Colorado plans to cancel the phrase “sex offender” because it offends sex offenders

Posted on November 26, 2021

Child rapist Joseph Rosenbaum, who was shot and killed by Kyle Rittenhouse

Some 20,000 sex criminals in Colorado get “treatment” from the state Sex Offender Management Board, or “SOMB.” It’s a big bureaucracy with layers of committees and “work groups.”

Rapists treated by the SOMB are of course not called “rapists.” In fact, that term appears nowhere on the big SOMB website. It was banned years ago because it became associated with criminals who coercively, forcibly and sometimes violently prey sexually upon others – persons who commit what we used to call “rape.”

Stated another way, the term “rapist” came to connote persons who rape. Such a connotation offended such persons and the bureaucracy that caters to them. Hence the modern non-judgmental and non-insulting term, “sex offender.”

But the SOMB now considers even “sex offender” too injurious to the feelings of sex offenders. That’s because “sex offender” has come to connote persons who . . . well . . . coercively, forcibly and sometimes violently prey sexually upon others – persons who commit what we used to call “rape.” Parts of the SOMB website now refer to such persons as “clients.”

Having eradicated rape in Colorado by semantic decree, the SOMB now has time on its hands and wants to formalize its semantics. It wants to adopt a new name for persons who . . . well . . . you know. The new name is “client.”

Always responsive to the public they serve, the SOMB invites us as the public to pick a specific “client” term. The choices are, verbatim from the SOMB website:

— Clients/Adults/Individuals who commit sexual offenses

— Clients/Adults/Individuals who engage in sexually abusive behavior

— Client/Adults/Individuals in treatment for engaging in sexually abusive behaviors

— Clients/Adults/Individuals who have committed sexual offenses

— Client

— None of the above

— No preference/whatever term the Board selects

In short, your choice is to vote for a “client” term or none at all.

These semantics games are what the left does. Looters cannot be called “looters” anymore because “looters” has become associated with people who loot. Looters have feelings, and those feelings get hurt when they’re called “looters” for looting. Because criminals who vote usually vote Democrat, the Dems want to spare them hurt feelings. 

Now they’re called “smash-and-grabbers.” Of course, “smash-and-grabbers” will soon become offensive to looters because the phrase will become associated with looting, and then we’ll have to find yet another euphemism.

“Racial discrimination” was replaced years ago with “affirmative action” until the latter became associated with the former. Then it was “diversity” and then “equity” and then “anti-racism.” Nice try, but all these terms are now rightly known to be euphemisms for racial discrimination.

The Democrats have been playing these word games for a century. “Socialism” got cancelled because people came to associate it with Democrats who coercively, forcibly and sometimes violently take money from people who earn it and give it to people who vote for them – what we used to call “theft.”

They replaced “socialism” with a term they stole, “liberalism,” but that too became associated with . . .  well . . . Dems who coercively, forcibly and sometimes violently take money from people who earn it and give it to people who vote for them – what we used to call “theft.”

Then came “Progressive” and then “Woke” but each time the Dems have to replace the word when it becomes associated with . . . well . . . you know.

Expect the same corruption of the word “client” once the SOMB adopts it. “Client” will come to connote criminals who . . . well . . .you know. And so in a few years the SOMB will have to come up with yet another euphemism for such persons. 

Prediction: They’ll come up with a word for these criminals which they think is incapable of developing a bad connotation such as “sexually misunderstoods” or maybe “victims of their own sexual desire” or maybe “Joseph Rosenbaums.”

A college professor recently defended pedophiles with the moniker “child-attracted persons.” So maybe rapists will become “rape-victim-attracted persons.”

Prediction Number Two: They’ll have to drop those terms as well because, like every term used to label persons who commit certain criminal acts, those terms will come to connote persons who commit such criminal acts.  

In the meantime, the SOMB’s new use of “client” presents a ticklish matter for lawyers. Back when I practiced law, we referred to our customers as “clients” because, I suppose, “customers” revealed the mercantilism for which lawyers are sometimes known.

After the SOMB adopts “client” to label rapists, er, sex offenders, er, persons who commit sexual offenses, er, persons who coercively, forcibly and sometimes violently prey upon others sexually – persons who commit what we used to call “rape” – then what will lawyers call their customers?

Maybe “Johns”?