Do you know what social anxiety is? You may have some clue, the name alone seems pretty self explanatory, right? What I bet you didn't know was that social anxiety/social phobia is the third largest psychological problem in the United States. It's true. According to socialphobia.org and this information that they have provided, social anxiety affects 15 million Americans and, almost 90% of the time, these Americans are misdiagnosed. It seems that health care professionals and us average Joe Schmoes without a PhD do not, on the whole, understand or know much about social anxiety.
The important thing to note is that there is a difference between social anxiety/social phobia and simply feeling nervous. It is perfectly normal to feel nervous in certain situations such as a first date or before an exam. In fact, this is an important part, I think, of being human. These "first date jitters" or the nervousness we get before a test help keep us on our toes. With social anxiety/social phobia, though, every day interactions with people can cause extreme self-consciousness and fear in a human being. Simple tasks like calling a business on the phone about an electric bill or even going to the grocery store can cause a person with social anxiety to panic. There are many symptoms of social anxiety, as found here on mayoclinic.com. Some of which include: fearing that others will notice you look anxious, anxiety that disrupts your daily work and life routines, avoiding situations where you may be the center of attention, as well as blushing, profuse sweating, nausea and confusion. Now these symptoms may seem like the normal feelings of just being nervous, right? We have all felt these feelings at some time or other but imagine, if you will, feeling these feelings before doing something completely normal that we do every day such as using a public restroom or even making eye contact with someone. This is social anxiety.
It can be crippling. It is part of our lives, and sometimes our jobs, to do things such as make small talk or interact with strangers. If you can imagine having such an intense fear of these situations that you avoid them at all costs then you can know, to an extent, what it's like to suffer from social anxiety. It can make a person feel less than adequate, to say the least.
The good news is that there are ways to live with social anxiety and still have a somewhat normal life. This helpguide.org website provides us with some techniques in reducing general anxiety (which can make dealing with social anxiety more manageable) and those include: avoiding caffeine, drinking in moderation and getting adequate sleep. There are other, more intensive, treatments for social anxiety which include therapy and medications. While these techniques do not serve as a cure for social anxiety/social phobia, they have been proven affective in the treatment and management of social anxiety/social phobia.
It is important that we understand social anxiety. Not only because it's effecting so many American people but because so many people who are misdiagnosed do not realize that they have social anxiety and that it is indeed a common problem. For support and to further research the topic, you can go here.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Friday, March 19, 2010
Passive/Aggressive
You know what I hate? I hate when conflict. I am so non-confrontational that it's insane. I will let people walk all over me. I will push my passive nature to the limit just to avoid conflict with a roommate or a friend. I will side step any issue; sweep it under the rug neatly and hope it doesn't rear its ugly head at a later date. It just seems easier sometimes.
Sure there are pros to being passive. Some people like a passive person. Some people mistake this as "easygoing" or, often times "good listener" and will tell you anything about themselves that you may or may not actually care about. They will reveal intimate personal details that, many times, I'd rather not know. But do I take the time to stop them? Do I tell them "actually buddy, I'd rather not hear about what this girl did to...oh..you're going to tell me anyway, huh?" No, of course not, because I wouldn't want to interrupt my friend. Maybe I'm the only person that he can talk to about this particular issue. So, I put his feelings before mine and listen to awful, graphic stories that I am probably still too young to be hearing.
There are most certainly cons to being passive, too. All of these repressed feelings of frustration and resentment can only be bottled up for so long. Eventually they must all come to the surface in an often times surprising explosion of anger and hostility. Whoever happens to be in the path of this verbal destruction? Take cover! There will be months of repressed anger fired your way, whether it was your fault or not. The other cons include, getting involved in long-term relationships that you never wanted in the first place (I know from firsthand experience) and taking shifts at work so other people can just have a free Saturday (because you can't say no...because, ya know, you're passive).
Seems like being aggressive would be so great. I could finally say "no!" to all those people I've wanted to say no to for so long. I could finally say what I think! But I guess the grass is always greener on the other side. There are probably many aggressive people who wish that they could just keep their mouths shut when, instead, they blow up.
