What About the Sheep Humpers?

|

Reader "Baldur" sends along this story in Counterpunch, "Scapegoats and Shunning," by "Pariah" (not his real name). Pariah writes:

There is a class of people in America today, numbering two million or more, who have been utterly scapegoated, ostracized, demonized and shunned….They are regularly vilified with the most vicious and hate-filled language–language previously reserved for classes now protected: Jews, Blacks, homosexuals….About 600,000 of them have been rounded up and forced to register–many soon to be monitored for life with electronic bracelets and global positioning devices. Nearly 4000 have been locked up for life, not on criminal charges, but by civil commitment, and those numbers are growing by the day.

He writes, of course, of sex offenders and, without ignoring the "criminals who have caused extreme harm," argues that the entire category is both of relatively recent vintage and the result of a long-playing social panic in the United States. He also challenges the belief that sex offenders are particularly likely to re-offend. It's worth reading and is online here.

Though it does fail to address the question at the heart of a Detroit Free Press story sent along by reader Scott Ross: Should sheep fuckers be on sexual-offender registries? Jeffrey S. Haynes of Michigan has admitted having sex with the sheep of a neighbor but is fighting his inclusion on the sort of registry that Pariah notes have become increasingly ubiquitous in the past 15 years:

At sentencing, Haynes accepted "full responsibility" and said he was sorry, the Battle Creek Enquirer wrote. But he added, "I should not be treated as a child molester." He appealed the registry order.

That story here.

Reason Contributing Editor Thomas Szasz wrote about the Catholic Church child-molesting scandals here. Reason Web Editor Tim Cavanaugh noted that the most infamous of the convicted priests, Paul Shanley, was convicted solely on repressed-memory testimony here (and so did Reason contributor Jonathan Rauch here). And Reason Senior Editor Jacob Sullum underscored the troubling constitutional issues in "civil commitment," used to lock sex offenders up to prevent future crimes, here.

Advertisement

NEXT: Forget Vietnam

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. In another thread, I pointed out that Brokeback Mountain was about shepherds rather than cowboys. Sorry ’bout the following, but it’s Oscar night and I couldn’t help but conflate that film and this story. …There’s a sequel here just beggin’ to be made.

    Jack Twist: “God, I wish I knew how to quit you!”

    Molly the Sheep: “Baaaaaa!”

  2. The defendant did commit an adulterous act with a sheep – most distasteful in view of the fact that the sheep was under 18 years old.

  3. Before the snarky comments start, let me preface this by saying that I find sex with animals to be particularly disgusting but,

    Why can we farm and kill them for food, clothing, sport, etc – but screwing them is illegal?

  4. Ken, if you told 90% of the people I know that Heath Ledger plays a shepherd they’d ask you “in what Christmas pageant?” Even though you’re right, it’s a hopeless cause.

  5. KS,

    This non-meme arises a lot; it is common usage in Wyoming to refer to shepherds as “cowboys.”

  6. If you’re at a party where political discussions can fly, a good way to kill conversation is to bring up the rights of convicted sex offenders. Regardless of how badly the system wrongs a man who may have made an honest mistake, the “would somebody please think of the children?” crowd holds sway from cocktail parties to Capitol Hill. That being said, please, oh please, may the LP wait until they have made some headway on drugs or property rights before they adopt defending the rights of sex offenders as a major platform. But nor should they be forgotten.
    First, they came for the guys who had slept with 17 year olds, but I had never slept with an underage girl, so…

  7. I always wondered how the sexual-offender registries didn’t trip over the “no ex post facto” clause in the Constitution, at least for people who were convicted before the Megan’s Laws etc., started getting passed.

  8. When sheep fucking is outlawed, only outlaws will … oh nevermind.

  9. yeah recently I tried to convince my emidiate circle of friends that sheep fucking should remain legal in washington state (and other barn yard shenanigans) on the grounds that my tax dollers would be better spent on putting mureders theives and rapists in jail…the response I got was not not a good one…there really is a hatred out there for these confused individuals.

  10. Eeeeeew!

    I say, pubish their names in their local paper, and leave it at that. Not every revolting act is the same, and putting sheep fuckers on the sex offender rolls can consume law enforcement resources that are better spent on keeping tabs on those who have actually hurt a human being.

    -jcr

  11. So Angus and McTavish are sitting around in the pub. Angus takes a long pull at his drink, looks out the door and says “Angus, you see that bridge out there.”

    “Aye Angus, I do”

    “S’a goood Bridge. Built it with me bare hands I did. But do they call me angus the bridge builder?”

    “No angus they don’t” he says sympathetically.

    “And ya see that roof on the school. S’ a good rooooof, took me a month, with me bare hands.” He takes a pull again. “But do they call em Angus the Roof Maker?”

    “No angus they don’t”

    Angus takes another deeeeep pull at his beer, his face going red.

    “But you fuck ONE Sheep . . .!!!!”

  12. …Should sheep fuckers be on sexual-offender registries?…

    I prefer to call them “sheep lovers”.

  13. …but seriously, if it consumes law enforcement resources and keeps the LEOs away from my meth lab then I fully support it.

