You must log in or register to comment.
“he’s not attracted to small children, just slightly bigger children!”
Kinda insane so many of them are defending it
After the normalisation of racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, white-supremacy, maga is now explaining us how raping kids is not actually pedophilia. Or if it is it’s because those kids where beging for it. And if they didn’t they just deserved it and the age of consent is a woke concept anyway.
Yup, suddenly now they’re interested in nuance
Sometimes its not easy to filter the news just with memes. Who fucked who this time?
Laura Ingraham (of Fox News fame), put out an article that we should all relax, because Jeffrey Epstein’s victims were on average closer in age to 15 than 5, and spouted some technicalities about the definition of pedophile, as if that makes grooming children to sexually exploit and trade access to for favors any less repulsive.
The timing of the news release is right after a clever procedural move in the US House brought a vote to release the Epstein files and now all the conservative media is trying the “maybe we did, but it wasn’t really that bad” lines.
Oh shit, thanks for the explanation.
It’s OK to have Sex with Children!
-People OUTLAWING Rainbows to Protect The Children!
Our shitty uneducated slave-holding ancestors did it so why shouldn’t we?
-them
To be fair, they claim to take all their moral cues from a book writtem by our shitty slave-holding and sheep-fucking ancestors. This is par for the course.
He can go on live television and eat a living, screaming baby and they will defend him.
The only reason they asked for the files is because they believe there are only people they don’t like on it.
There are no bounds to this insanity.
Lol, pedo-prez supporters have been working overtime to protect their pedo-leader. No surprise that this old libertarian “I’m not really a pedophile even though I want to rape minors” chestnut came back.
Gonna have to change the meaning of POTUS, given the head of our country is now the Pedophile of the United States
That implies he’s the only one. There’s plenty of pedophiles in the GOP. Maybe we call it the GOPOP now
“Grand Old Pedophiles on Pedophiles”?
GOPP - Grand Old Pedophile Party
Nah, 12-13 is definitely ped territory. Don’t even have the fancy names as an excuse.
I would just call him a child rapist. IMO that actually sounds worse than “pedophile” because you could apply the latter to someone who was attracted to minors but didn’t rape any.
Regardless of his attraction, he raped children, so he’s a child rapist.
“Child rapist” also applies to people who aren’t actually sexually attracted to children, but rape children anyways, which is more common than people think, because rape isn’t usually actually about the sex, it’s about the power
pedophile, hebephile and ephebophile, are after all just terms for someone with a sexual attraction disability. Typically due to a hormonal issue, trauma or mental disability.
A child rapist is someone who fucks minors and should be locked up for life if not put down. With a list of exceptions that a reasonable person can count on one hand.
While no one reasonable goanna call two high school seniors fucking when ones 17 and the other is two months older at 18. A child rapist.
A fat old fuck doing it sure the fuck is.
We should really start calling things by what they are and not misusing terminology. Makes it less impactful.
Add to that, that to the best of my knowledge, most child rapists are not pedophiles and most pedophiles are not child rapists.
The two being convoluted helps child rapists by letting them hide behind their sexual orientation (“he can’t be a child predator, he has a wife and kids!”) and hurts pedophiles by stigmatizing their condition so that they have a harder time getting help to control or remove their sexual urges.
If we really want to reduce the amount suffering for both adults and, most importantly, children then we have to be able to start having actual conversations about this.
If we really want to reduce the amount suffering for both adults and, most importantly, children then we have to be able to start having actual conversations about this.
I appreciate that calling Trump a child rapist is also good for society.
keeping it very old school, i see. i like it.
See, the distinction between a pedophile, hebephile and ephebophile exists for a good reason.
But the thing is, the moment you start getting into those differences, it immediately makes you sound like a pedophile.
Removed by mod
Only because online people are dumb as fuck
What I find very funny about this very unoriginal “online is so different than real life” line of thought, is that the comment you are responding to is one of the most popular jokes from stand up comedian Gianmarco Soresi.
They cant process the nuance of basic arguments.
People can, there just aren’t any of substance to be made on this topic. Raping kids is bad.
This is why we now have some of the dumbest cunts in the world claiming that 25 year old “children” cant consent…
This is such a wild strawman to fight against, completely unrelated to the topic at hand its very interesting this is what you’ve chosen to bring up.
To put these under one umbrella term is fucking weird.
No one is putting all of those under one term. You’ve added woman and even teenager (purposefully vague) to that list because it makes your pedophile, hebephile and ephebophile appear stronger than it actually is, which is very weak.
Everyone just needs to take a page out of the UK play book, and call him a fucking nonce!
To make all of this noise about lacking nuance just to suggesting using a more local synonym for pedophile is a pretty ridiculous hill to die on.
Removed by mod
Its crazy you think I must be American to think child rape is bad. That’s such a peculiar line of thought.
This whole comment is a trip, all based on you making things up to be mad at because you know what you actually want to argue against isn’t acceptable to argue against.___
Well obviously the only people who care about protecting children are The Chosen People of God, the Republican party. Everyone else who isn’t a Republican is a child molestater just waiting for a vulnerable child. We should give Republicans, who are the only good people ever, access to any child they want any time so they can protect the Children from the disgusting dangerously deranged Democrats. /S
One of the many reasons it’s impossible to have an honest and mature discussion on the topic. No one cares to actually be accurate with terminology just because it’s “icky”
Now if only we could also get research funding on the topic that doesn’t have a billion strings attached to the researchers or the results being locked away forever because no one wants their name attached.
Or the best one peer review being basically impossible on the topic.
It’s such a huge problem.
This is not only wrong it’s extremely wrong.
It’s a well documented sexual dysfunction with diagnosis codes and treatment methods (really mostly coping mechanisms and therapy) and everything.
