In the late 1940s and early 1950s, hysteria over sexual deviants swept the nation.  Fed by reports in the popular media, the situation became what would later be called a "moral panic" by historians.  Magazines such as Newsweek, Time, and Collier's warned that sex crimes by homosexuals, exhibitionists, voyeurs, rapists, and "defilers of children" had "virtually gone out of control."  One article claimed that "the shadow of the sex criminal lies across the doorstep of every home."  The Saturday Evening Post said, "No one knows, or can even closely estimate, how many tens of thousands of them are loose in the country today."  FBI director J. Edgar Hoover concurred, writing that "the most rapidly increasing type of crime is that perpetrated by degenerate sex offenders...permitted to rove America at will."  He told of "maimed and murdered women lying in isolated areas" and "violated children in a state of hysteria." 

Studies eventually refuted such perceptions.  Government commissions concluded that the number of actual sex crimes was nowhere near that reported in the media, and that it was actually decreasing.  They also showed that the amount of predatory or violent sex crime had been exaggerated, with murder being extremely rare.

However, the media persisted, creating a new monster based on the old nineteenth century image of moral insanity, according to historian Philip Jenkins.  These subhuman brutes were called "sex psychopaths" or "sex fiends," and were characterized as sexually aggressive, progressing from minor offenses to violent ones, having no regard for their unwilling victims, compulsive and irresistible in character, and therefore repeating their crimes over and over.  According to this image, they acted under the influence of an exceptionally strong overwhelming urge, the tension of which was released by their offending behavior.  Hoover called them "depraved human beings, more savage than beasts."

Again, sophisticated criminological studies fundamentally challenged this perception of the "sex psychopath."  They found that offenders were far less persistent and compulsive than commonly believed, actually repeating their crimes less often than non-sexual offenders.  Most sex crimes turned out to be non-pathological instances of consensual homosexual activity, indecent exposure, statutory rape, "impairing the morals of a minor," or even sex play among children.  Researchers refuted the theory that minor or consensual sex offenses eventually escalated to violent crimes.  Furthermore, "sex psychopathy" was not even a scientifically or clinically defined term; psychiatrists were unable to agree on its meaning, had no method of recognizing a "sex psychopath" (except in the most extreme and rare cases), and considered the concept simplistic.

Nevertheless, distorted perceptions continued to be reinforced by the reporting of extreme cases.  Jenkins refers to the case of Albert Fish, who had sexually assaulted, mutilated, and murdered up to 15 children, when he writes, "Perceptions that crime was out of control were stimulated by reports of a handful of spectacularly brutal acts that were then reported at a regional or national level, thus creating an image of a systematic problem....Most quantitative estimates [of sex fiends] drew no distinction between violent or predatory sex crimes and minor or consensual acts.  If the latter were included, then the nation had many thousands or even millions of sex criminals, but these numbers were then presented as if they referred to individuals like Albert Fish."

Homosexuals, of course, were the focus of much of the fear and hatred. Howard Whitman, in Terror in the Streets wrote that "Detroit, like most big cities, is plagued by the homosexual prowler...Police know that such men are dangerous-that when trapped, they may kill."  Coronet magazine warned that homosexuals "descend through perversion to other forms of depravity, such as drug addiction, burglary, sadism and even murder."  This view was also held by law enforcement personnel.  One police psychiatrist wrote, "The homosexual will murder his victim during an act of sexual frenzy and afterwards rob him."

This is not to say that violent sexual assaults did not occur in that era 50 years ago, nor that none of those classified as offenders did any harm or engaged in behavior many of us would still consider wrong today.  But admitting there were some cases of violent or harmful offenses, or that behavior was morally wrong, is not the same thing as mischaracterizing all or even most offenders as violent monsters.  Christians must reject any belief which labels an entire class of people as subhuman monsters, unworthy of compassion or redemption.  And such a belief can only lead to persecution and injustice.

In addition, a distorted understanding of a social problem prevents society from effectively responding to it, often making it worse.  Huge amounts of resources may be poured into ineffective approaches, or diverted from other more serious but less sensational problems.  Innocent victims are easily harmed by hysteria and faulty policies.  In fact, fear and suspicion have a devastating impact on all of society, leading to hostility and violence.  As Jenkins writes, "Examining past crises over sex crimes shows us not only how claims tend to be exaggerated and distorted but also that policy responses exhibit the classic signs of panic legislation, namely, poor conception and drafting, overly broad scope, and inadequate consideration of likely side effects.  Ideally, studying past failures would help us to avoid making the same mistakes in the new generation of sex law."

Has American society learned from the "sex psychopath" panic of the 1940s and 1950s?  Consider the March 19, 2001 issue of Newsweek magazine's cover story on Internet pedophilia.