3 ms·
That is the context of the subthread to which you responded. Sorry if it wasn’t clear from my original post.
by historygurl 3y ago
That is the context of the subthread to which you responded. Sorry if it wasn’t clear from my original post.
- freejazz 3y agoI'm confused because you seemed to be dismissing them as if they aren't "real" crimes...
- historygurl 3y agoNah I was dismissing faux outrage at a guy saying whatever dumb shit, and those people basing their outrage in large part on such arbitrary jurisdictional issues. Outrage about the actual crime of human trafficking is of course called for but has nothing to do with RMS. Also, outrage at RMS won’t actually in any way address those crimes. But it feels good!
- freejazz 3y agoI don't care about RMS, but what are the arbitrary jurisdictional issues. There's nothing arbitrary or jurisdictional about human trafficking, just because might be of legal age. I feel like you aren't getting the fundamental issue that people base their shock/outrage/whatever off of. It's totally separate from thinking that attacking RMS over it will result in anything - as that's nothing but a strawman. There's no reason why criticism of anyone has to be tied to creating whatever societal-wide change is desired. That's just facially absurd.