It must just be my day, but I am coming to the conclusion that rationale even based on hard facts are never going to be the basis for change. It will only come about when we push back like California has been doing. Sounds a bit like a defeatist, so sorry.

I told my psychiatrist yesterday after giving him a copy of the new article about sex offenders in Psychology Today..."People are shooting themselves in the foot by refusing to allow pedophiles to get treatment. It just makes more victims." I truly believe that.

There are tons of cases where pedophiles (men as young as 16) search out help, and are turned away by clinicians that refuse to have anything to do with "those people." Pedophilia is a mental illness, and like any illness, when left untreated it goes rampant and festers.

Ugh ... folks pedophilia is not synonymous with child molestation. The vast majority of child molesters are NOT pedophiles .... We have to use the correct language if we ever expect the media and public to conform to it or understand it.

Advocate:
Exactly! Pedophilia is prepubescent.

Is it prepubescent? I know one cannot be diagnosed until they are at least sixteen years old (per my psych course anyways). They definitely aren't interchangeable, especially since not all pedophiles are even attracted to children sexually, but I meant strictly pedophiles that have reached out for help and been shot down. More awareness and willingness would decrease pedophilic violations, and I'm curious if a more open attitude on behalf of the mental health field to discuss these urges and drives behind a more 'common' molester's psyche would do the same.

According to Google anyway, prepubescent would be prior to puberty. So that's roughly 12 y/o.
And pedophile is a person who is sexually attracted to young children.

@catspaw. You said, "It must just be my day, but I am coming to the conclusion that rationale even based on hard facts are never going to be the basis for change. It will only come about when we push back like California has been doing."

You are correct. Most people do not understand that the "ick" factor of sex crimes is too high for people to use common sense and critical thinking regarding these laws. Too much emotion is involved for these laws to be changed without court decisions in our favor. Barring court decisions, there will be most likely be no drastic changes in most of the sex offender laws and ordinances and any change will be at a snail's pace.

California has stopped some of these laws not because people have wised up or have been thinking how unfair these laws are, but because they have Janice to sue the hell out of the state and the counties----and she wins.

A good example is the recidivism rate. At one time several years ago, the myth of the high recidivism rate of sex offenders was THE reason for all these laws and regulations regarding sex offenders. In almost every instance, a comment was made that we need these laws since most sex offenders reoffend.
.
Fast forward to the present. The myth of the high recidivism rate for sex offenders has been debunked by study after study; most people now agree that the recidivism rate for sex offenders is quite low.

Did the revised "facts" that the recidivism rate is not high, but very low result in a repeal of any of these laws? NO. Did the new recidivism rate statistics cause these laws to no longer be enacted? NO.

What does that tell you? It tells me that these laws and restrictions are not fueled by fact, but by emotion and biases-----that no amount of facts will sway the public's mind.

The only situation in which I think things MIGHT change is if the taxpayers can be shown that the registry and all its laws are too expensive. And some of the Romeo and Juliet laws will be changed as moms and dads are mad as hell that their teenage sons are being placed on the registry for having consensual sex with a younger teen.

We need to fight these laws in court. Hoping someday that people will see how unfairly sex offenders are treated and want the laws changed because of the unfairness is an exercise in futility.

rewdiazepam

rew:
I mostly agree with you. But I would also say that over enough time, more and more people will know one of us and learn how things really are. I mean there are 300m people in the country. It's not like turning a small boat. It's like turning a huge huge tanker. It takes lots of time and energy. As our numbers grow, as more of us get involved, we should eventually hit a critical mass. It will be a long time, maybe never, when a politician stands on the podium and says this stuff is stupid. But maybe in back channels, someone purposefully shelves a bill, or a restriction is reduced or stricken from an upcoming bill, etc.

We all need to get involved to whatever level we can handle. Whether that's actually doing the work of fighting, but others can simply donate money to the cause of their choice, or volunteer, etc. We have VERY VERY strong numbers. And we need to link arms together to carry those that aren't in a position to fight directly. But there is a lot to be done indirectly as well.

The RSOL conference will be in Atlanta sometime in September 2016.

Droid,

You make a very valid point, and I agree with you. There will have to be enough families who have been affected by this nightmare to create a fuss with the lawmakers for any change. When enough people have sex offenders in their family----and are willing to take a stand--- this may change, but it will not be a drastic change.

Nobody cares about an issue until it happens to them or one of their loved ones. I cannot count the number of people who come to this board and say "Like others, I was in favor of the registry and I thought most of the people on the list were really bad people; but I now see that I was wrong."

