One of the driving forces behind the latest push for Internet censorship seems to be a former live webcam performer (aka a "camwhore") named Justin Berry, who made quite a bit of money charging clients to watch him do things in front of his web cam.
Now that Berry (with lots of MSM hype) claims he's reformed, the former live performer still performs live as a new kind of celebrity -- a sort of moralistic scold condemning his former life and demanding that the government crack down on the evil Internet which seduced him. (Internet "seduction" is a familiartheme these days, I'm afraid . . .)
While my ultimate worry is that such a crackdown might lead to every web site (possibly including this blog) having to carry some sort of government seal of approval, I'd like to stick to the more narrow issue of what it is that constitutes a victim.
Like it or not, being a victim -- especially a high-profile victim -- can be a very rewarding experience. Americans have plenty of empathy, and these things sell newspapers and drive network ratings. So, if someone is able to cast himself as a victim in such a way as to elicit strong public appeal, he can pretty much write his own ticket. Whether the victim really is a victim is secondary.
The recent hoopla over the still-anonymous "escort" who claims she was raped by Duke University's La Crosse team is a good example of this. We still don't know whether the crime even took place, but because of the nature of the media hype, the woman will always be able to claim that she was a victim. (Of rich people, or sex, or hype, or something.) And no matter what happens, there will of course be a book deal, an Oprah appearance, the rest of it.
I know I haven't been put in charge of these things, but it just goes against my sense of individual responsibility to allow someone to claim he was a victim of others when he deliberately engaged in the conduct said to constitute victim status. If I drink too much, it is not the responsibility of the Seagram distillery, and if I run in front of an SUV, it is not the fault of General Motors. Similarly, if Justin Berry deliberately sold images of himself, that is not the fault of the Internet for being there any more than it would be the fault of Nikon if he sold glossy photographs of himself on the street.
This in no way excuses the conduct of people who violated the law by buying his pictures. They committed crimes -- just as in a drug transaction, both the dealer and the user are legally culpable. I just can't see any of them as victims, because (absent a showing of compulsion) they are doers, participants, actors, not innocent bystanders.
A webcam does not invade my home unless someone else installs it surreptitiously and does not tell me. Therefore, in logic I cannot be a victim of it, any more than I can be a victim of my own gun. Or my own blog.
Or can I?
To play Devil's Advocate, am I missing something here?
Or is this another example of the hopeless split between communitarian and libertarian thinking?
posted by Eric on 04.24.06 at 07:40 AM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/3528
Comments
Who was this 'adult acquaintance' who hosted Justin's site when he was underage? Was it the internet that 'seduced' him, or the adult who facilitated his 'seduction?'
A teenager can be "facilitated" by being given a phone, a computer, a car, or a web site.
I suspect there might have been a few issues related to parental supervision as well. (According to Wikipedia "His father became aware of the source of Berry's funds and they collaborated on a new site titled mexicofriends.com.")
Lest people misunderstand my argument, I neither condone nor defend the conduct of Justin Berry's clients in any way. During the time he was under the age of consent, his clients were pedophiles, and deserved punishment for their crimes.
But just as murder is still murder even if it is committed by a juvenile, prostitution is still prostitution.
Stupid kid plus abusive adults. Never a good combination. We forget how immature people in their early twenties can be. Teens are even worse, and as long as we insist on treating them as adults they will continue to get into situations like this.
The price of well behaved kids is eternal supervision.
It sounds weird but these are the good problems. A surfeit of riches and few con-men have made it possible for kids to be kids in their late teens, and for the worst kind of cons to be taken at face value.
Really it is like having a national obesity problem- it does suck, but it is so much better than the alternate extreme!
I agree that Justin Berry was a victim of himself. He knew he was doing something that was wrong. He took measures so that his mother would not find out what he was doing, such as renting an apartment where he could carry on his web porn business with even greater privacy. Only the most hysteria-afflicted child protection advocates could argue that he was totally ignorant of the nature of his activities, a completely innocent victim of evil pedophiles. The thing that hasn't been said in anything I've read about Justin so far is that the likely reason he got caught in this mess to begin with is that he had a need to be an exhibitionist. He likely enjoyed appearing nude and "performing" for his webcam audience. The money was gravy. Fetishes or paraphilias don't just suddenly appear when a person hits 18 years of age; they appear long before that at the start of one's sexual awakening. And God knows there are plenty of legal adults out there indulging their fetishes online even as I type! So before we start blaming webcams or MySpace or the entire Internet universe for the poor judgement of one kid who found it titillating to expose himself publicly, let's be honest with ourselves and identify the real causes behind the behavior at issue. Let's not insult the vast majority of kids out there who go on MySpace, chat with strangers, and even transmit their images via a webcam without crossing any legal or moral line. And, yes, mom and dad, your little 13-year-old probably can experience sexual arousal just like you when you were his or her age. Try being more frank in your discussions of sexuality with your children and perhaps they will learn how to direct their newly-found feelings toward healthy, socially-condoned outcomes.
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Don?t bang your head!
Who was this 'adult acquaintance' who hosted Justin's site when he was underage? Was it the internet that 'seduced' him, or the adult who facilitated his 'seduction?'