[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] No, Stallman isn't "nuts" nor does he deserve

From: Steven Sullam
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] No, Stallman isn't "nuts" nor does he deserve less freedom of speech
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 21:47:26 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0

WTF? I became interested in the libre group as a more human alternative to commercial profit driven technology. I am not interesed in reading discussions of Richard Stallman's personal life or the lack of ethics in his personal behavior here.

On 9/15/19 8:53 PM, J.B. Nicholson wrote:
Adrienne G. Thompson wrote:
The record on Richard Stallman underscores that he is driven by ethical sensibilities. He's not about to approve of rape anytime soon. So let's just tell rms to shut up about the Epstein matter, not to attempt to
defend his idols (some of which I, *personally*, know are not worth
defending) and to get a female FSF colleague to censor all his comments
pertaining to women before these comments go public.

Or you could choose to not tell him or anyone else to "shut up" or accept a censorship regime. And you could also reject virtue signaling, sexism, and identity politics (regarding the "get a female FSF colleague"). After all, for all you know he could select a woman who doesn't agree with your take and you'll have nowhere to go because he met your sexist and identity politics-driven request.

You could understand that he too gets freedom of speech to say things you don't agree with (that's what freedom of speech is for, after all). You could choose to continue to use your freedom of speech as you've done while also respecting his. Counterspeech seems far more appropriate for this situation where Stallman hasn't done anything more wrong than possibly hold, share, and change views some others don't like.

His comments across some posts to his personal blog make me think I'm getting a poorly-explained half story from others on this topic. Considering what he wrote in

I want to respond to the misleading media coverage of messages I posted
about Marvin Minsky's association with Jeffrey Epstein. The coverage
totally mischaracterised my statements.

Headlines say that I defended Epstein. Nothing could be further from the
truth. I've called him a "serial rapist", and said he deserved to be
imprisoned. But many people now believe I defended him — and other
inaccurate claims — and feel a real hurt because of what they believe I

I'm sorry for that hurt. I wish I could have prevented the

Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex
between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it.

Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to
understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This
changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. I
am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why.

Media Lab Director Joi Ito confessed that he had secretly accepted
donations from Epstein after MIT had decided not to do so.

He also accepted funds for some personal activities of his own.

That dishonesty, and conflict of interest, make his resignation

But I fear for the effect on the Media Lab. Under Negroponte, the lab
was notoriously stingy and proprietary. Ito corrected that. I fear that
the next director will undo some of Ito's changes.

Jeffrey Epstein appears to have committed suicide in his cell. Or
perhaps he was murdered — it is not unusual for prisoners to murder
prisoners accused of sexual crimes.

Epstein was accused of trafficking: bringing people long distances on
false pretenses and then pressured them into sex or prostitution. He
also reportedly raped some of those people. I believe those accusations,
and I think he deserved to be imprisoned.

Some of his victims were legally adult. Some were teenage minors. I
don't think that makes any moral difference. I don't think rape is less
wrong if the victim is over 16.

as well as other posts on that same webpage, I see a consistent objection to rape regardless of the age of the victim, and I see public contrition for changing a view he held which he now views as wrong. Had we followed your censorious recommendations back then (to either "shut up" or to "get a female FSF colleague to censor all his comments pertaining to women before these comments go public") we might not have been able to read today and we'd lack any principled claim on free speech.

Those who choose to conflate Stallman's views with those of the FSF or the GNU Project seem to me to be either making a mistake in that conflation or be opportunistic (possibly virtue signaling).

libreplanet-discuss mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]