17 ms·

> It wasn't just awkward demeanor. He actively made women feel unwelcome in the workplace and behaved unprofessionally over and over again. Every episode I rea

> It wasn't just awkward demeanor. He actively made women feel unwelcome in the workplace and behaved unprofessionally over and over again. Every episode I read about fell into the category of "socially awkward adult male". If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. By all means, point me to a real abuse scenario by Stallman. I like being proven wrong.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Ignoring a legal age of consent, refusing to accept the accepted definitions of assault and rape, and claiming they were actually willing are emphatically not just "socially awkward".
- metiscus 7y ago
  Can you cite some specific evidence for your specific claims?
  - spats1990 7y ago
    On his website, for example, Stallman says that he "reject[s] the term sexual assault" completely.[1] ~edit: I have included the full quote below as I did not intend to twist/misrepresent in any way. Stallman writes: " The term is applied to a broad range of actions, ranging from stealing a kiss to rape, as well as other things in between. It acts as propaganda for treating them the same. There seems to be an exception for TSA agents, however. The term is further stretched to include sexual harassment, which is not a specific act, but rather a pattern of acts that amounts to a form of gender bias. Gender bias is rightly prohibited in certain situations for the sake of equal opportunity. I don't think that rape should be treated like stealing a kiss, so I reject the term "sexual assault" completely." [1]https://stallman.org/antiglossary.html#assult https://stallman.org/antiglossary.html#assult
    - dpq 7y ago
      ...and does a great job explaining his pov. It's not like he's saying that sexual assaults do not exist, and people should be able to rape / immodestly touch whoever they please with impunity. > Sexual assault: The term is applied to a broad range of actions, ranging from stealing a kiss to rape, as well as other things in between. It acts as propaganda for treating them the same.
      - tom_mellior 7y ago
        "Violent crime" also applies to a broad range of actions. It's not a propaganda term for treating all kinds of violent crime as the same. Why would that be the case for sexual assault?
    - ORioN63 7y ago
      I'm split on your comment. On one side, you indeed quote Stallman itself and the source of the quote. On the other side the complete quote reads: The term is applied to a broad range of actions, ranging from stealing a kiss to rape, as well as other things in between. It acts as propaganda for treating them the same. There seems to be an exception for TSA agents, however. The term is further stretched to include sexual harassment, which is not a specific act, but rather a pattern of acts that amounts to a form of gender bias. Gender bias is rightly prohibited in certain situations for the sake of equal opportunity. I don't think that rape should be treated like stealing a kiss, so I reject the term "sexual assault" completely. Reading the full context and your except was totally different for me. The full context, implies he doesn't accept the term, because it's an umbrella term that does more harm, than good. That's arguable, but doesn't seem a radical opinion. In fact, IMO, I agree that using "sexual assault" for something other than rape / attempt of, is depreciating the full meaning of the term and victims are normally the first ones to be affected by it. I do agree that other crimes, born from gender inequality, are very serious as well - that doesn't mean, we should bundle them up. How would society react, if slaps started to be prosecuted as attempted murders?
      - spats1990 7y ago
        Hmm. I wasn't trying to twist his words at all, so thanks for quoting in full. If I see a problem with his characterization of the term "sexual assault" / his reasoning in rejecting it, it's that the "broad range of actions" he says are labeled with the term "sexual assault" share one common trait: they happened without the consent of one party. He kind of ignores this in favour of describing the term as "propaganda for treating [acts of non-rape] as the same". And I find the argument that "one unwanted act that I and presumably others find mostly harmless was described as sexual assault, thus this term has lost its meaning in general" somewhat hard to swallow. Wikipedia: "Sexual assault is an act in which a person intentionally sexually touches another person without that person's consent, or coerces or physically forces a person to engage in a sexual act against their will."[1] If we did away with the term "sexual assault", I'm not sure what terms we would be left with when describing such things, except to describe the exact acts themselves. In fact, I'm not sure if I buy the idea that "the term sexual assault is losing/has lost its meaning because it used to mean rape" at all, because there has always been a word for that: rape. As far as I know, this term has always existed to describe a broad-range of sexual acts performed without consent. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault
- diffeomorphism 7y ago
  And he did none of these.
- efdee 7y ago
  Claiming they were actually willing and claiming they presented themselves as actually willing are two very different things. These are very dangerous accusations you are throwing around - you might do well to stick to what he actually said and wrote.
  - jimhefferon 7y ago
    It seems to me not credible that a 70 year old Minsky believed that a quite young lady would, on minutes of meeting him, be so attracted that she would be anxious to be intimate.
    - hdfbdtbcdg 7y ago
      According to eyewitnesses he turned down the advances...
      - DanBC 7y ago
        but that's irrelevant to Stallman's comments, because RMS starts by assuming that Minsky did have sex with the trafficked coerced child.
    - efdee 7y ago
      Possibly, but that is not the point. The point is that RMS never said the victims were willing, which is the quote (or one of the quotes) he's being burnt for.
    - rndgermandude 7y ago
      He might have thought she was attracted to him. Anna Nicole Smith claimed to have been attracted to her 90-something husband. There have been enough historical examples where power or intellect apparently attracts. Or maybe he thought she was attracted to Epstein's money and wanted to be on his good side by "entertaining" his friends. Or maybe he was fully aware of the situation. We cannot know what he thought, and we cannot even ask since he is dead, and we did not even know what actually happened after she "offered" herself (unwillingly and coerced by Epstein, of course).
- ldjb 7y ago
  Having a view that the law is wrong is not a crime, and nor should it be. If it were, who needs legislature?
- iagovar 7y ago
  Citation needed.
- Chris2048 7y ago
  He did not "ignore" age of consent, and what you describe as "refusing to accept the accepted definitions" is not refusal to accept the law, as you ambiguously characterise it, but the crime of arguing how unhelpful those definitions are in the context he describes.
- isoprophlex 7y ago
  No. Wrong. You, and many others, seem incapable of parsing basic sentences. RMS claimed it was plausible that she presented herself to Minsky as willing, due to coercion by Epstein. There's a big difference.
  - foldr 7y ago
    And what could be more normal than an 17 year old girl on a billionaire's private island willingly offering free sex to a man in his 70s? How could Minsky possibly have suspected that anything was amiss?
    - EmeraldMoon 7y ago
      Have you considered the possibility that your definition of normalcy is not equivalent to what's technically possible, or may be even the truth?
      - foldr 7y ago
        I have read over your comment a few times and still have no idea what you mean. But yeah, I'm confident in my judgment of what is and isn't normal in this instance.
    - tasuki 7y ago
      > How could Minsky possibly have suspected that anything was amiss? Reportedly, Minsky did suspect that something was amiss and refused the offer.
      - foldr 7y ago
        I know, but RMS was saying it would have been ok if he hadn't, hypothetically.
    - icebraining 7y ago
      I guess it's possible Minsky confused her for a 18 year old prostitute. Whether that counts as "willing" depends on your views on prostitution, of course.
- dpq 7y ago
  > claiming they were actually willing Did you even bother to read the emails or at the very least the article? This misconception is exactly what's being argued there, that Stallman said something clearly different. > Ignoring a legal age of consent By doing what, raping someone underage? Or rather expressing his opinion that it's ridiculous that when in one state the age of consent is 16, in another one it's 18, and yet people are judged morally and criminally for failing to distinguish between these two? So basically what you're saying is that possessing a non-standard opinion and criticizing existing laws should make you a non-person. I believe you'd feel very much at home in the USSR, the communist party had the same ideas.
  - vezycash 7y ago
    Once people have decided, or taken a position, facts and evidence are virtually useless. I read here on HN a few days ago that the dude in question, TURNED THE GIRL DOWN. How people are crucifying two people (Stallman and the dead guy) for underage rape that never happened is just crazy.
    - chii 7y ago
      it's SJW and cancel culture, with people who pile on as a virtue signalling that is causing this. See how badly critics blasted dave chappel for his new show, despite the audience loving the jokes (even if they were edgy, they were done in good taste, and pin-pointed a problem that society at large refuses to comment or talk about).
blowski 7y ago
