Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Richard Stallman Resigns From The Free Software Foundation

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Much the same point skeevy420 Is consent that has been scammed or coerced still consent?
    No.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by hotaru View Post

      that's the whole point. it can't be consensual.
      Oh, I didn’t recognize the oxymoron.
      Still don’t find it comfortable to use word “rape” in situation when there’s a formal consent (it just inflates the meaning of the word). Though indeed it’s bad to use child’s lack of responsibility to own advantage.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

        Different form of rape -- it's about not being knowledgeable enough about life to make an informed decision or choice. A child probably knows enough not to touch a hot stove because they'll get burned whereas they likely do not grasp the concept of an overdose and drug usage or when it's appropriate to get naked and with who or why.

        Think of it like a scammer ripping someone off -- the scammer comes in with a bunch of fake numbers and tricks people into "investing" in something. Even if a pervert groomed the child up for to "know" what sex was, it's essentially scamming them and tricking them due to their lack of life experiences and them not knowing that someone touching them there isn't appropriate because they haven't had the time to learn right and wrong, appropriate and inappropriate.

        Is consent after being scammed actually consent regardless of the crime committed? Rape, money, murder...is scam or trickery for consent real, actual consent?

        I don't consider it to be real, actual consent.
        I don’t argue that it’s bad. I find that it’s just somehow wrong to use “rape” for any felony regarding sex. It’s like using “robbery” for everything from actual armed robbery to scamming by abusing trust.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by grigi View Post

          Say, for example. A superior in a hierarchy of some sort, strongly implies that to be part of the group (and keep your job) it is highly recommended (implicated to be required) to attend the bar and drink Whiskey.
          This is coercion and is against their will. The implication makes it unconditional.

          So in the same way one could "convince" someone to have sex. Even though it is actually against their will, but due to mentally abusive games, their will is forced.

          And this is much easier with a minor whom internally fears that the superior has the power to make or destroy his/her career.
          How can someone be convinced to genuinely consent against their will? If it’s against the will - it’s rape, if it’s not - it’s not (still can be another kind of felony though).

          Comment


          • #45
            Who benefits ?

            Comment


            • #46
              What the… Political correctness?!? It has nothing to do with technical merit. I would have nothing against Reiser4 either.

              RMS is known as a peculiar one, and that was fine. Jesus wasn't politically correct either, so why should St. Ignucius.
              Last edited by andreano; 09-17-2019, 11:06 AM.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by iavael View Post

                How can someone be convinced to genuinely consent against their will? If it’s against the will - it’s rape, if it’s not - it’s not (still can be another kind of felony though).
                Thats the point. They are not giving consent. The may be coerced into saying they give consent, but that is not the truth.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by ossuser View Post
                  Who benefits ?
                  Considering this was what Stallman actually said:

                  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.
                  Yes, that's really what set this whole thing off. In the same email chain he also called Epstein a "rapist" and never actually defended him, only his now-dead colleague from the MIT AI lab who attended at least one of Epstein's parties and was propositioned by one of his underage victims, but turned her down.

                  First and foremost among the beneficiaries of this fake controversy would probably be the "journalists" who were able to significantly raise their profiles by making such a big stink over something as small as this. After this we have people who don't like Stallman, of which there are plenty and many of them with legitimate reasons as he's not a very pleasant person to physically be around and has expressed some "interesting" opinions on controversial subjects in the past. Finally we have people like the GNOME foundation leadership who also want to raise their profile by slamming Stallman as a "pedophile defender" or something equally false.
                  "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    The Register has a really good article as to why Richard stallman was forced to resign from the FSF. As a bonus they include what turns out to be Stallman's last interview as head of the FSF right after he had visited Microsoft. Both are very interesting reads.

                    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/0...man_interview/

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by grigi View Post

                      Thats the point. They are not giving consent. The may be coerced into saying they give consent, but that is not the truth.
                      If victim didn't give genuine consent, so it was against their will, so then it's rape. And one who forced victim is rapist.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X