4 ms·

Sure, there are different definitions of sexual assault. In none of them does the law say "let's break the phrase up into two words, sexual and assault, now, a

by Frondo 7y ago

Sure, there are different definitions of sexual assault. In none of them does the law say "let's break the phrase up into two words, sexual and assault, now, assault implies violence, and was this violent?" That's not pedantry, that's playing word games.

freetime2 7y ago
The phrase “sexual assault” consists of the adjective “sexual” modifying the noun “assault”, meaning “an assault of a sexual nature”. If I then substitute in the definition for “assault”, I get “a physical attack of a sexual nature”. I’m not playing word games here, this is just how I understand the English language to work and sexual assault to be defined. I understand that in certain legal settings, any sexual interaction with a minor is deemed a sexual assault due to the fact that a minor cannot legally give consent. But as mentioned above, the laws in the US dealing with sex crimes are actually quite complicated, and details of what actually occurred between Minsky and the victim are few and far between, so I don’t know if that term would apply in Minsky’s situation. Maybe I am wrong or maybe we just have different understandings of the phrase (possible given the vagaries of the language). But I think accusing people of “playing word games” and trying to “move the goal posts” is not constructive. You’re assuming bad intent where it could just be something as simple as a difference in understanding.
- Frondo 7y ago
  I am quite honestly happy to accept that you're not playing word games and that your intent with trying to dive into this language is good. I do not believe the same is true of stallman, after having watched him redefine terms for decades, offer his own set of meaning for jargon in common use elsewhere, and so on. I think his frequent stance of "we must examine what this means" is more often than not a distraction, because sometimes he takes a technical meaning, sometimes he substitutes his own, and it never seems like his goal is a shared understanding; just that we should accept his.

by Frondo 7y ago

freetime2 7y ago

The phrase “sexual assault” consists of the adjective “sexual” modifying the noun “assault”, meaning “an assault of a sexual nature”. If I then substitute in the definition for “assault”, I get “a physical attack of a sexual nature”. I’m not playing word games here, this is just how I understand the English language to work and sexual assault to be defined. I understand that in certain legal settings, any sexual interaction with a minor is deemed a sexual assault due to the fact that a minor cannot legally give consent. But as mentioned above, the laws in the US dealing with sex crimes are actually quite complicated, and details of what actually occurred between Minsky and the victim are few and far between, so I don’t know if that term would apply in Minsky’s situation. Maybe I am wrong or maybe we just have different understandings of the phrase (possible given the vagaries of the language). But I think accusing people of “playing word games” and trying to “move the goal posts” is not constructive. You’re assuming bad intent where it could just be something as simple as a difference in understanding.

Frondo 7y ago
I am quite honestly happy to accept that you're not playing word games and that your intent with trying to dive into this language is good. I do not believe the same is true of stallman, after having watched him redefine terms for decades, offer his own set of meaning for jargon in common use elsewhere, and so on. I think his frequent stance of "we must examine what this means" is more often than not a distraction, because sometimes he takes a technical meaning, sometimes he substitutes his own, and it never seems like his goal is a shared understanding; just that we should accept his.