1749
The news is sugarcoating how revolting the Epstein files are (discuss.online)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world
175 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -4 points 9 months ago (8 children)

Like people are saying “Oh, no, he didn’t rape the kid he just had sex with her.”

It's much more likely simply a legal CYA maneuver on the part of the media outlet vis-à-vis libel allegations, to not use the name of the crime to describe an act that no one's yet been convicted of.

Sex, by definition, is engaging in sexual pleasure with both persons consent.

Well, not to be pedantic, but that's not accurate. Consent is not an intrinsic attribute of sex.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    What are you on about?

    Rape is a crime. A crime of nonconsensual sexual activity with another person. That, by necessity, requires consent for uncriminalized sex. Children can't give consent and that's why sex with children is called statutory rape.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    It’s much more likely simply a legal CYA maneuver on the part of the media outlet vis-à-vis libel allegations, to not use the name of the crime to describe an act that no one’s yet been convicted of.

    That's what the magic word "allegedly" is for. I'm not saying this person committed this crime, I'm saying that someone has said that this person did a thing that could reasonably meet the definition of this crime.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    ok what do I look like a dictionary

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

    Well, using a word usually mean that you have a cursory knowledge of its meaning. But they didn't exactly elaborate on what they meant by saying that sex doesn't implcitly mean consent.

    The only way i could justify that position, is of they meant sex(*noun), and the description of organisms that create gametes of different size and shapes.

    Sexual relations, coitus, boinking or one of the many different versions of describing the various acts of genital relationships between humans, DOES imply consent. Otherwise it is sexual misconduct or rape.

    But i recon both of you already know this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago*

    But they didn’t exactly elaborate on what they meant by saying that sex doesn’t implcitly mean consent.

    I was pretty straightforward about it, I think. Rape is a 'subcategory' of sex.

    There's a difference between the disingenuous act of describing a nonconsensual sex act while deliberately not mentioning the 'nonconsent', and claiming that the word "sex" itself carries with it the 'trait' of consent.

    If consent was part of the definition of sex, then when two people get blackout drunk (which legally makes them both unable to render informed consent) and fuck each other at a party or something, we'd consider no sex to have happened, which would be an obviously ridiculous conclusion that no one reaches. It's obvious consent is not an intrinsic attribute of "sex".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent