I’ve gone through a lot of different kinds of harassment and intimidation campaigns over the years, and none as stupid nor as prolonged, or recurrent as those from lolicon enthusiasts. In my experience, most people who are obsessed with ferreting out perceived defects in or misdeeds of others are typically compensating for their own insecurities or misdeeds. Here’s a recent example. Lolicons — or at least the ones who spend time to harass me — would be Exhibit A for that phenomenon. I think Freud called it a reaction formation, but perhaps the more accurate description here is just projection. I’m not sure.
Lolicon, for those uninitiated refers to anime-style cartoons that feature naked or sexualized cartoon children in sexual situations, such as cartoon depictions of child rape for example. Prior to the 2002 SCOTUS decision in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, such images were treated the same as child pornography / CSEM. In the wake of Ashcroft, so long as the works in particular do not meet the definition for obscenity, they are legal in the United States and are protected speech simply by virtue of the fact that they do not feature actual children. Great. Fine.
To be clear, I don’t have any problems with what legal activity people want to partake in or what legal pictures people want to collect and look at. I’m not here to yuck anyone’s yum, and I wouldn’t be writing this had I not spent the last several days being yelled at by Twitter accounts with avatars of sexualized toon tweens. I didn’t care the last time they came after me either beyond the fact that I was being harassed.
But there’s a very curious psychological thing happening here. Here’s one such tweet that showed up in my notifications this week attached to a tweet of mine offering advice to formerly incarcerated people who wanted to become lawyers, followed by the pinned tweet (meaning they are very proud of this one, and would very much like you to see it) of that account:
I wish I were making this stuff up. I wouldn’t be writing this or have a problem with them or with lolicon had they not showed up in my menchies. I realize there are important policy debates right now centered around AI-generated CSEM and whether such material ought to be criminalized despite the fact that under prevailing precedent it would be legal so long as it was not obscene. I don’t know whether access to such material reduces or exacerbates pedophilic desire, it’s not my area of expertise. If it would reduce pedophilic desire such that there would be fewer abused kids1 then it’s difficult to see why it shouldn’t be available, in my opinion. If it results in more abused kids, well.
Either way, I’m sure that lolicons take a lot of heat from people who don’t have a particularly high opinion of their choices with respect to media consumption. I’m not one such person — as I said, I don’t particularly care one way or the other. Even still, being harassed and called names isn’t fun. Death threats less so. I’d imagine they get those a lot from other people. I can certainly sympathize with the need to find someone else that they can harass so that they can assure themselves that their hobbies and fantasies are in fact good, and by extension, themselves as well. I seem like a good target because of my 2007 conviction and the work that I do. By harassing me, they can don the mantle of the righteous. Some call it shame dumping, and it’s not subtle. Similar phenomenon can be observed in prisons (snitches and those convicted of sex offenses and cops are the bottom of the totem pole despite the fact that most everyone in prison has caused some kind of harm, often tremendous harm), and even within the community of people who have been convicted of sex offenses — e.g., my offense wasn’t a contact offense, or she was nearly 18, etc. Everyone’s got to have someone to look down on, it seems.
I’m not saying that being a lolicon-enthusiast is worse or equivalent to possessing CSEM. That the crime that I committed and which I have fully explained elsewhere was 17-some-odd years ago when I was 22 and I’ve always accepted responsibility for it. I’m grateful for my arrest because it allowed me to get honest and get help. The freest I’ve ever felt was in a locked interrogation room in handcuffs, and my experiences with the legal system inspired me ultimately to become a lawyer. I’ve used my experiences both as someone who has caused harm and someone who has been harmed (I was raped when I was eight years old, which I’ve also written about elsewhere) and as someone who has worked a long time in the legal system to advocate for policies that would be more effective at preventing and reducing harm. I’m also not in the habit of saying I’m better or worse than anyone else. Less of an asshole, perhaps.
What I am saying is that it’s deeply bizarre and a bit funny to be called a pedophile by folks that are openly fantasizing about incest and sharing pictures of naked cartoon kids online, probably even as I write these words in the year of our lord 2023. As I have learned, they super do not like it when you point out that particular disconnect. Someone hung on to a screenshot of an old tweet of mine from three years ago making that observation, stitched to my registry page in photoshop, and used that to harass me further on twitter which — beyond likely being a crime under state law — reflects a profound lack of getting or inability to get my point. A point which is underscored by the trouble they have gone through to try to shame me.
Were this an observation limited to just the lolicons I could probably do without writing this up.2 But the etheral levels of irony dovetails into a longer piece that I’m working on regarding what you might call the “real” or subtextual purposes of sex offense registries given that the stated purposes (i.e., public safety) doesn’t bear out under much scrutiny. One of those purposes, which I will probably link to this piece on, is that registries are a sort of purification ritual. Purification rituals are ancient, and to a large degree, sex offense registries are their modern form in America. They exist as a way for society to absolve itself of its collective anxieties and sins onto a disfavored group. The proverbial scapegoat, for example, was one such example. Given that 95.6% of all sex offenses that are reported and cleared by arrest are not attributable to anyone on a registry, it’s easy to see how they might perform that function. In other words, everyone hates sex offenders, but nearly all sex offenses are committed by non-sex offenders. As in, the people who hate sex offenders.3
Worth noting that the majority of people who are convicted of child sexual abuse are not actually diagnostic for pedophilia, according to researcher Michael Seto. I believe an analogy he uses to explain the phenomena is that not everyone who drives drunk and crashes a car is an alcoholic — but some are.
Also, given that lolicon enthusiasts have come for me multiple times now, it might be wise just to write this up so I don’t have to keep explaining this and can just link to it next time, as I’m sure there’ll probably be a next time since I doubt human nature is going to change very much in the near future.
