• NABDad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s kind of a shame. If only Hugh Hefner knew any journalists or publishers. They could have done an exposé.

    Not blaming Hugh for Epstein’s crimes, but…did it not even occur to him?

    • whereitsat@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      17 hours ago

      why was it his responsibility? he passed the knowledge onto the proper authorities. he did the right thing.

      maybe he didn’t want to jeopardize an investigation by publishing hearsay. maybe he thought they were investigating.

      what a silly comment. lol @ the upvotes.

      • NABDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I would argue that it was his responsibility as a publisher. Otherwise, what’s the point of hiring journalists?

        The reason a free press is important in a democracy is to hold the proper authorities responsible when they don’t do their job.

    • BlaestEgnen@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      I’m not sure people would had respected a piece of proper journalism published in PlayBoy

      • NABDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        23 hours ago

        But why wouldn’t he just do something like, “Hey Bob (or whoever), put someone on the Epstein story. Someone who can do some digging.”

        • Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Same reason nobody else really has, they’re vicious gangsters, they kill innocent people. If they rape children en masse they have no qualms killing an investigator.

  • the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    248
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    The kicker is that Hugh Hefner was a god awful person him self. If someone like him saw red flags with Epstein then they must have been unimaginably horrific.

      • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        172
        ·
        3 days ago

        Hefner had a very specific type, and it wasn’t children. Still a terrible person, just not a pedophile.

          • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            49
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            “barely legal” is such a disingenuous attack.

            Is it legal? Yes. What’s the problem? Something will always be “barely legal”. Even if we decide that it’s immoral and make it illegal, something else will still always be “barely legal”.

            If you think something is immoral, then just say so. If a bunch of consenting adults do something that doesn’t harm anyone, mind your own business.

            • IronBird@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              i mean…still scouted girls while they were underage/in highschools iirc, the bar to beat is running international pedophile sex-trafficking blackmail ring though so…sure. better than epstein

              • whereitsat@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                17 hours ago

                do you have a point here?

                if a teenage girl has a choice between college or posing for playboy, the studious teenage girls aren’t going to choose playboy, and if they do, it’s to fund their college education. the promiscuous, body confident girls are DEFINITELY going to choose playboy.

                good for them.

                who the fuck cares about this other than annoying, self-righteous fucks who try and speak for every single person? it’s their decision. if someone came up to me right now and said ‘eat a weeks worth of my turds and i’ll give you 100k’ i probably wouldn’t fucking do it.

                posing nude isn’t really the same thing as this but you act like it is. the girl who posed nude probably landed some rich husband or possibly gained a modeling career. i doubt many of them ended up on welfare and in the end their path was less exploitative than a typical lower-class life in america, tits or not.

                those girls exploited the system with their bodies–something that women give away for far less every single day; your average only fans model makes less than a playboy centerfold.

                • Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  16 hours ago

                  if a teenage girl has a choice between college or posing for playboy, the studious

                  You have no idea what you’re talking about. Plenty of girls with opportunity and means for a better life get abused and manipulated into joining the sex industry every day. You don’t have the slightest understanding of the sex industry and why or why not some girls join.

                • IronBird@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  16 hours ago

                  i’m just saying there was alot more to rhe playboy empire than just…nudie magazines. plenty of girls were effecticely kept hostage in that mansion

                  only compared to scale of running international pedophile/rape trafficking ring does what hughe did look good by comparison. he drew the line at raping kids apparently, hardly praise worthy

            • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              19
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Honestly, the obsession with 18 Specifically is also disingenuous. Many countries consider 16 to be an appropriate age. Some consider 18 to be too young. This obsession of “18 okay. 17 A LITERAL INFANT!!!” is just ridiculous. And I would bet money that this comment will have people clutching their pearls and accusing me of being a predator.

              • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 day ago

                Believe it or not, most of the US has the age of consent below 18, even before factoring in Romeo and Juliette laws. I’m sure there are some restrictions on making use of that information, use of sex toys being banned being one of them if I recall and making porn being banned until 18 regardless, but 18 is hardly a universal thing even here.

