If it was 20 and 25 or 25 and 35, I wouldn’t care. Why? Because both are adults and can consent. Calling something what it is isn’t ‘‘downplaying’’ anything and you should stop using that word because it undermines actually creepy non-rape shit pedos do. If someone was beaten or got a fist to the face once out of the blue, is it ‘‘downplaying’’ one of these by saying that both are assault? Yes, shoplifting and robbing are both stealing yes, at least you should know that.
In Japan it was 13 until recently, does that mean that it should be 13 everywhere? In most countries it’s between 16-18. Pedophilia is being attracted or doing that stuff with a minor, this doesn’t mean just outright rape, it includes touching, inappropriate kissing and yes, you guessed it, showing your tongue down someone’s throat.
I’m not saying what should be or shouldn’t be legal or acceptable. It can be wrong but that doesn’t make it correct for you to use a term that clearly has different meaning than this professionally and commonly. It dilutes the meaning and does undermine the cultural perception of the severity of pedophilia by calling other things, right or wrong morally, the same term. Even if you argue that it’s a slippery slope, it still dilutes the meaning. From your legalistic perspective, it would make it morally right or wrong depending on location while simultaneously taking a position based on our modern perceptions of past events. I’m not saying that this is correct, just that it makes the term lose its severity, which I think is a very significant thing.
It is correct. Pedophilia-being attracted and/or doing any inappropriate stuff with a minor, this DOESN’T have to be only outright rape and intercourse, it can be anything I stated, it is pedophilia, that’s the fact, you can’t call it murder, bombing or evading taxes or whatever because it isn’t, it’s fucking pedophilia. As for various places, incest is legal somewhere, that doesn’t make it ok. ‘‘Basing on modern perceptions’’ is the exact thing reactionaries say every time when someone talks about their racist idols from 19th century as if that makes it completely alright. You can’t use the term terrorist for example for pedo, you have to call it what it is, and not excuse it. I bet my ass if it was a male adult reactions would be completely different.
Except that just fundamentally isn’t what being a pedophile is, socially or professionally speaking. You are the one trying to take past events into the present and connect them to our morality so I would argue that your actions much better mirror that of those reactionaries, since I am not arguing for any connection to our present times.
Fundamentally, I think you are arguing against a straw man that doesn’t exist. You keep bringing up points I haven’t made. Fundamentally, this action isn’t pedophilic from any definition of the word. Other actions may be or may not be. That isn’t relevant. I just think that by conflating this with actual pedophilia, you work to undermine how awful it really is.
That’s not what I meant, I meant that reactionaries DEFEND their idols by saying that we take into account modern times and that we shouldn’t, when being racist, and in this case pedophile is bad no matter the time, be it Middle Ages or today and can’t be excused.
In case you didn’t know, let me explain: if an adult shoves it’s disgusting tongue down the throat of a MINOR, that action is DEFINITELY pedophilic.
That’s a purposefully ignorant interpretation of it. You deciding to use the term in way that it isn’t normally used bastardized the term and downplays how awful being a pedophile actually is. The whole thing seems like you are commenting in bad faith with that interpretation
It isn’t interpretation, it is literally what it is and was captured on camera. Pedo is pretty universal word and everyone knows what it is, it’s just that some people like to go leaps and bounds about technicality and trying to downplay it in cases where rape didn’t happen. But especially since the perpetrator happened to be female who looks good to some people and not a male looking like a Nosferatu, it’s completely ok.
Where was that said? To say this has anything to do with gender is a purposefully dishonest argument. Secondly, by that same logic, she also had someone force their tongue down her throat because the video clearly also shows the boy lean forward to kiss her following the first one. Your interpretation is trying to force the misusage of the word even when it clearly is nonsensical to do so.
It frequently does, because if genders were reversed, ESPECIALLY if the male pedo was a Nosferatu in terms of appearance, it’d be an uproar, female pedos sometimes get a pass, just look at the disgusting comments when a female pedo teacher gets arrested, vile stuff, but people act and behave accordingly when male is in question. A child cannot rape or assault an adult, she shoved her goddamn tongue down child’s throat, what part do you not understand? This was blatantly predatory on her part, she was pretty much pulling him a forceful way, the look in her eye as she gazed at him then wouldn’t even let the kid pull back was telling. Then she disgustingly mentions that they could possibly become lovers while being fucking married at the time.
I seriously suggest you and people like you to stay away from kids out there if you could witness something as disgusting as this first hand and not do anything.
