DOCSLIB.ORG

Sexting) Updated July 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sexting) Updated July 2011 Self-Exploitation (Sexting) Updated July 2011 Please note that this area of law is changing rapidly. We strongly recommend checking both case law and current legislation for possible modifications to the statutes listed below, especially the status of pending legislation. ALABAMA......................................................................................................................................................4 ALASKA..........................................................................................................................................................4 ARIZONA........................................................................................................................................................4 ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 8-309 (2011). UNLAWFUL USE OF AN ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION DEVICE BY A MINOR; CLASSIFICATION; DEFINITIONS.........................................................................................................4 ARKANSAS ....................................................................................................................................................5 CALIFORNIA..................................................................................................................................................5 A. 321, 2011-12 LEG., REG. SESS. (CAL. 2011). AN ACT TO ADD SECTION 51207 TO THE EDUCATION CODE, AND TO ADD SECTION 729.14 TO THE WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS CODE, RELATING TO JUVENILES .....................................................................................................................................................................5 COLORADO....................................................................................................................................................6 CONNECTICUT..............................................................................................................................................7 CONN. GEN. STAT. § 53A-196H (2011). POSSESSING OR TRANSMITTING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY BY MINOR: CLASS A MISDEMEANOR ..............................................................................................................................7 DELAWARE ...................................................................................................................................................7 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ...........................................................................................................................7 FLORIDA.........................................................................................................................................................7 2011 FLA. LAWS CH. 2011-180 (H.R. 75). OFFENSE OF SEXTING (EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2011) ..............7 Section 1. Sexting: prohibited acts; penalties.--.....................................................................................8 Section 2. This act shall take effect October 1, 2011. ............................................................................9 GEORGIA........................................................................................................................................................9 HAWAII...........................................................................................................................................................9 H.R. 573, 26TH LEG., REG. SESS. (HAW. 2011). OBSCENITY; PROMOTING OR POSSESSING ELECTRONICALLY COMMUNICATED INDECENT MATERIAL BY A MINOR.....................................................9 IDAHO ...........................................................................................................................................................10 ILLINOIS.......................................................................................................................................................10 705 ILL. COMP. STAT. 405/3-40 (2011). MINORS INVOLVED IN ELECTRONIC DISSEMINATION OF INDECENT VISUAL DEPICTIONS IN NEED OF SUPERVISION............................................................................................10 INDIANA.......................................................................................................................................................11 H.R. 1042, 117TH GEN. ASSEM., 1ST REG. SESS. (IND. 2011). DISSEMINATION OF SEXUAL MATERIAL ....11 IOWA .............................................................................................................................................................15 L.D. 1251, 84TH GEN. ASSEM., 1ST. SESS. (IND. 2011). CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND SEXTING ..................15 KANSAS........................................................................................................................................................18 KENTUCKY..................................................................................................................................................18 H.R. 126, 2011 LEG., REG. SESS. (KY. 2011). AN ACT RELATING TO CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS.............18 