Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
And Who Will Check the Apples for Razors?
In Texas and
several other states across the country, law enforcement officials
are engaging in the annual pre-Halloween ritual
of corraling and branding "sex offenders" to prevent them from
molesting kids while handing out candy. The efforts include arrests
(typically for violating registration requirements or residence
restrictions), confinement to police stations during
trick-or-treat hours, and mandatory posting of signs declaring
the homes of sex offenders candy-free zones. In South
Carolina, A.P.
reports, registered sex offenders "cannot give out candy or
have their outdoor lights on." New York goes further, decreeing
that sex offenders "can't answer the door to trick-or-treaters,
have Halloween candy in their possession or dress in
costume" (italics added). When do sweets legally qualify as
Halloween candy? Minis presumably are contraband, but what about
fun size?
There is little rhyme or reason to this crackdown, which does not distinguish between registrants who have a history of sexually assaulting children and those who have never shown any inclination to do so. Furthermore, as Scott Henson notes at Grits for Breakfast, the sex offender roundup diverts police resources from more pressing concerns to address a hazard that is vanishingly unlikely to materialize:
Such programs are all about playing to the media, not public safety. Kids trick or treating are more likely to be hit by lightning while going door to door than they are to be abducted by a registered sex offender.
There's only one [documented] case in the history of the planet where a child was abducted by a stranger while trick or treating (in Wisconsin in 1973). In that instance, the killer had no prior record and wouldn't have been on any sex offender registry even if it had existed....
By comparison, how many drunk drivers are out on Halloween? How much vandalism and other youth crime occurs that night while police attention is focused on tracking sex offenders?
They can say this is all about protecting children, but if authorities really wanted to protect kids they'd protect them from actual, demonstrable risks that occur in the real world.
Henson's advice to parents:
Let the kids go get some candy and have some fun, for heavens sake, and if you're worried what will happen, tag along. It's called "parenting."
Jesse Walker noted Halloween hype about sex offenders back in 2006.
|10.23.08 @ 5:27PM|#
I was thinking about putting one of those signs on my door to keep the kids away.
robc|10.23.08 @ 5:28PM|#
A friend of mine has wanted*, for years, to go to the grocery on
halloween and buy a bag of apples and a box of razorblades just to
see the reaction. Ive told him Im willing to film.
*but not in the sense of actually doing it.
|10.23.08 @ 5:49PM|#
This crap is just mass hysteria.
When I went begging in ancient times ('60? - '67) I was told to
never, ever, under no circumstances, enter somebody's
home. I was also taught to look before crossing the street
every time and to always, without fail, say thank
you. Ages 8-12 can go out on their own, age 13 and up go to a party
at a friend's house or you stay home (and munch on the candy you
pass out).
That pretty much covers the rules I layed down for my own kids as
well. Halloween safety (and manners) in three short, no nonsense,
sentences.
Elemenope|10.23.08 @ 5:56PM|#
When I went begging in ancient times ('60? - '67) I was told
to never, ever, under no circumstances, enter somebody's home. I
was also taught to look before crossing the street every time and
to always, without fail, say thank you. Ages 8-12 can go out on
their own, age 13 and up go to a party at a friend's house or you
stay home (and munch on the candy you pass out).
Nah, those were still the rules in my neighborhood, in
not-so-ancient times ('84-'90). I think it went topsy turvy
sometime during the nineties.
|10.23.08 @ 6:12PM|#
Nah, those were still the rules in my neighborhood, in
not-so-ancient times ('84-'90). I think it went topsy turvy
sometime during the nineties.
Have you had the high school trick-or-treaters show up at your door
too? Don't you just want to jap slap them?
|10.23.08 @ 6:33PM|#
When I was a kid, they forced kids like me to take long bus rides to socialist schools.
|10.23.08 @ 6:41PM|#
Here's what I've been doing the last few years. I load up a
prescription pill bottle with M&Ms. I put on the tie-dye. When
the kids ring the bell:
them: Trick or Treat!
me: AHHHH! Oh wow man, you scared me.
