Peer pressure driving sexting

THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE

"...if boys refrained from engaging in the activity they were labeled ‘gay’ or could be ostracized from the peer group. " Image: manley099/iStockphoto Both young men and women experience peer pressure to share sexual images via the new phenomenon of ‘sexting’, preliminary findings from a University of Melbourne study has found. ‘Sexting’ is the practice of sending and receiving sexual images on a mobile phone.  The study is one of the first academic investigations into ‘sexting’ from a young person’s perspective in Australia. The findings were presented to the 2011 Australasian Sexual Health Conference in Canberra. Ms Shelley Walker from the Primary Care Research Unit in the Department of General Practice at the University of Melbourne said the study not only highlighted the pressure young people experienced to engage in sexting, it also revealed the importance of their voice in understanding and developing responses to prevent and deal with the problem. “The phenomenon has become a focus of much media reporting; however research regarding the issue is in its infancy, and the voice of young people is missing from this discussion and debate,” she said. The qualitative study involved individual interviews with 33 young people (15 male and 18 female) aged 15 – 20 years. Preliminary findings revealed young people believed a highly sexualized media culture bombarded young people with sexualized images and created pressure to engage in sexting. Young people discussed the pressure boys place on each other to have girls’ photos on their phones and computers. They said if boys refrained from engaging in the activity they were labeled ‘gay’ or could be ostracized from the peer group. Both genders talked about the pressure girls experienced from boyfriends or strangers to reciprocate on exchanging sexual images. Some young women talked about the expectation (or more subtle pressure) to be involved in sexting, simply as a result of having viewed images of girls they know. Both young men and women talked about being sent or shown images or videos, sometimes of people they knew or of pornography without actually having agreed to look at it first. Ms Walker said ‘sexting’ is a rapidly changing problem as young people keep up with new technologies such as using video and Internet via mobile phones. The Australian Communication & Media Authority reported in 2010 that around 90 percent of young people aged 15-17 owned mobile phones. “Our study reveals how complex and ever-changing the phenomenon of ‘sexting’ is and that continued meaningful dialogue is needed to address and prevent the negative consequences of sexting for young people,” she said. Editor's Note: Original news release can be found here.

Unbelievable!!

This is the case of 1 photographer taking photographs of a 2nd photographer.
The following photos were taken by Hans van de Vorst from the Netherlands at the Grand Canyon, Arizona .
The descriptions are his own.
The identity of the 2nd photographer is unknown.

Look carefully at the photographer.
He has a camera, a tripod and a plastic bag, either on his shoulder or in his left hand.
Only his right hand is available to grab the rock and the weight of his stuff is a problem.
He landed low - his right hand and right foot are slipping.
At this very moment, I took this shot.
He then pushed his body against the rock, waited for a few seconds, threw his stuff up on the flat rock , climbed up and walked away, presumably to a bathroom to change his shorts.
I know I had to change mine - and I was only watching !

 

Beyond Growth: Is investing in infrastructure good for people’s well-being?

SUBMITTED BY JORDAN SCHWARTZ 

In our last blog, we asked whether it is possible for an infrastructure investment in Latin America and the Caribbean  to hit the triple win: spur growth, aid societal well-being, and help the environment.

One young woman, on the World Bank Facebook page, posted this plea : "We as citizens have to demand these types of investments from our governments: modern roads, clean energy, investments that create employment without contaminating." ("Nosotros como ciudadanos tenemos que exigir ese tipo de inversiones a nuestros gobiernos: vías modernas, energía limpia que dé trabajo y no contamine.")

I take this as a signal that we should move beyond growth, so...

We explored the first linkage and found that the bonds are indeed strong between infrastructure investment and growth, both short-term and long-term. And while growth is crucial to poverty alleviation, growth can’t do the job alone. A more holistic view of development will help us to judge whether investment in infrastructure is good for society’s well-being. From both an economic and a personal perspective, we want to know if an investment is helping to include its users in the economy, to bring opportunity or advancement to its households.

One proxy of inclusiveness is income equality, and the research shows that, yes, larger stocks and higher quality infrastructure help improve the distribution of wealth. Although income equality tugs at our sense of fairness, as a sole indicator of inclusiveness it feels very indirect and somewhat impersonal. That is, money ain’t everything. For an investment to be truly inclusive, it needs to do something… to provide a service that makes people healthier and happier.

Although the application of Economic Impact Evaluation to the infrastructure sectors is in its infancy, we can see some linkages between infrastructure and development outcomes without stretching our imaginations beyond the evidence. We can say, with some confidence, that:

• Better public transport networks get us more reliable access to job markets and create cities with less congestion and pollution.


• Better water and sanitation mean less schistosemiasis (snail fever), diarrhea and infant health problems. 


• More reliable electricity means more time to study and learn, and the freedom to work out of the home.

All season roads mean better access to markets, schools and hospital… and to cheaper goods.

But does the average citizen paying fuel taxes, utility bills and bus fees think about these indirect impacts?

If not, what do the people want from infrastructure investment? It turns out the answer is tautological: We want the infrastructure service that the infrastructure is supposed to provide. During public consultations for a national Infrastructure Strategy in El Salvador not too long ago, an elderly man in the village of Villa Belen expressed this better than I could.

“The truth is that nobody would move to this town, because there is not a single basic service here. Those who are here now are truly desperate…we are on a boat with many problems, but if we abandon it, we will drown. If somebody would offer me money, I would take it and leave everything here. There is no light, no water, no basic services.”

Time after time, when the poor are asked what their priorities are, it is the infrastructure service itself that surfaces to the top.

The “well-being” of the poor is improved when they have household sewerage connections and running tap water they can trust. Period. Their lives are better when they have reliable electricity and when they can get get to a good road easily. Period. City dwellers want better public transport because they want better public transport. It means less waiting, less stress, more time for the important things in life. Studying the impact of infrastructure services is crucial to design and to investment prioritization.

But we don’t need regression analysis or experiments with control groups to grasp the truth of the importance of infrastructure services for the poor. They tell us themselves and, ultimately, this is the link between infrastructure and inclusiveness.