Tuesday, February 28, 2012

The Question that So Desperately Needs to be Asked...

Are All Men Pedophiles?

By Kendra Holliday | February 23, 2012
This girl is 14 years old.

Are All Men Pedophiles?, a documentary premiering next week at The Queens World Film Festival 2012 in New York City, is already creating a lot of furious discussion by people who have not yet seen it.
Good! This topic sorely needs discussion.

So often sensitive or taboo subjects are avoided, and it's better to be open and honest about them so we can gain a better understanding of ourselves and those around us.

Let's start with a simple question: Are we, as a society, sexually attracted to youth? Yes or no?

What is youth?
Youth: the appearance, freshness, vigor, spirit, etc., characteristic of one who is young.

the time of being young; early life: His youth was spent on the farm.

the period of life from puberty to the attainment of full growth; adolescence.

the first or early period of anything.

Have you ever been attracted to a woman, only to find out later she is 13 years old?

Therefore, this film asks: what is the difference between you and pedophiles?
From the film's synopsis:
We live in a society that condemns pedophiles, though biological instinct and world cultures throughout history suggest that an attraction to adolescents is as natural as it is unavoidable. The fashion industry on the one hand sexualizes ever-younger girls while those who act on these instincts are reviled. The apparent hypocrisy at the heart of society forces the question: What do we mean when we talk about Pedophilia? Are All Men Pedophiles?
Before we go any further, let's define pedophile. In clinical terms, a pedophile is a person at least 16 years of age and five years older than the pre-pubescent youth they are sexually attracted to. If a 10 year old is attracted to another 10 year old, does that make them a pedophile? According to this definition, no.
The legal definition varies widely - the age of consent around the world is anywhere from 9 years old to 20 years old. The Western standard is 18 years old.
If a person is 24 and is in a relationship with a 16 yr old, is that wrong? What about 30 and 16? 40 and 16?
The film argues that girls mature sooner than boys, and for thousands of years our life expectancy was 33 so it made sense to reproduce as soon as the woman came of age (began menses)

These days, girls are developing into women earlier (11-14 instead of 16), PLUS we are living longer are a species. This shift is significant.

What's more, we live in a society that is not conducive to emotional maturity, which is admittedly a serious issue. What's the reasoning behind the genital shaving fad? Many people say they do it because it feels more comfortable for them, but are they talking physical or mental?
Let's Talk Numbers
If sex with children is wrong, why does it figure prominently in so many religions? Mary was 12 or 15 when she was divinely fucked by God. Throughout history, the average age for a female's first birth was 13.

In 2012, the Jewish bar mitzvah still marks the age of 13 when a boy becomes a man - really?! They haven't thought to adjust this ceremony to take place at 16 or 18?

How old were you when you first started thinking about sex? I was 9 years old. How old were you when you started experimenting with sex? 16? 14? 12?
I was 9 years old. And it wasn't consensual. I was molested by my older adopted brother. He molested my younger siblings as well. According to the clinical definition, that makes him a pedophile. I told my parents, and they had to fight the courts to get him removed from the home. They had to prove to the legal system they were unfit parents in order to keep their younger children safe. It took months, and they locked him in the basement at night to keep him away from us. He moved away and I don't have contact with him, but I know he married a woman with daughters. I wonder if he chose to molest his stepdaughters.
Many argue that to use the word "pedophilia" is misleading, that technically most people are attracted to teeangers, which makes them a hebephiliac. Does that make it better? How come the word "hebephilia" is not widely used by the media? This film attempts to mirror society and analyze the truths behind the hateful, fear-inducing stories.
MOST people are technically a mix of hebephile and teleiophile (an attraction to adults). This is clearly evident in the fact that the average fashion model is 16 years old. The girl in the movie poster above is 14 years old.

We have priests and other positions of power who get away with molesting children for years. What about all the female teachers who have been busted for fucking their students?
In the film, they interview a female pedophile. Her graphic story was difficult for me to hear. Another shocking moment is when they interview a woman who was repeatedly raped as a child by her father and a neighbor (you can read a similar story here, featuring Quanitta Underwood and her sisters).
They also interview a man who is out about being a pedophilia. During that interview it is noted that pedophilia is an orientation, not an action. The man interviewed claims to be a non-exclusive, non-offending pedophile, meaning he admits he is sexually attracted to children, but is also attracted to adults and does not act on his attraction to children. He believes a lot of people are attracted to kids; they just won't dare to acknowledge it.

In this article "Who Is Hurting the Children? The Political Psychology of Pedophilia in American Society," by Dr. Michael Bader, he poses the question:
Why does the act of sexually molesting a child seem to command our collective outrage and desire for vengeance, while acts of ignoring, humiliating, or starving that same child do not? After all, no one goes to jail for the crime of "narcissistically using your child as an extension of yourself," or "demeaning your children because you feel demeaned," or "being so drunk and depressed that your children have to raise themselves."

