this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2025
718 points (98.1% liked)

Political Weirdos

1068 readers
2 users here now

A community dedicated to the weirdest people involved in politics.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] leadore@lemmy.world 43 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

By even debating this idea of 'at what age is having sex with children OK', you fall into the trap. We already have laws defining age of consent for a reason.

The trap is to distract you from trump's sex crimes. They need to normalize statutory rape as acceptable, because more and more stuff is going to be coming out about his doing that. His base is horrified by pedophilia, but not by misogyny.

This is how they prep the base to be just fine with crimes trump did (in this case rape) when more info comes out. Keep their thinking in black-and-white: 'pedophilia is evil, but trump didn't do that, so he's not evil! He's still our Daddy.' So they'll ignore his rapes of under-age girls just like they already ignore his rapes of adult women. So by saying,

"Sure, why wouldn't anyone be attracted to a girl whose body is developed even if she's 'technically' under age -- it's not like it's pedophilia or anything, which would be wrong!". As long as they're 13+ it's fine!"

they are saying statutory rape is OK as long as the girl is at least 13. No, that's just how the new Christian Nationalist theocracy wants it to be. The crap about "it was acceptable back in his day, only taboo since the '90's" is of course bullshit. I'm surprised they didn't claim it was only made taboo by the 'woke left'.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 days ago

We already have laws defining age of consent for a reason.

And it probably me moved upward anyway.