I guess part of growing up and maturing is learning how to be passive without being a doormat. How to get what you want without being overly aggressive. And the biggest part of growing up? I guess that's figuring out how to be at peace with the fact that yeah, sometimes you're passive but deep down, you're a good person.
Sure there are pros to being passive. Some people like a passive person. Some people mistake this as "easygoing" or, often times "good listener" and will tell you anything about themselves that you may or may not actually care about. They will reveal intimate personal details that, many times, I'd rather not know. But do I take the time to stop them? Do I tell them "actually buddy, I'd rather not hear about what this girl did to...oh..you're going to tell me anyway, huh?" No, of course not, because I wouldn't want to interrupt my friend. Maybe I'm the only person that he can talk to about this particular issue. So, I put his feelings before mine and listen to awful, graphic stories that I am probably still too young to be hearing.
There are most certainly cons to being passive, too. All of these repressed feelings of frustration and resentment can only be bottled up for so long. Eventually they must all come to the surface in an often times surprising explosion of anger and hostility. Whoever happens to be in the path of this verbal destruction? Take cover! There will be months of repressed anger fired your way, whether it was your fault or not. The other cons include, getting involved in long-term relationships that you never wanted in the first place (I know from firsthand experience) and taking shifts at work so other people can just have a free Saturday (because you can't say no...because, ya know, you're passive).
Seems like being aggressive would be so great. I could finally say "no!" to all those people I've wanted to say no to for so long. I could finally say what I think! But I guess the grass is always greener on the other side. There are probably many aggressive people who wish that they could just keep their mouths shut when, instead, they blow up.
I guess part of growing up and maturing is learning how to be passive without being a doormat. How to get what you want without being overly aggressive. And the biggest part of growing up? I guess that's figuring out how to be at peace with the fact that yeah, sometimes you're passive but deep down, you're a good person.
Diets: Do's and Don'ts.
We've all heard of these famous diets. Atkins, The Zone, South Beach Diet. And chances are we've tried at least one of these, if not another diet that we heard about from some various source or another. Diets are like ex lovers. We cheat on them, we break up with them, we tell ourselves that after this one binge, we'll go back to them. Most of the time, we never do. The word diet itself seems to have a negative connotation. In reality, a person's diet, is just the food that that person habitually eats. Yet in our strangely obese, yet weight obsessed culture, we've taken a simple word, "diet", and given it a twist. A meaning. A connotation.
According to this eatingdisorders.org article, dieting is the number one risk factor for developing an eating disorder and approximately 68% of 15 year old girls are dieting. The question I'm left with is why? Why diet when it's proven that these "crash" diets do not work. All these diets do is restrict one's eating. Most of the time leaving a person feeling groggy and hungry. Not only this but dieting can reduce the body's metabolic rate, which would defeat the purpose of the diet, yes?
This CNN article about the dangers of dieting sheds light on what should be avoided when dieting such as skipping meals. Skipping meals is always a bad idea as it leaves one feeling hungry and much more tempted to splurge their daily caloric intake on a high calorie snack. Instead try having many small, healthy meals throughout the day. Your metabolism stays up and you won't have to spend all day feeling hungry.
What about detox diets? They seem like a good idea, flushing your body of toxins and excess fat, but in reality detox diets, which are skyrocketing in popularity thanks to extremely skinny actresses and models, are dangerous for your health. This MSNBC article warns of the unpleasant side affects of a detox diet such as frequent liquid bowel movements and blood sugar problems. To me, this just does not seem to make sense. The whole purpose of a detox is to emerge healthier, not deficient in important vitamins and liquid.
The logical, and safe way, to diet includes drinking plenty of water, exercising and consuming the right amounts of foods high in vitamins and proteins and low in bad fats and carbohydrates. Also, avoiding foods with ingredients that are unrecognizable in nature helps. Not only is it better for your insides but it just tends to make you feel better, knowing what you're putting in your body. A diet that works shouldn't be a diet that starves you or places extreme limits on your eating habits. The human body needs fats, proteins and sugars to thrive. We need carbohydrates for energy. So denying yourself those based upon the rigid rules of some of these crash diets makes no sense and, ultimately, you'll end up breaking up with another bad diet and be left feeling unsatisfied.
