. . . as discussed in this post. The bill would set the wheels in motion to allow physical castration, as two other states already allow.
The bill makes no provision for mutilating female sex offenders. What are we to make out of that? Are we to take it that biology -- that testicles -- really do make a difference? That rape, that sexual assault, are not crimes of "power" as we are always told but are inextricably tied to the male sex drive? To testicles? One would think feminists would oppose this bill because it is premised on that understanding, but I haven't heard any rumbling about it in the feminist blogosphere.
This bill is troubling for a host of reasons. Among other things, every year, men are falsely accused and wrongly convicted of sex crimes. Once a man is castrated -- apologies to all the people who love to use this lovely expression -- it's just not possible to "grow a pair."
Click to enlarge: