independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Fri 19th Jul 2019 6:08pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Epstein arrested for sex trafficking minors
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 6 of 9 <123456789>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #150 posted 07/12/19 6:03am

poppys

2elijah said:

RodeoSchro said:


Perhaps, but almost the entire world (except for the USA, of course) has determined what a "child" is:


The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child defines anyone under the age of 18 as a "child". Although the US played a part in drafting this, we haven't ratified it. We're the only UN member that hasn't ratified it.


Thanks Rodeo. I think this argument has taken the focus off the ‘animal’ that has committed the crime against the victims. My hope is that his victims get the justice they deserve. They are the ones who have to live with what he did to them, and has scarred them for life.


nod Here's what his cousin in Alabama got - and he apologized in court.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/452718-alabama-man-sentenced-to-over-600-years-in-prison-over-sex


A man in Alabama was sentenced Wednesday to more than 600 years in prison for molesting five girls, all under the age of 16, the maximum possible sentence for his crimes.

Local news affiliate WSFA 12 reported that Raven Smith, 35, was sentenced to 615 years in prison. A judge reportedly structured his sentence to make the possibility of parole unlikely.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #151 posted 07/12/19 6:11am

deebee

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

deebee said:

As I understand it, Mikado and jaawwnn have both suggested that using the term "children" to refer to Epstein's victims may be misleading, as it seems to indicate a younger age group, which thus sensationalises the issue, and that the legally correct term "minors" would be better. Both have unequivocally condemned Epstein, regardless of terminology.

There's not really an argument as such on the other side; just a strong assertion that "children" is the correct term, and incredulity that anyone would disagree. I would suppose that the reasoning is that not using the term "children" risks lessening the force of the accusation, implying a lesser offence, which could, as such, encourage greater leniency. Slightly oddly, there's also a suggestion that two orgers expressing relatively muted disagreement over this is evidence of the proliferation of a "right-wing talking point" or even some kind of "orchestration."

As for the point I wanted to make in my own post, that doesn't really have anything to say about what term it's preferable to use. ("Children", "minors", "underage girls", or anything else that emphasises the exploitative and abusive nature of Epstein's sexual interaction with them is fine with me.) What I want to contest is the claim that "the media" are referring to victims as "underage women." A quick look at a few sources suggests that's not factually correct in general. Though there may well have been instances where that did happen, it's not a general trend. My 'dog in the race' on that is merely that, like a lot of salty memes I see in circulation, these days, I think it gives us a view of things that's incendiary but inaccurate - getting us all fired up unnecessarily - and that seems to me to be worth noting.

[Edited 7/12/19 2:48am]


Thanks for clearing that up. Now that I know what's all about... I'm gonna ignore it.

I was so sure that this is a topic we could all agree on, guess I was wrong. Oh, well. That's on me. I've been here for years, shouldn't be surprised at all. SMDH!


In fairness, I think the revulsion at the offences and will to see justice meted out to Epstein is universally shared.

"Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced." - James Baldwin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #152 posted 07/12/19 6:20am

deebee

avatar

2elijah said:

deebee said:

As I understand it, Mikado and jaawwnn have both suggested that using the term "children" to refer to Epstein's victims may be misleading, as it seems to indicate a younger age group, which thus sensationalises the issue, and that the legally correct term "minors" would be better. Both have unequivocally condemned Epstein, regardless of terminology.

There's not really an argument as such on the other side; just a strong assertion that "children" is the correct term, and incredulity that anyone would disagree. I would suppose that the reasoning is that not using the term "children" risks lessening the force of the accusation, implying a lesser offence, which could, as such, encourage greater leniency. Slightly oddly, there's also a suggestion that two orgers expressing relatively muted disagreement over this is evidence of the proliferation of a "right-wing talking point" or even some kind of "orchestration."

As for the point I wanted to make in my own post, that doesn't really have anything to say about what term it's preferable to use. ("Children", "minors", "underage girls", or anything else that emphasises the exploitative and abusive nature of Epstein's sexual interaction with them is fine with me.) What I want to contest is the claim that "the media" are referring to victims as "underage women." A quick look at a few sources suggests that's not factually correct in general. Though there may well have been instances where that did happen, it's not a general trend. My 'dog in the race' on that is merely that, like a lot of salty memes I see in circulation, these days, I think it gives us a view of things that's incendiary but inaccurate - getting us all fired up unnecessarily - and that seems to me to be worth noting.