According to this eatingdisorders.org article, dieting is the number one risk factor for developing an eating disorder and approximately 68% of 15 year old girls are dieting. The question I'm left with is why? Why diet when it's proven that these "crash" diets do not work. All these diets do is restrict one's eating. Most of the time leaving a person feeling groggy and hungry. Not only this but dieting can reduce the body's metabolic rate, which would defeat the purpose of the diet, yes?
This CNN article about the dangers of dieting sheds light on what should be avoided when dieting such as skipping meals. Skipping meals is always a bad idea as it leaves one feeling hungry and much more tempted to splurge their daily caloric intake on a high calorie snack. Instead try having many small, healthy meals throughout the day. Your metabolism stays up and you won't have to spend all day feeling hungry.
What about detox diets? They seem like a good idea, flushing your body of toxins and excess fat, but in reality detox diets, which are skyrocketing in popularity thanks to extremely skinny actresses and models, are dangerous for your health. This MSNBC article warns of the unpleasant side affects of a detox diet such as frequent liquid bowel movements and blood sugar problems. To me, this just does not seem to make sense. The whole purpose of a detox is to emerge healthier, not deficient in important vitamins and liquid.
The logical, and safe way, to diet includes drinking plenty of water, exercising and consuming the right amounts of foods high in vitamins and proteins and low in bad fats and carbohydrates. Also, avoiding foods with ingredients that are unrecognizable in nature helps. Not only is it better for your insides but it just tends to make you feel better, knowing what you're putting in your body. A diet that works shouldn't be a diet that starves you or places extreme limits on your eating habits. The human body needs fats, proteins and sugars to thrive. We need carbohydrates for energy. So denying yourself those based upon the rigid rules of some of these crash diets makes no sense and, ultimately, you'll end up breaking up with another bad diet and be left feeling unsatisfied.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Text Talk: It's robbing u of basic knowledge. lol.
You know what I hate? Text talk. And it is rampant these days. It seems I receive at least one text message a day with "lol" in it. Or "g2g!" or "u" instead of "you." People use the letter "b" instead of simply adding ONE MORE freaking letter to make a real word. And I am fed up with this!
Now yes, I feel that it is important to know the differences between "your" and "you're" and "there", "they're" and "their." Also important is realizing when it is appropriate to use "to", "too" and "two" but these seem like common sense problems that can be fixed with a little bit of grammatical, and spelling, knowledge. It's this damn text talk that really gets my goat.
Not only is it lazy but it's irritating. In my opinion, it makes me think that the person sending me a text message is either lazy or illiterate. I will always take the time to spell out the words I'm using to get my point across because it's the right thing to do. When we get into the habit of abbreviating everything, it becomes simply that; a habit. This habit is harmful. It's important, in my opinion, to have a basic knowledge of spelling and appropriate grammar. When we ignore this because we don't feel like typing out words, it can be harmful.
If I were someone's boss and I read an email from my employee in which they used the phrase "lol" or they used "u" instead of "you" I would be disgusted. This is not professional behavior. Now I'm not saying that just because one uses text talk in every day life means that that person uses text talk in a professional setting, but it is possible to slip in said text talk when it has become habitual.
I also realize that text talk is mostly used in a casual conversational setting, mostly with friends and relatives, but still it's gotten to a point where it's taking over! A high school English teacher once told me that she had to actually tell her students that "lol" is not an acceptable word or phrase to use in a formal English paper. I was baffled upon hearing this. And, according to this teacher, it hasn't just happened with one student. Many students are using text talk in English papers that they are handing into teachers. To this I say, we need a change!
With the use of spell check we've become totally lazy when it comes to spelling and grammar. Maybe that's okay because technology has basically taken over and rarely do we need to turn in a formal document that hasn't been spell checked, but still it's important that we have some sort of knowledge of spelling and grammar because what if, god forbid, one day we won't have the use of spell check? And Microsoft Word doesn't always correct every error. Blasphemy you say! Well it's true. Sometimes there are errors that are not caught by spell check. In these cases, it's up to us to know what we're trying to say and to get our point across in an educated manner. So, bring an end to text talk! Or at least try to curb your text talk. Next time you feel tempted to type "u" instead of "you", go the extra mile. Say what you really mean. Show your friends that you are still capable of basic spelling. For my sake.
