
The media's hit piece on Richard Stallman - thinkingemote
https://libreledger.net/2019/09/17/the-medias-hit-piece-on-richard-stallman/
======
sp332
This specific point was discussed to death in several threads yesterday. And
why does the title call out "the media" instead of VICE? Or even just Edward
Ongweso Jr.? It's trying to frame this as two sides in a fight where one side
is lying. It dismisses the decades of Stallman's abuse of his positions at FSF
and MIT which are the real reason he should have been removed.

~~~
scohesc
Because it's the absolute laziness of other media companies that see articles
posted on other journalism sites and blindly copy-paste it instead of doing
their own investigation. It ends up most of the time causing witchhunts and it
turns out we're making mountains out of mole hills.

~~~
2_listerine_pls
Just saw a TechCrunch article with a title saying Richard was defending
Epstein.

edit: what's up with the downvotes

~~~
amanzi
Exactly - this why 'media' is being called out here.

------
VikingCoder
> Stallman’s second argument, points out the inconsistencies regarding the age
> of consent, as the victim was 17, many countries and states within the U.S.
> have an age of consent ranging from 16 to 18. Stallman is merely pointing
> out how the same act can be legal or illegal in a span of a few miles.

"is merely pointing out"? No. That is completely inaccurate.

He's saying it is "morally absurd" to have such a law:

> I think it is morally absurd to define "rape" in a way that depends on minor
> details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years
> old or 17.

~~~
gwd
My impression was that Stallman wasn't making a clear distinction between what
was _legal_ and what was _moral_ ; and that he was primarily focused on
people's _moral outrage_. He seems less concerned with whether what Minsky did
was a crime, and more concerned with Minsky's portrayal as a sexual predator.

In countries such as France or Germany -- hardly barbaric backwaters -- it
seems it's perfectly legal to have consensual sex with 15-year-olds[1]. So
maybe he does think that America's laws are "absurdly" strict; in which case
most of Europe would agree with him. Or maybe he's just making the point that
this is an area where many reasonable people come to different conclusions,
and so it's absurd to be so outraged about it.

I mean, I have a hard time understanding how anyone could think a 15-year-old
can possibly be considered to consent to have sex with someone in their 20's.
But obviously a lot of Europe thinks differently; if you're going to cut off
ties with Stallman for his view on the matter, you'd better cut off ties with
all of Europe too.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe)

edit: Forgot the reference

~~~
DanBC
Minsky didn't have consensual sex. She was coerced.

Age of sexual consent isn't relevant here. We need to legal age for
prostitution. Does any US state or any EU country set that below 18?

But also, it doesn't matter. US federal law makes it a crime to travel abroad
to have sex with people under 18.

[https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/citizens-guide-us-
fede...](https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/citizens-guide-us-federal-law-
extraterritorial-sexual-exploitation-children)

~~~
gwd
We're not talking about Minsky; we're talking about a hit piece on Richard
Stallman, which brings up his opinion on the _morality_ of sleeping with
17-year-olds as a reason to revile him.

The age of consent in Finland is apparently 16. Should we ask Linus Torvalds
what his opinions on the matter are, and force him to step down if he
disagrees? The age of consent in Italy is apparently 14 (!). I know a number
of Italians prominently involved in the kernel community; shall we ask them
what their opinions are?

It's important that we distinguish exactly what it is that we're accusing
someone of, and make sure that each individual element is true, for two
reasons.

One is just plain justice sake: it's not right to railroad someone and force
them to step down from the organization they founded based on bad logic and
twisted facts.

The second is, Stallman is not the only target here: everyone else is looking
at this and deciding how they need to act in response. If what the average guy
sees is "he expressed a minority viewpoint and he was lynched", then they'll
learn to simply not express minority viewpoints; they won't see what was
really problematic about either the current behavior, or Stallman's history.

His "but is it really assault" defense of Minsky is definitely problematic
given his position and the situation. And apparently he's had a long history
of "creepy" behavior, along with a long history of people telling him he needs
to change. Those are good reasons to ask him to step down.