What do you want?
them: CANDY!!
me: Candy? I don't think I have any candy
Oh but wait. I've got something just like candy... Only better
TallDave|10.23.08 @ 6:42PM|#
When I was a kid, they forced kids like me to take long bus
rides to socialist schools.
Stop it, you're scaring the home-schooled kids.
Jerry|10.23.08 @ 6:47PM|#
The high school kids are probably trick-or-treating just long enough to find a house that sells candy, instead of one that just gives it away.
|10.23.08 @ 6:48PM|#
The fundamental question here is, if these "sex offenders" are
so dangerous and present so much of a risk to society that they
need to be put on a watch list and/or other measures why are
they even allowed out of prison in the first place????
Wouldn't we be better off just incarcerating them forever, or
better still executing them outright?
|10.23.08 @ 7:04PM|#
What sucks is that in many areas there aren't any kids
trick-or-treating at all any more.
Last year, I decided to hand out the most expensive chocolate I
could find just for the lark of introducing kids to some quality
chocolate. Nobody showed up.
That you have to live in a suburb to find kids trick-or-treating is
a depressing commentary on the denizens of cities. IMO, less so the
crime than on the hypocritical attitudes of parents who want to
live the urban lifestyle, but deny their kids the fun of childhood
cause they think the city is an unsafe place for kids to roam
around.
|10.23.08 @ 7:08PM|#
Let the kids go get some candy and have some fun, for heavens sake, and if you're worried what will happen, tag along. It's called "parenting."
Hmm... Sounds tough.
/First time parent of a week-and-a-half boy. :-D
SexOffenderIssues|10.23.08 @ 7:09PM|#
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com
Yep, this is nothing but a moral panic and mass hysteria, like the
70's and 80's poison candy scare, which turned out to be
bogus.
It does nothing to protect anyone, except further shame and
humiliate the offenders.
Plus, most states, this is only for those on parole or probation,
and not for all sex offenders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_hysteria
If the lights are out at the house, GO ELSEWHERE, and if you are so
scared for your children, then BE A PARENT AND GO ALONG WITH THEM!
Stop letting the Government dictate your life, and incite fear for
political gain!
|10.23.08 @ 7:12PM|#
I just love the sex offender threads at hit and run. I'm going to get some popcorn and read all of the great comments about how sex offenders, children, and candy go together just fine.
Mister DNA|10.23.08 @ 7:13PM|#
Wouldn't we be better off just incarcerating them forever, or better still executing them outright?
Don't worry... sometime in 2010 or so, Congress will pass the
Insert Name of Murdered Child Here Act which will allow
for this. In order to help with our massive deficit, some
cost-cutting measures will be added to the bill, dispensing with
trials, appeals and all that jazz.
It's for the kids, so no politician in his right mind would oppose
it.
|10.23.08 @ 7:23PM|#
It does nothing to protect anyone, except further shame and
humiliate the offenders.
The horror!
Franklin Harris|10.23.08 @ 7:51PM|#
I wonder if the new TSA-run airport security X-ray machines do as good a job of catching razor blades in candy bars as they do catching anything else.
Doug|10.23.08 @ 8:16PM|#
Wouldn't we be better off just incarcerating them forever, or better still executing them outright?
I'm with you...36¢ of electricity and problem solved.
MAX HATS|10.23.08 @ 8:22PM|#
If we spent half the time we spend inventing new pillorys for
sex offenders on preventing rapes and prosecuting rapists, we could
do a lot of good.
How many date rapists and other sleaze go on to lead happy lives?
"Sex offenders" are rare, but sex crimes remain depressingly
common.
|10.23.08 @ 9:18PM|#
Franklin,
During the late 70's and the razor blade, laced candy scare my
elementary school provided xray machines to scan our apples and
volunteers to examine our candy. The next year they suggested we
abandon trick or treating entirely and show up at the formal event
put on by our school that offered no candy but "fun and games."
|10.23.08 @ 9:26PM|#
Publicly and loudly raging against dem damn preverts is a
tried-and-true method for a politician to make himself look good
for the mouth-breathing public without actually accomplishing
anything.
