Playboy founder Hugh Hefner notified the FBI of Jeffrey Epstein and reported that a Playmate was sexually abused and trafficked by the late financier, according to new court documents reported this week.The FBI reportedly ignored several of Hefner's tips about Epstein for 15 years, according to News...
He had a kink for the blonde bombshells/pinup girls of his youth. Full bodied women with a “girl next door” quality (his gross words, not mine). Epstein and Trump preferred jailbait. Where Hefner liked sex with women he objectified, Epstein and Trump liked to rape, abuse and have power over girls. In my opinion, Hefner was gross, but Epstein and Trump are evil.
EDIT: To be clear, I’m not a fan of Heffner, but to equate him to Epstein and Trump waters down the gravity of what Epstein and Trump did. That’s why I make the distinction.
Can we not use the term “jailbait?” It connotes a willing-but-underage person, rather than someone who has been manipulated or coerced into an abuse situation.
I don’t think “willing” has been a primary defining factor for the word ever since the /r/jailbait thing. That yuck factor is why I chose the word (that place was a cesspool). Regardless, I am very open to suggestions for a replacement. I don’t mean that aggressively, I genuinely would love a different word with that much baggage that really puts into perspective how foul men like Trump are.
I appreciate your view that in the context of that subreddit the term connotes a yuck factor, I also bring the context of 70s/80s songs like “Jailbait” implying that young teenage girls were willing participants in what were actually predatory relationships.
I think simply calling them children makes the criminality clear without any questionable connotations.
I’m somewhat in favor of using yucky words for giving nuance as long as the rest of the text implies you’re not one to use the phrases in an earnest way.
I’ve had mixed results on Lemmy with words like “homemaker” when trying to discuss a specific kind of social expectation, and then got immediately told off for using it. I never use it. It was the right word in the moment.
Maybe write “what they’re gleefully call X” instead of “X” and it would keep the yuck factor of putting the word there without seeming like you’re taking the word at face value
Is there another word that perfectly encapsulates the specific intent of the abuser. I don’t think woman want to be objectified or raped in those terms.
Is it legal? Yes. What’s the problem? Something will always be “barely legal”. Even if we decide that it’s immoral and make it illegal, something else will still always be “barely legal”.
If you think something is immoral, then just say so. If a bunch of consenting adults do something that doesn’t harm anyone, mind your own business.
Honestly, the obsession with 18 Specifically is also disingenuous. Many countries consider 16 to be an appropriate age. Some consider 18 to be too young. This obsession of “18 okay. 17 A LITERAL INFANT!!!” is just ridiculous. And I would bet money that this comment will have people clutching their pearls and accusing me of being a predator.
The US has literally charged teenagers for distributing CP, because they exchanged pictures with each other… The entire country is just fuckin’ bonkers.
More than that, if the legal age of consent was 40, then 41 would be “barely legal”. Why do people use the term negatively (or positively for that matter). It’s just so arbitrary.
Because it’s moral posturing. I saw a post not long ago for an advertisement for alcohol-free beer. Clearly targeted at late teens and early 20’s, and it was called “Under-Age beer! Great for driving!” And there were swarms of people complaining that “Advertising beer to children is awful!”
Believe it or not, most of the US has the age of consent below 18, even before factoring in Romeo and Juliette laws. I’m sure there are some restrictions on making use of that information, use of sex toys being banned being one of them if I recall and making porn being banned until 18 regardless, but 18 is hardly a universal thing even here.
i mean…still scouted girls while they were underage/in highschools iirc, the bar to beat is running international pedophile sex-trafficking blackmail ring though so…sure. better than epstein
if a teenage girl has a choice between college or posing for playboy, the studious teenage girls aren’t going to choose playboy, and if they do, it’s to fund their college education. the promiscuous, body confident girls are DEFINITELY going to choose playboy.
good for them.
who the fuck cares about this other than annoying, self-righteous fucks who try and speak for every single person? it’s their decision. if someone came up to me right now and said ‘eat a weeks worth of my turds and i’ll give you 100k’ i probably wouldn’t fucking do it.
posing nude isn’t really the same thing as this but you act like it is. the girl who posed nude probably landed some rich husband or possibly gained a modeling career. i doubt many of them ended up on welfare and in the end their path was less exploitative than a typical lower-class life in america, tits or not.
those girls exploited the system with their bodies–something that women give away for far less every single day; your average only fans model makes less than a playboy centerfold.
if a teenage girl has a choice between college or posing for playboy, the studious
You have no idea what you’re talking about. Plenty of girls with opportunity and means for a better life get abused and manipulated into joining the sex industry every day. You don’t have the slightest understanding of the sex industry and why or why not some girls join.
i’m just saying there was alot more to rhe playboy empire than just…nudie magazines. plenty of girls were effecticely kept hostage in that mansion
only compared to scale of running international pedophile/rape trafficking ring does what hughe did look good by comparison. he drew the line at raping kids apparently, hardly praise worthy
Hefner had a very specific type, and it wasn’t children. Still a terrible person, just not a pedophile.