LOUISIANA ..................................................................................................................................................24 LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 14:81.1.1 (2011). "SEXTING"; PROHIBITED ACTS; PENALTIES ..........................24 MAINE...........................................................................................................................................................25 MARYLAND.................................................................................................................................................25 MASSACHUSETTS......................................................................................................................................25 MICHIGAN ...................................................................................................................................................25 MINNESOTA ................................................................................................................................................25 MISSISSIPPI..................................................................................................................................................25 MISSOURI.....................................................................................................................................................25 MONTANA ...................................................................................................................................................26 NEBRASKA ..................................................................................................................................................26 NEB. REV. STAT. § 28-1463.03 (2010). VISUAL DEPICTION OF SEXUALLY EXPLICIT CONDUCT; PROHIBITED ACTS; AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE.....................................................................................................................26 NEB. REV. STAT. § 28-813.01 (2010). SEXUALLY EXPLICIT CONDUCT; VISUAL DEPICTION; UNLAWFUL; PENALTY; AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE. .............................................................................................................27 NEVADA .......................................................................................................................................................28 2011 NEV. STAT. CH. 245 (S. 277). REVISES PROVISIONS GOVERNING CERTAIN ACTS BY JUVENILES RELATING TO THE POSSESSION, TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION OF CERTAIN SEXUAL IMAGES. (EFFECTIVE 07/01/2011) ........................................................................................................................28 NEW HAMPSHIRE.......................................................................................................................................31 NEW JERSEY................................................................................................................................................31 A. 1561, 214TH LEG., 2D SESS., (N.J. 2011). CREATES DIVERSIONARY PROGRAM FOR JUVENILES WHO ARE CRIMINALLY CHARGED FOR “SEXTING” OR POSTING SEXUAL IMAGES .......................................................31 NEW MEXICO ..............................................................................................................................................34 NEW YORK ..................................................................................................................................................34 A. 8170, 234TH SESS. (N.Y. 2011). THE CYBERCRIME YOUTH RESCUE ACT ...........................................34 S. 3439, 234TH SESS. (N.Y. 2011). AN ACT TO AMEND THE EXECUTIVE LAW AND THE PENAL LAW, IN RELATION TO EDUCATING CHILDREN ON THE ELECTRONIC SENDING AND POSTING OF CERTAIN IMAGES...37 NORTH CAROLINA ....................................................................................................................................38 NORTH DAKOTA ........................................................................................................................................38 OHIO..............................................................................................................................................................38 H.R. 53, 129TH GEN. ASSEM., 2011-12 REG. SESS. (OHIO 2011). TO PROHIBIT A MINOR, BY USE OF A TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICE OR OTHER MEANS, FROM KNOWINGLY CREATING, RECEIVING, EXCHANGING, SENDING, OR POSSESSING A PHOTOGRAPH OR OTHER MATERIAL SHOWING A MINOR IN A STATE OF NUDITY .......................................................................................................................................38
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Teen Sexting THINK TWICE Before You Hit "Send"
