We have to be better than this.

In the county next to mine there are 22 registered sex offenders under age 18, one of them is a 13 year old who reportedly had ten victims.

So what do we do? We lable him a sex offender and from there it all goes down hill to hell, what chance will this kid have of a normal life?

Turns out through a little digging that this kid's own sexual abuse began at age 6 by his step brother (at charging time for the 13 yo he was 20) I dug a little deeper into news papers and public records to try and find out if this fact was taken into account when the boy was charged and tried through the court. Not one newspaper explained this fact and to date the now out of state step brother has not been sought nor charged for what he was doing.

So this is how it ends? No mercy for this kid, with the state budget in tight straits support programs have been cut. The only thing this 13 yo will be known for is that he's a sex monster, society will throw him to the trash as just another pathetic animal who can live under a bridge and damn you if we catch you stepping out from the overpass, we'll re-arrest you and chuck you right back into the prison system.

So now you'll have a potential adult who will more than likely re-offend because after what he's going through, nothing will matter and he'll have nothing left to lose. Anyone else feel the same way I do?

Yes, and I've never been abused nor abused anyone. I am against hysteria and demonization, as I can't see how demonizing people is good for anyone in the equation, least of all victims of sexual abuse, who are recipients of endless messages encouraging them to think they have been subjected to unspeakable barbarity. I say this not to downplay genuinely abusive or traumatic experiences, but to highlight the fact that society's hysterical efforts to demonize at best compound any damage done and at worst amplify it considerably. In cases where the acts were more or less 'consensual' (obviously not in the legal sense - but picture a scenario in which a 13-year-old girl initiates sexual activity willingly with a 22-year-old man), damage may actually be created where otherwise there would have been none.

Society's efforts to create and maintain an idyll of innocence have their merits, but if taken to the extreme we risk damaging our children for the sake of protecting them. There has to be a balance.

I have a number of thoughts on this.

First, my views of the American Criminal Justice (sic) System and such: Filling Up Prisons Without Fighting Crime
Next, the prisons themselves: Prison Nation / The Machine

Lastly, within this context there is the specific issue sexual offenses. Luckily, google translate seems to work (passingly), so allow me to present how the newspapers here in my country present some of these cases: Kindergarten employee convicted of 11 sexual assaults.

According to the sentence he put on her panties theirs, touched them in the crotch, kissed them and ran them over her breasts.
...
Only one of the victims demanded compensation of counsel. The requirement was for 30,000 dollars, but the judge thought 10,000 dollars would do.
Few of the other children have so far indicated that they are struggling.
Some have said that what happened was very innocent, but they were more frightened of the parents 'and teachers' reactions.

My impression is that yes, there is a lot of demonization attached to issues of sexual abuse.
And it is also an issue which it is very difficult to inform people about, because it is, well, "icky".
Compound that with american's tendency to demonize criminals and their fervor in believing that everyone are responsible for their own success in life, and you get the attitude that instead of helping people not do wrong (again), they are left to themselves and punished.

What worries me about the whole concept of registering sex offenders for public view and such, is what that does to how a person sees him / herself.
I can't see it being helpfull in any way, for a person to be publically identified as such-or-such.

...there is a joke about a bridgebuilder in here somewhere...

Sadly it is not just sex offenders it is all who fit into the criminal justice system that are under age that become victims themselves.
I did work for the courts years ago and seen a 15 year old take a murder wrap for an adult, because he wanted out of his house (full of drunks) and he liked living in the youth detention center.
It is a very complicated issue and only so much money to go around to address it. So society comes up with general procedures for all that do not address the youths issues.
At the same time society expects to be protected from those with mental health issues and yes sadly those being born into the wrong family. So many kids don't stand a chance in life from the get go.
Many times kids confess to crimes they read about or see on tv, just to get away from their familes and bad conditions, sad really. not that they are convicted because their stories don't add up, but sad they feel that is their only way out.
There are no easy solutions to the problem and not enough money or people to deal with it

truthfully, someone labeled a sex offender is open to investigation by anyone, defamation of character, verbal and physical abuse and destruction of property. there are like 2 dozen websites not including government websites that list the name, age, location, and place that the person works at. if you ask me, i believe that to single a person out for a past crime that he committed, is like saying "hey this guy here is going to rape you and anyone he gets a chance at."
not only that, Sex offenders have a hard time finding a job, having personal relationships with people, and being able to live in peace. it's bad enough that we have to fight ourselves tooth and nail to not think or act a certain way but to also have the rest of mankind to deem us as the devils hellish warriors who want nothing more than to rape, kill, and traumatize other people. sometimes i wonder why i should even continue living if this is what i have to look forward too.

but picture a scenario in which a 13-year-old girl initiates sexual activity willingly with a 22-year-old man

And it's the 22 year old man's responsibility to say no isn't it? I would think by age 22 you'd realize that a child under age consent has no legal recognition to be self determinate on anything.

-- Thu Jun 30, 2011 4:26 pm --

What worries me about the whole concept of registering sex offenders for public view and such, is what that does to how a person sees him / herself.

I can't see it being helpfull in any way, for a person to be publically identified as such-or-such.

especially when the person is making an honest effort to reform then there are those who've been in jail multiple times only to offend multiple times, like Kenneth Parnel who was a career child rapist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Parnell

This unrepentant monster should have been executed decades ago.

echo1 wrote:there are like 2 dozen websites not including government websites that list the name, age, location, and place that the person works at.