[Edited 7/12/19 2:48am]

It has nothing to do with sensationalizing it. There’s no difference in the raping of a 12 yr old vs a 14 yr old. It’s like some here trying to ‘diminish’ the act by the rapist, because of the older child’s age, yet a 14 year old is still a child, being raised by adults. The ‘act of rape’ by an adult on children is not sensationalizing the term, it’s telling the truth that a sick monster like that is s pedophile who liked raping children. You all can argue over it all you want, but it will not change my mind that he raped 14 and 15 year old children/minors. [Edited 7/12/19 4:51am]

In fairness, I did try to represent that point of view in my second paragraph. I don't dismiss the concern that underpins it (though I also think the other point of view deserves a fair hearing). My own issue, in any case, was more to do with a claim about the media that I don't think is correct in general.

"Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced." - James Baldwin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #153 posted 07/12/19 6:23am

poppys

Robert is in a world of shit too - deservedly. Maybe he and Epstein can share a cell.


Singer R. Kelly was arrested Thursday on federal sex crime charges, according to reports.

NBC New York reports the 52-year-old, whose full name is Robert Kelly, was arrested by NYPD detectives and Homeland Security Investigation agents in Chicago on sex trafficking charges. Kelly is expected to be brought to New York.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #154 posted 07/12/19 6:33am

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

Mikado said:

Thanks for chiming in deebee, I agree with what you're saying. The framing is less important than the overall picture.

Then why do you and your alters keep bringing it up lol

Persistent Turd is the shit.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #155 posted 07/12/19 6:34am

deebee

avatar

RodeoSchro said:

Mikado said:


Is this some sort of thinly veiled RUSSIA thing? Is that what you're hinting at?

When I think of children I think of minors under ~12 or so. That's the biological defintiion and the common accepted definition - preteens. .

Essentially, it strikes me as bizarre and a bit strange to say that anybody under the age of consent is a child given that the age of consent is different all around the world.

All of this is irrelevant to the Epstein case given that there was a level of coercion that makes the age of consent issue null. I just disagree with the people who seem to be insistant on sensationalizing the depravity by forcing the word "children" at every turn.


Perhaps, but almost the entire world (except for the USA, of course) has determined what a "child" is:


The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child defines anyone under the age of 18 as a "child". Although the US played a part in drafting this, we haven't ratified it. We're the only UN member that hasn't ratified it.

That's not correct. Article 1 of the UNCRC reads: "For the purposes of the present Convention, a child means every human being below the age of 18 years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier." In other words, it gives the final say to the laws of the country in which the child lives. (UN conventions always do this, because ultimately only member states are sovereign, and thus they have to write the stipulations of conventions into their own laws.)

I do agree that it's shameful that the USA hasn't ratified the Convention, especially since this seems to be largely to do with the fear that it would curb states' abilities to treat under-18s in the criminal justice system in ways most decent people would find objectionable. Hopefully, the widespread opposition now to the appalling treatment of children in immigration detention under Trump will galvanise support for whoever comes after to sign up along with the rest of the world. pray

"Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced." - James Baldwin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #156 posted 07/12/19 6:40am

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

jaawwnn said:

Lololol, I may be funded by Soros, I may be funded by the AntiFa Foundation, but I am NOT funded by Russia, they can't afford me.

lol
You wish.
More like the demo most likely to regurgitate your echo chamber.

Persistent Turd is the shit.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #157 posted 07/12/19 7:02am

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

Ok let's get this thread back on track. Sorry about that.

.https://www.huffpost.com/...fdaa534ba9

Alexander Acosta Out As Labor Secretary Over Cushy Jeffrey Epstein Plea Deal

As a U.S. attorney in Miami, Acosta helped devise a secret agreement granting the accused child sex trafficker immunity from federal prosecution.

Persistent Turd is the shit.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #158 posted 07/12/19 7:03am

2elijah

avatar

poppys said:

Robert is in a world of shit too - deservedly. Maybe he and Epstein can share a cell.



