What’s in a word?
By Sandy . . . Long before condemnation of the term “sex offender” became so prevalent, many advocates, including those of us at NARSOL, were very uncomfortable with that term. That was the primary reason behind us making the decision, in 2016, to change our name from RSOL—Reform Sex Offender Laws—to NARSOL—National Assoc. for Rational Sexual Offense Laws.
Various terminology was used, tried out, and critiqued. Everybody knew who was meant when “sex offender” was used—someone who had been convicted of a sexual crime and was on a sex offender registry. “Registrant” became the most used when we simply meant someone on a registry, although we knew we needed more when writing or speaking to a wider audience because not everyone would understand what a “registrant” was. “Person convicted of a sexual crime” or “person with a sexual crime conviction” has the advantage of covering those who were innocent of the offense of which they were convicted as does “person on a sex offender registry,” but that one uses the objectionable term.
At some point, “person forced to register” came into limited use. With the abbreviation “PFR,” it was easy to use, and it is used exclusively among advocates. People outside the advocacy community, and many within it, don’t know what a “PFR” is.
I have never used the term, and I have strong objections to it.
Why? It perpetuates a victim mentality. A person forced to register is a person who has no control over his life or his future. He can do nothing to make his life better. When he is forced, he is a victim and will remain a victim as long as he sees himself as being forced.
People who are forced have no control. People who have no control are at the mercy of someone or something else. Those at someone else’s mercy can do nothing to help themselves. Nothing will change for them unless someone else changes it.
Rather than being forced, they are required, obligated, but they are choosing to comply with a law–no matter how wrong or how despised–that says they must register. They have control of their actions, their lives, and their futures. It’s just semantics, some will say, and yes, it is, but semantics matter. Words matter.
Many, many very active and capable advocates are required to register. They protest. They lobby. They speak out at legislative hearings. They write editorials. They volunteer with advocacy organizations and other worthy criminal justice reform movements. They serve on the boards of such organizations. They become NARSOL contacts and advocates and form NARSOL state groups.
They are not sitting and waiting for someone else to save them. They take the responsibility for their lives and their future, and they do all that they can to work for the betterment of people who are required to register and for the abolishment of the registry.
This reflects the opinion of the writer; it is not intended to convey the opinion of NARSOL as an organization.
Yep, they lobby to no end, they write, they protest, but rarely do they fight it out in FTR trial. I don’t blame them. If ya signed the State’s standard waiver of civil rights, you’ve formally surrendered and pissed away your rights to contest whatever politicians dream up to pile upon you after the fact. And Boy! Haven’t they been busy heaping on the punishment disguised as regulation.
Personally I do not believe a gov computerized database of known convicts can be abolished. However, the maintenance of that database is another matter entirely. The maintenance constitutes labor, albeit administrative it is still labor or a job.
The job of a judge is mainly administrative, but their labor is highly paid. Why is the sex offended registration labor being treated differently? Because it is punishment just as the 13th amendment suggests.
Sandy, I really enjoyed reading your thoughts on What’s in a word. Now that you have explained your reasons for not using ‘PFR’, I get it and moving forward I like the term Person convicted of a sexual crime. I also use registrant as a starter topic when I explain who we are helping out.
Registration is not a matter of choice, but rather a compulsory obligation. Registrants are forced to choose whether to submit themselves to public ostracization or endure incarceration. That is not a choice. The registration process compels individuals to act under pressure to avoid incarceration. The term “forced” is appropriate as it denotes compulsion, or constraint inflicted upon a person or an object. Registration is forced on registrants, failure to do so will result in restrictions, including the potential for imprisonment.
This author’s logic implies slaves had no control to be free or the Jews had no control over internment. Individuals who are forced maintain an individual power of authority, including the choice to oppose and retaliate. Registrants are forced to fulfill the registration requirement and simultaneously possess the capability to alter their predicament.
Forced registration doesn’t deter the community from fighting back. Slaves were compelled to serve, and some risked their lives for freedom. Jews were interned by force, but some bravely fought against evil. Citizens are forced to register and some choose to face the risk of public attacks to advocate for change.
Person Forced to Register is correct and are not victims but a survivors.
Thank you, Lloyd. I appreciate the comment as it hopefully will open the door to a meaningful discussion over what is the main, albeit somewhat buried, point. It is one’s perception of himself that allows or disallows action. One who sees himself as forced does not see that he has opportunities he can take to better the situation; he will be waiting for someone else to get him out of it. It is one’s perception of himself as not being forced that enables him to act. Your examples prove that point. Slaves rose up and became martyrs, forging the first step toward freedom. Rosa Parks said, “No more,” starting the movement toward ending an extension of slavery. Jewish people did the same, allthough once incarcerated, their ability to do so was slim. Many, many registrants take strides every day to end their form of slavery, strides mentioned in the piece and many others.
