Supreme Court weighs death for child rapists

[Deagle]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24115142/


updated 6:54 p.m. ET April 14, 2008
SLIDELL, La. - When the news broke last month that a janitor had been arrested and accused of raping boys in the bathroom at an elementary school, the issue of justice and retribution became the talk around dinner tables and baseball fields.

Castrate him, some said. No, let the other inmates deal with him. No, execute him.

Castration and jailhouse vigilantism are out of the question, but putting a child rapist to death is within the bounds of Louisiana law.



Why is castration out of the question?

[Lubbock]

Because it doesn't work, other than to prevent the penis from being used as the instrument of rape.

Rape is not about sex.

[Rhino]

Because it doesn't work, other than to prevent the penis from being used as the instrument of rape.That means it works.

And who says jailhouse vigilantism is out of the question? These folks don't know very much about our prisons!

[Deagle]

That means it works.
Yea I wasn't exactly seeing the downside to having the primary "tool" removed from the equation.

[Wolfcounsel]

Castration is removing the testicles from a male. It does not involve removing the penis. And in anger, the castrato can very well use a splintered broom handle on the victim. It is better to castrate his head from his shoulders.

[DesertFox]

I think rape is very much about sex, because a man can't penetrate without an erection and an erection has no other function than sex.

Rape may also be about other things but it's fundamentally about sex.

[Lubbock]

Castration is removing the testicles from a male. It does not involve removing the penis.

Which was my point.

Castration --removing the testicles, either by surgery or by chemical treatment [which is usually temporary], does nothing to stop rape. Just because the man can not use the penis he has as an instrument of rape will not stop the use of other instruments of torture from being used as an instrument of rape.

Once again: RAPE IS NOT ABOUT SEX.

Get it?

[Deagle]

I see your point Lubbock, but I would like to know that they are removed from the gene pool.

[Wolfcounsel]

"I think rape is very much about sex, because a man can't penetrate without an erection and an erection has no other function than sex.

Rape may also be about other things but it's fundamentally about sex." --DesertFox




Sex involves the voluntary union of a male and female in coitus. Otherwise, it is unwanted coitus, or rape. A man wanting to have sex with an unwilling woman is wanting to rape.

[DesertFox]

It's still sex. Changing the word doesn't change what it's about, which is getting your rocks off.

[Rhino]

Castration is removing the testicles from a male. It does not involve removing the penis.Somewhat of a semantics argument. Although people commonly use the term castration, I think it's plain that they mean to refer to penectomy.

And in anger, the castrato can very well use a splintered broom handle on the victim. It is better to castrate his head from his shoulders.I have no opposition to that.

[DesertFox]

Once again: RAPE IS NOT ABOUT SEX.

Get it?Nope. Nothing stops a rapist from using those "other instruments" if terrorizing the victim, or dominating the victim, or hurting the victim, were what he was after. He uses his penis because he wants to get his rocks off. If he also wanted to do that other stuff he would also do that.

Get it? RAPE IS ABOUT GETTING YOUR ROCKS OFF.

[Wolfcounsel]

Rape is not about getting your rocks off and it's not about sex. If it were so, you would get arrested for rape if you were to rub yourself against my leg like a puppy does.:punish:

Once more, sex involves the agreement and union of two people in coitus. Unless you want to :roar:call masturbating on an unwilling woman sex!

[Deagle]

What is wrong with castrating males who sexually abuse children? It removes the mechanism that generates the desire for sexual gratification.
Also, should it only apply to cases of child molestation or should all forms of rape be judged the same way. If not why not?

[DesertFox]

Rape is not about getting your rocks off and it's not about sex. Yeah, it is. If it weren't, there would be no semen. If it were so, you would get arrested for rape if you were to rub yourself against my leg like a puppy does.Say what? Rape, by law, involves penetration.

Once more, sex involves the agreement and union of two people in coitus. Unless you want to call masturbating on an unwilling woman sex!Once more, you don't get to redefine "sex" to suit yourself. :punish:

[Lubbock]

Get it? RAPE IS ABOUT GETTING YOUR ROCKS OFF.

Apparently, you've never had a lot of one-on-one contact with rape victims.

