I just want to note that just because someone is seen smiling like this in a photo doesn't mean they are not a victim. She was young and not even legally of age to make the decision to do what they made her do. She had no idea the implications or long lasting impact of it. Also, people put on a good face when they know they're being watched.
I know most people here will know this, but I just wanted to put it out there for the few that might not.
Look, I'd never talk in defense of Epstein, especially after having read parts of the documents released so far (like the one where he got furious for not being not being the first one to sleep with one girl and stuff).
But, yes but, the way you talk about the girl isn't right. You infantilize a 17 year old person who isn't a total idiot. It's also perfectly possible she was genuinely having a good time in this exact moment, and frankly she looks genuinely amused, her smile doesn't seem forced. People are perfectly able to have a good time with their abuser at certain moments of calm. Don't ask me why, but I know.
The documents released so far hint at far worse things he has done or enabled, we can hate him without dangerous infantilization. At 17 you can choose a college, that will change your life forever too. You can also choose not to go to a college, or to start work and what kind of work.
People make life altering decisions at an earlier time than this. Stick to the real horrible things he has done please, this is disrespectful to the girl. She certainly doesn't want people talk about her as a mentally challenged person who had no agency or autonomy.
I'm not saying it was her fault. But her decisions played a role in all this. I'm sure she knows, and I'm pretty sure she would hate people saying she was a child fully incompetent of thought. Talk about power dynamics, coersion, bribing, things like these. But maybe don't imply that she was brain dead, when just a few months later she would have somehow suddenly be fully aware of what she's doing. That's not reality.
Imagine a girl who goes to a party, gets moderately drunk, leaves with some guy she likes with the intention to have sex with him, they start having sex, suddenly he gets violent, she says stop but he doesn't, he rapes her.
One person says she's 17 and a half, so she was a child and didn't know what she was doing, she couldn't anticipate how bad the consequences will be, that's why she's a victim and the rapist is to blame.
I say she knew what she's doing, she underestimated the risk, but she's still a victim and the rapist is to blame.
[EDIT: People somehow refuse to read this part so I'm highlighting it. In this example, me and the person above would agree about her being the victim and we would both blame the rapist. But the person above adds undesirable infantilization whereas I don't. That's the only difference. Nobody is blaming the victim.]
See? That's how things often work in reality. My support for the girl in this example doesn't sound like it's conditional, and I don't claim she had no agency. My support for the girl in this example acknowledges reality. I argue that my comment would help the girl more, because she would know I'm on her side even though she made some careless mistakes on the way, which she is painfully aware of after the fact.
I don't know what was the extent of the mistakes of the girl in the photo, but I know she's not a child with no agency. Just to be clear, the point isn't to remind the girl of all the mistakes she might have made, the point is not to make up stories about her being a child with no agency. That's all.
"she made some careless mistakes" damn, man. It's still rape regardless whether you class a child as a child or not, and in no way the victims fault due to "careless mistakes" or "she knew what she was doing".
This is honestly sickening to read and I hope you never have daughters.
You're not even trying to read what I wrote. If you did, you'd see that I explicitly said the girl from this example would be a victim and the rapist is to blame.
I'm literally trying to suggest we treat the victim with more respect, dignity and authenticity and you try to paint me as a sickening bastard who shouldn't have kids.
Stop for a moment and think before you knee-jerk like this.
All you have to do is look at how old and gross he is here, to know that she would not be attracted to him sexually without being brainwashed / groomed / manipulated. Just stop and think logically for a minute.
Again, why do you feel the need to add this unnecessary assumption?
Why add anything completely unnecessary and based purely on your opinion that might actually be false and which might make the victim feel worse?
If you say:
"He's so old and gross and nobody in their right mind would find him attractive without being brainwashed,"
and the victim in fact happened to beattracted to him at first, that statement can easily feed her guilt further.
She might interpret it as:
"Nobody normal would find him attractive, but I did. I'm not normal."
She might have found him attractive.
Just the same, she might have found him hideous.
We cannot know. Unless she said anything on this topic herself of course.
The entire point is we don't need to add extra assumptions of what she did or didn't feel, what she did or didn't do. Especially not if we can't prove them in any way, and if they're based only on our opinions and hunches.
Before you bring it up, I know I said above she might have been genuinely enjoying herself in that exact moment, but I was bringing that up only as a counterpoint to the person above me who was implying she's faking. The idea was the same, to remind the person both can be true and we cannot know, so let's not make assuptions about her internal state, emotions, opinions, etc.
Her trauma is not our drama show.
Only her truthful experience is valid.
None of the extra stuff we "assume" is needed to conclude that she is the victim and he is to blame.
Now please, if you refuse to read it all, just don't read any of it. This takes energy to write and I hate seeing my words being twisted by people who skim my posts or just read in them whatever they want to read.
All I said here was written in hopes of helping a few people maybe see a slightly better way to talk about victims, in a manner that is more authentic and respectful to the victim.
Wtf is this comment. Yes she has some agency at that age snd wasn't a total idiot.
The comment above was claiming she was a victim. She absolutely was a victim. You can definitely be coerced into doing things by much older and more powerful people at that age which you will live to regret.
