Damn constitution, eh, Susanann?
Oh, and what about female child molesters?
And wrongful convictions?
Photopat is right. As much as I hate sexual violence, once someone has served their time it is unconstitutional restrict their rights once they are released.
“For every problem, there is a solution that is simple, attractive—and wrong.”
Susanann’s approach assumes that a) castration will somehow correct the underlying cause of the rape/molestation, and/or b) his “thing” is the only tool available to the perpetrator.
BZZZZZZZZT! Sorry, this ticket is not a winner. Please play again.
That is a good question, but a minor one, and ignores the larger issue/problem.
I really dont think the bulk of child molestors or rapists are female - I think most of them are male. It is better to focus on the larger problem. After we get the men, we will think of what to do with whatever few women commit these crimes.
If you want to know what to do with female child molestors, you are talking about a very small percentage of violent sex offense cases.
Castration or cutting off the male part would prevent most sexual offendors(who are male) from committing a repeat offense.
What small percent of convicted rapists and child molestors are female?
Uhhh, I disagree. How you gonna rape somebody if you dont have it anymore? Not possible.
Hey, I am offering a very simple and easy suggestion, that has not been tried. I think after cutting it off and castration, will certainly stop someone from commiting further rapes,and will likely eliminate any sexual gratification of the child molestors.
Lets try it and see how many convicted rapists and child molestors who have been totally cut commit repeat offenses. There are no statistics, but we can get them soon enough.
Are you under the impression that a penis is somehow necessary to commit a sex offense, even for males? Judging by my experience with child molesters (nearly all male), the most common offenses against female children do not involve the perp’s penis, but his fingers and/or tongue.
And as for " How you gonna rape somebody if you dont have it anymore?", I’ve heard of bottles, sticks and baseball bats. Technically, it might not be called “rape”, but it will be a sex offense nonetheless, and I doubt it makes a difference to the victim.
I disagree with the notion that a rape of a minor is worse than a rape of an adult. All conditions being equal, I would even argue that a raped adult suffers greater psychological damage than a raped child. It is also aggravated by the fact that many adult rapes are conducted with force and violence, either with the threat of, or actual execution of assault. Minors are usually coerced with manipulative tactics and trickery. And of course there is the chance that their psyches are damaged by this unfortunate occurance during their formative years.
Not to lessen the impact and trauma that a child suffers at the hands of a pedophile sexual offender, BUT I get pissed off when society treats their rape as a far greater evil than the rape of an adult man or woman.
Castration requires the testicles to be severed, not the penis. The root of sexual offenses lies not in the penis, but in the hormones, sexual urges, and testosterone that is produced in those wrinkly nutsacks.
I know what castration is but I assumed by “thing” and “male part” Susanann was referring to the penis. BTW, I think the root of at least some sexual offenses lies in the mind, not the testicles. I don’t think anyone’s testicles ever told him to jam a bottle up a woman’s vagina.
If any surgery would “cure” sex offenders that would have to be a lobotomy. In my opinion (and you know what they say about opinions) rape is more about control than about sex. Reasons notwithstanding I think that mandatory castration is the wrong solution.
YMMV
I’m inclined to agree with Mighty_Girl here, on both counts.
First of all, rape (and, it could be argued, most sexual offences) is about control and power more than it is about sex. doreen mentioned earlier using bottle, baseball bats, or other implements to commit a rape, and I don’t see how anyone could call it anything but rape. It’s a violation of a particularly vile and brutal sort, but it’s not about sex as such. It’s about domination, power, control. And it’s definitely rape.
Second, mandatory castration may or may not solve the problem (and I’d be interested to know whether Susanann has any cites to back up her assertion that it would), but it would be an act of society committing a brutal mutilation against someone who committed a brutal act. It may sound great on a retribution, “eye for an eye” level, but a fair and just society should never use such a primitive model for justice. How could a society consider itself moral, when it commits the same acts as its worst criminals?
No, I think mutilating our criminals is not the path we need to take. I kind of wondered whether this would come up, though, and I’m glad it did.
Hello All
I live in Washington, Seattle to be exact.
Washington state has this law also, Part of the conflict of the placement of the sexual offenders is due to what I have Bolded. The state is releasing very few to live on their own. Instead they have, over the last decade, been “warehousing” them in halfway houses.
Of course this has led to a glut of these residences across the state. And simply put they are running out of low density areas to house them and pushing into middle class neighborhoods.
In regard to castration. I believe that denmark uses chemical castration on sex offenders. From what I understand at first it was a dismal failure. Many of the offenders just reverted to old behaviours by other means i.e. objects, hands etc.
With the introduction of psychotopic medications to control the mental part of their actions rather than just the physiological I understand the program has since been very effective.
*my bolding
Sexual offenders in Denmark are not subjected to mandatory castration. It is actually the offender who decides if to accept the treatment in exchange for shorter sentences.
Of course, if the conviction is overturned later, it’s only fair to castrate the prosecutor, judge, and jurors… though that might have a chilling effect on the number of people who are willing to prosecute or preside over sex offense trials.