|>>|| No. 14838
I've always had a problem with the word "sexual predator". Yes, there are wronguns who commit sexual offences and who are (hopefully) punished accordingly for their deeds, to the extent of the law.
But I don't know if you can liken people who are prone to sexual transgressions to animals that hunt for food. In a biological sense, that is the only valid definition; predators hunt other animals for food. Calling somebody a "sexual predator" does injustice both to the very natural act of a creature gathering food to sustain itself, and sexual offences that wronguns commit, because their urges are equated with one of the most natural urges in existence. And with proper therapy, you can often reduce your dangerous sexual urges to a certain point, while nobody would seek therapy to get themselves off eating. Well, some people get therapy to help them eat less, but that's a different matter.
Not sure you lot know what I'm on about here. I'm not trying to question the wisdom of punishing people who abuse others sexually and behave in inappropriate ways. But I've always felt that "sexual predator" is a poorly constructed metaphor.