«

»

Feb 14 2010

Michael Jackson perv alert in Austin neighborhood

Blamer Susan just got this postcard in the mail. She yawned.

Risk Level: HIGH!!!!!

Risk Level: HIGH!!!!!

You know these cards. “NOTICE OF HIGH-RISK SEX OFFENDER IN COMMUNITY.” The state sends’em out when a convicted perv, who for some reason isn’t in jail even though he is “high risk,” moves into your neighborhood, to frolic and molest.

The question is, what the fuck are you supposed to do with this information? Go from orange to red alert? Or, if you are already on red alert because this is, like, the 8th one of these cards you’ve gotten, escalate to infrared alert? Arm yourself at all times with a pit bull and a flamethrower? Build a cinderblock bunker and lock yourself up in it?

They should send out cards that read NOTICE OF BLOCK PARTY CELEBRATING CASTRATION OF ANOTHER SEX OFFENDER. PUBLIC SHAMING AT 9. MUSIC STARTS AT 10. BYOB.

Because, Jesus in a jetpack, these unhelpful warnings are meaningless, merely adding to the shitpile and general sense of exhaustion women perpetually experience as a result of performing our unceasing hyper-vigilance.

As Susan points out, big whoop. Another day, another perv in close proximity. As we all know, these assholes are everywhere, and the overwhelming majority don’t come with picture postcards. In fact, the only ones with postcards are the non-white, non-affluent ones.

Except this one. Ha!

petetownshend

Wouldn’t it be funny if, instead of sending out postcards announcing the arrival of unreconstructed violent criminals, the state would think up ways to prevent dude-based violence in the first place? Such methods would not, if I may be allowed an even more improbable dream, include advising women on how to keep from being attacked.

50 comments

  1. yttik

    Thank you, those stupid alerts have been annoying me for ages. I live in a town that has around 200 convicted sex offenders and I only have this info from working in the court system and watching the trials. These alerts are reserved for a certain level of offender. Most don’t even warrant notification. So naturally who do we decide to alert the public about? Two women, a black guy, and three teen age boys. Women probably comprise 1% of sex offenders, if that, but they’ve practically achieved equality as registered sex offenders around here. The boys, although certainly living up to their patriarchal training, were busted for dating girls under 16. Exploitive perhaps, but a 17 yr old dating a 15 yr old girl is simply not the same as forcibly raping a child or a woman. Just the same, the general public is now expected to be wary of women, black guys, and teen age boys. Let’s keep those stereotypes going, folks.

    And what good do these notices do? I haven’t got a clue. My instincts and experience make me afraid of several unconvicted perps and two convicted and yet not required to register. Truth be told, the five we have notified the community about are people I am least afraid of.

    And who do we screen at our public school and demand back ground checks on to prevent child molesting? The mothers who volunteer in the classroom, the ones who are raising the kids at home. Yeah, we’re not sure if you’re safe enough to be around kids.

    I will say in the name of safety, don’t trust or rely on the system, it doesn’t know it’s ass from a hole in the ground. Always trust your instincts and raise your children to listen to theirs and to tell and tell and tell because most of these guys rely on shame and secrecy to keep them in business.

  2. rj

    dearest twisty,
    this is my first post. i’ve been reading your post for some time. in fact, i’ve been through all of your archives. now that i have finished, i have to wait several days for my fix. i am lost without my daily blaming fix. you are the only sane person i know. i half believed everyone when they said i was the crazy person… but since your site, i know better. You have changed my world and i love you. i don’t know how to express my gratitude. i’m sorry if my email contains any spelling or grammar mistakes. i am pissed as a cricket. i’ve wanted to write for the longest time. it’s funny how someone is part of your everyday life (but they don’t know it!) haha. did i say i love you? x rj

  3. Saphire

    Maaan we don’t have pervert castration shaming parties.

    Women are just pissed on for justice. Radical I know, but all I care about is the smashing of the oppressive system we live in, allowed to get away with evil day by day. The pathetic Dos and Donts of society are all a big haze.

    That smug face at the bottom looks like a melted wellington boot.

