Sexual Predators.

[Serious Paul]

Those of yuo, who loke me, follow the news and recent events know that hurting children isn't something new.

The Department of Justice Statistics unfortunately has the unenviable job of keeping track of these crimes. In America:

• Sixty-seven percent of all victims of sexual assault reported to law enforcement agencies were juveniles (under the age of 18); 34% of all victims were under age 12.
• One of every seven victims of sexual assault reported to law enforcement agencies were under age 6.
• Forty percent of the offenders who victimized children under age 6 were juveniles (under the age of 18)

Also

• On a given day in 1994 there were approximately 234,000 offenders convicted of rape or sexual assault under the care, custody, or control of corrections agencies; nearly 60% of these sex offenders are under conditional supervision in the community.
• The median age of the victims of imprisoned sexual assaulters was less than 13 years old; the median age of rape victims was about 22 years.
• An estimated 24% of those serving time for rape and 19% of those serving time for sexual assault had been on probation or parole at the time of the offense for which they were in State prison in 1991.
• Of the 9,691 male sex offenders released from prisons in 15 States in 1994, 5.3% were rearrested for a new sex crime within 3 years of release.
• Of released sex offenders who allegedly committed another sex crime, 40% perpetrated the new offense within a year or less from their prison discharge.

Obviously there is a problem, one I feel that is even larger than these numbers let on. So what do we do? My response is obvious, but am I missing something?

[MissTeja]

Obviously there is a problem, one I feel that is even larger than these numbers let on. So what do we do? My response is obvious, but am I missing something?

And, as you point out, what those statistics don't show is the scope of unreliability that the UCR and NCVS have. (Uniform Crime Report and National Crime Victimization Survey.) Especially in the case of crimes like rape, where there is often much displaced shame felt by the victim of the crimes, the UCR, which is often the primary source for "official" criminal statistics in this nation, far from accurately reflect the magnitude of sexual offenses in this country.

I think some of the statistics you cited point out one major thing we can do:

the median age of rape victims was about 22 years.

...in particular.

Rape victims, women in particular, need to be more educated on predatory warning signs and in how to defend themselves. Most women by this age are familiar with what rape is, and if they haven't been sexually assaulted, most have either known personally, or know of someone who has been. And of those who don't, it's most likely because it hasn't been brought in the open. That's just sad, not to mention scary. And while most women are familiar with the terms "date-rape drugs," "GHB," etc. - not all of them realize specific things, like not accepting drinks poured to you by other individuals unless within your vision, the fact that just because you are drunk does not mean you waive your right to give consent, or the common misconception that rapists are often strangers.

The media likes to embelish the outrageous stories, but in truth, a strong majority of all sexual assaults and rapes occur by someone the victim knows personally. While universities and other institutions offer education on these matters, they are often elective, if offered at all. I know that in my seven years of college, the only presentation I've been to was one I got to attend while in my sorority. Otherwise, I would have not been. Preventative education has been increased, but it needs to continue increasing for the young adult population.

Education needs to take place in elementary schools more, too, but I think it focuses too much on preventing victims and not enough on preventing assailants. Many may have memories of grade school teachers telling children not to get into a car with a stranger and never to let anyone touch you in your private spots, but how many remember a teacher or other adult role model, other than parents, instructing you as a child to never touch other people's private parts, that other people doing this are bad even if they say they are and to not follow their behavior, etc.? Sure it occurs, but it much rarer.

Fact of the matter is, most education children receive is going to be in the home. Parents are one of the most valuable sources of information for kids - both positively and negatively. I would really like to see more parental involvment in the schools and some sort of incentives given to parents who participate with their children in programs for drug abuse resistance, sexual education, etc. I don't see anything like that in society currently and I think it would be a great initiative for government to take on. I can't say if it would be successful or not because it hasn't occurred to my knowledge, but I think it would be worth a try.

Recidivism, on the other hand, is a hard one to tackle. Sexual predators are one of the largest groups to recommit their crimes. If I weren't such a staunch advocate of human rights, (yes even for the proven guilty in a court of law), I would recommend a chemical castration process that would eliminate the ability for an assailant to assault again. However, this will not happen and it's silly to entertain the idea. Rather, I would like to see smaller drug crimes receiving more community-based or punitive sentences, and requiring these vicious criminals to stay in prison longer, receiving stiffer sentences and forcing them to actually serve them through the implementation of more truth-in-sentencing laws throughout the states that still do not have them.

Okay, I've written a book now. This is all just opinion, but I'm pretty passionate about this subject and a large part of my MS degree will have been spent studying and researching it. My thesis is actually dealing with CSEC, but that's almost a whole 'nother ballgame.

[Serious Paul]

No that's great stuff, and stuff for me to think about.

[Cain]

The media likes to embelish the outrageous stories, but in truth, a strong majority of all sexual assaults and rapes occur by someone the victim knows personally. While universities and other institutions offer education on these matters, they are often elective, if offered at all. I know that in my seven years of college, the only presentation I've been to was one I got to attend while in my sorority. Otherwise, I would have not been. Preventative education has been increased, but it needs to continue increasing for the young adult population.