BUT even a change caused by these circumstances will be very slow. Many people affected by the registry either cannot or will not take a stand. Some have jobs and they cannot risk coming out in the open and some have been beaten down to such an extent that they are overcome with fear. As a result, only a small percentage of the total registrants are doing anything at all to help their plight.

Droid, you said, " But I would also say that over enough time, more and more people will know one of us and learn how things really are."

That is true, but will those people stand up and go to bat for us "sex offenders?" Hell, many of us cannot even go to bat for ourselves, so how can we hope or expect that others will help us?

I personally don't think that very many people who knows the inefficiency of these laws are willing to risk sticking their necks out for someone as hated as sex offenders. as they would be looked down upon by others.

I think we can actually do well in stopping some of these new proposed laws before they are enacted in law. We seem to have moderate success in that area.

rewdiazepam

We need a more efficient method of getting the word out. The recent Rhode Island 300' -> 1000' change is terribly disturbing and also a perfect example of what our problem is.
There is so much that can be done without actually sticking your neck out into the public.
Last night I got an action alert via WAR about a change in a law to make CP folks considered violent offenders. The Secular Coalition for America does something similar. I'm interesting in building something like that for us. Over on SOSEN, I posted an outline and I'm looking for helpers. Not sure when I'll start working on it. But maybe soon. No takers thus far.
We need to streamline our efforts. It's a really daunting task to build all of this up from scratch for someone new. These battles aren't the first ones fought. Most of the fighting people are doing, we as individuals are reinventing the wheel. My point being these battles have been fought already, for the most part.
Listen to the recent TED Radio Hour on NPR. It's about OpenSource
http://www.npr.org/programs/ted-radio-hour/449179937/open-source-world?showDate=2015-10-23
This is something that we should employ. We should build a community where successful templates are available to our ranks to help them fight these things. Be it probation problems, permission to have access to friends children w/ their permission, fighting a law, residency restrictions, etc.

Sorry for the long post....

Andy

This is a multi-faceted fight and just like the three arguments it is fought on three levels. In the courts which is argument one, relationally argument two, and in the media and academia argument three.

@peek you said, "People are shooting themselves in the foot by refusing to allow pedophiles to get treatment. It just makes more victims." I truly believe that.

Yes, I think Dr. Seto's comment goes to all sex offenders not just pedophiles though it definitely includes them too. Treating abusers and wanting to help reintegrate back into society isn't siding with them it is a plan to help ensure less victims. If treating sex offenders like they are less human actually reduced recidivism it would be one thing for people to go along with their emotions, but this policy is set up to actially create more victims which is insanity!

@advocate yes, people don't really understand pedophillia. I mean I was on probation for a crime against a pubescent girl when I was a young teen and for the first year on probation I wasn't allowed to see my 6 year old nephew. Nothing in my sexual history or psycho-sexual eval gave any hint that I am attracted to pre-pubescent children or boys or men yet I couldn't see my nephew. For me this all goes back to the state not using evidence based practices in making laws and trying to over legislate everything.

@rew I agree, we have talked about this a lot, where we will see the biggest changes is in the courts. Legislators surely won't get off the golden goose if veins tough on sex offenders until the court outs a stop to it. That is not to say argument 1 is more important than the others. The SCOTUS doesn't like to lead public opinion, so they can choose not to grant certiorari on any sex offender case until they want to rule on it. Arguments 2 and 3 are what is going to change overall public opinion and we are already starting to see a little of that now.

@droid I agree that eventually people will get to the point when they all know a sex offender, but I don't think unless they have argument 3 to tell them that it actually improves public safety to help reintegrate sex offenders back into society. I have a very conservative extended family and to them they support me 100% and think what happened to me is ridiculous, but it's still hard for them to come to terms with what they see as the "real sex offenders". I keep on telling them I am a real offender and that my crime hurt someone very badly but it was from the love of my family and close friends (those crazy far right people included lol) that have helped me reintegrate and live a more successful life now.

So yes I think public perception can change eventually but it's tough sledding.

Conclusion or Tl;dr this is a fight we fight on three fronts each argument has its place.

"it needs to be about maximizing the odds they won't become abusers again. The registry does the opposite of that! "

What do you mean by that? How does the registry do the opposite?

It's not just the registry but also all the things that connect to it. Can't get a job because your on the registry, can't find a place to live, people harass you, can't go where children might be, etc.

Instead of rehabilitation and reintegration it ostracizes you.

Let's not forget tha there are some vigilantes that will now know where you live and attack you or your family from the information.