Yet here are the Americans calling the kettle black
Edit: Americans. Being sjws doesn’t make amends for the atrocities you committed against my people. And we (including us natives that you despise) can see right through your hypocrisy and bullshit
it’s not about liking it. It brings nothing to the conversation. The type of people who don’t like this picture of Jerry Seinfeld also don’t like guns in America. It’s not that complex of a thing to think about.
Plus plenty of us Americans mock that stuff too. In the state I live in, a man was killed by people loving guns like this because he was black while jogging. At the time, I was living in a city called White, GA. Down the street was a lumberyard that flew Confederate and Trump flags. I’m a person who since I was young loved exploring places in woods etc, but I’m rather terrified to do it in this day and area, especially with my skin color. A lot of us are trapped by circumstances here, so that comment felt more like a
“You complain about America, yet you live there. Curious.” type of comment.
IMO this is a nothingburger that only a small vocal minority of generally unpopular opinioned people are pushing, I would bet money nothing is going to happen.
I have not seen any concrete evidence that would lead me to think so negatively of him like these comments I’m reading would suggest. We have a difference of opinion but I don’t think that justifies calling someone a pedophile for dating a mutually consenting adult.
Also:
According to People in March 1994, sources told the magazine that Lonstein Gruss’ family approved of the match
Seinfeld met her when she was a 17 in a public place and got her number. She was a minor. She wasn’t an adult. Say what you want about being “canceled” or whatever nonsense you want to say to frame it, but that is the very definition of grooming. Are you okay with the grooming of minors?
Not trying to defend him. But sexual self-determination of 17 or 18 year old girls is a strange topic. Usually most people, especially the girls themselves are all for it. We generally are too. Unless it is our own daughter, a sister, a god-daughter or someone like that. Than we do not want them to actually exert this right. And we do love to use love affairs of couples like this as ammunition if we want to discredit someone, don’t we?
No. We want them to have healthy relationships. Being groomed is not healthy. It’s also nearly impossible to have that kind of an age difference without grooming being involved. This is why we have Romeo and Juliet laws to set boundaries for teenagers.
When I was a teen I would have been “all for it” with adult women. But maybe adults should not groom children regardless of that. The power dynamic is gross.
It’s the position of power that might play a role, so as a rule, if you might be in position of power (boss, gov authority figure, or just older), make really really sure everything is out in the open and talked about. It’s a necessary topic to understand consent.
Absolutely. It is really not ok for someone in a position of power over a another person to leverage that power for personal gain. The age and gender of the “victim” only plays a minir role in that scenario, however.
Also: Was Seinfeld in a position of power over her?
The girls themselves are mostly “all for it” when it’s people roughly their age. There are exceptions but most girls that age see 30+ year olds as lame old dudes. Most 30+ year olds aren’t going after high school girls either. That’s why we all cringed at David Woodson’s line in “Dazed and Confused”.
The people who don’t want them to “exert this right” are the responsible parents, friends and community who know that a 30+ year old dating a teenager is creepy AF.
The few people who actually support this are mostly rationalizing.
What about an 18 year old and someone who is 30 doing consensual sexual activities together? They are both adults according to law. I am legitimately interested in people’s thoughts here. 30 seems to be the most common example, for instance.
There’s not much to discuss. The vast majority of the time it’s creepy grooming and we all know it. It’s technically legal and there may be cases when it’s genuinely a case of consent and mutual attraction but those are the exceptions.
Attempts to find the exact line are futile. “Half your age plus seven” is a rule of thumb, not a clear border.
I mostly want to have these discussions because there has been such pushback from the right in the areas of relationship equality, marriage, age of consent, etc. I want us to be able to look at people who have been convinced and really be able to say, “Well no, because of this reason.” Maybe I’m wrong, though I do feel there’s some merit to making things clear for those who don’t see it in the same light.
There is no single reason. It’s the sum of many reasons. They’re too many to list exhaustively but when we see a concrete example the vast majority of people come to the same conclusion on creepy vs appropriate.
When there isn’t a clear line, trying to define one is misleading. You can always find some couple somewhere on earth with an arbitrarily large age gap where people will agree that it’s the result of informed consent. People then try to make the argument that this justifies all relationships with that age gap even though most relationships don’t have whatever extenuating circumstances made the one example palatable.
Large age gaps are creepy. Whenever someone has to ask if a particular age gap is also creepy the answer is almost always, “Yes.”
I’ve been the young party and the old party, same age gap (massive), it’s fine and fun and people are just weird. Sex is somehow treated like this horrific thing but also totally no big deal in fact here’s my Funko POP! dildo collection, people are so very weird.
I guess each person is different. I have zero sexual interest for women under (at very least) 25 (i am slightly older than him at the time they meet)
Even if they look older than they are, i still have no interest because there is too much different life experience and expectations. I just don’t click (as a friend let alone as lover or partner).
Why 18 and not 17 or 25? Well society decided this is a (imo conservative, could have been higher) threshold for old people to have sex with young people.
Also 17 year old people can totally have sex with people of similar age (and we all have done 🙂) so it is not really about sexual self determination but rather avoiding predatory/manipolative behaviors of (much) older partners/lovers
Some societies did. Retardistan is notn “The Society”. Retardistan also decided that you can volunteer to go to war and get killed for your country and that at the same time you are not old enough to have a beer. Maybe Retardistan is not the measure of all things.
In Germany, while it never is ok for a person in a position of power to abuse this power, regardless of age or sexes, the age of consent is generally 14, 16 at the latest. Not everybody is happy with that of course, but maybe one should be a little more open to see more colors than black and white.
Regarding Seinfeld: Was he actually in a position of power over this girl? How so?
What Germany has to do with this? What war has to do with this?
If you weren’t a trustworthy internet stranger i would make conjectures that this is a topic that hits you personally and you live in Germany. And you are talking about yourself here.
But good you are a trustworthy internet stranger that totally would not look in all possible provisions and exceptions for justifying their actions
I personally am not interested in women that are more than 5 or 6 years my senior or junior. But I don’t judge. Why did I bring up the army, you ask? Only as an example of 'muricans deciding what’s age-appropriate. Joining the army and going to war? 17 year olds will do. Having a beer and shagging the neighbour? NO! That’s immoral if you are not at least 21 and/or about the same age as the neighbour! Driving a SUV that has hundreds of horse powers and weighs multiple tons? 16! It just doesn’t make any sense. So maybe turn at least down the judgyness a nudge. So Seinfeld had a fling with a consenting adult. So what? Judge him for being the most overrated and unfunny comedian ever, not for this. But as a German, who am I to judge humor. I am sure some people even appreciate his “humor”.
'Muricans and their opinions about age are really, really strange and shouöd not be a point of reference for anybody.
I’m 46. The women in MILF porn feel too young for me sometimes. Really. I want to see women around my age in porn more. That’s who I’ve always been most attracted to- women approximately the same age as me.
I get crucified every which way possible any time I bring up the fact that they didn’t start dating until she was 18.
Instead of moving the goalposts like “well it’s still grooming and/or fucked up somehow”, or “not all brains are fully developed at 18” or “he’s subjectively too old” or whatever, be mad at the law and try to change it if you really disagree so much. Best of luck getting anywhere with that though, I don’t think it’s a popular opinion.
I dont like jerry seinfeld at all but implying that he is a pedo is completely unsubstantiated. I think the scandals here are gross but everyone is clearly above the age of consent.
It’s still fucking gross. He was almost 40 and dating someone far less mature, rich, powerful, and famous than he was. A young person doesn’t magically grow up the day they turn the age of consent in their home state.
I remember we had a coworker (in his late 20s or early 30s) gushing on how he celebrated his gfs 18th birthday. Then we all started doing the math when earlier he had mentioned they had been together for 2 years.
The New York Penal Law Sections 130.25, 130.30 and 130.35, define statutory rape. This crime is defined as having consensual sex with a minor that is under the age of 17 years old.
Jerry Seinfeld and his family were in Caliber 3. During their visit to Israel last week, they came to us for a special and exciting activity with displays of combat, Krav Maga, assault dogs and lots of Zionism. It was great.”
He went to a church where the pastor said some stuff others don’t like and people expected him to attack the pastor using their values.
I saw this post the other day and laughed a bit about how often I see people who don’t realize that this is them. They tie themselves up trying justify why it’s okay because their values are TRUE while others are only true
But because he didn’t do what they wanted him to do then he’s now a huge piece of shit with Spiked up hair, button up shirt, open all the way, sunglasses doing Jaegar Bombs all fucking night,
Which are what? That his need to only date Jewish women even when only they’re 17 is not amusing? Are you Jewish? Because if you aren’t, maybe you wouldn’t understand why that’s funny.
For one I think many of your takes are just subjective opinions that others often disagree with, but they seem to be said as if they are somehow concrete facts that others can’t or shouldn’t disagree with, but not everything is always so black and white. And I feel like a lot of your responses are strawman arguments and just unnecessarily negative and condescending. It makes this not a fun place to be IMO.
See this is exactly what I’m talking about, the deflection and ad hominem. We should attack the position, not the person.
I believe my opinions to be based in fact
It’s one thing to believe it, but it’s another to provide credible sources when trying to speak authoritatively. The burden of proof is always on the person making the empirically unfalsifiable claims. I feel like you generally don’t do that.
You are free to block me
Yes, but you are also an omnipresent moderator of several communities and that can make things difficult. I would prefer mods to set a better example. You may not agree with me, but that continues to be my wish.
No one said you can’t block moderators and if you have a problem with my moderation, please do report me to Lemmy.world admin.
Do you think maybe I wouldn’t be moderating several communities if I were the problem you think I am? Do you think I forced World News or Lemmy Shitpost to make me a moderator? I didn’t even ask.
You could also use the willpower I assume you have to ignore me. I can’t make you read my comments and I certainly can’t make you reply to them. No one else seemed to have a problem with my Jewish humor.
I don’t think I would have deleted either my posts or theirs. As much as they would like you to think that I’m the most selfish, unfair moderator on Lemmy, I’m a lot more lenient than they suggest.
I think many of your takes are just subjective opinions that others often disagree with, but they seem to be said as if they are somehow concrete facts
There’s an argument that 18 is still not responsible.
There’s an argument that a 25 year old and a 38 year old still isn’t right.
At the end of the day I think now that the woman is 48 years old she is the one who should say whether or not the relationship was acceptable. She’s been married, divorced and had three children. I don’t think anyone could be more qualified to weigh in than her.
“Jerry Seinfeld and Shoshanna Lonstein Gruss claimed they were “just friends” in the beginning of their relationship and only went public when she turned 18…”
“…Shoshanna is a person, not an age. She is extremely bright. She’s funny, sharp, very alert. We just get along. You can hear the click.”
Yeah I remember first hearing about it after watching Seinfeld (the show) a few years back and thought it must be some overreaction for a bad joke or something, then I heard the recording and well, definitely not an overreaction
To me, it emphasizes the fact that she’s a schoolkid, and it’s like he’s playing “got your nose”. If they were both adults, it would be a cute, silly moment, but…
A 38 year old dating a high schooler? Yeah, I think that’s gross. I don’t care who approved of it. By the same token. nobody needs to agree with me, either.
Yes. How difficult is that to understand for you? The age of consent isn’t some magical day where a person suddenly matures and is capable of making all of the right decisions.
He was 38, fabulously wealthy, and incredibly famous. She was a 17-year old schoolgirl. THAT’S. FUCKING. GROSS!
The fact that her family were just like “a rich, aging celebrity?!? Of course you can predate on and fuck my 17 year old daughter”, that says awful things about her parents.
Good. It’s what he deserves. I was 9 or 10 when that happened and I remember thinking it was so gross and being confused why people were just like…cool with it? I’m glad people are calling him out now - better late than never, I guess.