If it was 20 and 25 or 25 and 35, I wouldn’t care. Why? Because both are adults and can consent. Calling something what it is isn’t ‘‘downplaying’’ anything and you should stop using that word because it undermines actually creepy non-rape shit pedos do. If someone was beaten or got a fist to the face once out of the blue, is it ‘‘downplaying’’ one of these by saying that both are assault? Yes, shoplifting and robbing are both stealing yes, at least you should know that.
In Japan it was 13 until recently, does that mean that it should be 13 everywhere? In most countries it’s between 16-18. Pedophilia is being attracted or doing that stuff with a minor, this doesn’t mean just outright rape, it includes touching, inappropriate kissing and yes, you guessed it, showing your tongue down someone’s throat.
I’m not saying what should be or shouldn’t be legal or acceptable. It can be wrong but that doesn’t make it correct for you to use a term that clearly has different meaning than this professionally and commonly. It dilutes the meaning and does undermine the cultural perception of the severity of pedophilia by calling other things, right or wrong morally, the same term. Even if you argue that it’s a slippery slope, it still dilutes the meaning. From your legalistic perspective, it would make it morally right or wrong depending on location while simultaneously taking a position based on our modern perceptions of past events. I’m not saying that this is correct, just that it makes the term lose its severity, which I think is a very significant thing.
It is correct. Pedophilia-being attracted and/or doing any inappropriate stuff with a minor, this DOESN’T have to be only outright rape and intercourse, it can be anything I stated, it is pedophilia, that’s the fact, you can’t call it murder, bombing or evading taxes or whatever because it isn’t, it’s fucking pedophilia. As for various places, incest is legal somewhere, that doesn’t make it ok. ‘‘Basing on modern perceptions’’ is the exact thing reactionaries say every time when someone talks about their racist idols from 19th century as if that makes it completely alright. You can’t use the term terrorist for example for pedo, you have to call it what it is, and not excuse it. I bet my ass if it was a male adult reactions would be completely different.
Except that just fundamentally isn’t what being a pedophile is, socially or professionally speaking. You are the one trying to take past events into the present and connect them to our morality so I would argue that your actions much better mirror that of those reactionaries, since I am not arguing for any connection to our present times.
Fundamentally, I think you are arguing against a straw man that doesn’t exist. You keep bringing up points I haven’t made. Fundamentally, this action isn’t pedophilic from any definition of the word. Other actions may be or may not be. That isn’t relevant. I just think that by conflating this with actual pedophilia, you work to undermine how awful it really is.
That’s not what I meant, I meant that reactionaries DEFEND their idols by saying that we take into account modern times and that we shouldn’t, when being racist, and in this case pedophile is bad no matter the time, be it Middle Ages or today and can’t be excused.
In case you didn’t know, let me explain: if an adult shoves it’s disgusting tongue down the throat of a MINOR, that action is DEFINITELY pedophilic.
That’s a purposefully ignorant interpretation of it. You deciding to use the term in way that it isn’t normally used bastardized the term and downplays how awful being a pedophile actually is. The whole thing seems like you are commenting in bad faith with that interpretation
It isn’t interpretation, it is literally what it is and was captured on camera. Pedo is pretty universal word and everyone knows what it is, it’s just that some people like to go leaps and bounds about technicality and trying to downplay it in cases where rape didn’t happen. But especially since the perpetrator happened to be female who looks good to some people and not a male looking like a Nosferatu, it’s completely ok.
Where was that said? To say this has anything to do with gender is a purposefully dishonest argument. Secondly, by that same logic, she also had someone force their tongue down her throat because the video clearly also shows the boy lean forward to kiss her following the first one. Your interpretation is trying to force the misusage of the word even when it clearly is nonsensical to do so.
It frequently does, because if genders were reversed, ESPECIALLY if the male pedo was a Nosferatu in terms of appearance, it’d be an uproar, female pedos sometimes get a pass, just look at the disgusting comments when a female pedo teacher gets arrested, vile stuff, but people act and behave accordingly when male is in question. A child cannot rape or assault an adult, she shoved her goddamn tongue down child’s throat, what part do you not understand? This was blatantly predatory on her part, she was pretty much pulling him a forceful way, the look in her eye as she gazed at him then wouldn’t even let the kid pull back was telling. Then she disgustingly mentions that they could possibly become lovers while being fucking married at the time.
I seriously suggest you and people like you to stay away from kids out there if you could witness something as disgusting as this first hand and not do anything.