Megyn Kelly's attempt to downplay Jeffrey Epstein's abuse of minors has sparked widespread outrage, with many labeling her comments as a gross misrepresentation of the severity of his crimes.
In an interview on her SiriusXM show, Kelly expressed her view that Epstein was not necessarily a "pedophile," but rather someone who preferred "very young teen types" - specifically 15-year-old girls. She clarified that she believed there's a distinction between a 15-year-old and a 5-year-old girl, which would make the widely accepted term "pedophile" inaccurate.
Kelly cited an unnamed source close to the case as saying Epstein was drawn to girls around 15 years old, calling it "disgusting." However, her argument has been met with criticism from advocates for survivors of Epstein's abuse, who claim that his actions were nothing short of predatory and exploitative.
Critics argue that Kelly's attempt to reframe Epstein's crimes as less severe can be damaging to those affected by his abuse. It is essential to remember that Epstein's victims were minors at the time of their exploitation, and no age should ever be used to justify or diminish their suffering.
Kelly's remarks have also drawn fire from prominent figures in media and beyond. The Daily Show host Josh Johnson mocked her argument as "diet pedophilia," emphasizing the gravity of such behavior. Online critics have taken to social media to express their outrage, with many accusing Kelly of minimizing Epstein's abuse.
It is essential for public figures like Kelly to prioritize accuracy and sensitivity when discussing sensitive topics like this one. By reframing Epstein's crimes in a way that downplays their severity, Kelly has inadvertently caused harm to those who were impacted by his actions.
In an interview on her SiriusXM show, Kelly expressed her view that Epstein was not necessarily a "pedophile," but rather someone who preferred "very young teen types" - specifically 15-year-old girls. She clarified that she believed there's a distinction between a 15-year-old and a 5-year-old girl, which would make the widely accepted term "pedophile" inaccurate.
Kelly cited an unnamed source close to the case as saying Epstein was drawn to girls around 15 years old, calling it "disgusting." However, her argument has been met with criticism from advocates for survivors of Epstein's abuse, who claim that his actions were nothing short of predatory and exploitative.
Critics argue that Kelly's attempt to reframe Epstein's crimes as less severe can be damaging to those affected by his abuse. It is essential to remember that Epstein's victims were minors at the time of their exploitation, and no age should ever be used to justify or diminish their suffering.
Kelly's remarks have also drawn fire from prominent figures in media and beyond. The Daily Show host Josh Johnson mocked her argument as "diet pedophilia," emphasizing the gravity of such behavior. Online critics have taken to social media to express their outrage, with many accusing Kelly of minimizing Epstein's abuse.
It is essential for public figures like Kelly to prioritize accuracy and sensitivity when discussing sensitive topics like this one. By reframing Epstein's crimes in a way that downplays their severity, Kelly has inadvertently caused harm to those who were impacted by his actions.
i mean i'm all about nuance and balance but come on this is so wrong 
she's basically saying that if a girl is 15 it's okay to be "drawn" to her, no way!! 
5-year-olds or not, those kids were still VICTIMS OF ABUSE and they deserve respect and support, not some watered down version of the truth 
. i'm so tired of people trying to downplay these crimes just to fit their narrative... it's always about the victims, always 
. Like, come on, girl! Downplaying the severity of his abuse is NOT okay 
. Social media is lit with people calling her out for being insensitive... I'm here for it 
! Public figures need to be more mindful of the language they use when discussing sensitive topics like this one. It's not okay to minimize the suffering of others, Megyn 
.
. She's gotta be outta her mind thinkin' that's a legit defense for what he did. I mean, come on, 15-year-olds are minors too! You can't just pick and choose when it comes to the law. And what's with this whole "very young teen types" thing? That's just plain ridiculous 
. I feel bad for the survivors who've had to deal with all this trauma. They don't need some public figure tryin' to water down their experiences. It's like, yeah, we get it, you're tryin' to be nuanced, but nope, just sayin' what happened was wrong is good enough for me 
.
. I mean, come on, there's a difference between 15 and 5, Kelly! Don't try to erase the suffering of those kids 
Come on, it's not about age, it's about exploitation and abuse. Those girls were minors when they were taken advantage of, and no amount of nuance can change that.
It's just not right. And honestly, I'm getting really frustrated with people like her who try to downplay or minimize the severity of these crimes... it's like they're saying that what Epstein did wasn't THAT bad 
. But let me tell you, it was 
I get where she might be trying to find nuance in her argument, but this is a total misstep 
. I'm all for nuanced discussions, but not when it comes at the expense of survivors who have already suffered so much trauma 
I mean, come on, 15-year-old girls? That's not just "preference" for young teens, that's a whole other level of creepy and predatory. And to make matters worse, she's basically saying it's okay because they're over 14? No way, period. Her argument is like trying to downplay a car accident by saying the victims were old enough to sign a waiver... 
. her excuse is just a total misrepresentation of what happened to those kids 
. Can't we just focus on supporting the survivors of Epstein's abuse rather than trying to reframe his crimes in a way that minimizes their suffering? 
