6 ms·

This has nothing to do with technology. If you start expressing opinions about how sex with a sex-trafficked child should be legal, won't your friends and fami

This has nothing to do with technology. If you start expressing opinions about how sex with a sex-trafficked child should be legal, won't your friends and family raise some questions about your character? Unless we're talking of morally flexible individuals. And at least parents should raise an eyebrow, since we have this natural reaction to protect our children. > information wants to be free Whomever said that was probably thinking of facts, of knowledge, s/he was probably not thinking of having opinions about pedophiles. EDIT: don't get me wrong, I think there's a time and place to argue that consensual sex with teenagers might be ok and I think people should be free to make that argument, the problem in this case is that the sex couldn't have been consensual, in which case age becomes relevant, as that teenager isn't fully developed, therefore the harm done is amplified. And also these opinions have been delivered by a very public figure, with a history of harassing women. Words matter so the lesson here is don't be a jerk, as technology won't save you from that.

throw_away_zyx 7y ago
>If you start expressing opinions about how sex with a sex-trafficked child should be legal, won't your friends and family raise some questions about your character? In a civilized world you would be sued for libel for saying that. I look forward to someone making a startup doing just that.
- tptacek 7y ago
  In a civilized world, you would be able to sue someone for libel for making a statement of opinion, in the abstract, that might somehow be applied to you? And this is your response to a thread rooted in someone concerned about the need for self-censorship?
2_listerine_pls 7y ago
You are twisting what Stallman said. -He argued that rape is no the same as having sex with a minor. He is right, that's not the definition of rape. -A minor is not necessarily a child. You can be a minor and the next day be 18 in a porno movie. -Never did Stallman said it was ok, He just raised the question whether Minsky knew She was being coerced by Epstein. Clearly not the same.
- asciimo 7y ago
  I hear this argument exclusively from adults.
  - virgilp 7y ago
    Have you actually tried talking to a lot of children about this topic? (it would be funny if you did; it would also be equally funny if you didn't, and are surprised that children didn't express said argument, even though you didn't give them the chance)
davidcuddeback 7y ago
>> information wants to be free > Whomever said that was probably thinking of facts, of knowledge, s/he was probably not thinking of having opinions about pedophiles. John Stuart Mill is probably rolling over in his grave from this conversation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty#Of_the_liberty_of_thought_and_discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty#Of_the_liberty_of_t... Edit: Particularly relevant to the topic of self-censorship: "unmeasured vituperation, enforced on the side of prevailing opinion, deters people from expressing contrary opinion, and from listening to those who express them."
anonuser123456 7y ago
>If you start expressing opinions about how sex with a sex-trafficked child should be legal That is not what Stallman said, wrote or advocates so that's kind of a strawman hypothetical that continues to pedal a false narrative.
jaspax 7y ago
That is a grotesque distortion of what Stallman actually wrote, though it does seem to be how his enemies decided to distort him. Thanks for being part of the problem.
Shinkei 7y ago
Yet another person who throws around the word 'pedophile' in a very inaccurate way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia There is no evidence that he was a pedophile. In fact, many of the 'girls' he had relations with were by their own admission consensual and involved compensation. He certainly broke the law in this country and his morals and character are in question, but what he did is (and has been throughout history) legal in much of the world and we can't act like US law is a surrogate for universal ethics/morals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe At some point we have to decide if girls/women have agency to decide their sexual activity. 25 year-olds can be coerced in asymmetric power relationships just like a 16 year-old. We already know about the double-standard of sex when drunk--if you are man, it's consensual, but if you are a woman, it's always rape. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_trafficking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_trafficking And as an aside, I think that the use of 'sex trafficking' in this context does a disservice to the actual, bonafide victims of sex trafficking--people that are kidnapped, passports confiscated, literally enslaved. Now because the term has been co-opted by a self-righteous political agenda, we can't have personals on Craigslist.
- csb6 7y ago
  I am absolutely floored by your comment. I sincerely hope that it is parody. Jeffrey Epstein was convicted in 2008 of soliciting a prostitute and of procuring an underage girl for prostitution. He plead guilty and was convicted. How much more clear does this have to get? He is a pedophile. How could he not be? He straight up solicited children for sex and has had dozens of credible accusations by women stating that he sexually assaulted them while they were underage. In what planet does this kind of behavior count as okay, even if only a single accusation was true? He solicited a child for sex! No matter what fucked up views of what is/isn’t pedophilia you have, surely you see how employing underage girls and encouraging them to have sex with adult guests is objectively bad and so justifiably illegal? I mean these are children. Them getting paid makes it no better. Would you be ok with your child being employed by an older man to have sex with rich friends of his? I wouldn’t. Am I just too “self-righteous” to see such employment as exploitive and inherently immoral/fucked up? It doesn’t matter if it was consensual. It is statutory rape, and 16 year olds are not emotionally and mentally as developed as 22 year olds - no matter what you claim. Ask any 22-year-old woman if she is the same person emotionally/intellectually as when she was 16. How many would say yes? Not many. If saying, “Hey, Epstein built a secret harem of underage girls and solicited them to adult men - regardless of the children’s consent to be solicited - is a bad thing” is considered a “self-righteous political agenda”, then I guess I’m a full-on self-righteous prick. The fact that I’m arguing that systematic, coerced sex between rich adult men and underage girls is bad and condemnable and that a lot of people in this comment section would disagree with me makes me lose hope for this world. It should be obvious that statutory rape laws protect minors and are a good thing. But here we are. Something truly is rotten in the state of Denmark.
eecc 7y ago
Dude please review what you wrote, that’s libel
josteink 7y ago
> If you start expressing opinions about how sex with a sex-trafficked child should be legal Good thing RMS never did that then. And your comment is a good representative of the modern debate climate: People will exaggerate whatever their opponent said, and they will assume no good faith in their opponents what so ever. They will not consider an argument something to be learned from, but rather something to be "won". Getting someone fired over having the "wrong" view is merely a bonus, but a bonus the SJW-crowd loves aiming for none the less. No wonder we're all getting dumber, when merely trying to have a discussion can get you fired. Of course people will stop debating, and stop gaining insights from that debate.
eecc 7y ago
Well “child”, a 17yo woman doesn’t qualify as “child” unless it’s a curious legal definition. These kind of comments are clumsy claims to moral authority, useless flame fodder.
- solidsnack9000 7y ago
  In the law they are a “minor”.
- csb6 7y ago
  > a 17yo woman doesn’t qualify as a child What? 17-year-olds are still in high school. They probably just barely got a driver’s license. They can just barely see an R-rated movie without a guardian. They can’t even sign waivers to give themselves permission for field trips in my state. How on Earth is it fair to consider them adults and fit to give consent for sex with older men while employed for sex services?
  - eecc 7y ago
    As somebody else wrote: “minor”. The word “child” has significantly different implications that deserve to be preserved. The examples you’re brining up are evidence of legislative incongruities more than arguments in support of equivalence.
  - diffeomorphism 7y ago
    The common definition of child is <13 years old https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child A 17 year old is not a child, but also not an adult.
  - darklajid 7y ago
    I don't wanna touch the Stallman / Epstein story with a 10 foot (3.x meter?) pole, but I do believe that standards vary. In Germany a 17yo cannot drive, CAN drink and can have (I'm old and it doesn't apply to me, so this might be only somewhat accurate) sex with other people (but cannot be a prostitute), might marry (needs parents approval I believe). Age of consent is 14 (but .. not for sex with adults as far as I'm aware). I know that German law has nothing to do with this. But please stop and reflect for a second: The US allows 17yo to steer 2+ tons of steel at high velocities, Germany (as the one example I'm familiar with) lets them have consensual sex or drink beer. The same way you say 'How can they agree to sex' one might ask 'How can they be responsible enough to drive'. It's cultural, not absolute. I understand the outrage, I am in no way defending Epstein, Stallman or anyone here - but please don't present your moral position/your upbringing as absolute truth. See it as something that you were raised to believe and that A LOT of people disagree with on this globe. (It's obviously not helping the fact that the girls got paid, it's a completely disgusting, sad and shameful story with no recourse - but don't claim 17yo can't have sex with someone older, ... just because)