Agreed. If Stallman was a charming, charismatic, handsome guy with a square jaw and good hair the whole conversation would probably have a different lens placed on it.
- t0astbread 7y ago
  Then he wouldn't be seen as an awkward guy who doesn't know any better but instead as an arrogant dick.
  - blowski 7y ago
    Exactly. The conversation should be framed around what he did (or didn't) do, rather than how others felt around him.
    - t0astbread 7y ago
      Yesn't IMO. When discussing RMS as a person I agree but in the context of the presidency of the FSF (which is more or less the "face of free software") we should certainly take into account what kind of energy he radiates.
- foldr 7y ago
  Hot, charming people get away with things that ugly awkward people don't. However, the lesson to be drawn from this isn't that it's ok to do those things. Rather, it's that life is unfair.
  - rusk 7y ago
    except that Stallman was let off for years ... I think people often just let him off because he wasn't "Hot, charming" and they maybe felt a certain amount of pity for him ...
  - chii 7y ago
    > the lesson to be drawn from this isn't that it's ok to do those things if it's OK for the charming, suave guy to do it, then the issue exists at the "victim", not the "perpetrator". Rule of law is meant to make life more fair, and this isn't a lesson, but it is something for society to improve on.
mbel 7y ago
> If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. Which seem to go against all goals of diversity and inclusiveness. If we strive for more diverse community we have accept quirks of some people. Only in purely homogeneous group everybody can be comfortable and not offended.
- ourlordcaffeine 7y ago
  Society: "We must embrace neuro-diversiry" Midly Autistic, not-good-looking man: Shows signs of autism Society: "No! Not like that! Kill it! Kill it!"
  - DanBC 7y ago
    Stop using autism to defend someone who's said that raping children doesn't harm them.
    - fold_right 7y ago
      Children? ... Honestly curious, when did he say that?
      - DanBC 7y ago
        https://stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html#05%20June%202006%20%28Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party%29 https://stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html#05%20June%20... > I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing. https://stallman.org/archives/2003-may-aug.html https://stallman.org/archives/2003-may-aug.html > The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia" also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally--but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness. > Some rules might be called for when these acts directly affect other people's interests. For incest, contraception could be mandatory to avoid risk of inbreeding. For prostitution, a license should be required to ensure prostitutes get regular medical check-ups, and they should have training and support in insisting on use of condoms. This will be an advance in public health, compared with the situation today.
viraptor 7y ago
> If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. There's a difference between tolerating it to a degree and letting leaders continue uncomfortable awkwardness. If it's enough to distance people, maybe they're not a great candidate for a leader. That doesn't remove anything from their achievements and abilities to contribute or to spread new ideas. The post says "If an occasional social gaffe or failed attempt at humor is all it takes to get thrown out on the street" - entirely omitting the space occupied by almost all of us: between homelessness and being a leader of a global movement/organisation. We can at the same time tolerate awkwardness and hold our local and global leaders to high standards.
- twelvechairs 7y ago
  > If it's enough to distance people, maybe they're not a great candidate for a leader. Isn't the whole point of a 'leader' that they challenge the status quo not bite their tongue to follow it?
  - viraptor 7y ago
    The point of a leader is that they do/present something that gathers followers. If the followers say "no, that's not ok", they're by definition not a good leader anymore (or not for that group of people - RMS can definitely create an FSF clone with people who accept him). There's lots of leaders who love the status quo and organise people around it. No challenging needed. (for example priests being leaders for a small local community)
    - twelvechairs 7y ago
      There's also lots of leaders (many important ones on history) who say controversial things. You are saying they shouldn't be given a platform by society, which I can't disagree with more. This isn't the followers saying "no, that's not ok", this is large institutions saying "no" on behalf of a vocal few.
      - 7y ago
throw0101a 7y ago
