108
Megyn Kelly questions whether Jeffrey Epstein's desire for “very young teen types” made him a pedophile
(www.mediamatters.org)
this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2025
108 points (95.8% liked)
News
33133 readers
3561 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Ephebephilia or possibly hebephilia rather than pedophilia, but the distinction is moot, because non-psychology litterate people mean all minors when they say pedophile.
Ephebophile (noun): A pedophile with a thesaurus.
Or a Psychology litterate with the DSM-V
This is one of those technical distinctions where if you're making the distinction, you're already on the wrong side of everything.
Psychology and precision in language using the diagnostic terminology of the DSM V is on the wrong side of everything?
No one is excusing or belittling anything. People who hurt children must fry.
Yeah, if you're quoting the DSM V to defend yourself as technically not a pedophile, then yes you've crossed the rubicon of decency.
I'm not defending anyone from anything. Your repeated, blatent and misguided attempts to mischaracterise what's being said makes me think "He doth protest too much.".
It's the litteral terminology from the diagnostic manual from the APA. You may want to book an appointment.
I'm not suggesting you're doing it specifically. I'm saying generally if you feel the need to make that distinction in your normal day to day life, you're almost certainly a sexual predator.
Or any number of psychology related or adjacent professions, or just well read.
What is really really weird is that you seemingly equivocate ephebephilia and hebephilia as some lesser crime. They are all equally child abuse. There is no lesser crime being implied here. All punishable the same. All irreperably damaging to the victims.
You got some serious issues to work out. Imagine a courtroom where the lawyer present evidence of the accused stabbing someone, then you stand up in the gallery and scream accusing the lawyer of being a murderer because he said the accused stabbed the victim, rather than shot the victim. Ridiculous right? That's what you're doing.
Your saying generally that being correct, accurate and precise with the nature of the crime means the lawyers, judge, medical practitioners testifying and anyone with a loose awareness of standards and terminology are murderers in my analogy.
Did you know there is an entire section in wikipedia on various forms of chronophilia You better report the researchers, the writers of the articles, the publishers of textbooks, the entire psychology profession and anyone who clicked that link for sex crimes against children.
Your bigotry is insane. Get help.
Just like the difference between a scientific theory and a layman's theory!
Another technical aspect: all of the philias relate to attraction to something, rather than having sex with it.
One could have necrophilia and yet never have sex with a corpse or not have necrophilia and still have sex with a corpse.
Yep. I don't care if he's a pedophile, not, or something else entirely. He is a rapist and child sexual abuser.
And presumably one could have sex with a corpse yet not be attracted to it.
Can't wait to try these words at the next Scrabble game.
I'd say there's nothing inherently wrong with any of these. It's the child trafficking and child molestation that's the issue.