Thank you so much for the wonderful class!
It was quite interesting to hear everyone reflection on searching for sex offenders in their neighborhoods.
We dove right into the what the definition of "sex offender" was and we ultimately came to a conclusion that it is impossible to define what is a "sex offender" and the legal term "sex offender" varies from state to state. Such as in Virginia, a 16 year old having a sexual relationship with a 14 year would according to the law be considered a sex offender. Because the law in Virginia states that anyone having a sexual relationship with someone under the age of 15 can be arrested, prosecuted and convicted. Lastly, he/she will earn him/herself a lifetime spot on Virginia's sex offender registry. Stating this, do you think there needs to be a reform of our sex registries nationwide?
Secondly, the majority of sex offenders are male offenders. However, in recent years we have seen big cases of female sex offender. The media might be responsible for hyping of female teacher cases with male student. As mentioned in class, can gender and stereotypes can impact how the criminal justice system handles cases of female sex offenders?
Females, are often seen as non threatening. Meanwhile because of cultural stereotypes, males are often given "props" when they have sex with an older female. Along with these female sex offender stereotypes we are undermining the result of reports on victimization, as it can lead to an under reporting.
Conducting, our role play in class was very important for me. I hoped that it might have conveyed some of the concerns that FEDCAP employees have to deal with while trying to get a client hired.
Lastly, I leave you with this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTm9efzHaTk
Thank you all again!
10 comments:
Wonderful class Imtashal! Thank you for highlighting this issue. I would never have paid much/any attention to it otherwise. Now I would not be so quick to form an opinion when I hear someone is labeled as a sex offender. I now know there are many layers to the label.
Based on the assigned readings, our class discussion on the issue, the video you posted and class discussions in my senior seminar class (which happens to deal with prisons, offenses etc), I now have an understanding of the problems caused by the label placed on sex offenders and the layers to these labels. We cannot use one brush to paint everyone (so to speak). Some sex offenders truly deserve the label and incarceration, for example having sex and inappropriate touching of a minor like 6,7,8 years-old or violent rape. I say violent rape because someone who has consentual sex with his/her partner is considered to have raped the partner. I know this is a gray area but I am referring to legitimate intimate partner relationship. It is not fair for someone described by the latter scenario to be labelled a sex offender. What about the person who urinates in public? Haven't you ever been in desperate need of a public restroom and none is available for one reason or another? Yes, there definitely needs to be reform to the sex-offenders registry. They paid their debt to society by serving time, why are we still punishing them by making their information public and further hampering them for the rest of their lives. There are the violent offenders who pose a risk to the public because they have not been rehabilitated and would continue to offend. But there are those who are innocently labeled. There also needs to be a standard as to the definition of 'sex offender'. It varies from state to state. Consistency is important.
Imtashal, thanks for a great class on a highly undiscussed issue.
Our sex registries nationwide definitely need to be reformed. While it may be much more difficult to change local sex offender laws, a much more simple solution would be to require that the sex offender description be much more clear to an average citizen. If the purpose of these registries is to make citizens more aware and safe, they must be really understood. This may also alleviate some of the tensions that those on the sex offender registry may feel if they are in an interview.
Simmone, I must disagree with you. Violent rape is not one having sex with his/her partner *consentually*. In fact, it is exactly the opposite, which is why it is called rape; It is not consentual, even though they are partners. However, I do agree that there needs to be consistency in the definition of a sex offender and that I am now much more aware of the discrepancies and misunderstandings that arise from the lack of clarity.
One thing I am very interested in, however, is the psychological aspect behind pedophilia. But its something that has been highly neglected in science. I am attaching the link to an audio interview (and transcript) of a 19-year old who claims he is a pedophile, but has made a conscious decision to never act on his desires. He explains the difficulty and misconceptions of being a pedophile. I *HIGHLY* recommend that you listen to/read it.
http://www.upworthy.com/this-19-year-old-pedophile-has-never-gone-near-a-child-and-he-needs-you-to-hear-his-story
A professor, one of the top researchers on child sexual abuse in the world is also interviewed. She explains how the current reaction to pedophilia is counterproductive because there is absolutely no funding for research that can help understand and possibly prevent or treat the condition. She says," If we can prevent this, we can prevent a lot of harm and a lot of cost. And we just don't. It's nuanced. It's difficult to wrap your head around. It's a lot easier to say these guys are monsters. Let's put them in prison. Let's put them on a registry. Let's put them in civil commitment facilities. And forget about them." It seems like this is the same response that we have to so many members of our society that are "different," in one way or another. While being a pedophile is much different and far more harmful than being a drug addict, for instance, how complicit are we in strenghtening these, often crippling and harmful, differences? Once again, we see ourselves addressing the symptoms of the problem, and ignoring the root.
Thanks, Imtashal, for bringing this topic to our class for discussion.As you know, I sent around the book by anthropologist Roger Lancaster (author of one of the readings Imtashal assigned) titled "Sex Panic and the Punitive State" (2011), that I hope you will put on your "wish list" for reading at a later time.
