echoshifting

very salt heavy
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
16,578
The Negative Zone
Setting aside the fact that innocent people would suffer under such a law, how about we just don't institutionalize mutilation as an acceptable form of punishment for any crime
 

Sheentak

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,415
Just make sex offenders not go in protected custody in prisons make them hang out on gen pop. Trust me that's the worst punishment
 

Bryo4321

Member
Nov 20, 2017
1,577
Cruel and unusual punishment.

They should do the time to the fullest extent for this evil crime. But do we start cutting off the hands of thieves too? Seems like a strange route to go down.
 

Deleted member 3924

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
46,074
Whether you believe they're irredeemable or not, this is just another thing that's inevitably going to hurt innocent people and further normalize barbarism. Death and gore making anyone feel better is twisted.
 

Atom

Member
Jul 25, 2021
13,663
Glad the the prevailing response ITT is level headed.

This is nuts. What a terrible idea.
 

Saori

Avenger
Dec 12, 2018
690
This is just wrong. It won't solve anything. It probably will make things worse for victims and the state can't ever be trusted to wield such a power, even if we had absolute certainty.
While testosterone has an effect on the libido, it's not the cause for why rape happens. Rapist don't need to feel any sexual desire to rape. There can't possibly be any benefit from this, beyond satisfying some peoples bloodthirst.

Instead of wasting our time to produce even more harm, we should figure out how we can actually best help victims of rape. What we have to go through, in order to report and prosecute the crime, is often worse than the act itself. It's torturous, it's dehumanizing and it's violating. But people aren't actually interested in helping us.
 

Daphne

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
4,167
This is a terrible idea anywhere but especially the US which has a long history of forced sterilisations of minorities, prisoners and the disabled (which was broadly defined to also include promiscuity or homosexuality); practices that were only banned as late as 1978, though they continued to 1983 officially (in Oregon, where The Oregon Board of Eugenics had been renamed to The Board of Social Protection, which tells you everything you need to know about what the motives were) and still continue to this day unofficially in places like immigrant detention centres as we've seen in threads on Era.

This WILL be broadened to apply to many other people if it is once again normalised.

This is alongside the fact that it will be applied to innocent people convicted of this crime. That there seems to be no scientific basis for this punishment or its effect on recidivism. That mutilation, like the death penalty, should never be within the power of any State (or anyone, for that matter).
 

regenhuber

Member
Nov 4, 2017
5,590
Conservatives have a real obsession with pedophilia.

Pedophiles are one of the very few groups everyone hates, so the fascist rhetoric and call for medieval punishment doesn't rub people the wrong way.

It also puts anyone who pushes back a little in regards to constitutional rights and due process in a weird spot.
"Are you taking the pedophiles side?!"
 

Capra

Member
Oct 25, 2017
16,552
You cannot convince me the entire point of this is not to weaponize it against black and LGBTQ+ people
 

Desi

Member
Oct 30, 2017
4,381
Happy at a lot of skepticism in this thread.
I recommend you steer clear from Facebook comments on this. Crazy behavior
Friend of mine dm'd me this on TikTok. Comments weren't really any better.

That's not the intent of castration in this situation at all though - it's a secondary effect that will surely be weaponized against anyone that is "undesirable" with this law.
I can seen so many future scenarios already: We are trying to make ubermenschs here bro, under 5'8? Won't be needing these *snip snip*

"Miss you look trans, come with me. We have to protect kids from you lot. "
 
Last edited:

Qikz

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,196
Castration, the death penalty and any other forms of capital punishment never stop people from commiting any other crime and this likely won't do anything either. Violent responses to crime don't solve anything, if anything it feels like it makes certain people want to go even further as if they're going to recieve such a harsh barbaric punishment (like death) they may as well do as much damage they can before it happens.
 

Hrist

Member
Jun 30, 2023
439
We all hate child rapists. See my posts and outrage over the olympia rapist participating and being protected by his country's officials.

But this isn't it. Because we all also know that this will not be enforced against the common white rapist that will repeatedly rape, but it will be enforced against a random non-white person that got in the crosshair because the police looked for a scapegoat to protect the white mayor's son who actually did the crime.
It will be enforced against random LGBTQ people, because these states are already defining "being LGBTQ in the vicinity of teenagers" as grooming. The promising sports star will NEVER get hit by it. The olympia guy, if he was living in louisiana, would never be hit by it, ever. Never ever ever.

Priests, politicians, policemen will all be completely exempt from ever being hit by this, and their sons will be excused because gosh we can't ruin their future.

So just by a bit of thinking this is a bad idea. There's also the fact that rapists don't tend to be scared of punishment (because the police doesn't care to begin with!), and that even if you do castrate them, rape is about power, not sexual appetite, so it won't even do anything, they will *still* be dangerous!

This law is just made to slam minorities with it, and to have the state pretend it's doing something. Meanwhile, rape kits get left to rot, unexamined and the politicians sure don't do jack shit about it.
 

Raftina

Member
Jun 27, 2020
4,472
You cannot convince me the entire point of this is not to weaponize it against black and LGBTQ+ people
I suspect this is one of many ill-thought out tough on crime bills that come out of Democratic minds. You can see the problem happening in this topic. And if you check who sponsored this bill, I do not think it is likely that this was meant to be weaponized against Black people.

Here are details of the bill:
fastdemocracy.com

Bill tracking in Louisiana - SB 371 (2024 legislative session) - FastDemocracy

CRIME/PUNISHMENT: Provides for surgical castration of persons convicted of certain crimes when the victim is under the age of thirteen. (8/1/24) (EN SEE FISC NOTE GF EX)

This is the primary sponsor:
Regina Ashford Barrow
(D - 15)
LAL000120.jpg


I don't know her politics, but her electoral record has some suggestions. She won the 2023 election uncontested. In 2019, she won with 75% of the vote. Her opponent, Gary Chambers, is Democrat (and a Black guy), because Louisiana has a jungle primary where all candidates participate; and if someone wins a majority in the primary, they are elected. Chambers was the highest vote-receiving Democratic challenger (with only 18% of the vote) to Republican John Kennedy (62% of the vote) to the US senate election in 2022. These all suggest that she represents a heavily Democratic and Black district (probably gerrymandered to be such), so I would not suspect her of sponsoring a bill to weaponize it against Black people.

And this is the bill's co-sponsor:
Delisha Boyd
(D - 102)
LAL000322.jpg


For similar reasons, she seems to represent a heavily Democratic and Black district. So I would not suspect her of sponsoring a bill to weaponize it against Black people either.
 

Keikaku

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,908
Seems harsh, but could be effective for repeat offenders. Not gonna shed a tear for pedophiles like Elon Musk.
 

beebop

Member
May 30, 2023
3,219
My first, knee-jerk reaction was 'good.'

Then, of course, all of the ways this could go wrong for wrongful convictions or focused on certain demographics, as there's no way a policy like this wouldn't be abused. And, of course, it's not like it would be an actual solution.

It's one of those things rooted in emotion that appeals to vigilante justice but opens the doors for misuse.
The problem is that the lawmakers can't get past that intellectual first step after the initial reaction, like adults. I think it's fine to have that gut reaction as long as your head ultimately recognises how problematic this is.
 
If you want children (and all victims of rape, rape can be just as devastating regardless of your age) to feel safe, the best thing you can do is tear down the barriers that make victims coming forward against their assailants so difficult. Hold people in power and the institutions that cover for them accountable.
 

Menchin

Member
Apr 1, 2019
5,652
Would any doctor even oblige to this? It's barbarism.

In many states physicians are required to be at least present in the room while the death penalty is being carried out by authorized staff, sometimes themselves medical professionals, sometimes not. I imagine it'll work the same way, they'll either get the prison medic(s) to do it or give the relevant training to corrections staff and have a physican in the room in case of an emergency/out of legal obligation

This is all assuming it actually goes through, of course
 

entremet

You wouldn't toast a NES cartridge
Member
Oct 26, 2017
66,418
I feel this also focuses on a bio essentialism that genitalia as the cause of sexual abuse. SA can take many forms, unfortunately. The approach seems barbaric and misguided.

In many states physicians are required to be at least present in the room while the death penalty is being carried out by authorized staff, sometimes themselves medical professionals, sometimes not. I imagine it'll work the same way, they'll either get the prison medic(s) to do it or give the relevant training to corrections staff and have a physican in the room in case of an emergency/out of legal obligation

This is all assuming it actually goes through, of course
A medic to do surgery?

Surgery is a big deal. You can really fuck someone up if something goes wrong.
 

bm1677

Member
Oct 28, 2017
356
Barbaric and I have zero trust in the legal system to not get it wrong. Sorry.

Child rapists are the scum of the earth, but I don't think a modern society should be using mutilation as a punishment, especially when it means someone falsely accused could be subject to it. Also, a penis/vagina aren't the only ways a vile person could sexually assault a child if they ever get released from prison. And I'd fear for someone who was released after their genitals were mutilated by the State to be extremely vindictive in an even worse way.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,007
London
This isn't going to be effective. If facing social ostracism, long prison time and being on a public sex offender registry in the US isn't a deterrent to people who go and abuse children then no amount of punishment is. Also, what are they going to do to women who offend? Plenty of women do. They going to remove their ovaries? What is going to help is making sure victims can come forward, and report this. Also the legal system isn't infallible and innocents will be harmed.
 

