Why would it not be applicable? Why is the part of the definition you care about applicable but the part that ruins your argument isn’t?
Neither would I, as a 20 year old is an adult in every state. This example is an adult dating an adult.
-I explained why, in the post to which you are responding.
http://statelaws.findlaw.com/mississippi-law/mississippi-legal-ages-laws.html
Ah that’s my bad. When I googled I looked for age of consent instead of age of majority (which to be fair overrides age of majority).
I understand. I hope no one thinks I’m arguing that I think what Moore is accused of is normal or anything. It was also illegal, unless I’ve misunderstood. That said, neither its legal prohibition nor its subjective strangeness make Moore an actual pedophile(as always, assuming the accusations are true). Eyedentist’s crude “if it bleeds, it breeds” comment was actually pretty accurate when it comes to separating actual pedophiles from those that merely have strange preferences in women.
Is this under the definition that pedo is a mental disease? Seems under a literal definition it’s pretty dead on.
I’m not sure I understand what you’re asking, but pedophilia is a mental disorder. I believe puberty is the proper line by which to define it. Using ages is fine for legal purposes, but pedophilia is not a legal issue; it’s not(necessarily)even illegal to BE a pedophile. That’s(that Moore is not accused of being an actual pedophile) all I’ve been arguing.
What is this based on? Your personal opinions of pedophilia?
We’ll have to agree to disagree, my sister hit puberty at the ripe age of 10. If a 35 yrold man tried to sleep with her, I wouldn’t fail to call him a pedo.
No. It’s the actual meaning of pedophilia.
I wouldn’t either, but my calling him that wouldn’t make it so(unless, of course, he was trying to sleep with her BECAUSE he believed she was prepubescent).
pe·do·phile
ˈpedəˌfīl/Submit
noun
a person who is sexually attracted to children.
Seems pretty cut and dry.
So in your definition of pedo, one is not a pedo as long as the child he/she is going after has already hit puberty?
One problem with this whole “it isn’t pedophilia if the child has reached puberty” argument is that it assumes the predator knows that. In the case of the aforementioned 10 year old who reached puberty, I don’t think anyone could tell by looking at her that she wasn’t prepubescent.
1 Like
I agree. That’s why I wrote what I did in parentheses. A 14-year-old, and definitely a 16-year-old, is a different story, though.
That’s correct, unless the guy is pursuing the child BECAUSE he (mistakenly, in that case) believes s/he is prebuscent.
That’s what you’re left with though isn’t it? If “pedo” only applies to people that take a run at pre puberty kids, you can’t (or rather it doesn’t fit the definition) call a guy pedo if he goes after a 9 year old as long as she hits puberty by then.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on the definition
I doubt many adults are pursuing 9-year-olds for any reason other than a belief the 9-year-old is prepubescent.
Can you prove that? Without proof if a guy says “I thought she hit puberty already” what is your response going to be?
To label a persistent, intense attraction to early-pubertal children as a ‘strange preference in women’ is perverse and misleading, because 1) it classifies children as “women,” which they are not; and 2) it minimizes the profound pathology represented by such an attraction by lumping it in with other, relatively harmless paraphilias.
Prove what? Pedophilia itself is not something that needs to be proven. It’s not a crime. A person’s body changes during puberty, so it should be pretty apparent whether his claim is valid.
It is a process not something that happens in one day.
Your argument is that if someone goes after a post puberty child, they’re not a pedo. Where is the burden of proof on whether or not the child in question has hit puberty (or whether or not said pedo thought they had/hadn’t hit puberty)? Do we assume all people that go after young children thought they were pre puberty unless proven otherwise? Or the inverse?
There is no burden of proof. Pedophilia is not a criminal offense.