this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
174 points (89.5% liked)
Gaming
20162 readers
169 users here now
Sub for any gaming related content!
Rules:
- 1: No spam or advertising. This basically means no linking to your own content on blogs, YouTube, Twitch, etc.
- 2: No bigotry or gatekeeping. This should be obvious, but neither of those things will be tolerated. This goes for linked content too; if the site has some heavy "anti-woke" energy, you probably shouldn't be posting it here.
- 3: No untagged game spoilers. If the game was recently released or not released at all yet, use the Spoiler tag (the little ⚠️ button) in the body text, and avoid typing spoilers in the title. It should also be avoided to openly talk about major story spoilers, even in old games.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well.... If the person was a minor, and you weren't, and you knew they were young and the messages were 'leaning inappropriate', you're a pedophile.
Also a predator.
I hate to get so semantical but using the word pedophile incorrectly just desensitizes the word. Pedophilia means being attracted to children, primarily meaning before or in the early stages of puberty, usually younger than 13. In fact, many pedophiles would not be attracted to someone aged 15+ because they are typically exclusively or primarily interested in prepubescent bodies.
That doesn't mean this guy isn't a total asshole, but he's not a pedophile, and I think anyone can understand an adult sexting an older teen, while still absolutely horrid, is quite different from sexting a child.
Once again, absolutely not defending this guy, I don't even know who he is... but I think it's important not to desensitize the word.
I know the distinction, but hebephile doesn't carry the same weight. Also, I believe I read the minor was 12. So... Pedo.
I stand by what I said. We don't need to be apologistic towards the scum of the earth. Kids are kids.
Oh fuck. I heard she was 17 and that was fucking bad enough as is. Fucking hell this man is awful.
Yeah I would totally agree with this if the word wasn't already desensitized a very long time ago. The language has changed. (I'm assuming people were ever differentiating, I don't really know/remember the history.) Colloquially it means interested in teens unless it's clarified to be worse than that.
I recommend not trying to make this argument, anywhere. It will not change the way people use words, even if it could there would not be a point (attraction to pre-teens is so egregious that it will always be clarified), and a lot of people will assume that someone who doesn't accept the colloquial usage is themselves interested in teens and in denial about how the public actually views that to the point where they think only interest in prepubescent children is problematic and handwave everything else away as a language issue.
Colloquially, it's a catch-all nowadays. Like I said in another reply, we don't need to differentiate between lowest common denominators. That gets into sounding sympathetic to these fucks, and anyone who sympathizes might as well be one themselves.
I’ve attended a seminar for child protection before that was delivered by a former cop (that worked in the sex crimes division) and they said the exact same thing - in the context of correctly making the distinction between paedophile and sex offender.
Sounds like he was grooming her.
You sound like a pedophile.
That is not the words you should use for a 17 year old he didn't even know was underage.
He said he knew in his post.
Still not a pedophile nor a predator even for flirting. This is not a 12 year old, but in many jurisdictions a responsible adult.
He's a morally reprehensible asshole either way.
I leave my basement and talk to people every day without hitting on underage girls
Have you talked to 17 year olds? They are far from developed in most cases. Anyone even in their late 20s should notice the difference in development and stay clear.
Yeah that's a fair take.
It is reprehensible and disgusting behavior, but it doesn't mean we should universally apply labels across vast swaths of different issues, as it devalues said label and poisons future discussion.
Simple labels simplify discussion of course, but that runs the risk of losing nuance for the specific way someone was a disgusting creep.
No it's not. Beahm, a 38 year old man at the time, was sexting a minor. That makes him a pedo.
I did not disagree with that, so I'm not sure what you're on about.
So you agree that Beahm is a pedo? You replied to a person that does not think he is a pedo with "fair take". Maybe you replied to the wrong person.
Yeah I do. I disagree with most of their posts, but I agree with the motion that using the same labels indiscriminately is a problem in online discourse.
For example, far as I know so far, I'd call him a pedo, but I am unsure whether I'd call him a predator (of course, language differences apply, too). That's just because I need words to express the predatory nature of people like Maxwell who prey on teens and YA.
That's kinda what I meant, there's too few words to just use the same label across the board sometimes. Doesn't make something someone does less reprehensible. Rather i prefer to sometimes use full sentences instead of quick labels because it more accurately expresses the matter.
What do you mean by this? Beahm was preying on a minor by sexting that minor and asking to meetup at twitch con. Are you specifically referring to people operating child sex rings? In either case, I don't think anyone else uses your ultra-specific definition. For myself, and I assume most others, pedophiles are merely a type of predator. For example, the show, to catch a predator, was about creeps sexting kids online. This is precisely what Beahm was doing so I don't think it's unreasonable to call him a predator.
Dubious take.
Not in the jurisdiction he was in, and that’s all that matters.
Also, while sending sexually explicit texts to minors (using only words) is not illegal, I’m pretty sure we can correlate what his intent was. What, do you think he’s going to come out and fully admit he’s a pedophile? No.
Also, nowhere in any of his statements has he clarified that he didn’t know they were underage. If it were the case that he didn’t know, that’s a pretty fucking big deal and he should know how important it is to explain that. He didn’t though.
Stop defending pedophiles.
Where did that age come from?
Are you seriously taking the pedophiles side on this?!
Ya he was just trying to be a pedophile. Totally different...