A lot of things about Stallman are unusual. Creating a C compiler, library, editor, and from that a software movement is unusual. He is clearly neurodivergent; doesn't / can't anticipate how people will react to his opinions on socially fraught topics. History shows he is usually right, but doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut. I think the world is a better place for that, but it's come at his expense.
The author of that report, Drew DeVault, is also neurodivergent. Like Stallman he becomes fixated on topics, to the point of obsession. As a case in point, he obviously spends an inordinate amount of time stalking Stallman. It must of taken he years to gather all those references in the report you linked to.
Sadly DeVault's neurodivergence hasn't driven him to create a movement that binds people together, to create something bigger than of those people any could do alone that benefits everyone in the way Stallman has. Instead it drives he to attack others, and tear down what they have created.
Neurodivergent's make fairly easy targets, so I guess it's easy to understand why DeVault targets someone like Stallman and the movement he created instead of someone like Trump. Still, watching one neurodivergent tear into another in the way DeVault is fond of doing makes me very uncomfortable.
> The injustice [done to Minsky] is in the word “assaulting”. The term “sexual assault” is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation: taking claims that someone did X and leading people to think of it as Y, which is much worse than X. (…)
> The word “assaulting” presumes that he applied force or violence, in some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing. Only that they had sex.
> We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates.
> I’ve concluded from various examples of accusation inflation that it is absolutely wrong to use the term “sexual assault” in an accusation.
This seems a very reasonable thing to say. Also useful concept "accusation inflation" thanks for linking.
> "sex with someone under 18 is rape”, “sex with a prostitute under 18 is enslavement”, and “making a nude photo of someone under 18 is a sexual assault.”
What is happening here is law being repurposed. Rape already has big sentences, and we want to give under 18s extra protections, so let's redefine what the word rape means so we can reuse the rape law.
> Efforts against the business of making and distributing images of that are justified — but these must not be done by dangerous methods.
He was making a valid philosophical point in order to defend the legacy of his late best friend and mentor who did not get a chance to defend himself and got caught up in the Epstein drama. It's human and understandable and the political equivalent of offing yourself. Stallman never much cared for other peoples opinions or (office) politics. While the secrecy surrounding the Epstein files makes it impossible to know what (if anything) Minsky knew about Epsteins conduct or whether he participated in any of the criminal acts surrounding Epstein there have never been any allegations against Stallman and personally I do not think he has any actual interest in sexual reproduction and would not waste his time interacting with people that do not actively work in GNU / Free Software.
Reading through those quotes, I get the impression that Stallman doesn't understand why underaged people can't give consent to people considered adults by the legal system. It falls in line with his other misunderstandings or lack of awareness on social issues.
He's right that young people have agency and can make informed decisions about themselves, but fails to recognize the social pressures that means that young people often aren't in a position to say no, or even understand that they can can say no. There are financial, social, and even legal power imbalances between minors and non-minors that make it impossible to assert that certain interactions are consentual, even if they aren't of a sexual nature. It's these power imbalances that are the issue, not whether or not a young person has enough factually to understand what they are consenting to. Interactions like this are abuses of the power that adults have over children, and that's a big part of what makes them so disturbing.
>personally I do not think he has any actual interest in sexual reproduction and would not waste his time interacting with people that do not actively work in GNU / Free Software
I'm getting my one lick in because I know litigating this will be futile, people will defend RMS to the bitter end regardless of what he says or does, and I'll probably just be flagged for my trouble.
RMS blogged many times over many years about his beliefs that child pornography and pedophilia should be legal and socially acceptable. He also has a history of creepy behavior around women. He clearly is not asexual.
If RMS wasn't a part of Epstein's shit, it's only because he wasn't sociable enough to fit in with that crowd, not because he wouldn't be into it.
