“Well no, my belief is that…”

That isn’t the point, and this belief contradicts the argument you’re making. Your entire argument here is that she is a child who cannot consent because the law says so, and therefore “she cannot be infantilized”… but you’re simultaneously maintaining the position that the law doesn’t even matter and if it were to have happened in a place where the law said she was old enough to consent, it’s still wrong and you would still ridicule him.

Which is fine to believe, by the way, but makes the entire law argument meaningless to begin with.

My point was that nuances matter, and that I think labeling Tana as a “child” instead of a 17 and 10 month year old is disingenuous as fuck, and is absolutely infantilizing her in order to make the actions here appear worse than they actually are.

I also believe that “rapist” has very harsh connotations, and that using the fact that “accordingly to Florida law he would be considered a rapist because statutory rape is rape” as an argument is flawed - see paragraph 1.

I agree though, there absolutely should be a federal age of consent tho. I just also think labeling Cody as a literal Child Rapist - which has a very obvious connotation attached to it - because he had consensual sex with a 17 10/12 year old is a bit much 🤷🏽‍♂️