I’m not saying it’s normal. I’m saying it was normalized in the past, and thankfully that attitude is changing now and we can see how gross it always was.
Yes, Nugent is a fucking pedophile. He absolutely isn’t alone in the world of rock in that, though.
They really do. My own father married a 17 year old when he was 26 (years before he met my mom), and I spent a long time trying to justify it to myself with the fact that a lot of people did that kind of thing in the 70s. It wasn’t until I was an adult that I was finally able to process my feelings about him as a human separate from my feelings about him as a father and just admit that was disgusting. He actually said her parents should’ve had him thrown in jail, but she was already a huge asshole (and still is) and they probably saw an opportunity to pawn her off on someone else. I’m not surprised she was a nightmare with everyone around her totally failing her, though.
I know this won’t be popular, but it’s for a few reasons:
It wasn’t and isn’t illegal.
Most people would look at her and see a hot woman and understand it.
This whole puritanical BS that if you are over 18 and find someone under 18 attractive, that makes you a pedophile, is a modern a theme. Back then people were free to admit that they found young women attractive without being labelled by so many to have a mental disorder.
I speak strongly about this because I think we are doing great damage to mental health to repeatedly claim it’s a mental disorder to have a completely normal and common biological attraction.
But don’t get me wrong, I 100% support protecting minors from predators. I agree these laws should exist, I just wish people would stop pretending that there is something wrong with the attraction itself.
You’re telling on yourself quite a bit here. Your mental health doesn’t have to suffer if you find a “biologically mature” woman attractive but after a certain age if you’re seeing a “hot woman” and not “a young girl” there definitely is some deviation from the norm.
We’re talking about sexual attraction to children that don’t know how to file their taxes and are just learning what it means to be an adult. If your sexual attraction to someone is purely physical and not affected by your rational mind telling you that they’re a kid then there really is a bit of a disconnect there.
Maybe you’re closer in age to them than I am, there’s certainly a range of “adult ages” where people are still developing mentally, but when you’re old enough that you’re finding a woman SEXUALLY attractive who is the age of your daughter or your friends’ daughters that’s a red flag and worth some introspection.
We’re talking about sexual attraction to children that don’t know how to file their taxes
Motherfucker are you in the IRS or why the hell do you think a boner is somehow related to following processes? “Oh god, yeah baby file that W2, I’m so hard right now” gtfo outta here with your weird ass fetish, what a fucking shit show.
I’m perfectly comfortable with who I am attracted to. Don’t worry about my mental health. There is no telling on myself, I’m 100% open about it.
I just recognize that this is the same BS trauma that we’ve been inflicting on gay people by telling them that their perfectly normal and natural attraction is some kind of mental issue. Just like how I see through when someone claims gay people have a mental problem, I see through the implications that men being attracted to young women is indicative of some kind of mental issue.
but after a certain age if you’re seeing a “hot woman” and not “a young girl” there definitely is some deviation from the norm.
We are talking about a young woman in her prime reproductive years. Objectively speaking, evolutionarily, it would make sense that men are attracted to this. In fact, I would argue that if you don’t find them physically attractive, you are the one deviating from the norm. Now to be clear, don’t confuse what I’m saying with emotional and intellectual attractiveness.
We’re talking about sexual attraction to children
No we’re not, we’re talking about being attracted to women in their prime reproductive years. They are young and likely immature and we should have laws that protect them, but let’s not conflate that with the physical attraction being a mental illness.
I’m probably as old or older than you. I’ve talked to people in their 40s who I find completely emotionally immature and intellectually unattractive, and I’ve talked to teenagers whom I’ve found to be mature and the conversation to be intellectually stimulating. Although the latter is few and far between, and getting further apart as I age.
Would I want to have a relationship with them? No. Would I want to have sex with them? Sure.
I’m literally defending my position, you and the other poster are just attacking my character.
It’s fine, I get it. It’s some of the same exact pushback I saw when I was arguing in favor of rights for homosexuals back during the rise of their widespread acceptance.
You’re making the same arguments and even appealing to the same historic causes as pedophilia-acceptance advocates do.
This is an empty ad hominem that I don’t care about. I’m not arguing that pedophilia is normal, I’m pointing out that being attracted to young women is not pedophilia and should stop being labelled as such.
Don’t try to make your desire to have sex with teens a civil rights issue, it cheapens everything that LGBTQ+ people have suffered and fought for.
I view it as quite the opposite: by labelling a perfectly normal attraction as a mental disorder, you’re guilty of the same puritanical nonsense that we have fought against for the past few decades.
I’m really not trying to engage here but if you’re appealing to what makes biological sense then killing your sexual rivals and responding violently to aggression or stress are also perfectly normal and should be allowed by your reasoning.
You’re jumping through a lot of hoops to justify sexual relationships between people of vast maturity level and power imbalances.
The defining feature of human civilization is that we move beyond biological impulses
I’ve been very clear and explicit that I believe the laws should exist. And yet you’re still arguing that I’m saying that because it’s natural, it should still be legal.
Sorry, but it’s clear you aren’t arguing in good faith or you’ve completely shut yourself down and are not open to reason, so I’ll bow out.
Point is we treat those psychological violent urges and don’t brush them off as natural. We teach people how to cope with them. We don’t spend an awful lot of time justifying those impulses.
Dude you can’t reason with these people. They are repressed sickos that want to make their viewpoint seem normal. It’s like some vegans who pretend that meat isn’t delicious. It’s all the same authoritarian shit. Eroticism makes them uncomfortable so they want to outlaw it. The ironic part is that if these neopuritans ever have kids their kids will grow up kinky AF.
One of the hottest times I had before I was 21 was a woman in her early 50s seducing me. I imagine there neopuritans would attempt to explain away my agency or frame me as a victim and shit. It’s tragic when you consider where these neopuritans are headed.
We are talking about a young woman in her prime reproductive years. Objectively speaking, evolutionarily, it would make sense that men are attracted to this. In fact, I would argue that if you don’t find them physically attractive, you are the one deviating from the norm.
girls enter puberty so much earlier than boys, their capable of reproduction anywhere from 10-12. When you talk about “prime reproductive years,” know that it includes girls as young as 10. So… stop using that term. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt and inferring that you actually mean girls that are on the very cusp of womanhood, like, ages 17-19, but others may not.
Women are hot, girls are not. Some girls can appear to be older than they are, and it’s confusing when confronted with a genuinely attractive woman that is not yet 18, because we’re caught between the confusing notions of “I am attracted to this person” and “this person is not yet old enough to to be engaged with in a socially conscious manner.” It’s not wrong to find the person attractive, it IS wrong to engage with them in a manner reserved for those that are fully realized adults. For my purposes, I’m putting adulthood at around age 22-25, when your brain is pretty much fully developed.
So with that being said, No, Jerry Seinfeld didn’t do a bad thing by thinking a 17 year old girl attractive, he DID do a bad thing by engaging with her as if she was a fully formed adult.
When you talk about “prime reproductive years,” know that it includes girls as young as 10.
Prime reproductive years for women is generally late teens to late 20s. I’ll keep using the term because I’m using it accurately, and it’s exactly the whole point: biologically speaking why would it be surprising that some men would find a women who is prime for reproduction attractive? It just makes perfect sense.
it’s confusing when confronted with a genuinely attractive woman that is not yet 18,
It’s only confusing to you because you’ve bought into the puritanical notion that there is something wrong with being attracted to young women; there’s really nothing confusing about it: it’s reasonable to find them physically attractive, but almost certainly inappropriate to engage in a relationship with them. This is the misconception I’m trying to dispell here.
I agree that at best he did a questionable thing. However I know nothing of her maturity at the time. As I’ve said elsewhere, I’ve met emotionally and intellectually immature 40 year olds (certainly plenty in their late 20s) and intellectually stimulating and mature 16 year olds. If it’s legal, and she was mature, why would it be wrong? And would it be wrong if I had sex with “a fully formed adult” when she is emotionally immature? I get we need a rule to catch the vast majority of the cases, but from a moral stand point I can’t say why it would be okay to have sex with an emotional immature adult, but not okay to have sex with an emotionally mature adult just because the latter is younger than the former.
Again, don’t get me wrong, the vast majority of the time there is some taking advantage going on, and there should be laws to stop it. I’m not arguing against this.
If it’s legal, and she was mature, why would it be wrong
Well a thing being legal does not make a thing right. Emotional maturity is subjective, and thus is not what we use for determining whether a person is considered an adult or not.
would it be wrong if I had sex with “a fully formed adult” when she is emotionally immature?
Maturity isn’t the guiding rod by which we can determine adulthood. I’m suggesting that age is relevant to this, because it’s the best we have at determining brain formation. Intellectual disabilities in an adult would mean that engaging with them sexually is wrong, showing that it is the functionality of the brain that determines adulthood. If there was never a need for a draft, I think we would naturally have concluded adulthood starts around 22-25, instead of the arbitrary designation of 18. For the purpose of having a hard rule to stop children from being taken advantage of, age is the best we have (for people without intellectual/developmental disabilities).
With that in mind, we really can say definitively, that no, Seinfeld isn’t wrong for finding her attractive, but he was for having a sexual relationship with her.
That being said, arguing that the urges behind the wrong act are “natural,” seems to argue for a relaxation of our attitude towards these relationships, which is also wrong. which is why other Lemmineers got the “ick” from your previous comment.
Because nobody is upset that he found her attractive. We’re upset because he was a fully formed adult, with super-stardom and all the trappings of power that come with it, engaging in a sexual relationship with a not fully formed adult.
Because nobody is upset that he found her attractive.
You should absolutely read the rest of this thread because someone outright said that I deviate from the norm by finding some of them attractive, and even tried to equate being attracted to them to having the desire to murder.
But that being said, as I already very clearly and explicitly said, I agree laws should be in place to protect minors from predators. I’m also fine with it being based on age.
It’s just that you are, on one hand, saying legality and morality are not the same (correctly, imo) but then arguing with me that it’s morally bad in many cases so we need to have a clear law (which I also agree with), which makes what he did immoral. Maybe they were emotionally and intellectually compatible. I don’t know, as I don’t know either of them, and everyone close to it has said it was a good relationship. Who am I to say it was bad?
One of the leading causes of death for teen girls aged 15-19 is complications from childbirth. Also infants born to teen mothers have increased risk of death and poorer health outcomes. One of the most common issues is obstructed labor, since their pelvises are too small to accomdate a baby.
Recent research has also found teen pregnancy is linked to premature death later in life.
The science doesn’t agree that teen girls are in their prime reproductive years. I wish this idea would fade into the history books and live alongside the idea that women shouldnt ride trains because their uteruses would fly out.
girls under the age of 15 are five times more likely to die in pregnancy than women in their 20s
I put prime years at late teens to late 20s. This seems to confirm that, not contradict it.
The second link I cant see if or where they broke it out by age…only teen vs non-teen. I would be curious to see what would change if you moved the number to 17.
Here is more information that includes the ages 16-19. Having a child before the age of 20 increases risks of death, injury, or complications. Again, not prime reproductive years. Before the modern era women had kids young, but thats because EVERYONE had shorter live spans and death was common in general. Still doesn’t add up to “teens are in their reproductbe prime.”
I have a feeling no matter how many facts or how much data I present to refute your position you aren’t going to be open to changing your mind. However, I’d like this information to be available to others who might find it insightful.
But that being said, you recognize that this was typical, which seems you should also recognize that this is what we evolved around. If women were reproducing at a young age, but were dying slightly more by their 30s, this wasn’t creating downward evolutionary pressure.
A little off base, but, Many of my relatives came from families of 6-10 children. More often than not, mothers died in childbirth. Is this where we want society to return?
