internet, it's not in your control anymore. If it's potentially compromising, it could be used against you. This could happen years or even decades in the future. Another concern is that people often forget the very simple and important fact that anyone can read a weblog. From that link:

One young teen who is a friend of mine was shocked to learn that I knew her boyfriend had broken up with her. She knows I have a Xanga, but she was still shocked that I knew. Funny thing is, it was supposedly a secret from the boy's mom, yet it was posted on the WWW for the world to see.

This problem isn't just limited to teens--I've made this sort of mistake myself more than once. It's a very common issue on multi-forum websites like Worldcrossing. You never know who might be lurking. People have actually lost their jobs because of stuff they've posted on their blogs--they failed to consider that their boss could read a blog just as easily as anyone else. The question is, will the boss actually read it? Or will xmiss_vietx's mother actually read her blog? There is no way to know. However, the fact that "Citizens for Literary Standards in Schools" has gone through the trouble of compiling a compendium of weblogs of area high school students actually seems to make it more likely that something like this would happen! In other words, their very effort to try and fix this problem is making it worse.

In light of all of this, I think it's obvious that teen blogging safety (as well as blogging safety in general) is not a cut-and-dried issue. However, I think the best thing to do is simply to encourage some reasonable precautions, and to support the freedom of teenagers to write as they please. Any type of suppression is simply not going to help. My own precautions include not posting pictures of myself on the internet. I think posting a picture of yourself on the internet is still pretty risky, especially if it's right alongside text that might be compromising in some way. Over time, this may change at a cultural level (in fact, I hope it does--more than one science fiction author has dealt with the question of how society would change if anyone could access personal details about anyone else's life), but at present, it just seems too risky to me, looking at it from a long-term perspective (and given what I write about). The other main precaution I take is that absolutely no one who I know in real life knows how to find my weblogs. I hate this restriction, and I often find myself wishing I could tell people about this stuff. But it's just too great a risk. In fact, nobody I know in real life is even aware that I blog at all. I also take the further precaution of never using the real name of someone I know in my blogs, nor do I mention the name of the city where I live.

Perhaps I am overly cautious. Others will no doubt be less so, and, quite frankly, I would love it if they are the ones who turn out to be right. The current trends in teen blogging appear to be towards greater frankness and openness. If an entire generation embraces this trend, it is virtually inevitable that society will be forced to accommodate it, just as society has mostly adjusted to the body piercing and tattooing of the 90's generation, and the pot-smoking tendencies of most of the generations in the past 100 years. Of course, there will always be a small percentage of fuddy-duddies out there who simply will not hire a person with a nose ring or visible tattoo, and there will always be asshole corporations who insist that none of their staff smoke pot ever. Likewise, there will probably always be people who have a problem with the level of openness displayed on the blogs of today's young people. But as time goes by, their numbers will continue to decrease. In the long run, I don't think teenagers blogging about how drunk they got on Halloween or how pissed off they are at their mothers is anything to worry about.

NIPPLE ALERT!!! CIVILIZATION TO END FORTHWITH!!!

Well, friends, it's been nice knowing y'all, but it looks like this is the end for sure. Mischa Barton has inadvertently allowed her nipple to appear on television. First Janet Jackson and now this...surely the fabric of civilization cannot withstand this horrific assault! What will we say to the children?!?!?!?!?

The Article of Doom:

The producers of hit teen drama The OC are desperately crossing their fingers that eagle-eyed viewers don't complain about a scene broadcast in the States last week in which Mischa Barton inadvertently showed more than she meant to. In the scene, Mischa is wearing a negligee and gets out of bed. But one 'very interested' viewer with an unhealthy obsession with the pause button discovered that her breast briefly popped out, exposing her nipple. In the UK that would barely merit a raised eyebrow but following Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction, indecency fines in the US were increased ten-fold and anything that upsets viewers can carry a penalty running into millions. Needless to say, the clip has already been posted on the web where saddos and teenagers can decide for themselves what they can see. 'We have not received any complaints,' said a spokesman for the network although the production company behind the show has declined to say anything at all. Hoping no doubt, that this, er, molehill doesn't become a mountain.

Page 3 Girls

Something like this will never happen here in America. We are, after all, a free country...er...wait a minute...:

Britain's topless Page Three Girl turns 35

Tue Nov 15,12:25 PM ET

LONDON (AFP) - An indisputable star feature of Britain's biggest-selling newspaper The Sun, the topless phenomenon known as the "Page Three Girl," celebrates its 35th anniversary on Thursday.

The pun-laden Sun launched the idea 36 years ago on November 17, 1969, but the models appeared in wet T-shirts. Exactly a year later, the tops were peeled off and the tabloid has never looked back.

In a gamble taken by editor Larry Lamb while owner Rupert Murdoch was out of the country, Stephanie Rahn, a 20-year-old German, became the first to be pictured topless, sparking outrage from women's groups and conservatives.

But sales rocketed from 1.5 million to 2.1 million copies a day within one year, and Murdoch, the Australian-born media baron, forgot his initial fury.

Thirty-five years later, around 9,000 women have appeared topless on The Sun's page three. A group of 15 or so models appear on daily rotation, barring rare events like the deadly July 7 London bombings.

From July 8 until July 11, topless models did not appear. On July 12, a model reappeared with her hands hiding her breasts.

Today, few dare criticize a newspaper which sells some 3.25 million copies a day.

Among the critics is Labour Party MP Clare Short, a former member of Prime Minister
Tony Blair's government, who waged a parliamentary campaign in 1986 to get the page three girls to cover up.

At the time, The Sun was an ardent supporter of prime minister Margaret Thatcher's Conservatives and blitzed "killjoy" Short, launching a full-scale SOS "Save Our Sizzlers" campaign in response.

