Free-Range Kids

Teens Who Sext Are Child Pornographers?

There are too many teens on the registry for being horny, not horrible.

|

Texting
Darko64 / Dreamstime

Thanks to our mistaken belief that no one under 18 can have any legitimate sexual feelings—and hence any sex they've engaged in was coerced and bound to render unspeakable emotional harm—we have laws on the books like this one in Wisconsin, according to USA Today:

In 2012, state lawmakers passed into law a mandatory, minimum three-year prison sentence for possessing child pornography. Previously, judges had the discretion to order lesser penalties depending on the circumstances. That means a 17-year-old who receives explicit images from a younger friend can be sent to prison for possession of child pornography.

Gee, what a great idea. Prison solves so many problems, including reforming those incredibly deviant teens who are interested in sex.

So how's that working for the Dairy State? Here's what happened in the town of Rhinelander:

Until November, when the mother of a Rhinelander High School student turned over a nude image of one of her son's classmates that she found on his cellphone, law enforcement officials had no idea the problem was so pervasive. That single image led police to identify dozens of students, all of whom had been trading explicit images with one another on a regular basis.

"It was overwhelming how many kids were involved," said Oneida County sheriff's Lt. Terri Hook…More than 40 students were involved in distributing teen pornography, police said. Few understood that just having the photos in their possession could have landed them in prison — and on the sex offender registry for life.

Some good news, at least:

Increasingly, judges and lawmakers recognize that criminalizing every case, especially those involving common teenage behavior, might not be the best response.

Some states have passed sexting-specific statutes to lessen the penalties against minors engaged in sexting. For example, Texas has passed a law that will impose a misdemeanor on a minor's first sexting offense. Under the statute, a minor may be sentenced to community supervision if he or she completes a state-sponsored sexting education course.

(Which sort of sounds like a class on how to sext. But anyway…) Now that we're getting a handle on how normal it is for young people to send sexy images of themselves, maybe we can also start understanding that when teens have actual sex, that should not be a felony either, except in cases of coercion and rape. A high school senior with a freshman girlfriend is not a sex offender, nor is a 20-year-old with a 16-year-old partner a rapist. In fact, acting as if teens don't want to have sex until the day they turn 18—and at that point they couldn't possibly be interested in anyone younger than themselves—is just plain insane. We are criminalizing hormones.

It's time to examine our sex offender laws, and reconsider what we deem child porn. There are too many teens on the registry for being horny, not horrible.

Advertisement

NEXT: FBI Hangs Whistleblowers Out to Dry, Says Government Watchdog

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. When the nanny state and the daddy state merge, no one is safe.

    1. I thought we already had a term “big brother” for this?

      1. No, tha’ts just the Voyeur state.

      2. “Big Brother” is the Incest State.

  2. If Walker had finished college none of this would have happened.

    1. Bo approves

      1. Michelle Obama graduated Princeton with honors, and she’s really smart. Just read her thesis.

  3. That single image led police to identify dozens of students, all of whom had been trading explicit images with one another on a regular basis.

    How, exactly, were these other students identified?

    1. They were fingered.

    2. A lineup where they looked for a penis with a mole on it?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75yAH9hWrZ0

    3. I imagine they were MMS’ing the pics to one another. That’s easy to trace with warrants.

      1. That’s easy to trace with warrants when you’re a cop who collects teen porn.

    4. nude teen line-up?

  4. There are too many teens on the registry for being horny, not horrible.

    Well, you certainly can be both! Especially if NO one cared to see you naked!

  5. What’s next, Lenore? A campaign against the bodice, overskirt and polonaise? Leave my Victorian mores alone!

  6. Kids are children. Sexting is porn. Kids sending sexting, therefore, is child pornography.

    QED

    Seems legit

    1. Except I still don’t understand how someone can be tried as an adult for doing something that’s illegal only if they are not an adult.

      (Other than FYTW.)

  7. Damn. Youth is wasted on the young.

  8. ” Until November, when the mother of a Rhinelander High School student turned over a nude image of one of her son’s classmates that she found on his cellphone,”

    What kind of fucking imbecile thinks calling the cops because of a teens porn stash is appropriate?

