Seeking to move away from labels that can work against a person’s rehabilitation, Colorado’s Sex Offender Management Board plans to vote Friday to replace the term “sex offender” in its own guiding principles.
The board is considering several new terms, including clients, adults or individuals “who commit sexual offenses,” “who engage in sexually abusive behavior,” who are “in treatment for engaging in sexually abusive behaviors” or “who have committed sexual offenses.”
The board, which governs the standards for treatment of people convicted of sex offenses, is far from united on the issue of “person-first language” in this context. Members split 8-7 in the spring on a vote to adopt new guiding principles concerning language. Friday’s expected vote would finish off that process.
“I think the biggest thing is research really shows us that assigning a label has the potential for negative effects in rehabilitation,” said Kimberly Kline, a licensed counselor and chair of the board.
Governor quashes change in language:
https://www.denverpost.com/2021/12/20/sex-offender-label-colorado-jared-polis/amp/
Kudos to the Denver Post, who in this article eschewed the term “sex offenders” in favor of “people who committed sex offenses.” The Denver Post caught on!
The Colorado SOMB decided today to replace the term “sex offender” with the phrase “adult who commits sex offenses.” This is like replacing a certain derogatory term with “The N Word.” We still know what you mean. This is insufficient, and it is present tense language that implies everyone is actively offending. But there is a 20 day window to submit better suggestions. Go here and click on the “submit public comment” link:
https://dcj.colorado.gov/boards-commissions/sex-offender-management-board
We STRONGLY encourage all of you to submit your comments.
PLEASE!
Wow. I thought they were trying to improve something. That phrase is actually worse and even more inaccurate. That level of incompetency is pretty funny actually.
I caught my listing on the Oppression Lists (OLs) over 2 decades ago. Today, I’m not anything related to “sex offender” or whatever nonsense terms they want to use. I’m just a PFR.
The great thing is that because of the OLs, I don’t have any remorse about what I did. I won’t even acknowledge it any longer. Couldn’t care less about it or what people think. I thank the OLs for giving me that peace.
They can keep calling me names if they want. They might as well because I’m not going to stop calling them names or making them pay consequences for the mere existence of the OLs. Amerika is a hateful place.
WAKE UP PEOPLE!
THE TERM ‘SEX OFFENDER’ MEANS THAT ONE IS STILL SEX OFFENDING
SO, ON ITS FACE, THE ACRONYM, ‘SORNA’, IS WRONG!
-IT MEANS THAT WE ARE ALL STILL OFFENDING
I WILL NEVER EVER SIGN A DOCUMENT THAT HAS ‘SEX OFFENDER’ ON IT BECAUSE IT IMPLIES THAT I AM SEX OFFENDING, WHICH I AM NOT AND NEVER HAVE AND NEVER WILL!
EVERYONE, NEEDS TO FIGHT FOR THEIR RIGHTS!
NEVER CAVE IN TO THESE DRACONIAN PEOPLES!
Truth
I use to live near a lady who once told me “All of you on that list are a bunch of rapists”. Really?
So Someone looking at porn is a rapist? Who are they raping? Perhaps the computer monitor?
Amerika is full of truly stupid, hateful “people”. They are of no concern other than the fact that they suck up resources and cause problems. I certainly wouldn’t care about anything they say or think.
At FAC, we believe in person-first language.
Until the state actually proposes it, at which point we refer it as “nonsense,” “irrelevant,” “potatoes” (?), “just another label,” and “a waste of time and money,” according to the comments below.
Go on calling them sex offenders if convicted if you prefer.
To me, the most straightforward terms are “registrant” (per RBG’s classic dissent in Does) and “former sex offender” (per ACLU Jeanne Baker’s televised debate with Ron Book).
PFR, by contrast, is not straightforward. It’s hyperbolic while making it sound like we’re hiding something. I’ll call people PFR’s once the public replaces the term “taxpayers” with “PFPT’s” (Persons Forced to Pay Taxes).
not sure how extraneous “if convicted” got into the above other than errant auto-complete
@Jacob
As a PFR, I am doing so against my will in a system where registration is felt to be needed for a false sense of security for those who believe it is needed; hence, “forced” is appropriate here so one can avoid a punishment from a regulatory scheme. I know I am not a danger and have two professionally attained assessments seven years apart to prove it; therefore, no one needs to have a false sense of security from me because of something someone else feels needs to be levied against me.
The RBG term “registrant” is more apropos because it is the truth but still is forced on some of populace because of what certain people think. She could have said “forced registrant” to be more correct of those who don’t need it.
PFR is the best term. It better helps illustrate the immortality, stupidity, unfairness, and the lack of basis in reality that is the Oppression Lists.
If the scumbag criminal regimes don’t like PFR then they can just call me enemy. Domestic enemy, maybe?
Taxes are not comparable to registration. Do they inflict taxes just in certain people? Retroactively change it?
While the thinking seems to be in the right direction, all the terms seem to just change a label into a definition. The definition is still wrong.
“If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.” – Fox Mulder
Still no matter how you look at it is just another label. It’s not changing the laws. The ordinances that have been put on us are still punitive.
You want to promote rehabilitation? Stop wasting time and money on coming up with new terminology and just eliminate the registries.
Problem solved.
I can’t believe they’re even considering this nonsense. Any euphemism they come up will still be disparaging and an afront to basic dignity and respect.
It seems they’re trying every way in to world to give off the illusion that the registry is non-punitive, necessary and proper.
You can bet your bottom dollar they will never come up with a re-branded label that elicits sympathy from the public.
I am willing to be Colorado will be the first state to adopt the new model penal code reforms on the sex Offender Registry.
Kline has heard the criticism, from prosecutors and others, that it’s unfair to victims of sex offenses to call their perpetrators something other than “sex offender.”
Soooo… peeing in public has a “victim”? Two people caught getting in on in the backseat has a “victim”? I suppose a college grad mooning out the car window as they are driven off after graduation has multiple “victims”, eh? Because no one’s ever seen someone else’s ass in a locker room before. These are also your “sex offenders”, you idiots.
I believe that victims of sex crimes don’t have any particular rights, or even represent an interest group regarding registration. They received their retribution, fairness and justice in the criminal punishment phase. The registry is ostensibly intended to increase future public safety, not to continue punishment for prior crimes. (BTW, I don’t believe the registry contributes to public safety.)
Victims had their say at sentencing, whether or not they agree that the punishment was adequate. Court-ordered retribution for a criminal offense is appropriate. Continuing to extract revenge through the registry is not.
For the same reason, I don’t believe the district attorney has a stake in registry regulations either. They get their pound of flesh and promotion points through the courts.
Veritas.
As a former victim of sex abuse, and now a Registered Citizen, I have mixed feelings on “victim’s rights.” Because the system is flawed by failing to bridge gaps between people who commit crimes against others and the people directly affected by those crimes, often the latter will eventually become the former.
While I can relate to your feelings as to how people affected by crimes committed have the opportunity to “[continue] to extract revenge through the registry,” these people have been irrevocably affected and our system hasn’t afforded them the chance to heal and grow. If the system figured out how to close the gap, to allow reformed people to make amends and provide a safe avenue for both parties to express themselves in a safe environment, there would be less incidences of “revenge.”
To come full circle to the original topic, changing terminology will not change the damage any label brings. Simply, if FL changed the phrasing from SO to RC, the public will transfer the same connotations it gave to SO to RC.
LeeLee, you have my sympathies for your victimization, and I agree with you. What you have described is very much like the restorative justice movement. That emphasizes resolution of injustices and healing for both the victim and the offender. I wish you the best.
Two ideas
#1 Ex-Offenders
#2 Maybe let us move on with NO labels ? (We are not our past)
I’m in Colorado so while this certainly is a “feel good” thing they are doing it gives me really great pause. If being a PFR, or “Sex Offender” is such a negative connotation, how is it not equally considered punishment? If it isn’t punishment, then the label is irrelevant.
To me this is just window dressing on trying to make it look like the registry isn’t punitive and they are doing something about it.
So we can fire all the attorneys now on get on with our lives with this new and improved label? (Much sarcasm implied)
Call it a mule or a donkey, they are closely related.
I prefer to call it a jackass.
There is a virtual meeting, and supposedly will include public imput.
You’ll have to RSVP here:
See also: https://dcj.colorado.gov/…/domestic…/somb/somb-meetings
or email [email protected]
With the tagline “RSVP for SOMB Meeting”
I wish that I could see this as a positive move. Forward progress would be great, but the replacement language doesn’t “move the chains”. It’s still potatoes and potatoes.
Not every play may move the chains, but third and short is easier that third and long.
Very true, and to paraphrase George Carlin, we’ll have to use a sustained ground attack to punch holes in the opposition forward line.
Amen Derek! Let me ask a simple question folks, Has the Florida SOMB held such a meeting with the opportunity for anybody to speak? Or any other state?
There is no Florida SOMB 🙁
IMO. That’s exactly what Vicki is saying.
HAHA
Sorry but I had never heard of SOMB. If someone texted me that I would think they were cussing me out 🙂
I looked it up and I guess our FDLE here is the equivalent Although they also do other law enforcement duties in the state