Megyn Kelly suggests Epstein wasn't an 'actual pedophile' if victims went through puberty
9 months ago by just_another_person to c/politics
More like "I'll be dating her in 5 years, and her in 15."
Nah, that was funny.
respectively?
Megan Kelly has a 15 year old daughter, someone should call CPS and look into this poor kid if her mom thinks a grown man grooming her isnt a bad thing
I mean, you will succeed in turning some people away from Megan Kelly but mostly only dying boomers are watching her anyway.
Yeah, that seems on brand
Yes, it’s technically
Exactly the same if I started to call driving with a blood alcohol level between 0.8% and 25% "happy fun time driving" and pretended that means it's no longer the same as DUI...
People can make up all the terms they want, don't change the law tho.
At .4% I call it Death. By 25% I think that's just a type of embalming procedure.
I like to think of laws as flibberlintons because who the hell cares if you break a flibberlinton?
You're off by an order of magnitude in these percentages.
In most places, it is legal to drive with a blood alcohol content between 0.025% and 0.08%.
Over 0.08% is a DUI.
Over 0.8% is death.
25%... you'd indeed need a thanatologist to get there.
technically Hebephilia or Ephebophilia
You've been made mod of r/Libertarian
That doesn't change the level of disdain.
You've been removed as mod for r/Libertarian
Relevant stand up https://youtu.be/nu6C2KL_S9o
"You've heard the news?" 😂
Holy shit they're actually doing the hebophile bit
TIL hebophile and ephebophile, two words I didn’t want to know existed.
The best explanation I have seen was that it's like death metal sure there's varying types and styles within death metal but at the end of the day the only ones who really care about those distinctions are death metal fans.
(My apology to any death metal fan offended by the comparison)
All sub categories of reprehensible creep
I don't think a 20 year old dating a 17 year old falls into that category but it would fall under the legal definition you're referring to in many states. That's the problem with drawing arbitrary lines, you usually end up labeling some things incorrectly. That doesn't mean you get rid of the line but understanding the context is still important.
That being said, there is no amount of context that will lessen the creepiness of a 50+ year old man serially preying upon 15 year old girls. That's disgusting and I find Megyn Kelly's invocation of this defense to be indefensible. She should be ashamed of herself if she were capable of feeling shame.
Yeah of course a 20 year old dating a 17 year old is fine....we all know this isn't what they are talking about....it's disgusting people trying to justify someone old enough to be their parent or grandparent..
Maryland has a system in place to protect teenagers...the age of consent is 16 (which if you're over 21, shame on you) but there's a 4 year sliding clause, so for example if your 17, a pissed parent cannot charge you for having relations with their 14 year old, if all was on the up and up.
I'm in my 40s and anyone under 30 is too young.
Especially when the age of consent in half the states of the US is 16.
17 year olds still tend to be physically less developed... But even if they're not, if you're more than a handful of years older than the 17 year old, having a sexual relationship with them is still exploitative since they're still mentally (both emotionally and reasoning abilities) immature.
I mean it's kind of important to be more mindful about the choice of words in general as many people say pedophile but mean child predator.
There are many people born with that attraction to kids that never act on it or even actively seek help.
The whole "let's call everyone a pedophile" is doing more harm than good as it creates a huge stigma preventing people from looking for help.
That said: they are 100% not caring about that at all and just moving the goalpost...
I do 100% agree that the concept of having hugely varied terms for pedophile, and say the term Minor attracted person, and get really sick of hearing people lash out on when the term MAP is used to say "You just want to protect pedophiles".
No I want people who have the urge to abuse children, to get treatement and never act on it and live peaceful happy lives where they never harm an innocent person, and to me that is far better of an outcome than a child being abused, but supposedly it gets made up for by the abuser getting tortured in prison.
I don't know. Can't we just stigmatize it to the point where their only recourse is to turn to faith and try to live a life of celibacy and denial? They can all become priests or something. That'll help them with the internalized guilt while they're at it!
uncomfortable catholic church tugs on its collar
I don't think priests go celibate. What you're suggesting would likely result in a lot of child molestation
If the person has never acted on it, then there isn't really anyway to know and he wouldn't be labeled with it.
I guess we could be more accepting of people that just download pictures, but downloading those pictures is acting on it, and shows that they have trouble controlling it.
I get your point, and that it isn't always their fault, but the link between both words seems very justified imo.
Except that people who have not acted on it and are seeking support in continuing to not act on it are afraid of identifying themselves as pedophiles because the association, even amongst mental health professionals, is with the action and not the thoughts.
I've never heard the word hebophile and I bet a lot of people haven't either. Sometimes when unfamiliar words are introduced as part of a story or event, they become a central part of that story and forever linked to it. Maybe people should use it more regarding trump.
I really wish I lived in a world where psychiatrists could spend time inventing terms for people who prefer rogue-likes versus people who prefer rogue-lites instead of this shit.
I learned about hebophilia yesterday and today I started wondering if I'm supposed to be pronouncing ephebophilia as "ep-hebophilia" or was i right saying "ef-ebophilia"
Look at those goalposts go!
funny that QAnon stuff circled around Dems having pedo-leanings and that was an OUTRAGE yet now it turns out to be OK, Humane even... wtf? Their morals exist only to stick it to anyone opposing them and they evaporate the second one of their own is caught doing exact thing
But they're still probably gonna push to prosecute lgbtq people as pedophiles. They should at least have to pretend to be consistent.
End up? They were already there since at least almost a decade ago.
Supporters defend Roy Moore: “Mary was a teenager and Joseph was an adult carpenter” | Vox - https://www.vox.com/...
There's a few pedos in every group, also pedo haters. JD Delay is not a Trumper but he's conservative and always advocates for the woodchipper for pedophiles, but he's been mostly pointing out pedophiles on the left. That said, he would advocate the woodchipper for any and all of them. His merch includes ""Make Pedophiles Scared Again" shirts and "Woodchipper for President '28" hats.
*rapist
I'm pretty sure they named the pedo region of Epstein island after him
Im sorry, is this a conversation about the degree to which he is a pedophile?
Apparently for his sycophant followers. Absolutely insane.
No, I'm not — I was disgusted to hear Megan Kelly try to draw some kind of positive distinction between "barely legal types" and "children".
Personally I don't consider the distinction between terms to be meaningful beyond human need to categorize. A 12 to 16 year old is still a fucking child, a 17 year old is still a child. There are plenty of arguments to make about whether 18 year olds are adults.
That being said, nothing about my comment suggests that I support the message they're trying to portray. Maybe read the entire comment before calling me a conservative next time, ok?
the more they try to come up with new terminology to excuse it away, the more I just put them in the bucket labelled 'kid fuckers'.
whether 18 year olds are adults
Some would say that holds true until well into people's 20s
Reminds me of all the disgusting turds in the courts who went, "Aw it was just a little rape."
This is one of the wildest most disgusting goal post moves I've ever heard
From the people who brought you pizzagate.
What are they even defending here. Even if they were 18 year old trafficked women it would be heinous.
It’s not like he was dating young girls or some shit, this is about sex crimes of which their age is only one of the awful awful factors.
It's like distinguishing between burglary and robbery. Maybe it makes a difference in the exact length of their sentence but they're still both serious crimes
Technically, pedophilia is considered a mental disorder. it's listed in the DSM-V. Pedophiles could be considered mentally ill.
Hebophilia and ephebophilia aren't illnesses. They are crimes.
What are these words?
Is a square not a rectangle?
Getting out in front of the Epstein release I see.
well a pedophile goes for prepubescent children….
Ephebophilia is the primary sexual interest in mid-to-late adolescents, generally ages 15 to 19
so like, still a sex predator for underage girls….
In most US states that would not be illegal.
They're just deflecting from the trafficking and rape part. Call them out on it.
"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," she continued. "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."
"And that is what I believed and that is what I reliably was told for many years."
Kelly admitted that she began to change her opinion after Attorney General Pam Bondi claimed that Epstein had thousands of videos with child sexual abuse material.
"For the first time, I thought, oh, no, he was an actual pedophile," the conservative host recalled.
Megan "I was fine with him fucking teenagers" Kelly, everyone.
But he liked the very young teen types that could pass for even younger than they were, but would look legal to a passerby."
How does this make any sense at all? How does one "pass as even younger" but still somehow "look legal to passersby"? Those are directly conflicting concepts.
Probably "look like a 12 year old to your average person but perfectly fuckable to the GOP."
It's called desperation
goddamn this fucking talking point is spreading. Just yesterday I was watching a video where some maga piece of shit was questioning a streamer about why he thinks its wrong that adults rape 13 year olds. Pretty soon we're going to have absolutely no choice except physical violence.
for ref: https://www.reddit.com/...
This talking point is very popular among the right wing libertarian guys who are so offputting they cannot date their peers.
