France didn't even have an age of consent until 2021, since in previous decades there were many celebrities including famous writers who petitioned against it; the previous law stated that children aged 5 and over could consent

I am curious whether this is misleading. Like, in how many of these places does it actually mean a 40 year old can legally sexually abuse a 14-16 year old, vs the places it just means teenagers can bang each other without worrying about cops busting down their door

Only one country, being Turkiye, with a reasonable AoC has ruined my night.

Right off the bat, if it's true, of course Marxist-Leninists can admit this to be monstrous behavior. We do not base our ideology on blind hero worship, but instead dialectical materialism, scientific socialism, and the law of value. Stalin did a number of things we can confirm are true that we would not support in the modern era. That does not mean he has not been dragged through the mud historically, and does not mean he was not a widely beloved and successful leader of the Soviet Union for his time, helping lead the Red Army to defeating the Nazi threat. Under Stalin, life expectancy doubled, education was made free and high quality, housing and employment were guaranteed, and society was democratized. Both are true, as Marxism is not based on moralist ideas of "good and evil."

However, even Wikipedia is careful to state that this is probably baseless. Here's selections from that same article:

Historian Ronald Grigor Suny, writing in Stalin: Passage to Revolution, stated that "whether Stalin was the actual father cannot be confirmed".[2] Similarly, Oleg Khlevniuk wrote that "the rumours that they [Stalin and Pereprygina] had a son together have never been proven",[22] and that the available reports of it are "muddled and contradictory".[10]

In his 2018 biography of Stalin, Stalin: The Lord of Terror (German: Stalin: Der Herr des Terrors), German historian Helmut Altrichter [de] expressed scepticism about the authenticity of the relationship.[23] Stefan Creuzberger [de] connected the allegations of Stalin's relationship with Pereprygina with the fact that Stalin was reported to enjoy his exile, stating "while a costly war raged in Europe, Stalin apparently enjoyed hunting, fishing, and roaming the taiga as much as the close and sometimes rough community with the ordinary local population, who were decidely not composed of political dissidents or intellectuals". Creuzberger found it "therefore hardly surprising that rumors circulated during this period about an affair with a minor".[24]

Russian historian Vladimir Dolmatov,[25] discussing the Serov memorandum, argued that "apart from these documents, there are no credible others attesting that Koba cohabited with Lydia Pereprygina. Neither oral nor written."[26] Dolmatov contests Serov's claims:

If Serov is to be believed, their first child was born in 1913, but Dzhugashvili was sent to Kureika in 1914. Another matter is that criminal convicts in exile had lived there before him; might this be the result of their escapades? […] Molotov stated in conversations with Chuev that Khrushchev and Mikoyan had, at one point, gone so far as to want to fabricate documents discrediting Stalin. […] Perhaps the purpose of Serov’s memorandum was precisely to use the revelation of one fact – concerning the security services – to convince the reader of the veracity of another – regarding Stalin’s illegitimate children? That would explain why the memorandum bears no signature from the ‘client’ – Khrushchev.[26]

In April 2016, during a Russia-1 TV show,[27] Yuri Davydov had taken a DNA test showing that Stalin was Alexander's father, with a reported 99.98% accuracy. Alexander Burdonsky, Stalin's grandson through his son Vasily Stalin, provided the genetic material for the test.[21] However, a subsequent DNA test taken few days later showed an accuracy of 85% instead. Ultimately, the TV show host stated that a more complex test is needed to establish kinship.[28]

In 2026, magazine Rodina reported that a researcher Alexei Nilogov uncovered birth documents of Alexander Davydov from the archives of the Turukhansk Holy Trinity Monastery, according to which Davydov's birth date was 21 August rather than 6 November, as previously thought. Nilogov thus argued that Davydov could have been Stalin's son, arguing that Lidiya could have become pregnant in December 1916.[29] However, according to historian Robert C. Tucker, Stalin had left Kureika in October 1916.[30]

And even then, the point of this meme is that child prostitution skyrocketed in the former Soviet states after the dissolution of socialism. This is empirical fact, along with the fact that child prostitution (and prostitution in general) fell dramatically in the first decades of the Soviet Union:

Crime today is rapidly diminishing in the Soviet Union. From 1929 to 1934 sentences for murder decreased by one-half while sex crimes fell off to one-fourth. The cause is found in the growing strength of the Soviet environment to remake human beings; the penal policy is only a supplementary force. A striking example of the play of both causes may be found in the figures of prostitution. Pre-war Moscow had 25,000 to 30,000 prostitutes; these sank by 1928 to about 3,000,1 diminution clearly due to economic causes. In 1931, after the Five-Year Plan -had abolished unemployment, the number sank still further to about eight hundred. To reclaim the more habituated, prophylactoria were established. These rose to the number of thirty-four in the whole USSR in 1934, and then swiftly declined to nineteen as their work was done. They are still declining for want of inmates; only one of the original five is left in Moscow. No woman was ever compelled to go to a prophylactorium; the chief punishment for breaking rules was to be put out. Nine-tenths of those who entered left cured both of physical disease and of old habits and were accepted without comment into the normal working life of the city.

• This Soviet World, Chapter XIV: Remaking Human Beings, Anna Louise Strong

Really not sure what your point is, here. That communists are hypocritical for supporting Stalin and opposing pedophilia? If the allegations are true, we certainly do not support them! If they are false, then this is an example of bourgeois distortions of Stalin's character to attack the legitimacy of Marxism-Leninism. In either outcome, none of this paints a negative light on Marxism-Leninism itself, especially as it has been partially responsible for dramatic reductions in child predation, and it's absence led to it skyrocketing.

Did you read the article? Nothing concrete has come of it.

When you can't make an argument as to why child prostitution after the fall of the USSR is actually a good thing but you need to be an anticommunist anyway

Many such cases.