Culturally, we have mislabeled biology and
criminalized it. And labeled “criminals”
those who are responding to biology the way nature designed.
I refer to the LACK of distinction we make in
sexual “offenses.”
By our laws, a 22 year old who has non-coerced
sexual relations with someone below the supposed age of “consent” (let’s say 16
for discussion) is guilty of a “sex crime” and is labeled a “sex offender.” To serve time, and yet never be able to pay a
debt to society and be done as others can, but rather be put on a list for
life, to be shunned and marginalized, to be hated and feared forever because of
that label.
Given the same label as an adult who has
sexual relations with an 8 year old. No
distinction.
The one is natural biology. The other is unnatural—a criminal sickness, a
heinous crime.
We send mixed signals in our society of sexual
attractiveness at a pubescent age on the one hand, while on the other extending
childhood and lack of responsibility far beyond the years that cultures of the
past did. It is bad enough in our
disconnected and constantly afraid society to have unjust condemnation by
anonymous accusers and a spectacle-obsessed media. To use words like “rape” with careless
ubiquitous-ness not only contributes to more irrational fear and distortion in
this disconnected society, but also demeans those who have truly experienced
rape.
The 22 year old in our example is not guilty
of deviancy, but has merely manifested biology.
Deviancy is sickness, perverted sickness. Pre-pubescent sexual relations is a form of deviancy/sickness,
and SHOULD be a criminal one, but post-pubescent sexual relations should not be
classified with it. The one is a
crime. The other MAY OR MAY NOT be a SOCIAL
INFRACTION, depending on the social culture of the time. It should not be a crime.
In sensible societies, puberty has been the
defining measure between biology and criminal sexual predation. At puberty, the presumption was that if no physical
coercion was involved, no crime occurred.
Of course, the sexual relations may or may not have been considered
socially or psychologically or emotionally appropriate, and the family may have
had another opinion even if it was. But
it was not considered “deviancy.” See
Cokie Roberts’ book Founding Mothers, about 14 year old “mothers” of this
country, if you want something a little more recent about 14 year olds than the
Joseph and Mary story.
We have a choice: We can go on in our
unselective and mindless rage. We can
create criminals out of those who are biologically normal. We can ruin lives. We can be emotional and irrational.
Or we can have distinction. Although it’s
biological, if we still feel it’s somehow “wrong” concerning pubescent relations,
then just set some guidelines. Something
like: “Although it may not be a law, here’s society’s guideline. If you choose not to follow it, it is on your
conscience, which is, after all, the true arbiter and punisher, both in this
life and perhaps the next. Know that if
you go against this guideline, these are the things that often or usually
happen, and most are bad: [and then go on to list those things].
That’s far better than what we’re doing
presently, with scarce legal and governmental resources being chewed up, and
jails full of non-criminal people made criminals like casual smokers of
marijuana have been made criminals.
And for those of you who think I’m
pontificating from lofty and woolly ivory towers, utterly disconnected from it
all, hardly. I have a 13 year old
daughter, and woe to anyone who ever tries to coerce her into anything. I hope she stays smart enough and learning
enough from teachings, and the examples she has been shown, to navigate her way
successfully through this chaotic society long into the future before sex ever
comes into the picture. But if
non-coerced ever does, criminality should have no part.