It’s also popular among Christian fascist theocrats who want to be able to date and marry children.
It is spreading for a reason though. There certainly is a difference between raping an 8 year old and a 16 year old. And medically it is defined as "sexual interest in prepubescent children." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19327034/ People have started slinging the term even at guys dating 20 something year old women just because they are 50 or 60. In short, the term has been made into a dog whistle and used were it doesn't apply because it carries more negative connotations than terms like statutory rape, sexual assualt of a minor, sex trafficking.
Frankly, I think the term has been cheapened by this misuse. Now when people here someone is a pedo, instead of immediate revulsion, they have to ask, "what kind of pedo". It shouldn't be that way. All of the phrases should be bad enough that we don't need to exaggerate. So it is more the acceptance that statutory rape is ok that is the source of the problem.
That said, the motives for this talking head to say what she said are purely political. Her words aren't worth spit.
The biggest tragedy about everyone on the left using pedophile as a dog whistle is that it actually directly harms children in my opinion. Pedophelia is a mental disorder, and just because someone is a pedophile doesn't mean they have ever or will ever harm a child or anyone else for that matter.
The problem with everybody using the word pedo and creating such a hateful and negative reaction to that word instead of the more proper term of child sex offender or child rapist, is it directly results in pedophiles who want to get mental health help to ensure they never hurt a child, never will and they will just keep it quiet because their entire life will be destroyed if they try to get professional help.
Of course, everybody is always responsible for their actions, but all of you using the word pedo in such a negative and catch-all way directly results in children being harmed.
You all need to use better terminology, like rapist or child sex abuser, not using a real DSM-5 mental disorder to vilify.
I won't compare it directly to any other mental disorders because I will get a significant amount of hate, but imagine picking any other DSM-5 disorder and using it as a catch-all to vilify, it would be unpopular.
WOW....just..........WOOOOWWWWWW
She has a 14 year old daughter
If you tell someone not to fuck kids and their response is "actually 15 year olds aren't kids" then that person is a pedo.
hand gestures, trump voice It's called ephuba... epheeba... ephebiolphilia, folks, look it up. These girls. Women. Beautiful women, because you know, I'm only attracted to beautiful. I ran the miss USA pagent for years, you know that? I'm very proud of it. They call me up sometimes and say, "Mr. Trump, the evil, socialist communist left says beauty pagents are wrong and we have to give awards to ugly ladies with nose rings. Please come back". I have to tell them I'm just too busy saving America. But these women aren't kids. They're smart, intelligent ladies. The left hates beautiful women. They say "Donald is robbing the cradle he's a pedophile". That's fake news. Fake. News. Children don't have... well you know just look at these girls. They're very well-endowed, these ladies and I won't bow down to the evil communists. They're the pedophiles folks. Why doesn't anyone look into sleepy Joe sniffing all those girls' hair - it's creepy. But I'm attracted to beautiful. All the most beautiful things... you've seen my new bathroom, right? It's the greatest bathroom in the history of indoor plumbing... Kim told me that on the phone yesterday. He said he could see it through the window in pictures.
I feel like this is how Trump thinks he sounds. Semi-cogent, explaining full thoughts for rhe most part. The reality is so much more stilted and involves vertical leaps between topic layers with little warning and almost no rhetorical device.
This was great but at "beautiful women" he would have had a brain fart and started talking about Sydney Sweeney and how the left hates her for being beautiful. "The left hates lots of beautiful women because beautiful women all love me. They all love my big beautiful bills..." et al.
I don’t know what those words even mean. If in completely honest I don’t think I’ve ever heard of them
Giancarlo has a great joke about it
Says I'm not allowed to watch it without some app I don't have.
Indeed I misspelled
Fuuuuuuuuuck
"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," she continued. "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."
Plus, she's saying epstein went as young as he could get away with. That he liked the 13 year olds.
Here’s an extra mindfuck twist, Megan Kelly has a 14-15 year old daughter. So she made this comment as the mother of a girl who is the same age as these victims. She has no soul
And when you find out their age you're supposed to keep walking.
Edit: autocorrect
The Narcissists Prayer
That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad. <----- We are here
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it.
progress at last
Her child should be removed from her custody.
He's a hebephile not a pedophile isn't much of a defence. So he goes after 11+yo children instead of children less than 11yo? Also most people don't know, or rightly care, about the age distinction - both are child abusers.
Yeah. I've only ever seen the hebebebenebphile argument made by creepy pedophile motherfuckers. Nobody else wants to split hairs to defend this sort of behavior.
Even if he wasn't a pedophile he was still a sex trafficker on a massive scale. He just was doing it to minors
Oh I agree. Pedophile, hebebebenebebphile, who cares. Pervert. Criminal. Abuser. Rapist. Those fit either category.
Well, technically the distinction is important for psychiatrists. So if they ever study what the fuck was wrong with Epstein and his fellow creeps the psychiatrists need to have that distinction in mind.
Who else could also use that distinction... Judges? If there's a punishment range (like e.g. you get 5 to 15 years in prison) I can imagine they might be giving harsher verdicts the younger the victim maybe?
God, I need a shower. Why did you made me think about it.
It's still trafficking and rape.
When women are stripped of personhood, then the actions of these rapists and sex traffickers haven't actually hurt any people.
I hate that I know the words hebephile and ephebophile. I only know them because of people who do weird mental gymnastics to justify their creepy behaviour. "Um actually, he's an ephebophile, not a pedophile" is a huge red flag whenever I see it
The "um it's ackchually ephebophilia" is spreading to the auth-right!
REPUBLICANS LOVE CHILD RAPE
simple as that.
Thank God the Right is out here protecting our kids from transpeople. /sarcasm
Let's be real. The right is "protecting kids from trans people" because they think transexuality is socially contagious and they don't want to fuck trans kids.
Sigh. Fair.
Or worse, the trans kids refusing to fuck conservatives. Far as a turdpublican goes, other people exist to be exploited, and a willfully chosen sexual identity can be a roadblock. People developing a personality inherently means having the willpower to say "NO!".
Ah yes, the "social contagion" theory, out here acting like Dawkins wasn't full of shit when he came up with memetics
It's already been pointed out how wrong and gross this is.
But for the sake of discussion let's give her the biggest possible benefit of the doubt.
So then the president of the united states was ONLY a human sex slave trafficker. Super.
unfortunately I think her handlers know that simply planting a seed of doubt will work on many in their audience.
And child rapist. Even if you want to be pedantic about what qualifies as pedophilia, statutory rape is still rape and some who’s not an adult is still a child.
And if you want to be extra pedantic, it’s worse. Following a response above, one is a mental disorder that can be lived with, whereas the other is taking action, actually sexually assaulting children
The age puberty starts has been dropping and it now occurs earlier than ever in recorded history
But I imagine this fact actually appeals to conservatives and republicans
The child bride party strikes again
"Raping 12 year olds is OK"
It's a translation
"If there's grass on the field, play ball!" -Megyn Kelly
I would bet good money that she banged a guy in his 30s when she was 15 and she is REALLY invested in maintaining the personal illusion that she wasn't victimized.
In the next episode she will argue that domestic volence against women is a love language
"...and therefore marital rape cannot exist." Didn't Trump's lawyers try to use that argument in his divorce case with Ivanka?
Fucking what case with Ivanka?
A distinction without a difference is a type of logical fallacy where an author or speaker attempts to describe a distinction between two things where no discernible difference exists.[1] It is particularly used when a word or phrase has connotations associated with it that one party to an argument prefers to avoid.
For example, a person might say "I did not lie; I merely stretched the truth a little bit."[2]
So you think the legal punishment for an adult having sex with a 5 year old should be the equivalent to them having sex with a 15 year old? There's no difference?
Luckily, the laws in all states disagree with you.
My point is that there is a difference which is important. People are acting like the two are somehow the same.
People do the same with rape, acting like all rape is equally bad. When clearly having sex with your drunk wife is not as bad as abducting and violently restraining a stranger to rape them.
All rape is bad, and that includes all sex with minors. But there are certainly still distinctions to be made.
In the context of Trump et al doing rape, I don't think the distinction presented by Kelly really matters. Any amount of sexual assault and abuse is too much.
In what way does it matter here? Is some amount of trump rape acceptable? Is it beneficial to anyone other than trump et Al to split this hair?
It's like what critters are or aren't "bugs"
Entomologists usually limit it to Hemiptera, or even a more specific sub-order, while colloquially it just means any terrestrial arthropod
Ants, bees, beetles, and butterflies technically aren't "Bugs", but they're still bugs.
Adults who fantasize about or engage in sex acts with minors above the age of 13 technically aren't "Pedophiles", but they're still pedophiles.
Bugs, that is.
Yes there are technically differing types of people who rape kids but the distinctions are really only relevant to the people treating these child rapists, who need proper terms for diagnosis and treatment, and the community of child rapists themselves.
jeeeeeesus
Megyn Kelly is an idiot.
She knows exactly what she's doing
These people are pathetic.
Should have listened to Gianmarco Soresi
Okay, so if or when Megan’s daughter Yardly hits puberty (she’s 14), she’s fair game for men? That’s not pedophilia? That isn’t statutory rape? Really???? And with more and more girls having their first period as early as 9, that wouldn’t be pedophilia to pursue and have sex with them? What a piece of shit for a woman and mother.
nah, but she's pro raping children
To stay on Team Republican, all you gotta do is be ok with old guys fucking your kids!
I'm not so sure. Have you seen how he eats/lives?
She must hang out on Reddit, cuz this sounds like a Reddit comment.
Ignore her. She’s reaching for attention. Her career is collapsing.
You do know who the controlling share holder of this company is? They do not care. It’s all a plus for them.
This is where we’re at now?
Weeeeelllllll technically, that would make them ephebophiles. (Kelly is grabbing on to what ever she can to deflect). Medically, people sexually attracted to early to later teens. As far as what we know right now, there are no pedophiles, (pre-pubescent attraction) on the list. Though there might be a possibility. We just don't know yet.
In any case, rape most foul it most certainly was. And all of them need to be prosecuted and jailed for it. While being sued for every penny they have in civil court.
There's a comedian bit about how pointing out that technically ephebophiles are different from pedophiles actually makes you look like a pedo.
It's crazy this woman is literally acting out a bit:
This one came to my mind instantly as well...
Kill ALL Pedophiles! Kill MOST Pedophiles! Pedophiles are People TOO! If the Field has grass PLAY BALL!
-LITERALLY 100% of Republicans!
Ah, so the human trafficking, sex monster that fucked children was not a full "pedophile".... yeah would not want to mislabel the child fucker as a pedophile....
What in the hormone filled milk is this medieval era statement trying to say?
Thus reinforcing the idea that Republicans are as pro pedophilia as they are pro child labor.
Pro-Chid Exploitation in every manner that your personal wealth and power allows.
+1 for the woodchipper!
If, at any point in your life, any part of your stance involves the language “technically not a pedophile,” for any fucking reason, you’re entirely on the wrong side of the situation.
12 year olds having sex with 12 year olds.
And if they say no, also don't have sex with majors.
Never expected anything else from the Grotty Old Pedo party.
I am not going to ask WTF is wrong with Megyn, because she sank well beyond the fuck nut level.
she sank well beyond the fuck nut level
Like Trump on his knees?
I got banned from reddit for commenting "woodchipper" on this article next to posts openly supporting violence against young girls. Pretty cool platform to be thrown out of.
This was the very first thing I thought of when I saw the headline. I literally thought to myself “oh so she sounds like a pedophile.”
I mean, technically correct?
People use the term wrong, but people who are ruled by emotion and not facts hate to think things through rationally. Which is the majority of everyone.
"This is why kids shouldn't be dressing like that these days!"
I disagree. Look in the dictionary, or a few dictionaries, and you will see that there are multiple definitions, one of which matches common usage.
This happens all the time with language. Sorry, but you gotta keep an eye on how words evolve!
Technically correct, but media never uses it that way. People generally do not differentiate the two
The fact she is making this distinction, which she has never made before for anyone, tells me she's priming her audience to be okay with rich and powerful men raping underage women
Ding ding ding And this may or may not be her own opinion as well, but right now she's -as per usual- parroting exactly what she's been told, what's she's been paid to say
She's ex fox news, lying for money is her only real skill
The term as used might not be consistent with a specific definition, but I'm pretty sure this wasn't about "technically, that isn't the correct term to denounce his sexual abuse of minors with" so much as shifting the goalposts for what counts as sexual abuse of minors in the first place. It's a shorthand, and both parties agree what it's short for, it's just that they draw the lines for that thing differently.
So no, it's not that people "hate to think things through rationally", because rationally thinking things through makes it clear that the context isn't a scientific one, but a moral and legal one. It's not wrong, you're just emotionally attached to a specific meaning.
I'd add that pedophilia could be the genera and ephebophile the species.
Or whatever the corresponding trinomial nomenclature is.
A teenager is still a kid. Legally, ethically, morally.
She's not having a discussion about semantics.
Yup it's true. He was a rapist and ephebophile.
could be both, we don't know the extent of his depravity.
I'm a scale between trump and Netanyahu, how much you love children
I remember a description of a photo from Epstein’s house where there was an unclothed toddler in the background and barely dressed tweens in the foreground. The 15 year olds are not ok, but it wasn’t just them.
Wow, but somehow they can't conceive the notion that people who have cooters or dicks don't have to be dudes or gals? ???
Don't you love religion
Regardless of whether or not he was a pedophile, we should not be using that medical term the way we do. Most pedophiles don't molest children. Most child molesters aren't pedophiles. Sexual assault isn't about sexual attraction and being sexually attracted to someone doesn't make you a predator.
Eh. Mostly right. Given that pedophilia is, by definition, sexual attraction to prepubescent children, and given that any sexual contact with a prepubescent child is sexual assault, a pedophile sexually assaulting a child is probably about sexual attraction. But not necessarily.
But yeah, most child molesters aren't pedophiles per se, but are assaulting children because they're vulnerable. I don't think that we can make any absolute claims about most pedos not assaulting children, simply because we don't have a good grasp on how many people are pedos. I've heard that up to 25% of men (!!!) might have some level of sexual attraction to children, which is disturbing as fuck. (And no, I couldn't give you a citation for that, I'm sorry. Just a weird claim that stuck in my head.)
Hey, Megyn... you're a stupid, rotten cunt!
This reminded me of: "Hey Linda, you're a bitch." IYKYK 😆
Soulless. Where’s her trashbag dress?
She would sale her own children to be sex slaves if it meant she got some attention.
I think because this person has a reach themselves. I haven't followed lately, but she was even hired on "liberal" TV news networks for a while, after coming from Fox News. Makes no sense to me, but apparently people will listen to anyone shoved in front of their faces. They probably think they're being fair, when in reality they're super ignorant and don't ask questions.
kelly argues that a subtype of pedophilia is not pedophilia
sure, but that doesn't mean it wasn't child sexual exploitation and abuse
so… if they releases the files and we know who will be there… you know what will be the excuse…
If we're being technical, it may not be pedophilia, but it's still morally wrong and these people still should be arrested
I asked AI when girls go through puberty. It gave me back: "In 2025, American girls will typically go through puberty between the ages of 8 and 13, with the average age for the start of puberty being around 8 to 10 and the first period occurring around age 11.9."
So I am confused, is sex ok at 8 in the US now according to republicans, or do men have to wait till they are 12 years old to be safe?
Heres a pic of an 8 year old kid, for reference: https://www.123rf.com/...
Ozempic
Lemme just hate on a woman because of her appearance real quick, nvm her active child-rape apologia
You doing okay bro?
I just think the looks-obsessed MAGAts with their Mar-a-Lago face, hair extensions, barbies everywhere are all overdosing on Ozempic to look slim and it has this odd effect on the face. John Donald Bowman is hitting the spike a lot now, even Bibi is claiming a beach body with his overuse of it.
It’s just weird and kind of creepy in that yet another prophecy of Gilliam’s Brazil is met.
Yeah she’s a proud fascist too but everybody else seemed to have that covered.
The Mar-a-Lago face is a uniquely Trumpian aesthetic, but it’s not exactly like the chief worm himself is taking efforts to also be healthy, let alone exude a vision of beauty. It’s performative for The Boss alone, because that’s the twisted vision of female beauty that Trump wants to look at whilst he eats himself into Holden Bloodfeast’s sluglike form.
But the hypocrisy and narcissism of these people quietly abusing GLP-1s is a new data point on a long trend line of image-obsessed fash. Publicly defending a child sex trafficker is a wild new escalation, especially for a party that robes itself in ‘family values’ and ‘god fearing’ politics.
That has nothing to do with anything.
Au contraire. It’s something to do with something.
What does that have to do with anything?
The point about puberty meaning a girl is "mature enough for sex".
Menstruation isn't a sign of sexual maturity.
Being pregnant as a teen is a serious health complication.
I feel like the argument they were making was that if the girl has went through puberty (started menstration) she's old enough and it doesn't count as a child anymore.
I was pointing out that this process occurs at age 11-12 for most girls.
Girls.
Menstruation or puberty is an irrelevant factor.
Honestly I think age of consent should be set to 20. With exceptions made for a 2 year age difference.
We don't let people buy alcohol until 21. Don't you think making a baby is a bigger responsibility than having a drink ?
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
go to feed...
She should not be able to walk down the street without constant reminder of making this statement about victims of sex trafficking. Absolute monster of a person.
save