    1. Thanks, mom!

    2. What kind of an imbecile goes digging through her child’s cellphone?

      1. On this one, I’m going to go with “good parent.”

        1. We’re going to have to agree to disagree on that. Why not just stick a homing beacon in their backpack so that you know where they are at all times?

          1. A company I used to work for had a division that made custom wireless devices. The biggest thing most people approached them for help with was designing a GPS tracker that they could use on kids.

            Literally hundreds of clients that wanted their help with this. I thought it was sad.

          2. A good, smart parent will let their child know that the potential for an unannounced inspection exists, and that they should not do or say stupid things with that device.

            Sneaking into your childs cell-phone to later confront them is the wrong way to do it.

            1. Exactly this. And if he changes the keylock on his device, its gone.

            2. Seconded.

              It’s also a lot less work than doing it the way this lady did.

            3. Thirded.

              My teen can have his privacy when he starts paying the bill on his own. Till then I reserve the right to periodically inspect his online activity

          3. What do you think the cell phone is for?

          4. I’ll amend that to go more along with what Bobarian said. I don’t have kids, I don’t want kids, but if either of those things changes I think I’m taking the “trust but verify” approach. Invasion of privacy shouldn’t be step one but if you’ve treated them as burgeoning adults and you get wind they are abusing that trust with you or endangering their future, I’m not above going to the single greatest treasure trove of likely evidence.

            I think most of us got away with (or got caught for) a ton of shit when we were this age and now it’s largely forgotten. Tech and social media ensure that’s no longer the case. More active parenting should equal less state involvement.

            Upon re-reading, that last sentence was awfully quaint.

            1. I’ve found these house rules to be effective:
              1) Don’t embarrass mom.
              2) Do not make me interact with government officials.
              3) You can do whatever you like as long as you pay for it yourself and it doesn’t violate rule #2

      2. I was at a party last weekend where the subject of monitoring kids cell phones and internet usage came up and everyone thought I was a monster for not doing any of it.

        Almost everyone at the party worked in IT and it was stunning to me how many tools they had installed to block sites and to log and alert them if their kids went to iffy sites.

        I told them I don’t even check the browser history on my kids’ computers because I trust them. Just like we don’t have a bed time for them. If they get up and go to school on time with no issues, when they turn in is up to them.

        1. “I told them I don’t even check the browser history on my kids’ computers because I trust them. ”

          I wouldn’t check the browser history on my kids’ computers because the primary thing you’re going to find is porn.

          Why would I care if my teenager is looking at porn? What teenager doesn’t, given the opportunity?

          This stuff just seems intrusive and mean. The only way people mature is by letting them mature, and I think helicopter parenting retards your kid’s maturity. Eventually they’re going to be out of your sight and will suffer the same sorts of maturation pains regardless, why not let them mature when they’re 16 rather than sending them off to college where they’ll behave like idiots since it’s the first time they were out of your sight?

          1. why not let them mature when they’re 16 rather than sending them off to college where they’ll behave like idiots since it’s the first time they were out of your sight?

            Something to be said for this.

            1. So now every kid has preacher’s kid syndrome?

              Yikes.

              1. Yes. Didn’t you? I certainly did. Got to college and went apeshit on liberty.

          2. My parents did not monitor my cell phone or internet usage either, just like they didn’t monitor what I was reading. Now smart phones didn’t exist but considering the lack of internet monitoring I doubt they would act any different now with phones.

        2. I’m going to take a wild stab in the dark and guess that you are your clique’s token libertarian.

      3. This one. And I am glad I do. I have found out about some personal issues that she evidently didn’t feel like she could talk to us about and were able to get her help for them before they got out of hand.

      4. What kind of an imbecile goes digging through her child’s cellphone?

        Seeing as how her child is most likely not paying for her own phone, it’d be more accurate to say that mom is looking through her own phone — a phone that she chooses to lend to her child. Seeing as how she probably does not pay the bill so that her dumbass child can text his buddies pictures of every girl in school who’s managed to take her top off in front of an iPhone, I’m not seeing the problem.

  9. sentenced to community supervision

    Is that anything like being put in the pillory?

    1. “It takes a village…”

  10. If smartphones / digital photography had been around when I was a teenager, it would have been an arrest an hour at the suburbs I grew up in.

    It was hard to get booze, and sometimes difficult to get weed. Sex, on the other hand, was “free”.

