to err is human
what makes us human?
anatomy? emotion? social conscience? all of the above?
i caught part of a dateline special last week in which internet watch-groups set traps for would-be child molesters, and the subsequent sting-operations were documented on camera. the watch-group would initiate internet chats and webcam correspondence using actresses and actors that appeared younger than they were, in hopes of luring unsuspecting (or just stupid) criminals into an in-person visit. when the men arrived at the house, they found themselves face-to-face with a dateline correspondent for a candid interview. needless to say, "hand in the cookie jar" quite accurately describes the reactions of these men, and one by one they sat down and poured out their guilty hearts, reiterating the same ideas, "i know it's wrong. i don't know why i'm doing it."
and, it struck me. what we're all witnessing here, over and over and over, year after year, scandal after scandal--in this special, in the news, on oprah--is nature at work.
this attraction, however immoral and socially-detestable it may be, is clearly a primal--deeply seeded--instinct shared by countless men (and women) throughout the history of mankind. is it not the same chemical makeup that leads adult heterosexual men to seek adult heterosexual women? teenage homosexual women to seek teenage homosexual women? and so on, and so forth.
which leads me back to the question, what makes us human? maybe it is the ability to decipher, and ultimately choose, between right and wrong. (of course, defining right and wrong is an entirely different sort of essay, but let's assume for a moment that right and wrong are congruent with the mass opinions we have all been taught). in the animal world, for example, i'd find it difficult to believe that a 7 year old dog would morally restrain itself from aggressively pursuing a puppy of 6-months if it found the younger animal attractive.
i don't intend to suggest, in any way, that molestation, statutory rape, or anything in between is "okay," because clearly it's not. but, the reason it's not okay is because when the aggressors choose to act on their instincts, they ultimately violate the rights and safety of their victims, resulting in a commonly accepted definition of a criminal act.
thus, we have developed a system of protecting would-be victims by proactively chastising would-be criminals. we preach oppression and repression. we preach sin. we preach the devil. we preach disgusting, reprehensible, despicable, and many other polysyllabic adjectives. and, for some some, the fear of consequence works outright. others undoubtedly turn to drugs, alcohol...unhappy marriages to cope. and still others turn to the cloth (and we all know how that story ends). and the rest, "the weak" who cannot resist the call of nature, are simply resigned to a life of crime and shame.
all of this leads me to the fascinating revelation that these people are inherently criminals for simply being who they are...because being who they are is forbidden in this society by the majority who have made the rules--circle of life.
so, i ask the question one last time, what really makes us human? perhaps it is simply the ability to be better than natures intends us to be.
anatomy? emotion? social conscience? all of the above?
i caught part of a dateline special last week in which internet watch-groups set traps for would-be child molesters, and the subsequent sting-operations were documented on camera. the watch-group would initiate internet chats and webcam correspondence using actresses and actors that appeared younger than they were, in hopes of luring unsuspecting (or just stupid) criminals into an in-person visit. when the men arrived at the house, they found themselves face-to-face with a dateline correspondent for a candid interview. needless to say, "hand in the cookie jar" quite accurately describes the reactions of these men, and one by one they sat down and poured out their guilty hearts, reiterating the same ideas, "i know it's wrong. i don't know why i'm doing it."
and, it struck me. what we're all witnessing here, over and over and over, year after year, scandal after scandal--in this special, in the news, on oprah--is nature at work.
this attraction, however immoral and socially-detestable it may be, is clearly a primal--deeply seeded--instinct shared by countless men (and women) throughout the history of mankind. is it not the same chemical makeup that leads adult heterosexual men to seek adult heterosexual women? teenage homosexual women to seek teenage homosexual women? and so on, and so forth.
which leads me back to the question, what makes us human? maybe it is the ability to decipher, and ultimately choose, between right and wrong. (of course, defining right and wrong is an entirely different sort of essay, but let's assume for a moment that right and wrong are congruent with the mass opinions we have all been taught). in the animal world, for example, i'd find it difficult to believe that a 7 year old dog would morally restrain itself from aggressively pursuing a puppy of 6-months if it found the younger animal attractive.
i don't intend to suggest, in any way, that molestation, statutory rape, or anything in between is "okay," because clearly it's not. but, the reason it's not okay is because when the aggressors choose to act on their instincts, they ultimately violate the rights and safety of their victims, resulting in a commonly accepted definition of a criminal act.
thus, we have developed a system of protecting would-be victims by proactively chastising would-be criminals. we preach oppression and repression. we preach sin. we preach the devil. we preach disgusting, reprehensible, despicable, and many other polysyllabic adjectives. and, for some some, the fear of consequence works outright. others undoubtedly turn to drugs, alcohol...unhappy marriages to cope. and still others turn to the cloth (and we all know how that story ends). and the rest, "the weak" who cannot resist the call of nature, are simply resigned to a life of crime and shame.
all of this leads me to the fascinating revelation that these people are inherently criminals for simply being who they are...because being who they are is forbidden in this society by the majority who have made the rules--circle of life.
so, i ask the question one last time, what really makes us human? perhaps it is simply the ability to be better than natures intends us to be.
posted by mark at 4:48 PM
1 Comments:
I don't really want to get into this... but I can't help but leave a short response.
The thing that your essay (well written though it may be) doesn't touch on is that all of these natural "crimes" are not simply the result of a person being unable to overcome their baser instints. There is an inherent power issue involved in molestation, statutory rape and sexual assault. Regardless of the genders of the individuals involved there is always an underlying psycological need to hold power over someone else (*The only one I think there could be arguement for less of a power issue is statutory rape between like a 14 year old and a 16 year old who started dating when they were both minors and now the numbers of the law are against them... regardless). Unless you're Tom Cruise in which case psychology is bunk and the aliens make them do it.
My point is, a discussion of socially defined sexual crime cannot be limited to a discussion of human nature. Social and psychological factors are key to understanding how and why such crimes happen the way they do.
Post a Comment
<< Home