The problem with the 'sex offender' label...and why we need to change it.

[Danger Mouse]

We all have triggers, things that set us off and make us angry. It varies depending on what your beliefs are, and the type of background you are. Some people get really pissed off by murderers, because they've lost someone close to them to a murderer. Others despise stories of discrimination or persecution, because they or someone they know has experienced it.
For me, one of my biggest trigger is 'sex offender.' Some of the people I've been closest to over the course of my life have been rape victims, and I work with a population of kids where more than a few have been victimized sexually. The label sets me off, and I have a knee jerk reaction, and all I see is red.
When you hear 'sex offender'...what do you visualize? You think of a brutal rapist or a child molester. You don't think of a guy who had sex with a fourteen-year old when he was seventeen. You don't think of someone who was slapped with the label for a stupid or arbitrary reason.
I'm thinking about this because of a case where a guy was murdered for fun by a couple of scumbag teenagers and it just so happens the victim was a 'sex offender'...or at least, he had sex with a fourteen year old at the age of seventeen.
Debate the morality of that all you want (I'd have to hear more about the case to decide about that), but I can't see how it's right for this guy to receive the same label as a baby rapist.
Hearing the label 'sex offender' though, set me off, and I got angry and dismissed the guy as a dirtbag...not knowing the facts of his case.
In retrospect, it was wrong, and it goes back to the problem with the label sex offender. It's a real stigma, and one that is far too easily applied.
However, I don't think the label shouldn't be done away with entirely. It just needs to be significantly narrowed down, maybe categorized. Right now it's just an albatross hanging around one's neck, and for often dumb reasons, and that's not fair or just. It's just punishment, and that's not supposed to be the PURPOSE of justice.
Anyway, what do you all think? Do you think the label is too broad? Do you think it's fine as is? Do you think sentences for sex crimes should be harsher or more lenient? Do you think the designation should be done away with entirely? I'm interested in hearing your thoughts.

[angstlessk]

1. I agree totally..there should be an age spread which kicks in

before one is called a pedophile...especially if both parties are under 21 years of age!!! after age 21, one needs to be VERY circumspect with whom one choses to have sex with.

If a 17 year old has sex with say a 12 year old...and it is NOT consensual...SEX OFFENDER!! If it is consensual and you have every reason to believe the 12 year old lied about his/her age and appears to be able to get away with that lie...NOT sex offender.

sex with ANYONE under the age of 12...no matter what...with a 17 year old...UNLESS THERE ARE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES...(he is mentally retarded?? etc) SEX OFFENDER!

but common sense should prevail..in EVERY FUCKING THING WE DO!! Including a mom teacher her kids about sex!!!

[Danger Mouse]

7. It seems that common sense is lacking in our justice system.

The drug war is a perfect example of this.
I agree that there should be very SPECIFIC cases in which the sex offender label is applied...I think most appropriate is for someone who has raped or taken advantage of someone (adult or child) and is at risk for doing so again.

[whistle]

2. Is this so Senator Larry Craig gets off easy because he only used hand signals?

...Maybe his crime could be called sexual hitchhiking

[Danger Mouse]

8. Craig should have the word 'hypocrite' branded onto his forehead

for all to see, forever.

[fenriswolf]

3. 2 cents

first off IMO consentual sex between two people under 18 should not label someone a sex offender.

a sex offender to me is somoene who has sex with someone without consent or in the case of consentual sex a sex offender is a mature person having sex with a teenager or younger (dont ask me what the right age is)

2. most sexual offenders are people who cannot help themselves. They are people who have their brains wired a little bit differently. The only thing that will help them will be a. take away their victims so they cannot harm them. b. keep them under watch and medicated so that they cannot act upon their impulses their is another option but i would be flamed for even suggesting it.

[Danger Mouse]

12. what's your other option?

i may disagree with you, but i won't flame you, promise. :hi:
as for two people under 18....weeeelll...it depends. common sense in all things. What if it were a 17-year-old and a 10-year-old?

[fenriswolf]

13. well what do you do with a rabid dog

(ie someone who is a danger to society and cannot control themselves?)

[Danger Mouse]

15. wow. that's harsh.

i wouldn't go that far. at the very very worst, you could just lock them up for the rest of their lives...but i'd say only for repeat offenders who have not responded to treatments and meds and CAN'T control their impulses.

[fenriswolf]

22. well thats why i didn't want to say it

I know it's harsh and i don't think that should be done but ultimatly it is one way to insure they will not harm someone else ever again.

[rzemanfl]

19. You hunt rabbits with a rabbit dog. In written English "i.e.," has

periods between the letters and is always followed by a comma. Cannot what themselves?

[fenriswolf]

24. spelling corrected

thank you

[Benhurst]

4. Yes, I think the label is too broad. I read where in some jurisdictions

being caught peeing in public can lead to being labeled a sex offender. (I guess in the case of males for having the member exposed. How absurd.) Rapists and child molesters are the only persons I think should be so labeled. And I agree, the whole matter of young people close to the same age having consensual sex is a difficult problem to deal with; but I don't like the term sex offender being applied in such cases.

