Strange observation

I was recently watching one of those typical media hysteria items on tv about internet "predators" meeting up with young teens online. And of course, as usual, the media consistently referred to these guys as "groomers" and "pedophiles" (which of course is the completely wrong description anyway, given that the so-called "victims" in the item were all young adults, aged 13 and 14). It had been pointed out that a couple of the "predators" were actually in their 40s posing as younger men, aged 20. The journalist was involved with the police on these stings which lured the MAAs to these meeting places, usually public parks. These guys got busted when they turned up to meet the young teens, who as it later turns out were actually cops having stepped in and taken over by pretending to be the teens.

But what kind of struck me as very odd was that the teens themselves AND their parents THOUGHT right from the outset that these MAAs they were chatting to were aged 20, yet the teens nor their parents were already even bothered by that. My confused feeling says WHY weren't they alarmed right from the beginning that these supposed 20 year old men were chatting them up?? It seemed to go right over their heads that these guys are 20 year old adults ANYWAY. What the fuck would it have mattered if they were 20, 40 or 60 in terms of the "predatory" factor to it? Now am I failing to miss something here or what?? I mean, seeing these anti morons a) consider a 13 year old to be "just a vulnerable little rug rat" and that b) a 20 year old is a "big grown man" therefore c) a "big grown 20 year old man can only be a complete predator if he wants to have relationships with little 13 year old rug rats", why then weren't the alarms already ringing?

Years ago a 20 year old meeting a 13 year old would have been considered just as catastrophic as if a 60 year old was doing the same thing, but are things changing somewhat now? Do young teens and their parents view a man in his 40s or 50s much more of a "threat" than a younger man aged 20 odd? It certainly didn't USE to be like that. It kind of made me wonder that perceptions could have changed. Another thing that made me wonder this was that the dishonest MAAs involved in the media report thought they would not cause any alarm to the teens and their parents by feigning 20 year old men. I've heard of men in their 20s and older feigning teens of their own age, but it struck me as kind of odd that an older MAA would pose as a younger man of 20, which I would have thought would still cause loud alarm bells to ring! Any ideas on this?