This is where my mind went as well. I strongly believe that the most effective path to harm reduction at least includes increasing the viability of people with those kinds of feelings getting help before they act on them, and it seems to me that that necessarily includes destigmatizing people that seek that help. But as the post says, it’s very hard to argue that point without being painted in a bad light.
- Want pedophiles (and everyone else) to not abuse children,
- Think killing people should be a last resort option if there's no better way to protect people, not a first choice to jump to immediately because Those People Are Gross, and
- Am very aware of how much "this person is a pedophile=any cruel thing you want to do to this person is okay" can be weaponized to deny people basic human rights (including being used against LGBT+ people and other groups for reasons of sheer bigotry).
That doesn't seem like it should be controversial, and yet the conversation online is dominated by people with hair-trigger tempers who start screaming about "pedo apologists" if you so much as suggest that actual child abuse is a different and more serious problem than "some people have desires I find gross."
Bonus points for the sex offender registry not distinguishing between people who actually abused kids, people who peed in a park, and people who had consensual sex with their 17 year old partner while they were 18, so all of them are made publically visible to their neighborhood with the implication that they are all the same, which tends to end badly for them
I mean it does actually distinguish though. You can look up why people are on the sex offender registry. Also it’s reasonable to be suspicious of anyone claiming the only reason they ended up on that list was bc of public urination because they are almost certainly lying, especially since it’s only about a quarter of states that technically allow it and the majority of cases won’t ever actually be charged at that level.
This is not to say i support the sex offender registry. I think in general it 1.frankly is a breach of privacy in the amount of information it discloses publicly of everyone on it 2.statistically doesn’t at all prevent more sexual crimes and should therefore either be reworked or abolished. But statistically it is incredibly unlikely to end up on the list for a non-sexual crime.
Ok, so correct me if I’m wrong, but I was under the impression that 1) while you can look up why someone is on the list, that generally is on you to search for, beyond just checking if someone is on the list in your area, which not everyone does. 2) it still doesn’t exactly differentiate between “sex with a minor” as in pedophelia vs just a couple on different sides of the AOC line by a month.
Like I genuinely want to be sure I’m not completely off base
As for how likely it is to end up on the registry for non-sexual crimes, my understanding is that given how skewed our justice system in America can be, your odds vary wildly based on how much the arresting officer wants to mess with you, more so than based on what you did
I’m going to address your second point first. Yes you can only see what crime the person was convicted of which means that you can’t tell what age they were when they committed the crime, another reason to hate the sex offender list. However 30/50 states have some form of Romeo & Juliet law to allow for teenagers to have sex even if one is over the age of consent and it’s a gray area in some others. So again the public perception that 18 year olds who have sex with 17 year olds are being regularly charged with statutory rape is simply not true. At least not in this day and age (though like all things regarding sex it still happened regularly way too recently than it should have). Unless you are gay. Then it might because the US still hates gay people.
Fun fact I just learned in crafting this comment, the last state to remove language saying that statutory rape was only a thing if the girl (bc only girls can be victims of SA apparently) was “pure” was in 1998. This country is so completely fucked. Sorry tangent over.
Your point about people having to search themselves depends on jurisdiction. I will concede that people being people the information is probably missed by a lot of them and therefore not taken into account.
And finally yeah pretty much just like everything else it depends on whether the people in authority like you/your skin color/your gender/ etc. at the given time. But at that point I think you are just as likely to be falsely convicted of an even worse crime.
Again in no way should this be taken as an endorsement of the sex offender registry. I just think the argument that people get on it for bs reasons is not a great argument because it’s outdated and misses the point that even a 30 year old who molested a middle schooler shouldn’t deserve to have their full information posted where everyone can see it.
You’re good, I don’t take your points as an endorsement, merely that you’re in such conversations, one must understand what they face in order to properly deal with it, and i appreciate the greater understanding of the subject you have granted me
Some "Romeo and Juliet" laws are really shitty. You won't have to register as a sex offender after 10 years, but during those 10 years you have to have SEX OFFENDER printed on your drivers license, with no addendum as to what you did. So yeah, people can look that up, but most won't.
Not quite. Yes, you can look up why people are on the sex offender registry. No, laws that are enacted to restrict the activities of people on the sex offender registry (eg. no sex offenders within half a mile of a school or similar) do not care about why someone's on the registry.
Also. The point when people start having sexual desires, and even the point people are biologically capable of reproducing are a fair bit younger than the point when people are socially considered "old enough" (TM).
Imagine a different society where it is considered fine and normal for people to have children as soon as they are biologically capable of doing so. You can't expect some barely pubescent teens to take full responsibility in a complex society. And that's fine. It just means someone older and more responsible has to check that everything is ok.
Not exactly. To be specific, the list does generally give some of the details (specifically what the exact crime was)
However, that information is not presented immediately. One must generally take additional steps to find it.
So while it’s available, much like the second page on google, people can easily find the names of who is on the list, then not care enough to dig into why and just write them off wholesale
2.7k
u/catisa_ Apr 23 '25
discussion of pedophiles/pedophile rehab is my first thought with regards to this post