The citizens tolerate prisons because we believe that prisons somehow accomplish something. We accept that imprisonment has some socially beneficial effect. We are probably wrong. With that in mind, it's informative to look at the imprisonment of sexual offenders. A sexual offender is someone (almost always a rival male) who enjoys some sexual activity with which we disagree; someone with sexual appetites different from ours. The most frightening thing is that the sexual standard is set by the majority of the voters and the majority of the voters are blue-haired old women who haven't been hopped in a coon's age and didn't like it when their henpecked husbands used to bribe it out of them. Pennsylvania has more laws against sexual activity than any other state except Alabama. For that reason, Pennsylvania has a great many sexual "offenders." The question is, why do we imprison them? out of jealousy? Are sexual offenders in prison for punishment, treatment, revenge or what? Many of us naively believe that sexual offenders are imprisoned in order to receive "treatment" to "cure" their "unnatural" sexual appetites. Well, that's not what they are getting! How do you "cure" what isn't a sickness? To most women, just being male is a "sickness." The Pennsylvania Department of Corrections "DOC" that acknowledges that a "pervert" is forever. There is no "cure." Can you "cure" a taste for pizza? The most you can do is deter, threaten and intimidate. The DOC's most overt admission of the folly of imprisonment for perverts is in their visiting policy. A part relating to visits from children says: "4. Any inmate who, as an adult or as a young adult [that means a child] offender, was ever convicted or adjudicated for a physical or sexual offense against a minor is prohibited from having a contact visit with any minor child." If imprisonment doesn't do any "good," why do we do it? There's something wrong with this system.