throw_away_zyx 7y ago

>If you start expressing opinions about how sex with a sex-trafficked child should be legal, won't your friends and family raise some questions about your character? In a civilized world you would be sued for libel for saying that. I look forward to someone making a startup doing just that.

tptacek 7y ago
In a civilized world, you would be able to sue someone for libel for making a statement of opinion, in the abstract, that might somehow be applied to you? And this is your response to a thread rooted in someone concerned about the need for self-censorship?

2_listerine_pls 7y ago

You are twisting what Stallman said. -He argued that rape is no the same as having sex with a minor. He is right, that's not the definition of rape. -A minor is not necessarily a child. You can be a minor and the next day be 18 in a porno movie. -Never did Stallman said it was ok, He just raised the question whether Minsky knew She was being coerced by Epstein. Clearly not the same.

asciimo 7y ago
I hear this argument exclusively from adults.
- virgilp 7y ago
  Have you actually tried talking to a lot of children about this topic? (it would be funny if you did; it would also be equally funny if you didn't, and are surprised that children didn't express said argument, even though you didn't give them the chance)

davidcuddeback 7y ago

>> information wants to be free > Whomever said that was probably thinking of facts, of knowledge, s/he was probably not thinking of having opinions about pedophiles. John Stuart Mill is probably rolling over in his grave from this conversation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty#Of_the_liberty_of_thought_and_discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty#Of_the_liberty_of_t... Edit: Particularly relevant to the topic of self-censorship: "unmeasured vituperation, enforced on the side of prevailing opinion, deters people from expressing contrary opinion, and from listening to those who express them."

anonuser123456 7y ago

>If you start expressing opinions about how sex with a sex-trafficked child should be legal That is not what Stallman said, wrote or advocates so that's kind of a strawman hypothetical that continues to pedal a false narrative.

jaspax 7y ago

That is a grotesque distortion of what Stallman actually wrote, though it does seem to be how his enemies decided to distort him. Thanks for being part of the problem.

Shinkei 7y ago

Yet another person who throws around the word 'pedophile' in a very inaccurate way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia There is no evidence that he was a pedophile. In fact, many of the 'girls' he had relations with were by their own admission consensual and involved compensation. He certainly broke the law in this country and his morals and character are in question, but what he did is (and has been throughout history) legal in much of the world and we can't act like US law is a surrogate for universal ethics/morals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe At some point we have to decide if girls/women have agency to decide their sexual activity. 25 year-olds can be coerced in asymmetric power relationships just like a 16 year-old. We already know about the double-standard of sex when drunk--if you are man, it's consensual, but if you are a woman, it's always rape. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_trafficking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_trafficking And as an aside, I think that the use of 'sex trafficking' in this context does a disservice to the actual, bonafide victims of sex trafficking--people that are kidnapped, passports confiscated, literally enslaved. Now because the term has been co-opted by a self-righteous political agenda, we can't have personals on Craigslist.

