• pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      Actually, not this time. I can only read the first part of the article due to paywalls, but she was 22 when she disappeared (probably she was still either abducted or brought into Epstein’s network and then someone disappeared her, but I can’t read far enough in the article to see the details about the mentions of her. Anyone here have a Spiegel subscription who’s willing to share the relevant excerpts? Article here)

    • Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Does it matter? Human trafficking is shitty no matter what age it is done at.

      • pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        3 days ago

        I believe the comment here is because a lot of news articles about the Epstein Files will refer to trafficked underage girls as “underage women” or “young women,” a practice widely criticized for downplaying the fact that these victims were children. Kairos was asking with the expectation that this would be another of those cases, but this is one of the rare times when “young woman” is actually the accurate term, because the probable victim here was 22 at the time she disappeared. Human trafficking of anyone of any age is still, of course, awful.

        • SalmiakDragon@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Additionally, OP titled this “Human trafficking of little kids”, which is blatantly untrue in this case (as the article OP should have linked to would have made clear).