Now yes, I feel that it is important to know the differences between "your" and "you're" and "there", "they're" and "their." Also important is realizing when it is appropriate to use "to", "too" and "two" but these seem like common sense problems that can be fixed with a little bit of grammatical, and spelling, knowledge. It's this damn text talk that really gets my goat.
Not only is it lazy but it's irritating. In my opinion, it makes me think that the person sending me a text message is either lazy or illiterate. I will always take the time to spell out the words I'm using to get my point across because it's the right thing to do. When we get into the habit of abbreviating everything, it becomes simply that; a habit. This habit is harmful. It's important, in my opinion, to have a basic knowledge of spelling and appropriate grammar. When we ignore this because we don't feel like typing out words, it can be harmful.
If I were someone's boss and I read an email from my employee in which they used the phrase "lol" or they used "u" instead of "you" I would be disgusted. This is not professional behavior. Now I'm not saying that just because one uses text talk in every day life means that that person uses text talk in a professional setting, but it is possible to slip in said text talk when it has become habitual.
I also realize that text talk is mostly used in a casual conversational setting, mostly with friends and relatives, but still it's gotten to a point where it's taking over! A high school English teacher once told me that she had to actually tell her students that "lol" is not an acceptable word or phrase to use in a formal English paper. I was baffled upon hearing this. And, according to this teacher, it hasn't just happened with one student. Many students are using text talk in English papers that they are handing into teachers. To this I say, we need a change!
With the use of spell check we've become totally lazy when it comes to spelling and grammar. Maybe that's okay because technology has basically taken over and rarely do we need to turn in a formal document that hasn't been spell checked, but still it's important that we have some sort of knowledge of spelling and grammar because what if, god forbid, one day we won't have the use of spell check? And Microsoft Word doesn't always correct every error. Blasphemy you say! Well it's true. Sometimes there are errors that are not caught by spell check. In these cases, it's up to us to know what we're trying to say and to get our point across in an educated manner. So, bring an end to text talk! Or at least try to curb your text talk. Next time you feel tempted to type "u" instead of "you", go the extra mile. Say what you really mean. Show your friends that you are still capable of basic spelling. For my sake.
Prom
Ah prom night. It's a right of passage for most high school seniors, right? The giddy excitement of picking out your dress. Finding a date who will look good next to you in the pictures. Getting just the right corsage or boutonnière. This is something that many American teenagers start thinking about around this time of year. But, what about gay teenagers? There are many, many schools that do not allow same-sex prom dates.
According to this Sex, Etc. article, this is not a new issue. In the year 1980 teenager, Aaron Fricke sued his Rhode Island high school for not allowing him to bring his boyfriend to prom. Many schools' defense is that they are worried that same sex couples may be harmed at prom and prom is meant to be safe for every student. While this is a valid point, isn't this kind of behavior, this side stepping of the homophobia issue, only reassuring the homophobic teenagers that their behavior is valid? Wouldn't it be a great example of acceptance to allow same sex couples to attend their prom?
Although it is not a new issue, there are new cases of this popping up quite often. Just today in fact I saw this USA Today article about a Mississippi high school canceling its prom after a lesbian student requested that she get to bring her girlfriend, also a student at the school. The school claims that they have chosen not to have prom this year because it is a distraction to the educational process. The school did encourage the public to plan their own prom-like activity for the high school students, but does this make their blatant homophobia okay? Now, Constance McMillen, the student who wanted to bring her girlfriend to prom, is worried about how angry the other students will be at her. Did the school take this into consideration before making the hasty decision of canceling prom altogether? And what sort of message are they sending? If a gay couple wants to come to prom, well then we just won't have a prom!
In Utah, after many same sex prom date controversies, there is now a law in effect protecting the rights of same sex teenagers to attend their prom. You can read about this law here.
While homophobia is probably always going to be a problem, just as racism and ageism will always be a problem, there are actions we can take. There are examples of acceptance and tolerance that we can provide, starting in school. While I can understand that administrators want the prom to be safe and fun for everyone, it is their duty to make sure that students are safe from harassment at prom. Under federal law, it is their duty to stop the harassment of gay students.