    1. Sex, on the other hand, was “free”.

      At least that’s what my sister said when she came through here last week!

      /old joke.

  11. I WOULD say that the article is logical, brave, and 100% correct..

    But as an adult male & father in 2015 America, my official response is “oh my! wrong wrong wrong. Individuals engaging in sex or sexting under the age of legal consent are committing a horrible, horrible felony and the benevolent state must be empowered to do anything any everything necessary to, you know, imprison the felons forever and keep all innocent pure children safe from everything wicked. Please, please do not take my children away.”

    1. TFA says one good samaritan driver rushed two shooting victims to a hospital without collecting fares. I can easily imagine some petty bureaucrat with connections to an ambulance service being upset, or the EMT union whining, or some taxi bureaucrat upset at the undocumented and unpaid ride.

      Probably unrelated, but government is so low in respect that I can still imagine the butthurt rebounding on the taxi company.

  12. I think the major problem is that the prosecutors are not executing the laws JUSTLY.

    This is why prosecutorial discretion exists. A prosecutor is supposed to look at what occurred, determine that it does technically qualify as a crime under a statute, and then choose to not prosecute because of totality of the circumstances (not ignore the circumstances that would make otherwise criminal activity innocuous).

    However, with our DAs elected to office (and oftentimes aiming for higher office), they have a motive to go gung-ho for any “easy” win, even unjust ones.

    1. Totality of the circumstances only applies when police break the law.

    2. Better yet — only allow victim or guardian prosecution. They can prioritize and hire the lawyers thay want. Insurance would pay thereasonable ones, as determined by policy and company, and if people don’t like their choices, they can change insurance companies or finance prosecution themselves.

      Get the politics out of criminal prosecution.

    3. I disagree. There’s no such thing as just prosecutorial discretion for criminal cases. Either a law is just or it isn’t.

      Arbitrary enforcement just leads to more injustice.

      The only advantage of prosecutorial discretion is acting as a gambling buffer in the face of unjust laws. However, it’s a double-edge sword because this is the reason why 98% of federal cases and similarly with state cases are plea-bargained

  13. The mom who turns over her kid’s phone to the cops because she sees an inappropriate anything on it is part of the problem here.

    This new trend of involving policing in parenting always seems to end bad for the parents who thought of it in the first place. But it seems to keep on happening.

    1. there is never a good reason to involve the po-po in anything.

    2. Exactly. Why go to the cops? Just delete the photo from the kids phone, and explain that the phone is technically “Dad’s phone” because he pays for it and his name is on the contract. Explain further that any more nude teens on the phone will be considered child porn and could jeopardize Dad’s freedom, and the family as a whole. Assuming the kid likes his Dad, a roof over his head, and food to eat, he’ll probably comply with the house rules.

      No need to go to the cops.

      1. I agree with this. Where it gets complicated is whether or not you have any duty to go talk to the parents of kid in the picture. I’d like to think the answer is yes and all that shit gets squashed in a very uncomfortable joint living room discussion but I’m terrified that the other parents immediately pick up the phone and call the police.

        1. …whether or not you have any duty to go talk to the parents of kid in the picture.

          I get your point. Personally, I’d handle it as ,”none of my business.”

        2. If they do call the cops, you are going down hard, for destroying evidence in a felony (child porn) case.

          1. This is what terrifies me.

  14. What was the whole point of criminalizing kiddie porn that would be non-criminal if it were of adults? It was justified on the basis of the consent of the subjects not being authentic or legitimate. But how can that possibly be extended to cases where the pornographer is also the subject? It’s clearly just a means of exploiting a loophole in the constitutional rulings limiting censorship to obscenity?a loophole which works only if the rationale & application of the statute not be looked at simultaneously.

    1. It was justified on the basis of the consent of the subjects not being authentic or legitimate

      Sexual maturity beginning at 18 was an invention of government. Most cultures and the US up until modern times treated some early post-puberty year–basically early to mid-teens as adulthood, basically something that was not far off of biological maturity.