Singer R. Kelly was arrested Thursday on federal sex crime charges, according to reports.



NBC New York reports the 52-year-old, whose full name is Robert Kelly, was arrested by NYPD detectives and Homeland Security Investigation agents in Chicago on sex trafficking charges. Kelly is expected to be brought to New York.


Yep just saw that. They need to keep those pedophiles locked up. Epstein and Kelly.
As an American you have a right to question/call your country out on its wrongs/injustices. That doesn’t make you un-American nor does anyone have a right to tell you to leave, because you have the courage to stand up against any injustice in this count
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #159 posted 07/12/19 7:04am

2elijah

avatar

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

Ok let's get this thread back on track. Sorry about that.



.https://www.huffpost.com/...fdaa534ba9




Alexander Acosta Out As Labor Secretary Over Cushy Jeffrey Epstein Plea Deal


As a U.S. attorney in Miami, Acosta helped devise a secret agreement granting the accused child sex trafficker immunity from federal prosecution.


Good!!
As an American you have a right to question/call your country out on its wrongs/injustices. That doesn’t make you un-American nor does anyone have a right to tell you to leave, because you have the courage to stand up against any injustice in this count
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #160 posted 07/12/19 7:07am

poppys

2elijah said:

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

Ok let's get this thread back on track. Sorry about that.

.https://www.huffpost.com/...fdaa534ba9

Alexander Acosta Out As Labor Secretary Over Cushy Jeffrey Epstein Plea Deal

As a U.S. attorney in Miami, Acosta helped devise a secret agreement granting the accused child sex trafficker immunity from federal prosecution.


Good!!


hammer Finally something they decided they couldn't sweep under the rug.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #161 posted 07/12/19 7:10am

djThunderfunk

avatar

jaawwnn said:

djThunderfunk said:

This is fucked up stupid shit right here.

Everybody agrees on this: FUCK Epstein and every motherfucker that had anything to do with his fucking underage girls. Right?!?

Nobody's happy unless they have an "other" to bicker with?

Let the disagreement be just that, a disagreement. Focus on the AGREEment.

Sure. There's so much to this case, i'm riveted by it, it feels like half the elite establishment are involved.


Let's hope everyone involved in this pedo shit, and anybody that provided support or obfuscation of it, goes down with him, regardless of their politics, finances or stardom.


Ross Perot was right!!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #162 posted 07/12/19 7:11am

djThunderfunk

avatar

deebee said:

djThunderfunk said:


Thanks for clearing that up. Now that I know what's all about... I'm gonna ignore it.

I was so sure that this is a topic we could all agree on, guess I was wrong. Oh, well. That's on me. I've been here for years, shouldn't be surprised at all. SMDH!


In fairness, I think the revulsion at the offences and will to see justice meted out to Epstein is universally shared.


I think so too. All the more reason for us to drop this bickering and be united for once.


Ross Perot was right!!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #163 posted 07/12/19 7:16am

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

https://www.politico.com/...ry-1411998

Things began to unravel for Acosta in November, when the Miami Herald published a lengthy reexamination of the case, and accelerated in February, when a district court judge ruled that the 2008 plea deal violated the Crime Victims Rights Act because Acosta never revealed the terms of the deal to Epstein's victims before it was finalized. Also in February, the Justice Department opened an investigation into whether Acosta’s prosecution team committed professional misconduct in its handling the Epstein case.

Key details of Acosta's plea agreement with Epstein were known to senators at the time Acosta was confirmed as labor secretary, though initially these seemed minor compared to domestic abuse allegations against Trump’s first pick for labor secretary, Andy Puzder. Acosta defended his actions at a congressional hearing this past April, saying he entered the case only after a state grand jury recommended that only one charge be filed against Epstein — a course of action that would have resulted in no jail time for Epstein, no restitution to victims, and no registration as a sex offender.

Persistent Turd is the shit.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #164 posted 07/12/19 7:16am

Empress

Acosta resigns! Good riddance.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #165 posted 07/12/19 7:26am

2elijah

avatar

poppys said:



2elijah said:


Ugot2shakesumthin said:

Ok let's get this thread back on track. Sorry about that.