Of course it matters because I certainly don’t believe we should go back to that at all and I have no idea how you could had possibly gotten yourself there.
The best time to have a baby with the lowest risk is ages 20 - 26. That’s the window with the best outcome. I love science, it’s the best way to move towards better ideas and medical practices. That’s why I care about dispelling the idea that teenagers are in their reproductive prime.
Also, this might be interesting to you. Women didn’t marry young as frequently as we’re told.
So not being open to changing your mind was a projection. I figured as much, its almost always people thinking they see themselves in other people when they make baseless accusations.
You ignored data twice, and then I agreed that past 30 is a higher risk pregnancy. No idea what you are talking about friend.
I then provided info that shows women werent always marrying as young as people tend think which goes against your basis that evolution supports teens being in their reproductive prime. You haven’t supplied any data at all to back up your claims.
But you do you. The info is out there for you and others. Have a nice day now
I addressed all of the data you provided, even asking for further clarification for one of the sources. You just hand-waved my point, with data, away. Even now trying to claim that I didn’t provide it. And you’re accusing me of ignoring data. Lol Just another projection. You’re good at doing this.
Imagine responding to an actual thought out, reasoned argument with some braindead thought terminating snark. Saves the effort of trying to actually engage in conversation or uncomfortable thoughts I guess but that’s about it.
Posting publicly on the internet means people can respond to you.
Responding to a relatively well-formed statement and rationalized statement with a 1 sentence meme-response is lazy and braindead and contributes nothing but go off if it makes you feel like you’re doing something I guess. Certainly easier than actually engaging with a topic.
To me, it’s a distraction. I think it’s legal in just about every state for someone to marry a child under the age of 15 with the approval of their parents.
I can guarantee you that all those puritan ass hats have the same feelings as everyone else but will “ooohhh no no no no, not me, I would never think THAT!” when asked.
Of course we should protect minors, that’s why we have these laws in the first place. However, 18 is an arbitrary age and I’ve seen girls at 15 being more grownup and responsible for their own actions than certain 25 year olds who clearly still needed protection. Just saying that a relationship is abuse because the girl is 18 and the guy is 30 is honestly stupid.
In the end, it’s a consensual relationship, it’s legal, and it may fail or not, like any relationship.
On a relevant side note: I’ve seen many relationships that are actually abusive, instead of “the girl being young”. Hell, I’ve been in one where the woman would beat the crap out of me. I’m a 2 meter (6 feet) big guy with black belt on karate, so I MUST be the bad one here, no?
That day that I got pushed down the stairs, mangled my leg, limped outside, called the police, waited for them to arrive, she came out with a bloody lip out of nowhere. Police were smart and kind enough to explain to me that they understood what happened but that next time they would HAVE to arrest be, because girl is girl and I is big bad man.
Yeah you didn’t read. My point was not “hey let’s date 15 year olds”, my point was that there are enough 25 year olds out there that are less mature and responsible than certain 15 year olds.
I’ve seen girls at 15 being more grownup and responsible for their own actions than certain 25 year olds
Because they already have sexual trauma. That is never a good sign - as in, that is a sign that people who work with youth are taught to look for.
The ability of a teenage girl to put on makeup and look “mature” does not indicate that they are emotionally developed enough to be independent or in a relationship with an adult man.
Romeo and Juliet laws show we absolutely have some tolerance for adults dating teenagers. And nobody I know is saying a 17 year old can’t be sexually attractive. The problem is they essentially unarmed against the average 30 year old. And I’d much rather draw a line somewhere than the actual puritanical practice of marrying teenagers to a 40 year old man who happens to have the most money available.
I don’t really have an issue with a 16 year old dating an 18 year old. They’re close enough that the age thing wouldn’t be an issue, but 17 and 38 is a bit different.
