The media then twisted that into "Famed Computer Scientist Richard Stallman Described Epstein Victims As 'Entirely Willing'" [0], which is not something that RMS claimed in that email. To this day there has been no redactin, apology or anything else to atone for this deliberate character assasination - but sure, keep blaming the victim.
If you read what RMS actually wrote, it's kind of hard to disagree with the line of argument:
"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".
Of course, it was incredibly tone deaf to write this out in a thread about Epstein no less, and promptly got twisted into "RMS advocates raping little children".
What he was really guilty of was sharing his opinions on a dangerous subject when he really had nothing interesting or original to add. He might as well complain about the speed limit on a particular road being 65 instead of 75. We set standards and conventions to keep order.
And while I completely approve of RMS, that argument works just as well for 10 year olds and has often been made. Listen to screaming Gajdusek about his right (or even duty) to have sex with consenting children at the end of The Genius and the Boys.[0] Maybe when RMS said it, he set an age in his mind of some precocious post-pubescent teenager. Whatever his mental imagery was, it was just as arbitrary as the law.
We set a standard to give kids a bit of runway before they are a legitimate object of the desires and efforts of adult men (and women.) 18 is fine, it gives them a little time. 17 would probably be fine, too. I don't see any reason why it couldn't be 19. But it is what it is.
account42|4 years ago
The media then twisted that into "Famed Computer Scientist Richard Stallman Described Epstein Victims As 'Entirely Willing'" [0], which is not something that RMS claimed in that email. To this day there has been no redactin, apology or anything else to atone for this deliberate character assasination - but sure, keep blaming the victim.
[0] https://www.vice.com/en/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scient...
thematrixturtle|4 years ago
"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".
Of course, it was incredibly tone deaf to write this out in a thread about Epstein no less, and promptly got twisted into "RMS advocates raping little children".
pessimizer|4 years ago
And while I completely approve of RMS, that argument works just as well for 10 year olds and has often been made. Listen to screaming Gajdusek about his right (or even duty) to have sex with consenting children at the end of The Genius and the Boys.[0] Maybe when RMS said it, he set an age in his mind of some precocious post-pubescent teenager. Whatever his mental imagery was, it was just as arbitrary as the law.
We set a standard to give kids a bit of runway before they are a legitimate object of the desires and efforts of adult men (and women.) 18 is fine, it gives them a little time. 17 would probably be fine, too. I don't see any reason why it couldn't be 19. But it is what it is.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OxppDxzSww