Debate user "More AWS-8Q Than You" about whether banging a 17-year-old makes you a pedophile

The Last Stand said:
Why is it different when women date younger men but when men date younger women, it's a concern?
Click to expand...
It's not different.

Emmanuel Macron is married to his former schoolteacher, who he first met when he was 15 and she was 39.

Translated from a French article
...the parents of Emmanuel Macron, at the time aged 16, were against this relationship that they imagined harmful for their son. The two doctors then decided to take him away from Amiens and send him to finish his schooling in Paris.
Click to expand...
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Justa Grata Honoria, not william stenchever, Toji Suzuhara and 4 others
Apologies for the doublepost

You wrote the following 2 years ago,
More AWS-8Q Than You said:
I'm sure no relatively attractive woman teacher has ever had any motivation for letting a 16 year old fuck her than just straight up pedophilia. She's just that into kids or whatever. No nuance or other psychological motivations.
Click to expand...
More AWS-8Q Than You said:
No shit, you don't say. I'm sure that's their entire internal psychological motivation. "I'm a pedophile, better get a 16 year old to bust a nut in and/or on me." Because that's how actual people think. No other reason.

To cut through the Autism here, I'm not saying that they're not pedos, I'm talking about their psychological motivations and justifications. I know at a certain level of autism nuance is hard, but I'm pretty sure most pedos will attempt to justify their actions with something other than "I just like to fuck kids, lol."
Click to expand...

Do you still think female teachers having sex with 16-year-olds is pedophilia? If not, what would you call it now?

More AWS-8Q Than You said:
Sure, but doesn't make it pedophilia. For the autists, I'm not approving of McCarthy's behavior, if this is even true, I am disapproving of equating someone fucking a 17 year old with Raping Prepubescent Children. Just because a good chunk of the Millennial generation is incapable of "Adulting," that doesn't actually make you children. If they did bang, that makes it creepy and maybe makes him a groomer, that's not the same thing as Pedophilia. Words have meanings, don't be fucking progtards and Motte and Bailey yourselves.
Click to expand...
Is the cut-off point for calling someone a pedophile whether or not their victim is undergoing puberty?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Toji Suzuhara and UERISIMILITUDO
My 100% correct take is that the same thread getting made in mass debates over and over only proves that everyone likes to think about 17 year old girls having seccs, when they argue about it over and over again they get to think about 17 year old girls having seccs

Billions must die
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Feels
  • DRINK!
Reactions: DOUBLE_WHEEL, Rimanah, Nigger Cobson and 10 others
Syzyg said:
Apologies for the doublepost

You wrote the following 2 years ago,



Do you still think female teachers having sex with 16-year-olds is pedophilia? If not, what would you call it now?
Click to expand...
That was two years ago, but looking at the context, I'm pretty sure there was sarcasm involved in those posts.

Syzyg said:
Is the cut-off point for calling someone a pedophile whether or not their victim is undergoing puberty?
Click to expand...
There's going to be fuzziness around the edges, but yes, Pedophilia is definitionally a paraphilia that is about having sex with prepubescent children. Actual pedophiles will always and specifically target children, typically as many as they can get away with, and if caught and put in prison, when released will always reoffend or seek to. If you want to see actual Pedophilia, go read Moira Greyland's book. Famous Sci-Fi writers for parents, it's bad shit. I know everyone likes lumping everything together, but with the recent progtard push to trans out kids and the whole Frontal Lobe discourse and the like, I don't think this is the time to muddy the waters.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
Reactions: Toji Suzuhara, UERISIMILITUDO and Tablet County
draggs said:
My 100% correct take is that the same thread getting made in mass debates over and over only proves that everyone likes to think about 17 year old girls having seccs, when they argue about it over and over again they get to think about 17 year old girls having seccs
Click to expand...
The real correct and truthfully honest take is that everybody loves to mass debate paedophiles.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: draggs
Tablet County said:
If you want to get pedantic... though I know most everybody bundles hebephilia and ephebophilia into pedophilia even if it isn't technically correct. Even I do it.
Click to expand...
All three categories share one thing in common:

All three are attracted to minors and are so because they seek a partner that’s easy to manipulate.

