Chemical castration for sex offenders may horrify the masses but I'm delighted
But no. It's happening here in Britain – a pilot scheme to use chemical castration on sex offenders has been operational in prisons in the south-west of England since 2022. And it will be rolled out to 20 new prisons if Shabana Mahmood, our Justice Secretary, has her way. Hang on, Labour? I should have thought it was more on-brand as a Reform policy, but hey, this Government is performing so many U-turns it's hard to know which direction it's facing at any given time. Other than Brussels.
Anyway, when the truth dawned about chemical castration on this sceptred isle (talk about cognitive dissonance), I'm not going to lie: I was torn between horror and elation and a palpable sense of relief that Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, who died the same year the trial started, probably wasn't briefed on the particulars.
Horror because are we not civilised people who invented warm beer and, um, Empire? A nation of cricket grounds and old maids bicycling to Holy Communion? Elation because those rain-coated pervs will never again flash our beloved spinsters once they're singing falsetto in the schola cantorum. (Yes, I know castrati were operated on pre-puberty to preserve their treble pitch but I just wanted to mention they were typically dosed with opium, laid in a hot bath and had their tiny little testes either crushed by hand, twisted or snipped to sever the blood supply.)
So in light of that procedure, how could anyone possibly object to sexual-suppression chemicals being given to convicted sex offenders? These would be administered by injection, implant or orally. Believe me, there are worse ways.
I grew up among Irish farming folk and I can't unsee the things I witnessed. Back in the late 1970s, 'Burdizzos' were the thing; essentially a pair of large metal pliers that were clamped round a young bullock's scrotum to crushing point as the farmer counted to 20. On each side. You were supposed to hear a discernible crunch but it was hard to hear anything over the distraught creature's anguished bellow. After release, it went back to amiably eating grass. All sorted. Forever.
Chemical castration for prisoners? A breeze! It's not even permanent. Unfortunately.
Now, I am quite sure there are Dear Readers out there crossing their legs who are also really very cross at my upbeat tone. I will, of course, be accused by various chaps of sexism for my attitude towards emasculation. To them I say this: any woman, which is to say the vast majority, who has been sexually assaulted will have a very different perspective on the sanctity of a man's genitalia.
Figures from Rape Crisis show that in England and Wales 71,227 rapes were reported to police in 2024. The same year, charges were brought in just 2.7 per cent of those cases – that's fewer than three of every 100 rapes recorded. It is a deeply depressing fact of modern life that rape is so commonplace and the treatment of victims by our justice system so demeaning that five out of six women who are raped don't report it – that's an additional 356,135 women every year. Sisters, mothers, daughters.
Every one of my girlfriends will openly say they know someone who has been raped (for a troubling number that 'someone' is themselves), so how can it be that not a single one of their husbands and partners knows anyone who has committed rape?
Sarah Everard, a talented, shining 33-year-old, was kidnapped, raped and murdered by serving Met officer Wayne Couzens in 2021. Long before he committed this heinous crime he was nicknamed 'the rapist' by colleagues. Because they thought it was funny.
A shocking number of men joke about sexual depravity. In 2022, the Met had to deny the force was plagued by misogyny after an official report revealed shocking details of police officers sharing 'banter' about hitting and raping women. And these are just the men tasked with protecting us.
So forgive me – or don't, I'm honestly not that bothered – for applauding the prospect of chemical castration for sex offenders and paedophiles. The pilot scheme currently under way is voluntary but, looking ahead, Mahmood will apparently consider overhauling medical laws in order to compel sex offenders to take libido-supressing drugs.
I do have concerns, primarily about the way this treatment has been linked to the early release of prisoners in order to free up spaces in our overcrowded jails. The idea that simply taking medication would allow serious sex offenders to walk free early and spend less time behind bars is absolutely unacceptable.
The Justice for Victims campaign group has already voiced its concern that proper efforts have not been made to place the needs of victims and families at the heart of sentencing policy. Another complicating factor is that rape can be a crime of anger and control; any sexual gratification is purely secondary, something that must be taken into account on a case by case basis. This then is a policy we will need to keep a close eye on.
But in the meantime, in the public spirit of London 2012 Games Makers who happily herded the crowds or indeed the lockdown snitches who dobbed in their friends and neighbours during Covid, I'd be more than happy to volunteer for chemical castration duties.
