• Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    6 days ago

    I don’t think “willing” has been a primary defining factor for the word ever since the /r/jailbait thing. That yuck factor is why I chose the word (that place was a cesspool). Regardless, I am very open to suggestions for a replacement. I don’t mean that aggressively, I genuinely would love a different word with that much baggage that really puts into perspective how foul men like Trump are.

    • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I appreciate your view that in the context of that subreddit the term connotes a yuck factor, I also bring the context of 70s/80s songs like “Jailbait” implying that young teenage girls were willing participants in what were actually predatory relationships.

      I think simply calling them children makes the criminality clear without any questionable connotations.

    • ggtdbz@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I’m somewhat in favor of using yucky words for giving nuance as long as the rest of the text implies you’re not one to use the phrases in an earnest way.

      I’ve had mixed results on Lemmy with words like “homemaker” when trying to discuss a specific kind of social expectation, and then got immediately told off for using it. I never use it. It was the right word in the moment.

      Maybe write “what they’re gleefully call X” instead of “X” and it would keep the yuck factor of putting the word there without seeming like you’re taking the word at face value