    Teen Sexting THINK TWICE before you hit "send" ? Male and female teens IN WHAT IS sext at the 7 10 SEXTING? same rate. Sending or getting sexually explicit photos, videos, or Roughly 7 in 10 youth But females are messages through have felt some ? more pressured pressure to sext for your cellphone to sext. or online. reasons like making their romantic partner happy or getting someone's attention. HOW MANY TEENS SEXT? 15% I've sent a sext. 27% 12% I've received a sext. I've sent a sext from someone else without asking permission. WHY IS IT RISKY? Sexting can have legal Online photos Sexts can be used consequences like child live forever and to hurt you and pornography charges or can get into the be shared without having to register as a wrong hands. your consent. sex offender. HOW CAN I PREVENT IT ? "I don't think that would be good for us." Protect yourself and others by not taking sexually explicit pictures or videos. "I'd rather do other things with you." Speak up when someone makes you uncomfortable with their "I'm not ready texts or what they send you. for that yet." Respect others by not pressuring them to sext you. I RECEIVED OR SENT A SEXT. NOW WHAT? Delete the picture or video. Share your concerns with a Report a sext that was sent parent or trusted adult. to you or shared without your consent to the Cyber Tip Line. To report an explicit image or video: Call the Cyber Tip Line (800) 843-5678 or visit https://report.cybertip.org/ To remove sexual pictures and videos from the internet: Visit http://www.missingkids.com/gethelpnow/is-your-explicit-image-out-there- Visit https://cdn.netsmartz.org/tipsheets/You_Sent_A_Sext_Now_What.pdf To learn more about your safety and how to deal with sexting: Visit https://cyberbullying.org/sexting-advice-for-teens.pdf Click to Visit https://cdn.netsmartz.org/tipsheets/sexting.pdf learn more SOURCES Connect Safely.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminalization Downloads Evil: Reexamining the Approach to Electronic Possession When Child Pornography Goes International
    \\jciprod01\productn\B\BIN\34-2\BIN203.txt unknown Seq: 1 2-JUN-16 14:19 CRIMINALIZATION DOWNLOADS EVIL: REEXAMINING THE APPROACH TO ELECTRONIC POSSESSION WHEN CHILD PORNOGRAPHY GOES INTERNATIONAL Asaf Harduf* INTRODUCTION ................................................... 280 R I. THE LADDER OF CRIMINALIZATION ....................... 281 R A. The Matter of Criminalization ......................... 282 R B. The Rungs of the Ladder of Criminalization ........... 284 R 1. First Rung: Identifying the Conduct, Causation, and Harm ......................................... 285 R 2. Second Rung: Examining the Ability to Achieve Goals ............................................. 286 R 3. Third Rung: Examining Alternatives to Criminalization .................................... 287 R 4. Fourth Rung: Assessing the Social Costs of Solutions and Striking a Balance .................. 288 R C. Towards an Analysis of Child Pornography Possession ............................................. 288 R II. APPLICATION TO THE ELECTRONIC POSSESSION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ............................................ 289 R A. First Rung: The Offensive Conduct of Electronic Possession ............................................. 292 R 1. Conduct of Electronic Possession .................. 292 R 2. Harms to Children ................................ 294 R 3. Causation: Four Possible Links .................... 295 R 4. Offensiveness: Summation ......................... 302 R B. Second Rung: Criminal Law’s Ability to Reduce Harm to Children ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Harm Being Done to Australian Children Through Access to Pornography on the Internet
    Harm being done to Australian children through access to pornography on the Internet That the following matter be referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by the first sitting day in December 2016: Harm being done to Australian children through access to pornography on the Internet, with particular reference to: trends of online consumption of pornography by children and their impact on the development of healthy and respectful relationships; current methods taken towards harm minimisation in other jurisdictions, and the effectiveness of those methods; the identification of any measures with the potential for implementation in Australia; and any other related matters Who we are The South Eastern Centre Against Sexual Assault (SECASA) provides sexual assault and family violence services in Victoria within the Mornington Peninsula, Frankston, Bayside, Port Phillip, Stonnington, Glen Eira and Kingston local government areas. We also work in the Greater Dandenong, Casey and Cardinia growth corridor. South Eastern Center Against Sexual Assault and Family Violence PO Box 72 East Bentleigh Victoria 3165 Prepared by: Carolyn Worth, Manager 10 March 2016 Phone: 03 99288741 Fax: 03 99288749 Introduction “Before the invention of the Internet, children and young people curious about sexual terms, phrases or the act itself were likely to talk to each other, or older siblings about it; these days they ‘Google it’. Even phrases which seem, on the face of it, innocent can lead children towards websites hosting adult content. Research also shows that young people are prone to seeking out sexual material, to discuss with friends or for their own sexual gratification.” (The Lucy Faithfull Foundation) “Exposure to pornography is routine among children and young people, with a range of notable and often troubling effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Sexting Or Self-Produced Child Pornography – the Dialogue Continues – Structured Prosecutorial Discretion Within a Multidisciplinary Response