I also don’t really have an issue with adults being attracted to… people below the legal limit so long as they don’t act on it. It’s very difficult to have this discussion when most people can’t grasp that desires don’t always lead to actions and have problems separating fiction from reality. There are people with rape fetishes that find healthy, consensual ways to simulate the act, something that the mainstream can’t really cope with.
But that’s not really the discussion we’re having. Jerry Seinfeld had a teenaged girlfriend when he was 38. Celebrities using their positions of power isn’t acceptable.
Why does everyone keep bring up my kid dating? In my day you could date kids and no one would bat an eye. Now the woke mob says it’s bad. Go woke go broke
Can’t expect him to think it’s wrong when I’m his world it isn’t. Even lovable celebrities like Guillermo del Toro signed petitions to pardon Polanski. All the rockstars of the 70s fucked kids. Savile got away with it because everyone who knew let him. The ex and likely next president is a rapist who wants to fuck his own daughter and people are defending him for it.
No, the records of families at the impoverished school I work at suggest money has nothing to do with it. You wouldn’t want to hear what some of these kids experience.
People with a long-going abundance of money lacking brainjuice can rarely imagine the way to spend them, and they want the most exclusive and unavailable thing there is. For some reason it’s a trend within their circles that pedophilia is Sex 2.0 exclusive to elites, and nothing in their head rings an alarm, or just a bullshit detector. Besides obvious anger about what they do, why do they choose that of all things? There’s so much more gated behind the paywall that they can get, like extreme(ly expensive) sports, property design and management, investing into start ups and following them, top tier education and getting acclaimed in scientifical\professional fields, traveling to a new place every other week or just riding in an MBT for groceries shopping. Is there some street cred coming with that or what? It’s just stupid.
I think it’s more that not giving a fuck about hurting someone makes you more likely to become rich, and being rich makes it easier to get away with things.
increased money and power correlate negatively with the portion of your brain responsible for empathizing with others. The more money/power you have, the smaller that portion of your brain is. Here’s a landmark study that’s since been cited over 200 times
I’m gonna go with like an alternative viewpoint here and say that, rather than it being kind of like, a inevitability of human behavior once you reach a certain point of like, not giving a shit about consequences, or like, having enough power, you just lose touch with reality and become a pedo like, automatically (which is kind of a weird self-report). I’m gonna say that instead, it’s probably because of that kind of mentality. Because it’s seen as a sort of inevitable thing, once you reach a high enough status. Because of the mentality of like, women at younger and younger ages being seen as more desirable sexually, because of like this weird collective cultural fetish around female innocence and beauty, and even naivety, to some degree. You ever notice that weird like, “born yesterday” movie trope, where some chick has like, amnesia, or is a robot, or whatever, and so is a kid, but is also supposed to be like, smokin’? Like the fifth element. That movie’s still pretty good, but that shit’s weird af as a trope, probably evidence of cultural baggage, it’s like the western version of the thousand year old loli.
Probably all wrapped up in like some old timey patriarchy shit I need to read up on. Maybe due to the prevalence of child brides in sort of like, societies in which inheritance is a thing? Like, patrilineal societies, maybe, where marriage asap at the capacity of childbirth is seen as a thing which sort of, preserves patrilineal inheritance. Then something to do with like, the western nuclear family’s imposition on history, to sort of, retroactively frame history along the lines that it provides, while also unconsciously adopting, nonsensically, some of the same historical, cultural narratives that were propagated around patrilineal inheritance in order to attempt to justify it.
There’s some through-line there, probably. Something along those lines.
I think it’s pretty inarguable that sexual attraction in some way is affected by the standards of the society in which you’re raised on a pretty fundamental level, so, probably it’s due to like an extremely depressing and fucked up societal standard, I would think, more than just like. Ahh, they’re rich, so, the pedo switch flipped in their head. Like, once they realized they could, they just did, kinda thing, and then it all ends there and nobody asks any questions as to why that switch was there in the first place.
I mean he’s a movie director, I think “all style” is kind of a good appeal for those to generally have, especially for popcorn bucket kind of movies, right? Substance is generally something people actually hate in movies, in my experience.
Add comment