In the meantime I would like to quote from another piece Lancaster wrote. It is a chapter titled "State of Panic" that appeared in the edited volume, "New Landscapes of Inequality: Neoliberalism and the Erosion of Democracy in America" (2008).
I might need two entries to fit the entire quote. Please bear with me. It is worth it, relates to Imtashal's questions, Simonne's and Leena's comments, AND helps TIE IN themes we have discussed ALL semester:
In this chapter, Lancaster sketches "how the cultivation of a perpetual state of panic gives rise to a new mode of citizenship, to a distorted definition of what might count as public good, and to endless calls for more punitive forms of governance. If I am right these four elements define an emergent social formation, the institutional nexus on which neoliberal capitalism presently rests. Sex figures prominently in this arrangement--even, I would argue, when sexual content is not manifestly evident. Ongoing since the conservative turn of the 1970s, sex panics provide a basic template for the production of other states of panic. Moreover, the logic of punitive governance has been further advanced by sex panics than by other means (including ongoing panics around crime, drugs, and even terror)... (also) in America, stories about sex are never entirely innocent of stories about race..."
...more.....
Lancaster continues...
"Whether sex, crime, drugs, or terror is involved, four elements seem crucial to this configuration in America.
First, the cultivation of a perpetual state of panic embodied in a certain style of journalism [tabloid]...
Second, a new mode of citizenship and civic participation emerges alongside (and in relation to) such journalism. The victims' rights movement is paradigmatic of this approach. Tethering the rhetoric of grievance to a law-and-order politics, it has provided the basic organizational template for scores of movements over the past 30 years, and is now fully integrated into policing, sentencing, and the provision of social services...
Third, active collusion between sensational journalism, victims' rights activism, and political grandstanding creates and reinforces a distorted definition of what might count as public good...
Fourth, because the protection of imperiled innocents now defines citizenship to the exclusion of other interests that might come into play, and because social ills are attributed to moral shortcomings rather than sociological or political-economic causes, the mechanisms heretofore described will admit only one variant of civic action: the passage of new laws to punish; new statues to surveil; the application of new, more exacting definitions of infraction; the devising of new policies to reduce already negligible risks--in short, endless calls for ever more punitive forms of governance.
The citizen has only to choose his or her allotted role: victim, potential victim, or victim's advocate. Citizens, so defined, clamor for repression; the most repressive elements of the state ventriloquize the citizenry."
Verons: As we close this semester and move forward into the future, I hope you will take James's message to heart: You have the right to dream and CAN imagine and work towards a different way of being than the social world you have inherited.
I know it is possible.
I agree with both Simonne and Leena, in that we are in desperate need of a sex registry reform. However, I must disagree when Leena states that "sex offender" needs to become standardized. Though it would be ideal to place these offenders under one umbrella, it is simply impossible for the reason that each case is individualistic regardless of whether or not there may be some common details present between cases. My main problem with the registry rests with its effectiveness and not the labeling dilemma (though that is also important). For instance, since many of us had not visited the site before class - how do we know that members of the community are checking the registry? Furthermore, once they check the registry, are they left with an increased feeling of fear, or security? Lastly, as discussed in class, the registry further stigmatizes these alleged "sex offenders" and hinders their re-entry into society. In line with the above, what this field needs is intensified research efforts including preventative measures. Until we become more informed about the issue, the same problems will continue to arise (from the registry and the topic in general).
In regards to whether or not gender and stereotypes can impact how the criminal justice system handles cases of female sex offenders, of course they can! As I stated in class, not only are women viewed as the nurturing and motherly type that would never hurt their child, or any child for that matter, if convicted, they have lesser sentences in comparison to their male counterparts because it is assumed they must return to their roles in the home as quickly as possible (i.e. primary caretaker, housewife, etc).
In closing, thank you Imtashal for highlighting a very prominent issue in the criminal justice system.
Lastly, thank you fellow Verons for this past year's heated debates, discussions, and overall engagement via the seminar and the blog. I wish you all continued success!
- AP
Imtashal, thanks for a stimulating conversation. To my fellow Verons, it has been an absolute pleasure to have met all of you and it is an honor to call you all my colleagues.
As prof. Reitz stated, aside from the obviously violent crimes committed by true predators (e.g a serial rapist or pedophile), the real dilemma with the sex offender registries lies in the "gray" area that exist on the crime continuum. The need for Reform is urgent as the lives of those convicted of these minor, misidentified offenses are being sacrificed for the sake of public persecution and to fuel an antiquated "tough on crime" mentality. Obviously, punishments should simultaneously have a rehabilitative and deterrent effect, but casting a blanket over all those convicted of a sex offense requires intense scrutiny because not all crimes of this class should be weighed equally (or as Simonne puts it "We cannot use one brush to paint everyone"). For example, grouping those convicted of public urination or your example of statutory rape with serious sexual predators is not only unethical but also a waste of valuable resources. If nothing else in the registry changes, then, at the very least, we should reevaluate our stance on the crimes that merit a ticket but which are being punished with as life-long pariah status.