Just pass me the pills, the syringe or implants and I'll do the rest. And just in case there's trouble, I'll bring along a Burdizzo. A bit rusty, admittedly, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like to hear the crunch…
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Associated Press
26 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Judge blocks order barring asylum access at border, gives administration two weeks to appeal
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge said Wednesday that an order by Donald Trump suspending asylum access at the southern border was unlawful, throwing into doubt one of the key pillars of the president's plan to crack down on migration at the southern border. But he put the ruling on hold for two weeks to give the government time to appeal. In an order Jan. 20, Trump declared that the situation at the southern border constitutes an invasion of America and that he was 'suspending the physical entry' of migrants and their ability to seek asylum until he decides it is over. U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss said his order blocking Trump's policy will take effect July 16, giving the Trump administration time to appeal. Moss wrote that neither the Constitution nor immigration law gives the president 'an extra-statutory, extra-regulatory regime for repatriating or removing individuals from the United States, without an opportunity to apply for asylum' or other humanitarian protections.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fox News Joins MAGA Hissy Fit Over Zelensky's ‘Suit'
Volodymyr Zelensky's wardrobe continues to generate MAGA theatrics. Ukraine's wartime president has shunned suits since Russia invaded his country in 2022, opting instead for military-style fatigues as a symbol of solidarity with his troops. That seemed to irritate President Donald Trump enough that he made a comment about it when his Ukrainian counterpart visited the Oval Office in February. At the NATO summit on Tuesday, Zelensky was spotted in a slightly more formal getup, but stopped short of wearing a traditional suit. His all-black outfit included a button-up shirt, a jacket with a subtle military cut, trousers, and utilitarian sneaker-style shoes. He dressed the same way when meeting with U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Monday. He also dressed similarly at last month's G7 summit. According to Fox News' Peter Doocy, who reported live from the Netherlands in the early hours of Wednesday local time, Zelensky's outfit qualified as a suit this time. 'If President Trump winds up seeing Zelensky tonight at the leader's dinner, he might not recognize him, because the Ukrainian leader has ditched the sweatshirt that he wore for that infamous Oval Office meeting earlier this year,' Doocy said. 'Mr. Zelensky has been spotted here in the Netherlands... wearing a suit,' he added Doocy wasn't alone in noticing Zelensky's new threads. 'LOL! Zelensky actually wore a SUIT this time,' right-wing podcaster Nick Sortor wrote on X. 'He wasn't about to make that mistake again after the Oval Office visit,' he added. 'Especially now that he's running low on cash.' Other right-wing social media figures piled on, making crude remarks and suggesting it was an attempt to impress Trump and obtain more foreign aid. 'Zelensky seeks $40bn a year in aid. He sure learned his lesson from the last time he begged for money,' conservative pundit Steve Gruber posted. Zelensky was wearing a black sweater when he met with Trump earlier this year in a meeting that devolved into a shouting match. 'Oh, you're all dressed up today,' Trump said to Zelensky when he first greeted him. Zelensky's attire has long triggered pearl-clutching in MAGA world, where the Ukrainian president is viewed with suspicion. Many on the far right resent the billions in U.S. aid sent to Ukraine to defend itself against Russia. During the fraught Oval Office meeting, conservative reporter Brian Glenn, who also happens to be the boyfriend of Marjorie Taylor Greene, scolded Zelensky. 'You're at the highest level in this country's office and you refuse to wear a suit,' said Glenn. 'Just want to see, do you own a suit? A lot of Americans have problems with you disrespecting this office.' 'I will wear a costume after this war will finish,' Zelensky replied. 'Maybe something like yours, maybe something better, we will see, maybe something cheaper.' Glenn wrote on X Tuesday: 'As the unofficial Director of Wardrobe at the White House, I personally approve President Zelenskyy's attire at the NATO summit.'
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Kills Key Weapons Shipments to Ukraine as Putin Unleashes Hell
Kyiv has been left scrambling after the Pentagon made the sudden decision to stop supplying air defenses to Ukraine, citing concerns over U.S. stockpiles. The Ukrainian government has been left blindsided by the move, a source told The Washington Post, with the country's Foreign Ministry urgently summoning the U.S. ambassador to 'check with the Americans what's really happening.' Crucial air defense systems are among the munitions being withdrawn from Ukraine, with the Kyiv Independent reporting that Patriot missiles, precision artillery rounds, Hellfire missiles, drones, and other missiles used by F-16 fighter jets are under threat. The decision to halt some shipments to Ukraine was driven by Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby, according to Politico, after a Defense Department review of U.S. munitions stockpiles. In a statement confirming the news, White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly told Politico the decision 'was made to put America's interests first following a DOD review of our nation's military support and assistance to other countries across the globe.' 'The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned — just ask Iran,' Kelly added. Russia has drastically increased its aerial attacks on Ukraine, battering the country with an ever-increasing number of missile and drone attacks. June saw 5,337 exploding Shahed drones unleashed upon Ukraine, smashing the previous record of 4,198 in March, according to the Ukrainian Air Force and Dragon Capital. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has welcomed the suspension of arms shipments to Ukraine, stating on Wednesday that 'the less weapons are supplied to Ukraine the closer the end of the special military operation,' using Russian President Vladimir Putin's euphemism for his war on Ukraine. President Trump has yet to approve any additional arms packages to Ukraine since his inauguration in January, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicating in June that the U.S. plans to scale down its funding allocation to Kyiv during the next spending review. Nevertheless, Trump indicated at a NATO summit last month that he would 'see' if the U.S. could supply Ukraine with additional munitions for its Patriot missile defense systems. 'They do want to have the anti-missiles, as they call them, the Patriots, and we're going to see if we can make some available,' Trump said following a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. 'They are very hard to get. We need them too,' he added. 'We are supplying them for Israel, and they are very effective. According to Politico, plans to redirect shipments back towards Israel or the U.S. homeland have been in place since at least March, as the Trump administration has repeatedly stated it wants to bring an end to the conflict by negotiating a peace treaty, which critics claim is overly favorable to Russia. Ukraine's Foreign Ministry said in a statement following the news that 'any delay or slowing down in supporting Ukraine's defense capabilities would only encourage the aggressor to continue war and terror, rather than seek peace.' The Daily Beast has contacted the Department of Defense for further comment.