A 20 year old is barely distinguishable from a 17 year old, physically. Mentally, a 20 year old is more likely to be significantly more street smart than their 17 year old counterpart.

Thats why it’s very telling that anyone who is over 24 years old, and is still hanging out at the public school to pick up chicks isn’t someone to be associated with. There’s a good reason they’re not dating within their age group, and it isn’t because people in their age group are a bunch of shrill harpies.

In the case of “hebephiles” and “ephebophiles”, they almost always are man children with severe cases of arrested development. They’re almost always trying to compensate for not getting any dates in their high school years by targeting minors.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: fake farts, lego racers, Justa Grata Honoria and 7 others
Inco G. Nito said:
Can we stop pretending that someone who's willing to fuck a 17 year old (as morally dubious as that is) is automatically going to rape toddlers. You're eroding the total moral repugnancy of the term 'pedophile'. Teenagers aren't smart or qualified to be able to consent but they are nowhere near as inherently helpless physically and intellectually as children, and the psyche of the offender is fully aware of that. Some sleezeball going after barely underaged girls is a far cry from a child rapist.

And no. This isn't me saying it's okay to have sex with teenagers
Click to expand...
It's always very sus to see people act like there's no difference between a person boning someone a day away from their 18th birthday and raping a baby a day after it's born. It's like littering and genocide, both are crimes but of incomparable weight.

More AWS-8Q Than You said:
Generally speaking, yes. I'm not supporting a 40 year old banging a teenager here, I'm ranting about people equating it with Raping Prepubescent Children because it dilutes the meaning of the word. And I've had to endure women going about "Well, the frontal lobe doesn't finish developing until 25, and that's like pedophilia." I don't like the term being stretched because it feels like it could be used by progressives to eventually justify Raping Children.
Click to expand...
Why do you keep capitalizing it like an edgy band name :story:
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Justa Grata Honoria, UERISIMILITUDO and Cnidarian
Kiwisee said:
A 20 year old is barely distinguishable from a 17 year old, physically. Mentally, a 20 year old is more likely to be significantly more street smart than their 17 year old counterpart.

Thats why it’s very telling that anyone who is over 24 years old, and is still hanging out at the public school to pick up chicks isn’t someone to be associated with. There’s a good reason they’re not dating within their age group, and it isn’t because people in their age group are a bunch of shrill harpies.
Click to expand...
Your example is based on a man-made phenomenon. You tightened the scope of this argument to a very, very specific purview where high school ends and college (or whatever) begins. If the average age of a high school graduate was extended to 20 and college was most commonly began at 22 then that would be your totally subjective metric; you would be insisting "well mentally a 22 year old is much more street-smart than a 20 year old."
 
  • Agree
Reactions: UERISIMILITUDO
More AWS-8Q Than You said:
"Well, the frontal lobe doesn't finish developing until 25, and that's like pedophilia."
Click to expand...

A good response to that is to say "So maybe they shouldn't be allowed to vote then".

Also, words matter. Don't do the neoliberal thing where you change the definitions of words to make things you don't like or agree with sound worse. Pedophiles are attracted to prepubescent children. That means your brain is miswired and you're fucking sick in the head. We have a special word for it specifically to separate out that mental sickness.

A 30 year old fucking a 17 year old is weird/creepy and they should know better, but it's not even in the same ballpark. If you're using the same word to describe sexual attraction to toddlers as sexual attraction to a fully developed female, then you're the one being retarded. Words have meanings. We're still allowed to call it weird and socially unacceptable or whatever. But it's not remotely pedophilia, don't water that word down.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: UERISIMILITUDO and More AWS-8Q Than You
LilyoftheDesert said:
All interactions are inherently manipulative, if you want to inflate the meaning of this word which carries only negative connotations to that degree.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's a valid response to the following
Kiwisee said:
All three are attracted to minors and are so because they seek a partner that’s easy to manipulate.
Click to expand...

Isn't grooming a form of manipulation? Is it not feasible to deduce that by easy to manipulate, they mean easier to groom?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: UERISIMILITUDO
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back