That type being barely legal?
He had a kink for the blonde bombshells/pinup girls of his youth. Full bodied women with a “girl next door” quality (his gross words, not mine). Epstein and Trump preferred jailbait. Where Hefner liked sex with women he objectified, Epstein and Trump liked to rape, abuse and have power over girls. In my opinion, Hefner was gross, but Epstein and Trump are evil.
EDIT: To be clear, I’m not a fan of Heffner, but to equate him to Epstein and Trump waters down the gravity of what Epstein and Trump did. That’s why I make the distinction.
Can we not use the term “jailbait?” It connotes a willing-but-underage person, rather than someone who has been manipulated or coerced into an abuse situation.
I don’t think “willing” has been a primary defining factor for the word ever since the /r/jailbait thing. That yuck factor is why I chose the word (that place was a cesspool). Regardless, I am very open to suggestions for a replacement. I don’t mean that aggressively, I genuinely would love a different word with that much baggage that really puts into perspective how foul men like Trump are.
I appreciate your view that in the context of that subreddit the term connotes a yuck factor, I also bring the context of 70s/80s songs like “Jailbait” implying that young teenage girls were willing participants in what were actually predatory relationships.
I think simply calling them children makes the criminality clear without any questionable connotations.
I’m somewhat in favor of using yucky words for giving nuance as long as the rest of the text implies you’re not one to use the phrases in an earnest way.
I’ve had mixed results on Lemmy with words like “homemaker” when trying to discuss a specific kind of social expectation, and then got immediately told off for using it. I never use it. It was the right word in the moment.
Maybe write “what they’re gleefully call X” instead of “X” and it would keep the yuck factor of putting the word there without seeming like you’re taking the word at face value
Is there another word that perfectly encapsulates the specific intent of the abuser. I don’t think woman want to be objectified or raped in those terms.
Children is the word. They enjoy raping children.
Posts like this are what activated Trump’s voterbase pre-2016.
“barely legal” is such a disingenuous attack.
Is it legal? Yes. What’s the problem? Something will always be “barely legal”. Even if we decide that it’s immoral and make it illegal, something else will still always be “barely legal”.
If you think something is immoral, then just say so. If a bunch of consenting adults do something that doesn’t harm anyone, mind your own business.
Honestly, the obsession with 18 Specifically is also disingenuous. Many countries consider 16 to be an appropriate age. Some consider 18 to be too young. This obsession of “18 okay. 17 A LITERAL INFANT!!!” is just ridiculous. And I would bet money that this comment will have people clutching their pearls and accusing me of being a predator.
it’s specifically stupid when it’s high schoolers dating, omg one is 18 and one is 17 !!!
The US has literally charged teenagers for distributing CP, because they exchanged pictures with each other… The entire country is just fuckin’ bonkers.
More than that, if the legal age of consent was 40, then 41 would be “barely legal”. Why do people use the term negatively (or positively for that matter). It’s just so arbitrary.
Because it’s moral posturing. I saw a post not long ago for an advertisement for alcohol-free beer. Clearly targeted at late teens and early 20’s, and it was called “Under-Age beer! Great for driving!” And there were swarms of people complaining that “Advertising beer to children is awful!”
Believe it or not, most of the US has the age of consent below 18, even before factoring in Romeo and Juliette laws. I’m sure there are some restrictions on making use of that information, use of sex toys being banned being one of them if I recall and making porn being banned until 18 regardless, but 18 is hardly a universal thing even here.
i mean…still scouted girls while they were underage/in highschools iirc, the bar to beat is running international pedophile sex-trafficking blackmail ring though so…sure. better than epstein
do you have a point here?
if a teenage girl has a choice between college or posing for playboy, the studious teenage girls aren’t going to choose playboy, and if they do, it’s to fund their college education. the promiscuous, body confident girls are DEFINITELY going to choose playboy.
good for them.
who the fuck cares about this other than annoying, self-righteous fucks who try and speak for every single person? it’s their decision. if someone came up to me right now and said ‘eat a weeks worth of my turds and i’ll give you 100k’ i probably wouldn’t fucking do it.
posing nude isn’t really the same thing as this but you act like it is. the girl who posed nude probably landed some rich husband or possibly gained a modeling career. i doubt many of them ended up on welfare and in the end their path was less exploitative than a typical lower-class life in america, tits or not.
those girls exploited the system with their bodies–something that women give away for far less every single day; your average only fans model makes less than a playboy centerfold.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. Plenty of girls with opportunity and means for a better life get abused and manipulated into joining the sex industry every day. You don’t have the slightest understanding of the sex industry and why or why not some girls join.
i’m just saying there was alot more to rhe playboy empire than just…nudie magazines. plenty of girls were effecticely kept hostage in that mansion
only compared to scale of running international pedophile/rape trafficking ring does what hughe did look good by comparison. he drew the line at raping kids apparently, hardly praise worthy
Wow that’s really brave of you to admit
Barely Legal was published Larry Flynt i think.
Oh you
Pornographer and American Hero, Larry Flynt.