Another one:
Epstein is a convicted sex offender. They keep calling him, “disgraced Financier”
I watched the first few hours of his interview that leaked. That man had a room temperature IQ. No one was asking him for financial advice.
Eh.
He wasn’t the kind of financier that handled accounts, he was the kind that had connections and when you needed a loan knew who could hook you up.
Of course, his real line of work was trafficking children.
That is not what he did. He was a financial manager who was paid by billionaires (literally, exclusively billionaires) to hide money in tax shelters.
It’s called “sane-washing” and the media won’t stop doing it. Even NPR, though less so recently.
You would think with their funding cut off they would stop doing the “fair and balanced” act and stop carrying water for Republican liars.
Overall the problem comes from the fact that there is a difference between consensual and non-consensual sex, no matter the age. And yes there is the question of at what age can a person truely consent, but technically the word still applies for descriptive purposes.
So, for people above the legal age, rape is generally non-consenual sex. But below a magic age that isn’t consistent across the world, rape includes consenual sex. That causes there to be a gap in that there aren’t useful words to differentiate between consensual, and non-consensual sex with a minor. Some word argue there is no difference, but technically there certainly is.
You also have no easy way to describe sex with a very young kid vs a 17.9 year old. Yet they are certainly very different also. Since the world can’t agree on a static age for consent, and really everyone is different, so it just isn’t that simple, you can be sure that these differtiations matter to some people. In short, all rape is bad, but some is certainly even worse. But terminology doesn’t support differentiation. So news people make up thier own.Edit: I know it may have been hard to parse, but my intent here is to advocate for removing the ambiguity of what people have done. At this point “rape” means so many things that people no longer universally consider it bad. I can’t change those people’s opinions, but better terminology would help ensure those people aren’t discounting how bad a thing a person did was, just because we don’t have good terminology to communicate it.
Take statutory rape, it doesn’t distinguish enough.
If some 30 year old person ties down a fighting 5 year old and… straight to the gallows in my opinion. If a 18.5 year old has consenual sex with a 17.9 year old girlfriend, then the gallows seem a bit extreme. But they are both statutory rape technically. Better terminology would make it easier to assign even harsher penalties than are already assigned for the base case. And they could remove some of the wiggle room it gives judges to be lenient because “it would ruin his life”…Not much of a difference “They touched kids”
I disagree. Take statutory rape, it doesn’t distinguish enough.
If some 30 year old person ties down a fighting 5 year old and… straight to the gallows. If a 18.5 year old has consenual sex with a 17.9 year old, the gallows seem a bit extreme. But they are both statutory rape technically. Better terminology would make it easier to assign even harsher penalties than are already assigned for the base case. And they could remove some of the wiggle room it gives judges.I don’t think you got what I meant, not going into detail myself on the whole actuality of physically abusing a “child”. My Point was that though, they physically engaged in the sexual abuse of underaged/children. As for the second half of what you said "different states/territories have thier own distinct rules and regulations of age difference between / statutory statues.
Oh gotcha. My obscure point there was intended to be that if it is all called rape, but in some places, some of those thing categorized as rape aren’t illegal or even abnormal (child marriages for example). Then when people here rape their first thought will be “what sort of rape”. Better terminology can change that first thought to “what a bastard” in more minds for more cases.
In all do respect, the whole ;Epstein BS: First of all this took place in a time before things like the glorious digital age, the children in question and the effects " depending on what actually happen on that Island,… " May they have been sexualized " put into awkward situations between themselfs and adults in person,… essentially is the equivalent of molestation and sexual harrassment ", that or more seriously “penetrated/raped” These where actual people/children… That is just wrong. excuse me if my next opinion is controversiaL, as for current times “The content alone an the legislation over it to me seems more like a physiological tool for power, while being pretentious,… oftenly used as a means too incriminate persons either completely out of context that or either way as an indirect incitement leading to the indictments of others, aka it is used/leveraged as power over ones/others vs the legislation itself being a contradiction”,… The Legislation claims these ambiguous and vague laws “that which are so skewed a general case leans on and essentially not only allow for a jury but nearly require one to make sense of any such given facts whatsoever, and while that seems fair it is completely besides the point because it leans on the jury and nearly requires one too even ground itself, it is arbitrarily ungrounded either way in actuality or true fact…ect. I see no point further explaining this, that which is broad as daylight"on the legislation continued‐ it which overlooks btw the very fact that such content of any kind even so called “legal? just call it all barely legal then” is all grounds for sexual misconduct charges, while doing so lay claimant that they serve to “protect children”, & Im just wondering “not just how much of that is relevant or even true”, but at what cost to children? As if the criminalization wasn’t enough 'sarcasm much,… These thing’s come with great alienation that could easily cause " any child who comes into contact or across such things much distress + mental issues/scars,… Im not going to say or chose what side or at what line these contents or legislation should be grounded in or on “, & second statement here is Just that I would like to point out that the “alienation” is well expected but the disarray of it all and the legislation actually “do harm to children”… My final statements on this portion of the topic “nsfw, 18+, and other if not either or gore or provocative content” Is not meant for children albeit any, or at least the majority of humans are going to experience such things hopefully not physically…especially if;” unconsensually”…, So with a hard note on “at ones own risk…ect.”, & the current legislation of prior warning before entering…ect. should be the only legislation imo.
take a condom, check IDs, and google tea sex by: ted talks. baybie babye bibai.
