This is an outrage! Chemical castration gets the green light?

Question

I heard this on the news earlier tonight. I live in Queensland and our FEMALE premier is giving the thumbs up for chemical castration for shortened sentences on s*x offenders. I cannot believe this, this is why radical feminists should not be in any high posistion. This is absolutly ridiculous! Please discuss your thoughts.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23914138-12377,00.html

Answer 1

It's got nothing to do with feminism, mst men agree with it. Why should a s*x offender who has phsycially and emotionally hurt a PERSON sexually using his testicles and p***s have them? An eye for an eye - cause him great emoitnal and phsycial pain and see how he likes it. Don't do the crime if you can't stand the punishment.

EDIT: You must be some kind of serious wierdo if you are supporting s*x offenders.If a pervert sexually molested your child, male or female are you saying 'Oh no, the poor guy shouldn't be castrated! It doesn't matter than my daughter had to be stiched up where he'd ripped her open and now she can't have children.

Answer 2

The ultimate goal for all feminists is the chemical castration of the whole of mankind.

Answer 3

Feminists blood lust will be up because of the act, CASTRATION.

In a feminists mind it is better to risk a child rape than to miss out on a good castration.

I take it there is no discussion of an equivalent treatment for female s*x offenders.

Answer 4

In theory it's a good idea.

In practice not so much.

First of this isn't a mandatory punishment. s*x offenders can choose this form of punishment as opposed to going to jail and becoming some burly, bald guy's b*tch.

Second, it does help counter the problem of overcrowded jails.

Third, in many cases s*x offenders find great relief from it and go on to live normal lives without being racked with fantasies of little children, dominating women, etc.

With all that said, I really don't like chemical castration in general because in doesn't work in all cases. While it takes away the libido and urge to have s*x, it doesn't take away the tool(p***s) nor the physiological problems s*x offenders have so many of them do go back out and commit the same horrendous crimes.

As for the 1 in 3 mothers commits a s*x crime against their children, well that is arguable. Put a poll up, ask the people here on GWS, I'm sure some people would be willing to give you honest and serious answers. I think you'd find that very few, if any have been molested by their mothers. Conversely, I think you'd also find very few, if any have been molested by their fathers. s*x crimes against children is common but it's not THAT common. Believe me, if it was proved that 1 in 3 mothers/fathers molests their children people WOULD be outraged.

As for why this isn't being done to women, well as far as my knowledge goes they haven't developed a way to castrate a woman. In case you haven't noticed the female anatomy is VASTLY different than the male one.

Answer 5

yo mate im over in WA. neway, seriously? chemical castration is fantastic, but its only being applied to men? off however men and women get sexual impulses from diffrent sources, men its easily dealt with women its more difficult. however i think it would be better just to castrate them anyway (within reason, otherwise some poor guy i knows going to be busted). if its applied to both sexes then there nothing wrong.

Answer 6

Did you miss the bit about it being voluntary? It's no different to treating any number of other mental disorders. Drug addicts often have to consent to treatment programmes to avoid harsher sentences for crimes. At least they're being offered treatment and rehabilitation. It's not as if they're having their balls chopped off without their consent.

Answer 7

I clicked the "answer this question" button, but then realized there's no question to answer.

This is a place to have questions answered, not an open forum to discuss your outrage.

Answer 8

It's offered/recommended to women as well right? Right?

Answer 9

what a *****. well anyways, they can still **** after chem. castration, which makes it all OK.

Answer 10

It may be "voluntary" at first but this is the thin end of the wedge again. Under today's fascistic governments even our bodies are not our own anymore.

Feminists would be wise not to cheer just yet. It is only a matter of time before the state wants to interfere with your bodies too.

We ought to remember that once the state steamroller gets under way it is almost impossible to halt it.

Answer 11

I personally like that idea.

I know if i was a parent of a s*x crime victim, I would want whoever molested my child to be castrated.

Answer 12

Cool your jets....it is being offered ans an OPTION, and it requires CONSENT from the convicted criminal.  It's a negotiation to open up a jail cell.