If I may say something positive about South Carolina (cuz I live
here and all), Governor Sanford at least attempted to veto the
atrocious DNA collection laws the legislature just passed without
him.
|10.23.08 @ 10:13PM|#
This will mean nothing to most of you, but ElectraWoman's twin sister gave us candied apples for Halloween back in the 70s. I mean her actual twin, not some similar-looking woman. Possibly the most "celebrity" laden apartment complex in a small city in America--Dick Howser and Paula Hawkins lived there around the same time.
SexOffenderIssues|10.23.08 @ 10:21PM|#
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com
Check out these kids, ruined for life, some as young as 4 years
old:
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/12/child-sex-offenders.html
And these corrupt politicians, police, lawyers, etc:
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/07/corruption-links.html
|10.23.08 @ 10:36PM|#
the mouth-breathing public
On a completely unrelated tangent, I've always wondered what the
epithet "mouth-breathing" is supposed to mean.
Is there supposed to be something wrong with breathing through your
mouth? Are nose-breathers supposed to be superior in some way? What
about people who wheeze, or have sinus problems? Where is the
justice for them?!!
Does having a deviated septum automatically lower my social
standing?!! And how is that fair?
Mouth-breathers of the world unite!!!
cunnivore|10.24.08 @ 12:21AM|#
I always thought a mouth-breather in this context was someone
who was overly excited or on edge about something. You know, since
people tend to breathe through their mouths when excited.
It also could refer to the fact that the "de-lites" are more likely
to work in the sort of job where you have to breathe through your
mouth to endure the stench.
Conservationist|10.24.08 @ 12:25AM|#
Send all sex offenders to China.
No one wants them in the neighborhood.
cunnivore|10.24.08 @ 12:48AM|#
So if I put a giant black-and-orange "REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER"
sign out in front of my house, I won't have to deal with
trick-or-treaters, or worry about getting my house egged if I don't
answer the door?
Sounds like a great idea!
Franklin Harris|10.24.08 @ 1:06AM|#
This will mean nothing to most of you, but ElectraWoman's twin sister gave us candied apples for Halloween back in the 70s.
So, in other words, you had someone in your neighborhood in the
'70s with whom I would have liked to have reenacted "The Summer of
'42."
Franklin98|10.24.08 @ 1:48AM|#
I cannot think of any good reason why pedophiles should be forbidden from giving candy to children. It seems like an activity that they would enjoy, and since they are not the compulsive, drooling, sex-crazed weirdos everyone thinks they are, it wouldn't cause harm to anyone. An exception would obviously made for that small minority who are aggressive, sociopathic, or have any history of 'abduction' crimes.
|10.24.08 @ 3:07AM|#
I'm planning to hand out candy cigarettes to the kiddies. Should make for some interesting conversations from the parents.
wengdongqin|10.24.08 @ 4:24AM|#
Buy World Of Warcraft Power Leveling,welcome to our Wow power
leveling
site http://www.powerleveling2000.com. we offer wow powerleveling
& WOW
Gold
servie.cheap World Of Warcraft Powerleveling.We are the leading
MMORPG services company.
we professionally focused on providing Wow power
leveling service and offers 24/7 non-stop power
leveling service. With the quickest speed and best service we will
satisfy your powerleveling aspiration for your game. We only employ
the most professional players and assign only those familiar with
your specific class to play your characters. So your character can
be leveled by our professional players who are expert in World of
Warcraft,We have helped thousands of players reached their desired
levels at their appointed time. In addition, we have a strong
credit standing and the safety of your account will be protected
forever. Our motto is "Do what you wish!".And our high quality
service, good reputation and competitive price will make you enjoy
your purchase from us.
We offer a range of services for your World of Warcraft character.
We are selling World of Warcraft Gold and doing power leveling for
you at an unimaginable price. Cheap WOW Gold is on
hot sale on all servers, especially on American servers. You can
buy WOW Gold
and wow power leveling from us, a professional, loyal and reliable
wow gold exchange corporation and power leveling work group.
anarch|10.24.08 @ 5:03AM|#
they are not the compulsive, drooling, sex-crazed weirdos everyone thinks they are, it wouldn't cause harm to anyone. An exception would obviously made for that small minority who are aggressive, sociopathic, or have any history of 'abduction' crimes.