But it is _not_ true that Richard Stallman said the girl was "entirely
willing"; that is just a lie, and covers up the real problems Stallman had.
And regarding his question about whether a 17-year-old can give consent -- be
consistent: either drop this issue, or take it up with every European in our
community.

~~~
DanBC
We are talking about Minsky, because it's Stallman's comments about Minsky
that are the problem.

> The age of consent in Finland is apparently 16.

1) Not for Americans visiting Finland.

2) Not for prostitutes in Finland.

> But it is not true that Richard Stallman said the girl was "entirely
> willing";

I haven't said this. I'm focussing on the things that Stallman actually said.
You yourself agree that these are enough to ask Stallman to step down.

> he second is, Stallman is not the only target here: everyone else is looking
> at this and deciding how they need to act in response. If what the average
> guy sees is "he expressed a minority viewpoint and he was lynched", then
> they'll learn to simply not express minority viewpoints; they won't see what
> was really problematic about either the current behavior, or Stallman's
> history.

Yes, this is entirely the point. We don't want powerful men to make public
comments saying that fucking children is fine so long as those children have
been brutalised into looking willing. We don't want powerful men saying that
"voluntary" child sexual abuse isn't harmful for those children.

~~~
Chris2048
> is fine so long as those children have been brutalised into looking willing

Stallman never said "it's fine", He called Epstein a rapist - i.e. indicated
it was whoever did the brutalising who is to blame. Also, it was a 17 year
old, not a child.

------
AstralStorm
I wonder, why Stallman just won't sue Vice for the hatchet job they did?
Defamation suits are a thing, and it would be a high profile one.

He has access to some very good lawyers and can allege both lots of income and
reputation, with damages.

~~~
faissaloo
Is there some kind of nonfree software he needs to use in order to sue
someone? If not I'd assume he's already in the process of doing it

------
cududa
If you can’t see the problem with making such arguments, you don’t belong in a
leadership position, period.

~~~
taylodl
Is someone who follows the herd or is afraid to state an unpopular opinion on
a contentious topic your idea of a leader? I don't think so, in fact I think
they're the exact opposite. This world needs people who are willing to go to
the mat for their contentious ideas, regardless of how misguided they may
appear to be so long as there's evidence of _reasoning._ Otherwise how do we
progress? A lot of today's mainstream thought was once contentious, even
illegal. I really don't understand this attitude at all.

~~~
DanBC
But here the reasoning was weak.

He tried to say that assault shouldn't be called assault if it didn't involve
force, because assault requires force.

That's a definition of assault that is incorrect in English usage and
incorrect in law. Assault does not require use of force.

30 seconds of web searching, or reading a dictionary, would have told him
this.

If this was the only time he'd said something fucking idiotic about sexual
violence maybe he'd have got away with it, but it isn't, is it? He keeps on
saying stupid shit about abuse of children.

When it comes to sexual abuse against women and children he doesn't know what
he's talking about; he knows he doesn't know what he's talking about; but he
keeps doing it.

~~~
taylodl
Except he wasn't talking about Jeffrey Epstein, he was talking about Marvin
Minsky. He was trying to portray a scenario where Jeffrey Epstein would have
been committing a crime while Marvin Minsky was not. Minsky's presumed guilt
is predicated on two things:

1\. His knowing what Epstein was doing, i.e. knowing these were sex slaves

2\. The girl was under age

RMS defended Minsky against (2) by stating it's morally absurd having a law
differing in different jurisdictions by age. There are many places in the
civilized world where (2) wouldn't apply due to the girl's age.

With regards to (1) all RMS mused was what if the girl presented herself
willingly? How do we know Minsky knew Epstein was committing a crime and thus
making himself complicit in that crime? Does Minsky not have plausible
deniability? Too bad he's dead and can't defend himself.

In the end RMS was painting a picture where Epstein is a monster, the girl was
a victim, and Minsky was innocent. The media completely misrepresented this
portraiture.

~~~
DanBC
Where did I say he was talking about Epstein?

There's a bunch of people across these threads saying "he wasn't talking about
Epstein" as if that excuses what he was saying.

> How do we know Minsky knew Epstein was committing a crime and thus making
> himself complicit in that crime? Does Minsky not have plausible deniability?

If you're a 70 year old man you should understand that a 17 year old girl is
not going to want to have sex with you. He was at the minimum hugely reckless.

> In the end RMS was painting a picture where [...] Minsky was innocent.

Yes, I know, and this is enough for most people to realise that RMS is not a
suitable figurehead for any project.