[Danger Mouse]

11. It's bad enough that they end up with a criminal record, which is enough of a scarlet letter as is..

but they get this, too...and like I said, it too often conjures phantoms of rapists and molesters.
Not fair. Not just. Absurd.

[Warpy]

5. It's far, far too broad a label

and applies equally to a college kid who got drunk and then was caught peeing in an alley and to a piece of filth who serially rapes little children.

"Public indecency" isn't always a sex crime. Rape always is. Perhaps we need to have the "sex offender-crime" appellation applied instead of a blanket term that tells us nothing and unfairly stigmatizes people who were stupid one time when they were kids.

[Danger Mouse]

10. That's why I think the label should apply to two things, and two things only...

1. Rape.
2. Child pornography.

[fizzgig]

33. what about other types of sexual assault?

you can be sexually assaulted without being raped (at least not in the way we traditionally think of it). What about child molesters who only fondle their victims? perpatrators who force the child to perform sex acts them?

there needs to be a balance struck and it needs to be done with common sense

[Danger Mouse]

34. as i said on the phone...

i used too broad a term in that first category.
my bad.

[fishnfla]

6. I am reminded of a true story

I know first hand accounts are notoriously unreliable and anecdotal, but I always will remember this. People ahve seen the sex stings the cops have pulling around here ( daytona Beach Beach restrooms). It has been going on for years. A gal I used to work with, her dad got busted in one of the stings. This was about 10 years ago, got his name in the paper and she bent over backwards defending him: he's happily married, doesn't do this stuff, had diabetes and had to pee real bad and got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, yada, yada, yada

2 years later, no longer working with this gal, see both their names in the paper. He molested her 4 year old daughter. Diabetes my ass.

Everyone, it seems has got their freak of some sort. These guys who are advertising their hot spots on Craiglists are more horny than they are wise, IMO.

It has gotten bad. I am coaching youth sports now and have to go thru all sorts of background checks no big deal. But one thing I do and this seems to put alot of people at ease when I get my team's is meet and talk with the parents, hand out my business card, reassure them that I am happily married and my freak is sports, not sex. Never had any problems or complains, I can hug, put an arm around or high five or rough house with the kids without having to worry

[Danger Mouse]

9. I don't know why it's gotten so bad...

I'm curious as to whether it's that incidences of child molestation have increased, or that in the past they were covered up or not reported as frequently.
The hysteria over it certainly has reached fever pitch. Shit like 'to catch a predator' doesn't help things either.

[SoCalDem]

14. the way to avoid a lot of the mis-labeling is so simple

Go back to a more "traditional" method of a three-tier school system

k-6 age 5 to 11-12
7,8,9- age 12-13 to 15-16
10,11,12- age 15-16 to 17-18

That system more or less insured that kids of similar development would be together and by the time a kid got to high school where MOST "dating" occurs, there would be a smaller age-spread, and less likelihood that an 18 yr old would be "dating" a 14 yr old freshman..

The middle school plan we have now is ridiculous...putting 6th graders in middle school and dumping 9th graders in with high school..

Whether we like it or not, kids ARE maturing younger, but in the old scheme of things, "dating" (in cars..1 on 1) was usually reserved for older teens..and we all know how flattered young girls can get if a senior jock "takes an interest in them".. I would be more comfortable if that girl had a few more years under her belt before she faced that possibility..

[Danger Mouse]

16. and middle school is totally vicious.

i was in a junior-senior high school...7-12, all in the same building!
geez...

[rzemanfl]

17. I absolutely agree. In Florida, someone who gets caught up

in an Internet sting, where an officer, using money from Alberto Gonzales, under legislation first sponsored by Mark Foley, impersonates an underage girl and he sends an "obscene" image to the cop over the Internet they get treated as a "sex offender." If that person handed a hard copy of the same image to REAL underage female outside the junior high, they are NOT categorized as a sex offender and face a small fraction of the sentencing points that apply to the transmitting the same image over the net. If someone SOLD the same image to a minor it would be a mere misdemeanor and a "good faith" error as to the kid's age would be a defense.

Besides this, the cops have pages on MySpace saying they are 19 and then change their age after they get a instant message conversation going. This is entrapment. Someone close to me, who is in his twenties, is faced with this situation.

[Danger Mouse]

28. Wow...they do that?

That's slimy.

[rzemanfl]

36. Slimy and expensive to fight. n/t

[aikoaiko]

18. Its changing for the better

For example, here in GA, consensual sex with a underage person when you are less than 3 years older will only get you a misdemeanor and NOT put on the sex offender registry.

On the other hand, I'm all for all criminals and their records being available to the public via the web.

[rzemanfl]

21. Yeah, well Georgia is so progressive and all. Think that your

Governor's prayers are gonna work?

[aikoaiko]

23. Exactly, even a state like GA is making progress on the issue

But just in case you were being serious, no, Our Governor's prayers are not going to work.