Personally I think you can at 21 as well, but you have to make an age cut off somewhere.
She definitely looks genuinely happy in that moment but that doesn't represent the whole time and the whole experience. I feel dumb writing this out it's so obvious
Teenagers get really upset when you imply they aren’t Totally Rational and Fully Capable Adults. They end up getting very uncomfortably close to defending pedophiles and groomers and creeps because “I’m grown up and can make my own choices!”
Like, sure thing kid. Get back to me when you’re 30 and realize that cool 26 year old didn’t actually think you were “mature for your age” when you started “dating” when you were 16. They lack perspective and want to be seen as fully grown and mature because the government says so.
I have no idea how could you read my post and think I'm trying to say she loved the whole experience or that she wasn't a victim.
It's about the way we talk about younger people (usually women), saying things like "she was a child, she had no idea what is she doing." Why should we talk like this? Whom does it help? Epstein is a criminal and the girl being a self-aware person with autonomy and agency doesn't diminish that. So why do people always need to bring up these ideas that the victim had absolutely no idea about anything, or that the victim was "just a child" when they were actually a teenager or even mere months from 18 years of age?
Maybe you will understand better if I put it this way:
A rapist has reduced you to an object used for his sick pleasure, and now people "on your side" are reducing you to a child with no agency. It's not your fault, because you a just a child who has no capacity to think and make decisions. No side treats you like a human, with respect and dignity.
Can't you see it, even just a little bit?
Also, by talking like this, it can sound as if people were implying that if she wasn't a child and if she was capable of thinking, it would be her fault and they wouldn't be sorry for her. You could interpret it that way, especially if you're in a full self-blame mode. And since she knows that she did have agency, she might blame herself even more after hearing such comments.
So it's not factual, it's not even a white lie that might make the victim feel better, so why are we doing it. The crime would be just as severe without it.
Also, the age of consent is below 18 in several countries. The exact age is quite arbitrary. That's not an excuse for his behavior and countless horrible actions, but the American "she wasn't 18, so he's a pedo" mentality is annoying. With 17 she was not a child and didn't look like a child. Her age alone doesn't mean she didn't know what was going on. Abuse of power can occur at any age, it is just more likely at a younger age.
He set out to take advantage of her. He lured her in with the promise of money and saying she won't have to do much but... then pushed it farther. He groomed a young girl.
I didn't say that simply because she was 17 that he's a pedo. If an 18 or 19 year old boy had a relationship with her and they fool around that's quite different than a many with power grooming a 17 year old.
I highly suggest spending some time learning about how undue influence and grooming work instead of just seeing the situation in the same light as a couple kids that have sex.
I was not talking about and did not compare them to a couple of kids who had sex. The age difference is absolutely known. You did not get the point at all.
> That's not an excuse for his behavior and countless horrible actions, but the American "she wasn't 18, so he's a pedo" mentality is annoying.
Yes, exactly this. That's my point, I just had to be careful with my wording, because going against that without care immediately labels you as defender of child rapists...
> Abuse of power can occur at any age
Again, exactly right.
There is no age limit that makes someone immune to abuse of power and other forms of coercion. What makes a much bigger difference is education and life experience. And I worry that people who keep thinking of their offspring as "children" for way too long actively prevent them from getting both, leaving them more vulnerable to predators and sometimes even enabling abuse and rape.
Just imagine how many cases of abuse and rape (also teen pregnancies) could have been prevented if children, tweens and teens were properly educated, specifically warned and allowed to acquire experience in an environment safeguarded only to extent appropriate for their current level of maturity, not some arbitrary numbers. Also if they weren't scared of approaching their parents.
Glad someone said it. Literally 24 hours separate 17 from 18 year olds. Idk why people magically think something huge changes over night during those 24 hours, but goddamn this girl was about as capable of choosing as possible.
Epstein did terrible things for sure, but this picture isn’t indicative of anything. I suspect the down votes that you are eventually going to get are going to come from people who have never actually been abused or groomed before and have no idea what they’re talking about.
Which laws? You want more burkas on the streets because some old geezer can't accept the fact that some things are not meant for him, even when he's rich?
Did you read the person's comment that I was replying to? They commented on the technicality that 17 is legal where this took place. I then made the comment that you replied to that until very recently, in the UK, they would have a centerfold of half naked girls as young as 16 in their newspaper. If you elaborate on what confuses you, then maybe we can work together.
As I replied to that other person, the AoC in that foreign country might not matter as much as people think. So that "technicality" is more of a distraction. And while I agree that having a 16yo as a centerfold is in very poor taste, I don't need calls for even more censorship either.
Quit saying this s, the age of legal consent in Florida and New Mexico is 18. Do you have a hard time understanding which numbers are bigger and which numbers are smaller? And as you've been told rape, sexual assault, trafficking, sexual abuse you cannot consent to those, there is no age of consent to those. Stop saying this sick s
211
u/phylter99 1d ago
I just want to note that just because someone is seen smiling like this in a photo doesn't mean they are not a victim. She was young and not even legally of age to make the decision to do what they made her do. She had no idea the implications or long lasting impact of it. Also, people put on a good face when they know they're being watched.
I know most people here will know this, but I just wanted to put it out there for the few that might not.