  4. feral

    Call me an idealist, but pervert castration parties would supply the booze.

  5. SargassoSea

    Townshend. Research? My ass, fucker. Nice the way that WM(Iconic Rockah!)P of yours allowed you to perv and *rock* on.

    I’d happily supply all the booze for that public shaming. Please.

  6. Kiuku

    The Solution:

    Enforced curfew for men. The only males allowed on the streets are men. Men police men and they must do so on male tax dollars only. Men cannot be around kids, period.

  7. Laughingrat

    Didn’t Golda Meir recommend just such a curfew, only to be greeted with appalled gasps? I seem to remember her retort that since it was men doing the raping, men oughta be the ones to stay indoors at night. Of course, stranger-rape is much less prevalent than rape from family members and acquaintances, but nevertheless I like the cut of her jib, or whatever the hell that saying is.

  8. Schnee

    Don’t Blamers get accused of castrating men by just blaming them? We should be having one long continual partaaaay.

  9. Sarah

    In Oregon, we don’t get alerts in the mail, but there is a web site that conveniently maps the locations of all the predatory sex offenders in the state, complete with cute little photo IDs. I’ve had much fun with it, and have invented a little game wherein I try to guess the sex offenders in the crowd when out in public. Unfortunately, the game’s grown a bit tiresome as I see at least the potential for sex offending (offense?) in almost everyone with a Y chromosome.

  10. Boad

    Kiuku: What?

  11. agasaya

    Yttik,

    You drew a rather fine line with regard to statutory rape issues.That is understandable but perhaps it should be considered more closely. Teen girls who are pressured to become sexually active at early ages usually lack the sophistication for expressing consent. They may not understand the difference between choosing to have sex for the physical enjoyment (although it’s doubtful many find it all that scintillating as virgins with inexperienced boy partners)versus sex to enhance/deepen a relationship. Girls and boys approach sex differently at that age (if not at all ages) and only the threat of legal action can keep some boys from crossing the line from exploitation (psychological rape) to physical rape.

    Of course, few women can successfully fight accusations of consent so the statutory component is essential for younger females or they will be certain fodder for every perv around. Adult sentencing need not be the rule for convicted juveniles but what will stop the eighteen or twenty-one year old for pursuing sixteen year olds in order to lessen the consequences through claims of consent?

    Just some thoughts.

  12. Mortisha

    Jeez we don’t those alert thingies here in Australia. The local media has an occasional outing on slow news day.

    Sounds like some suburbs they need to be handing out a ‘guide to your local scumy blerks directory’ instead of a couple of cards.

    My puppy “Mr Bitey” has good instincts:)

  13. Mortisha

    Feck –sorry about the slack editing.

  14. PandanCat

    Holy flying donut! There’s a kiddy-molesting zombie Michael Jackson in town? Keep a full tank of gas and plenty of food/water in your car! This could get ugly!

  15. slythwolf

    It might be nice if the government, or indeed anyone but humorless feminists, would acknowledge that it’s the sex offenders who haven’t been caught yet that pose the greater threat, there being shit-tons more of them.

  16. kristyn

    Hooray, blamers. Hooray, again, Jill.

    If any of you are ever in Brooklyn — free booze. Free Indian food and/or pie. No men. And we can go beat up sex offenders afterward, if we want.

    Seriously. Why does the gov’t even bother with informing anyone about ”sex offenders”? It’s not like they do anything about it, even when they bother to peg the right people as opposed to ”scary scary Black men/women/teens/people who were incareful enough to get caught doing what a lot of men do every day”.

  17. kristyn

    PS — no need to answer that. It was a rhetorical question. I know why as well as well as any of you do.

  18. Shopstewardess

    Long before the internet childporn thing, I met Pete Townsend, spent an hour or so chatting to him, and thought he was OK.

    I suppose I ought to have more sympathy for the signatories of the Roman Polanski petitions, because my instinct on first hearing the original story about Pete Townsend was “surely not”, whereas my first instinct on hearing the same about a man I didn’t know at all, or hadn’t liked, would be “surely yes”.

    I have no inclination to defend Pete Townsend. But the instinct was there, so obviously a blamer still in training, here.

  19. Katherine

    Teen girls who are pressured to become sexually active at early ages usually lack the sophistication for expressing consent.

    Agasaya, doesn’t that raise the danger of infantilizing young women though? I ask the question not to disagree as such (because to do so would be to get into boring TMI personal anecdote territory) but to raise the possibility.

  20. Laughingrat

    It seems like the question of “infantilizing” women always comes up right about the time someone raises really pertinent questions about how Patriarchy constructs “consent,” but not so much when we’re actually being infantilized by an oppressive culture. Given that “consent” under a Patriarchy is a murky concept at best–that women are simultaneously taught they they’re in a constant state of consent because they’re designated as sexual receptacles, and also that they must never, ever yield up their precious sexual purity–it seems important for us to discuss what consent means, and to acknowledge that the ability to give or withhold it is a pretty ambiguous thing under the current circumstances.

    This has nothing to do with infantilizing women and everything to do with calling out oppression culture on how it screws women over. Although anecdotes are not data, I do see plenty of anecdotes ’round these parts, so I will point out that I am one of the many women pressured to become sexually active at an early age, and it’s because I literally could not imagine that I had the right to say “No.”

    IBTP.

  21. agasaya

    Your concern about ‘infantalizing’ women isn’t actually applicable in this case because we are discussing children – females under the age at which we can or should consider individuals to be responsible for (if not capable of) making considered, adult choices.

    So, yes. My opinion refers to treating children as children and barring males from having sex with them until they can at least have more time to learn about the kinds of choices available to them in terms of

    -selecting a male to trust

    -obtaining medical resources for ensuring reproductive health and selecting optimal methods of birth control in advance of conception.

    -learning strategies for dealing with pressure to do anything in opposition to one’s best interests (takes a lifetime but childhood has to end at some point)

    -older girls are less attractive to baby rapers who pick on barely post-puberty children to employ excuses of consent before law enforcement agents willing to avoid the entire prosecution thing.

    There are lots of reasons to protect girls until they reach the age of consent. Heaven knows there isn’t any protection for them after that age.

  22. norbizness

    If it weren’t for budget cuts, we could have a more comprehensive system.

  23. Sarah

    I must have missed this before, but the male-curfew idea put forth by Kiuku is sheer genius. Imagine the exponential growth in nightlife fun if womenfolk didn’t have to fend off yicky male advances at every turn? In a male-curfew world, drinking to oblivion would be not only fun, but also safe(r)!

  24. yttik

    Agasaya, my point is that there are plenty of 35-55 yr old men sexually exploiting and impregnating young girls. We don’t prosecute them, force them to register as sex offenders. We go after the less powerful, the less connected. If justice had anything to do with women’s safety, our first concern would not be the exploitive teen age boy who probably poses no threat to the general public.

    As much fun as castration parties would be, giving the system we have, we wouldn’t be whooping it up with the most dangerous, the most vile, we’d be getting the politically correct offenders, the scary homeless guy in the bushes, not the city councilmen, the teen age boy, not the real estate tycoon with 43 child victims.

  25. Saphire

    Boad, I think Kiuku meant (and any woman with two eyes would tell you the same, feminist or nay) men have a natural affinity towards youth. They fancy primarily children, or women who look like children. Again, radical, but shoot me down if it ain’t the truth and every woman knows it. I think it’s entirely credible an individual doesn’t want men having anything to do with their children. Most men only care what’s legal, and ‘hide’ their fascination with youth, instead of finding it disgusting. (Most men, 80%?) When I was in school there wasn’t a single male teacher from the age of 13 who didn’t act like a fox in a hen house with the girls in his classroom. Men can’t help themselves if they see 13 year olds – indeed, why Jill and Susan yawned at such a postcard. Reality hurts, for the record I wouldn’t trust a strange man around my children. Most women are secretly the same.

    What I looovee about this blog, the reality check, being able to say the truth about those with privilege more freely.

  26. kristyn

    ”men have a natural affinity towards youth. They fancy primarily children, or women who look like children. [...] Most men only care what’s legal, and ‘hide’ their fascination with youth, instead of finding it disgusting. [...] Men can’t help themselves if they see 13 year olds …”

    Agreed, other than the word ”natural.” Unless, of course, you were wryly stating your real argument as a deconstruction, and logical conclusion, of the evo-psycho argument.

    Perhaps men’s fixation, for which we have an overwhelming amount of evidence, is caused by porn and culture as opposed to something innate.
    I propose this not to defend men — far from it. However, if we get comfortable believing that possible cultural constructs are in fact innate, we’re treading dangerous evo-psych waters.

    It doesn’t mean that men aren’t extremely dangerous, or that they don’t desperately need curfews, if not castration en masse. For the fact that neither of these actions have already been taken to curtail rape and stranger abuse of women and children, of course IBTP.

  27. Boad

    No I grasp all of that, and I don’t disagree.

    My brain can’t quite wrap around this though:

    “The only males allowed on the streets are men. Men police men and they must do so on male tax dollars only.”

    Maybe I’m missing something, but as far as I can tell, that makes no sense. The first sentence just makes no sense at all, and the second sentence makes no sense in a different way. How would men policing men be a solution?

  28. Brianne

    Evidently I live in the same neighborhood as Susan; my roommates and I got the same card. It didn’t occur to me that this was a guy named Michael Jackson who’d apparently molested a child. Maybe I’m a little slow on the uptake.

  29. kristyn

    ‘“The only males allowed on the streets are men. Men police men and they must do so on male tax dollars only.”

    Maybe I’m missing something, but as far as I can tell, that makes no sense. The first sentence just makes no sense at all, and the second sentence makes no sense in a different way. How would men policing men be a solution?”

    Yeah, that smacks of gender role-ism. ”Manly men.” ”Real men.” ”Men who are men.” All that horseshit.

    How I read it was — Men who view women and children as humans and do not rape or condone rape, must take it upon themselves to intercept and f-ck up men who are less, shall we say, enlightened. Less human, less capable of acting like appropriate humans.
    Because lardess knows it’s NOT WOMEN’S JOB, any more than it ever has been/should have been.

    Which are all agreeable concepts, in fact concepts worth endorsing. Just worded a little funny, in an evo-psych-ish way.
    However, I could be totally wrong, in which case I apologize to the original poster and encourage her to jump in.

  30. Kiuku

    I actually didn’t realize I wrote that. You know, I probably meant “policemen.” No I don’t believe in “real men.” When I think about it, I thought I wrote male policemen. And something must have happened.

  31. Antoinette Niebieszczanski

    My neighbor Pam raps on the newly-arrived perv’s door and boldly announces her intention to keep a weather eye on him and his antics. Lard only knows what this is supposed to accomplish, but Pam has two daughters (12 & 14). It probably gives her the illusion that she can protect them.

    Me, I favor the public shaming option, with tar and feathers. And rotten aigs and tomatas.

  32. Sally Sputnik

    Kiuku said: “I actually didn’t realize I wrote that. You know, I probably meant “policemen.” No I don’t believe in “real men.” When I think about it, I thought I wrote male policemen. And something must have happened.”

    Something must have happened all right. You’ve been blaming under the influence, am I right?

  33. Rebecca

    So I guess my question is– at what point do we allow people to reintegrate into society as human beings?

    There are plenty of violent, misogynistic assholes in the wide world and only a very VERY small fraction of them actually do time and “pay for their crime.” As Twisty pointed out, the few who DO see time for it, are often those who are poor, nonwhite, and who have mental illness. It seems to me that if the justice system has doled out a sentence and a person has paid that sentence, then society should be willing to allow them another attempt at living as a free human being. No? And by free human being, I mean a human being that can live, without discrimination and hatred, in a community. It seems like sending out notification that some sex offender is moving into your neighborhood is the absolute OPPOSITE of this concept. It also seems like discussing beating these individuals to death is in opposition to this concept.

    I’m not a fool. I don’t think prison/jail time will cure men of their violence, sexism, or power-hunger. I don’t think that a child sex offender should be allowed to work, unsupervised, in a daycare. I DO think that our society should be more interested in helping these men rehabilitate (i.e., find jobs, get a support group, get therapy, etc) than we should be in freaking the fuck out any time one of them moves in within a 5 mile radius of our homes. Approximately 3 bajillion studies have shown that help in these sorts of areas is more helpful than fantasizing about beating someone to death. (Ok, I made that last statistic up)

    Maybe I’m a bleeding heart liberal. Maybe I’m not feminist enough. Maybe I’m taking these comments too seriously for my own good. But in my experience, violence against men isn’t any better than violence against women. It’s still violence. And violence is bad, whether you have a penis or not. These men are going to have to live somewhere (unless, of course, public opinion prevails and they are tarred and feathered) and so it seems more prudent and less hateful to try and address the problem constructively. At least with men who have been convicted we have laws that can enforce actions like attending therapy (which is more than the rest of the men who aren’t caught receive). Why not use those to the best of our abilities to actually REHABILITATE these people?

  34. Jane Q Public

    My daughter’s school sends a perv postcard home whenever a new sex offender moves into the neighborhood. The school began doing this after a 7 year old girl, who was a second grade student there, was kidnapped, raped and killed by her babysitter’s boyfriend. I don’t know why they imagine sending home information on strangers will save unsuspecting children from the perverts they know and trust. The babysitter’s boyfriend was 19 years old, not a registered sex offender, and lived next door to the child her entire life.

  35. Kiuku

    HAHAHA Sally. very possible.

  36. PandanCat

    Some activist group should send out cards that look like those sex criminal thingies that warn not about a terrifying black guy or stereotypically creepy old lech, but about Nigels, grandpas, uncles, cousins, classmates and such. Maybe even about older sons, alas. They’d have to do it in a way that doesn’t just send recipients into a tizzy or anger or paranoia, though. It would be an interesting way of getting the point across about who is more likely to commit these kinds of atrocities.

    Or is my rock showing because this has been done already?

  37. Saphire

    Krystin – ha as far as I’m concerned, men recognise their own demise in quality of sperm after the age of 30, and project insecutities onto women.

    They may be naturally attracted to youth – which means piss all because there’s a culture almost entirely based on exaggerating this attraction. Culture stamps out nature until it’s not even there, or, when used to oppress people, cultivates it like a cherished child.

    With a P we all live on one side of a shelf life. So we don’t have a life so much as whatever life needed by men. Nothing at all natural about that. It’s part of misogynistic culture, the exaggeration of male attraction to youth always has been.

    I think the degraded quality of male sperm after 30 needs to be exaggerated in any progressive world.

  38. goldengirl

    I attend a big midwestern party-and-sports university. I live about three blocks from all of the frat houses. Every couple of months I get a sex offender notification card about some adult man who lives in an apartment a couple streets away. Sorry, but out in front of his house is probably the _safest_ place for me to be on weekend nights around here!

  39. Sarah

    @kristyn There are no men in Brooklyn? And free pie? And booze? Sounds like a party! Sign me up.

    As for evo psych, my thoughts on the entire “academic” concept that men are naturally rapists interested in 7-year-olds and women are gold-digging sluts are summed up as follows: ARGHHHHPFFFT.

  40. kristyn

    @Sarah — well, at least at my house! Alas and alack for the rest of the city.

    Also, I guess as a person who is not interested in either het marriage or children, I don’t think about reproduction, or in fact relationships with men at all. So the ”shelf life” concept, the drive to reproduce, is something I’m aware of but choose to ignore. Because of this, you could call it privilege, I assume that others can choose to ignore it as well instead of blindly slavering after their ”animal” instincts. Then again, we ARE talking about men here.

    However, if we think outside of the Freudian mindset that reduces every impulse to an infantile sexual drive, and yet still maintain that men are naturally attracted to youth because of their declining sperm count, what does molesting children aged fourteen or younger accomplish?
    Even if children that young can get pregnant, they are often too physically immature to give birth, especially to healthy much less infants. Up to age sixteen or seventeen it’s still a slippery slope.
    Thus, once more, though I agree with what you said about culture erasing or over-enforcing nature, I’m not buying this particular phenomenon as a ”nature” thing at all.