~~~
taylodl
The presumption is Minsky wouldn't have known she was 17 and with regards to
your other point - you know many men have been having affairs with girls 40 to
50 years their junior. Pablo Picasso was the first to come to mind. There have
been many others. I presume they feel flattered rather than suspicious.

~~~
rurban
We still don't know exactly if she was 17 or already 18 at that time. Someone
found out that she actually was 18 already, but it's unclear yet.

------
ajross
I'm as much a RMS booster as you'll find, but he dug his own grave here. At a
point in history when we're finally realizing that the kind of deeply sexist
culture among our elites (i.e. one where male billionaire sex peddlers drive
opinions among exclusively male elites by trading their harem of more-or-less-
plausibly-consenting-maybe nubile girls) is toxic, Stallman walked right in
with a "well, you know, this wasn't technically sexual assault".

I mean, he's not wrong. But he's missing the point, ethically. And given that
his whole schtick is an ethical position... I dunno. It's time to step aside.
Free Software can find better evangelists.

~~~
zzzcpan
You are missing the point here. It was a targeted attack on Stallman through
mass media, social media.

~~~
sp332
He's being "attacked" by FSF board members and employees, other free software
foundations, and FLOSS advocates.

~~~
gruez
>He's being "attacked" by FSF board members and employees, other free software
foundations, and FLOSS advocates.

Source on this? The only articles/blogs I've seen on this are from Vice, Selam
G. (MIT alumni, unclear what her other affiliations are), and the Gnome
foundation.

~~~
sp332
Former board member
[https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html](https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/52587.html)
&
[https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1172293871109320704](https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1172293871109320704)

Founder of FSF's GPL Compliance Labs
[https://twitter.com/NovalisDMT/status/1172573166956437505](https://twitter.com/NovalisDMT/status/1172573166956437505)

Former FSF staff
[https://twitter.com/georgialyle/status/1173788445732462593](https://twitter.com/georgialyle/status/1173788445732462593)

FSF member since 2004
[https://twitter.com/downey/status/1172328679889756162](https://twitter.com/downey/status/1172328679889756162)
Other members
[https://twitter.com/dustyweb/status/1173690170090168320](https://twitter.com/dustyweb/status/1173690170090168320)
&
[https://twitter.com/j00bar/status/1172309099410669568](https://twitter.com/j00bar/status/1172309099410669568)

Free Software Conservancy [https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-
does-not-spea...](https://sfconservancy.org/news/2019/sep/16/rms-does-not-
speak-for-us/)

Senior staff technologist at EFF
[https://twitter.com/cooperq/status/1173789555993956352](https://twitter.com/cooperq/status/1173789555993956352)

Forbes writer and "FOSS advocate"
[https://twitter.com/killyourfm/status/1173014344973598722](https://twitter.com/killyourfm/status/1173014344973598722)

Director of community for DIAL Community (part of the Open Source Center at
the UN Foundation)
[https://twitter.com/cooperq/status/1173789555993956352](https://twitter.com/cooperq/status/1173789555993956352)

Tech author
[https://twitter.com/mwlauthor/status/1173690259277848576](https://twitter.com/mwlauthor/status/1173690259277848576)

[Not sure how to describe Sarah Jeong briefly]
[https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/561785170538553344](https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/561785170538553344)

~~~
gruez
thanks.

------
overlordofdata
Just because the law is different somewhere else doesn't mean the law here is
invalid. Stallman lives in the US, and should be help to US standards.

People use the 'legal in europe' reasoning to justify many things. My parents
used it to give me alcohol as a child. Did that make it right? No, it didn't.
Should europe change? That's up to them. We are all still evolving. Some do it
at a different pace.

------
chasing
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning)

~~~
Dork1234
Did they really provoke RMS into saying anything? Seems like he put his own
foot into his mouth?

------
nkjoep
Confirmed also from FSF:
[https://twitter.com/fsf/status/1173780935910797312](https://twitter.com/fsf/status/1173780935910797312)

