Megyn Kelly's SiriusXM Show Sparks Fury Over Epstein Case, Prompts Accusations of Downplaying Abuse
The conservative commentator sparked outrage after downplaying the severity of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's crimes on her show. Rather than using the term "pedophile," Kelly used a more nuanced approach, stating that Epstein had a preference for "very young teen types" - specifically 15-year-old girls.
Kelly claimed an unnamed source close to the case told her that Epstein was drawn to "barely legal type" girls, rather than prepubescent children. While she acknowledged the distinction between 15- and 5-year-olds as significant, many critics saw her comments as a thinly veiled attempt to minimize the severity of Epstein's actions.
The comments sparked immediate backlash, with several outlets criticizing Kelly for trying to downplay the abuse perpetrated by Epstein. The Daily Show host Josh Johnson reacted with disgust, calling Kelly's argument "diet pedophilia" and saying that she was perpetuating a damaging narrative that implied there was ever an acceptable age gap.
Online critics echoed this sentiment, accusing Kelly of minimizing sexual abuse by reframing Epstein's crimes as less severe. Survivors' advocates took issue with the distinction, noting that Epstein's decades-long pattern of coercion and trafficking involved minors who were legally incapable of consent, regardless of age.
Kelly has not responded to the criticism, leaving her audience to wonder how she can justify her stance on the case. The comments have raised questions about Kelly's understanding of the severity of Epstein's crimes and whether she is using her platform to perpetuate a narrative that diminishes the impact of abuse on survivors.
The conservative commentator sparked outrage after downplaying the severity of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's crimes on her show. Rather than using the term "pedophile," Kelly used a more nuanced approach, stating that Epstein had a preference for "very young teen types" - specifically 15-year-old girls.
Kelly claimed an unnamed source close to the case told her that Epstein was drawn to "barely legal type" girls, rather than prepubescent children. While she acknowledged the distinction between 15- and 5-year-olds as significant, many critics saw her comments as a thinly veiled attempt to minimize the severity of Epstein's actions.
The comments sparked immediate backlash, with several outlets criticizing Kelly for trying to downplay the abuse perpetrated by Epstein. The Daily Show host Josh Johnson reacted with disgust, calling Kelly's argument "diet pedophilia" and saying that she was perpetuating a damaging narrative that implied there was ever an acceptable age gap.
Online critics echoed this sentiment, accusing Kelly of minimizing sexual abuse by reframing Epstein's crimes as less severe. Survivors' advocates took issue with the distinction, noting that Epstein's decades-long pattern of coercion and trafficking involved minors who were legally incapable of consent, regardless of age.
Kelly has not responded to the criticism, leaving her audience to wonder how she can justify her stance on the case. The comments have raised questions about Kelly's understanding of the severity of Epstein's crimes and whether she is using her platform to perpetuate a narrative that diminishes the impact of abuse on survivors.
her attempt to downplay epstein's crimes was super insensitive & hurtful to victims & their families. she's basically saying it's okay to have a 10 yr old crush on someone who's still a teen, that's not okay at all 
using terms like "barely legal types" is also super problematic, it implies that there's some kind of acceptable age range for abuse & that just isn't true. i'm so tired of people trying to minimize the severity of epstein's crimes & perpetuating this narrative that makes it seem like he was just a 'bad apple' instead of a serial abuser 
. And what really gets me is that she's using this as an excuse to downplay the severity of his crimes. Newsflash: there's no such thing as "acceptable" when it comes to underage abuse. It's always a serious crime and always a violation of consent.
. she basically said this guy Epstein was into "very young teen types" like 15-year-olds but not like, super little kids 
. and people are calling her out for it because that's still a pretty big deal, you know? the thing is, survivors of abuse don't care about nuances, they just want to acknowledge that what happened was wrong and hurtful 
. but yeah, gotta agree with Josh Johnson on this one 
. the way she's framing it is basically saying there's a difference between 15-year-olds and 5-year-olds and that's just not right 
i mean, even if u differentiate between 15 & 5 years old, that still sounds pretty messed up to me 
what a terrible thing to do on live tv