> Every episode I read about fell into the category of "socially awkward adult male". If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. Perhaps you need to read about more episodes: > I worked 10 years ago at VA Linux which had Richard Stallman on its board of directors. You might have heard that Stallman applied his open source ideas to his publicly open marriage as well. The problem was that he was more than open. He made overt sexual advances to women at work. One young woman who worked next to me was so upset from his multiple advances that she took it to senior management. She was able to deal with the problem without taking the issue outside the company. I don’t know the details, but she was given advanced warning anytime Stallman was headed over so that she could leave. He was a creep and women at the company knew to stay away. * https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/richard_stallmans_disgrace https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/richard_stallmans_disgrac...
- sergiosgc 7y ago
  I'm sorry for the specific request, but it must be a first hand account of an event. This second hand account can easily be the result of RMS being a difficult person to be around, for any number of reasons, constructed via word of mouth into a sexual issue. I haven't read the description of anything that resembles sexual abuse by RMS. (edited to remove an unintended reference to sexual assault)
  - foldr 7y ago
    Why are you shifting the goalposts to sexual assault? No-one here is saying that RMS has sexually assaulted anyone, and he wasn't fired due to allegations of that nature.
    - sergiosgc 7y ago
      Sorry, it was unintended. Thanks for pointing it out. I edited the text.
  - throw0101a 7y ago
    > I'm sorry for the specific request, but it must be a first hand account of an event. The excerpt is from an e-mail that John Gruber received in 2011. It is the written testimony of someone who witnessed the events in question first hand.
pvaldes 7y ago
> He actively made women feel unwelcome in the workplace This sword cuts both ways. MIT is not a kindergarten, they are adult people moving in an adult work context. It has been said here, that some women are so terrified of Stallman that will carry plants around with they. If true this would speak volumes but not about RMS; about those women! I assume that there are a lot of very smart but socially awkward people (men and women) in MIT. Excentricity and twisted humour is not a trait exclusive of men. Sex jokes are not exclusive of men. A fully growth women, so terrified of any contact with men to barricade herself behind a geranium all day, should raise a red flag. Maybe somebody in the administration could stop chasing the "big bad men" and kindly try to help this women to improve her social skills instead. Dealing with sex and relationships is part of being an adult. Any adult women should be able to stop and deal elegantly with an undesired proposition. Men act nervous, clumsy and awkward all the time when try to develop a romantic relationship. This does not convert them in monsters. Is just the human nature. Just a smile and a "thanks, but not thanks" should be enough, and this is a skill that can be learned also.
- ianleeclark 7y ago
  > A fully growth women, so terrified of any contact with men to barricade herself behind a geranium all day, should raise a red flag. Cool victim blaming. > Any adult women should be able to stop and deal elegantly with an undesired proposition. They're in a professional environment, they shouldn't have to deal with this.
  - new2628 7y ago
    > They're in a professional environment, they shouldn't have to deal with this. Tell that to all the millions of people who are happily married to people they met in professional environments.
    - ianleeclark 7y ago
      > Tell that to all the millions of people who are happily married to people they met in professional environments. Ahh, cool, so we can keep harassing women insofar as there are sometimes positive benefits.
seebs 7y ago
The behavior I saw, with creepy-sounding jokes about how being molested by guards is desireable if the guards are cute and similar comments, was definitely beyond "socially awkward adult male". There is also no reason that "male" should be a relevant qualifier.
- sergiosgc 7y ago
  As I referred afterwards on the thread (and should have done on the original comment), please refer to actual first-hand accounts. These kinds of stories tend to grow on each retelling.
  - seebs 7y ago
    The quote I saw was: > OP: "CBP waved me through with hardly a word last week (TSA did grumble at me, for not moving fast enough through their fondling queue)." > > RMS: I generally ask, "Could I please be checked by a woman? It's not fair that only gays get to enjoy this." I don't have a link, but I have not seen this one grow or change at all, everyone referring to it refers to the same thing. And that one is pretty damn creepy.
    - sergiosgc 7y ago
      That is obviously a joke. If that's the kind of stuff condemning Stallman, my point is proven.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

