4 ms·

Unbelievable. This site adds insult to injury by defending pedophelia and links it to trans issues. Are they saying that if the latter is ok, the former is also

Unbelievable. This site adds insult to injury by defending pedophelia and links it to trans issues. Are they saying that if the latter is ok, the former is also ok? Sounds like it to me. RMS deserves all the rejection he is getting for this sentiment alone, never mind the other charges. > But he did publish a highly controversial comment[2] in 2006 about the intention of pedophiles in The Netherlands to form a political party. Stallman wrote, "I am skeptical of the claim that voluntary pedophilia harms children." People today don't think that a prepubertal human being—a child—is capable of understanding all the implications of sexual activity, and in some cases this is so even after puberty. So, in widespread social opinion, “voluntary” does not apply. However, when we make an unprejudiced analysis of this thought, we can see a connection to skepticism which is typical of scientific thinking and inquisitive minds. Skepticism has a role to play in challenging social norms as in “I'm skeptical that human binary genders constitute an immutable truth.” https://stallmansupport.org/debunking-false-accusations-against-richard-stallman.html https://stallmansupport.org/debunking-false-accusations-agai...

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
unityByFreedom 6y ago
I agree. This "debunking" is simply a defense of Stallman's views on pedophelia. And Stallman's statement is still on his website. Nothing has changed, https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html
- okareaman 6y ago
  I'm being downvoted into oblivion by people who believe children should be able to choose to have sex with adults. I have to guess because the downvoters won't leave comments defending their position of support for sex between children and adults. I am surprised that they exist on Hacker News, not by their cowardice.
  - d_tr 6y ago
    Richard Stallman has changed his views on the matter with a very sincere newer note. I am not ok with adults having sex with children by the way and I never was. Now, at what age do you think that a child is capable of giving consent to undergo hormone therapy and gender altering treatments or operations in general? Is 8 good? I think there has been some, you know, discussion about this as well. All of these "taboo" matters have to be discussed at some point. Scientists discuss them and society discusses them every now and then, and they will be rediscussed sometime in the future, maybe in 10 years, maybe in 50, maybe in 200. It is kind of natural to discuss things.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
    The people who downvote you do not believe what you claim they do. That's the true reason you are downvoted. Also, you are twisting the facts by trying to present a discussion about a certain topic as a call to engage in sexual activity.
    - okareaman 6y ago
      As I said, I had to guess at why people were downvoting me because they weren't saying. A couple of people have since left comments. I am aware that children have complicated sexual feelings based on my own experience as a child. I think there's a time and a place to discuss this topic, such as between parents, doctors and educators. When RMS and other older males want to discuss childhood sexuality in broad terms it raises suspicions for many people. I think most people accept this reality, except perhaps the authors of this website. That was my point.
      - betwixthewires 6y ago
        > I had to guess at why people were downvoting me because they weren't saying. And you guessed "they're downvoting me because they're pedophiles?" Maybe people aren't responding to you because they feel that from your initial frame on the topic and your decision to frame opponents on it as bad people, no fruitful discussion with you can be had.
torthrowaway999 6y ago
No, it is rather a defense of skepticism rather than of specific opinions. It does not say that both of them are the same. >RMS deserves all the rejection he is getting for this sentiment alone How so? He posts his raw thoughts in his blog. Surely we would not want to discourage skepticism and rationalism just because these thoughts are not currently common. Please remember: the paradox of tolerance concerns these who withdraw from public dialog and instead take actions against these with different opinions and characteristics instead of engage them in a debate. As for the other charges, they are similarly dubious at best.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

unityByFreedom 6y ago

I agree. This "debunking" is simply a defense of Stallman's views on pedophelia. And Stallman's statement is still on his website. Nothing has changed, https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html https://www.stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html

okareaman 6y ago
I'm being downvoted into oblivion by people who believe children should be able to choose to have sex with adults. I have to guess because the downvoters won't leave comments defending their position of support for sex between children and adults. I am surprised that they exist on Hacker News, not by their cowardice.
- d_tr 6y ago
  Richard Stallman has changed his views on the matter with a very sincere newer note. I am not ok with adults having sex with children by the way and I never was. Now, at what age do you think that a child is capable of giving consent to undergo hormone therapy and gender altering treatments or operations in general? Is 8 good? I think there has been some, you know, discussion about this as well. All of these "taboo" matters have to be discussed at some point. Scientists discuss them and society discusses them every now and then, and they will be rediscussed sometime in the future, maybe in 10 years, maybe in 50, maybe in 200. It is kind of natural to discuss things.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  The people who downvote you do not believe what you claim they do. That's the true reason you are downvoted. Also, you are twisting the facts by trying to present a discussion about a certain topic as a call to engage in sexual activity.
  - okareaman 6y ago
    As I said, I had to guess at why people were downvoting me because they weren't saying. A couple of people have since left comments. I am aware that children have complicated sexual feelings based on my own experience as a child. I think there's a time and a place to discuss this topic, such as between parents, doctors and educators. When RMS and other older males want to discuss childhood sexuality in broad terms it raises suspicions for many people. I think most people accept this reality, except perhaps the authors of this website. That was my point.
    - betwixthewires 6y ago
      > I had to guess at why people were downvoting me because they weren't saying. And you guessed "they're downvoting me because they're pedophiles?" Maybe people aren't responding to you because they feel that from your initial frame on the topic and your decision to frame opponents on it as bad people, no fruitful discussion with you can be had.

torthrowaway999 6y ago

No, it is rather a defense of skepticism rather than of specific opinions. It does not say that both of them are the same. >RMS deserves all the rejection he is getting for this sentiment alone How so? He posts his raw thoughts in his blog. Surely we would not want to discourage skepticism and rationalism just because these thoughts are not currently common. Please remember: the paradox of tolerance concerns these who withdraw from public dialog and instead take actions against these with different opinions and characteristics instead of engage them in a debate. As for the other charges, they are similarly dubious at best.