Child exploitation: For children, by children.

VALPARAISO [Indiana] -- A 12-year-old boy and a 13-year-old girl each face charges after allegedly "sexting" each other.

Each is charged with child exploitation and possession of child pornography, for sending nude photos of themselves over their cell phones. ^[1]

Let me just stop right there. WHAT IN THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH INDIANA?

Okay, so two kids did some naughty things just like kids have been doing for years. And sure, new technology has made for a slightly different variation on that. However, I don't really see a difference. Of course, I also have a problem with hypocritical laws as to the double-standards of sex and pornography.

I've never understood why in the same state it's legal for a 16-year-old to have sex with somebody of any age (Maryland), it's not okay for them simply to photograph themselves in the nude or to look at photographs depicting such. I'm pretty sure that actually having sex is a bit more "dangerous" than looking at pornography or even simply photographing yourself nude.

Admittedly, I may be wrong in this instance (it would be a rarity), but last the time I checked, pornography itself can't lead to pregnancy or STDs. But, meh, I digress, as that's not the main point of this rant.

The main point is this: Ignoring the "child pornography" charges completely, how can these children BOTH be in trouble for EXPLOITING one another? In all sane realms of reality, if two people are using one another in some way, it's not exploitation, it's a mutually beneficial relationship. It's like they don't even understand the meaning of the word.

Indiana: Invest in dictionaries... I hear California might have some spares these days.

1. Source

Dictionaries: Now for ages 10 and up.

What do the words fuck, sex, bitch, cunt, twat, dick, cock, nigger, spic, faggot, shit and piss (and some others I can't think of right now) all have in common? To my knowledge, they're often considered impolite (some are downright offensive), they've all been in various dictionaries for many, many years, and none of them have sparked enough of an outrage to get a dictionary taken out of a school system... Until now.

...Sort-of!

"Oral sex": We all know what it is, how it's done (okay, so maybe some of you aren't experts on how it's done, but whatever), and most of us probably enjoy it. But, were you aware that there are some people that don't even enjoy the existence of the phrase itself? Take, for instance, Menifee Union School District officials. In a strange vote of idiocy, they decided to pull Merriam Webster's 10th edition from the shelves of all schools in the district.

And why would they do such a thing, seemingly so randomly? A parent complained to them that their child's precious little eyes read the horrible phrase, "oral sex" in the dictionary. And why was this so bad? They actually had to go through the horror of explaining to their child what it meant. Oh, gosh, they had to be... PARENTS!

And the stupidity doesn't end there, either! Just at this gem:

..."[it's] a prestigious dictionary that's used in the Riverside County spelling bee, but I also imagine there are words in there of concern," said Randy Freeman...^[1]

Oh, my! It's used in a spelling bee! A SPELLING BEE, FOLKS! A SPELLING BEE! DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE PRESTIGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE HONOR OF BEING USED IN A SPELLING BEE? WELL, YOU OUGHT ONLY HAVE FANCY WORDS, APPROVED OF BY PARENTS EVERYWHERE (much like Kix cereal). You can't have naughty words and phrases used in the real world in a dictionary used in a SPELLING BEE... Spelling bees are the most serious of business!

But don't worry, this ban is just temporary... For now!

School officials will review the dictionary to decide if it should be permanently banned because of the "sexually graphic" entry, said district spokeswoman Betti Cadmus. The dictionaries were initially purchased a few years ago for fourth- and fifth-grade classrooms districtwide, according to a memo to the superintendent.

"It's just not age appropriate," said Cadmus, adding that this is the first time a book has been removed from classrooms throughout the district.^[2]

As it turns out, the real world - you know, the one we live in - isn't actually age appropriate for a lot of people of a lot of ages. But guess what? It's the one we live in. And since these phrases exist, it's probably best for kids to understand them instead of being mistaken thanks to some playground urban legend or silliness.

And I'm not alone in this, at least one person agrees:

"It is not such a bad thing for a kid to have the wherewithal to go and look up a word he may have even heard on the playground," father Jason Rogers told local press. ^[1]

Jason Rogers, keep up the good work! Randy Freeman, please go an die in a fire... Maybe the one from the book burning that seems inevitable if you have your way.

1. Source
2. Source