I had never heard that about him. That’s disappointing.
Comment on Why are so many leaders in tech evil?
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 3 weeks agoHe was a big defender of paedophilia, necrophilia, incest, and bestiality. He thinks people should have the right to fuck their pets or their children. Not to mention the reports on his creepy behaviour with women.
Stallman is an incredible steward of FOSS, but he is not a decent guy overall.
wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Yeah, for me too. Because I love practically everything he says when it comes to software.
“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.”
RMS on June 28th, 2003
“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.”
RMS on June 5th, 2006
"There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children.
RMS on Jan 4th, 2013
In the interest of fairness, he did claim to have changed his mind on some of this, although that only happened 2 days after his job became on the line after making strange comments about Epstein.
For me, suddenly having a change of heart on a decades-held (and publicly-championed) opinion, only to suddenly change your mind the second it threatens your job seems a bit too convenient, so I’m unwilling to believe it.
Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Holy shit…
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
as long as no one is coerced
Well, the opinion that a child can consent is technically acceptable, because the line at 12,13,14,16,18,21 years is arbitrarily drawn which is why it differs in various countries.
But in practice he should have used common sense and at least drawn his own line.
“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.”
That’s scary, but I’m not sure how really wrong he is. The issue is again with child’s consent being less certain, affected more easily by various distractions.
so I’m unwilling to believe it.
So am I, the question is whether he has internal consistency or not in his views. If yes, it’s still better than, well, just being a jerk and proud of it.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Well, the opinion that a child can consent is technically acceptable, because the line at 12,13,14,16,18,21 years is arbitrarily drawn which is why it differs in various countries.
But in practice he should have used common sense and at least drawn his own line.
This charitable interpretation doesn’t make sense when you remember that he also says it’s a shame people can’t have sex with animals/their family pets. They definitely cannot consent, even if you argue that a 12 year old could (which I’d also disagree with).
wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
I would say it’s not a sincere change. It’s groupthink.
Well the skit keeps getting smaller and smaller
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You think being against having sex with infants is “groupthink” (i.e. a group pressuring individuals into having – or expressing – an irrational or dysfunctional view)?
I don’t think that’s true. I’m against raping children because it’s wrong.
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Let’s note that necrophilia with mutual agreement (pre-mortem, and same with cannibalism) and incest with mutual agreement (between adults) are fucked up, but should be defended. Animals can’t consent, children can’t consent, so not that.
That - yeah.
Believing in discourses and narratives without understanding that they are never real is bad.
You can believe only in what you see with your own eyes since inception and till death.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Why are you saying between adults, as if that’s what he said? He was talking about children. I even provided multiple examples of him saying so.
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
He’s saying all of those. Those concerning children obviously can’t.