              • underscores@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                it’s specifically stupid when it’s high schoolers dating, omg one is 18 and one is 17 !!!

                • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  The US has literally charged teenagers for distributing CP, because they exchanged pictures with each other… The entire country is just fuckin’ bonkers.

              • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                More than that, if the legal age of consent was 40, then 41 would be “barely legal”. Why do people use the term negatively (or positively for that matter). It’s just so arbitrary.

                • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Because it’s moral posturing. I saw a post not long ago for an advertisement for alcohol-free beer. Clearly targeted at late teens and early 20’s, and it was called “Under-Age beer! Great for driving!” And there were swarms of people complaining that “Advertising beer to children is awful!”

          • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            183
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            He had a kink for the blonde bombshells/pinup girls of his youth. Full bodied women with a “girl next door” quality (his gross words, not mine). Epstein and Trump preferred jailbait. Where Hefner liked sex with women he objectified, Epstein and Trump liked to rape, abuse and have power over girls. In my opinion, Hefner was gross, but Epstein and Trump are evil.

            EDIT: To be clear, I’m not a fan of Heffner, but to equate him to Epstein and Trump waters down the gravity of what Epstein and Trump did. That’s why I make the distinction.

            • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              34
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              2 days ago

              Can we not use the term “jailbait?” It connotes a willing-but-underage person, rather than someone who has been manipulated or coerced into an abuse situation.

              • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                32
                ·
                2 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
                  ·
                  2 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
                  ·
                  2 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

              • pilferjinx@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                2 days ago

                Is there another word that perfectly encapsulates the specific intent of the abuser. I don’t think woman want to be objectified or raped in those terms.

  • Mulligrubs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I despise Hefner usually, this is the first time I can think of where he’s been somewhat honorable.

    How disgusting is that? Hefner was actually too good to hang out with Epstein, Trump, Clinton, et al

    • hansolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 days ago

      He’s one of those cases where he’s 90% horrible, 10% making good points. He fought media censorship for obvious reasons for a long time, and was on the right side of history for that, at least.

      • cmbabul@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        We all can and should shit on Hugh Hefner, but one thing he wasn’t was stupid. Apparently another thing he wasn’t was a child rapist.

        Good on you Hef for not being the biggest piece of shit alive, at the time, I guess

  • SGGeorwell@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    ·
    3 days ago

    Reported to FBI in 2005, didn’t hear back until 2020. So that’s Robert Mueller, James Comey, and Andrew McCabe as directors during those 15 years FBI ignored her. It was three years into Chris Wray’s tenure that she finally got a call back. And a year after the perp DIED. Jesus fuckin Christ

    • 𝕱𝖎𝖗𝖊𝖜𝖎𝖙𝖈𝖍@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      174
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      They knew. They didn’t investigate on purpose. Fucking conspiracy theorists went crazy thinking there was a child trafficking ring in the basement on a one story pizzeria, but now gobble their cucklord’s pedophilic nuts

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        81
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        That’s because it was never about the paedophilia, the only reason they worked themselves into a lather is because they thought it was a Democrat run child trafficking ring. Accuse a Republican of literally anything and they don’t give a shit but the second you accuse a Democrat of so much as jaywalking and they’ll turn it into a national emergency.

        • Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          During Trump’s first term it came out that Roy Moore, an Alabama Republican running for Senate, was a rapist and a pedophile (naturally he was Trump’s endorsed candidate).

          Not only did Moore not drop out of the race, he almost won the election. And he only lost because enough Democrats showed up to vote for his opponent - the Republican voters still mostly supported Moore even after he admitted to going after teenagers.

          • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 days ago

            i remember that election, it was insane how much support he still had, and the msms immediately shut up about reporting on moore.

        • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          accuse a Democrat of so much as jaywalking and they’ll turn it into a national emergency

          Or wearing a tan suit.

        • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          also so many billionaires funding dinos and gop are in to, to expose them would end that money train, thats why they have the MSMs running inteference.

      • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        in which the ruling class installed the FBI heads themselves. epstein was more of a liability than ghislaine, because he was the head of the operation.

      • BussyGyatt@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        my money’s on it was a honeypot run by israel to entrap us leaders, was wildly successful beyond the wildest expectations, the fbi caught on to it after a bit and rather than, y’know, doing the right thing, they decided they wanted to also have the dirt on the us leadership.

        • huey_m@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’ve wondered if it’s just straight up the latter. Entities like the CIA or FBI going rogue against elected government isn’t exactly unheard of…

    • DandomRude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      3 days ago

      They still aren’t doing that, quite the opposite, in fact, which shows who’s really running the U.S. and what a farce this so called democracy is—the very democracy they supposedly always defend around the world. For example, in Israel, which also had the very best connections to Epstein, as evidenced even by the little information that the so-called U.S. law enforcement agencies are willing to disclose.

  • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    3 days ago

    I think I remember this from a Behind the Bastards episode from way back when, maybe 2020.

    Or maybe I’m confusing two BtB stories, in any case in one Playboy helped the abused & exploited woman become independent and also gave emotional support. (or was it You’re Wrong About? Damn.)

    In any case, the true Epstein story was known for basically ever (even before Q-Anon) and he was just never investigated properly, even though multiple victims came forward ages ago. Which is somehow even more shocking.

    His (first) time in jail was a joke btw, he was allowed to go home to do office work every day…

    • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      Clearly, there was a lot more going on than we’ve ever been told, and it was well-known at the highest level of our government for multiple administrations from BOTH parties. Both sides covered this up, and are STILL covering it up.

      We need to expose ever tiny detail, and destroy whoever gets destroyed. It’s time to clean house of many years of accumulated scum, and if it destroys reputations and careers, that’s too bad. That’s what you get for covering for MONSTERS.

      • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        it was well-known at the highest level of our government

        It was public. Robert Evans could make a well-researched episode about him in 2019, with public sources that reach much further back.

      • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Or we can just make your government irrelevant by allowing America’s economic, cultural and geopolitical power to collapse. That seems like the more likely option.

    • sem@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      3 days ago

      Here is the text for anyone here in the comments:

      Playboy founder Hugh Hefner notified the FBI of Jeffrey Epstein and reported that a Playmate was sexually abused and trafficked by the late financier, according to new court documents reported this week.

      The FBI reportedly ignored several of Hefner’s tips about Epstein for 15 years, according to NewsNation.

      Court records show that Audra Christiansen, a former Playboy Playmate, told Hefner in 2005 that she was an Epstein survivor and asked Hefner to contact the FBI. She suggested that authorities would be more likely to take his call over hers because of his status.

      ALSO READ: ‘God’s money’: White House enrages with vow that public cash belongs to evangelicals

      Hefner died in 2017 at age 91.

      Miami Herald reporter Julie K. Brown, in her Substack, reported on the legal complaint, which was filed by 34 Epstein survivors against the United States in the Southern District of Florida.

      [… ad redacted]

      In the court document, the FBI agreed to assist Christiansen and investigate her claims. But Christiansen apparently did not hear from the FBI until October 2020.

      “For about fifteen years, the FBI did not investigate Ms. Christiansen’s tips or follow up on her allegations,” according to the court documents.

      The documents revealed that Christiansen met the late convicted child sex offender, and “before she knew it she was naked and raped by Epstein” and “trafficked for 10 years.”

      “The complaint alleges the FBI did not investigate the model’s claim and by not doing ‘violated mandatory policies and protocols requiring it to investigate claims, like Ms. Christiansen’s, of child sexual abuse and trafficking’ and ‘failing to investigate credible tips, such as Ms. Christiansen’s allegations, the FBI created a foreseeable zone of risk to future victims of Epstein’s sex trafficking enterprise, including Plaintiffs,’” NewsNation reported.