Maine Wants You for Their Salt Mines
There’s an article out of Maine discussing a proposed new law that basically makes it illegal to look at a child in public locations in such a way as to cause sexual arousal in the viewer. The article mistakenly suggests that it will now be illegal under the new law to look at clothed children for sexual arousal, but that’s irrelevant. What’s more important is how amazingly scary it is that the government is getting into the business of thought crime.
The article cites an anectode from a police officer about a situation in which “a man … appeared to be observing children entering … community bathrooms” at a public beach. The police couldn’t charge him with anything, and were only able to tell him to move along. This new bill would address this so-called “visual sexual aggression” against children, making it a felony.
What’s particularly interesting about this episode is that the guy only “appeared to be observing” children, nothing more. He wasn’t talking to them, he wasn’t masturbating, he wasn’t taking pictures, he wasn’t doing anything except looking, and even then they’re not sure. Basically, the police thought that the guy was “creepy” and didn’t want him there. I can understand this, as I wouldn’t want some creepy guy staring at my kids either, assuming I had kids. Nevertheless, it scares the hell out of me that the police wanted to charge the guy with anything at all despite him complying with their request to leave the area. Since when are the police entitled to patrol the thoughts of American citizens? Even IF the guy was staring at the kids so that he could pleasure himself later, I find it absurd that some random cop on some random beach can make that determination without any evidence and throw some guy in jail on a felony charge. Utter nonsense.
By the way, it’s for similar reasons that hate crime legislation pisses me off. It shouldn’t matter why someone committed a crime, only that they did it. If white-skinned man A stabs white-skinned man B, does it hurt B any less than if A stabs a black-skinned guy because of racism? I tell you, if I’m ever stabbed, I hope a white-skinned guy does me in. If a black-skinned guy did it because he hates whites, that knife is probably going to hurt way worse. This, of course, is just plain stupid.
If the guy watching kids is creepy, move him along and keep an eye on him. If he continues to do it and people are feeling threatened, charge him with something like physical intimidation. The threat of rape is a real crime, and a grown man who persists in leering at small children after warnings from police could be legitimately conveying this threat. But, to make up some bullsh*t felony of “visual sexual aggression” and to actually create a pre-crime over someone’s sexual thoughts is just plain frightening. Since when did Joseph Stalin start running Maine’s government?
I will give the author(s) of the bill some credit: the bill doesn’t make it a crime to stare at someone over 12 or 14 (depending on the circumstance) in this way. I say this not because I’m happy that creepy men can intimidate 15-year-old girls, but because this apparently recognizes the distinction between pedophilia and just “regular” sexual attention paid towards a minor. In semi-scientific terms, if a human being has secondary sex characteristics (e.g. developed breasts or hips in girls), it’s not pedophilia to be attracted to them. We still don’t want grown adults taking advantage of minors who may be sexually—though not mentally—developed, but attraction towards secondary sexual characteristics is normal. Sexual attraction towards children with no discernible secondary sex characteristics is not considered normal, and falls into the category of paraphilia. I have no problem with crimes that penalize adults for taking advantage of unwitting minors, but to say that an adult can’t be sexually aroused by a 16-year-old who is just as developed as an 18-year-old is just dumb. This bill doesn’t do that, thankfully, but I wonder if it’s on the horizon.
Who knows what could be next? Maybe we can bring back debtor’s prison and throw away people who merely consider skipping a credit card payment. Rather than help the potential pedophile or the potential bankruptcy candidate before they do an offending act, we can just preemptively ruin their lives. Everybody wins. Hooray!
To close, let me quote George Orwell’s 1984:
It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself — anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offence. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime, it was called.