      However, they raising the age. And the age of consent was finally raised to 18 in 1984 purely in order to make prosecutions easier This is actually officially in Congressional record:

      https://reason.com/archives/201…..h-them-jus

      But as Hamilton points out in his sentencing statement, there is no indication that Congress had this rationale in mind when it raised the age of consent in 1984. Instead the congressional record indicates the reason for the change was that prosecutors usually are not able to track down the women depicted in explicit photos to verify their ages. With the cutoff at 16, prosecutors were having problems winning convictions if the girls depicted in the images showed any signs of puberty. Raising the age to 18, a House committee reported, “would facilitate the prosecution of child pornography cases and raise the effective age of protection of children from these practices probably not to 18 years of age, but perhaps to 16.”

      1. Now imagine a congressman or state legislator proposing reducing the age to 16 (let alone 13).

        what do you think the result would be?

  15. OT: Ron Paul has gone batshit insane

    Ron Paul
    The Chris Kyle Verdict and The Mistreatment of Our Veterans

    If Eddie Ray Routh had never served in the military, I’m of the opinion that he would probably not have killed anybody. He would not be imprisoned for life and Chris Kyle would be alive today. Much of the blame should lie with our foreign policy of interventionism and the VA’s faulty reliance on psychotropic drugs for treating the guilt associated with preemptive wars.

    http://t.co/hx0FlSK3s1

    1. Paul is saying that Routh wouldn’t have PTSD if he hadn’t gone to war. I don’t see how that is particularly insane.

      1. Sure, because the US is run amok with PSTD suffering veterans looking for someone to shoot in the back.

        1. You really should try responding to what people write instead of the voices in your head.

          1. “If Eddie Ray Routh had never served in the military, I’m of the opinion that he would probably not have killed anybody.”

            Isn’t what you said and it doesn’t need your interpretation
            .
            Speaking of voices.

            1. The whole story is that Kyle was taking Routh to the gun range to help him with his PTSD. And then at the range Routh snapped. It is reasonable to infer that Paul is saying that had Routh never served then that situation would have never occurred.

        2. Even if it is one soldier in 10,000 that has a PTSD breakdown, that is a cost of war and should be taken into account before we go guns blazing into some foreign country

      2. Because Routh was never in any combat and was never diagnosed with PTSD as far as I know.

        1. My understanding is that Kyle was taking Routh to the gun range to help him with his PTSD. At least that’s what a Marine coworker told me, and I believe him. Don’t know if he was in combat, but if he had PTSD then it’s a fair assumption.

          1. Routh made a claim of PTSD, but there is no evidence he actually had it or was diagnosed, and his military records indicate he was never in combat.

            1. Whatever. Like I said to my Marine coworker, it seems to me to be unwise to take someone claiming to be suffering from PTSD to the gun range.

              1. it seems to me to be unwise to take someone claiming to be suffering from PTSD to the gun range.

                Yup. Especially when Kyle and his buddy had already had a conversation about Routh being “straight up nuts”.

  16. Gotta say I’m kinda disappointed that my “teens+sext” search string just brought me back here.

    1. How many places did you stop along the way?

    2. And are you on a work computer?

      (HR bangs on Hugh’s door)

  17. Sexting is stupid (yes, that’s a synonym for child). What these kids aren’t thinking of (because they’re in love (or lust, as the case may be) is the amount of trust they’re placing in the person they send this stuff to. Do you trust him to not be sharing pictures these pictures of you with the whole school?

    How about tomorrow when you catch Bobbie making out with Jenny in the band room, and you have a horrible fight and break up? Do you still trust Bobbie not to send those pictures around to the whole school? How about 10 years from now? Also, even if Bobbie is a paragon of virtue, how good is his security? Ask the victims of the Fappening about internet security and nude photos.

    1. I don’t understand people freaking out over nude pictures. Women have tits. Men have dicks. I think most people know that. What shocking new information is being unveiled?

      1. What shocking new information is being unveiled?

        In my case, it’s genital warts.

        1. Well, those are pretty common too.

      2. Women have PUSSIES. There, fixed it for you. If you really believe that women don’t send pussy pics to men, and you have to substitute in tits (which are not equivalent parts), then you must be from some other planet.

    2. What’s the big fucking deal? (In this case I mean “fucking” both as an intensifier and literally.) So people see you. How does that hurt? It’s just in your head.

