• jeffw@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    90
    ·
    28 days ago

    Next week in a totally unrelated news story: Louisiana to charge LGBTQ adults as sex offenders when they come within 100 feet of children

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      28 days ago

      Works out well for anyone looking to fully transition but can’t afford that phase of surgery. Louisiana wondering why all these out of state people hanging around their schools suddenly.

      • Norgur@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        28 days ago

        Further underlines the baffling failure to understand about anything related to what experts call “humans” by the GOP.

  • Silverseren@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    28 days ago

    I have a couple of concerns with this.

    The first being if some states are going to try to use this against any kids charged with being child sex offenders, like several states have done with teenagers who have sex with each other (or have nude pictures of each other).

    An additional concern is obviously conservatives trying to use this against trans people and drag queens, whom they are already trying to define as sex offenders just for existing in public.

    Another concern or just question is…is this meant to be a deterrent? And is it even effective in that? For a lot of child sex offenders, a major component of the pleasure derived is from having power over the child in question. Removing their genitals wouldn’t necessarily change that? It’s possible it may even have them turn more to violence toward children as their outlet.

    I’m just wondering on the effectiveness of this method. Is there any evidence at all or is this being done on an emotional whim?

    • vividspecter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      28 days ago

      It also has the same issue as the death penalty, where once the punishment is enacted, it can’t be undone based on new evidence.

      • hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        27 days ago

        This is the most legally sound argument against it.

        Sure it’s bad to diddle kids, but it’s even worse to not have diddled kids, be accused and falsely convicted, have you genitals removed, and then on appeals the court is like “yeah sry bro they fucked that up, just reverse it”.

        Although a lot of people think the death penalty is bad for financial or logistical reasons, but in my opinion the biggest reason against it is that there’s no quick way to revive a person when a court later on says they got it wrong.

  • Stern@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    27 days ago

    Unless the evidentiary standard is like, “video evidence of the person stating their full name and social security number before doing it”, I’m firmly against any punishment that can’t be reversed or at least readily resolved like the death penalty or castration. We’ve got plenty of cases overturned years later on DNA evidence and the like.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      27 days ago

      Yeah, the right wing obsession with punishment is absurd. Even if we do have that level of evidence, the first reaction should be an attempt to rehabilitate, not inflict irreparable harm.

      It’s also stupid because sometimes sexual abuse of a child is about power, not sexual pleasure itself.

  • rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    27 days ago

    I’m not really sure what removing a female sex offender’s ovaries are supposed to do to prevent recidivism. As far as I’m aware, that wouldn’t do anything but send her into early menopause; restlessness, irritability, and libido might actually increase, which may make reoffending more likely.

  • guyrocket@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    28 days ago

    Next we should cut off thieves’ hands. Then harvest organs randomly from prisoners.

    They’re criminals. They should not have any rights. Fuck em, right?

    (/s)

  • JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    27 days ago

    False accusations gonna go through the roof in Louisiana. Calling it now.

    Also, how are women child sex offenders affected by all this?

  • 5oap10116@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    28 days ago

    This will certainly help them pay their debt to society and become fully functioning rehabilitated members. I can see only pros. /s

  • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    28 days ago

    Cool, Louisiana joins Florida and California as the only places with medieval penal codes like this.

      • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        28 days ago

        Yeah, it’s one of two states still using chemical castration as a punishment. Between that and still being a death penalty state it’s a rather barbaric place.

        • Snowclone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          28 days ago

          People spend so much time hating CA for being liberal, they can’t seem to figure out we have a justice system that’s more responsible for the huge percentage of prisoners vs free citizens than Texas. We had a ‘‘three strikes’’ rule in the 90s that made nearly every single conviction a mandatory life sentence, as we have so many tack on laws you can’t be convicted of one singular crime in almost every case. We had to stop enforcing the 3 strikes rule, apparently baseball isn’t a viable guide to civil codes. Who knew? And we regularly have prisons just send lesser or non violent crime prisoners home with time served because they don’t have any space left in the prison.

  • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    28 days ago

    Why not Chemical Castration? The state’s ability to decide who is and is not an offender aside, surgical castration seems pointless and ineffective.

    • kitnaht@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      28 days ago

      Surgical castration is quite effective. It removes the ovaries/testes which produce testosterone/estrogen. Problem is, from that point on, you probably need to take supplements, because I’m no doctor but I think you need those hormones for proper bone density control, etc.

      • PolarisFx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        27 days ago

        I have a genetic condition that severely limits testosterone production. Didn’t find out until I was almost 40, my health hasn’t been terrible. Mental health is a different story.

        I’ve spent the majority of my life “castrated” and it hasn’t been all that bad, that being said I still had urges even with pretty much zero testosterone so I question whether it will do anything to prevent abuse.

      • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        28 days ago

        I used to think so, too, but it turns out castrated monks and other animals have a lot of data implying they live even longer. I still think Chemical Castration would be better, though.

        • rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          27 days ago

          Living longer doesn’t necessarily mean that your bones are healthy. Osteoporosis is much more likely without adequate sex hormone production.