In regards to gender discrimination in the sentencing of those convicted of sex crimes, I believe the point brought up in class about women being commonly portrayed as "loving" and "caring" plays a key role. In other words, we simply don't consider women as capable of such actions. In addition, with the registry filled with several crimes that only males can physically commit (e.g public urination), the registry is skewed with more men as offenders, thus perpetuating the public image of men as the only gender capable of sexual deviance. In fact, this public image may play a part in the fear of men women are socialized to have.
Thanks for a great class Imtashal!
So I have to say I have a serious problem with the registry. I do not believe it needs to be reformed, but completely eliminated. First off, there is the obvious dilemma that arises with the labeling of offenders that the registry causes, but the labeling issue does not fully encompass my disdain for the registry. Many of my issues with the registry comes from the premise that the registry helps keep people safe. My immediate response to this is what makes sex offenders so much more dangerous than other criminals that there needs to be a registry for them, but not others? I believe one of the articles we read mentions this, and how sex offenders have some of the lowest recidivism rates. Although sex offenders can commit some truly terrible crimes, I think most people would feel just as much in danger living in a neighborhood filled with people convicted of serious assault charges, breaking and entering, armed robbery, etc. Why must we have a registry for one criminal, but not another which is arguably just as dangerous?
One of the biggest things that bothers me with a lot of the current policies of today is the irrationality behind their creation. If we accept the premise that the sex offender registry is vital for the protection of innocent citizens, why were there not registries created for all types of crimes? My understanding is that the registry was created in reaction to a case, or cases, of child abduction. My only issue with this is that it suggests that the registry was created out of emotion, and potentially influenced by public outcry, and not in a place of rational thought, which is very problematic.
On top of the fact that the registry completely singles out one type of offender, there is also the fact that these individuals paid their debt to society! If we as a society find it necessary to continue to punish offenders well after they complete their sentence (which the registry does), what is the point of even sentencing people to prison in the first place? The reason why I advocate for eliminating the registry, rather than creating one for all offenders as I mention above, is for this very reason. In theory, the sentences people receive for their crimes are meant to be a form of compensation for their wrongdoing. Rather than having an eye for an eye, today it is more like a crime for a prison sentence. Although this is problematic in itself since it is not really reforming anyone, it is still the society we live in, and as long as we continue to live in a world where incarceration is an adequate way of paying your debt to society, then no further punishment should take place after your sentence. Unfortunately the registry is a form of punishment since it deprives offenders of a variety of liberties, which is why it needs to be eliminated.
With all this being said it is important to note that I do not believe the elimination of the registry is the only thing that needs to be done. Even more important would be significant reforms to our criminal justice system so that we can actually focus on the rehabilitation and reintegration of prisoners. However, as long as we live in a society where the debt to society created by crime is paid through incarceration, then I believe an individual’s slate must theoretically be wiped clean once they are released, but the registry goes completely contrary to this belief, as it continues to treat ex-offenders as criminals, even after they become regular citizens again.
Imtashal, thank you for a great class!
I've always had an issue with our sex offender registry, mostly because it does more harm than good for our society and for the members of our society. While I'm not sure how realistic it would be in stating that I'd rather have the entire registry dismantled than reformed, I think that it should be. But if the entire elimination of the practice is not feasible, we have to place some hard and fast reformations in place.
First, the sex offender registry has no clear method of deciphering what each individual has been charged with, leaving the public to decipher legal jargon/code by themselves- fueled on nothing but some Scandal episodes and emotion guiding them through understanding our legal system. Secondly, the implications of wearing this proverbial Scarlet Letter does nothing but hinder any chance the individuals charged with this crime have of "rehabilitation" (whatever that might mean) and/or becoming "contributing members of society."
I won't echo Michael, but YES, YES, YES, to his response. The registry just renders the time they've served in prison useless because their time never ends. Regardless of all of the data that is out there that point to the fact that this group of offenders have some of the lowest recidivism rates doesn't matter-- what matters is public perception and public emotion.
As for female offenders, I think we're all aware of the gender norms and expectations that make it hard for the public and for the legal system to see them as viable offenders-- as Professor Stein has always said, "We like our victims a certain way," I might go further and say that we also like our offenders/perps/etc a certain way. This is why we have these stranger-in-an-alley tropes when it comes to sex offenses; if you "look creepy" in a sex crime trial, you are most likely getting thrown behind bars. If you are a white, male, trust-fund baby, you probably aren't. If you're a female, you cannot be possibly "strong" or "manipulative" or even "sick" enough to violate someone else sexually. It's something that I think the changing of our gender norms will change the perception of. Only time will tell.
In any case, the sex offender registry is asinine and ineffective.
Post a Comment