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.
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.
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.
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.