Foolhardy

Member
May 4, 2024
1,895
Surgery is a big deal. You can really fuck someone up if something goes wrong.


Probably a feature.


I suspect this is one of many ill-thought out tough on crime bills that come out of Democratic minds. You can see the problem happening in this topic. And if you check who sponsored this bill, I do not think it is likely that this was meant to be weaponized against Black people.

Here are details of the bill:
fastdemocracy.com

Bill tracking in Louisiana - SB 371 (2024 legislative session) - FastDemocracy

CRIME/PUNISHMENT: Provides for surgical castration of persons convicted of certain crimes when the victim is under the age of thirteen. (8/1/24) (EN SEE FISC NOTE GF EX)

This is the primary sponsor:
Regina Ashford Barrow
(D - 15)
LAL000120.jpg


I don't know her politics, but her electoral record has some suggestions. She won the 2023 election uncontested. In 2019, she won with 75% of the vote. Her opponent, Gary Chambers, is Democrat (and a Black guy), because Louisiana has a jungle primary where all candidates participate; and if someone wins a majority in the primary, they are elected. Chambers was the highest vote-receiving Democratic challenger (with only 18% of the vote) to Republican John Kennedy (62% of the vote) to the US senate election in 2022. These all suggest that she represents a heavily Democratic and Black district (probably gerrymandered to be such), so I would not suspect her of sponsoring a bill to weaponize it against Black people.

And this is the bill's co-sponsor:
Delisha Boyd
(D - 102)
LAL000322.jpg


For similar reasons, she seems to represent a heavily Democratic and Black district. So I would not suspect her of sponsoring a bill to weaponize it against Black people either.

A lot of Louisiana Democrats are built different. It's part of how they get elected here.

That aside, putting this shit on the table is horrendously shortsighted for all the cruelty noted already, continuing to normalize acceptance of cruelty by the state, and for handing a very tempting weapon over to the right.

Both of them need to hit the history books yesterday.
 

Red Liquorice

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,556
UK
Like others have said, it could so easily be a short hop and step to extend this, you already have the framework there to possibly extend to LGBT "correction" because of the """""grooming""""" panic.
 

Soap

Member
Oct 27, 2017
17,163
Yeah and what happens if it turns out somebody was falsely prosecuted?

Fuck this.
 

Ensorcell

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,205
Seems harsh, but could be effective for repeat offenders. Not gonna shed a tear for pedophiles like Elon Musk.
You know I wish people would think critically about issues instead of just going with gut reactions. What about females who repeat offend? Do they get a lesser punishment just because of their gender? When a mistake is made (and there will be mistakes and abuses of the punishment) do the lawmakers get castrated for allowing it?
 

Keikaku

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,908
This is dumb as fuck. There's no way in hell this isn't going to be weaponized against minorities.

What about the innocent people that will inevitably be castrated?
That's why I mentioned repeat offenders.
A "repeat offender" is not going to stop because they have been castrated. There is no scientific support for this actually working as a deterrent.
If it ain't gonna work at all, then it's a dumb idea. I'm sure that there are some rapists that do it for the sexual pleasure and castrating them would at least help a little?
You know I wish people would think critically about issues instead of just going with gut reactions. What about females who repeat offend? Do they get a lesser punishment just because of their gender? When a mistake is made do the lawmakers get castrated for allowing it?
Yeah, it's difficult to determine what a right punishment is. Maybe just give longer sentences or straight to an asylum.
 

Ensorcell

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,205
Yeah, it's difficult to determine what a right punishment is. Maybe just give longer sentences or straight to an asylum.
That isn't how law and justice is supposed to work, even though that is how it is abused in the U.S., which is why the justice system is unequal. You don't dole out a particular punishment for one class of people and then turn around and dole out a different one for a separate class.
 

Burt

Fight Sephiroth or end video games
Member
Oct 28, 2017
8,714
This is a terrible idea anywhere but especially the US which has a long history of forced sterilisations of minorities, prisoners and the disabled (which was broadly defined to also include promiscuity or homosexuality); practices that were only banned as late as 1978, though they continued to 1983 officially (in Oregon, where The Oregon Board of Eugenics had been renamed to The Board of Social Protection, which tells you everything you need to know about what the motives were) and still continue to this day unofficially in places like immigrant detention centres as we've seen in threads on Era.

This WILL be broadened to apply to many other people if it is once again normalised.

This is alongside the fact that it will be applied to innocent people convicted of this crime. That there seems to be no scientific basis for this punishment or its effect on recidivism. That mutilation, like the death penalty, should never be within the power of any State (or anyone, for that matter).
Yeah, this was my first thought -- specifically, that it's the first step down the road towards wielding the threat of sterilization against people seeking or aiding in abortions. There's zero chance that they don't link abusing minors and terminating a pregnancy.
 

