• collapse_already@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Sounds like Megan knows there is a video of Donald in Epstein’s files (He had a bunch of carefully documented CDs). I think I can envision how her deposition would go:

    Q. Did Donald make child porn?

    M.K. No, Donald didn’t know he was being filmed, Epstein did that to have leverage over him.

    Q. Did Donald get blackmailed by Epstein?

    M.K. No, they were friends.

    Q. So Donald just started in the child porn / statutory rape video for fun?

    M.K. Fuck you, Donald’s a great man and the president.

    Q. Objection, non-responsive.

    We can’t see the video because it is child porn, but Donald is not a pedo because she was 15. At least that is how I see this playing out.

  • thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    24 hours ago

    The difference between a pedophire and hebephile might matter in a clinical setting, if you’re a psychiatrist or something. This isn’t that. He was a child rapist who sold children to be raped by other rich fuckers. Donald trump was one of those. Trump is a child rapist.

    • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Donald Trump owned teen beauty pageants and you think hes just an end consumer of Epstein’s child sex trafficking? Wait til more comes out and hes revealed as just as involved in moving these girls around as Epstein, if not more.

  • MuskyMelon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    “MEGYN KELLY IS PRO-PEDOPHILIA IF THEY’RE OLDER THAN 5 YEARS OLD”

    That’s the correct headline.

  • Hikermick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    This is preparing for the inevitable release of the Epstein files. Softening the blow by insisting it wasn’t pedophilia. They could have made this argument a long time ago but didn’t

  • Tedesche@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Pedophiles, by clinical definition are people who are attracted to prepubescent people. That means people who are attracted to simply mid- to late-level teenagers are not pedophiles. Sad as it is to say, post- or mid-pubescent teenagers have already developed adult sexual features and normal adults can be attracted to them.

    Sorry, folks. Pedophilia is a real disorder with specific criteria, and it doesn’t align with the casual term we use as “pedophilia,” which is just sexual involvement with people under 18 years old.

  • Sunflier@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Okay conservatives, ask yourself: are those young girls not the very people you seek to protect from the transgender persons? Like, if you’re fine with the shit that tRump and Epstein pulled with kids because that level of depravity is suddenly okay, then you must clearly be fine with kids peeing in the stall next to a transgender person or seeing a transgender person wash their hands. After all, seeing a transgender person wash their hands is nothing compared to the now-not-a-risk from the pedophile-in-chief.

    Oh, it’s never been about protecting children? It’s just been about hate?

    • tym@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Hate requires no intelligence to operate. The US has an adultescence problem. Turns out the bystander effect applies to a society’s impact on children too. The irony is kids in the US have never been more intelligent or open-minded… can’t have that kind of future competition.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is this person’s view, who was there for a lot of this, but that he was into the barely legal type. Like, he liked 15-year-old girls. And I realized this is disgusting. I’m definitely not trying to make an excuse for this. I’m just giving you facts, that he wasn’t into, like, 8-year-olds. But he liked the very young teen types that could pass for even younger than they were, but would look legal to a passerby.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 days ago

      This is one of those technical distinctions where if you’re making the distinction, you’re already on the wrong side of everything.

      • StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Psychology and precision in language using the diagnostic terminology of the DSM V is on the wrong side of everything?

        No one is excusing or belittling anything. People who hurt children must fry.

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yeah, if you’re quoting the DSM V to defend yourself as technically not a pedophile, then yes you’ve crossed the rubicon of decency.

          • StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            I’m not defending anyone from anything. Your repeated, blatent and misguided attempts to mischaracterise what’s being said makes me think “He doth protest too much.”.

            It’s the litteral terminology from the diagnostic manual from the APA. You may want to book an appointment.

            • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 day ago

              I’m not suggesting you’re doing it specifically. I’m saying generally if you feel the need to make that distinction in your normal day to day life, you’re almost certainly a sexual predator.

              • StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                Or any number of psychology related or adjacent professions, or just well read.

                What is really really weird is that you seemingly equivocate ephebephilia and hebephilia as some lesser crime. They are all equally child abuse. There is no lesser crime being implied here. All punishable the same. All irreperably damaging to the victims.

                You got some serious issues to work out. Imagine a courtroom where the lawyer present evidence of the accused stabbing someone, then you stand up in the gallery and scream accusing the lawyer of being a murderer because he said the accused stabbed the victim, rather than shot the victim. Ridiculous right? That’s what you’re doing.

                Your saying generally that being correct, accurate and precise with the nature of the crime means the lawyers, judge, medical practitioners testifying and anyone with a loose awareness of standards and terminology are murderers in my analogy.

                Did you know there is an entire section in wikipedia on various forms of chronophilia You better report the researchers, the writers of the articles, the publishers of textbooks, the entire psychology profession and anyone who clicked that link for sex crimes against children.

                Your bigotry is insane. Get help.

                • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  13 hours ago

                  Ok, you caught me. I’m prejudiced against pedophiles and pedophile enablers, and I’m not sorry. If that offends you, I assume you’re a member of one of those two groups, and I don’t want to continue talking with you. I suppose that’s a sort of bigotry, but I’m not really worried what you think or what offends pedophiles and pedophile enablers.