Not all people who are pedophiles rape children or consume CSM. Some people have the presence of mind to seek out help. Those people are people we can have an adult discussion about and if you want to be specific with definitions with them, fine. Be my guest.
For the people who raped minors, or consumed CSM? Literally does not fucking matter what you call them. Any discussion on exactly the right word to use is a targeted distraction from the point. You’re either willfully and knowingly engaging in that distraction, or you’re ignorant of the harm some people are trying to cause by doing so.
He’s a pedophile. Everybody that went to Epstein’s Island is a pedophile, rapist, child molester, whatever, or in the very best case complicit in those crimes.
I see your point about distraction from the matter, and I agree there. At the same time I am very bothered by the media coverage saying pedophile 99% of the time. Because, as you have mentioned in your first two paragraphs, pedophilia is a disorder, and not every pedophile/ephebophile/hebephile is an offender or consumes CSM. They should be calling them child rapists, sex offenders who raped minors, whatever. At least in Epstein’s case you can reasonably assume he did, indeed, have a sexual disorder, I’m not sure if it is true for all his clients. But they all are child sex offenders, there is no doubt about that.
Language matters. The last decade was putting such an emphasis on this, but with this case a lot of people seem to agree that “language distracts”. Let it be vague, everyone knows what is meant. Don’t distract from the important matter by being specific about the words you use. Well, I disagree, and I disagree not because it is ephebophilia or hebephilia, I disagree because a) It’s not about the …philia, it is about the offenses committed, and thus b) there are more precise terms that should be used in this case, and these terms (child rapist, statutory rape, child sex trafficker, etc) sound much harsher anyway. Also c) you are working against the interest of non offending pedophiles here and dismantle any awareness there is about everything you had pointed out above. Language matters for them as well.
I’m lucky enough to have a very bland, healthy sexual orientation and preference, but I do have a kid, and God knows I want to protect her from harm.
For this, I need people who are attracted to minors to be open about it, and they won’t be if we run with torches after them for just their orientation, or if we keep calling every person who offended a minor a pedophile. They won’t be open or seek help, and the discourse right now is incredibly counterproductive.
I also need people to be more aware that about half of sex offenses concerning minors are committed by people who have no attraction dysfunction. If it were so easy as to just “remove all the pedophiles” to stop child sex offenses.
So, in my opinion, the response to “ackshually he’s not a pedophile” should be “you’re right, he sex trafficked and raped minors. Better now?”
Using the wrong terminology does attract unwanted attention to the wrong group though, because now a lot of people are saying “kill all pedophiles!” and that definition somehow also extends to the non-offending ones you mentioned. Those people don’t deserve all that fire for a paraphilic disorder they didn’t choose and are still actively in control over.
There really isn’t a way to protect the non-offenders from this outrage other than a collective effort to clarify our terminology. I’ve been using “rapist” instead: it’s short, gets the point across, and is accurate.
Seek out help? In the US? Lol good one
This distinction only means something for psychology.
And I get that the vast majority of child rapes happen because children are more vulnerable HOWEVER at some point you can just afford an adult prostitute 1000 times over if you actually want that. It’s clear that these people actually wanted to rape children. So the pedophile label makes sense.
Exactly. Splitting hairs and calling it an obscure word that is only ever used in a clinical setting weakens and cheapens it. just call them pedophies. don’t let them redefine or spin it. just pedophile.
Or just be accurate and call them a rapist. A child rapist.
Pedophile already is a weakened word. Both cause it gets over used, and because it does have an actual accurate use case that doesn’t accurately describe what’s happened.
Accurate terminology is always more powerful.
As I said in my comment the pedophile label makes sense here. Although they’re both. People use them interchangeably for some reason.
That works as well!
Removed by mod
My take on this is that pedophilia encompasses sex with minors a whole, and then you have your subtypes.
Don’t really care if this is technically accurate or not. It dodges the semantic bullshit pedophiles use.
Better terms would be child rapist and statutory rape. Each of those have only one very clear definition.
Those are good terms, but I feel like statutory rape isn’t as impactful as pedophile, because you’re still raping a minor
You could just say raping a minor, then.
That’s pretty all encompassing.
Fucking dirt bags
I don’t understand how they can even defend it. Best case scenario they are saying that raping women is perfectly fine as long as they’re old enough. I get that with some of the extreme MAGA out there really do believe this kinda shit, but I’m sure bullshit like this is why we see more and more people leaving MAGA every day. It’s no surprise that Republicans are getting absolutely destroyed in almost every election lately when you see what they act like and I feel like that will be their eventual downfall. They see these echo chambers online and believe that is an actual representation of what all republican voters think. A lot of people seem to forget, but most people still sit somewhere in the middle especially outside the internet. There’s still an argument to be had about how ignorant people were when it came to the election last year, but bitching about what already happened is never going to get us moving forward.
And trafficking! Trump’s base was on a mission to root out pedos AND sex traffickers. This is at the core of the awful things Epstein was found guilty of. Take away the pedophilia and you still have monstrous behavior that should be dealt with harshly.
The pizzagate projection
The right wing party, to an astonishing degree, cozies up with and funds literal extremist organizations en masse. the left went for more social and peaceful methods, while the right wing only ramped up the mayhem. that’s one of the reasons that since the late 70’s there has been absolutely no element of left wing organized terror (only a few lone wolf attacks and ecoterrorism), while there is always, at any given point in time, a number of organized, well equipped extremist organizations on the right engaging in all types of activities… political violence, stochastic terrorism, radical violence, misogynstic violence, massive amounts of disinfo, and countless other activities.
No, not all individuals who are conservative subscribe to or even know about this. But the party itself is absolute cancer of the worst degree possible. they are not nearly as benign and harmless as you think. .
What was the word he was about to say?
