this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2025
785 points (98.4% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

35667 readers
3747 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 121 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I would just call him a child rapist. IMO that actually sounds worse than "pedophile" because you could apply the latter to someone who was attracted to minors but didn't rape any.

Regardless of his attraction, he raped children, so he's a child rapist.

[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 46 points 1 day ago (1 children)

pedophile, hebephile and ephebophile, are after all just terms for someone with a sexual attraction disability. Typically due to a hormonal issue, trauma or mental disability.

A child rapist is someone who fucks minors and should be locked up for life if not put down. With a list of exceptions that a reasonable person can count on one hand.

While no one reasonable goanna call two high school seniors fucking when ones 17 and the other is two months older at 18. A child rapist.

A fat old fuck doing it sure the fuck is.

We should really start calling things by what they are and not misusing terminology. Makes it less impactful.

[–] Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Add to that, that to the best of my knowledge, most child rapists are not pedophiles and most pedophiles are not child rapists.

The two being convoluted helps child rapists by letting them hide behind their sexual orientation ("he can't be a child predator, he has a wife and kids!") and hurts pedophiles by stigmatizing their condition so that they have a harder time getting help to control or remove their sexual urges.

If we really want to reduce the amount suffering for both adults and, most importantly, children then we have to be able to start having actual conversations about this.

[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 6 points 23 hours ago

If we really want to reduce the amount suffering for both adults and, most importantly, children then we have to be able to start having actual conversations about this.

I appreciate that calling Trump a child rapist is also good for society.

[–] Zink@programming.dev 2 points 14 hours ago

I am 100% in favor of pushing the distinction.

Let's get the pedophiles treatment or therapy or whatever helps them while they continue to not hurt anybody while contributing to society.

Let's get the child rapists 3 hots and a cot with concrete walls all around.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 13 points 21 hours ago

"Child rapist" also applies to people who aren't actually sexually attracted to children, but rape children anyways, which is more common than people think, because rape isn't usually actually about the sex, it's about the power

[–] MTZ@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

keeping it very old school, i see. i like it.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 67 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] MTZ@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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.

[–] MTZ@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

That works as well!

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 points 22 hours ago

As I said in my comment the pedophile label makes sense here. Although they're both. People use them interchangeably for some reason.

[–] fonix232@fedia.io 46 points 1 day ago (3 children)

See, the distinction between a pedophile, hebephile and ephebophile exists for a good reason.

But the thing is, the moment you start getting into those differences, it immediately makes you sound like a pedophile.

[–] BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz 40 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's OK to have Sex with Children!

-People OUTLAWING Rainbows to Protect The Children!

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 6 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Our shitty uneducated slave-holding ancestors did it so why shouldn't we?

-them

[–] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 6 points 22 hours ago

To be fair, they claim to take all their moral cues from a book writtem by our shitty slave-holding and sheep-fucking ancestors. This is par for the course.

[–] Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works 29 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

After the normalisation of racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, white-supremacy, maga is now explaining us how raping kids is not actually pedophilia. Or if it is it's because those kids where beging for it. And if they didn't they just deserved it and the age of consent is a woke concept anyway.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 17 points 23 hours ago

Yup, suddenly now they’re interested in nuance

[–] guy@piefed.social 28 points 23 hours ago

"he's not attracted to small children, just slightly bigger children!"

[–] rustyfish@piefed.world 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

He can go on live television and eat a living, screaming baby and they will defend him.

The only reason they asked for the files is because they believe there are only people they don’t like on it.

There are no bounds to this insanity.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Well I dunno, what else are you supposed to do with screaming babies, cut them in half?

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 1 points 13 hours ago

Downvoted, because i hate the mental image you gave me.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

Lol, pedo-prez supporters have been working overtime to protect their pedo-leader. No surprise that this old libertarian "I'm not really a pedophile even though I want to rape minors" chestnut came back.

Gonna have to change the meaning of POTUS, given the head of our country is now the Pedophile of the United States

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 15 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Kinda insane so many of them are defending it

[–] Saffire@sh.itjust.works 4 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

The party of pedophilia defends pedophiles? Why I never!

[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I don't understand how they can even defend it. Best case scenario they are saying that raping women is perfectly fine as long as they're old enough. I get that with some of the extreme MAGA out there really do believe this kinda shit, but I'm sure bullshit like this is why we see more and more people leaving MAGA every day. It's no surprise that Republicans are getting absolutely destroyed in almost every election lately when you see what they act like and I feel like that will be their eventual downfall. They see these echo chambers online and believe that is an actual representation of what all republican voters think. A lot of people seem to forget, but most people still sit somewhere in the middle especially outside the internet. There's still an argument to be had about how ignorant people were when it came to the election last year, but bitching about what already happened is never going to get us moving forward.

[–] makyo@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And trafficking! Trump’s base was on a mission to root out pedos AND sex traffickers. This is at the core of the awful things Epstein was found guilty of. Take away the pedophilia and you still have monstrous behavior that should be dealt with harshly.

[–] ParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

The pizzagate projection

[–] MTZ@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The right wing party, to an astonishing degree, cozies up with and funds literal extremist organizations en masse. the left went for more social and peaceful methods, while the right wing only ramped up the mayhem. that's one of the reasons that since the late 70's there has been absolutely no element of left wing organized terror (only a few lone wolf attacks and ecoterrorism), while there is always, at any given point in time, a number of organized, well equipped extremist organizations on the right engaging in all types of activities..... political violence, stochastic terrorism, radical violence, misogynstic violence, massive amounts of disinfo, and countless other activities.

No, not all individuals who are conservative subscribe to or even know about this. But the party itself is absolute cancer of the worst degree possible. they are not nearly as benign and harmless as you think. .

[–] stupidcasey@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What was the word he was about to say?

[–] mechaboss@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[–] krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My take on this is that pedophilia encompasses sex with minors a whole, and then you have your subtypes.

Don't really care if this is technically accurate or not. It dodges the semantic bullshit pedophiles use.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 5 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Better terms would be child rapist and statutory rape. Each of those have only one very clear definition.

[–] krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Those are good terms, but I feel like statutory rape isn't as impactful as pedophile, because you're still raping a minor

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

You could just say raping a minor, then.

[–] krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 hours ago

That's pretty all encompassing.

Fucking dirt bags

[–] Credibly_Human@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Nah, 12-13 is definitely ped territory. Don't even have the fancy names as an excuse.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

"He's not a pedophile(class), he's a pedophile(subtype)" is what mm hearing

[–] MTZ@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

That lady was absolutely insane to say that

[–] nialv7@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago

I am so sorry, at first glance I read minors as minions....