5 ms·

There was also one that I can't be bothered to find that goes something along the lines of "teens sext each other, therefore child pornography should be legal".

mirimir 7y ago
Well, there was that recent case about the tween girl who got convicted of distributing child pornography for sexting another tween. So it's obvious to me that underage sexting itself shouldn't be prosecuted as child porn. Because if they're old enough to prosecute as adults, they're also old enough to legally share naked pictures of themselves. But of course, it's arguable that third parties -- especially adult third parties -- who distribute such images should be prosecuted.
- salawat 7y ago
  Look, this conversation right here that you're making is exactly why people beiing willing to take a stance against these sorts of "thou shalt be dumped upon for even mentioning" things is necessary. He's not a fool in that regard. He understands that as long as you can attach paedophilia to something, this type of outrage phenomena can completely sink any attempt at civil discourse, and can be weaponized in order to force through liberty/civic rights destructive measures. Think about it. We could frame an Act to implement Panopticon for the sake of catching Paedophiles, and then poof! Resistance disappears because if you dissent, you're now pro-paedophile! Yet every last civic minded person who values personal freedom/liberty should be able to tell that the inevitable result of such a system being implemented is inevitable abuse. Now replace that with LGBT rights, or women's rights, or sexual assault, or any other controversial theme under the sun. You cannot have the Nazi exception. In any form, or on any topic. Freedom is Freedom. And you can't even dismiss it with a handwave to the freedom to experience consequences either, because you're just perpetuating the sin you're willing to punish Stallman for by tolerating the outright lies of the reporter which fueled the whole thing in the first place. https://www.popehat.com/2017/04/18/the-seductive-appeal-of-the-nazi-exception/ https://www.popehat.com/2017/04/18/the-seductive-appeal-of-t... People need to put the pitchforks down, and go about your day. You should advise the people who started the entire hubbub that the proper place to deal with that disagreement was with Stallman himself in private, maybe with an administrator. If we resort to mob justice to get our way, we end up throwing out any semblance of Order to our country, instead we just end up with a reflexive gaggle of inflammable passions waiting for the next match to be struck. I hate to say it, but you really can't fault Stallman on this one. You can be annoyed. You can find it distasteful; but in the end he is exactly right. It is important that the more heinous the accusation, the greater the pains needed to be taken to ensure that we specifically and only read into what is actually there, and adhere to what is actually actionable by law. Otherwise you see exactly what has erupted here. An outburst of rage against someone completely uninvolved, combined with the burning down of the metaphorical village for what? A Five Minute Rage? Christ, how Orwellian! 1984 isn't even being misused as a manual. It's here and now. God help us.
  - widowlark 7y ago
    This is incredibly dramatic. Orwell warned us of governmental censorship. Huxley warned us of government and citizen complacency. What we are experiencing here is something else, and it's NOT in the form of a law, or a punishment, or anything else. The government is not enforcing these actions on anyone. People are free to mob around an idea and attempt to actuate results. You can still speak your mind. It has nothing to do with 'Our Country'. Your equating of the two is worrisome
    - salawat 7y ago
      >People are free to mob around an idea and attempt to actuate results. You can still speak your mind. It has nothing to do with 'Our Country'. Your equating of the two is worrisome You are free to "mob" around an idea. Yes. You are free to actuate to generate results. I do not contest that. >Equating of Our Country I'm merely referencing a collective investment and faith in a system of Law and Order as set forth in the Constitution. Everyone is free to believe as they want, but reality demands it's toll when your "belief" begins to extract cost in the form of pursuits of extrajudicial justice. When you start seeing the lynch mobs gather (which make no mistake, this type of escalation isn't that far off from; reputational violence is still violence), I put my foot down. It darn well should be concerning. There are clearly battle lines being drawn. There is a growing corpus of individuals that see fit to utilize internetworking and information warfare through disinformation to cause harm; without due process, or respect to any authority or attempts at officially mediated redress. Civilization depends on mutual restraint, and unity in the agreed upon means to the redress of grievance. If individuals cannot come to the table to resolve their issues in a private manner, or do something novel, like calling each other out on something without outright lying in a public forum, or maliciously smearing each other in a manner unable to withstand basic scrutiny, but leading to a widespread disruption of the peace, then battle lines are well on their way to being drawn. Voicing the truth is one thing. Sometimes, it is unpleasant, but needs to be spoken. ; but to spread lies and slander maliciously to the end of tormenting