Repeat Sexual Offender or Biological Misfit?

A rather serious subject under discussion in this post; one which has often surfaced in my mind along with a passing intellectual curiosity. I'm an opinionated bloke, though generally not without first educating myself with the basic facts surrounding a subject.

Recently here in Australia there has been a paedophile/murder case going through the courts subject to substantial media coverage and public discussion. Out of respect to the family involved I won't mention any names or even the specific case, but I'm sure that even if you live halfway to Timbuktu you would have caught a snippet of the case and results on your local world-news broadcast at some stage over the last week or so.

This particular case has sparked much talk about a proposed Sexual Offender Register, mainly fanned by the Australian "Human Headline" himself, Mr Derryn Hinch. (Google him; he's a tripper!) While I personally think that on the surface the idea holds merit, I believe that if one looks just that little bit deeper into the possible outcomes of such a register, you'd find something like that would quickly turn the society to mush.

Firstly there's the vigilantly factor. In every town there'd be some meat-head that would round up a posse and go around stringing these sick buggers up. While I wouldn't necessarily want to put a stop to that, I'm sure we all agree that is not the way a "civilised" society such as the one we think we uphold would want to act.

Then there are other issues like where does one draw the line for and define a sexual offender? Is the 17yr old fella that has sex with his under-age girlfriend in the context of a loving relationship considered a sexual offender? Should he be listed forever and shunned by society? And there's the not-in-my-back-yard thing, where these supposedly rehabilitated sexual offenders can't find a place to settle back into normal life because nobody will allow them to move in next door.

Now don't get me wrong. I've got four children, and if one of my neighbours was a released sexual offender, I'd want to know about it. However, it would create a conundrum. While it may allow me to protect my kids, it would also have me wanting to toss a half-litre of petrol over the fence, promptly followed by a match! I don't want someone like that living next door any more than you want him next to your house. But is knowing that they are there a help or a hindrance to a normal society? Is it both?

I just can't see how a register of sexual offenders would work. Really though, if you really sit down and nut it out like I have, you may eventually come to an even bigger question that negates the first.

If they just stayed in prison, would a register even be needed?

You see, my argument would be: how is it that these people are allowed back into society at all? And before you human rights people jump up and down at that comment, first hear me through. There's a very simple thing that everyone seems to be forgetting when it comes to the way we, as a society, look upon repeat sexual offenders and paedophiles.

Just like you and I, they a living breathing biological beings. The Human, or Homo Sapien, are a species of mammal and part of the animal kingdom. Just like any other animal, the major driving force of the Human is to survive as a race. In case you weren't aware, to survive involves in simple terms the acts of eating, breathing and reproducing. For the purposes of this blog, it's that last one I'd like us to focus on... or at least the further verbs brought up when one thinks about that very innocuous verb, "reproducing."

Let's do an experiment. When I give the signal, there's something I'd like you to do. I need you to close your eyes and picture for me your favourite partner; the one person in your life that you have been most physically and sexually attracted to. It can be the girl you lost your virginity to twenty years ago, your current boyfriend, wife or lover, or some movie star that you've always secretly had a crush on. For me, it's my wife of 11 years. (That's why we got four kids, dude!)

Imagine that person standing very close to you; the lights are turned down, or off, with a soft moonlight flowing past the curtains and a gentle breeze caressing your bare skin. There's a low, rhythmic music wafting from the room next door where, after the last hour or so of flirting, talking and teasing each other across the dinner table, you have both now retired to the bedroom. As your partner wraps their body around yours, your skin pressing together, you draw a deep breath. Their scent surrounds you, as the tingling stroke of their fingers sliding down your body brings fire to your senses. Slowly, you both move onto the bed...

Okay, here's the signal. Close your eyes now and imagine all of that. Really get into it; imagine you are there right now with that person in that room.... I'll leave you two alone for a minute.

Done? Goodo. Now if you did it right, you may have found that your heart rate has just lifted slightly, breathing has increased and you're feeling just a little warm. A mirror may reveal a flushed expression with flared nostrils. Hormones are bouncing forth all over your body. If you have a FMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) machine handy, quickly stick your head in it for a second and then have a look at the results. They may look like this:

Coincidently, I've heard that some people have a similar response to eating chocolate.