      Sex is good. It makes people happy. Making people, including yourself, happy is nothing to be ashamed of; if anything, it should be something to be proud of. What’s wrong with people knowing about times you were happy and/or making someone else happy?

      1. Now try telling parents it is okay for their 16-year-old (let alone 13-year-old) children to bare their nakedness for public viewing.

        How do you think they would react?

  18. Don’t take any pictures that you don’t want the world to see.

  19. “Law enforcement officials had no idea the problem was so pervasive. That single image led police to identify dozens of students, all of whom had been trading explicit images with one another on a regular basis.”

    Oh, we got trouble!
    Right here in River City!
    With a capital “T”
    and that rhymes with “P”
    and that stands for phone!

    It was harder to distribute back in the day, but I’m thinking the neighbor’s kid and I broke into the attic and found his old man’s Playboy and Penthouse stash form the ’70s when we were about 10 or 11.

    Taking pictures of ourselves and sharing them wasn’t possible though.

    Not sure I understand what motivates kids to do that. Maybe it’s like Christian fundamentalist kids listening to Black Metal and scribbling pentagrams everywhere. Maybe doing whatever our parents fear the most has the attraction of forbidden fruit.

    1. Taking pictures of ourselves and sharing them wasn’t possible though.

      Polaroid?

      1. Too expensive on my allowance. One shot would have been a week’s money.

  20. 18 being an absolute cutoff for AOC is moronic. A much more favorable approach is to have some sort of age difference exception. Sex between individuals under 18 by someone more than four years older…sort of thing.

    And 18 seems high considering not so long ago people (perhaps some of our grandparents) were marrying at 14-16.

    Not sure how anyone who voluntarily sends a nude photo of themselves could be a child pornographer? That’s idiotic on it’s face.

    1. Not sure how anyone who voluntarily sends a nude photo of themselves could be a child pornographer? That’s idiotic on it’s face.

      Yep. Just as all prostitution is now considered to be sex trafficking. Puritans get really weird when it comes to anything remotely sexual.

      1. Or seeing any bit of control threaten to slip from their grasp.

        Statists are control freaks, pure and simple.

    2. It’s completely stupid. The sex laws and the drinking laws in this country are complete paternalistic nonsense that infantilizes people and ill-equips them to be responsible with sex and drinking, respectively.

      1. That’s the unstated goal, I am convinced. Anyone who thinks government (ie, them) knows best surely isn’t going to surrender control voluntarily just because the subjects^Wcitizens^Wvictims passed some arbitrary age.

  21. our mistaken belief that no one under 18 can have any legitimate sexual feelings[…] we’re getting a handle on how normal it is for young people to send sexy images of themselves

    Most teenagers don’t have a particularly good grasp on the ramifications of sexual relationships. If you are lucky as a parent and have communicated yourself well, they will understand the medical and biological issues at play and take your word on how sexual relationships can emotionally compromise the people in them (not to be confused for actual understanding or sexual/emotional maturity) — that is what you are there for.

    Unless you look forward to having your child star in “16 and Pregnant”, I can’t see how letting your kid go in blind and make decisions based solely on their FEEEEEELS is anything less than irresponsible parenting. You are the parent in this relationship, not their friend and it is your responsibility to figure out how best to transmit your superior knowledge and experience rather than simply ceding the field because teenage fuckups are “normal” and leaving it at that.

    Bringing the state into this is inappropriate and sheerly idiotic. A good parent will not need to bring the state into it, but will not brush this off as no big deal. Giving a space for failure is an important part of parenting, but so is protecting your child and others from your kids’ bad decisions when those decisions are out of their pay grade.

  22. For example, Texas has passed a law that will impose a misdemeanor on a minor’s first sexting offense.

    How ’bout Texas just leave underage sexting up to the parents and if the parents aren’t concerned the state can still mind its own goddamn business. Unfortunately, satiating the autocratic hand-wringing of Baptists requires that the private sex lives of consenting minors be raided by the state.

    BUT, please-oh-please leave our religions alone. No god-forsaken state has any goddamn business fucking with our religious Fritos!

    1. It is not just Baptists who support kiddie porn laws.

      Imagine what would happen to a legislator who proposed reducing the legal age to 16 (let alone 13)?

