Wow, lots to unpack here.
-
You can argue about definitions all day if you want, at the end of the day, if your daughter somehow "dated" a 39-year-old, I'm hoping you'd want the guy arrested. The vast majority of people would call it pedophilia, and calling it "tasteless" is a hell of an understatement.
-
"let's not pretend you're not gonna bang a hot young girl". Hell no. Speak for yourself mate. I'm 26 and I would NEVER date an 18-year-old, let alone "date" a 17-year-old when I'm 39.
-
"you're nowhere to be found when the genders are reversed". Who are you talking to? Whether a man or a woman has sex with a minor, it's still statutory rape. I know there are some so-called "press outlets" that word things differently when it's a woman having sex with a minor, where they use terms like "had sex" instead of "raped". I think it's appalling. I'm not part of the crowd you think you're addressing.
-
"It hasn't been 5 seconds & the guy responded with his butthurt, looks like I hit the nail on his character" Again, who are you talking to? My first comment is the one where I called Seinfeld a pedo, and this is the second one. I posted my initial comment 6 hours ago and came back 6 hours later to see that I had apparently caused a shitstorm.
I sure wasn't expecting to see a brigade of strange individuals arguing about the definition of pedophilia. Are you usually this enthusiastic about semantics?
First you talk about laws and due process, then you talk about morals. Which is it? I'm not sure which part of what I've said is either illegal or immoral/amoral.
Dating a minor is bad, whether legally or morally. Some countries enforce this with no exceptions, while some allow exceptions for people who are close to the same age, like a 17yo dating a 19yo. Feel free to prove me wrong, but I don't think there are any countries in the West where an actual fully-grown adult is allowed to "date" a minor.
On an individual level, morals are technically malleable and arbitrary, but the law doesn't (and shouldn't) give two shits about that. If you think dating minors is perfectly fine, explain that to the judge.
And if you still want to argue about semantics, then sure, maybe in some countries, there's an age-based difference in legal terminology between "an illegal relationship with a minor" and "pedophilia", but outside of the legal realm, they're one and the same. I have no respect for pedos (crazy, right?) and certainly won't defend them, whether they diddle 9, 12 or 17yo kids.
"people are considering calling old men who date 25 y/o women as pedos" Yeah, and "people" are saying Hillary Clinton is a lizard. "People" say Paul McCartney was replaced by a clone. "People" say all kinds of shit. "People" is no one and everyone at the same time. You can make "people" say anything.
At the end of the day, a 25-year-old is an adult, and therefore cannot be a victim of pedophilia. Therefore, old men who date 25-year-olds are supercreeps, but not pedos. I'm not defending them, I'm only saying that you can't put an old guy in jail for dating a 25-year-old, simply because no matter how reprehensible you think their relationship is, they're both adults in the eyes of the law. The guy is still a creep though.
What is there to argue about? Who are you defending exactly? And what makes my reasoning so "amoral"?
"when you get a taste of your own amoral-medicine" "when the goal shifts again" I'm pretty sure my aversion to dating immorally young people will protect me from any slippery slopes and moving goalposts in the future.