    But ”we don’t have a life [to men] so much as whatever life needed by men” is absolutely spot-on, in virtually any arena.

  41. kristyn

    Re, proofreading — just going by my comments here, you would not know that I write for a living. Perhaps I’m just burned out.

    But regardless, Jill and others, I’m sorry for any odd sentence structure and poor antecedents that happen despite my efforts. Thanks for putting up with it.

  42. Gozzibopli

    Rebecca — Rehabilitation would be great. But for pervs, some degree of public shaming is a necessary part of the rehabilitation process, if rehabilitation can be accomplished at all. In the small town where I live, the community rallied ’round a perv-rapist-YOUTH MINISTER who pleaded guilty to attempted statutory rape. Even after he entered his plea, people didn’t want to believe he’d done it, and he and a prominent religious-leader-dood encouraged that misconception. They also encouraged slut-shaming of a 16 year old girl. Sure, that perv is serving his sentence. But he hasn’t received his dose of public shaming, despite what the court did. I’m not necessarily talking tar and feathering (although it wouldn’t hurt my feelings), but SHIT. The community response is worse than the crime for how much it reinforces the behavior. And IBTP.

  43. yttik

    As to “men have a natural affinity towards youth,” that’s a valid point. I don’t believe it has anything to do with biology or nature, but the cultural conditioning that could create that impulse is all around us. Things like shaving your legs and other parts are designed to make women look like pre-pubescent girls. Fashion models must be so emaciated they almost resemble little boys in drag. Youth is worshiped and the culture considers 23 yr old women pretty much over the hill. For a pedophile, I guess you would be.

    This cultural conditioning, youth worship, combined with being taught not to empathize with women and girls, is bound to create a whole lot of child molesters. This does not excuse their behavior.

  44. kristyn

    yttik — Exactly.

    The ”fashion models looking like emaciated little boys in drag” is a point I’ve personally pondered many, many times. Does it mean that men are all secretly pederasts?

    ”This cultural conditioning, youth worship, combined with being taught not to empathize with women and girls, is bound to create a whole lot of child molesters. This does not excuse their behavior.”

    Praise lardess. While I can only speak for myself, I wasn’t trying to say that pedophiles should be excused for raping children — especially because I think it’s a cultural thing, for reasons I mentioned above (an eleven-year-old might be able to conceive, but she probably cannot carry much less give birth to living offspring; hence, no evolutionary or innate reasoning behind molesting a child).
    Saying it is an innate trait carries more of an imperative. Because men cannot help but rape, especially rape children, either forgive all men or kill all men.

  45. kristyn

    Er, ”praise lardess” in a positive way, i.e.: thanks for the pithy p-blamin’ statement, yttik.

  46. AileenWuornos

    “Jeez we don’t those alert thingies here in Australia. The local media
    has an occasional outing on slow news day.”

    You answered my question perfectly.

  47. nails

    People let their neighbors babysit their kids sometimes, ya know.

  48. Veganrampage

    Reply buttons; wowie zowie! Thanks Jill.

    Speaking of child molesters, sometime ago someone commented on this blog, I think, but I do not recall positively, that Emma Thompson signed that petition for Polanski. That bothered me more than it should have.
    Since that time I scoured the connecting tubes that the net is made of, and found many names, some that were on the original wretched document, and some that were added later, and Ms. Thompson’s name was not on any list that I could find.
    That is all.

  49. jezebella

    Upon being fully informed re: Polanski’s crime, Ms. Thompson retracted her signature. I believe you can find details at Shakesville.

  50. Veganrampage

    Thank you Jezebella. Too much personal identification with actresses cum movie stars is bound to get me in trouble, yet still I am glad she retracted her name.

    Recently I have not made such an huge glaring error as Thompson’s, but I cannot account for my previous life under the unconscious mal-fluence of the putrid P.

    Hurray for the “Blame” button, long may she wave! Thanks again Jill.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>