    The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law CUA Law Scholarship Repository Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions Faculty Scholarship 2010 Sexting or Self-Produced Child Pornography – The Dialogue Continues – Structured Prosecutorial Discretion Within a Multidisciplinary Response Mary Graw Leary The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/scholar Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation Mary Graw Leary, Sexting or Self-Produced Child Pornography – The Dialogue Continues – Structured Prosecutorial Discretion Within a Multidisciplinary Response, 17 VA. J. SOC. POL’Y & L. 486 (2010). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions by an authorized administrator of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SEXTING OR SELF-PRODUCED CHILD PORNOGRAPHY? THE DIALOG CONTINUES - STRUCTURED PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION WITHIN A MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESPONSE Mary Graw Leary* CONTENTS Introduction ......................................................................................... 4 87 I. Clarifying Definitions: "Sexting" vs. Self-Produced Child Pornography ................................................................................ 491 A. Self-Produced Child Pornography ............................................. 491 B . "Sexting" .............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Child Pornography, Pedophilia, and Contact Offending: the Empirical Research
    In the Thames Magistrates Court Case No: 011700940001 --------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF POLICE FOR THE METROPOLIS (Applicant) and LEO GARETH ADAMSON (Respondent) ---------------------------------------------------- Child pornography, pedophilia, and contact offending: the empirical research. Expert report by Dr. William Thompson PhD. Introduction I have been asked to give an opinion regarding the scientific basis, for or against, the prohibition of private possession of 'virtual child pornography' such as drawings, as opposed to photographs of children. In particular, I was asked to address two issues: (a) is there any evidence of a correlation, positive or negative, between the levels of availability of pornography and rates of contact offending; (b) is there any evidence, for or against, the use of pornography to facilitate contact offending. Given the original question, I have concentrated on the evidence concerning child pornography, and I have included other forms of evidence concerning the behavior of child pornography offenders (CPOs) that are relevant to the question. I am capable and qualified to offer an opinion having undertaken similar commissions in the past. Between 1990 and 2006, while resident in the UK, I was a practicing associate of the British Academy of Experts, and a forensic criminologist. My main areas of expertise were: child sexual assault allegations and investigative methods; the history of pornography, pornography effects studies, and related paraphilia––homosexuality, pedophilia, and sadomasochism. I supervised postgraduate research and taught courses on these subjects to undergraduates at Reading University. I was a guest lecturer on the post qualifying courses for social workers at Portsmouth University; and was frequently engaged as a lecture and/or seminar leader on these subjects at conferences for police and probation officers.
    [Show full text]
  • Sexting, Is It a Crime? We Are Here to Discuss
    RESPONSIBLE YOUTH INITIATIVE SEXTING, IS IT A CRIME? WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS • Sexting • Child Pornography • Revenge Pornography • Punishments • Information sharing on social media • What to do if you receive images WHAT IS SEXTING? • SEXTING is the exchange of sexually suggestive messages or images between minors via cell phone or computer. • When sexting involves images of children under the age of 18, it can violate state and federal laws against exploitation of minors, and teens can be prosecuted under laws intended to punish adult sex offenders. WHAT IS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY? • Sexually explicit nude photos or videos of any person under the age of 18 • This includes photos or videos of the human genitals, pubic area or buttocks, and the female breasts (except during breastfeeding) • Photographs or videos of sexual activity (with/out clothes) WHO IS GUILTY OF SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF A MINOR (AKA CHILD PORNOGRAPHY) Any person of any age that creates, possesses, or distributes photos or other media depicting sexual activity of a person under the age of 18. TAKING THE PICTURE OR VIDEO = SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF A MINOR CHARGES AND PUNISHMENT • First Degree Sexual Exploitation of a Minor • Class C Felony – 44 to 279 months of imprisonment SENDING THE PICTURE OR VIDEO = SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF A MINOR CHARGES AND PUNISHMENT • Second Degree Sexual Exploitation of a Minor • Class E Felony = 15 to 136 months of imprisonment KEEPING THE PICTURE IN YOUR PHONE, COMPUTER, OR CAMERA = SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF A MINOR CHARGES AND PUNISHMENT • Third Degree Sexual Exploitation of a Minor • Class H Felony = 4 to 39 months of imprisonment SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF A MINOR • Mistake of Age is NOT a defense • Identity of the person depicted in the photo is NOT necessary to prosecute.
