Really is simple
Really is simple
Comments
73-
-
Call cps, Megan has a 14 year old daughter and clearly Megyn has no issue with her being groomed by old, rich men. She’s not safe
-
Good point!
-
-
Good ol' "anchoring tactics" to make the discussion about 15 year olds.
The youngest documented age was 14 in criminal filings, and those investigations have been repeatedly criticized.
The youngest alleged victims, in civil court filings, are 11.
So, let's stop talking about 15 year olds. Let's discuss 11 year olds. I'm assuming the Overton window will be shifted by bots to talk about how the world was pre-1800s.
-
If someone ever finds themselves having to use the phrase "non-adult women" in defense of their actions, preeeeeetty sure you can write them off as the bad guy. They're called children.
-
Certainly people under majority are regarded as children legally, or at least should be. We still have problems of child marriage and child labor here in the states which have been getting worse with the rise of the MAGA movement. Some states are relaxing their regulations regarding what kinds of work and when and how much that child employees can be expected to perform. The same people who want to take sexual advantage of our kids also want to use them for cheap labor operating hazardous machinery.
Curiously, I'm used to talking about adolescents as young men and young women as kids are often eager to grow up and have the privileges and responsibilities of adulthood (and are supposed to be practicing their conduct towards some day having such responsibility.) But there's a difference between acknowledging what they strive to be, and exploiting their inexperience and naïvety for sex and labor.
And to be fair, it is acceptable for our institutions to exploit adults for sex and labor. Especially, so, when the victims are lacking in alternative means of survival. It should be illegal to do so regardless of whether the victims are adult or children.
-
-
-
Epstein was a predator and a sex slave trafficker. Whether his victims were 5 or 50, he was still a monster and all of those who partook in his debauchery are complicit in his crimes.
So yes, as far as we know, Megyn Kelly is technically correct in saying that Epstein was not a pedophile. Pedophilia is a psychological disorder, not a crime. Having sex with minors is a crime, and Epstein and all those who partook were very guilty of that.
Fuck you Megyn Kelly. Don't try to confuse the issue. Piece of shit.
-
On one hand, I'm absolutely horrified and surprised that the rightwing propaganda machine decided to go with this talking point, i.e. "it wasn't that bad because 15 year olds are almost 18 so basically adults anyway". They are literally excusing and covering for pedophilia (or ephebophilia as they've made clear, aka raping a child).
On the other hand, given everything else they do, I'm not really surprised.
-
Pedophile = attraction to ~under 13s (pre pubescent)
Hebephile = attraction to ~11 to ~14s (early pubescent)
Ephebophile = attraction to ~15 to ~19s (post pubescent)
I think her point might be a medical definition rather than a societal definition
-
-
I can’t believe they’re trying to whitewash Epstein’s reputation.
The man was a fucking monster.
-
Gotta defend their friends!
-
-
Now that I think about it, Megan Kelly does look like that one hot teacher in your school district who eventually gets hauled away for banging a high school student.
-
It's honestly impressive (but in a gross way) what Donald has gotten his cultists to make excuses for.
-
Kelly's daughter is 14 btw
'Barely legal'
-
I don't always upvote your posts, LadyButterfly, but I always enjoy it vehemently when I do.
-
😃😃😃
-
-
You fail to take into account that Megyn Kelly's mental age isn't that of an adult either. How would she know?
-
15 is the legal limit in Sweden. Seems to be the median around the world, too (14–16 or so).
Lost my virginity at 16 with a 15 year old. It felt right, it felt beautiful, and it was consensual.
Edit: please note that I wrote this comment not realizing what this picture is referencing. Sorry to anyone offended! I will leave it as-is to make everything below make sense.
Again, apologies.
-
Ok so that's nice for you. What happened to these girls is nothing like that.
-
I've understood the context since posting the comment, and I apologize to anyone offended. I wasn't really aware of what was referenced here. Sorry about that.
-
-
This post is about teenage girls (at the oldest) being raped by adult men and a vile woman spouting propaganda to protect them, and you're in here talking about age of consent and sleeping with someone in your age range.
If I had to guess you aren't actually defending pedophilia, you just might need to take a massive step back and realize what you posted was weird as shit in context. The difference between your situation and that of the epstein victims was violence, exploitation and sexual abuse. Though even lacking that, I don't believe teenagers can truly consent to sex with adults regardless of what the law says. There are power dynamics in play that are unhealthy no matter how its spun.
I'm saying this as someone just scrolling through with no stake in your argument with others in this thread, just thought you should probably get some perspective.
-
Id love if the criticism would focus on the rape, forced actions and the heinous power situation of being a child or young teen stuck on an island rather than focusing on calling it "pedophiles" since that both draws focus away from justice for victims toward the perpetrators as well as putting focus on a "title" rather than an act.
Raping people are bad. Being a pedophile/hebephile is a horrible mental issue that needs to be handled before any act can happen, and so we should remove the stigma so the sufferers that hasnt commited acts can get help. These two things are not the same.