Now you want to hear something scary? When a paedophile stands across the road looking at a child playing in a playground, or a rapist is picking his next victim on a park walkway, he is having these same reactions. I've seen it in a documentary, so it must be true. While in no way do I condone that, I do recognise that it is a basic biological reaction called arousal, working the same way as in you or I. Only difference is, their biological reaction is sparked by the wrong thing. We are not naturally built to be aroused by a young child's appearance, no more than a tom-cat is going to be aroused by a kitten. But for some reason, in these people, things aren't wired correctly.

You see what I mean? That right there is the fundamental reason why we all need to open our eyes and recognise that a repeat sexual offender, especially a paedophile, is not just your average run-of-the-mill criminal. If a bloke steals a car and goes to prison, he can be educated, rehabilitated and given a purpose in life. In an ideal world, when that bloke is released he is free to lead a fulfilling life, without the stealing of cars. Same theory for a convicted fraud, drug addict or gangster. Even a murderer. Now, if the car thief gets a hard-on every time he lines up a BMW to steal, you may have a problem.

I'm absolutely no Neurologist, but from what I've heard and read in my meagre 30-odd years, I would think that a man's sexual urges and arousal triggers can't be changed too easily. Yes the brain is "plastic" and can be modified, but when it comes to the things buried very deep in our primitive brain, how pliable are they? I mean, can a person's neurological make-up be altered to, say, no longer need food to eat? I hear your argument, that it's not just the brain that needs food; it's the whole body which would eventually drive the fasting nutter to eat something. True, dear, but it's the same thing with sex. Your body needs that as much as your brain. Why do you think the Catholic church is having such issues? No person is naturally able to abstain from sexual interaction. It goes against everything that makes us a biological being. We may think we are all high, mighty and can control nature, but in the end Human's are still just a type of animal, subject to animal urges and needs.

With this view in mind, when I hear that the perpetrator in a serious sexual crime against a child has a history of such acts, but was released from prison previously with the aid of a Psychiatrist's advice that the offender had "rehabilitated" while incarcerated, I can't help but shake my head. The ignorant futility of it all is, at the least, frustrating.

For a game, let's say there is a law against eating chocolate. It's considered the worst crime known to man. I did it a few decades a go, got caught, and have been in prison for half my life, on and off a rehabilitation program. My parole has just come up. I'm not a bad liar (comes with being a story-teller), and I reckon with a bit of work I could convince a shrink that I had changed, seen the error in my ways, was born again, and from this day forth I was no longer going to eat chocolate. And blow me down if I wouldn't give it a bloody good go at staying away from it. But you know what? Eventually, and despite all the consequences, I'm going to give in to the urge and eat that chocolate again. Just once.

If society really wanted me not to eat chocolate, they should have just kept me in prison where I couldn't get my hands on the stuff.

Now, eating chocolate is not paedophilia. I have no intention of diminishing the abhorrent nature of such a crime, or belittling the hurt that such cases have caused the families involved. But I think you get my point. These people are not as much criminal as they are mentally ill. There is a condition you may have heard of called Object Sexuality, where a person can exhibit "a pronounced emotional, often romantic and even sexual desire towards developing significant relationships with particular inanimate objects." (Wikipedia)

While that's not considered a crime, it is not natural/normal, thus subject to clinical treatment. Could not the same be said for someone exhibiting "a pronounced emotional, often romantic and even sexual desire towards developing significant relationships" with under-age children? That is a crime, and should be severely treated as such. But from an initial pre-crime point of view, how is it any different from a man that is only ever aroused by a redhead woman? Or a woman turned on only by a short man with dimples and a bald spot? Or a person that has intimate dreams about their teacher, boss or a toaster?

In my opinion they simply need to be kept well away from society, indefinitely, hopefully until medical technology advances to the point where their brains can be re-wired at the touch of a button. In doing that, a Sexual Offender Register, and all it's related problems, would then never be needed. What do you think? It's a big deal, either way, but I reckon before governments go making any knee-jerk reactions after one of these cases, there needs to be some changes in common thought. We can't keep putting these people away, then letting them out in a few years with this naive view that they're all better for being behind bars, only to have them go out and victimise some other poor innocent child.

Fix it, people! The world is full of experts that know a million times what I know. Why haven't these incredibly learned people found a solution to this problem (and many others)????

Anyway, nothing I can do from my living room chair. But I do feel better for ranting. Feel free to agree or disagree, and comment to such ends below.

Till next time,
-Damien.