This article is a slap in the face to those who have been FORCED to put a sign in their yard, who have been FORCED to put a Registered Sex Offender stamp on their license, who have had to sell their house because a Probation Officer said so – and then they also end up in jail for 90 days while their wife has to sell the house and buy a new one. It’s a slap in the face to those who are FORCED to have a stamp on thier passport. There is no amount of talk you can give that will get me to change my mind on the subject. It’s a trash article and that’s where it belongs. It should be removed and Sandy should write an apology letter to the people who are FORCED to register.
Steve, I do apologize for offending you. However, I respect your opinion in what you said here, and I respectfully ask you to respect mine. I trust you read the line at the end that makes it clear this is my opinion. And Steve, actions are being taken in the legal arena against several of the issues you mention. In fact, if you personally have been and will be this year required to place a yard sign at Halloween, please let me know what state and county you are in.
Again, I hope you will accept my apology to you. I stand by my opinion, but I never, ever, want to offend someone.
Sandy, thank you for your work in support of people forced to register (PFR). I appreciate your continued reasonable, fact-based advocacy, however, I disagree with your commentary regarding using the term PFR. Although I wholeheartedly agree that taking a victim stance is harmful for the person taking that stance and prevents them from moving forward positively, I disagree that using the term PFR equates to a victim stance.
Many PFRs prefer that term and work very hard to advocate for change as you suggest. I believe we use that term as a rally cry, a form of rebellion, against the harmful policies and irrational laws imposed upon PFRs. They are truly forced, there is no option; I do not believe prison (which sadly is sometimes a death sentence for PFRs) is an option.
I do not like watering down the heinous impact of the registry by calling it a requirement or by referring to people on it as registrants, as if they signed up for a conference.
Athena, you make a very powerful case. I stand by my opinion and reasoning, but I have the highest respect for yours.
And please note, I didn’t say the term equated a victim stance. I said it perpetuated one, meaning that one is present initially upon being forced to register (there–I said it!) And of course forced is the correct term. No, prison isn’t a viable option. But I still maintain that it isn’t healthy for those on the registry to continue thinking of themselves that way. It makes it easier to see oneself as a victim when one thinks of himself as being controlled by an outside force. Clearly it doesn’t equate to being a victim because some who stand by the term are also staunch advocates, fighting hard to change the system.
Thank you, Athena, for your comment.
I’m late commenting on this, but I was aghast reading this and somewhat dumbfounded with the sentiment that we’re not victims?. We simply cannot afford to -tip-toe around this and hope things will get better on their own. Unless we acknowledge the fast that we ARE victims – in more ways than one — nothing will change.
If we’re not victims then why are we here? I mean, “FTR” is not a perfect nomenclature or descriptor, but it does accurately portray the compelled imposition we’re forced to participate in – a compliance or prison ultimatum.
I am willing to admit that if you will admit that continuing to think of yourself that way is paralyzing. Did you know that in legitimate therapy for victims of sexual assault and rape, one of the first things they start with is teaching them not to think of themselves as victims. I once read a beautiful essay by a young woman who had been the victim of a vicious, brutal, and prolonged gang rape. She earned the name “survivor” because they thought they had killed her but hadn’t. She wrote that she refused to think of herself as a victim because it meant they still had power over her, and she refused to give them that.
Yes, others still have power over you, but that doesn’t mean you are powerless. I contend that as long as you continue thinking of yourself as a victim, nothing will change for you. Person required to register is just as accurate and much less demeaning and corrosive. It requires changing only one letter–PRR–but it changes attitudes about the self.
Even though the general public will always scoff and balk at the notion, we are victims of an unconstitutional “public notification” law we’re forced into participating in via extortion, coercion and blackmail. Not only are we victims, we’re also hostages because our lives have been hijacked. We are slaves to public opinion and mob justice . We are being FORCED to perform a “duty” under threat of incarceration regardless of the optics of pubic opinion. Once your sentence is completed, any additional “regulatory” auxiliary function – outside of probation – is extraneous punishment outside of the original sentence and thus fosters victim-inducing suffrage.
It’s not our job or responsibility to make others “feel” comfortable or safe, but we’re victims of the government compelling us to do so. For what? VOTES, MONEY AND POWER. Our misery is being monitized because lawmakers and the media knows we’re useful idiots to them. In fact, we’re the perfect golden goose and outrage bait fodder. So, as I said, we’re victims in more ways than one.
Involuntary Servitude? Exploitation? Compelled self reporting certainly saves government a lot of money. Like 200k per year per individual.