[Deagle]

Apparently, you've never had a lot of one-on-one contact with rape victims.
Me too. What is one on one contact with rape victims?

[DoctorDoom]

Unarguable fact: dead rapists and molestors no longer rape or molest.

[Rhino]

Rape is primarily a crime of violence, which has led to a lot of publication of the theory that it is violence, not sex. But that's not completely true in a real sense. It's an oversimplification. Sexual desire is less a motivation than violent aggression, but many people mistakenly believe that eliminates sexual desire from the equation, and that's simply not true. While rape is indeed primarily a crime of violence, sex is also a large motivator, and obviously is also the instrument of violence used. Remove that from the equation, and you eliminate most of the problem. It is true that removal of the sexual urge will not necessarily prevent violent acts by other means. However, given that sexual urges were a prime motivator or catalyst for that violence in the first place, such acts by other means would be far less likely.

[Rhino]

Unarguable fact: dead rapists and molestors no longer rape or molest.Now that I would view as an empirical axiom!

[DesertFox]

Apparently, you've never had a lot of one-on-one contact with rape victims.Please explain. I've known many women who were raped. Two of these were my sisters. I've had a lot of one-on-one contact with my sisters, though I wasn't the one who raped them. What kind of one-on-one contact are you talking about?

Based on the sheer number of woman I know who have been raped, I personally guesstimate the percentage of women walking around who have been raped at 50% or higher.

[PrezLeefun]

Castration is removing the testicles from a male. It does not involve removing the penis. And in anger, the castrato can very well use a splintered broom handle on the victim. It is better to castrate his head from his shoulders.

Bravo!!!!! What wolfie says.

[Kathy30]

Germany experimented with castration for violent rape and had to scrap the program as being too dangerous.

Rape is a crime of violence. True the penis might be the tool of that violence, but removing the tool does not remove the need for violence or the need to see the instilled fear in the victims. The rapist just gets another tool but the need to instill fear by violence grows. Rapists who have been castrated move very quickly from rape to prolonged torture. Since they never can achieve the release of sexual orgasm, the release comes from (and I quote) "seeing the life go out of their eyes". Some rapists say that this mental release is far more profound and pleasurable than sexual orgasm ever was.

There has been some success with chemical castration in which drugs suppress the pleasure centers in the brain, but actual castration only makes things worse.

[Rhino]

The rapist just gets another tool but the need to instill fear by violence grows. Rapists who have been castrated move very quickly from rape to prolonged torture. Since they never can achieve the release of sexual orgasm, the release comes from (and I quote) "seeing the life go out of their eyes". Some rapists say that this mental release is far more profound and pleasurable than sexual orgasm ever was.Got a link? The psychological studies I've seen all show sexual desire as a strong motivational factor.

[Kathy30]

Got a link? The psychological studies I've seen all show sexual desire as a strong motivational factor.

Sexual desire like any other desire is adaptable. The real source isn't the penis, it's the brain. The brain doesn't change, it merely redirects the pleasurable experience from sex to pure unadulterated violence. The violent sex offender isn't after sex, he's really after violence, it just takes the form of sex. Remove sex doesn't remove the need to experience the fear.

If you are asking whether I personally know any rapists. Yes, in my career I have known several hundred. The more violent the offender, the less sex is a component. At the end, sex is removed in any case, and they become merely serial killers.

[DesertFox]

The violent sex offender isn't after sex, he's really after violenceI don't think so. Like Rhino, everything I've read on this persuades me that a rapist seeks sexual release and can only get it via violence. Same with child perverts. Same with bestiality freaks. Same with queers, sadomasochists, B&D punks, feces eaters (who seek to be humiliated), on and on. Sex drives it all, and it's the perversion of their minds that takes them down these unacceptable paths to achieve sexual release.

[Kathy30]

So what happens when you take the sex away? Does the desire for violence go too? No.

[Rhino]

Very often, yes, since the violence was rooted in the sexual desire that manifested it.

[Rhino]

Tis is about chemical castration of pedophiles, but it's the same principle.