Amen, sister. A big problem with the women's self-defense courses I've been involved with-- and even the specific rape-prevention courses-- is that they don't generally prepare women to face a sexual assailant they know. It's focused way too much on strangers in dark alleys.

Recidivism, on the other hand, is a hard one to tackle. Sexual predators are one of the largest groups to recommit their crimes. If I weren't such a staunch advocate of human rights, (yes even for the proven guilty in a court of law), I would recommend a chemical castration process that would eliminate the ability for an assailant to assault again.

Here's where I disagree. From everything I've read on the subject, rape is about power, not sex. If you remove a rapist ability to reach orgasm, that doesn't stop them from other forms of penetration, for example. I don't think this would help at all, and it might make things worse-- the frustrated urges might lead them to start commiting murders instead.

[Serious Paul]

You're right rape is quite often about power. Child molestation isn't. Either way chemically castrating an offender is just as likely to reduce recidivism as any other currently available option, and perhaps evn more so. If nothing else it removes one very obvious factor from the situation. I say it's worth the chance.

If it deters just one person, its done as well as any other punishment we have enforced. The goal is not to reach a comprehensive all inclusive one size fits all punishment. It's retribution. Lex Talionis.

You might disagree, and that's cool-I realize it's not soemthing pleasant, and that we American's have this silly expectation that life is somehow meant to be fair-but I say go read the files. Go see the little girls and boys who've been raped. If you can still look me in the eye and say don't castrate them, don't kill them-then I'll be completly puzzled at your absolute lack of comapssion.

[Cain]

Oh, I don't think child molesters should get away unpunished-- I just don't think castrating them will do any good. I think the frustrated urges will still appear in one form or another. IIRC, that's why aversive therapy for pedophiles isn't very effective.

But I do think you've highlited one very important issue. We treat all sexual offenders in much the same fashion, when actually there's a bunch of different problems that need different approaches. Teaching a child to avoid molestation is not the same as teaching a woman to avoid rape. A flasher is not the same as a rapist, even though they're both classifed as sexual offenses. I think we need more clarity in defining the exact problems, before we can effectively start fixing them.

[Serious Paul]

We....we...agree! Sorry couldn't resist!

[MissTeja]

I suggest chemical castration simply because it solves the issue at hand. Other crimes were not mentioned earlier, and I truly do not believe that the chemical castration process would cause rapists to turn into murderers anyways. Rapists have a mental predisposition to committing the sexual-based offenses due to their urges and psychological make-up. You have to eliminate those urges and the ability to act on them in order to forcibly get a sexual assailant to regress. Would chemical castration increase drug use in this population? Perhaps. Would it increase physical assaults of other natures, committed by these offenders? Perhaps. Would it work? Perhaps. It's all speculation.

[Crazy Elf]

Rapists have a mental predisposition to committing the sexual-based offenses due to their urges and psychological make-up.

No, most rapists do it for power. Many rapists don't actually ejaculate. Sexual urges don't have that much to do with it.

[MissTeja]

Of course. Thanks for the thread Paul, but I've reminded myself of why I stopped posting like this. We'll have to chat up the topic over coffee sometime dude.

[WillyGilligan]

CE, what I think she's getting at is that the particular nature of rape, power through sex, is different than serial murder (though they are related, if Mindhunter was right), which is power through killing. The rapist is driven by sex, so reducing that sex drive would reduce their tendencies in this area. If all rapists would revert to killing after castration, you should see more rapes end in death, since a dead victim can't press charges.

Also, are you considering date rape (not as an option, but in your post)? Arguably, date rape would suggest that some rape is just about plain old bounce bounce squirt, to borrow your phrase.

Going lower, to molestation, I'd argue that a child molester isn't always wanting power over their victims, they want connection. That connection takes a turn from "kindly old guy that likes kids" to "sexual predator", when certain boundaries are crossed to fulfill the sexual desire. If they had less sexual desire, they'd likely not prowl the playgrounds, or at least fewer of them would.

[Serious Paul]

Rapists have a mental predisposition to committing the sexual-based offenses due to their urges and psychological make-up.

No, most rapists do it for power. Many rapists don't actually ejaculate. Sexual urges don't have that much to do with it.

Which in no real way contradicts what she said I believe. Power manifests in anumber of ways-sexual urges, controlling converstaion, etc...There is no set formula for tellling what power is to everyone.

I don't think Teja is advocating immediate chemical castration of every sex offender, but rather after a certain point (Which I am willing to bet anyone here would agree is the hard part, defining that point. That line they cross.) it becomes an option.

[Cash]

Even after chemical castration, the community won't want a "convicted child molester" in their town. Right now, Cary Verse, in California is going through this problem. Even though he was voluntarily chemically castrated and wants to continue the program (and be monitored), no community wants him. Even under threat of court order.

[mrmooky]

Even after chemical castration, the community won't want a "convicted child molester" in their town.

Can't blame them. I wouldn't want one near my kids either (not that I have kids, but you know, we're talking hypotheticals here).