Franklin98, please elaborate. Except for "drooling."
Compulsive/sex-crazed seem good descriptors of people who continue
to seek others for sexual experiences they know to be wrong.
So do you think the pedophile doesn't think seducing children is
wrong? That would make him sociopathic, which you deny.
Or is it that you think having sex with children is not
wrong? That would make you sociopathic. No offense meant,
just a fact that should adduce to your self-knowledge; a fact that
"weirdo" is an unkind way of paraphrasing.
Seducing children in itself entails aggressiveness, however
non-violent or subtle. It also entails abduction, however local and
temporary, in that it deprives the child of rightful protection by
responsible caregivers.
So there's my flat response, which I am fully willing to believe
belabored the irrelevant obvious because I missed your meaning,
and/or because I have no in-depth knowledge of the subject.
Perhaps you were addressing a contemporary overdiagnosis of
sex-offenders, such as in the homogenizing assimilation of all
consensual teen sex to exploitation; if so, I missed the
implication. Possibly I was taken in by a joke. At the very least
my take on your post signals a predictable misunderstanding, which
I'd be happy for you to repair. At a safe distance, thank
you.
|10.24.08 @ 7:34AM|#
"Mouth-breather" is a reference to someone who constantly lets their mouth hang open, a testament to their shock and awe at a world they cannot comprehend. It's a fancy way of saying stupid.
tarran|10.24.08 @ 7:39AM|#
Anarch,
It hink that franklin98 is saying that most pedophiles are capable
of interacting with a child without raping him/her on the
spot.
Thus, children showing up at their house to collect candy as part
of the Halloween ritual probably does not pose a risk to
the children.
Most pedophiles commit their assault after a period of grooming
their victims. Halloween night does not lend itself to that sort of
grooming.
Of couurse, what we commonly call pedophilia today isn't all
pedophilia, which describes sexual attraction to prepubescent
children. Nor are all the people being forced to put up signs sex
offenders who have attacked people under the age of 18. Urinating
in public, for example, can land you on the sex offender rolls. Gay
sex with another man in a public bathroom can get you on the rolls.
While pretty icky, and compulsive, these behavors don't imply that
someone is about to start kidnapping little boys and going John
Wayne Gacy on their asses.
It, like most laws, is a stupid law.
SexOffenderIssues|10.24.08 @ 8:06AM|#
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com
If you want a sign so bad, try this one.
http://cvtfqq.bay.livefilestore.com/y1puGt-z1KJoy1W2bhw-IrIdbeL8TvYb4lxKLAmye8Twpg7wUUnDYuC0inwNce_t2ikIPPuenRP2N8/halloween.jpg
cunnivore|10.24.08 @ 9:24AM|#
Wait a minute -- so I've been letting people call me a mouth
breather all these years, thinking it just means I'm excitable,
when it really means stupid?!
Excuse me, I've got a whole bunch of ass to kick.
cunnivore|10.24.08 @ 9:25AM|#
Of course, my dentist probably doesn't count for all the times he's like "cunnivore, mouth breathing irritates your gums! Stop it!"
Ash Lux|10.24.08 @ 9:30AM|#
Buy World Of Warcraft Power Leveling,welcome to our Wow
power leveling
site . we offer wow powerleveling & WOW Gold
servie.cheap World Of Warcraft Powerleveling.We are the leading
MMORPG services company.
Thanks wengdongqin, I can't even avoid this kind of crap when I'm
not playing.*
*Not that I play wow.
|10.24.08 @ 9:35AM|#
Can an unregistered mouth-breathing Electra-Woman fetishist get
a little love on Halloween?
(actually I'm more of Judy Strangis fan)
|10.24.08 @ 10:10AM|#
Last year, I decided to hand out the most expensive
chocolate I could find just for the lark of introducing kids to
some quality chocolate. Nobody showed up.