It makes me sad when schools like the Mississippi high school I mentioned earlier simply affirm for their intolerant students that it is okay to feel a prejudice against gay students. Every high school student should feel safe at his or her school. They should feel protected. They should feel free to be who they are. That's not the kind of example that we're setting when we ban same-sex couples from attending an old, teenage right of passage.
According to this Sex, Etc. article, this is not a new issue. In the year 1980 teenager, Aaron Fricke sued his Rhode Island high school for not allowing him to bring his boyfriend to prom. Many schools' defense is that they are worried that same sex couples may be harmed at prom and prom is meant to be safe for every student. While this is a valid point, isn't this kind of behavior, this side stepping of the homophobia issue, only reassuring the homophobic teenagers that their behavior is valid? Wouldn't it be a great example of acceptance to allow same sex couples to attend their prom?
Although it is not a new issue, there are new cases of this popping up quite often. Just today in fact I saw this USA Today article about a Mississippi high school canceling its prom after a lesbian student requested that she get to bring her girlfriend, also a student at the school. The school claims that they have chosen not to have prom this year because it is a distraction to the educational process. The school did encourage the public to plan their own prom-like activity for the high school students, but does this make their blatant homophobia okay? Now, Constance McMillen, the student who wanted to bring her girlfriend to prom, is worried about how angry the other students will be at her. Did the school take this into consideration before making the hasty decision of canceling prom altogether? And what sort of message are they sending? If a gay couple wants to come to prom, well then we just won't have a prom!
In Utah, after many same sex prom date controversies, there is now a law in effect protecting the rights of same sex teenagers to attend their prom. You can read about this law here.
While homophobia is probably always going to be a problem, just as racism and ageism will always be a problem, there are actions we can take. There are examples of acceptance and tolerance that we can provide, starting in school. While I can understand that administrators want the prom to be safe and fun for everyone, it is their duty to make sure that students are safe from harassment at prom. Under federal law, it is their duty to stop the harassment of gay students.
It makes me sad when schools like the Mississippi high school I mentioned earlier simply affirm for their intolerant students that it is okay to feel a prejudice against gay students. Every high school student should feel safe at his or her school. They should feel protected. They should feel free to be who they are. That's not the kind of example that we're setting when we ban same-sex couples from attending an old, teenage right of passage.
Friday, March 5, 2010
The movies.
I've been giving a lot of thought as to what I want to write my second blog post about this week. I've decided that the topic will be the sad lack of good cinema these days.
It wasn't that long ago that we had fantastic movies coming out. "Crash", one of my all time favorite movies came out in 2004. "Crash" had a fantastic ensemble cast and a wonderful message about racism and how it can take many different forms. It was dramatic and funny, not to mention incredibly powerful. "Babel" was another movie with a great cast full of intertwining stories and characters that I thought about long after the movie was over. A few more years back, in the year 2001, my all time favorite movie (and cult classic) "Donnie Darko" was released in theatres. "Donnie Darko" is one of those movies that I catch something new every time I watch it. It's much better in the second, third or even fourth viewing. In the year 2000 we had the movie "Traffic", a fantastic and gritty film about drugs. Then, in 1999, perhaps one of the best movies in American cinema was released. This movie was "American Beauty." With fantastic performances by Kevin Spacey, Annette Benning and Chris Cooper, the Coen brothers gave us one of the most amazing pieces of cinematic achievement that we had seen in a long time, in my humble opinion.
It seems that we've been sadly lacking really good cinema since these films. Sure, there have been some decent movies to hit theatres. In 2006 we saw "Little Miss Sunshine", which showed us that Steve Carell is extremely capable of playing more than just the lovable buffoon, Michael Scott in the American version of "The Office." In 2007 we had a couple of films that stuck out, to me, as decent including "Dan in Real Life" and "Superbad." It just seems that American cinema has gone downhill steadily in the past few years.
