Have sex offense laws ‘jumped the shark’?
The phrase “jump the shark”, according to the Urban Dictionary, is the point at which something loses its touch and begins to grasp at straws. It was coined by Jon Hein, who wrote a book citing examples of television shows that reached a peak and then began to go downhill. It refers to an episode of “Happy Days” in which Fonzie jumped a shark on water skiis. From that point on, the show ran out of story lines and came up with ridiculousness to keep it on the air.
Last week, when I read some news stories about a group of Jeffrey Epstein victims who are behind a proposed bill to block “childlike sex dolls” I realized that we might have arrived at the point where sex offense laws have jumped the shark.
To preface my thoughts; I greatly empathize with Epstein’s victims. What happened to them is horrible. That’s not the point. I’m also not in favor of “childlike sex dolls”. Until Sen. Lauren Book introduced a bill about them, I didn’t even know they were a “thing”. I’ve been involved in advocacy for more than a decade and have heard the stories of hundreds of registrants. Not one began with “well it all started when I saw this ad for a childlike sex doll…” Again, totally not suggesting that these things should be allowed to exist, but that’s not the point.
The point is; are “childlike sex dolls” really a problem or have lawmakers simply run out of ideas for new laws to capitalize on “sex offender panic” and are so desperate for ideas they are coming up with this doll agenda and then trying to sensationalize it by throwing Jeffrey Epstein’s name into the headlines?
One Florida lawmaker in this article was even quoted as saying, “These dolls not only violate children mentally and emotionally but also deny their privacy rights.” Wait… what? Are the dolls mentally and emotionally violated or are actual children violated by the dolls? I was also a kid once and I remember being terrorized by “Chucky” from the horror movie series, but I can’t remember any of my friends mentioning anything about childlike sex dolls.
Again, we are all against sexual abuse of any kind and it’s something that needs to be taken seriously. I just question whether there is an actual problem that exists here and needs to be addressed, or are politicians just trying to capitalize on the political points sex offense laws bring them, but are running out of creative ideas.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“These dolls not only violate children mentally and emotionally but also deny their privacy rights.”
I completely agree with the author – when I read the above statement, I immediately thought “Wait…what??”🤨🤔
So, to offer an obvious extension of that argument, silicone phalluses (i.e., “dildos”) violate men mentally and emotionally and deny men their privacy rights.
Clearly, this is an intolerable and indefensible assault upon the male gender!: All dildos must be made illegal, banned and confiscated.
😖 As a male, I feel degraded, violated & objectified just knowing such horrendous “artificial male genitalia” exist! 😖
(Seriously, that’s the argument, right??)
That’s cute, FAC, but no need for FAC to stoop to that level in a public forum (you can leave it to us commenters to do that just fine).
My impression is that the author is implying these dolls are used to groom children for sex. That is to make them feel like it is normal and thus ok for them. This is very much like one of the arguments against child porn, i.e. that it is used to reduce a child’s inhibitions.
I find it hard to believe there is any evidence that inflatables are used in this way, but exists only in the author’s imagination in an attempt to fortify his groundless assertions. He wrote, “Experts say pedophiles use the lifelike dolls to “normalize” sex acts against children and prey on minors.” What experts? Where are they? Show me the studies.
I’m fairly convinced that this is just more BS with no evidentiary support whatsoever.
Veritas.
What the issue is, anyone that would want to have sex with a childsex doll just might want to have sex with a child. Isn’t that what this is about? Or if a child happens to hear about or happen to see one of these dolls it might affect them in such away as to what they think about it depending on the child. One child might think it is rediculas or one might think it to be funny or the worst thing would be is to scare them and not know what to think. And the child could carry the thoughts with them for a long time. But hopefully they would tell their parents. Could this be the issue about the sex doll? I know it doesn’t help a registrant in any kind of way, so it probably is just another nail in our coffin.
Yes, Book is claiming that child sex dolls are a “gateway drug” that leads straight to having sex with real children. While that is possible when overused, you could also argue that legal adult sex dolls MAY lead to adult rape when overused. But it could also be said that for many people, they could satisfy their need and keep them from going any further. The child dolls would only bother a child or their privacy if a real child or their picture was used to create a very life-like face. Just seeing a naked doll or a naked person causing damage for life is BS when any child can see naked people in any museum or art book all day long not to mention seeing their own bodies. Occasionally, in any household, a child may accidentally see a relative naked or walk in on Mommy and Daddy. Most of us probably have. It also pops up on TV a LOT! Get over it! They do.
The entire sex offender status has gotten completely out of had, when I was in court mandated therapy the therapist said that by the laws being so out of hand that more than 90% of the population has committed a sex offense, I believe it’s 40% gets caught and out of that only 20% has an real brutal offense. We live in a society that gives teacher’s sex Offenses for sleeping with teenagers who by law can have sex, 18 year old who sleep with 17 year old bf and gf get sex Offenses, and jail and prison staff that get offenses even though they put opposite sexes together and you get to know these inmates what do you think will happen the whole process needs to be reevaluated.
In a word: yes
Could the same thing be said of the proposed new SORNA rules?
Are the States going to go along with these are is it going to be too much trouble for the money or are SO’s going to have to pay a tax (reg fee) in every state they have to register in? There may be a lot of shark jumping going on but I am thinking it is going to be bull shark.
I’d rather have them molest a doll than a real child
If doing a doll keeps kids safe i am all for it.
@ D: That makes sense to me as well – better a doll than a real child.
(Those who oppose the dolls are probably the same ones who argue that viewing pornography leads one to commit rape.).
In fact, sex toy manufacturers do make both artificial silicone vaginas and silicone anuses. So if one purchases and using one of those, how are the powers-that-be going to monitor one’s thoughts when one
uses those toys? What if the user is fantasizing about rape? Or fantasizing about a child? To be precise, wouldn’t they actually want to monitor the individual’s fantasies rather than monitoring what “toy” the individual uses? But that’s the real problem, isn’t it??