-
I didn't finish all of your comment because it was very hostile (understandably so), so I just want to tell you that I was not familiar with the context, so I apologize for that. I see how my comment was inappropriate.
-
-
Would you find it okay if a 15 year old had sex with a 25 year old?
-
That relative age gap is a bit concerning. I have a colleague who met her husband when she was 17 and he was 38, and they are a great couple now. She's in her mid thirties now. It's all situational, and parents need to be involved and society also needs to give the youth a sound understanding of what's acceptable and how not to be placed in a position of dependence within a sexual relationship with an older partner.
It's not a black and white topic for me, as you might have gathered. Not many things are, in life.
-
-
Wasn't it even lower in Germany?
In Poland 15 is also the limit, but if you're in position of authority to the minor it's illegal.
And if the age gap is significant it's frowned upon.
But nonetheless, that's not what the OC is about, and you redirecting it from sex trafficking to you feels vile.
-
Wasn't it even lower in Germany?
No clue, I don't know about Germany.
In Poland 15 is also the limit, but if you're in position of authority to the minor it's illegal.
In Sweden, that situation has a special rule where the younger person needs to be 18.
And if the age gap is significant it's frowned upon.
Same in all of western society, I imagine. 👍
But nonetheless, that's not what the OC is about, and you redirecting it from sex trafficking to you feels vile.
Alright, I apologize, I'm not familiar with the topic, as I try not to follow everything from America because it's very depressing news each day from there. 😞
-
-
Many countries have some sort of Romeo & Juliet-laws where teenagers of a certain age are allowed to have sex with each other/in their age brackets but adults are not allowed to have sex with minors.
Is that the case, or is 40+ and 15 good and legal?
-
When I was 16 I had a relationship with a 42 year old, it lasted a few months. People where expressing concern due to the age difference but not much more.
Also in Sweden
-
In Sweden, there have been a few cases where there's some kind of Romeo and Juliet judgement call when the two parties have been very close in age and it was deemed consensual etc, e.g. one case where one party was 17 and the younger was 14.
But otherwise, 15 is the legal limit for sexual relations of any kind, except in some cases where the age limit is 18, e.g. if you want to get with an aunt or a step dad or something, I think.
Sex with your own child or adoptive child is illegal regardless of the child's age.
Sex between two parties both younger than 15 is not punishable because they would both be below the legal age of sentencing. If that's how you say that. You get it.
Other than that? 40+ and 15, perfectly legal. But yeah, frowned upon, surely.
-
-
Removed by Moderator — Modlog
-
-
I'll concede that, if nothing else, Kelly has made a strong argument that age doesn't always correlate with mental capacity...
-
I agree with the underlying sentiment.
However, this seems like one of those comments that’s going for outrage over rationality.
I disagree that it matters, but the point of the controversial statement was that there’s a different term and level level of moral culpability between a person having sex with a 17 year old and the same person raping a 2 year old.
A tweet responding that they’re both illegal misses the point completely.
Genocide is illegal and jaywalking is illegal. We don’t equate them morally just because they are both illegal.
Just like how a person who rapes an infant isn’t morally equivalent to a person having sex with high schoolers even if it’s illegal to do both in your state/country.
-
The rational response to grown men sexually abusing children IS outrage. You sound like you should be on a list.
-
The rational response is to read and understand comments before letting outage compel you to say something ignorant. A lesson that both you and the tweet writer should learn.
I agree that this situation is outrageous, and that Megan Kelley is disingenuously trying to create cover for Trump. Nothing I wrote says anything otherwise.
You're doing this ignorant thing that chronically online people do where they assume that any kind of disagreement automatically means that the person is on the other 'side' of the issue. Instead of actually responding to what I've said, you've created a strawman in your head that believes something outrageous and are attacking that strawman instead of what I've said.
And, to demonstrate the complexity of the real world, I can say all of that about you while also agreeing with you that Trump is a pedophile.
-
-
A distinction without a difference for the purposes of the conversation surrounding this insanity.
Both are illegal. Full stop. That's where the conversation needs to end when discussing whether or not someone should be prosecuted here.
The varying levels of severity aren't relevant at this stage.
-
They should be prosecuted. At the same time, public debate on whether the law should be as it is currently or whether it should be changed is a fundamental pillar of democracy.
I don't know much about how these laws work in the US, but I think that an 18yo having sex with a 17yo is morally no different than a 19yo having sex with an 18yo, and laws should reflect that. At the same time, a 50yo having sex with a 17yo is just as icky as the 50yo having sex with an 18yo.
-
-
Illegal is not the main point, weed is illegal where I'm at among other things that should be legal.
Sex with kids is just fucking sick, abhorrent and vile.
I bet they wish they could legalize that, but it would still be sick, abhorrent and vile.
While your point is accurate, Kelly used the term 'barely legal' to describe 15 years olds which is why the meme is referring to legality.
Even porn sites know that “barely legal” means 18+.