At first, I thought so too. But then I thought about it some more and I think I get it. I'm having a hard time putting it into words, but it seems to me that sexting is problematic because it can so easily be shared with anyone and everyone. If a 16 year old consents to sex, unless there are cameras, there's a reasonable expectation that there is privacy. It can stay behind closed doors. Sexting seems to open a person up to a lot of different kinds of vulnerability and exploitation. That picture can be reproduced and shared without your consent. Sexting also seems to cross over into *advertiser censored* and the world of child *advertiser censored*--which obviously the state has a compelling interest in eradicating. The state has a far-less compelling interest in regulating the sex lives of 16 year olds. That's why I think there's a difference in the ages for the two activities. I think it provides a level of protection for minors that's probably helpful. The law acknowledges that 16 year olds do consent to sex, but also acknowledges how easily exploited a 16 year old could be and affords some protection.
I have one question though--A lot of states might have an age of consent at 16, but there's also a clause about age gaps--for instance, it's still illegal if the other person is an adult of 4+ years etc. Is Georgia just straight-up 16 with any adult?
JMO