Or, at least the people that we’ve chosen to label as sex offenders, which would include the lolicons prior to Ashcroft, and still does if any of the images they have meet the definition of obscenity.
I think it's certainly a good result for her, though I'd be surprised if she would be allowed to return to teaching ultimately. I think it certainly looks a lot closer to what should be done in the majority of cases, as opposed to sending someone to prison for a zillion years and then making their lives unlivable when they get out. It all depends on the facts of the case, though.
Hi, Guy. Great post. I wonder what you feel about this...
office@vrjc.org
KHoward@vscc.virginia.gov
cdrabert@vscc.virginia.gov
Commonwealth.Attorney@fauquiercounty.gov
AAshworth@pwcgov.org
Steve.descano@fairfaxcounty.gov
August 22, 2023
Hello:
The signatories of this letter and those voiceless incarcerated individuals for whom we write send it with mixed feelings.
The sad case of former teacher Kaitlin Grimley (see: https:/www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/virginia/former-fauquier-county-math-teacher-will-not-register-as-a-sex-offender/65-6138c67b-5652-4863-9855-132beef8a9bbhttps://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/virginia/former-fauquier-county-math-teacher-will-not-register-as-a-sex-offender/65-6138c67b-5652-4863-9855-132beef8a9bb underscores the need for thoughtful, just action, of the type Restorative Justice has apparently brought to Ms. Grimley's benefit. After a short probation, Ms. Grimley can return to teaching, despite having sexual intercourse with her students!
While we are happy (and incredulous) for Grimley, it is impossible for us to ignore that many of us have been denied such equally careful consideration for the same or even far lesser 'offenses.' Some signatories to this letter who committed the same as Ms. Grimley received long sentences in prison. Others, who were recently ensnared while acting lawfully on dating apps, had their lives destroyed without any “restorative justice” intervention. We were convicted for supposedly attempting to engage with a minor sexually, though with absolutely no sexual intent, sexual conversation, or sexual contact, and no incriminating pictures. In fact, in many cases, there was no minor at all, only police decoys! Dishonest court officers and police made the case to overly sympathetic courts, however, and we were punished as if we had committed some violent or aggressive action. Our family members, friends, and allies have been similarly abused for standing with us against devious, undemocratic and manipulative police practices online, or have otherwise been abused by Corrections officers, probation officers, law enforcement, and even predatory attorneys and sex offense treatment “experts.” Contrast that with Grimley’s very lenient penalty; conveniently having her four, Class 4 felonies reduced to two misdemeanors, providing she completes a one year probation period and ‘treatment.’! And, by returning to public life, she will likely retain her pension, benefits, and more. Perhaps she will even get to keep her teaching license, since she will no longer be branded a “felon.” Public teachers such as myself and other signatories to this letter have had our pensions clawed back by the commonwealth – money we have earned over long years of service. No such penalty seems to accrue to Grimley.
The glaring injustice of this should shock the conscience of the Crime Commission. Almost no one can escape substantive and ongoing post-incarceration punishment. Many were forced to register as sex offenders, experience pointless and ineffectual probation programs, and all experienced the collateral damage such stigma entails - financial, emotional, and social ruin.Yet, there was no restorative justice offered any of us.
Not content with the status quo, we have worked behind the scenes in Virginia political circles, aided by our fellow citizens of Citizens Against Government Entrapment - CAGE, to bring parity and fair treatment to those often viewed as the lowest. We would like again this year to bring to our elected General Assembly leaders proposals for equity.
In that spirit, we ask you to join with us in sponsoring either or both of the following options before one or more members of the 2024 Virginia Senate and House of Delegates:
A). Be it mandated under Virginia law that sex offenses as described under any statute of the commonwealth be eligible for a diversion program such as Restorative Justice maintains, and that upon petition by a defendant, a circuit court judge shall order a diversion program alternative to incarceration and in lieu of placement on the Sex Offender Registry at sentencing upon conviction of either a first offense or a no-contact offense or an offense for which there is no actual minor involved; or,
B). Be it mandated under Virginia law that upon petition by a defendant under a first time offense, a circuit court judge shall order at sentencing upon conviction of either a first offense or a no-contact offense or an offense for which there is no actual minor involved an alternative to registration on the Sex Offender Registry;
C). Certain no-contact sex crimes should be removed from the list of those required to register as sex offenders, with 18.2-374.3 being an obvious choice to be in that number; and
D). Police officers are specifically prohibited from conducting any pro-active sex stings on adult dating or other social media platforms unless they first have a warrant and affidavit (not administrative subpoena). This avoids cops “hanging out” on adult platforms, claiming to be saving kids who rarely frequent there.
These bills or similar would place the sex “offender” on par with the same penalties and diversion programs for drug-related offenses for which diversion programs have proved beneficial. Letter C would place reasonable limits on police abuse online and These needed changes would also remove the post-conviction cycle of perpetual punishment and long-term stigma involved with required continuing enrollment on the sex offender registry. Each of these proposed bills should be a retroactive feature to encompass all of us, regardless of time on registry, so we can avoid further discrimination in housing, employment, credit, and other stigmata.
We would welcome opening a dialogue with you on this matter. Please reach back out to us.
Sincerely,
Norman M. Achin, M.A., M.Ed Bonnie Burkhardt, M.S.
Woodbridge, VA Springfield, VA
Kim Avery Milesh Patel
Salem, VA Bristow, VA
Audra Garcia Tammie Lawson
Aurora, CO Independence, VA
Marilyn & Tom McCarthy Gordon McCarthy
Chesterfield, VA Chesterfield, VA
Robert Scianne Ryan & Darlene Pick
Chesterfield, VA Woodbridge, VA
John Zulaski Prem Thapa
Connecticut Reston, VA
johnz1966@gmail.com
Michael Cook
Centreville, VA