Depo-Provera also reduces recidivism rates. When used as a mandatory condition of parole (6), chemical castration decreases the occurrence of repeat offenses from 75% (6) to 2% (1). http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1778

[Rhino]

Attempts to reduce aggression and sexual predation in male sex offenders have included surgical castration and chemical castration (the use of female hormones to suppress testosterone levels). Studies suggest that either approach can be effective; a 1989 German study by Wille and Beier, for instance, compared 99 surgically castrated sex offenders and 35 non-castrated sex offenders about a decade after their release from prison, and found that the recidivism rate of castrated offenders was 3%, while the rate for non-castrated offenders was 46%.http://www.crimetimes.org/95d/w95dp6.htm

[Rhino]

The Politics Of Rape:
Debunking The Feminist Myth

By Trayce Hansen, Ph.D.

“Rape isn’t about sex!” That’s what feminists proclaim. And they’ve declared it so continuously and persuasively over the last few decades, most of our society have come to believe it. The fact is, it’s not true—it’s a myth.

Rape used to be considered an act of sexual assault—“sexual” being the operative word—perpetrated by a man of weak moral character and criminal inclination. But this commonsense truth has been replaced with a politically-motivated myth that has had long-reaching, negative effects on both rape victims and society....

...Feminism’s political redefinition of rape was driven by three basic ideological tenets, and, more critically, by one strategic decision.

First is feminism’s ideological belief in “secular creation,” a view held by many on the left that presumes man is born a blank slate, only becoming that which his culture teaches him to become. Hence, rapists are societal creations whose tendencies can be eradicated once the “culture of rape” is eradicated. Next is feminism’s ideological belief that all male-female interactions must, by definition, be viewed through the lens of power and domination. Naturally then, rape also must be seen through this distorted prism. Third is the feminists’ denial of any difference between male and female sexuality, because, in their lexicon, different means inferior. Thus, since these feminist women couldn’t identify in themselves a sexual urge to rape, then rape by men must also be other than sexually motivated. Finally, and most importantly, feminists strategically concluded that if rape was perceived as motivated “only” by sex, then it would be of limited political value, but if instead rape was seen as motivated by male desire to dominate and control women, then it could be used as a powerful political tool for radical cultural change....

...Society’s passions, however, must be ignited by truth. Even though the raping behavior of a specific individual likely involves a complex intertwining of motivations, the one common and overriding motivation of all rapists is sexual. So let’s examine some commonsense and empirical truths about rape that debunk the feminist rape-isn’t-about-sex myth and support the contention that rape is about sex.

First, rape is universal; it’s universal across time, across cultures and societies, and even across many species. This fact is clearly validated by data in biologist Randy Thornhill and anthropologist Craig T. Palmer’s book A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion. Specifically, Thornhill and Palmer’s documentation supports the contention that no rape-free human society has ever existed and that many non-human animal species do engage in raping behaviors. If rape were an act promoted or encouraged by specific patriarchal or political environments, as feminists assert, it’s inconceivable that rape would be found in all societies throughout recorded time....

...Second, the behaviors and motives of rapists are comparable to that of other criminal types and, when analyzed in this straightforward manner, the sexual motivation of rapists becomes apparent. Consider this. If a criminal sees your money and wants it, he takes it. If a criminal sees your car and wants it, he takes it. If a criminal sees you and wants you sexually, he takes you. These are amongst the immoral tendencies of criminals—they take what they want with a callous disregard for their victims. If you ponder the fundamental motivation behind these various criminal acts, a parallel analogy holds true. The mugger is motivated by his desire for your money, the car thief by his desire for your car, and the rapist by his desire for you sexually....

...Third, most rapists use only enough force to accomplish their goal of sexual access. If a rapist’s goal was other than sex, such as a desire to inflict violence upon his victim, why do most rapists not inflict high degrees of physical injuries on their victims? They certainly have the opportunity to do so. In 1991, Lee Ellis of Minot State University reported that studies of “date” rapists clearly demonstrate that these men try many tactics first (i.e., encouraging intoxication, professing love, verbally pressuring) before they resort to physically coercive tactics. Based on these particular facts it must be concluded that, at least for “date” rapists, a desire to have sex is the motivating factor, and only after exhausting less coercive tactics did these rapists resort to physical domination. As an aside, a small minority of rapists are sadistic and therefore are additionally motivated by a desire to violently aggress against, dominate, and humiliate their victims. But sadistic rapists are the exception and not the rule and are readily differentiated from most rapists by their tendency to mete out more violence than is necessary to subdue their victim....

