• weastie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I hate to get so semantical but using the word pedophile incorrectly just desensitizes the word. Pedophilia means being attracted to children, primarily meaning before or in the early stages of puberty, usually younger than 13. In fact, many pedophiles would not be attracted to someone aged 15+ because they are typically exclusively or primarily interested in prepubescent bodies.

    That doesn’t mean this guy isn’t a total asshole, but he’s not a pedophile, and I think anyone can understand an adult sexting an older teen, while still absolutely horrid, is quite different from sexting a child.

    Once again, absolutely not defending this guy, I don’t even know who he is… but I think it’s important not to desensitize the word.

    • MikeOToxin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I know the distinction, but hebephile doesn’t carry the same weight. Also, I believe I read the minor was 12. So… Pedo.

      I stand by what I said. We don’t need to be apologistic towards the scum of the earth. Kids are kids.

      • Asherah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        Oh fuck. I heard she was 17 and that was fucking bad enough as is. Fucking hell this man is awful.

    • Christian@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah I would totally agree with this if the word wasn’t already desensitized a very long time ago. The language has changed. (I’m assuming people were ever differentiating, I don’t really know/remember the history.) Colloquially it means interested in teens unless it’s clarified to be worse than that.

      I recommend not trying to make this argument, anywhere. It will not change the way people use words, even if it could there would not be a point (attraction to pre-teens is so egregious that it will always be clarified), and a lot of people will assume that someone who doesn’t accept the colloquial usage is themselves interested in teens and in denial about how the public actually views that to the point where they think only interest in prepubescent children is problematic and handwave everything else away as a language issue.

      • MikeOToxin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Colloquially, it’s a catch-all nowadays. Like I said in another reply, we don’t need to differentiate between lowest common denominators. That gets into sounding sympathetic to these fucks, and anyone who sympathizes might as well be one themselves.

    • skittlebrau@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’ve attended a seminar for child protection before that was delivered by a former cop (that worked in the sex crimes division) and they said the exact same thing - in the context of correctly making the distinction between paedophile and sex offender.

      Sounds like he was grooming her.