.https://www.huffpost.com/...fdaa534ba9




Alexander Acosta Out As Labor Secretary Over Cushy Jeffrey Epstein Plea Deal


As a U.S. attorney in Miami, Acosta helped devise a secret agreement granting the accused child sex trafficker immunity from federal prosecution.




Good!!


hammer Finally something they decided they couldn't sweep under the rug.


Exactly! Acosta was trying so hard to put the blame elsewhere. I’m glad he is out. The victims deserve justice.
As an American you have a right to question/call your country out on its wrongs/injustices. That doesn’t make you un-American nor does anyone have a right to tell you to leave, because you have the courage to stand up against any injustice in this count
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #166 posted 07/12/19 7:31am

djThunderfunk

avatar

2elijah said:

poppys said:


hammer Finally something they decided they couldn't sweep under the rug.

Exactly! Acosta was trying so hard to put the blame elsewhere. I’m glad he is out. The victims deserve justice.


Glad he's gone. Let's hope that if it's true that the intelligence community instructed him to lay off, he names names and brings some more down with him.


Ross Perot was right!!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #167 posted 07/12/19 8:03am

Mikado

cool
[Edited 7/12/19 8:04am]
A certain kind of mellow.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #168 posted 07/12/19 8:23am

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

Bill Clinton, Trump, Acosta, Dershowitz, Epstein

closer than seven degrees of Kevin Bacon. These guys are all noteable figures in this and other scandals.
Alan Dershowitz is the bologna in this sandwich, having defended both Trump and Epstein, and ALL OF THEM acused of sexual misconduct including raping these kids.

.

Dershowitz, should do himself a favor and disappear, instead of doubling down and saying that Acosta made a good deal.

Alan Dershowitz Says He Thinks He Should’ve Gotten Epstein A BETTER Deal In Wild Doubling-Down Interview

Says He Should’ve Gotte... BETTER Deal

Persistent Turd is the shit.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #169 posted 07/12/19 9:45am

Musicslave

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

Bill Clinton, Trump, Acosta, Dershowitz, Epstein

closer than seven degrees of Kevin Bacon. These guys are all noteable figures in this and other scandals.
Alan Dershowitz is the bologna in this sandwich, having defended both Trump and Epstein, and ALL OF THEM acused of sexual misconduct including raping these kids.

.

Dershowitz, should do himself a favor and disappear, instead of doubling down and saying that Acosta made a good deal.

Alan Dershowitz Says He Thinks He Should’ve Gotten Epstein A BETTER Deal In Wild Doubling-Down Interview

Says He Should’ve Gotte... BETTER Deal

-

These people feel untouchable with trump in the WH.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #170 posted 07/12/19 2:51pm

PennyPurple

avatar

2elijah said:




It has nothing to do with sensationalizing it. There’s no difference in the raping of a 12 yr old vs a 14 yr old. It’s like some here trying to ‘diminish’ the act by the rapist, because of the older child’s age, yet a 14 year old is still a child, being raised by adults. The ‘act of rape’ by an adult on children is not sensationalizing the term, it’s telling the truth that a sick monster like that is s pedophile who liked raping children. You all can argue over it all you want, but it will not change my mind that he raped 14 and 15 year old children/minors. [Edited 7/12/19 4:51am]

Exactly

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #171 posted 07/12/19 3:21pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

This is got to be the number one STUPIDEST thing to argue about. Can you all not agree to disagree on that point and move on to the reality that we all agree this scumbag and his fellow scumbags need to go away for a very long time?

It's ridiculous. I'm embarrassed for you. Just stop. Both "sides" have points, neither "side" is changing their mind. Sure, that's par for the course around here, BUT, we have an issue that we can otherwise pretty much agree on. Can't we take that for once?

Maybe some of you just get off on the fighting.

Meanwhile, every single one of us is happy Epstein is going down and hoping for ALL his cohorts to go down with him.

Ross Perot was right!!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #172 posted 07/12/19 3:26pm

PennyPurple

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

This is got to be the number one STUPIDEST thing to argue about. Can you all not agree to disagree on that point and move on to the reality that we all agree this scumbag and his fellow scumbags need to go away for a very long time?

