To believe in forced castration?

[SchoolShenanigans]

Sorry if this has been done before, but AIBU to think forced castration should be in place for paedophiles and people of child bearing age who have been convicted of any form of child abuse?

I get people have bodily autonomy; but the protection of children surely comes first?!

Just read the thread where a couple have already lost one child to care, are neglectful to another (disturbed) child, with social services intervention, and now pregnant with another.

I also have a family member who has 6 children with different inappropriate fathers, in and out of prison, social services involvement and criminal convictions. Providing a shit childhood for multiple innocent children who will be affected for life.

Why are we so again castration as a mechanism to stop further reproduction in damaging environments?

In many cases, people with prior child abuse convictions just have subsequent babies immediately removed. What's the point? Just stop them being able to have kids and the problems sorted?

Doesn't chemical castration happen in America in some states for sex offenders?

And what about the victims and their bodies. Anyone who harms a child sexually or anyone for that matter should have dicks ripped off them. I have no issue nor qualms whatsoever in saying that.

It's about everyone's bodies because once it is ok for the state to cross that line and control someone's body, it isn't always 'just' going to be the sex offenders body.

No. The problem with introducing something like this is that it gives governments the power to expand it. What's to say they don't change the law and make being gay or abortions a crime. And then they can castrate you for that? Or all prisoners? Or people who have multiple abortions?

You just cannot break bodily autonomy. That way madness lies.

Gay men used to get sent to prison too. Which was obviously wrong. But it doesn't mean that in 2023 sending people to prison for crimes such as murder is wrong. Because the wrong thing in the past was the reason they were being sent to prison, not the fact that people were sent to prison at all.

You could just as easily say the government could expand prisons, make it illegal to be alive, and put everyone in jail. We already put certain people in jail, so what's the difference?

Again as an actual ‘victim’ (survivor) I can tell you I would never have said a WORD to anyone if I knew my abuser would be killed or maimed - please don’t forget most abusers are known to the child and often family members

so have your irate rant but don’t think you speak for me and don’t pretend your motivation is to protect people like me.

Said with much respect due to the nature of this thread and what you have gone through "My rant isn't irate,nor did I say or imply anywhere in my comment that I was speaking for anybody. Can you please highlight exactly where I used the words " I speak for.......
You don't know what my motivation is. How do you prove or validate someone's motivation and thoughts on line.

I wholeheartedly agree with you OP. I don't understand people who don't like the sound of it.

You might disagree, but the evidence says you are wrong. Chemical castration has been trialed in many countries on many occasions (including in the UK).

One study (I'll try and find the source) showed that chemically castrated rapists of adult females went on to either become pedophiles or hurt women in other ways.

It's been tried. It doesn't work. No working penis doesn't= no risk, or even reduced risk.

I think any woman who has her children removed by SS for neglect or abuse should be offered and encouraged sterilisation to prevent more babies. I don't think it can be forced.

Having had my bike nicked recently, I'm warming to the idea of amputation as a punishment for thieves.

I am a dog owner and the procedure definitely removed my two male dogs instincts. I don’t agree with OP btw, seems quite medieval to me, but just commenting on your dog comment. 🙂

How would it ever work?

Physically holding them down in the operating theatre? Dragging them into hospital?

Do people not ever consider the staff who would have to work with these people??

@JustGeorgie Maybe we can get this guy back into useful employment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Maudsley

I'm being facetious now because I tried reasonable argument and posters started ranting about 'peado supporters' or something.

Peado supporters. Fuck me. Actually I'm a sociologist enjoy your moral high ground I guess.

In countries where it has been tried they exchange early release/a shorter sentence for consent.

Robert Maudsleys punishment has not fit his (horrific) crimes.
I'd never release him into the community but he's been punished reprehensibly.
His victims were predominantly peadophiles and with the life Robert had led prior and his psychosis, he doesn't need locking in a cage, he needs genuine, genuine help.
I'm not a supporter of his behaviour, I know he has stans, I'm certainly not, but I fully sympathise with his catastrophic childhood and early life.

Sorry, I feel very passionate about Robert Maudsley's living situation.
It's perhaps one of the worst lives I've ever heard of.

I've actually considered writing to him over the years, his level of loneliness really crushes me. The poor bastard just wants a fucking budgie.

We look at Colin Pitchfork, released into civilisation to immediately break conditions.
Gary Glitter.
Levi bellend, he I believe has taken a wife since being incarcerated, (would be interesting to know if he's allowed conjugal visits).

Sorry to derail

Huge difference between a functioning Criminal justice system and Eugenics.

Govts and business need people to work to pay taxes and make business money, thats not achieved by jailing everyone.

I'm surprised you would like to put so much power into politicians hands.

I find it fascinating that ops very premise and this thread prove how quickly this would be corrupted to be expanded to other groups and how that would work.
Only one paragraph in ops opening post references sex offenders or pedophiles. Three other paragraphs reference (another thread )where a woman's disability led to neglect, a woman who has many children and has social services involvement but has not met the threshold for having children removed.

And yet the pedophiles are all people have zoned in on to justify maiming and torturing individuals.

I wonder why noone is talking about chopping off the parts of a woman who has some social services involvement (of which the only thing we know deems her a sterilisation candidate is six kids and possibly not coping, op doesn't mention sexual abuse which seems to have become the theme of the thread.) Could it be that it's more palatable to push the idea of mutilating sex offenders? Yet that's not just what op was proposing. She spent the least amount of time writing about it.
It's literally what would happen if this became law. It already does in countries that have torture. Ostentatiously make it seem it's about one extreme set of criminals and then apply to all opposition.
Fascinating 40 percent of people can't see the patterns from history played right out in front of them.

Why only the mothers?

DH once said he thinks people should have permanent contraceptives implanted which are only removed once you obtained a license to have children. This was in the wake of a parent murdering a child. At the time I thought it was an awful thing to say. Now I’m not so sure .

Yeah I feel for Maudsley too. He shouldn’t be released but the isolation seems cruel.

On the rapist thing, castration doesn’t work. Some people are extremely compulsive, lifelong tag and long jail sentences. For some people stopping them offending literally means keeping them out of the population completely

By “people” does he mean women?

He meant women, didn't he?

Presumably he was talking in the heat of the moment and being a bit hyperbolic. At least I fucking hope so. I hope you're not being entirely serious either.