Well I was excited about making them feel stupid for liking something and you just make me feel stupid for being excited for something… asshole.

You mad man. Well done.

Cool, been out there throwing a lot a rocks and lawn chairs? Talking awful big game. Let’s see the action then. Put up or shut up, as they say.

The battle is not for the minds of the people that are pro-pedophilia. It is for the minds of the young people that will otherwise end up being indifferent to the pro-pedophilia people becuase they get convinced that they aren’t actually pro-pedophilia, but just think the victims are partially to blame. “Why did she get in the car? What was she wearing? Maybe she really wanted it.”

You talk about strategy, but think about what you’re doing here: you’re bickering with people you ostensibly agree with, and not with them.

In my very first comment, I called out them for the bullshit term, “underage women”, that they used. I call out “them” all the time on their bullshit. I also call out poor strategy on our side because how else to you improve without feedback and constructive criticism? Two things can be true.

How is choosing your words accurately capitulation?

I wasn’t being pedantic about the technical definitions of words like “pedophile”. I’m saying, outside of this type of assertion, we almost never use “child” to mean “teenager”. And I don’t care for its usage in this particular context, not because it’s technically/ colloquially incorrect in itself, nor that they’re only using that word to load the sentiment with emotional weight. I think it SHOULD have emotional weight, regardless of the victim’s age.

My care is that, in attributing the “wrongness” of the action to the incorrect fact that they are “children” as that word is typically understood, you make an easy target for someone with an opposing view. You undermine the very valid sentiment you are attempting to make with someone who will likely see your choice of words for what it is, an emotionally manipulative exaggeration, and then shift to arguing semantics or simply disregard your point because of that blatant exaggeration.

I do recognize the apparent irony here that I’m the one arguing semantics in this case. But I am on the same side as the person in this post and yourself. I’m not negating the point being made that these were vulnerable girls who are in no way to blame for this. I’m critiquing the technique of making that point by borrowing the emotional weight of words where they don’t belong. Similar to how Isreal throws ‘antisemitism’ around to dodge criticism of their government. That word means something else entirely but it would be convenient to your side of the argument if they let you apply it here. It’s a bad strategy and it makes those words ultimately meaningless and thus powerless when they’re applied to anything convenient.

I’m not advocating for anything to do with relations with minors, just to be clear. I am saying that, at least colloquially, we do tend to distinguish between children and adolescents/teenagers/young adults in our usage of language. Children’s books are not for teens. Children’s clothing stores are not for teens. Children’s medications are not for teens. There are certainly exceptions to this, for example the nearby Children’s hospital serves kids up to 17 years old. But generally speaking, when you say “child” no one is thinking you might be speaking about a 17 year old. We tend to recognize that there is a transition period between childhood and adulthood, not a sharp cutoff point, and our language reflects that.

That being said, none of that changes the absolute grossness of referring to minors who are victims of sex trafficking as “underage women”, obviously. That sort of language is both attributing more maturity and agency to them by calling them “women” and implying that they are somehow in the wrong for being “underage” like they are responsible for doing the things that were done to them as minors. We tend to use the term “underage” to refer to things kids do before it’s legal for them to do it, like “underage drinking”, and so that word has a connotation of wrong doing on the part of the minor, doing a crime rather than them being the victim of the crime. And “women” has the connotation of referring to adults that are responsible for themselves, have the capacity to concent to these sex acts, etc. Neither term should apply to these girls.

My understanding was that he was at least inappropriate with a minor, but he was like 17ish? Maybe 16? I don’t remember any of the details or how that panned out though.

“Oh well, then there is no pleashing you.”

Fuhgidaboudit!

Strokes can break your brain and fundamentally change your personality and values. Idk if that actually happened here or if he was always actually a piece of shit. It doesn’t matter ultimately. He’s a shithead now.

No body has ever begrudgingly become an ICE agent either. You do not stumble into it. Every ICE agent did so because they wanted to be deport people. Remember that.

The real download button only shows up after 30 seconds.

My wife’s family owns a fireworks store. We demo fireworks every year and record them on my phone. We post them on the store’s YouTube channel. We have people that watch and comment on them all the time as soon as we post them. We also have QR codes on our price tags linking to the videos so people can scan them and watch while shopping and it is an extremely effective tool for sales. But we might be the exception.

Gonna be as isolated at North Korea by the end of this administration. As trusted too.

What’s their business?

Frankly, how would DHS even know at this point?

I’ll keep on breathing while you wait, if you don’t mind.

“Bomb drop”… I’ll take “no shit” for $1000, Alex.

Banker: “And what is your account … number?”

Child on another child’s shoulders in a trench coat with a fake beard: “seven”.

Banker: “seven? . . . Sevennnn?”

Child inside coat: “Try eight!”

Child with beard: “Eight.”