hatred is another. I have no qualms with any of these people's causes. My beef is with their means. Given the increasing frequency with which people seem to be taking rather cavalier positions with the truth, and asserting that others should be deprived of their station without due process of any kind (the nigh inevitable result of a malicious false media campaign), a boiling point is clearly coming. I hate it. I don't know what to do about it, but it is written on the wall clear as day. There is very serious change on the horizon. This digital age has brought forth the new lynch mob. A veritable army of people can rebroadcast the worst types of untruth about you with little or no redress. I can't even say I can endorse their behavior from an ends justifies the means point of view. If everyone got these types of posses together and went after everyone else all the time, I don't see a reachable equilibrium. The sides just get larger, and wider until you either have the very quintessential example of the oppressed minority (thereby the minority deserves legal protection), or both sides get large, polarized, and energized enough where should violence break out, it's a threat to the entire system. I'm afraid our civilization is in the fits of a social anaphylaxis; and I have no idea what the anti-histamine would be. The adrenaline analog, however, is something we all know, and history has demonstrated time and again. Violence. I don't want it to come to that. If we can't stop making war against each other with words, there is nothing to keep us from falling upon each other with fists when the time comes that patience wears thin. Stallman, for all everyone is enraged at his gall and supposed insensitivity, said what absolutely needed to be said. I wouldn't be writing this if I didn't care for everyone involved. I understand. I may not agree, but damnit, I understand. I wish the entire thing never happened. That Epstein and his shenanigans would have been dealt with years ago instead of being allowed to fester. That none of those girls had to go through what they did. That two men of great intelligence weren't caught in the middle of it. But letting things devolve to this level of incivility is unacceptable. I cannot, and Will not on any last scrap of good conscience stand by and let this travesty play out without being heard. If all it means, is that everyone reads this, and waves me off as a crank so be it. I can accept failure. I tried. It is my hope that maybe, just maybe; even if it isn't in this issue in particular, mywords can act as a seed. A seed from which others may find that within the fertile landscape of their minds will burst forth a renewed commitment to treat each other with decency, respect, civility, and forgiveness. I don't care who you believe in, but if you can muster at least those four qualities,and maintain them to any degree, there is naught to be feared. Good night, and may whom you worship (if any) bless.
ng12 7y ago
> There was also one that I can't be bothered to find Then please don't post it. Lazy citation of original material is how we got here.
- DanBC 7y ago
  There are lots of them, and they're easy to find. They're all on his website. Here are a few. RMS has made a few comments saying that images of child sexual abuse should not be illegal. https://stallman.org/archives/2012-jul-oct.html#15_September_2012_%28Censorship_of_child_pornography%29 https://stallman.org/archives/2012-jul-oct.html#15_September... > Rick Falkvinge joins me in demanding an end to the censorship of "child pornography", and points out that if in the US you observe the rape of a child, making a video or photo to use as evidence would subject you to a greater penalty than the rapist. > The article does not mention that it's common practice for teenagers to exchange nude photos with their lovers, and they all potentially could be imprisoned for this. A substantial fraction of them are actually prosecuted. 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. 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... > Dutch pedophiles have formed a political party to campaign for legalization. [Reference updated on 2018-04-25 because the old link was broken.] > 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/2017-mar-jun.html https://stallman.org/archives/2017-mar-jun.html > In the US, people convicted for having copies of child pornography tend to get longer prison sentences than those convicted of having sex with children. > Mere possession of child pornography should not be a crime at all. To prosecute people for possessing something published, no matter what it may be, is a big threat to human rights. https://stallman.org/archives/2011-may-aug.html https://stallman.org/archives/2011-may-aug.html > "Child" pornography is being used as an excuse to threaten all American internet users' privacy. > The term "child pornography" is dishonest. The censorship of it puts young lovers in direct danger of prosecution. > Many published works are disgusting, but censorship is more so. In the Internet, enforcement of censorship puts other rights in danger. > Please support demandprogress.org's campaign against this bill. There are loads of these. Stallman takes a hardline anti-Censorship view, and he sees any prohibition on possession or distribution of images of child sexual abuse as censorship. His argument about criminalising children who share images of themselves with other children has a simple fix: stop prosecuting children for doing stupid shit.