Ignoring a legal age of consent, refusing to accept the accepted definitions of assault and rape, and claiming they were actually willing are emphatically not just "socially awkward".

metiscus 7y ago
Can you cite some specific evidence for your specific claims?
- spats1990 7y ago
  On his website, for example, Stallman says that he "reject[s] the term sexual assault" completely.[1] ~edit: I have included the full quote below as I did not intend to twist/misrepresent in any way. Stallman writes: " The term is applied to a broad range of actions, ranging from stealing a kiss to rape, as well as other things in between. It acts as propaganda for treating them the same. There seems to be an exception for TSA agents, however. The term is further stretched to include sexual harassment, which is not a specific act, but rather a pattern of acts that amounts to a form of gender bias. Gender bias is rightly prohibited in certain situations for the sake of equal opportunity. I don't think that rape should be treated like stealing a kiss, so I reject the term "sexual assault" completely." [1]https://stallman.org/antiglossary.html#assult https://stallman.org/antiglossary.html#assult
  - dpq 7y ago
    ...and does a great job explaining his pov. It's not like he's saying that sexual assaults do not exist, and people should be able to rape / immodestly touch whoever they please with impunity. > Sexual assault: The term is applied to a broad range of actions, ranging from stealing a kiss to rape, as well as other things in between. It acts as propaganda for treating them the same.
    - tom_mellior 7y ago
      "Violent crime" also applies to a broad range of actions. It's not a propaganda term for treating all kinds of violent crime as the same. Why would that be the case for sexual assault?
  - ORioN63 7y ago
    I'm split on your comment. On one side, you indeed quote Stallman itself and the source of the quote. On the other side the complete quote reads: The term is applied to a broad range of actions, ranging from stealing a kiss to rape, as well as other things in between. It acts as propaganda for treating them the same. There seems to be an exception for TSA agents, however. The term is further stretched to include sexual harassment, which is not a specific act, but rather a pattern of acts that amounts to a form of gender bias. Gender bias is rightly prohibited in certain situations for the sake of equal opportunity. I don't think that rape should be treated like stealing a kiss, so I reject the term "sexual assault" completely. Reading the full context and your except was totally different for me. The full context, implies he doesn't accept the term, because it's an umbrella term that does more harm, than good. That's arguable, but doesn't seem a radical opinion. In fact, IMO, I agree that using "sexual assault" for something other than rape / attempt of, is depreciating the full meaning of the term and victims are normally the first ones to be affected by it. I do agree that other crimes, born from gender inequality, are very serious as well - that doesn't mean, we should bundle them up. How would society react, if slaps started to be prosecuted as attempted murders?
    - spats1990 7y ago
      Hmm. I wasn't trying to twist his words at all, so thanks for quoting in full. If I see a problem with his characterization of the term "sexual assault" / his reasoning in rejecting it, it's that the "broad range of actions" he says are labeled with the term "sexual assault" share one common trait: they happened without the consent of one party. He kind of ignores this in favour of describing the term as "propaganda for treating [acts of non-rape] as the same". And I find the argument that "one unwanted act that I and presumably others find mostly harmless was described as sexual assault, thus this term has lost its meaning in general" somewhat hard to swallow. Wikipedia: "Sexual assault is an act in which a person intentionally sexually touches another person without that person's consent, or coerces or physically forces a person to engage in a sexual act against their will."[1] If we did away with the term "sexual assault", I'm not sure what terms we would be left with when describing such things, except to describe the exact acts themselves. In fact, I'm not sure if I buy the idea that "the term sexual assault is losing/has lost its meaning because it used to mean rape" at all, because there has always been a word for that: rape. As far as I know, this term has always existed to describe a broad-range of sexual acts performed without consent. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault
diffeomorphism 7y ago
And he did none of these.
efdee 7y ago
Claiming they were actually willing and claiming they presented themselves as actually willing are two very different things. These are very dangerous accusations you are throwing around - you might do well to stick to what he actually said and wrote.
- jimhefferon 7y ago
  It seems to me not credible that a 70 year old Minsky believed that a quite young lady would, on minutes of meeting him, be so attracted that she would be anxious to be intimate.
  - hdfbdtbcdg 7y ago
    According to eyewitnesses he turned down the advances...
    - DanBC 7y ago
      but that's irrelevant to Stallman's comments, because RMS starts by assuming that Minsky did have sex with the trafficked coerced child.
  - efdee 7y ago
    Possibly, but that is not the point. The point is that RMS never said the victims were willing, which is the quote (or one of the quotes) he's being burnt for.
  - rndgermandude 7y ago
    He might have thought she was attracted to him. Anna Nicole Smith claimed to have been attracted to her 90-something husband. There have been enough historical examples where power or intellect apparently attracts. Or maybe he thought she was attracted to Epstein's money and wanted to be on his good side by "entertaining" his friends. Or maybe he was fully aware of the situation. We cannot know what he thought, and we cannot even ask since he is dead, and we did not even know what actually happened after she "offered" herself (unwillingly and coerced by Epstein, of course).
ldjb 7y ago
Having a view that the law is wrong is not a crime, and nor should it be. If it were, who needs legislature?
iagovar 7y ago
Citation needed.
Chris2048 7y ago
He did not "ignore" age of consent, and what you describe as "refusing to accept the accepted definitions" is not refusal to accept the law, as you ambiguously characterise it, but the crime of arguing how unhelpful those definitions are in the context he describes.
isoprophlex 7y ago
No. Wrong. You, and many others, seem incapable of parsing basic sentences. RMS claimed it was plausible that she presented herself to Minsky as willing, due to coercion by Epstein. There's a big difference.
- foldr 7y ago
  And what could be more normal than an 17 year old girl on a billionaire's private island willingly offering free sex to a man in his 70s? How could Minsky possibly have suspected that anything was amiss?
  - EmeraldMoon 7y ago
    Have you considered the possibility that your definition of normalcy is not equivalent to what's technically possible, or may be even the truth?
    - foldr 7y ago
      I have read over your comment a few times and still have no idea what you mean. But yeah, I'm confident in my judgment of what is and isn't normal in this instance.
  - tasuki 7y ago
    > How could Minsky possibly have suspected that anything was amiss? Reportedly, Minsky did suspect that something was amiss and refused the offer.
    - foldr 7y ago
      I know, but RMS was saying it would have been ok if he hadn't, hypothetically.
  - icebraining 7y ago
    I guess it's possible Minsky confused her for a 18 year old prostitute. Whether that counts as "willing" depends on your views on prostitution, of course.
dpq 7y ago
> claiming they were actually willing Did you even bother to read the emails or at the very least the article? This misconception is exactly what's being argued there, that Stallman said something clearly different. > Ignoring a legal age of consent By doing what, raping someone underage? Or rather expressing his opinion that it's ridiculous that when in one state the age of consent is 16, in another one it's 18, and yet people are judged morally and criminally for failing to distinguish between these two? So basically what you're saying is that possessing a non-standard opinion and criticizing existing laws should make you a non-person. I believe you'd feel very much at home in the USSR, the communist party had the same ideas.
- vezycash 7y ago
  Once people have decided, or taken a position, facts and evidence are virtually useless. I read here on HN a few days ago that the dude in question, TURNED THE GIRL DOWN. How people are crucifying two people (Stallman and the dead guy) for underage rape that never happened is just crazy.
  - chii 7y ago
    it's SJW and cancel culture, with people who pile on as a virtue signalling that is causing this. See how badly critics blasted dave chappel for his new show, despite the audience loving the jokes (even if they were edgy, they were done in good taste, and pin-pointed a problem that society at large refuses to comment or talk about).