...Fourth, a desire for sexual access is the only motive underlying rape that’s both necessary and sufficient. In contrast to this assertion, Palmer and Thornhill point out that the feminist theory of rape holds that it’s a non-sexual motive that is both necessary and sufficient. But are any of the motives feminists posit (i.e., political oppression, violent domination, control, etc.) both necessary and sufficient? Ask yourself the following questions (although you can substitute any motivation for the one chosen as an example): Is it necessary for a man to have a desire to politically oppress a woman before he can rape her? Is a rapist’s political motive, in the absence of any sexual motive, sufficient for a rape to occur? The answer to both of these questions is no!

On the other hand, it is necessary for a man to have some type of sexual desire before he can rape. And a rapist’s sexual motive, even in the absence of all other motives, is sufficient for a rape to occur. Some desire for sexual access is always necessary during rape and is even sufficient unto itself; no other motive is both.

Fifth, demographic data on rapists and rape victims point to a sexual motive underlying rape. The majority of rapists are men between their teens and 20s, a time of life during which men are the most sexually driven. Next, consider the fact that the majority of rape victims are between the ages of 16 and 24, the age group in which women are considered the most sexually attractive. The result of this analysis is straightforward; the men who are most sexually driven are the ones most likely to rape and they’re most likely to rape women who are generally considered to be the most sexually attractive. Additionally, according to data in Thornhill and Palmer’s book A Natural History of Rape, rapists are more likely to engage in penile-vaginal intercourse, as well as in multiple acts of intercourse, when the victim is in this most-sexually-attractive age category. Coincidence? Does anyone really believe that if a rapist were offered a roomful of women from which he could select a rape victim, that every women in that room (old and young, ugly and beautiful, thin and fat) would have an equal chance of being “selected”? Of course not!

Sixth, most rapists themselves say that sex was the motivating factor underlying their crimes. Professor Lee Ellis of Minot State University wrote, “Even among rapists who victimize strangers, self-reports have given little indication that their real objective is to dominate their victims (or women generally), except to the extent that doing so aids in gaining copulatory access.” Thornhill and Palmer concur with Professor Ellis and specifically mention a doctoral dissertation authored by S. Smithyman that found 84% of rapists reported that sex, in whole or part, was the motivating force behind their actions. Contradictory research, often referred to by feminists, which claims that rapists report power and control as their motivation, frequently contain serious flaws. For example, many were done with incarcerated rapists, or other rapists who’d already been “re-educated” to give the “correct” response, while still others were done with rapists who may have believed that proclaiming a non-sexual motive was more likely to lead to their being deemed enlightened and thus “cured.”...

...Finally, and perhaps most empirically supportive of the hypothesis that sex is the fundamental motivation behind rape, are the results of surgical and chemical castration research.

John Bradford, M.D. authored a chapter in Sexual Deviance: Theory, Assessment, and Treatment where he summarized results of surgical castration research. Although surgical castration studies are unreplicatable today due to “ethical” considerations, they are theoretically important because, as Bradford writes, surgical castration’s “mechanism of action … is the reduction of plasma testosterone, the principal hormone for the maintenance of sexual behavior in males and the hormone involved in sexual drive.” Surgical castration studies therefore can shed considerable light on the degree to which a rapist’s sex drive is involved in his raping behavior. Bradford reviewed several studies that examined both pre- and post-surgical castration recidivism rates of sexual deviants, mostly rapists and child molesters. The results of these studies (which included large numbers of subjects over long periods of time) reported significant reductions in sex offender recidivism rates ranging from more than 70% precastration to under 5% postcastration. Regardless of how one looks at it, these are truly impressive success rates and do indeed offer illuminating clarity....

...Results of both the surgical and chemical castration research demonstrate that when the sexual drive of rapists is dramatically reduced, the likelihood that they will rape again is dramatically reduced. Sexual drive must therefore be considered the motivating force underlying the behavior of those rapists....