It's ridiculous. I'm embarrassed for you. Just stop. Both "sides" have points, neither "side" is changing their mind. Sure, that's par for the course around here, BUT, we have an issue that we can otherwise pretty much agree on. Can't we take that for once?

Maybe some of you just get off on the fighting.

Meanwhile, every single one of us is happy Epstein is going down and hoping for ALL his cohorts to go down with him.

Yes we are all happy that Epstein is going down. Don't tell us what we can or shouldn't post or discuss, just worry about yourself.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #173 posted 07/12/19 4:50pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

PennyPurple said:

djThunderfunk said:

This is got to be the number one STUPIDEST thing to argue about. Can you all not agree to disagree on that point and move on to the reality that we all agree this scumbag and his fellow scumbags need to go away for a very long time?

It's ridiculous. I'm embarrassed for you. Just stop. Both "sides" have points, neither "side" is changing their mind. Sure, that's par for the course around here, BUT, we have an issue that we can otherwise pretty much agree on. Can't we take that for once?

Maybe some of you just get off on the fighting.

Meanwhile, every single one of us is happy Epstein is going down and hoping for ALL his cohorts to go down with him.

Yes we are all happy that Epstein is going down. Don't tell us what we can or shouldn't post or discuss, just worry about yourself.


And I'll say what I want about it.

I get it now. You enjoy bickering. Have fun with that.

Seems like a miserable existance to me. But if you like coming across as unhinged, keep it up.






[Edited 7/12/19 16:52pm]

Ross Perot was right!!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #174 posted 07/12/19 6:32pm

poppys

There is only one person that is coming across as unhinged here. And they admittedly didn't even read the thread.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #175 posted 07/12/19 6:37pm

PennyPurple

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

PennyPurple said:

Yes we are all happy that Epstein is going down. Don't tell us what we can or shouldn't post or discuss, just worry about yourself.


And I'll say what I want about it.

I get it now. You enjoy bickering. Have fun with that.

Seems like a miserable existance to me. But if you like coming across as unhinged, keep it up.






[Edited 7/12/19 16:52pm]

You are the one complaining about the use of the words 'child' and 'children'. Every other post of yours is complaining about the use of those words, it's a fact, they are children.


Stop telling people what they should or shouldn't post. Again, worry about yourself. Don't like the use of those words in this discussion, too bad. Just like you, I'll say what I want about it. All you do anymore is complain about what other people posts...too BAD.


This jerk raped and pimped out children, why sugar coat it? Have the guts to call it what it is.

[Edited 7/12/19 18:37pm]

[Edited 7/12/19 18:38pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #176 posted 07/12/19 6:53pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

PennyPurple said:

djThunderfunk said:


And I'll say what I want about it.

I get it now. You enjoy bickering. Have fun with that.

Seems like a miserable existance to me. But if you like coming across as unhinged, keep it up.






[Edited 7/12/19 16:52pm]

You are the one complaining about the use of the words 'child' and 'children'. Every other post of yours is complaining about the use of those words, it's a fact, they are children.


Stop telling people what they should or shouldn't post. Again, worry about yourself. Don't like the use of those words in this discussion, too bad. Just like you, I'll say what I want about it. All you do anymore is complain about what other people posts...too BAD.


This jerk raped and pimped out children, why sugar coat it? Have the guts to call it what it is.

[Edited 7/12/19 18:37pm]

[Edited 7/12/19 18:38pm]


WTF are you talking about? Where did I complain about the word child? Every other post? WTF? Go back and read again and try to find just one where I "complain about the use of the word child", much less every other post, ya nut! lol

I didn't even understand what all the bickering about was until it was explained to me this morning, I thought you all were getting mad about semantics. Turns out that's not quite it but it's just as ridiculous.

I honestly don't care if you use the word children and someone else says teenagers, I think getting mad at either is dumb. Who cares? Agree to disagree. Here on out, I'll use "teenage children".

And maybe take a break from social media. (oh, shit! I told you what to do again. My bad!) lol




[Edited 7/12/19 19:22pm]

Ross Perot was right!!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #177 posted 07/12/19 7:01pm

PennyPurple

avatar

This is a huge talking point. Don't know why some on here want to sugar coat it....and try to sweep it under the rug, just because they don't like the sound of it.



Has the media 'sanitized' the accusations against Jeffrey Epstein?