I hate it when that happens, and I'm stuck with bags and bags of
top-shelf chocolate.
guy in the back row|10.24.08 @ 11:00AM|#
That you have to live in a suburb to find kids
trick-or-treating is a depressing commentary on the denizens of
cities. IMO, less so the crime than on the hypocritical attitudes
of parents who want to live the urban lifestyle, but deny their
kids the fun of childhood cause they think the city is an unsafe
place for kids to roam around.
I live in a city, and get a lot of kids each year. I think last
year we gave out 55 preped bags of candy.
However, since there are over 100 apartments in my apartment
building alone, maybe kids just get from their own buildings
withoutwandering to other buildings? My kids usually come home with
15 or 20 pounds of candy apiece, and that's just from our
building.
I always felt bad for the kids in suburbs, who can ring 5 doorbells
in the same time a city kid can ring 50 doorbells.
Franklin98|10.24.08 @ 11:41AM|#
anarch, your knowledge of pedophiles, sociopathy, violence, sexuality, and everything else is way too definite and unambiguous. It leaves no room for complicating and contradicting facts. It is philosophically dead, all law and no human variety and depth. This is the source of bigotry and misunderstanding in the world, and although I could explain a great deal about how things tend to work in society, in the law, and in the minds and lives of pedosexuals, there is really no point in me attempting this with someone who is inclined to call me a sociopath based on ideological differences.
anarch|10.24.08 @ 12:57PM|#
Franklin98, as I wrote, I meant no offense. I'm surprised by the proposition (so to speak) that adults having sex with children might be an OK thing to do. I confess I can't get my mind around it with my present, admittedly limited, state of knowledge. Since you can't reasonably expect me to accept on faith your avowal that it could be okay - ie, non-sociopathic - to approve of adults having sex with children, unless you or another spokesman takes the trouble to justify it, I will have to remain stuck in my prejudices, if that's what they are. I suppose I needn't point out that my view (just this once) seems to be widely shared. I encourage you, in the interest of truth, to confront it boldly if you believe it's an oppressive one, and be prepared to encounter at least initial skepticism when your assertions violate conventional morality.
anarch|10.24.08 @ 1:43PM|#
Thanks, tarran. I'm thinking, as I try usually to think, not
about the law, but rather [when the gummint lets me distinguish]
about ethics irrespective of legal sanctions. Since that's the
order on which Franklin98 responded, albeit to demur, I seem to
have been on the right track, or a right track, although in his
belief headed in the wrong direction.
As a practical matter, and the stakes (to provincials like me)
being high, since grooming could begin on Halloween - I
can't think of a more opportune public festival - I'd steer my kids
away from Mr. P.'s attractive nuisance.
What I was calling, and what I assume Franklin98 was calling
pedophilia, was pedophilia.
I agree, as I noted in my first post to F98, that many unrelated
offenses are misleadingly and damagingly subsumed to others, and I
agree that (at least) most laws are stupid. Hence my handle.
|10.24.08 @ 2:34PM|#
eCurmedgeon: "The fundamental question here is, if these "sex
offenders" are so dangerous and present so much of a risk to
society that they need to be put on a watch list and/or other
measures why are they even allowed out of prison in the first
place????"
You and your damn logic. Our whole economy is built on waste and
idiocy - we start doing things logically, and we'll be richer while
doing less work, and healther and happier - now what kind of life
would that be???
Franklin98|10.24.08 @ 2:42PM|#
anarch, my opinion is that sexual contacts between minors and
adults, within some cultural/familial/sexual paradigms, do not
violate the conventional morality therein. My opinion also
questions the construct of Childhood Sexual Abuse, produced within
the social and legal sciences of the anglophone west, as a fixed
and universal category to be applied imperialistically to such
contacts across all cultures. As the foundation for the questioning
of the Childhood Sexual Abuse category, my opinion opens up a
substantial body of narrative and ethnographic evidence that
children and adults involved in inter-generational relationships
that included sexual contact later described these relationships in
positive and non-abusive terms. Finally, my opinion wishes to
illuminate, and perhaps question, the power of the
political-legal-scientific 'complex' to devise and utilize
conventional narratives and formulas of knowledge in cases of the
perpetrators and victims of Childhood Sexual Abuse.
My opinion could be characterized as a broadly based but
specifically focused interrogation of the entire post-Victorian
model of understanding and controlling the sexuality of the
population.