I think that our defense of childhood virtue and innocence is so extreme because it bundles with it all of the ways that we, ourselves, feel--but cannot acknowledge feeling--afraid, rejected, unfairly taken advantage of, betrayed, subordinated to the self-interests of others, and helpless. At the deepest level of our psyches, we cannot compassionately face our own innocent victimization and, instead, project it onto the picture we create of the sexually virtuous and naive child.
What about the weird sexualization of girls in our society, such as making sweatpants for little girls with words like "JUICY" on the butt? Makeup for kids grooms them for future sexual advertising. And of course, there's the whole beauty pageants for little girls racket.

A friend of mine went to jail for a year because his friend sent him a topless pic of his girlfriend. Turns out the gf was 16 and he got busted for possession of child porn. When he got out of jail he found a job, but was fired two weeks later when the employer found out about his criminal record.

Chid porn is people under age 18 who are portrayed in sexual, lewd conduct erotic behavior. So wouldn't that mean that many magazine ads are child porn?
Hell, after doing research for this review, I hope no one digs into my Google search history and gets the wrong idea.

The film's world premiere is Friday, March 2, 9:30pm at the Queens World Film Festival, Jackson Heights Cinema, New York City. Buy tickets here.

Friday, February 24, 2012

How Much is Wisconsin Spending on Corrections??

The New Informational Papers are Out for 2011 -  These tell you how much our government is really spending.


The Department of Corrections is Informational Paper 57

Check out this article too, it is about the Juvenile correctional department of Wisconsin.

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Wisconsin AB209 - Not necessary AT ALL - CALL AND WRITE YOUR SENATORS!!!

Mandatory Minimums have done nothing to protect children.  What they have accomplished is make the United States the "Incarceration Nation" of the world, which isn't something we should be aspiring to. 

If we want to protect the children there are far more effective ways of doing so.

Everyone needs to call and write their Wisconsin Senators TODAY.  Let them know that this is a law that shouldn't be passed, that it does not protect children for which it was intended.

Find your senator



2011 - 2012 LEGISLATURE 
July 29, 2011 - Introduced by Representatives Honadel, Vos, Suder, Brooks,
Endsley, Jacque, Mursau, Nygren, Petersen, Petryk, Petrowski, Kapenga

and Spanbauer, cosponsored by Senators Darling, Lasee, Olsen and
Wanggaard. Referred to Committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections.
1        An Act to repeal 939.617 (2); and to amend 939.617 (1) of the statutes; 
2   relating to: mandatory minimum sentences for certain child sex offenses.
Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau
Under current law, if a person is convicted of sexual exploitation of a child, use
of a computer to facilitate a child sex crime, or possession of child pornography, the
court must impose a bifurcated sentence, which includes a term of confinement in
prison and a term of extended supervision in the community. Current law sets a
mandatory minimum term of confinement of five years if the conviction is for sexual
exploitation of child or use of a computer to facilitate a child sex crime, and a
mandatory minimum term of confinement of three years if the conviction is for
possession of child pornography. The mandatory minimum term of confinement does
not apply if the convicted person was under the age of 18 when he or she committed
the crime or if the court finds that, if it does not apply the mandatory minimum, the
best interests of the community will be served and the public will not be harmed.
Under this bill, the mandatory minimum term of confinement does not apply only if
the convicted person was under the age of 18 when he or she committed the crime.
The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do
enact as follows:
3        Section 1. 939.617 (1) of the statutes is amended to read:

1        939.617 (1) Except as provided in subs. (2) and sub. (3), if a person is convicted
2  of a violation of s. 948.05, 948.075, or 948.12, the court shall impose a bifurcated
3  sentence under s. 973.01. The term of confinement in prison portion of the bifurcated
sentence shall be at least 5 years for violations of s. 948.05 or 948.075 and 3 years
5  for violations of s. 948.12. Otherwise the penalties for the crime apply, subject to any
6  applicable penalty enhancement.
7       Section 2. 939.617 (2) of the statutes is repealed.
8   (End)

Thursday, February 16, 2012

New Recidivism Study... Pass on to your State Representatives


Executive Summary

Although the term “sex offender” is commonly used to describe anyone who has been convicted of sex-crimes, it is important to recognize that individuals who have committed sex offenses do not constitute a single, homogenous population. Together they exhibit a wide range of criminal behaviors that may or may not include violence or contact with other persons. As a consequence, the risk, or likelihood, of committing new sex crimes is not consistent across all sex offender types.

