5 ms·

> But now you say "Stallman came out to defend the pedophiles", so you must have some evidence I haven't heard. I believe people are referencing his long histo

> But now you say "Stallman came out to defend the pedophiles", so you must have some evidence I haven't heard. I believe people are referencing his long history of notes[0] supporting pedophelia such as this: > 04 January 2013 (Pedophilia) > There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children. > Granted, children may not dare say no to an older relative, or may not realize they could say no; in that case, even if they do not overtly object, the relationship may still feel imposed to them. That's not willing participation, it's imposed participation, a different issue. [0] https://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html https://stallman.org/archives/2012-nov-feb.html

leereeves 7y ago
You shouldn't post that without also posting this: > Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it. > Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. I am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why. https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September_2019_(Sex_between_an_adult_and_a_child_is_wrong) https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September...
- merlincorey 7y ago
  That's great and I agree anyone who is not pro-pedophilia should surely be heartened by Stallman's change of view here, however, I will point out that this entry is from 2019 September 14. That means these personal conversations and change of heart have come after the recent MIT mailing list posting and subsequent fallout.
  - leereeves 7y ago
    It only means that he didn't publicly say so until this incident.
    - 9935c101ab17a66 7y ago
      If that is the case — and I say that with a healthy dose of skepticism — don't you think that alone is problematic?
- DanBC 7y ago
  I don't get why people think this is some killer defence of Stallman. Most of us realise that fucking children is wrong because it's harmful to those children. We don't need to be told this. He talks authoritatively about stuff he has no idea about. That combination of arrogance, ignorance, and stunning lack of sensitivity is pretty hard to take from someone who is supposed to be using language as a tool of their job.
  - leereeves 7y ago
    > Most of us realise that fucking children is wrong because it's harmful to those children. We don't need to be told this. Do you imagine you were born with that belief? For most of human history, and in much of the world today, people believed otherwise, certainly about 17 year olds (the age in question here). It's not something people just know. It's something people come to know either through careful thought (like Stallman) or simply because they accepted what they were told (the "most of us" you've described).
    - DanBC 7y ago
      I was not born with those beliefs. Did Stallman make those comments (that the harms of incestual abuse can be avoided if condoms are used; that "willing" child abuse shouldn't be a crime) when he was a new-born child, or when he was a fully grown adult? The point is that these comments have no relevance to his work; he doesn't know what he's talking about but doesn't realise his ignorance; he has no ability to empathise with other people; yet he makes those comments anyway.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]

leereeves 7y ago

You shouldn't post that without also posting this: > Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it. > Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. I am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why. https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September_2019_(Sex_between_an_adult_and_a_child_is_wrong) https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#14_September...

merlincorey 7y ago
That's great and I agree anyone who is not pro-pedophilia should surely be heartened by Stallman's change of view here, however, I will point out that this entry is from 2019 September 14. That means these personal conversations and change of heart have come after the recent MIT mailing list posting and subsequent fallout.
- leereeves 7y ago
  It only means that he didn't publicly say so until this incident.
  - 9935c101ab17a66 7y ago
    If that is the case — and I say that with a healthy dose of skepticism — don't you think that alone is problematic?
DanBC 7y ago
I don't get why people think this is some killer defence of Stallman. Most of us realise that fucking children is wrong because it's harmful to those children. We don't need to be told this. He talks authoritatively about stuff he has no idea about. That combination of arrogance, ignorance, and stunning lack of sensitivity is pretty hard to take from someone who is supposed to be using language as a tool of their job.
- leereeves 7y ago
  > Most of us realise that fucking children is wrong because it's harmful to those children. We don't need to be told this. Do you imagine you were born with that belief? For most of human history, and in much of the world today, people believed otherwise, certainly about 17 year olds (the age in question here). It's not something people just know. It's something people come to know either through careful thought (like Stallman) or simply because they accepted what they were told (the "most of us" you've described).
  - DanBC 7y ago
    I was not born with those beliefs. Did Stallman make those comments (that the harms of incestual abuse can be avoided if condoms are used; that "willing" child abuse shouldn't be a crime) when he was a new-born child, or when he was a fully grown adult? The point is that these comments have no relevance to his work; he doesn't know what he's talking about but doesn't realise his ignorance; he has no ability to empathise with other people; yet he makes those comments anyway.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]