We have awful "horror" films like the "Saw" series, which is really just capitalizing on the fact that today's teenagers like to see more gore than actual horror. In my opinion, a horror film should be disturbing like "The Shining" or, for a more recent example, "Pans Labyrinth" which was actually a Spanish film. These days, though, filmmakers are more concerned with how much blood and guts they can get away with. We seem to have lost the art of the subtle, off-camera scares. If you want to watch something that is very disturbing, although not classified as a horror film, "Little Children" will stick with you for a long time after you are finished viewing it.
I suppose I miss the days of "The Big Lebowski" and "Fargo." The films we are offered these days seem to cater more to a generation who does not know what "good" cinema is really all about. It isn't corn syrup blood dripping out of a bloody stump on some guy trying to escape from a hostel. Or sugary sweet rom-coms like "Valentine's Day." Good cinema is about a viewing experience which allows a viewer to connect with the characters. A good movie should tug on the heart strings. A good movie should make me smile, it should make me cry. Hell, it should cause some sort of emotional reaction. It should stimulate my mind, not my gag reflex. Let's hope someday soon American filmmakers will get it right.
It wasn't that long ago that we had fantastic movies coming out. "Crash", one of my all time favorite movies came out in 2004. "Crash" had a fantastic ensemble cast and a wonderful message about racism and how it can take many different forms. It was dramatic and funny, not to mention incredibly powerful. "Babel" was another movie with a great cast full of intertwining stories and characters that I thought about long after the movie was over. A few more years back, in the year 2001, my all time favorite movie (and cult classic) "Donnie Darko" was released in theatres. "Donnie Darko" is one of those movies that I catch something new every time I watch it. It's much better in the second, third or even fourth viewing. In the year 2000 we had the movie "Traffic", a fantastic and gritty film about drugs. Then, in 1999, perhaps one of the best movies in American cinema was released. This movie was "American Beauty." With fantastic performances by Kevin Spacey, Annette Benning and Chris Cooper, the Coen brothers gave us one of the most amazing pieces of cinematic achievement that we had seen in a long time, in my humble opinion.
It seems that we've been sadly lacking really good cinema since these films. Sure, there have been some decent movies to hit theatres. In 2006 we saw "Little Miss Sunshine", which showed us that Steve Carell is extremely capable of playing more than just the lovable buffoon, Michael Scott in the American version of "The Office." In 2007 we had a couple of films that stuck out, to me, as decent including "Dan in Real Life" and "Superbad." It just seems that American cinema has gone downhill steadily in the past few years.
We have awful "horror" films like the "Saw" series, which is really just capitalizing on the fact that today's teenagers like to see more gore than actual horror. In my opinion, a horror film should be disturbing like "The Shining" or, for a more recent example, "Pans Labyrinth" which was actually a Spanish film. These days, though, filmmakers are more concerned with how much blood and guts they can get away with. We seem to have lost the art of the subtle, off-camera scares. If you want to watch something that is very disturbing, although not classified as a horror film, "Little Children" will stick with you for a long time after you are finished viewing it.
I suppose I miss the days of "The Big Lebowski" and "Fargo." The films we are offered these days seem to cater more to a generation who does not know what "good" cinema is really all about. It isn't corn syrup blood dripping out of a bloody stump on some guy trying to escape from a hostel. Or sugary sweet rom-coms like "Valentine's Day." Good cinema is about a viewing experience which allows a viewer to connect with the characters. A good movie should tug on the heart strings. A good movie should make me smile, it should make me cry. Hell, it should cause some sort of emotional reaction. It should stimulate my mind, not my gag reflex. Let's hope someday soon American filmmakers will get it right.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Sexting.
To say that we, in America, are heavily reliant on technology is a massive understatement. Imagine going a day without your cell phone glued to your hip. Imagine going a day without *gasp* checking your email! Or worse, your Facebook! How on earth would we manage to get through? I honestly do no know. I am just as dependent on technology as the rest of the world. If I lost my cell phone and all those programmed phone numbers, I'd probably have a panic attack. Technology is a great tool at our fingertips. It's extremely helpful and has brought us forward in leaps and bounds. Yet, like most things in life, it also has it's drawbacks.