    [Show full text]
  • An Examination of Rationales for the Continued Prohibition of Virtual Child Pornography
    An Examination of Rationales for the Continued Prohibition of Virtual Child Pornography James Houston Bales, Independent Scholar Since approximately 2004, a single- commonly listed as one of the main types of panel comic strip has been floating around doujinshi, or fan-created manga.3 on the internet: A man with a shocked In the West, the Tijuana Bibles of the expression on his face seated at a computer 1920s and 1930s lampooned many popular exclaims “Calvin and Hobbes?” while the characters, real and created, including the text above the image reads “Rule 34: There clearly high school-aged cast of the Archie is porn of it. No exceptions.” 1 Since its comics and other invented and popular inception as a meme, it has grown from a characters of dubious legal age.4 But setting joke about what unexpected depravities can aside the questions of taste, copyright, and be found on the internet to a full-fledged expression such images raise, focus instead phenomenon mainstream enough for South on the oft-ignored speech balloon in the Park to joke about on Comedy Central. 2 center of that comment: The content which Fanart communities have long embraced the has the cartoon man so shocked is, concept behind Rule 34, with the idea of ostensibly, a pornographic image featuring, pornographic embellishment of existing as his creator Bill Watterson describes him, properties becoming popular enough to be the child Bill Watterson never was.5 This creates a problem where Rule 34 and fan-created content in the same vein runs afoul of the law.
    [Show full text]
  • Revenge Pornography’ As a Theoretical and Political Problematic
    The transnationalisation of online sexual violation: the case of ‘revenge pornography’ as a theoretical and political problematic Jeff Hearn Matthew Hall Introduction The growth, and popularity, of the Internet is unprecedented. Internet World Stats (2020) reports that more than 59 percent of the world's population has access to the World Wide Web, and the Real Time Statistics Project (2020) live Internet statistics shows there are now nearly 1.8 billion websites worldwide. According to the Internet safety website, Enough is Enough (2019), around 30 percent of Internet content is pornography, and around 88 percent of that contains violence against women. Whilst such numbers might be contestable, there is no doubt that online pornography has mushroomed and online violence against women is endemic (Kyriak et al. 2018, Mihajlov and Vejmelka 2017). Online sexual abuse and violation concern matters of sexuality and violence, through the medium of new information and communication technologies (ICTs). In this chapter, we approach this nexus through attending to the phenomenon of what has come to be called ‘revenge pornography’, which, as we shall shortly discuss, is better conceptualised in rather different terms. Indeed, one of the more recent consequences of the relationship between pornography and the development of Internet and mobile technologies has been the borderless spread of various forms of online harassment, humiliation, abuse and violation, along with invasion of privacy and loss of reputation. In keeping with the theme of the book, we examine online sexual abuse and violation, and specifically so-called ‘revenge porn’, in relation to its transnational production, consumption, interventions to counter it, and its very existence as a new online-offline configuration.
    [Show full text]
  • Prolegomenon on Pornography Gerard V
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Journal Articles Publications 2018 Prolegomenon on Pornography Gerard V. Bradley Notre Dame Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship Part of the Computer Law Commons, Health Law and Policy Commons, and the Law and Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Gerard V. Bradley, Prolegomenon on Pornography, 41 Harv. J. L. & Pub. Pol'y 447 (2018). Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/1368 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Publications at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PROLEGOMENON ON PORNOGRAPHY GERARD V. BRADLEY' I. REEVALUATING "PORNTOPIA" .............. 447 II. HISTORY ............................... 458 A. 1954 ........................... ..... 458 1. Concerns About Comics ............... 459 2. Butler's Book and the Supreme Court as Obscenity Arbiter....................461 B. 1970 .................................. 466 1. The Commission's Findings..................468 2. Stanley's Influence ............... 472 C. 1986.............................478 1. A Changing Landscape ....... ...... 479 2. Means of Enforcement ....... ....... 481 3. The Legacy of the Meese Commission.483 III. DYSTOPIC SEEDS .............................. 487 IV. CONCLUSION ..................... ....... 497 I. REEVALUATING "PORNTOPIA" It is no longer surprising to walk along a bookstore aisle and see volumes, not of pornography, but about pornography. It is still a bit jarring, though, to encounter seriatim the likes of Pornified, 1 Pornification,2 Pornland,3 Porn.com, 4 The Porning of America,5 The PornographyIndustry, 6 and (simply) Pornography.7 * Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame; Director, Natural Law Institute at Notre Dame; Senior Fellow, Witherspoon Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • Pleasurev.1 Final
    Pornography & The Law Namita Malhotra Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 3 The Knowing yet Blindfolded ‘Gaze’ of Law upon the Profane ........................................ 6 Pornography the Trials and Tribulations of the Indian Courts ......................................... 19 Family Jewels and Public Secrets ..................................................................................... 33 Film, Video and Body ....................................................................................................... 47 Amateur Video Pornography ............................................................................................ 60 Downloading the State —Porn, Tech, Law ...................................................................... 76 The Technology Beast ...................................................................................................... 88 Vignettes for the ‘Next’ .................................................................................................. 102 Page | 2 Introduction “If you really want to be amazed at the total sightlessness of your blind spot, do a test outside at night when there is a full moon. Cover your left eye, looking at the full moon with your right eye. Gradually move your right eye to the left (and maybe slightly up or down). Before long, all you will be able to see is the large halo around the full moon; the entire moon itself will seem to have disappeared.”
