3 ms·

> You're biased in ways you don't see I'm biased against inappropriate conduct towards people and a lack of respect for other people. I'm not even angry about

by fao_ 6y ago

> You're biased in ways you don't see I'm biased against inappropriate conduct towards people and a lack of respect for other people. I'm not even angry about this, just deeply disappointed in the FSF and their decision to put one man above the voices of countless people who he has repeatedly acted inappropriately towards and has neither acknowledged nor attempted to improve his behaviour.

klibertp 6y ago
> put one man above the voices of countless people In other words, they chose to resist the cancel culture, stick to what they believe is right instead of appeasing an angry mob, and ignore the obviously ill-intended mischaracterizations spreading over the social media. I'd say they did a good job. A good read, referenced on Wikipedia: https://www.wetheweb.org/post/cancel-we-the-web https://www.wetheweb.org/post/cancel-we-the-web "Acting inappropriately" is not a crime. If you dislike his behavior, don't come near him - you're free to do so. Trying to force your way of thinking on him, instead, is wrong. The fact that he used to ask random women to have sex with him (actually, to "go out with him") does not make him misogynist. The fact that he said that "14 and above" people should be able to have sex if they want, and that "abstaining from sex after puberty is unnatural" does not make him a pedophile. The fact that he questions the use of "sexual assault" phrase in a situation where the "assaulted" person "appears entirely willing" does not make him a rapist. You might not like his "inappropriate conduct" and that's ok. He, on the other hand, might not like your standards of what is appropriate or not, and that's also ok. I, for one, don't like the hypocrisy and puritanism you seem to espouse. I wouldn't want to be your friend, what with having to worry about my "conduct" constantly. But that's ok, I don't have to be your friend. It's all good. At least until you start forcing your (to me - misguided) values on others, start forming a mob with the intention of lynching him (or me), and try to shame all the people with contrary views into silence.
- fao_ 6y ago
  > I wouldn't want to be your friend, what with having to worry about my "conduct" constantly. It's about consent. You do not do things to someone, without someone else's consent. An example: If you repeatedly prod me, and I ask you to stop, and you carry on going -- that makes you the asshole. That I asked you to stop, and you ignored me, does not put the blame on me. You claim he is not a misogynist. The fact that he makes women, in general, uncomfortable by repeatedly making unwanted and unwarranted passes at them constantly -- to the point at which almost all of the women who had to deal with him bought specific plants just to deter him, shows that he is not fit to lead a movement. Because he does not listen to others when they ask him to stop disrespecting their boundaries. The fact that, when he was asked to stop soliciting women for sex, that he circumvented these rules by passing out cards that asked for sex, shows he fundamentally misunderstands the reason he was asked to stop. That he fundamentally does not understand, or has no will to understand, accept and more importantly respect the personal boundaries of the people -- more often than not women -- around him. It's not like he was never given any warning. People asked him to stop making the women around him deeply uncomfortable, repeatedly, and he repeatedly refused to listen. At this point, 20 to 40 years later, this is a pattern of abuse. If this happened at a workplace, they would fire you. If this happened anywhere in society, they would remove you. The FSF did exactly that because people exercised their free speech to say no more to this. When you constantly, repeatedly act like an asshole in public, and show no respect for the boundaries and space of other people, that will make people very understandably irritated, even angry if it happens constantly. We even have a legal definition for this enshrined in our law -- harassment -- to account for the fact that doing something to another person, or a group of people, without their consent, is psychologically and physically damaging to their health. That is why he is not fit to lead a movement. That is why people are irate and angered by the refusal of people to listen to the voices of others.

by fao_ 6y ago

klibertp 6y ago

> put one man above the voices of countless people In other words, they chose to resist the cancel culture, stick to what they believe is right instead of appeasing an angry mob, and ignore the obviously ill-intended mischaracterizations spreading over the social media. I'd say they did a good job. A good read, referenced on Wikipedia: https://www.wetheweb.org/post/cancel-we-the-web https://www.wetheweb.org/post/cancel-we-the-web "Acting inappropriately" is not a crime. If you dislike his behavior, don't come near him - you're free to do so. Trying to force your way of thinking on him, instead, is wrong. The fact that he used to ask random women to have sex with him (actually, to "go out with him") does not make him misogynist. The fact that he said that "14 and above" people should be able to have sex if they want, and that "abstaining from sex after puberty is unnatural" does not make him a pedophile. The fact that he questions the use of "sexual assault" phrase in a situation where the "assaulted" person "appears entirely willing" does not make him a rapist. You might not like his "inappropriate conduct" and that's ok. He, on the other hand, might not like your standards of what is appropriate or not, and that's also ok. I, for one, don't like the hypocrisy and puritanism you seem to espouse. I wouldn't want to be your friend, what with having to worry about my "conduct" constantly. But that's ok, I don't have to be your friend. It's all good. At least until you start forcing your (to me - misguided) values on others, start forming a mob with the intention of lynching him (or me), and try to shame all the people with contrary views into silence.

fao_ 6y ago
> I wouldn't want to be your friend, what with having to worry about my "conduct" constantly. It's about consent. You do not do things to someone, without someone else's consent. An example: If you repeatedly prod me, and I ask you to stop, and you carry on going -- that makes you the asshole. That I asked you to stop, and you ignored me, does not put the blame on me. You claim he is not a misogynist. The fact that he makes women, in general, uncomfortable by repeatedly making unwanted and unwarranted passes at them constantly -- to the point at which almost all of the women who had to deal with him bought specific plants just to deter him, shows that he is not fit to lead a movement. Because he does not listen to others when they ask him to stop disrespecting their boundaries. The fact that, when he was asked to stop soliciting women for sex, that he circumvented these rules by passing out cards that asked for sex, shows he fundamentally misunderstands the reason he was asked to stop. That he fundamentally does not understand, or has no will to understand, accept and more importantly respect the personal boundaries of the people -- more often than not women -- around him. It's not like he was never given any warning. People asked him to stop making the women around him deeply uncomfortable, repeatedly, and he repeatedly refused to listen. At this point, 20 to 40 years later, this is a pattern of abuse. If this happened at a workplace, they would fire you. If this happened anywhere in society, they would remove you. The FSF did exactly that because people exercised their free speech to say no more to this. When you constantly, repeatedly act like an asshole in public, and show no respect for the boundaries and space of other people, that will make people very understandably irritated, even angry if it happens constantly. We even have a legal definition for this enshrined in our law -- harassment -- to account for the fact that doing something to another person, or a group of people, without their consent, is psychologically and physically damaging to their health. That is why he is not fit to lead a movement. That is why people are irate and angered by the refusal of people to listen to the voices of others.