blowski 7y ago

Agreed. If Stallman was a charming, charismatic, handsome guy with a square jaw and good hair the whole conversation would probably have a different lens placed on it.

t0astbread 7y ago
Then he wouldn't be seen as an awkward guy who doesn't know any better but instead as an arrogant dick.
- blowski 7y ago
  Exactly. The conversation should be framed around what he did (or didn't) do, rather than how others felt around him.
  - t0astbread 7y ago
    Yesn't IMO. When discussing RMS as a person I agree but in the context of the presidency of the FSF (which is more or less the "face of free software") we should certainly take into account what kind of energy he radiates.
foldr 7y ago
Hot, charming people get away with things that ugly awkward people don't. However, the lesson to be drawn from this isn't that it's ok to do those things. Rather, it's that life is unfair.
- rusk 7y ago
  except that Stallman was let off for years ... I think people often just let him off because he wasn't "Hot, charming" and they maybe felt a certain amount of pity for him ...
- chii 7y ago
  > the lesson to be drawn from this isn't that it's ok to do those things if it's OK for the charming, suave guy to do it, then the issue exists at the "victim", not the "perpetrator". Rule of law is meant to make life more fair, and this isn't a lesson, but it is something for society to improve on.

mbel 7y ago

> If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. Which seem to go against all goals of diversity and inclusiveness. If we strive for more diverse community we have accept quirks of some people. Only in purely homogeneous group everybody can be comfortable and not offended.

ourlordcaffeine 7y ago
Society: "We must embrace neuro-diversiry" Midly Autistic, not-good-looking man: Shows signs of autism Society: "No! Not like that! Kill it! Kill it!"
- DanBC 7y ago
  Stop using autism to defend someone who's said that raping children doesn't harm them.
  - fold_right 7y ago
    Children? ... Honestly curious, when did he say that?
    - DanBC 7y ago
      https://stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html#05%20June%202006%20%28Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party%29 https://stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html#05%20June%20... > I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing. https://stallman.org/archives/2003-may-aug.html https://stallman.org/archives/2003-may-aug.html > The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia" also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally--but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness. > Some rules might be called for when these acts directly affect other people's interests. For incest, contraception could be mandatory to avoid risk of inbreeding. For prostitution, a license should be required to ensure prostitutes get regular medical check-ups, and they should have training and support in insisting on use of condoms. This will be an advance in public health, compared with the situation today.

viraptor 7y ago

> If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. There's a difference between tolerating it to a degree and letting leaders continue uncomfortable awkwardness. If it's enough to distance people, maybe they're not a great candidate for a leader. That doesn't remove anything from their achievements and abilities to contribute or to spread new ideas. The post says "If an occasional social gaffe or failed attempt at humor is all it takes to get thrown out on the street" - entirely omitting the space occupied by almost all of us: between homelessness and being a leader of a global movement/organisation. We can at the same time tolerate awkwardness and hold our local and global leaders to high standards.

twelvechairs 7y ago
> If it's enough to distance people, maybe they're not a great candidate for a leader. Isn't the whole point of a 'leader' that they challenge the status quo not bite their tongue to follow it?
- viraptor 7y ago
  The point of a leader is that they do/present something that gathers followers. If the followers say "no, that's not ok", they're by definition not a good leader anymore (or not for that group of people - RMS can definitely create an FSF clone with people who accept him). There's lots of leaders who love the status quo and organise people around it. No challenging needed. (for example priests being leaders for a small local community)
  - twelvechairs 7y ago
    There's also lots of leaders (many important ones on history) who say controversial things. You are saying they shouldn't be given a platform by society, which I can't disagree with more. This isn't the followers saying "no, that's not ok", this is large institutions saying "no" on behalf of a vocal few.
    - 7y ago

throw0101a 7y ago

> Every episode I read about fell into the category of "socially awkward adult male". If we can't, as a group, tolerate awkwardness, we are very much down the rabbit hole of mandatory social conformity. Perhaps you need to read about more episodes: > I worked 10 years ago at VA Linux which had Richard Stallman on its board of directors. You might have heard that Stallman applied his open source ideas to his publicly open marriage as well. The problem was that he was more than open. He made overt sexual advances to women at work. One young woman who worked next to me was so upset from his multiple advances that she took it to senior management. She was able to deal with the problem without taking the issue outside the company. I don’t know the details, but she was given advanced warning anytime Stallman was headed over so that she could leave. He was a creep and women at the company knew to stay away. * https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/richard_stallmans_disgrace https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/richard_stallmans_disgrac...

