GenesisNemesis
I am a proud hedonist.
Another thing. Let's, for the sake of the argument, accept that "it's not pedophilia, it's ephebophilia!" Ok? Is that not just as bad as pedophilia? Am I missing something?
-
Features
Republicans Seem To Have A Big Pedophile Problem
- Thread starter ZiprHead
- Start date
Toni
Contributor
I don’t think that criminal behavior has a party affiliation.
Right now, it is extremely big news that POTUS is an alleged child rapist. Not enough people deny it was important that he was accused by many women of inappropriate behavior, including rape to keep him from power. Just as it wasn’t sufficiently important to enough people to keep Bill
Clinton from office when he was accused of sexual assault by more than one woman or to keep Clarence Thomas or Brett Kavanaugh from their positions. Much less volatile—or credible! accusations against Al Franken cost him his political career. In my town, a teacher was known to behave abusively in classrooms and less well known but still known to have backed up his female students—in middle school—in coat closets between classes. For decades. He was never fired but retired with full benefits. Before you ask; it turns out that if you complain on behalf of someone else’s kid who can’t go to their own parent, you are not considered to have any standing. I’m just throwing that in there to say that ignoring and thereby enabling bad behavior on the part of those in power is pervasive. Sometimes people don’t believe because they don’t want to believe. Sometimes they fear that persons bad behavior will bring down the institution if known, so better to keep it quiet.
People in the spotlight draw much more scrutiny. Right now, the GOP does seem to have a problem with some of its leadership engaging in sexual misconduct with minors.
Toni
Contributor
Pedophilia is easier to spell and pronounce.
I don't know what your point is, or why you brought it up. Are you assuming I have some opinion on that, one way or another? How about for the sake of discussion let's stick with "victims under the age of 18".
Toni
Contributor
Pedophilia is more concise.
laughing dog
Contributor
Why exclude admitted but uncharged pedos?
How many examples are in a “ statistically significant” sample?
You’re working pretty hard to obscure the obvious.
GenesisNemesis
I am a proud hedonist.
Lol no nothing to do with you. Just wondering why it's relevant to distinguish between pedophilia and ephebophilia if both are as bad as each other.
GenesisNemesis
I am a proud hedonist.
And we've even provided countless examples of evidence that Project 2025 is real. It still doesn't convince these people! So what kind of evidence am I supposed to provide for anything? These people would even deny that trans suicide rates are caused more by bullying, which is a pretty obvious and entirely uncontroversial claim to make.
Is it? I did a quick search on the definition. From a Harvard University link, which in turn links to the National Library of Medicine's thesauras:
Note the info in the parenthesis at the endYou must have a pretty active imagination. I can't quite figure out the scenario you have in mind...
Yes, pedophilia is more concise.
No, when people argue this they do not look any less like a pedophile. They look more like one, in fact, when people argue this.
There is no faster way at all to make me wonder whether you are a pedophile except when these hairs are so loudly and clearly being split.
No, when people argue this they do not look any less like a pedophile. They look more like one, in fact, when people argue this.
There is no faster way at all to make me wonder whether you are a pedophile except when these hairs are so loudly and clearly being split.
laughing dog
Contributor
One word (pedophilia) is more concise (fewer words) than six words (victims under the age of 18).
You realize your hole is getting deeper, not shallower.
Toni
Contributor
I meant the word, not the description. And have stipulated repeatedly that I was using the term in common parlance, not the precise psychiatric term.Is it? I did a quick search on the definition. From a Harvard University link, which in turn links to the National Library of Medicine's thesauras:
And moreover it's utterance outside any setting where that jargon is normally accepted is majorly problematic.I meant the word, not the description. And have stipulated repeatedly that I was using the term in common parlance, not the precise psychiatric term.Is it? I did a quick search on the definition. From a Harvard University link, which in turn links to the National Library of Medicine's thesauras:
The fact is, I have learned so very much about Derec and TheBeave that not only do I wish I hadn't learned, but that I wish didn't exist as facts to be learned in the first place.
What specifically have you learned about me?And moreover it's utterance outside any setting where that jargon is normally accepted is majorly problematic.I meant the word, not the description. And have stipulated repeatedly that I was using the term in common parlance, not the precise psychiatric term.Is it? I did a quick search on the definition. From a Harvard University link, which in turn links to the National Library of Medicine's thesauras:
The fact is, I have learned so very much about Derec and TheBeave that not only do I wish I hadn't learned, but that I wish didn't exist as facts to be learned in the first place.
That you are exactly the sort who splits the hair.What specifically have you learned about me?And moreover it's utterance outside any setting where that jargon is normally accepted is majorly problematic.I meant the word, not the description. And have stipulated repeatedly that I was using the term in common parlance, not the precise psychiatric term.Is it? I did a quick search on the definition. From a Harvard University link, which in turn links to the National Library of Medicine's thesauras:
The fact is, I have learned so very much about Derec and TheBeave that not only do I wish I hadn't learned, but that I wish didn't exist as facts to be learned in the first place.
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
Ironically, the word you are struggling with is correctly spelled "paedophillia", and the first syllable is pronounced "Pee-", but most people now spell and pronounce it incorrectly, so that it is analogous to "pedometer", and appears to describe a love of feet.
Your actual point is correct though, despite your poor etymology; Those who constantly and consistently derail discussions of the rape and abuse of children with this trivia are transparently showing a worrying desire not to talk about the immorality of raping children, and no matter what words are used, that's not a reassuring desire.
The fact is that the fine details don't matter. A sixty year old wealthy man who procures a twenty year old homeless woman for sex is clearly a vile abuser, despite having broken no laws and harmed no children.
The law has to draw a line somewhere, but doing so is a compromise, and for every unfair criminalisation of a "Romeo and Juliet" romance, there is an equally unfair legalisation of an abusive relationship that just happens to be technically lawful.
And anyone arguing the technical legality of a particular kind of relationship in discussions about how those relationships are fucking abusive as fuck in every clear way demonstrates those same sickening desires you mention.
But honestly, I enjoy this about humanity. It makes it so much easier to identify the point sources of such worrying desires and keep an eye on them; though I worry for the few with discipline to not so worry us all with their desires, for their desiring still should evoke worry.
Toni
Contributor
It’s an American vs British spelling.