csb6 7y ago
I am absolutely floored by your comment. I sincerely hope that it is parody. Jeffrey Epstein was convicted in 2008 of soliciting a prostitute and of procuring an underage girl for prostitution. He plead guilty and was convicted. How much more clear does this have to get? He is a pedophile. How could he not be? He straight up solicited children for sex and has had dozens of credible accusations by women stating that he sexually assaulted them while they were underage. In what planet does this kind of behavior count as okay, even if only a single accusation was true? He solicited a child for sex! No matter what fucked up views of what is/isn’t pedophilia you have, surely you see how employing underage girls and encouraging them to have sex with adult guests is objectively bad and so justifiably illegal? I mean these are children. Them getting paid makes it no better. Would you be ok with your child being employed by an older man to have sex with rich friends of his? I wouldn’t. Am I just too “self-righteous” to see such employment as exploitive and inherently immoral/fucked up? It doesn’t matter if it was consensual. It is statutory rape, and 16 year olds are not emotionally and mentally as developed as 22 year olds - no matter what you claim. Ask any 22-year-old woman if she is the same person emotionally/intellectually as when she was 16. How many would say yes? Not many. If saying, “Hey, Epstein built a secret harem of underage girls and solicited them to adult men - regardless of the children’s consent to be solicited - is a bad thing” is considered a “self-righteous political agenda”, then I guess I’m a full-on self-righteous prick. The fact that I’m arguing that systematic, coerced sex between rich adult men and underage girls is bad and condemnable and that a lot of people in this comment section would disagree with me makes me lose hope for this world. It should be obvious that statutory rape laws protect minors and are a good thing. But here we are. Something truly is rotten in the state of Denmark.

eecc 7y ago

Dude please review what you wrote, that’s libel

josteink 7y ago

> If you start expressing opinions about how sex with a sex-trafficked child should be legal Good thing RMS never did that then. And your comment is a good representative of the modern debate climate: People will exaggerate whatever their opponent said, and they will assume no good faith in their opponents what so ever. They will not consider an argument something to be learned from, but rather something to be "won". Getting someone fired over having the "wrong" view is merely a bonus, but a bonus the SJW-crowd loves aiming for none the less. No wonder we're all getting dumber, when merely trying to have a discussion can get you fired. Of course people will stop debating, and stop gaining insights from that debate.

eecc 7y ago

Well “child”, a 17yo woman doesn’t qualify as “child” unless it’s a curious legal definition. These kind of comments are clumsy claims to moral authority, useless flame fodder.

solidsnack9000 7y ago
In the law they are a “minor”.
csb6 7y ago
> a 17yo woman doesn’t qualify as a child What? 17-year-olds are still in high school. They probably just barely got a driver’s license. They can just barely see an R-rated movie without a guardian. They can’t even sign waivers to give themselves permission for field trips in my state. How on Earth is it fair to consider them adults and fit to give consent for sex with older men while employed for sex services?
- eecc 7y ago
  As somebody else wrote: “minor”. The word “child” has significantly different implications that deserve to be preserved. The examples you’re brining up are evidence of legislative incongruities more than arguments in support of equivalence.
- diffeomorphism 7y ago
  The common definition of child is <13 years old https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child A 17 year old is not a child, but also not an adult.
- darklajid 7y ago
  I don't wanna touch the Stallman / Epstein story with a 10 foot (3.x meter?) pole, but I do believe that standards vary. In Germany a 17yo cannot drive, CAN drink and can have (I'm old and it doesn't apply to me, so this might be only somewhat accurate) sex with other people (but cannot be a prostitute), might marry (needs parents approval I believe). Age of consent is 14 (but .. not for sex with adults as far as I'm aware). I know that German law has nothing to do with this. But please stop and reflect for a second: The US allows 17yo to steer 2+ tons of steel at high velocities, Germany (as the one example I'm familiar with) lets them have consensual sex or drink beer. The same way you say 'How can they agree to sex' one might ask 'How can they be responsible enough to drive'. It's cultural, not absolute. I understand the outrage, I am in no way defending Epstein, Stallman or anyone here - but please don't present your moral position/your upbringing as absolute truth. See it as something that you were raised to believe and that A LOT of people disagree with on this globe. (It's obviously not helping the fact that the girls got paid, it's a completely disgusting, sad and shameful story with no recourse - but don't claim 17yo can't have sex with someone older, ... just because)