Saying "I'm vegetarian, but sometimes I eat fish" is like saying "I'm not a pedophile, except for little boys".Truth be told, I don't use that particular bad analogy anymore. Not because it's offensive (that was the point, actually) and not because it's an overly absurd generalization (for when has that every stopped me!). I've recently reached the conclusion that saying those choice nineteen words subtly and inadvertently emphasizes two tumorous defects in our culture's inherent belief system. Perhaps I'm wrong, or perhaps I'm over-analyzing, but by singling out "except for little boys" the above phrase attempts to increase the shock value by introducing the extra aspect of homosexuality (one instinctively assumes the pedophile is a man, right?).
The recent affronts on basic human equality in California involving the infamous Proposition 8 have reminded me of what can happen when bigotry and stereotypes are allowed to flourish unchecked. Equally regrettable, by singling out only "little boys" it is implied that there is nothing surprising in the inclusion of girls: little or otherwise. This misogynistic standpoint is amplified by our culture's unspoken belief that "boys should be men" and "women should be girls".
Now, while we helplessly watch the conversation drift further into the realm of unpleasant topics, a tragic news story just broke last night concerning a missing 8-year-old Northern California girl: missing for over a week, her body was found in a suitcase a few miles from her home. The local news managed to stretch the announcement across the entire night's hour. With no further details, they resorted to 45 minutes of interviewing random people on the street, 10 minutes of repeating the known (and even a few hypothetical) timelines, and 5 minutes of weather. I assume (1) we'll see more of the same tonight and (2) the same type of reporting is taking place on local news stations across the country.
Don't misunderstand me; what happened to the girl and the hell her parents must be living through right now is truly heart wrenching. I can't imagine what would happen to me if one of my children were taken and murdered. I am, however, disgusted and angered by the exploitive coverage the news wings are giving this story. I am also angered and disgusted by the general population who, by "voting" with their remotes, have told the media companies this is the type of reporting they want to see.
Speaking of the general population, it didn't take long for rampant speculation to enter into the random street interviews. This speculation was then further expanded and discussed by the desk anchors, officially closing the loop of news to speculation to reported news. The topic of Megan's Law came up and the "need" for communities to be "more aware of their neighbors". This brings me to my last unpleasant topic for the evening: Megan's Law doesn't work.
First, a bit of logical reasoning: Someone commits a crime. They're found guilty and punished accordingly. They're then placed on a (national) registry that directly prevents them from getting a place to live, getting a jobs, and even integrating themselves back into a community. This person is now isolated from society and has nothing to do. Does that make recidivism more likely or less likely?
Next, a handful of logical facts: Simply knowing someone on a sex registry lives in your neighborhood isn't helpful. Public urination and consensual acts between a 17 year old and a 16 year old are sometimes enough to get on a list. Even in the worst-cast scenario of a violent offender who is likely to attack again, simply knowing about the person won't necessarily protect you. And it's almost moot when you consider that between 67% and 95% of sexual assault victims are victimized by somebody they already know, usually a family member.
Finally, an essay by UK journalist Johann Hari offering his opinion why Megan’s Law is wrongheaded:
Far from protecting little girls like Megan, the law named after her actually increases the number of children who are raped and murdered.His entire article can be found at http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=910
To understand why, you have to talk to the people who work with paedophiles and have a proven track record of bringing their reoffending rates crashing down, saving countless Megans and Sarahs. They are invariably the strongest and fiercest opponents of Megan’s Law. Pam Welch, a prison officer who works in-depth with paedophiles, explains, “It is when these people feel isolated and friendless that the risk of reoffending is highest. They feel that if the world considers them a monster they might as well behave like a monster. At least then there might be some feeling of pleasure, and some measure of control.”
Megan’s Law guarantees that a released paedophile will be put in this position. Instead of being able to find a job, build normal adult relationships and being given help to resist their darkest urges, they are plunged into a scalding bath of hatred. One newspaper, the Times Herald-Record, documented the effect of Megan’s Law in Newburgh, a small town in up-state New York. When a sex offender named John Duck Jr. was released on parole to live with his elderly parents, their neighbours were told about his crimes by hundreds of police knocking door-to-door with leaflets. All three family members received a cascade of death threats. A howling picket was established outside their house for weeks, demanding Duck “get out now!!” – presumably to a mythical place with no children. (He couldn’t anyway – it was a condition of his parole to remain at that address). He was shunned everywhere he went, unemployable and friendless. The few neighbours who did speak to him received threats of their own.
It’s hard to think of a situation more likely to make a sex offender relapse and destroy another child’s life. That’s why, despite Megan’s Law being introduced in every state, rates of child rape and murder by strangers have not fallen; in many, they have increased.
The only programmes with a proven track record of reducing reoffending adopt precisely the opposite approach to Megan’s Law.