sergiosgc 7y ago
I'm sorry for the specific request, but it must be a first hand account of an event. This second hand account can easily be the result of RMS being a difficult person to be around, for any number of reasons, constructed via word of mouth into a sexual issue. I haven't read the description of anything that resembles sexual abuse by RMS. (edited to remove an unintended reference to sexual assault)
- foldr 7y ago
  Why are you shifting the goalposts to sexual assault? No-one here is saying that RMS has sexually assaulted anyone, and he wasn't fired due to allegations of that nature.
  - sergiosgc 7y ago
    Sorry, it was unintended. Thanks for pointing it out. I edited the text.
- throw0101a 7y ago
  > I'm sorry for the specific request, but it must be a first hand account of an event. The excerpt is from an e-mail that John Gruber received in 2011. It is the written testimony of someone who witnessed the events in question first hand.

pvaldes 7y ago

> He actively made women feel unwelcome in the workplace This sword cuts both ways. MIT is not a kindergarten, they are adult people moving in an adult work context. It has been said here, that some women are so terrified of Stallman that will carry plants around with they. If true this would speak volumes but not about RMS; about those women! I assume that there are a lot of very smart but socially awkward people (men and women) in MIT. Excentricity and twisted humour is not a trait exclusive of men. Sex jokes are not exclusive of men. A fully growth women, so terrified of any contact with men to barricade herself behind a geranium all day, should raise a red flag. Maybe somebody in the administration could stop chasing the "big bad men" and kindly try to help this women to improve her social skills instead. Dealing with sex and relationships is part of being an adult. Any adult women should be able to stop and deal elegantly with an undesired proposition. Men act nervous, clumsy and awkward all the time when try to develop a romantic relationship. This does not convert them in monsters. Is just the human nature. Just a smile and a "thanks, but not thanks" should be enough, and this is a skill that can be learned also.

ianleeclark 7y ago
> A fully growth women, so terrified of any contact with men to barricade herself behind a geranium all day, should raise a red flag. Cool victim blaming. > Any adult women should be able to stop and deal elegantly with an undesired proposition. They're in a professional environment, they shouldn't have to deal with this.
- new2628 7y ago
  > They're in a professional environment, they shouldn't have to deal with this. Tell that to all the millions of people who are happily married to people they met in professional environments.
  - ianleeclark 7y ago
    > Tell that to all the millions of people who are happily married to people they met in professional environments. Ahh, cool, so we can keep harassing women insofar as there are sometimes positive benefits.

seebs 7y ago

The behavior I saw, with creepy-sounding jokes about how being molested by guards is desireable if the guards are cute and similar comments, was definitely beyond "socially awkward adult male". There is also no reason that "male" should be a relevant qualifier.

sergiosgc 7y ago
As I referred afterwards on the thread (and should have done on the original comment), please refer to actual first-hand accounts. These kinds of stories tend to grow on each retelling.
- seebs 7y ago
  The quote I saw was: > OP: "CBP waved me through with hardly a word last week (TSA did grumble at me, for not moving fast enough through their fondling queue)." > > RMS: I generally ask, "Could I please be checked by a woman? It's not fair that only gays get to enjoy this." I don't have a link, but I have not seen this one grow or change at all, everyone referring to it refers to the same thing. And that one is pretty damn creepy.
  - sergiosgc 7y ago
    That is obviously a joke. If that's the kind of stuff condemning Stallman, my point is proven.