14 year olds are Sex offenders?!

[Morven]

I think the sexualization was deliberate in Push, though.  That character was supposed to be acting creepily old for her years, and there was supposed to be a dissonance between age and behavior/looks.  I think it was supposed to make us feel uncomfortable, and supposed to hint at how damaged she was, how not like a normal childhood she'd had.

That's how it read to me, anyway.  It's one thing where a young teenager dressing and acting "sexy" is supposed to feel wrong, as I think it was meant to there.  It's quite another thing when it's just presented as normal, the way normal thirteen year olds are supposed to dress and behave.

[Braioch]

Good lord, I was a sex offender at 14?!

Well this just goes to show that the government once again prefers to slap labels on people, so as to inhibit them socially. Seriously? Most people begin exploring around that age, it's a natural part of growing up. One does begin to become curious when they're about that age, and it shouldn't become unlawful in any sense to want to give a try.

Mind you I didn't lose my full virginity until I was about 17 by choice, but still I had fooled around before that, and definitely before I was 16. It shows little in the way of the government once again.

Shame, what else will they take?

[kckolbe]

I think any line drawn on "who goes into the registry" would be arbitrary and disagreed with by many, so I propose everyone convicted of any sexual crime goes on it, regardless of how insignificant said crime is.  Now, because there are significant differences between type of crime, I would further propose that the actual crime be on the list, that way those convicted of serious crimes couldn't "play it off" and those convicted of marginal, consensual crimes wouldn't be villainized.  One could argue that this would violate privacy, but so does the current system.  Thoughts?

[Morven]

That's also setting a line. Just at the 'include all' level.

[Satnslillgrl]

I still think the list should be removed completely. It is discriminating against a particular type of criminal. Anyone else that commits a crime is free of it after they get out of prison. They might still be looked down upon, but they aren't on a public list that anyone can look up. Sex offenders are simply criminals. They should be treated the same. Yes, I know, they have a higher likelihood to repeat their crimes than most other types of criminals. That should simply mean they get a longer jail sentence, though. If they are still a threat to society, they shouldn't be released in the first place.