This study tracked 14,398 men for a five-year period following their 2005 release or discharge from a CT prison in 2005. Every subsequent arrest, criminal conviction or reincarceration event was captured and analyzed to produce the 5-year recidivism rates for the group.
In addition to analyzing recidivism among all offenders released or discharged during 2005, the study identified five subgroups from the total cohort who were either convicted for sex offenses or thought to have been involved in criminal sexual crimes but not convicted. The five subgroups were:
  • 1,395 men who had had a prior arrest for a sex-related offense
  • 896 men who had a prior conviction for a sex-related offense
  • 746 men who had served a prison sentence for a sex-related offense before being released in 2005
  • 423 men, a subset of the 746, whose last prison sentence before release was for a sex-related offense, and
  • 1,229 men who were assigned Sex Treatment Scores of 2 or higher by the Department of Correction prior to their 2005 release or discharge.
In 2005, 746 offenders who had served a prison sentence for a least one sex-related offense were released or discharged from prison. Over the next five years:
  • 27 (3.6%) of these men were arrested and charged with a new sex crime.
  • 20 (2.7%) were convicted for new sex offense, and
  • 13 (1.7%) were returned to prison to serve a sentence for a new sex crime.
The sexual recidivism rates for the 746 sex offenders released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The real challenge for public agencies is to determine the level of risk which specific offenders pose the public.

Recidivism data for each sex-offenders subgroup is presented in the Appendix.

In 2005, 37% of non-sex offenders completed their sentences in prison. In contrast, 79% of the 746 sex offenders who had served a prison sentence for a new sex crime were discharged directly from a prison facility at the end of their sentences (EOS). The reason the EOS discharge rate was so high for sex offenders reflects two facts: 1) the DOC did not release TS-eligible sex offenders into the community and 2) sex offenders were not accepted in most of the DOC’s residential, halfway house network. Almost 50% of sex offenders were sentenced to probation at the completion of their sentences compared to 33% for non-sex offenders.

According to this analysis, arrest on a prior sex charge was the single best predictor of being sentenced to prison for a new sex crime in the five years following release from prison. Of the 1,395 offenders who had been arrested on sex charges before 2005, 2.4% were sentenced to prison for new sex offenses within 5 years. This compares with a 1.9% rate among offenders who had a prior conviction for a sex crime, and a 1.7% rate for offenders who had served a prison sentence for a prior sex crime. This finding warrants further study. It suggests that conviction and incarceration for a sex crime exerts a positive impact on reducing future sex crimes.

The DOC-Sex Treatment Score was the 2nd best predictor of sexual recidivism. Among the 1,229 offenders with Sex Treatment Scores of 2 or higher, 2.3% were sentenced to prison for new sex offenses.

Connecticut employs a unique collaborative approach in supervising and treating sex offenders in the community. The approach links parole officers and probation officers, victim advocates and a non-profit provider of sex offender treatment and programming. Together these organizations design oversight and supervision plans for every offender.

Some sex offenders have extensive, violent non-criminal histories. Among the 195 offenders who had been convicted for Sex Assault 1 prior to 2005, 29.2% had also served a prison sentence for a burglary related crime; 13.3% had served a sentence for robbery. The high incidence of burglaries and robberies among this group indicates both a heightened willingness to use force and overstep boundaries. Among the entire population of male prisoners released in 2005, only 16% had been convicted of burglary-related charges and less than 8% had been convicted for a robbery.

Thursday, February 2, 2012

Weakening the Burden of Proof in Wisconsin

Here is a bill that has been proposed in our state of Wisconsin. 

Call your Representatives and tell them that a prosecutor should have proof and not hearsay to bring a person to trial.


2011 - 2012 LEGISLATURE
February 1, 2012 - Introduced by Representatives Jacque, Bies, Craig, Krug and
LeMahieu, cosponsored by Senators Grothman and Lazich. Referred to
Committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections.
1An Act to repeal 908.07 and 970.03 (11); and to create 970.038 of the statutes;
2relating to: the admissibility of hearsay evidence at a preliminary
Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau
Under current law, if an adult is charged with a felony (or, under certain
circumstances, if a juvenile is charged with a violation that would be a crime if
committed by an adult), a preliminary examination is conducted to determine
whether there is probable cause to believe that the person committed the crime as
charged. In the case of a juvenile, the preliminary examination is also used to
determine whether the juvenile should be tried in adult court or referred to juvenile
Under current law, hearsay evidence (a statement, other than one made by a
person who is testifying in court, that is offered to prove the truth of the matter
asserted) is generally inadmissible in court proceedings, including in a preliminary
examination. Current law offers some exceptions to the rule that hearsay is
inadmissible, which generally require some indication that the hearsay is reliable
or trustworthy. Current law also includes an exception at a preliminary examination
to establish property ownership, a victim's lack of consent to entry upon or
destruction of private property, and certain elements of identity theft crimes.

Under this bill, hearsay evidence is admissible at a preliminary examination.
Under the bill, the court may rely on hearsay, in whole or in part, to determine
whether there is probable cause that the defendant committed a crime.
The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do
enact as follows:
1Section 1. 908.07 of the statutes is repealed.
2Section 2. 970.03 (11) of the statutes is repealed.
3Section 3. 970.038 of the statutes is created to read:
4970.038 Preliminary examination; hearsay exception. (1)
5Notwithstanding s. 908.02, hearsay is admissible in a preliminary examination
6under ss. 970.03, 970.032, and 970.035.
7(2) A court may base its finding of probable cause under s. 970.03 (7) or (8),
8970.032 (2), or 970.035 in whole or in part on hearsay admitted under sub. (1).
9 (End)