This topic contains 10 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by Charlie 3 months, 2 weeks ago.
March 17, 2019 at 5:23 pm #53462
Originally published at Criminal Legal News By Sandy . . . In 1969, a man named Peter Yarrow, a musical pop star, opened the door of his dressing room
[See the full post at: Destroyed lives]
March 17, 2019 at 6:59 pm #53472
I concur that to keep a victim in a continuos victim state harms the victim. This give their power over to the perpetrator, or so we say. So, in most all instances, we cheer them on towards healing and health and a life without being forced to relive their victimization. This is therapy. But, society has taken that choice off the victim, and chooses instead to keep a here and now focus on the person who, regardless of the circumstances, did the harming. The victim has no say, and is forever linked in a vengeance cycle and therefore, never can, if they choose, ever be free. Not to mention in many cases, they marry their perpetrator because a statutory crime happened or in others, this was a parent, a brother, a sister, etc who they choose to figure, and who bear the mark of Cain every time they see them, opening a fresh remember now of all the associated wounds for both. The registry is evil and cruel and care not a wit who collaterally is destroyed, so those who are not true victims can feel good about themselves. Machiavellian narcissists drive this registry.
March 17, 2019 at 7:09 pm #53468
When I was 13 or so, in the 80’s, I had the awesome opportunity to see Peter, Paul and Mary play at a college nearby
And me and several young people were invited to sit at their feet while they sang Puff the Magic Dragon.
It was so cool.
It’s a shame that had the incident happened more recently, I would not have had such an opportunity
March 18, 2019 at 7:28 am #53479
Sandy, you have a very hard-hitting style of writing that goes to the heart of the issue. Although you’ve raised a number of questions, I will provide observations on only one.
To paraphrase, you asked why society is willing to forgive any transgression except those that are sexual in nature. One factor is that all humans are sexual beings. Not every person is inclined toward murder, robbery, violence or other anti-social behavior. So those are not feared. But most have fears about their own sexual desires, whether fleeting or more permanent.
Considering those convicted of a sex offense as aberrant monsters allows one to push away the mirror; to see that possibility not as a part of himself, and to deny the potential in all of us. We tend to hate what we fear most in ourselves. The witches are over there, not here.
May 5, 2019 at 6:57 am #55321
This also has a lot to do with the sensationalism of sex crimes in the media. It sells well. And the public has been educated to accept group thinking as a “societal norm” and accept sex offenses as monsterous. Since humans are social creatures, (herd animals) by nature, there is an existential drive to belong to the strongest group. Group think allows belonging, which creates a feeling of power and security. Much like a gang, a faith system, or a cliche, hating on sexual offenders makes you feel like you are part of the majority, therefore, normal. If society viewed human sexuality more like other countries where registries don’t exist, it would be different. This is why the work NARSOL does with public awareness, Fearless Groups, and advocacy is so vital. We must combat thinking errors with facts…change the minds of the general public.
March 18, 2019 at 7:37 am #53482
a man without a country
Great article, Sandy!
You might not post it here, but here’s a link to a newspaper I follow in the state where my descent began (I am now no longer in the USA, but I still watch things back there.)
http://www.hotsr.com/news/2018/jun/15/child-exploitation-20180615/ [EDITOR COMMENT: NARSOL IS ALLOWING THIS LINK BECAUSE IT IS PERTINENT AND RELEVANT TO THE POST AND IS NOT SELF-PROMOTING.]
I saw this last year and gagged on the junk science in it. AR’s deputy AG talks about how a customer in a check-out line notices the person behind her is looking at her strangely–as if they may have seen the pictures of said customer from thirty years before. First of all, the internet isn’t that old. Second, I remember many times looking at family photo albums and amusing my parents by my mistaking the little one in the picture for someone who is now 150 pounds heavier and twice as tall. The notion that a stranger can identify a person in their 30s with just a few seconds’ looking with a much, much younger version of the same person, having seen on the picture and the new old version is so dang ludicrous, but that’s what these gov’t shysters like to do: keep up the victimization!
Not to sound like a broken record, but I wish more people would look at the blog I posted over in Tales last year: “Quotes, Sources, and Thoughts.” Our team needs to be prepared with the logic of false cause/false effect arguments as well as false analogy and many more.
March 19, 2019 at 5:40 am #53507
a man without a country
Just looked at my link again. It almost looks like (purposeful ambiguity) the AR deputy AG is insinuating that a victim might, years in the future, FEEL when someone is looking at their old pictures.
I guess I should have destroyed those pics my parents took of me in my baby bathtub instead of tossing them in the garbage fifty years after the fact. Ooh! That explains those creepy feelings I get every now and then! Someone’s looking at a picture of me I can’t even remember being taken.
Is he or isn’t he playing word games to make this CONTINUED VICTIMIZATION by the system seem real.
March 20, 2019 at 6:03 pm #53592
People hate, convict, abuse, humiliate, shame, kill, blame, etc, etc, etc to hide their own past…. simple.
March 21, 2019 at 11:49 pm #53671
I have a question or two I’d love to have answered:
(1) How is bringing the registries across this nation in line with the Constitution and removing the punitive aspects “re-victimizing” any victim of any sexual offense? That’s always thrown out there by advocacy groups with full media support.
(2) Is there any part in the United States Constitution that bestows society has the “right” to know about a sex offender’s whereabouts, employment, address, etc. via a public sex offender registry? Is this not an “invented right”?
(3) How is demanding legitimate hard evidence re-victimizing the alleged victim of a sex crime?
(4) Who do so many women seem to think that a mere accusation should be all that’s required to convict a man of a sexual offense/sexual misconduct? Why do so many act as if women and children NEVER lie about an alleged sex crime?
March 25, 2019 at 11:28 am #53798
Don’t tread on me
It’s called a self reinforcing delusion.
March 25, 2019 at 10:27 pm #53833
Has anyone ever tried following the bouncing buck? Over the years I have seen various substances and activities become illegal and the government and the supreme court have twisted the commerce clause to usurp the power reserved to the state by the constitution. The more people that are arrested, charged, convicted, and imprisoned, the more money each department of the DOJ gets in its annual budget.
Now we have the registry. My po is forcing me to take sex offender treatment program and psychosexual therapy. Here again we are talking money. The more people the po has to manage the more money they get in the budget. I have evidence of how illegal and fraudulent this is but have been unable to find a lawyer with the intestinal fortitude to take on the doj.
If anyone knows of such a person, please let me know. The evidence I have includes affidavits from Senate secretaries, house secretaries, judges and other witnesses. But no one I have found other than two people who are now dead have been willing to even look at what we have. Someone out there knows someone who will be willing to look at what we have. Whomever you are, this could mean a big difference in the way our future could look. Thank you all so very much for all you’re doing. I just want to contribute also.