  14. All ye who laugh at the plight of the poor pig porkers, duck fuckers, and cow plowers, beware; for there, but for the grace…

    But seriously…

    Pete, a guy who graduated high school a year ahead of me, hooked up with a young hottie via the Evil, Evil Internet. He takes Miss Hottie on a date, which ends up at his place. Punchline, of course, is that young Miss Hottie is young, indeed: fifteen, which (he says) he discovers only as he drops her back off at “her place” only to be met by Angry Daddy and the police.

    Now, to be sure, it was a case of “he said, she said” which was promptly trumped by “her daddy said” and “her birth certificate said.” But Pete claimed the girl claimed to be of age, and I’m not disinclined to believe him.

    Why? I’ll enter as evidence my senior prom photo:
    http://savagejoy.com/AWJMJ.html

    I was sixteen at the time. Alicia, my date, was fifteen. I looked like a dorky twelve year old. She looked like an attractive young woman in her early twenties. In fact, she and her mother (who looked very young for her age) were frequently mistaken for sisters, and Alicia told me she was frequently offered drinks, no ID required. (Then again, this was 1987, and things weren’t quite the same back then as now.)

    Bottom line, of course, is that Pete can be found on Connecticut’s sex offender registry, on which he will remain for the duration.

    JMJ

  15. If I were the ex-girlfriend, one Ms. Handyside, I’d be extremely humiliated by both the ex-boyfriend’s acts and my last name.

    Setting aside the question of whether he belongs on the sex offender list, which I doubt, he was charged and convicted for sodomy. Does Michigan not have a law against sheep fucking? Sodomy shouldn’t even be against the law anyhow.

  16. A 15 year old hot girl dating via the internet in 1987? Unless she has the geekdom-polymath trifecta of interests ranging over filk, the sca and computer science I don’t know if I find that credible…

  17. A 15 year old hot girl dating via the internet in 1987? Unless she has the geekdom-polymath trifecta of interests ranging over filk, the sca and computer science I don’t know if I find that credible…

    Pete’s conviction was in 1999. The photo of me and my prom date is circa 1987.

    JMJ

  18. I’ve always wondered if, in many cases of statutory rape (I know, somewhat off-topic, but still, in PA, a Megan’s Law offense) the prosecution doesn’t harm the victim more than anything else.

    I’ve seen cases where the “victim” (often a very sophisticated 15 or 16 year old) is “counseled” incessantly for the many months leading to the trial. The counselors report that their main job is to “educate” the girl that she is a “victim” and tell her about all the psychological scars she should have from this occurrence. Of course, they say this is all about helping her “heal” and “get on with her life,” but when you hear the psychobabble the DAs get out of these girls on the stand…

  19. Somebody e-mailed me this site, which shows you where convicted sex offenders in your neighborhood live, who they are, and what they were convicted of.

    http://www.familywatchdog.us/

    (I think I’ve seen another similar site before, but this one seems to go into a greater level of detail.)

    “Statutory rape” seems to be the number one offense in my particular neighborhood, by far. Unfortunately for the offenders (and their neighbors who might want to know exactly how alarmed to be), there is no indication of whether the offenders are creepy old guys who prey on vulnerable, naive teenage girls who are desperate for love, or just 18-year-old guys who have sex with their 17-year-old girlfriends.

    (One of the statutory rapists nearest me is a woman, actually.)

    “Sodomy” is also a common offense in my area. I can barely believe that crime is still on the books in this area, but totally amazed that people are actually still being charged and convicted of it.

  20. vulnerable, naive teenage girls who are desperate for love

    …or, the cynic in me suspects, are looking for excitement and attention (and a little shtoopin’ from an older guy), and aren’t above deceit to get it.

    JMJ

  21. Pete’s conviction was in 1999. The photo of me and my prom date is circa 1987.

    Ahh. Well, perhaps at over 30, he should have stayed away from a girl claiming to be 18, anyway. I agree with you that he got shafted, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t creepy. Besides, how stupid would he have to be (or think that she was) to not be able to figure out that she was in high school after a night’s conversation? Mmm?

  22. FWIW, I seem to recall (but don’t hold me to it) that (he claimed that) she claimed to be older than eighteen. Not by a lot, mind you, but still. Pete was either 29 or 30 at the time (don’t remember). Creepy? Perhaps, but not hideously so, had she, in fact, been twenty or twenty-one.

    As to the conversation… I’ve met plenty of extremely bright, sophisticated, worldly high school aged girls, and still more twentysomething college coed dingbats. I don’t know that the night’s conversation would constitute an effective procedure. (Geez, I’m picturing a warped kind of Turing Test here. 8^) And I’m not entirely sure how many people, of either gender, hook up via ‘net chatrooms for witty repartee.

    And looks won’t work, either (as we can see from my prom photo, ref. above – Alicia is a year younger than me, don’t forget).

    JMJ

  23. Several years ago, the local paper reported a guy over in Madison County (Arkansas’ equivalent of Deliverance) busted for statutory rape of a 12-year-old. He was quoted as telling police “I thought she was 13.” I just about laughed myself into an aneurism.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.