mirimir 7y ago

Well, there was that recent case about the tween girl who got convicted of distributing child pornography for sexting another tween. So it's obvious to me that underage sexting itself shouldn't be prosecuted as child porn. Because if they're old enough to prosecute as adults, they're also old enough to legally share naked pictures of themselves. But of course, it's arguable that third parties -- especially adult third parties -- who distribute such images should be prosecuted.

salawat 7y ago
Look, this conversation right here that you're making is exactly why people beiing willing to take a stance against these sorts of "thou shalt be dumped upon for even mentioning" things is necessary. He's not a fool in that regard. He understands that as long as you can attach paedophilia to something, this type of outrage phenomena can completely sink any attempt at civil discourse, and can be weaponized in order to force through liberty/civic rights destructive measures. Think about it. We could frame an Act to implement Panopticon for the sake of catching Paedophiles, and then poof! Resistance disappears because if you dissent, you're now pro-paedophile! Yet every last civic minded person who values personal freedom/liberty should be able to tell that the inevitable result of such a system being implemented is inevitable abuse. Now replace that with LGBT rights, or women's rights, or sexual assault, or any other controversial theme under the sun. You cannot have the Nazi exception. In any form, or on any topic. Freedom is Freedom. And you can't even dismiss it with a handwave to the freedom to experience consequences either, because you're just perpetuating the sin you're willing to punish Stallman for by tolerating the outright lies of the reporter which fueled the whole thing in the first place. https://www.popehat.com/2017/04/18/the-seductive-appeal-of-the-nazi-exception/ https://www.popehat.com/2017/04/18/the-seductive-appeal-of-t... People need to put the pitchforks down, and go about your day. You should advise the people who started the entire hubbub that the proper place to deal with that disagreement was with Stallman himself in private, maybe with an administrator. If we resort to mob justice to get our way, we end up throwing out any semblance of Order to our country, instead we just end up with a reflexive gaggle of inflammable passions waiting for the next match to be struck. I hate to say it, but you really can't fault Stallman on this one. You can be annoyed. You can find it distasteful; but in the end he is exactly right. It is important that the more heinous the accusation, the greater the pains needed to be taken to ensure that we specifically and only read into what is actually there, and adhere to what is actually actionable by law. Otherwise you see exactly what has erupted here. An outburst of rage against someone completely uninvolved, combined with the burning down of the metaphorical village for what? A Five Minute Rage? Christ, how Orwellian! 1984 isn't even being misused as a manual. It's here and now. God help us.
- widowlark 7y ago
  This is incredibly dramatic. Orwell warned us of governmental censorship. Huxley warned us of government and citizen complacency. What we are experiencing here is something else, and it's NOT in the form of a law, or a punishment, or anything else. The government is not enforcing these actions on anyone. People are free to mob around an idea and attempt to actuate results. You can still speak your mind. It has nothing to do with 'Our Country'. Your equating of the two is worrisome
  - salawat 7y ago
    >People are free to mob around an idea and attempt to actuate results. You can still speak your mind. It has nothing to do with 'Our Country'. Your equating of the two is worrisome You are free to "mob" around an idea. Yes. You are free to actuate to generate results. I do not contest that. >Equating of Our Country I'm merely referencing a collective investment and faith in a system of Law and Order as set forth in the Constitution. Everyone is free to believe as they want, but reality demands it's toll when your "belief" begins to extract cost in the form of pursuits of extrajudicial justice. When you start seeing the lynch mobs gather (which make no mistake, this type of escalation isn't that far off from; reputational violence is still violence), I put my foot down. It darn well should be concerning. There are clearly battle lines being drawn. There is a growing corpus of individuals that see fit to utilize internetworking and information warfare through disinformation to cause harm; without due process, or respect to any authority or attempts at officially mediated redress. Civilization depends on mutual restraint, and unity in the agreed upon means to the redress of grievance. If individuals cannot come to the table to resolve their issues in a private manner, or do something novel, like calling each other out on something without outright lying in a public forum, or maliciously smearing each other in a manner unable to withstand basic scrutiny, but leading to a widespread disruption of the peace, then battle lines are well on their way to being drawn. Voicing the truth is one thing. Sometimes, it is unpleasant, but needs to be spoken. ; but to spread lies and slander maliciously to the end of tormenting hatred is another. I have no qualms with any of these people's causes. My beef is with their means. Given the increasing frequency with which people seem to be taking rather cavalier positions with the truth, and asserting that others should be deprived of their station without due process of any kind (the nigh inevitable result of a malicious false media campaign), a boiling point is clearly coming. I hate it. I don't know what to do about it, but it is written on the wall clear as day. There is very serious change on the horizon. This digital age has brought forth the new lynch mob. A veritable army of people can rebroadcast the worst types of untruth about you with little or no redress. I can't even say I can endorse their behavior from an ends justifies the means point of view. If everyone got these types of posses together and went after everyone else all the time, I don't see a reachable equilibrium. The sides just get larger, and wider until you either have the very quintessential example of the oppressed minority (thereby the minority deserves legal protection), or both sides get large, polarized, and energized enough where should violence break out, it's a threat to the entire system. I'm afraid our civilization is in the fits of a social anaphylaxis; and I have no idea what the anti-histamine would be. The adrenaline analog, however, is something we all know, and history has demonstrated time and again. Violence. I don't want it to come to that. If we can't stop making war against each other with words, there is nothing to keep us from falling upon each other with fists when the time comes that patience wears thin. Stallman, for all everyone is enraged at his gall and supposed insensitivity, said what absolutely needed to be said. I wouldn't be writing this if I didn't care for everyone involved. I understand. I may not agree, but damnit, I understand. I wish the entire thing never happened. That Epstein and his shenanigans would have been dealt with years ago instead of being allowed to fester. That none of those girls had to go through what they did. That two men of great intelligence weren't caught in the middle of it. But letting things devolve to this level of incivility is unacceptable. I cannot, and Will not on any last scrap of good conscience stand by and let this travesty play out without being heard. If all it means, is that everyone reads this, and waves me off as a crank so be it. I can accept failure. I tried. It is my hope that maybe, just maybe; even if it isn't in this issue in particular, mywords can act as a seed. A seed from which others may find that within the fertile landscape of their minds will burst forth a renewed commitment to treat each other with decency, respect, civility, and forgiveness. I don't care who you believe in, but if you can muster at least those four qualities,and maintain them to any degree, there is naught to be feared. Good night, and may whom you worship (if any) bless.