My opinion will not be discussed on its merits, because we are
caught up in the pressing concern as to whether holding it
constitutes sociopathy. To my knowledge, a political opinion such
as mine has never been the basis for a diagnosis of antisocial
personality disorder, but I would love to hear how you intend to
make that case. I might even be convinced to turn myself in for
thought crimes if you can show how my questioning of social norms
is likely to cause imminent disregard for the wellbeing of
others.
guy in the back row|10.24.08 @ 3:46PM|#
That sounds ominous. "Prepped" how?
It's not as scary as it sounds. Two chocolate candies (e.g. kit
kat/milkyway) a hard candy or lollipop, bazooka gum and a tattoo
all tied up in a plastic baggie.
yum!
anarch|10.24.08 @ 7:21PM|#
my opinion is that sexual contacts between minors and adults, within some cultural/familial/sexual paradigms, do not violate the conventional morality therein.
Of course not "therein." By definition not "therein." It would be
incoherent if they violated their own paradigms. It's the validity
of a pedophile's imposing such paradigms on trick-or-treaters
that's in question.
Franklin98 @ 2:42 pm, again assuming you're not joking - I do not
feel caught up in any concern, pressing or otherwise, about the
sociopathic quotient of your opinion, precisely because that
quotient is to be derived from, rather than determine, the merit of
your opinion. Were I to voice an opinion that offended some social
norm, I should be prepared to be met by general opposition until I
had proven my case to my opponents. Some people regard "Taxation is
theft" as a sociopathic sentiment, some regard in analogous light
consensual sadomasochism, deep ecology, behaviorist pedagogy,
racism, discretionary abortion, euthanasia, and other unpopular
views that, clearly having given unpopularity some thought, you can
probably list more quickly than I.
I read your approval of pedophilia not as "political opinion," but
rather as ethical opinion. There are many practices that can merit
disapproval-that-doesn't-translate-into-legislation. I hear you
answering rather than questioning social norms; it is I who am
questioning yours.
The ethical case I make for abstaining from sex with children is
hardly original nor arbitrary. It builds on respect for a child's
developing autonomy, recognition of the irreducibly interventive
nature of erotic contact (an intervention that other contexts can
make fruitful and welcome), and the obligation to treat other
subjects primarily as ends rather than means. I'm sure you're
familiar with such principles; you seem here to disagree about
their application.
Sexual interest directed toward those who are not autonomous and
therefore incapable of reciprocating discretionally is a sign, so
far as I know, of an underdeveloped sense of self, one that seeks
the low-stakes or no-stakes game of advancing upon those who can't
reject them; that's victimization, and approving it is
sociopathic.
Many "cultural/familial/sexual paradigms" merit disapproval,
including those universally condemned in this forum when the topic
of their practice arises. Pedophilia, which you were defending,
concerns that younger subset of minors called children - on the
other side of any gray area not only in this here anglophone West.
Sparing one's children contact with pedophiles on Halloween is
hardly to export one's reservations "imperialistically to such
contacts across all cultures." The charges of imperialism, that is,
opportunistically instrumentalizing those incapble of retreat or
defense, would seem better to apply to pedophiles than to people
who believe pedophiles have no right to gratify their desires with
children. That's also where I locate an unwarranted "controlling
the sexuality of the population," - namely pedophiles controlling
the sexuality of children. I don't see much ambiguity about their
targets' disproportionate vulnerability; I confess to sensing, in
the profession of altruistic motivations for initiating children
into sex, a rationalization for extreme selfishnes, but will keep
my mind open.
I don't know to whom you, or whatever pedophiles whose claims you
represent, would turn yourself in to in order to correct
uncharitable and self-deceiving thoughts; I wouldn't recommend the
State. I don't know enough about current psychotherapies to suggest
any. My counsel would be to stay away from children you are tempted
to engage for sex.
Franklin98|10.24.08 @ 11:33PM|#
anarch, I remain intrigued by your innovative theories of
sociopathy. I am entirely new to this way of thinking, and I wish
to be put in touch with your most esteemed colleagues at the
venerable institution at which this theory has been developed.