      1. Funny you should mention Baptists! A church I was attending was all abuzz when the preacher’s 17 yo son had a broken condom incident with a girl of the same age! Nowadays, sex is not a “sin” left, only, to the unsaved! My step son recently complained he broke up with a girl because he would not have sex with her. Way back in the 60s, it was hard to get girls to have sex! Things have changed! Still, I started with a 14 yo girl when I was 16. I can remember many times when the sex laws could have gotten me in plenty of trouble! People that delay telling their kids about sex and birth control are playing Russian Roulette with their kids’ lives!

        I became a conservative right winger in 1971, but still see the need for making sure the girls are protected from getting pregnant. That including education about, reliable, birth control. There are a few in whom abstinence will happen. I just would not put it to chance that it would be my kids!

    2. The Baptists I know are uncomfortable about sex – and especially their kids and sex – but they aren’t monsters that want to sacrifice their children to Moloch. In fact, age of consent laws were originally not intended to protect children from sexual predators, but from the state. “Fornication” (sex outside of marriage) was formerly not just a sin but also against the law, and the age of consent laws protected children from prosecution.

      It is only in the last 40 years or so that we have established the precedent of harsh legal penalties for children’s sexual experimentation – despite centuries of Christian dominance in society. I believe a much better case can be made that our current societal madness can be associated with 2nd wave feminism, in which there is a presumption that men are predators hunting children and that children could not possibly be interested in a sexual relationship with a man, leading to the presumption that all such relationships are abusive and all such sex is rape.

  23. Being a kid caught with nude photos and put through whatever administrative or legal process is going to be far more traumatic than the pictures are to anybody. Obviously these laws create victims rather than protect them.

    1. Thank you for writing something that was not completely insane. That was refreshing. 😉

      1. Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut.

      2. Of course, even though ‘Tony’ admits that the worst thing about sexting is that the government will ruin your life if it catches you, he still wants MOAR GOVERNMENT.

        1. More in some places, less in others.

      3. You’re damning with faint praise. Totally agree with Tony about this.

        1. I was just so shocked I didn’t really know what to write.

          I completely agree with Tony on this particular issue.

    2. But they’re still moral because democracy, right?

      1. That’s what ‘Tony’ actually believes, yes.

        1. He also believes that people have no rights, so locking somebody in a cage for texting a picture is at worst a morally neutral act.

      2. Are you pretending not to understand my point of view or do you really not?

  24. Are you arguing for NO age of consent? Are you insane? Do you have any children?

    1. D-

  25. What I would like to know is at what point did merely being uncovered come to be regarded as “pornography”? Apparently, puritanical hysteria over sex (and nudity, which I guess is worth also being hysterical about since generally people are nude when they have sex) is never going to go away. What bunch of stupid fucking, hang wringing ass hats Americans are.

    1. It’s not just Americans. In some ways Canadians & British are worse (but also in some ways better). And WTF is it in countries where women have to cover their face?!

  26. the mother of a Rhinelander High School student turned over a nude image of one of her son’s classmates

    Mom had now jolly well better be a registered sex offender.

    1. Yeah, how does that work?

      1. It’s a no-win situation for the parent. If you delete the photo, you’re guilty of destroying evidence of a crime. If you do nothing, you’re guilty of felony conspiracy. If you show the image to law enforcement, you’ve admitted guilt to possession child porn. If you send the image to law enforcement, you’ve made a copy of it, and you’re guilty of trafficking. You’re at their mercy no matter what you do.

        1. “a feature, not a bug”

        2. “But if you cooperate with our sting operation, we’ll let you off with probation…”

  27. Pedobear? approved

  28. Brad Spangler? approved!

  29. Putting aside the dumb comments that seem to prevail on this site. I think this is a well reasoned article on the subject. I guess adults forget when they were young and had normal sexual feelings they acted out on before they were 18.These laws mostly affect people who are just a few ages apart.

  30. I’ve made $64,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it. Heres what I’ve been doing,,,,,,,,,
    http://www.work-mill.com

  31. acting as if teens don’t want to have sex until the day they turn 18 is as silly as believing they shouldn’t have a glass of wine or bottle of beer until the day they turn 21.

    Life is not black and white, and the lawyers and politicians need to stop trying to treat it as if it were!

  32. You know, things weren’t bad back in the stone age when we kids had to get naked face-to-face.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.