A lot of things about Stallman are unusual. Creating a C compiler, library, editor, and from that a software movement is unusual. He is clearly neurodivergent; doesn't / can't anticipate how people will react to his opinions on socially fraught topics. History shows he is usually right, but doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut. I think the world is a better place for that, but it's come at his expense.
The author of that report, Drew DeVault, is also neurodivergent. Like Stallman he becomes fixated on topics, to the point of obsession. As a case in point, he obviously spends an inordinate amount of time stalking Stallman. It must of taken he years to gather all those references in the report you linked to.
Sadly DeVault's neurodivergence hasn't driven him to create a movement that binds people together, to create something bigger than of those people any could do alone that benefits everyone in the way Stallman has. Instead it drives he to attack others, and tear down what they have created.
Neurodivergent's make fairly easy targets, so I guess it's easy to understand why DeVault targets someone like Stallman and the movement he created instead of someone like Trump. Still, watching one neurodivergent tear into another in the way DeVault is fond of doing makes me very uncomfortable.
> The injustice [done to Minsky] is in the word “assaulting”. The term “sexual assault” is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation: taking claims that someone did X and leading people to think of it as Y, which is much worse than X. (…)
> The word “assaulting” presumes that he applied force or violence, in some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing. Only that they had sex.
> We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates.
> I’ve concluded from various examples of accusation inflation that it is absolutely wrong to use the term “sexual assault” in an accusation.
This seems a very reasonable thing to say. Also useful concept "accusation inflation" thanks for linking.
> "sex with someone under 18 is rape”, “sex with a prostitute under 18 is enslavement”, and “making a nude photo of someone under 18 is a sexual assault.”
What is happening here is law being repurposed. Rape already has big sentences, and we want to give under 18s extra protections, so let's redefine what the word rape means so we can reuse the rape law.
> Efforts against the business of making and distributing images of that are justified — but these must not be done by dangerous methods.
Dangerous methods meaning redefining words.
Oh my. Now I wonder if Stallman is in the Epstein files. (Release the Epstein files!)
He was making a valid philosophical point in order to defend the legacy of his late best friend and mentor who did not get a chance to defend himself and got caught up in the Epstein drama. It's human and understandable and the political equivalent of offing yourself. Stallman never much cared for other peoples opinions or (office) politics. While the secrecy surrounding the Epstein files makes it impossible to know what (if anything) Minsky knew about Epsteins conduct or whether he participated in any of the criminal acts surrounding Epstein there have never been any allegations against Stallman and personally I do not think he has any actual interest in sexual reproduction and would not waste his time interacting with people that do not actively work in GNU / Free Software.
Reading through those quotes, I get the impression that Stallman doesn't understand why underaged people can't give consent to people considered adults by the legal system. It falls in line with his other misunderstandings or lack of awareness on social issues.
He's right that young people have agency and can make informed decisions about themselves, but fails to recognize the social pressures that means that young people often aren't in a position to say no, or even understand that they can can say no. There are financial, social, and even legal power imbalances between minors and non-minors that make it impossible to assert that certain interactions are consentual, even if they aren't of a sexual nature. It's these power imbalances that are the issue, not whether or not a young person has enough factually to understand what they are consenting to. Interactions like this are abuses of the power that adults have over children, and that's a big part of what makes them so disturbing.
1 reply →
If you think that’s just about defending a friend, than I think you haven’t read enough of the quotes on that page.
>personally I do not think he has any actual interest in sexual reproduction and would not waste his time interacting with people that do not actively work in GNU / Free Software
I'm getting my one lick in because I know litigating this will be futile, people will defend RMS to the bitter end regardless of what he says or does, and I'll probably just be flagged for my trouble.
RMS blogged many times over many years about his beliefs that child pornography and pedophilia should be legal and socially acceptable. He also has a history of creepy behavior around women. He clearly is not asexual.
If RMS wasn't a part of Epstein's shit, it's only because he wasn't sociable enough to fit in with that crowd, not because he wouldn't be into it.
1 reply →