This distinction only means something for psychology.
And I get that the vast majority of child rapes happen because children are more vulnerable HOWEVER at some point you can just afford an adult prostitute 1000 times over if you actually want that. It’s clear that these people actually wanted to rape children. So the pedophile label makes sense.
Exactly. Splitting hairs and calling it an obscure word that is only ever used in a clinical setting weakens and cheapens it. just call them pedophies. don’t let them redefine or spin it. just pedophile.
Or just be accurate and call them a rapist. A child rapist.
Pedophile already is a weakened word. Both cause it gets over used, and because it does have an actual accurate use case that doesn’t accurately describe what’s happened.
If you were 18, and got caught having sex with your 17 year old girl/boy friend. Would you be happy to be placed into the same category of horrible human beings as Ian Watkins…?
This distinction only means something for psychology.
And I get that the vast majority of child rapes happen because children are more vulnerable HOWEVER at some point you can just afford an adult prostitute 1000 times over if you actually want that. It’s clear that these people actually wanted to rape children. So the pedophile label makes sense.
Exactly. Splitting hairs and calling it an obscure word that is only ever used in a clinical setting weakens and cheapens it. just call them pedophies. don’t let them redefine or spin it. just pedophile.
Or just be accurate and call them a rapist. A child rapist.
Pedophile already is a weakened word. Both cause it gets over used, and because it does have an actual accurate use case that doesn’t accurately describe what’s happened.
Accurate terminology is always more powerful.
That works as well!
If you were 18, and got caught having sex with your 17 year old girl/boy friend. Would you be happy to be placed into the same category of horrible human beings as Ian Watkins…?