With regards to rape being about power, I'm not an expert here, but it seems illogical that what goes through a rapist's head is reducible entirely to sexual urges. I mean, most of us have sexual urges for people, but we don't always follow through on them. If sexual urges alone were enough to make someone a rapist, then we would all be rapists. So there must be some other element to the psychological makeup of these people, and there's no reason to think that that element would go away if they were chemically castrated.

I don't know if that argument applies to paedophiles as well as "ordinary" rapists, because obviously their sexual urges are somewhat different from the mainstream. But I still believe there's a compelling argument that child molesters are not necessarily "fixed" psychologically by chemical castration.

[crone]

Even after chemical castration, the community won't want a "convicted child molester" in their town.

Can't blame them. I wouldn't want one near my kids either (not that I have kids, but you know, we're talking hypotheticals here).

But there probably is one around, anyway. If a kid can't deal with a known and identified danger, what hope do they have against someone who appears as a trusted friend? It's not about protecting children, it's just a blind hope that the problem can be sent somewhere else and ignored.

[mrmooky]

But there probably is one around, anyway. If a kid can't deal with a known and identified danger, what hope do they have against someone who appears as a trusted friend?

But in all likelihood there's not going to be a child molester who appears to my kids as a trusted friend. Despite the statistics quoted earlier, I have trouble believing that paedophilia is that incredibly widespread.

[MissTeja]

But in all likelihood there's not going to be a child molester who appears to my kids as a trusted friend

Dude. You just exemplified the exact reason this stuff is so prevalent. If you were going to molest a kid, you'd have to earn their trust and hide your secret. You sure as hell aren't going to go to them and their parents and say, "Excuse me, I like to touch young boys inappropriately. May I touch yours?" You'd hide it as best as humanly possible. As a parent, for your childrens safety, you don't have to go around being suspicious of every single person your child comes into contact with, but be wary of leaving the wool sitting over your eyes. Only a very, very small portion of child molesters molest children they do not know and have trust and friendship previously established with. Promise.

[Crazy Elf]

Okay, I have some statistics on it:

<a href=http://www.georgiacenterforchildren.org ... ml>Here</a>.

However, <a href=http://www.rasac.org/education/statistics.html>this</a> page cracks me up because of this remark:

Almost 24 million children (10-17) are currently online regularly each month. A representative sample of 1,501 young people in the U.S. was studied by CCRC. According to the study, 19 % of the young people surveyed received unwanted online request to engage in sexual activities or to provide intimate sexual information in the last year. In 15% of those incidents (approximately 35 of all the youth), the solicitor attempted to contact the youth in person, over the telephone or by mail, incidents the study called “aggressive solicitations.”

With a small smattering of a sense of humor, these statistics could turn against the horny retards online. Give me a healthy paycheck, access to <a href=http://www.amihotornot.com.au>Hot or Not.com</a> and IRC and you'll find yourself with far fewer soliciting online.

Here's the plan. Using random picture profiles provided to me by the aformentioned website, I can claim to be a 16 or 15 year old girl (or boy depending on flavor). Then using technical devices called, "maps", I can plot out likely meeting points.

Thus, when I manage to find several potential problem people online, I can have them meet me at various locations. However, instead of meeting me, they will meet other horny online retards, as I will give several of the problem people the same meeting point and same time. Film it all, put in sound effects and suddenly it's funniest home video material.

Alternatively, they can meet lifelike, exploding, 15 year old looking robots. Cue hillarity.

"Hey honey, want to surf my browser?"

"Your head asplode!"

*pop*

Leave it to me. I can fix this.

[Serious Paul]

[Cain]

Here;s the relevant stats from CE's link:

MOLESTER CHARACTERISTICS

One of the myths regarding child molesters is that they “look different” or behave differently from others in some way. Here are some statistics describing child molesters:

97% are male
91% are heterosexual
91% are religious
75% are married or formerly married
73% are Caucasian
65% earn a middle income or above
48% are college educated
• The molester is not a stranger. Over 91% of children are molested by someone they know.

• Stepfathers are 7 times more likely to abuse than biological fathers, however, abuse by a biological parent tends to be more severe. (A child who is abused by a biological parent is at higher risk of sustaining an injury from the abuse than those abused by a non-biological parent.)

• Contrary to popular belief, only about 30-35% of molesters were sexually abused as children (Hanson & Slater, 1988).

Source: This information was adapted from The Medlin Training Institute website, sexualdeviancy.com.

It's been a while since I studied sexual paraphilias, but IIRC pedophilia works pretty much like the rest of them-- it's not when someone has sexual urges towards kids. It's when someone can only reach sexual fulfillment when visualizing or interacting with kids sexually. This differs strongly from the legal definition of a child molester-- someone could be a diagnosed pedophile without ever touching a child; and one could have molested a child without meeting the diagnostic criteria.

There's also a difference between a pedophile and a pederast, which is unfortunately not reflected in the statistics provided. A pedophile is attracted to prepubescent children, while a pederast is attracted to post-pubescent, but legally underage, adolescents/young adults.

The problem is that all of the above are treated in exactly the same way by the courts; and by extention, by court-designed treatment programs. No wonder why they're not working very well-- we're lumping several different problems together, and trying to fix them all with one tool.

[Crazy Elf]

Well obviously they should fix it with the elf... tool...

Yeah.