Good. It’s what he deserves. I was 9 or 10 when that happened and I remember thinking it was so gross and being confused why people were just like…cool with it? I’m glad people are calling him out now - better late than never, I guess.

Boomers have a much higher tolerance of SA and grooming. Look at how it’s just accepted that Rock Stars could have underaged… pursuits.

I know this won’t be popular, but it’s for a few reasons:

It wasn’t and isn’t illegal.

Most people would look at her and see a hot woman and understand it.

This whole puritanical BS that if you are over 18 and find someone under 18 attractive, that makes you a pedophile, is a modern a theme. Back then people were free to admit that they found young women attractive without being labelled by so many to have a mental disorder.

I speak strongly about this because I think we are doing great damage to mental health to repeatedly claim it’s a mental disorder to have a completely normal and common biological attraction.

But don’t get me wrong, I 100% support protecting minors from predators. I agree these laws should exist, I just wish people would stop pretending that there is something wrong with the attraction itself.

You’re telling on yourself quite a bit here. Your mental health doesn’t have to suffer if you find a “biologically mature” woman attractive but after a certain age if you’re seeing a “hot woman” and not “a young girl” there definitely is some deviation from the norm.

We’re talking about sexual attraction to children that don’t know how to file their taxes and are just learning what it means to be an adult. If your sexual attraction to someone is purely physical and not affected by your rational mind telling you that they’re a kid then there really is a bit of a disconnect there.

Maybe you’re closer in age to them than I am, there’s certainly a range of “adult ages” where people are still developing mentally, but when you’re old enough that you’re finding a woman SEXUALLY attractive who is the age of your daughter or your friends’ daughters that’s a red flag and worth some introspection.

You’re telling on yourself quite a bit here.

I’m perfectly comfortable with who I am attracted to. Don’t worry about my mental health. There is no telling on myself, I’m 100% open about it.

I just recognize that this is the same BS trauma that we’ve been inflicting on gay people by telling them that their perfectly normal and natural attraction is some kind of mental issue. Just like how I see through when someone claims gay people have a mental problem, I see through the implications that men being attracted to young women is indicative of some kind of mental issue.

but after a certain age if you’re seeing a “hot woman” and not “a young girl” there definitely is some deviation from the norm.

We are talking about a young woman in her prime reproductive years. Objectively speaking, evolutionarily, it would make sense that men are attracted to this. In fact, I would argue that if you don’t find them physically attractive, you are the one deviating from the norm. Now to be clear, don’t confuse what I’m saying with emotional and intellectual attractiveness.

We’re talking about sexual attraction to children

No we’re not, we’re talking about being attracted to women in their prime reproductive years. They are young and likely immature and we should have laws that protect them, but let’s not conflate that with the physical attraction being a mental illness.

I’m probably as old or older than you. I’ve talked to people in their 40s who I find completely emotionally immature and intellectually unattractive, and I’ve talked to teenagers whom I’ve found to be mature and the conversation to be intellectually stimulating. Although the latter is few and far between, and getting further apart as I age.

Would I want to have a relationship with them? No. Would I want to have sex with them? Sure.

prime reproductive years

girls enter puberty so much earlier than boys, their capable of reproduction anywhere from 10-12. When you talk about “prime reproductive years,” know that it includes girls as young as 10. So… stop using that term. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt and inferring that you actually mean girls that are on the very cusp of womanhood, like, ages 17-19, but others may not.

Women are hot, girls are not. Some girls can appear to be older than they are, and it’s confusing when confronted with a genuinely attractive woman that is not yet 18, because we’re caught between the confusing notions of “I am attracted to this person” and “this person is not yet old enough to to be engaged with in a socially conscious manner.” It’s not wrong to find the person attractive, it IS wrong to engage with them in a manner reserved for those that are fully realized adults. For my purposes, I’m putting adulthood at around age 22-25, when your brain is pretty much fully developed.

So with that being said, No, Jerry Seinfeld didn’t do a bad thing by thinking a 17 year old girl attractive, he DID do a bad thing by engaging with her as if she was a fully formed adult.

When you talk about “prime reproductive years,” know that it includes girls as young as 10.

Prime reproductive years for women is generally late teens to late 20s. I’ll keep using the term because I’m using it accurately, and it’s exactly the whole point: biologically speaking why would it be surprising that some men would find a women who is prime for reproduction attractive? It just makes perfect sense.

it’s confusing when confronted with a genuinely attractive woman that is not yet 18,

It’s only confusing to you because you’ve bought into the puritanical notion that there is something wrong with being attracted to young women; there’s really nothing confusing about it: it’s reasonable to find them physically attractive, but almost certainly inappropriate to engage in a relationship with them. This is the misconception I’m trying to dispell here.

I agree that at best he did a questionable thing. However I know nothing of her maturity at the time. As I’ve said elsewhere, I’ve met emotionally and intellectually immature 40 year olds (certainly plenty in their late 20s) and intellectually stimulating and mature 16 year olds. If it’s legal, and she was mature, why would it be wrong? And would it be wrong if I had sex with “a fully formed adult” when she is emotionally immature? I get we need a rule to catch the vast majority of the cases, but from a moral stand point I can’t say why it would be okay to have sex with an emotional immature adult, but not okay to have sex with an emotionally mature adult just because the latter is younger than the former.

Again, don’t get me wrong, the vast majority of the time there is some taking advantage going on, and there should be laws to stop it. I’m not arguing against this.

If it’s legal, and she was mature, why would it be wrong

Well a thing being legal does not make a thing right. Emotional maturity is subjective, and thus is not what we use for determining whether a person is considered an adult or not.

would it be wrong if I had sex with “a fully formed adult” when she is emotionally immature?

Maturity isn’t the guiding rod by which we can determine adulthood. I’m suggesting that age is relevant to this, because it’s the best we have at determining brain formation. Intellectual disabilities in an adult would mean that engaging with them sexually is wrong, showing that it is the functionality of the brain that determines adulthood. If there was never a need for a draft, I think we would naturally have concluded adulthood starts around 22-25, instead of the arbitrary designation of 18. For the purpose of having a hard rule to stop children from being taken advantage of, age is the best we have (for people without intellectual/developmental disabilities).

With that in mind, we really can say definitively, that no, Seinfeld isn’t wrong for finding her attractive, but he was for having a sexual relationship with her.

That being said, arguing that the urges behind the wrong act are “natural,” seems to argue for a relaxation of our attitude towards these relationships, which is also wrong. which is why other Lemmineers got the “ick” from your previous comment.

Because nobody is upset that he found her attractive. We’re upset because he was a fully formed adult, with super-stardom and all the trappings of power that come with it, engaging in a sexual relationship with a not fully formed adult.

Because nobody is upset that he found her attractive.

You should absolutely read the rest of this thread because someone outright said that I deviate from the norm by finding some of them attractive, and even tried to equate being attracted to them to having the desire to murder.

But that being said, as I already very clearly and explicitly said, I agree laws should be in place to protect minors from predators. I’m also fine with it being based on age.

It’s just that you are, on one hand, saying legality and morality are not the same (correctly, imo) but then arguing with me that it’s morally bad in many cases so we need to have a clear law (which I also agree with), which makes what he did immoral. Maybe they were emotionally and intellectually compatible. I don’t know, as I don’t know either of them, and everyone close to it has said it was a good relationship. Who am I to say it was bad?