What is so outrageous about it?

Answer 13

A hint: not many people are going to be particularly sympathetic towards s*x offenders. Both males and females.

Also, this is voluntary not compulsory. Many would prefer it to prison. This is not particularly anti-male. In a way of dealing with the prison crisis; overfull prisons mean that less serious crimes are recieving less funding and intervention and actually leaving worse than they came in. And prison is supposedly there for reform, not just punishment, this is a form of reform. It might actually be effective.

Answer 14

WOW I can't believe all the sexist ramblings against female leaders...Anyway back to the topic. I think this is a good idea, anyone who believes this is the jumping off point for feminists to castrate all men is paranoid.

I'm sure this legislation in Australia was given "the thumbs up" for a few reasons. For 1 reducing inmate numbers therefore relieving expenses, 2 hopefully reducing the sexual impulses of some of these men that apparently don't know right from wrong.

Thats a pretty good tradeoff rather than let them sit in a cell and then release them knowing they still have plenty of urges left. I don't know the appeal process in Australia but i'd argue an innocent man would rather sit it out in jail than be castrated chemically.

Answer 15

I want to see the evidence proving the one in three mothers comment.  That had to be the most ignorant thing I have ever read in a "question".

congrats.

Answer 16

My understanding is that chemical castration does not work because it does not change thought patterns. The premier has probably won a few votes but really the policy won't help much.

Answer 17

If there's no question to answer then don't answer fool. I suppose you need the 2 points =D

It is a bit strange.. certainly can't be equitable treatment or equal treatment lol

I assume the equivalent (whatever that may be) has not been offered to females

Edit: jeez I get sick of straw man arguments.. Who here ever said that we're sympathising with the offender? I'm just saying be consistent if you're targetting a s*x. I could bring my own straw man argument to the table.. do you think only men are s*x offenders then?

Answer 18

Chemical castration(which reduces sexual urges, but does not actually remove body parts) in Australia is only a voluntary option for those offenders who wish to have their sentences reduced.

In some US states, such as Cali, Florida, Georgia, Texas, Louisiana, and Montana, chemical castration is mandatory.

You think now.......If you had a child and they were raped/molested, would you really have goodwill for the offender?

I know I wouldn't.  Male or female offender.

Answer 19

It's an option and it requires consent from the criminal. Why are you so concerned about what happens to a criminal? You are in no danger of being castrated so why are you lobbying for their rights? I'm sure that many female s*x offenders also need to be castrated and perhaps you could try and petition for that instead of being here whining about it. I frankly think that any rapist regardless of their gender needs to be castrated.

Answer 20

Please don't blame this on feminists and the fact that she's female. I think the option of castrating people (not just males) who sexually offend gets raised periodically by people who are horrified by the crime and what it means about the people who commit them.

I can be a feminist and believe chemical castration is a profound misunderstanding of sexual offending.

That said, I work with s*x offenders and some men who find that they have very disturbing and distressing fantasies can find relief with chemical castration. It is not permanent (though it can be made to be) and it reduces their libido. Not for all offenders though as for some, the offence is about power and control which would do nothing to reduce their risk of re-offending.

Answer 21

Thats what you get with a woman in "power".

Answer 22

""It's been proven that 1 in 3 mothers have done something sexual with their children.""  WTF  Where did that garbage come from?  

Please stay away from hospitals- You are in danger of being declared brain dead.

Answer 23

So? If they are going to be in prison for the rest of their lives, why not just behead them and get it over with?

It's to be done with the recommendation of a psychotherapist and with consent by the offender. It's not radical feminism, it's someone trying to do SOMETHING to end pedophilia, or at least re-occuring...

Answer 24

Who the h**l do these feminists think they are.

"Ms Bligh ruled out mandatory chemical castration, saying research showed it did not work"

$#$%%#. What is the next step people. Yes mandatory. What the..

To a feminist "the ends to a means, so what if there are innocent men caught up in this"

Shame shame shame. The uprising is coming you sexist pigs.