We have less face-to-face contact with people. We've lost the personal touch in many aspects of our day to day lives. We've also made it incredibly easy to be cyber stalked. Or, for those of us who have a lot of free time, it's easier to do the cyber stalking. It has also made it easier for predators to get to children. Just look at shows like "To Catch a Predator." Twenty years ago, we wouldn't have dreamed of seeing a show like that on tv. Now we have Chris Hansen intimidating pedophiles in a model home. Must be a Wednesday.
This leads me to the point of this week's first blog: the negative impact of technology on our future generations. Namely, sexting. Now you may be asking yourself "exactly what is sexting?" Well, according this CBS news article, sexting is the act of sending nude pictures via cell phone. It's become quite common in teens. In fact, information can be found in this article that states that about 20% of teens admit to sexting. Did your jaw just drop? Because mine certainly did. A few months ago I had never even heard of sexting. Now I'm reading that 20% of teens these days are sending nude pictures to others via text message.
Of course there are obvious consequences involved with sexting. One is that, should a teenager choose to "sext" there is now a nude photograph of that teenager in circulation. We all learned long ago that teenage boys cannot be trusted. We must assume that, if a teenage girl sends a nude picture of herself to a teenage boy, he won't be the only one to see it. That's exactly what happened to this teenager, Jesse Logan. She ended up committing suicide over the torment she received after sending a nude picture to her high school boyfriend.
Not only are there social ramifications to sexting, but legal ones too. According to this CNN article, Philip Aplert will now spend years on the sex offender list for forwarding nude pictures of his then 16-year-old girlfriend to several of her friends and family members. Sexting is considered child pornography, and that's because it is child pornography. Sexting is done by regular teens and famous ones as well. Several nude pictures of a High School Musical star began to circulate a couple of years ago. Kids these days look up to these celebrities and look at the example they are setting!
Sexting is not only dangerous but incredibly stupid. And while technology has put is forward leaps and bounds, it has also set us back just as much with the dangerous consequences of the easily accessible Mutli-Media Message phenomenon known as sexting. I think we should all stop and think about what kind of world we're facing where any high school student can become a pornographic sensation overnight. Our world is a crazy place.
We have less face-to-face contact with people. We've lost the personal touch in many aspects of our day to day lives. We've also made it incredibly easy to be cyber stalked. Or, for those of us who have a lot of free time, it's easier to do the cyber stalking. It has also made it easier for predators to get to children. Just look at shows like "To Catch a Predator." Twenty years ago, we wouldn't have dreamed of seeing a show like that on tv. Now we have Chris Hansen intimidating pedophiles in a model home. Must be a Wednesday.
This leads me to the point of this week's first blog: the negative impact of technology on our future generations. Namely, sexting. Now you may be asking yourself "exactly what is sexting?" Well, according this CBS news article, sexting is the act of sending nude pictures via cell phone. It's become quite common in teens. In fact, information can be found in this article that states that about 20% of teens admit to sexting. Did your jaw just drop? Because mine certainly did. A few months ago I had never even heard of sexting. Now I'm reading that 20% of teens these days are sending nude pictures to others via text message.
Of course there are obvious consequences involved with sexting. One is that, should a teenager choose to "sext" there is now a nude photograph of that teenager in circulation. We all learned long ago that teenage boys cannot be trusted. We must assume that, if a teenage girl sends a nude picture of herself to a teenage boy, he won't be the only one to see it. That's exactly what happened to this teenager, Jesse Logan. She ended up committing suicide over the torment she received after sending a nude picture to her high school boyfriend.
Not only are there social ramifications to sexting, but legal ones too. According to this CNN article, Philip Aplert will now spend years on the sex offender list for forwarding nude pictures of his then 16-year-old girlfriend to several of her friends and family members. Sexting is considered child pornography, and that's because it is child pornography. Sexting is done by regular teens and famous ones as well. Several nude pictures of a High School Musical star began to circulate a couple of years ago. Kids these days look up to these celebrities and look at the example they are setting!
Sexting is not only dangerous but incredibly stupid. And while technology has put is forward leaps and bounds, it has also set us back just as much with the dangerous consequences of the easily accessible Mutli-Media Message phenomenon known as sexting. I think we should all stop and think about what kind of world we're facing where any high school student can become a pornographic sensation overnight. Our world is a crazy place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)