[rzemanfl]

37. These are called "Romeo and Juliet" laws, and even Florida

has one. (16 up to 24) I swear these are based on the ages of girls the legislator's sons are dating, since they are different all over. Rich Repukes though, can marry women 25 years younger than they are and all they get is a "'atta boy."

[rzemanfl]

38. CNN is reporting it is going to rain in GA. Wanna bet the prayer

service was tied to the forecast? Kiran Chetrey said your gov met w/ "other religious leaders." So now he's a "religous leader."

[aikoaiko]

39. That's too funny, isn't it.

[Danger Mouse]

29. I don't agree...I think people should be able to keep that private...

unless the nature of their crime makes them a danger to their community in some way. I think people who do their time, clean up their lives, and never look back shouldn't have to be subject to such scrutiny. It's tough enough to get a job or lead a normal life with a criminal record. Why make it harder for them?

[aikoaiko]

31. Criminal records already are public record its just not easy to access

If anything should be public record and accessible it should be when people have been found by trial or by plea to have committed crimes. These crimes were against the people and state represents the people.

It has nothing to do with making it harder on them -- its about making it easier to keep certain people away from me and mine. I want to know about the people in my life or my wife's life or my kid's life. All I ask for is basic information to make good decisions without having to pay 50-100 bucks for background searches.

[redqueen]

20. For many DUers... "Chavez" is a trigger word. (nt)

[Danger Mouse]

27. and 'Sheehan' and 'Clinton' and 'taser' and 'cornflake breaded fried chicken'

:P

[redqueen]

30. and 'circumcision' and 'breastfeeding' and 'spanking' (not the good kind!)

:evilgrin:

[DCKit]

25. I've heard of people who have to register because they were caught pissing in an alley.

Aside from that, the fact that you wrote this and use that user name is quite funny. You do know where and with whom L. Ron spent his final days, don't you? They may as well have named it "The Good Ship Lollipop"

[Danger Mouse]

26. The username is mocking.

I despise Scientology and all that it stands for. I think it is a moneygrubbing sham of a religion whose only purpose is to hurt people and control every aspect of their lives. I've heard that people can be borderline enslaved by it...the only way to advance in the 'faith' is to pay money or engage in hard labor.
They also pursue their 'enemies' relentlessly. Their leaders are very dangerous people, every bit as nasty and venomous as the worst of the fundies.
Hubbard himself was a reprehensible scumbag who started a religion to get rich and eventually started to believe his own hype. The power went to his head and he died a crazy and paranoid man.

[izquierdista]

32. I see that within minutes, the broad brushers are out

Painting all "sex offenders" as violent rapists of toddlers. Such are the people that live in Bush's World, who can't tell the difference between A and Z, after all one letter is pretty much the same as another. Pretty much one sex crime is the same as another, so if someone is under 18 and another is over 18, pretty much lock the older one up and throw away the key. I wonder what these people would think of wet nurses, a lactating adult female that actually let someone unrelated to her suckle on her teat -- that has to be some kind of sex crime. :sarcasm:

Things that were perfectly acceptable 150 years ago, a 14 year old girl having some kind of encounter with a 19 year old boy, which then might require a quick marriage ceremony, now requires jail time and a lifetime mark of shame. Should a 17 year old be given a lifetime designation for mooning? When rudeness and bad choices become crimes to last a lifetime, something is seriously wrong.

The fascists have found that the stigma surrounding the term "sex offender" serves them well. They can imprison all sorts of people on evidence that would never hold up in other circumstances. They can carry out capital punishment where it is legally proscribed by just a few whispers to the right inmates. And no one will ever speak up in opposition, for to do so would mean that they are a pervert too. They know that only a porn star will be open about their sexuality and the other 99% of the population are so embarrassed, that they will plea bargain their way out, copping to exaggerated charges in the hopes that they can soon return to oblivion.

The real damage to the American psyche is that children will not be taught how to develop their own sexual identities. Just today, there was another thread about a woman arrested for having a frank discussion about sex with her teenagers. But to continually repress and deny and invalidate these children as they go through stages of sexual development and then say to them, "all right, you're 18, now all is legal with another consenting adult" is akin to taking a bird with clipped wings and flinging it off a cliff, expecting it to fly.

Categorization is a great idea, and better it be done by psychologists than by police and courts. Even finite categories have their limitations when the subject is so complex and the societal harms a broad continuum from serious to inconsequential. Sex is a part of every person's behavior, and along with their personalities and abilities, is distinct and unique. There are some that need to be restrained from the rest of society, but for the VAST majority, most of the people who have been accused, counseling, therapy, and redirection to more acceptable outlets needs to be practiced, not just "lock them up and let them be somebody's prison bitch".

Between Americans being too prudish and growing too obese, I can see sex in America becoming a waning phenomena. I doubt after another 20 years of fascist rule, whether Americans will be able to reproduce at all.

[Danger Mouse]

35. The rise of the religious right, the domination of the media by corporations...

it's all a part of this foul package.