......media outlets have drawn critique from some sexual abuse survivors and advocates who point

to language choices they say sanitize the accusations against Epstein, who has pleaded not guilty to the charges.


The media has been blasted for using terms such as "underage women" instead of "children," for saying "sex with minors" instead of "rape," for using the phrase "paid for sex," which they say erases coercion.

.....

"When journalists use words associated with consensual sex to report on sexual assault, they omit the very elements that make it a headline in the first place … coercion, threats, violence, manipulation … or even the legal charges. Legally, there is no such thing as 'sex with a minor.' It’s instead recognized as statutory sexual assault, child sexual abuse, rape, or corruption of minors, or any other legal charge … but 'sex' by itself implies consent," said Kristen Houser, chief public affairs officer at the National Sexual Violence Resource Center.


https://www.usatoday.com/...713172001/

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #178 posted 07/12/19 7:40pm

poppys

PennyPurple said:

This is a huge talking point. Don't know why some on here want to sugar coat it....and try to sweep it under the rug, just because they don't like the sound of it.



Has the media 'sanitized' the accusations against Jeffrey Epstein?


......media outlets have drawn critique from some sexual abuse survivors and advocates who point

to language choices they say sanitize the accusations against Epstein, who has pleaded not guilty to the charges.


The media has been blasted for using terms such as "underage women" instead of "children," for saying "sex with minors" instead of "rape," for using the phrase "paid for sex," which they say erases coercion.

.....

"When journalists use words associated with consensual sex to report on sexual assault, they omit the very elements that make it a headline in the first place … coercion, threats, violence, manipulation … or even the legal charges. Legally, there is no such thing as 'sex with a minor.' It’s instead recognized as statutory sexual assault, child sexual abuse, rape, or corruption of minors, or any other legal charge … but 'sex' by itself implies consent," said Kristen Houser, chief public affairs officer at the National Sexual Violence Resource Center.

https://www.usatoday.com/...713172001/


Our entire system of government including the legal system was formed by males. This issue is an extension of the appropriation and use of others to serve the system. Notice it is mostly males trying to split hairs about what these girls should "officially" be called. Even in this thread.

Kamala Harris was asked about it on the View this morning. She said something I thought was interesting about the changing of girls bodies. Men don't want to think of girls that are getting breasts and hips as being the children because they are already sexualizing them.

Would this be an issue if boys were Epstein's rape targets?

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #179 posted 07/12/19 8:00pm

PennyPurple

avatar

poppys said:

PennyPurple said:

This is a huge talking point. Don't know why some on here want to sugar coat it....and try to sweep it under the rug, just because they don't like the sound of it.



Has the media 'sanitized' the accusations against Jeffrey Epstein?


......media outlets have drawn critique from some sexual abuse survivors and advocates who point

to language choices they say sanitize the accusations against Epstein, who has pleaded not guilty to the charges.


The media has been blasted for using terms such as "underage women" instead of "children," for saying "sex with minors" instead of "rape," for using the phrase "paid for sex," which they say erases coercion.

.....

"When journalists use words associated with consensual sex to report on sexual assault, they omit the very elements that make it a headline in the first place … coercion, threats, violence, manipulation … or even the legal charges. Legally, there is no such thing as 'sex with a minor.' It’s instead recognized as statutory sexual assault, child sexual abuse, rape, or corruption of minors, or any other legal charge … but 'sex' by itself implies consent," said Kristen Houser, chief public affairs officer at the National Sexual Violence Resource Center.

https://www.usatoday.com/...713172001/


Our entire system of government including the legal system was formed by males. This issue is an extension of the appropriation and use of others to serve the system. Notice it is mostly males trying to split hairs about what these girls should "officially" be called. Even in this thread.

Kamala Harris was asked about it on the View this morning. She said something I thought was interesting about the changing of girls bodies. Men don't want to think of girls that are getting breasts and hips as being the children because they are already sexualizing them.

Would this be an issue if boys were Epstein's rape targets?

Harris is correct, and so are you about it being mostly males who have a problem with calling them children, but several males on here are at least on the up and up and agree that they are indeed children.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 6 of 9 <123456789>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Epstein arrested for sex trafficking minors