When The Sun -- always backing a winner -- switched its support to Blair ahead of his 1997 election victory, Short adopted a more conciliatory tone.

"They think it's normal and acceptable to carry daily pictures of half-naked women, which is still revolting, but I'm still glad they're supporting us," she said.

Sociology professor Peter Webb, from the University of Birmingham, said feminists are now fighting on a different front.

"Feminist movements prefer focusing now on questions like gender equality at work, or on pornography. This kind of nudity doesn't shock anymore," he told AFP.

A recent survey found that 67 percent of girls aged 15 to 19 thought that becoming a glamour model would be the ideal career.

Since January 2003, The Sun has been edited by a woman, Rebekah Wade, 37, who had battled against page three when a deputy editor, calling it bad for business.

However, her tune has also changed.

"Page three girls are intelligent, vibrant young women who appear in The Sun out of choice and because they enjoy the job. Unsurprisingly, millions of our readers -- men and women -- enjoy looking at them," she said.

Wade made headlines herself earlier this month for walloping her hardman actor husband after a night on the booze.

In a bid for sexual equality, The Sun launched the "Page Seven Fella", but readers never caught on to the idea and the greased-up pecs soon slid off the presses.

One of Wade's innovations is the News in Briefs speech bubble on page three, where the models give their analysis of the day's top story.

On February 3 2004, Zoe, 22, from London, as they are styled, professed: "You don't need to be an international diplomat to realize the world is better off without Saddam (Hussein). We should be proud of what has been achieved."

To celebrate the 35-year milestone, The Sun has launched a vote for the "breast ever" model featuring ten "stunnas" from down the ages.

[emphasis added]

And, just in case you're actually interested in this "breast ever" vote, it can be found here. (The initial page doesn't have any nude content on it--that comes in a clickable slideshow.) Also available is the Page 3 website. :)

Yahoo censorship?

I've noticed that certain pictures have a tendency to show up in Yahoo's Most Viewed Photos early in the day, and then disappear later on, as if they had never existed. The pictures are invariably shots of women in some sort of revealing clothing. The obvious conclusion is that Yahoo is censoring these pictures: shots that are a bit less revealing typically linger for several days, but the most revealing shots invariably disappear.

Here's the one from today (and it's rather nice, I must say):


What I find interesting is the audience in this picture--young boys. The picture is of a parade put on for street kids in the 'Barrio Triste' (Sad Neighborhood) in downtown Medellin in Colombia, two days ago. Apparently, folks in Latin America don't burst a blood vessel over buttocks the way we enlightened Americans do. Boys (straight and bi boys, at least) are going to be interested in women's asses anyway, so why make a big deal of it? I think if I had been able to witness something like this when I was 15, I would have been happy for a month! :)

Less guilt, more sex among young women

My apologies to the copyright gestapo, but this article is on Yahoo, which means it's guaranteed to disappear in the near future. And this stuff is too good to allow that to happen:

Young women lead the way in tearing down sex taboos: new US survey

LOS ANGELES (AFP) - Young women are leading the way in tearing down sexual taboos in North America, where teenagers are having more sex at a younger age than their parents and grandparents, a new survey showed.

Freewheeling young women in the United States and Canada first have intercourse at the age of 15, partake more in oral sex than previous generations and are far less prudish, according to a landmark new report by researchers at California's San Diego State University.

Between 1943 and 1999, the age of first intercourse dropped to 15 from 19 for females, while the percentage of sexually active young women rose to 47 percent from just 13 percent in 1943, according to the study that appears in the most recent issue of the Review of General Psychology.

"Feelings of sexual guilt plummeted, especially among young women. Attitudes toward premarital sex became dramatically more liberal over the same period," the analysis of 530 studies spanning five decades and involving more than a quarter of a million young people said.

Over the same 56-year period, approval of premarital sex increased from 12 percent to 73 percent among young women, while the figure rose from 40 percent to 79 percent among young men, according to the study.

"The change in young women's beliefs about premarital sex was enormous," said Jean Twenge, a psychology professor at San Diego State University who co-authored the report with Brooke Wells of City University of New York.

"Cultural influence was so much stronger for women than men, and that was true across behaviors. The attitudes that parents have is also an influence," Twenge said about the report that tracked "Baby Boomers," "Generation X" and the current generation of young people, whom Twenge calls "Generation Me".

The study revealed that the massive cultural revolution that swept North America in the past 30 years had contributed dramatically to the shift as movies and television shows tacked formerly taboo topics such as teenage pregnancy, abortion, sexually transmitted diseases and rape.

"This shift to more liberal sexual attitudes and behaviors, commonly deemed the 'sexual revolution', has dramatically altered American culture, especially for women," the report said.

The Baby Boomers of the 1950s and 1960s began having sex for the first time in college, while youngster of today are having sex for the first time in high school. "There's been a major shift there," Tweng said.

But, while their baby-boomer ancestors were having less sex with more people, young people now, faced with an AIDS epidemic, have more sex with fewer partners, the report indicated.

The sexual revolution has meant that sexual practices that were frequently reviled by earlier generations -- especially oral sex -- were becoming far more acceptable and widespread.

The percentage of teenagers and young adults having oral sex increased from 48 percent in 1969 to 72 percent in 1993 among young men, and from 42 percent in 1969 to 71 percent in 1993 among young women, the report said.

"Oral sex has become so popular. In previous generations, oral sex was considered disgusting. Now young people see it as another way of being sexual," Twenge said.

"It's also part of the general trend of sexual behavior moving away from marriage and reproduction and toward pleasure."

But what about the fundies? Wasn't there supposedly this big push to encourage young people to postpone sex until marriage? What about the whole abstinence education thing? I guess these have had no effect at all. Which, in my opinion, is great news.

Now why couldn't this have happened when I was in high school? ;)