Whereas academic psychologists previously labeled as sociopathic
certain behavioral patterns, chiefly the lack of empathy and the
inability to internalize and act according to social norms, we now
learn that 'sentiments', 'uncharitable and self-deceiving
thoughts', and ethical inquiries themselves can be evidence of an
antisocial personality disorder. My interest in the genesis of this
body of thought is only surpassed by my excitement in considering
the opportunity it affords to the elites within criminal and legal
psychology to expand the regions of their surveillance and produce
new diagnoses of great pertinence to the state.
After I receive your scholarly elaboration, I would also love to
explore your enterprising contributions to political theory,
particularly in regards to 'pedophile imperialism' and the
difference between political opinion and ethical opinion.
anarch|10.25.08 @ 4:19AM|#
labeled as sociopathic certain behavioral patterns, chiefly the lack of empathy and the inability to internalize and act according to social norms, we now learn that 'sentiments', 'uncharitable and self-deceiving thoughts'
I am unable to envision uncharitable empathy or self-deceiving
charity.
and ethical inquiries themselves can be evidence of an antisocial personality disorder.
If I thought your inquiry wrong, I wouldn't have
encouraged or joined you in it. I've already told you that what
seems wrong to me is not your inquiry, but rather certainly
particular answers to your inquiry that you've produced here.
My interest in the genesis of this body of thought is only surpassed by my excitement in considering the opportunity it affords to the elites within criminal and legal psychology to expand the regions of their surveillance and produce new diagnoses of great pertinence to the state.
We share - I suppose - a low opinion of the State, and, I suppose
also, a lower opinion of expanding its surveillance. The only way I
know of converting statists is by demonstrating that the services
they support are unnecessary; that individuals are capable of
exercising discrimination (in the good sense) and self-control, and
entrusting them to do so will produce results superior to those
produced by coercion. Thus, successful private philanthropy must
prove more efficient in relieving the distress of the poor than
governmental confiscation and distribution of property; an armed
citizenry must behave civilly in order to be more secure than a
population dependent on state-monopoly of deadly force; and
fostering a culture of respect for persons must preserve their
dignity better than public surveillance and monitoring. Conversely,
shoplifting, by showing the untrustworthiness of liberty, invites
the centralization of commodity-transfers, violent gangsters
provoke the disarming of the populace, and people who seduce
children provide others with the rationale and appetite for
external authorities' regulating adults' access to their
targets.
I would also love to explore your enterprising contributions to political theory, particularly in regards to 'pedophile imperialism'
As I explained, pedophilia is a private, individual, psychological
version of imperialism: guerrilla imperialism. Tyranny can be
entrepreneurial, and the failure to self-govern at the individual
level is what makes hegemonic governance appear an attractive
alternative to exploitation, and necessary in the absence of
self-regulation through voluntary responses to individual
conscience and compassion. These in turn require agents to practice
self-honesty regarding their motives for acting.
and the difference between political opinion and ethical opinion.
You need to ask this on a libertarian forum?
Ethical opinion regards choices individuals make, including
voluntary associations; political opinion concerns the
justification of force or the threat of force by agents holding a
monopoly of power to compel compliance. Applied to the case at
hand, political opinion would prescribe in what ways pedophiles
should or shouldn't be involuntarily prevented from having sex with
children, while ethical opinion addresses whether pedophiles should
or shouldn't seek opportunities to influence children by acting on
their pedophiliac impulses.
Franklin98|10.27.08 @ 4:38PM|#
From your last comment it is clear, then, that you did not understand how my opinion IS in fact a political opinion. It is a political opinion because it offers resistance to forms of power that bear on human sexuality, that construct not just norms and values, but entire frames of knowledge and discourse around the sexuality of people. In fact, the very 'pedophile' you seem to know so much about is a (relatively new) social construct, as is the entire economy of sexual deviance that you so unquestioningly reproduce in your analysis. I will not, then, give any credence to your claim that pedophilia is 'guerrilla imperialism', because it does not seem to me that you have even scratched the surface of the meaning of of the categories you wish to put into equivalency.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245