...But what of the “evidence” gathered by feminists and other so-called social scientists in support of their rape-isn’t–about-sex hypothesis? Two psychology professors at the University of Texas in Austin, Del Thiessen and Robert Young, decided to take a look. Professors Thiessen and Young analyzed the bulk of this literature and reported their findings in a 1994 issue of the journal, Society. Their analysis of 1,610 abstracts of sexual coercion studies (with sexual coercion defined as rape, date rape, acquaintance rape, sexual harassment, sexual abuse, and incest) published between 1982 and 1992, revealed unscientific and politically biased studies. For instance, Thiessen and Young reported that only 10 percent of the studies they analyzed had sought to uncover the causes or motivations of sexual coercion, often because the “cause” (i.e., male oppression) had been assumed, though not proven. They also found that only 1.5 percent of the studies examined had even applied a statistical test to a research question. And, significant due to their near complete absence (.002 percent), were studies that addressed biological issues because, as the authors noted, biological theories are considered taboo in the feminist world because they call into question foundational, ideological tenets of feminism. Perhaps most tragic was Thiessen and Young’s observation that little or no progress had been made in understanding sexual coercion because of the unscientific nature of the overwhelming majority of studies in this area.

In a scathing summary of their analysis, Theissen and Young wrote “The possibility exists that feminist interests enforce the orientation of published studies … and reflects the political perspectives of its advocates. … There is a near-total disregard for rigorous testing of hypotheses, quantification of data and possible biological mechanisms. Many studies appear anti-scientific in conception, execution, and interpretation. … But in the politicized arena of ‘women’s issues,’ social expressions are valued beyond scientific progress.” ...http://www.drtraycehansen.com/Pages/writings_politics.html

[MSGT]

Unarguable fact: dead rapists and molestors no longer rape or molest.:yeahthat:Have undeniable proof and :hang:

[Wolfcounsel]

"Once more, you don't get to redefine "sex" to suit yourself. :punish:" --DesertFox



And you don't get to define sex as between a man and Rosie Palma!:punish:

[DesertFox]

Sex be sex, dude. :D

[DesertFox]

So what happens when you take the sex away? Does the desire for violence go too? No.On the contrary, it does in most rapists. As Rhino's article shows, it does in most rapists because they're after sex, not violence. Those driven by violence won't stop with rape, but will then beat the living shiite out of the victim.

Yet most rapes don't involve that kind of beating. Most rapes are of the variety where they get into heavy petting and he won't stop when she says stop. And most of us know from having been there, that just as often when she says, "Stop!" she means, "Don't stop!"

[Wolfcounsel]

"Sex be sex, dude. :D" --DesertFox

That means most of the post-pubertal pimplebutts are running around experienced in sex already. No way, Josay!

[DesertFox]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sex

Definition of sex: coitus

to have sex, to engage in sexual intercourse

No differentiation between sex by consent or sex by rape. You lose. :rotflmbo:

[Wolfcounsel]

"No differentiation between sex by consent or sex by rape. You lose. :rotflmbo:" --DesertFox

And you have single-handedly wiped out the rightful meaning of coitus, by relegating it to the realm of perverts who force their peepees on unwilling women!:evilgrin:

[DesertFox]

How so, pray tell? I didn't write the dictionary. :D

[Wolfcounsel]

"How so, pray tell? I didn't write the dictionary. :D" --DesertFox

Well, if a group of known scholars wrote a dictionary that defined "gay" as related to homosexuality, and you went along with it, you are automatically a member of the band!:punish:

[Rhino]

And you have single-handedly wiped out the rightful meaning of coitus, by relegating it to the realm of perverts who force their peepees on unwilling women!:evilgrin:Or on Rosie! Don't forget Rosie! :rotflmbo:

[Pennville_Bill]

:yeahthat:Have undeniable proof and :hang:

Agreed!

[DeclinetoState]

It's still sex. Changing the word doesn't change what it's about, which is getting your rocks off.I've been confused about what is and isn't sex ever since a certain politician that used to be the governor of a southern state with a silent "s" at the end of its name tried to define it.