That makes me so angry!

dan1966 wrote:And it's the 22 year old man's responsibility to say no isn't it? I would think by age 22 you'd realize that a child under age consent has no legal recognition to be self determinate on anything.

I agree with you Dan. I personally believe the 22-year-old has a moral responsibility to not act upon the 13-year-old's wishes.

Yes, I agree the 22-year-old has a responsibility (legal, not just moral) not to act upon the 13-year-old's wishes; that's why I put 'consensual' between inverted commas and followed it with 'obviously not in the legal sense'.

However, that's not what this thread is about. The subject is (broadly) how society subsequently treats victims of abuse. Here I was looking at the less black-and-white scenario in which the 'abuse' is in fact initiated willingly by the minor, highlighting the fact that society can create tremendous psychological damage in individuals who would otherwise have been perfectly fine with what happened to them. In that scenario, irrespective of what the 22-year-old's moral or legal responsibilities are, if the 13-year-old initiated it willingly and the 22-year-old (against his better judgement) went along with things, it's unlikely the event would lead to tremendous psychological damage for the 13-year-old - she would most likely remember it as an act of experimentation (assuming, as I am for the hypothetical scenario, that nothing beyond affectionate and gentle sexual acts takes place).

A hysterical and righteous society isn't comfortable with the idea that the 13-year-old could be perfectly fine with this. It challenges all sorts of prevalent assumptions and threatens to derail the clear-cut binary opposition between child and adult. So what happens? There follows a systematic attempt to create the damage. Not deliberately, of course. But it starts with parents telling her 'what he did to you was evil and selfish, you're still a child, he's maliciously taken your innocence', etc. The tabloids seize on the event and ejaculate words like 'monster' all over their pages. The girl is encouraged to see a GP to establish whether any physical harm has been done, the police are involved, the girl is encouraged to attend counselling to deal with the 'trauma' of statutory rape, there's a court case which involves many more people stepping in from the wings and saying 'this must be terribly traumatic for you, you're such a brave girl, there will be more counselling available after the trial', etc. ad nauseum. Until the whole whirlwind drama engenders the anxiety she was supposed to have suffered.

So, yes, the 22-year-old has committed a crime and it's right he should be punished.

But what I'm saying is that in cases where sexual acts are initiated by (here) sexually aware pubescents willingly, society's response in terms of the messages they force upon the 'victim' can be disproportionate and generate a tremendous amount of damage themselves.

GinaSmith wrote:But what I'm saying is that in cases where sexual acts are initiated by (here) sexually aware pubescents willingly, society's response in terms of the messages they force upon the 'victim' can be disproportionate and generate a tremendous amount of damage themselves.

Ah, sanity, what calm you bring.

dan1966 wrote:especially when the person is making an honest effort to reform then there are those who've been in jail multiple times only to offend multiple times, like Kenneth Parnel who was a career child rapist.

I didn't know you could make a career out of such things

Is the pay good

dan1966 wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Parnell

This unrepentant monster should have been executed decades ago.

He spent much of his adolescence in and out of juvenile hall and mental institutions.

Seems like the institutions had plenty of chances to help him. And failed.

Again, here we have the perverse, extreme mentality of viewing each man as an island, and his development as separate from society's treatment of him.

Why not execute the workers at the juvenile halls and the mental institutions?
Did their influence on this man not play any part at all in how he came to consider it to be acceptable for him to ignore the well-being of others?
How he came to view his wishes as more important than others'?

You have brought up extreme cases of people before.
While I understand that serial killers holds some fascination to americans, I don't think they are helpfull in any debate, or actually, illustrate or explain anything at all.
You wouldn't bring up Adolf Hitler to try and make any kind point - implied or otherwise - about Catholicism now would you.

Back to the issue of making an "honest effort at reform", or rather, "be nice".
There is the saying "we get the politicians we deserve". Which in my view goes a long way to explaining why serial killers (and other things) is largely an american phenomenon.
Or put differently, a society's lack of a communal / systemic sense of responsibility does contribute to how people with problems fall between the cracks and act out.

Also I think the main point is about making it easy for people to seek help, so that a person does not act out even a single time, not about severly punishing AFTER the fact.

OFF-TOPIC RANT:
...or you weirdos could maybe like apply some american logic and employ six-year olds to entrap would-be molesters and lock them up for life how does that sound bet you could get a few guys off the streets that way go for it

GinaSmith wrote:However, that's not what this thread is about.

Ah sorry Gina, I did not read thoroughly enough and caught your quote out of context.

In practice, can society have the view that "the 22-year-old has committed a crime and it's right he should be punished" whilst simultaneously believing that the 13-year-old is not a victim?
I'm trying to think of comparable crimes where it is accepted that there is a criminal but no victim. I think it's normal that anyone who is subject to criminal behaviour is considered a victim. Of course that doesn't mean that the demonization, court dramas etc. aren't a negative experience.

Alevi wrote:I didn't know you could make a career out of such things

Is the pay good

Although I assume this is meant as tongue-in-cheek, that is not a very appropriate comment.
In case you didn't know, "career criminal" is an English expression referring to havitual offenders.

Alevi wrote:Seems like the institutions had plenty of chances to help him. And failed.

Agreed. But perhaps not everyone can be helped? Or perhaps we simply do not yet know how to help these people yet?

Alevi wrote:How he came to view his wishes as more important than others'?

Perhaps he was psychopathic or sociopathic?

Alevi wrote:to entrap would-be molesters and lock them up for life how does that sound

Sounds like Minority Report to me.