Intentionally ephemeral photos

[Jim Pascoe]

Well, Marc, once again, you have a point... up to a point

However, historical comparisons aside, the question for here and today is "do we really want our pre-teens and early teens to send around pictures of their boobs, crotches, butts and genitalia?" If we, as a society say it is ok, then all the power to Snapchat. But for the time being, it is actually illegal.

I come from Europe, and I grew up seeing naked and semi-naked bodies on beaches and in public parks, including children and teens. The last encounter of that kind was, surprise, surprise, in the capital of the (still) puritanic nation, your home town (I suppose), Washington DC, around the obelisk, in the middle of the day (she was 18+ though).

I also grew up with David Hamilton's books. So you can hardly call me a prude. And yet I think that sexting among children is highly inappropriate and sends a wrong signal.

I sympathise with your view Slobodan, but think Marc is being more pragmatic about this.  And anyhow, with the supposed onslaught of porn and young people being given a false idea of what a real bodies and sex are like, perhaps sending pictures of themselves 'warts and all' to their friends is a counterbalance!  The important thing is giving kids the education and confidence to understand and control what they are doing.  For years people have been able to photograph themselves and give those private pictures to others - now it is just easier and quicker.  A long time ago if we wanted to communicate with another person miles away we would sit down, write a letter and post it - giving time to think and reflect on what we were saying.  Now we can bang off an e-mail or text in seconds without chance to think, which sometimes leads to misunderstandings.  It is up to all of us to learn how to cope with new technology - it is almost inconceivable that we will go backwards unless there is a consensus.  Certainly the law, as Isaac alluded, is not going to do it.

Jim

[Rob C]

But you don't need sex for bullies to find outlets.

They have always found outlets for the need and it appears they are like hyenas: they work only in packs.

But indiscretion isn't found only in teenagers - seems most folks have the ability to tumble into their own version of honey trap, be it sex, money, booze or anything else.

Rob C

[Rob C]

"I also grew up with David Hamilton's books. So you can hardly call me a prude. And yet I think that sexting among children is highly inappropriate and sends a wrong signal."


Now that's interesting; I managed to get Dreams of Young Girls from the local library when it was new, (60s or 70s?) and years later on a trip back to Scotland I bought his book, Twenty Five Years of an Artist, and I ended up bowdlerizing the damned thing just so I wouldn't have to dump it. Why?

I think the answer to that is age, the times and too much information.

I saw no exploitation at all in Dreams when I saw it; none in his postcards, and then years later, when Twenty Five was mine, I read his commentary and he mentioned something to the effect of finding himself very partial to very young girls and their metamorphosis into older girls. It struck a very unpleasant note for me, and I saw the work with a new eye that I don't enjoy. I knew the models looked quite thin, but I hadn't realised they were also too young. Maybe it was being a parent and grandparent of girls that ruined it for me, but I don't think it needed that; I think it was probably that the later book included stuff that might not have passed into print years before. We may have been permissive at the time - openly instead of in secret as before - but that didn't mean licence for other things.

Yes, American popular mores can be odd to European eyes. We were in Florida many years ago and the two models and my wife were on the beach, lying topless, the two girls to get a better tan and my wife because she had no work to do until we got shooting again. She already had a good tan. Anyway, a group of American ladies walked past and were loudly and vocally insulting of the three girls, throwing out hurtful (and inaccurate) references to whores and fried eggs etc; we were amazed. America, the world capital of pornography. Wow, hypocricy, anyone?

Rob C

[jjj]

Oh no, young people are doing things that older folk disapprove of. Quick send for the moral police. Isn't the teenager's primary role to do something that upsets the previous generations? 

Besides seeing as you can easily screengrab anything on a phone, just like a computer, snapchat's ephemeral nature was always a bit suspect (though I think you do get informed if that happens).
And that was before the Snapchat app got hacked.

[Rob C]

Oh no, young people are doing things that older folk disapprove of. Quick send for the moral police. Isn't the teenager's primary role to do something that upsets the previous generations? 
Besides seeing as you can easily screengrab anything on a phone, just like a computer, snapchat's ephemeral nature was always a bit suspect (though I think you do get informed if that happens).
And that was before the Snapchat app got hacked.

Good heavens no! It's to have the time of one's life, and for free!

The previous generation almost never enters the scene: it's only visible when it's time to collect the pocket money. Or the dole. Or both. And in some countries, to borrow the car and ask if the tank's full.

Rob C