Saori

Avenger
Dec 12, 2018
690
If it ain't gonna work at all, then it's a dumb idea. I'm sure that there are some rapists that do it for the sexual pleasure and castrating them would at least help a little?
No, it wouldn't help, as it does nothing about them feeling pleasure. It affects their sexual desire, but that does nothing to stop a rapist from being a rapist.

What is going to help is making sure victims can come forward, and report this.
Meanwhile, rape kits get left to rot, unexamined and the politicians sure don't do jack shit about it.
I don't want to quote myself, which is why I'm quoting these two posts. This is what is actually important. Helping victims. And taking it seriously. In all the support groups I've been in, this is what we want.
 

DarthMasta

Member
Feb 17, 2018
5,099
I've seen many specialists say such a thing is hardly going to solve the issue, and might even lead to worse outcomes, so, I hope it doesn't make things even worse.
 

Mezentine

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,451
This is a terrible idea anywhere but especially the US which has a long history of forced sterilisations of minorities, prisoners and the disabled (which was broadly defined to also include promiscuity or homosexuality); practices that were only banned as late as 1978, though they continued to 1983 officially (in Oregon, where The Oregon Board of Eugenics had been renamed to The Board of Social Protection, which tells you everything you need to know about what the motives were) and still continue to this day unofficially in places like immigrant detention centres as we've seen in threads on Era.

This WILL be broadened to apply to many other people if it is once again normalised.

This is alongside the fact that it will be applied to innocent people convicted of this crime. That there seems to be no scientific basis for this punishment or its effect on recidivism. That mutilation, like the death penalty, should never be within the power of any State (or anyone, for that matter).
Nailed it on all counts
 

Saori

Avenger
Dec 12, 2018
690
That was my first thought. What happens in prison to people that do anything to a child seems like it gets handled without needing to clip their balls.
We really don't need to cheer for prison violence. Not only because it affects innocent people being locked up in prison, but also because it's just wrong. Prison is the punishment.
Also, them being away from the general population is not guaranteeing for their safety, when there are plenty of guards abusing their powers.
 

Doc Holliday

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,104
Why stop there? Chopping hands off thieves next.

What's scary is that there will be a lot of people that like this idea.
 
Dec 30, 2020
16,958
In my mind, I think, "yes, that does sound like a fitting punishment for a rapist."

And then the reality comes crashing in that it's not an ideal justice system and this would immediately be used to attack and destroy marginalized people, political rivals, the falsely accused, those seen as "deviant", those who simply support LGBTQ+ movements and youth, and so on and so on.

Considering we have a convicted rapist ex president who is free to run for office and no one in an official capacity is suggesting castrating him, it immediately shows that this isn't for those in power.
 

Violence Jack

Drive-in Mutant
Member
Oct 25, 2017
45,860
After learning about forced castration that used to happen to slaves as well as to innocent black people by the KKK (my late grandfather told me a horrific story about that before he passed), I don't support any laws wanting to mutilate anyone for a crime. Especially when rape doesn't have to involve only genitals.
 

SlasherMcGirk

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,084
Cincinnati
Jesus this country is regressing everyday. And what about the falsely convicted victims? Rapists should be punished but this is barbarism and on a dangerous slope.
 

Gentlemen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,161
Seems harsh, but could be effective for repeat offenders. Not gonna shed a tear for pedophiles like Elon Musk.
This is exactly the delusion the bill's authors want to sell you.

No law written ever seems to actually get applied to powerful, wealthy, connected white men.

The more likely outcome is that our justice system will do what it always does and and sanction this barbarity on innocent men and women who are more often than not nonwhite, nonheteronormative, and not cisgender. What governments did to citizens under 'gross indecency' statutes must never be forgotten or repeated.
 

Akira86

Member
Oct 25, 2017
20,282
they invented a whole medical method of injection to avoid this, but of course some big Dad thinks the body horror deterrence factor is key to preventing crime.


edit: apparently a woman with that "...then cut it off" mentality. Ma'am they've been able to just cut it off for centuries, this can't be the breakout legislation the community has asked for. I don't think this is the time to be "old fashioned" even in the psychology around this subject or crime.
 
Last edited:

Vicman

Member
Jan 29, 2024
462
I have no sympathy for a child rapist. A human like that deserves the worst. That said, as always, the problem is in institutionalizing this shit. That's a no for me.
 

Mezentine

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,451
The flip side to all of this is...do you think they're going to be spending more effort on pursuing priests who abuse children? Do you think they're going to invest more in social services to help children in abusive home environments, especially if Dad is friends with the sheriff? These people never have any interest in stopping child abuse perpetrated by the people who are "allowed" to do it, and their motivations should always be suspect.