    [Show full text]
  • How to Talk to Your Children About Pornography
    how to talk to your kids about porn This document and its content is copyright of Lizi Jackson-Barrett © lizijacksonbarrett.com 2021 . All rights reserved. Any redistribution or reproduction of part or all of the contents in any form is prohibited. ABOUT ME... Qualified secondary teacher since 2005 PSHE specialist - including Sex & Relationships Education Freelance emotional wellbeing educator Qualified coach Bestselling body confidence author Mum to 12-year-old twins Step-mum to two teenagers Open-minded Unembarrassable! This document and its content is copyright of Lizi Jackson-Barrett © lizijacksonbarrett.com 2021 . All rights reserved. Any redistribution or reproduction of part or all of the contents in any form is prohibited. BEFORE WE START Some assumptions and expectations... There are varied views on pornography and sex. You are free to hold your own view without judgement. Pornography may/may not be OK for adults depending on your view. It is not OK for children. Schools have an important role to play but parents have the main responsibility for preparing our children to know how to respond to pornography. None of us know everything about this subject (including me) and that's OK. There's nothing wrong with saying "I don't know". “Pornography” is defined as the portrayal of explicit sexual content for the purpose of causing sexual arousal. Today we're focusing mainly on online pornography. This document and its content is copyright of Lizi Jackson-Barrett © lizijacksonbarrett.com 2021 . All rights reserved. Any redistribution or reproduction of part or all of the contents in any form is prohibited.
    [Show full text]
  • Dutch Adolescents' Motives, Perceptions, and Reflections
    The Journal of Sex Research ISSN: 0022-4499 (Print) 1559-8519 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hjsr20 Dutch Adolescents’ Motives, Perceptions, and Reflections Toward Sex-Related Internet Use: Results of a Web-Based Focus-Group Study Suzan M. Doornwaard, Fedde den Boer, Ine Vanwesenbeeck, Carol H. C. J. van Nijnatten, Tom F. M. ter Bogt & Regina J. J. M. van den Eijnden To cite this article: Suzan M. Doornwaard, Fedde den Boer, Ine Vanwesenbeeck, Carol H. C. J. van Nijnatten, Tom F. M. ter Bogt & Regina J. J. M. van den Eijnden (2017) Dutch Adolescents’ Motives, Perceptions, and Reflections Toward Sex-Related Internet Use: Results of a Web-Based Focus-Group Study, The Journal of Sex Research, 54:8, 1038-1050, DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2016.1255873 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1255873 Published with license by Taylor & Francis Published online: 16 Dec 2016. Group, LLC© Suzan M. Doornwaard, Fedde den Boer, Ine Vanwesenbeeck, Carol H. C. J. van Nijnatten, Tom F. M. ter Bogt, and Regina J. J. M. van den Eijnden Submit your article to this journal Article views: 385 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hjsr20 Download by: [University Library Utrecht] Date: 27 November 2017, At: 08:28 JOURNAL OF SEX RESEARCH,54(8), 1038–1050, 2017 Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0022-4499 print/1559-8519 online DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2017.1255873 Dutch Adolescents’ Motives, Perceptions, and Reflections Toward Sex-Related Internet Use: Results of a Web-Based Focus-Group Study Suzan M.
    [Show full text]