• alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.org
    shield
    M
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    FYI: if you are an active apologist for Stallman in this thread, you will be indefinitely banned from Beehaw. to the extent that Stallman has salient critiques of anything he’s under fire for (as @t3rmit3@beehaw.org notes), his use of those critiques is almost exclusively to advance horrible, indefensible, actively harmful ideas. if you actually care about the merits of these subjects, nothing he argues is actually best argued from him. almost anybody else would be better served as a mouthpiece. and it is just incredibly silly to stand by the guy who took until 2019 to retract his belief that pedophilia isn’t harmful to children just because, as a foundational belief informing that position, he reasonably thinks we infantilize people between the ages of 12 and 17 too much

  • Midnitte@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 month ago

    Mere possession of child pornography should not be a crime at all. To prosecute people for possessing something published, no matter what it may be, is a big threat to human rights. – stallman.org, 5 June 2017 “Possession of child porn”

    I’ll honestly be surprised if he doesn’t end up being revealed to be in possession of CSAM.

    • Whom@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 month ago

      Entirely possible but he’s also a stubborn man obsessed with his own ideological consistency and absurdly precise (if not commonly understood) language. He’s clearly a creep but having kept up with him over the years I think it’s similarly possible that those statements aren’t self-serving and are instead sincerely held dominoes 15 down the line from following the implications of some core principles.

      That doesn’t make them not disgusting and also does not mean he should remain the voice of our movement, of course.

  • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 month ago

    There is a very real discussion of the way that we have conflated “minor” (a legal status) and “child” (a developmental state), and used that to infantilize adolescents who are very much not children…

    but that discussion is not about sex, it’s about the way that people abuse that legal status in order to deny adolescents normal choices that they are developed enough to make, such as what books to read, medical decisions, what they do with their property (or even the ability to own property), etc.

    Stallman is using that very legitimate discussion as cover to argue about whether children (i.e. pre-adolescents) should be able to have sex with adults.

    He is, at best, the worst kind of provocateur, doing this because he knows it riles people up, so that he can feign some position of superiority about not being upset about his very intellectual /s take, and at worst, desiring to enable or normalize pedophilia and hebephilia.

  • jherazob@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    I hate that this happens, because he’s a goddamned prophet when it comes to software freedom, the harms of proprietary dev models and related stuff, he’s also in mastodon and regularly posts about international news i see no one else mention, but damn there’s just no coming back from all this shit, how the hell would you share stuff he has said with all this gross stuff staining him? Goddammit, Stallman, you were supposed to be at least an OK person!

    • julian_schwinger@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      Responding mainly because I second this and feel the same way.

      The ethical bar is so low and yet he still chooses to not clear it.

  • galileopie@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Stallman pushed false propaganda about BSD for ideological reasons because the BSD developers allow freedom of choice to let people do what they want with their own computers and BSD developers don’t fight proprietary software, they simply don’t allow it as part of each BSD base operating system. Stallman and his followers think they know better than UNIX developers which software everybody in the world should use.

    It’s because of his kind that I only support open source software and comdemn free software and the politics of free software. A whole complete BSD operating system is 100% open source compared to the generic Linux kernel. Why doesn’t the Linux-libre develop their own drivers like BSD develop drivers and commision hardware companies for specs for the BSD’s to write their own drivers?