NEW YORK — It’s no laughing matter when it comes to how Jerry Seinfeld feels about what he seemingly believes is the lesser of two evils. During a Duke University event on Tuesday, the Emmy-winning comedian compared the Free Palestine movement to the Ku Klux Klan. He even went so far as to say that people who use the phrase “Free Palestine” are worse than the white supremacist group. Seinfeld ...
Good thing I don’t take advice from pedos who “date” 17-year-olds when they’re 39 😃
Removed by mod
You probably can’t imagine someone that doesn’t have the same desires you have, but I wouldn’t have sex with a 25 year old kid let alone a 17 y.o. one. Both look like kids to me and present no attraction whatsoever.
You wouldn’t have sex with a 25 year old because, you’re an incel or an asexual & the “Both look like kids to me” part of your statement is concerning. BTW, I’m into MILFs
Maybe you’re not old enough to understand, but once you get older, people start to look very young. That’s why some of us think it’s so gross.
Yeah & as long as they’re consenting adults/above age of consent, I have no business calling them pedos. You missed that part, Mr/Ms False-Accuser
deleted by creator
if thats really what you think this looks like then your discernment is… unreliable
So a non-answer. What a waste of human potential.
Yes, you certainly are.
Projecting are we (along woth another non-answer), unlike you I’m not a cretin that goes around twisting laws. But hey keep projecting, it’s going to be fun when you’re on the recieving end if such corruptive attitude.
I get to sleep soundly knowing that I am morally bankrupt.
“Projecting are we?”
Wow, lots to unpack here.
You can argue about definitions all day if you want, at the end of the day, if your daughter somehow “dated” a 39-year-old, I’m hoping you’d want the guy arrested. The vast majority of people would call it pedophilia, and calling it “tasteless” is a hell of an understatement.
“let’s not pretend you’re not gonna bang a hot young girl”. Hell no. Speak for yourself mate. I’m 26 and I would NEVER date an 18-year-old, let alone “date” a 17-year-old when I’m 39.
“you’re nowhere to be found when the genders are reversed”. Who are you talking to? Whether a man or a woman has sex with a minor, it’s still statutory rape. I know there are some so-called “press outlets” that word things differently when it’s a woman having sex with a minor, where they use terms like “had sex” instead of “raped”. I think it’s appalling. I’m not part of the crowd you think you’re addressing.
“It hasn’t been 5 seconds & the guy responded with his butthurt, looks like I hit the nail on his character” Again, who are you talking to? My first comment is the one where I called Seinfeld a pedo, and this is the second one. I posted my initial comment 6 hours ago and came back 6 hours later to see that I had apparently caused a shitstorm.
I sure wasn’t expecting to see a brigade of strange individuals arguing about the definition of pedophilia. Are you usually this enthusiastic about semantics?
Yes when it comes to laws & due-process. Will you be this enthusiastic when you get a taste of your own amoral-medicine ??
BTW, people are considering calling old men who date 25 y/o women as pedos. So good luck when the goal shifts again. Looks like your “unpacking” skills needs work
First you talk about laws and due process, then you talk about morals. Which is it? I’m not sure which part of what I’ve said is either illegal or immoral/amoral.
Dating a minor is bad, whether legally or morally. Some countries enforce this with no exceptions, while some allow exceptions for people who are close to the same age, like a 17yo dating a 19yo. Feel free to prove me wrong, but I don’t think there are any countries in the West where an actual fully-grown adult is allowed to “date” a minor.
On an individual level, morals are technically malleable and arbitrary, but the law doesn’t (and shouldn’t) give two shits about that. If you think dating minors is perfectly fine, explain that to the judge.
And if you still want to argue about semantics, then sure, maybe in some countries, there’s an age-based difference in legal terminology between “an illegal relationship with a minor” and “pedophilia”, but outside of the legal realm, they’re one and the same. I have no respect for pedos (crazy, right?) and certainly won’t defend them, whether they diddle 9, 12 or 17yo kids.