ng12 7y ago

> There was also one that I can't be bothered to find Then please don't post it. Lazy citation of original material is how we got here.

DanBC 7y ago
There are lots of them, and they're easy to find. They're all on his website. Here are a few. RMS has made a few comments saying that images of child sexual abuse should not be illegal. https://stallman.org/archives/2012-jul-oct.html#15_September_2012_%28Censorship_of_child_pornography%29 https://stallman.org/archives/2012-jul-oct.html#15_September... > Rick Falkvinge joins me in demanding an end to the censorship of "child pornography", and points out that if in the US you observe the rape of a child, making a video or photo to use as evidence would subject you to a greater penalty than the rapist. > The article does not mention that it's common practice for teenagers to exchange nude photos with their lovers, and they all potentially could be imprisoned for this. A substantial fraction of them are actually prosecuted. 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. 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... > Dutch pedophiles have formed a political party to campaign for legalization. [Reference updated on 2018-04-25 because the old link was broken.] > 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/2017-mar-jun.html https://stallman.org/archives/2017-mar-jun.html > In the US, people convicted for having copies of child pornography tend to get longer prison sentences than those convicted of having sex with children. > Mere possession of child pornography should not be a crime at all. To prosecute people for possessing something published, no matter what it may be, is a big threat to human rights. https://stallman.org/archives/2011-may-aug.html https://stallman.org/archives/2011-may-aug.html > "Child" pornography is being used as an excuse to threaten all American internet users' privacy. > The term "child pornography" is dishonest. The censorship of it puts young lovers in direct danger of prosecution. > Many published works are disgusting, but censorship is more so. In the Internet, enforcement of censorship puts other rights in danger. > Please support demandprogress.org's campaign against this bill. There are loads of these. Stallman takes a hardline anti-Censorship view, and he sees any prohibition on possession or distribution of images of child sexual abuse as censorship. His argument about criminalising children who share images of themselves with other children has a simple fix: stop prosecuting children for doing stupid shit.