“people are considering calling old men who date 25 y/o women as pedos” Yeah, and “people” are saying Hillary Clinton is a lizard. “People” say Paul McCartney was replaced by a clone. “People” say all kinds of shit. “People” is no one and everyone at the same time. You can make “people” say anything.
At the end of the day, a 25-year-old is an adult, and therefore cannot be a victim of pedophilia. Therefore, old men who date 25-year-olds are supercreeps, but not pedos. I’m not defending them, I’m only saying that you can’t put an old guy in jail for dating a 25-year-old, simply because no matter how reprehensible you think their relationship is, they’re both adults in the eyes of the law. The guy is still a creep though.
What is there to argue about? Who are you defending exactly? And what makes my reasoning so “amoral”?
“when you get a taste of your own amoral-medicine” “when the goal shifts again” I’m pretty sure my aversion to dating immorally young people will protect me from any slippery slopes and moving goalposts in the future.
17 is old enough to decide you want to fuck somebody, for sure. hell, the age of consent across most of europe is 16 iirc…
there’s a world of difference between drugging a/o raping woman/children, eastein and our pedo in chief, and choosing to fuck some guy for his $
(jerry still a piece of self-centered, self-serving piece of shit to be clear…i’m just still in the camp that words have meaning)
Would you look at that, the mods deleted my comments, because they had no way of countering logic.
Inciting dangerous acts of false allegations & calling it moral is not a can of worms you lot wanna open.
Stop watering down the term. Yucky? Sure. Pedophile? No.
Emphasis mine. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia.
He’s a type A fucking creep and a pederast if you want to get technical about it.
A little further down:
I quoted the psychiatric definition on purpose.
The general population has a tendency of diluting medical, mostly psychiatric, terms, either rendering them meaningless (see people describing themselves as having OCD because they are quirky) or even turning them into slurs (see various names for intellectual disabilities, like “imbecile”, “idiot” and so on).
I have an issue with that specifically. I replied to someone else why stretching the age from “prepubescent” to “below the legal age of consent” (hell, some poster even suggested “below the legal age of majority even if the legal age of consent is lower”) bugs me.
So basically below 16
Yes, and due to usage, “literally” now means “figuratively”, effectively diluting the word and making it useless. Plenty of us aren’t pedophiles but rather pedants and autists who just want to see things be said correctly and clearly. By the new definition, an 18yo having sex with a 17yo would be a pedophile too, but does that really seem accurate?
If we start exaggerating everything then soon we will be as bad as the other side that does it for literally everything as well(am I being serious or hyperbolic with my use of “literally” here? See how it’s unclear?)
Again, tiring to have to say this, but I don’t support pedophiles. I just support clear, accurate language. Call it the horrible thing it is, but call it the right thing. Be accurate in your insults lest you just become “the boy who cried wolf”. Use the word too carelessly and it loses its deservedly negative meaning.
Edit: For example, it would be better to call Jerry a “gross, sleazy pervert who preys on emotionally immature/vulnerable girls to take advantage of them”. You can be plenty insulting, descriptive, AND accurate. “Pervert” was already right there and definitely doesn’t have a positive meaning.
Second Edit: also, “local age of consent” means that in some places where the age is lower, say 13/14, it’s NOT pedophilia by the new definition even if the person had delayed puberty. So some actual pedophilia wouldn’t even be pedophilia with the new definition. It’s an appeal to authority rather than science.
The nature of language is to change over time. Help yourself to internalize that and a lot of these things may become less stressful.
Your attempt to use a non-inflammatory example doesn’t really work: “literally” has meant “exaggeratedly” for at least the past 200 years (likely more, it’s just been used extensively with that meaning for 200y).
If you try to demand that language have strict meaning, it’s just not going to work. Watch:
What’s the definition of “girl”? Do they need to be prepubescent? Pre-postpubescent? Or are you using it in the (gasp, shock) sloppy sense of “a girl or a woman”? You’ve fallen into the exact same pitfall that you were complaining about.
The resolution isn’t to claim that all words have an absolute meaning, but to understand that human language is fluid and extraordinarily context-sensitive.
Cool so if anything can mean whatever we want then you’re a cantaloupe. I just redefined the word to mean people like you. I’m not wrong, language evolves!
Yeah, we can play these stupid games, but we just become dumber in the process.
Creep, pervert, degenerate, abuser… The words are there. We don’t need to co-opt another. All you’ll do is speed up the euphemism treadmill. Once pedophile is meaningless, you’ll have to come up with a whole new word to describe it and just start the process over again. But sure, have fun reinventing words that already exist because your vocabulary is so diminutive that you lack other coherent verbiage to describe how you feel.
Also, don’t we deride the other side for spouting rhetoric to twist things to meet the definitions they want? So why is it ok for us to do the same? This is just the clown meme. You’re following their exact playbook while wearing a red nose and poofy hair and claiming you’re somehow different and superior.
Nah, you’re just a bunch of gaggling morons too. Imbeciles. Mouth breathers. Mentally deficient. See how language can be fun? Look at all these insults I have available to me and not once did I resort to calling you something like a “dragon fucker” just to sound outlandish. I used accurate descriptions of your lack of mental ability and reasoning skills.
Maybe try that?
We are dealing with morally & ethically bankrupt people who want to throw away the rule of law. What do you expect from these cretins ?
I guess we’ll have to wait until someone pedo-smears them. Which is disgusting. But you try explaining that to these non-humans.
Pot of crabs… were just a giant pot of crabs pulling each other back in.
But we can climb out. Let the rest of the crabs rot in the hell they created.
deleted by creator
Man didnt read the entire wikipedia or conveniently forgot that 17 is still considered a child in the US
Man “conveniently” referred to the psychiatric definition. Because the “sexual attraction to a person below the legal age of consent” definition is
a) harmful to victims of actual child sexual abuse (in my opinion);
b) geographically-dependent. In Europe the age of consent is 16, for example. According to the other posters, there are states in the US where it is lower than 18.
Depends on the state. 18 is age of consent in California, most movies and TV come from California, so 18 is the age everyone thinks of. So a guy can be a pedophile for wanting to have sex with 16 year olds in one state, cross state lines, and suddenly be perfectly legal.
It is federal law that you are a minor until you hit 18 The age of consent in each state has absolutely no bearing on if you are a minor or not.
True. So he’d be Schrodinger’s pedo depending on whether it’s federal or state law.
30 states have an unrestricted age of consent at 16. Only 7 have it at 17 and 13 have it at 18.
Maybe educate yourself before calling someone out with something blatantly proven wrong.
And in the united states by federal law a minor is anyone under the age of 18.
The fact youre really arguing about age of consent being relevant here is super creepy.
You sure youre not diddling a child?
I literally read the Wikipedia article you chastised the other person for not reading. I’m sorry if facts offend you.
Eat shit troll. When the right does this it’s “propaganda and reprehensible” but when you do it it’s “justified by the ends”. You’re no better than them spouting bullshit to fit your narrative regardless of facts.
Maybe reread my comments - I can Jerry Seinfeld a disgusting pervert who takes advantage of emotionally immature and vulnerable girls. Notice how I call him out for being a piece of shit and don’t lie at the same time? It’s possible.
Learn more words you retard. Don’t be mad at others because their vocabulary is better than yours and they can express themselves more eloquently than your backwards ass.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/minor
You seem angry and like you cant read
Whats the deal with girlfriends? You pick them up from school, and all they talk about is homework, and who’s going to the school dance! Don’t girlfriends know people who oppose genocide are worse then the KKK?
actually if its not from the pedophile region, otherwise it’s just sparkling child abuse
you and that other weirdo in this thread really need to check yourselves
Ad hominem. How refreshing. Yawns. You’ll get right along with that
.blahaj.zoneguy/gal/NB-person in the replies.What is a “pedophile region”, anyway? Epstein’s Island? And what’s with that “otherwise”? Are you saying that pedophilia in “pedophile regions” is NOT child abuse? You should work on articulating your thoughts better, it’s challenging to understand what you’re trying to say.
deleted by creator
Wow a morally & ethically-sound person on lemmy that respects the rule of law.
You are a rarity, sir/madam