RMS, Debian, and the world

Too much has been written, a war of support letters is going on, Debian is heading head first like Lemmings into the same war. And then, there is this by the first female President of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU):

Civil Rights Activist Nadine Strossen’s Response To #CancelStallman:

I find it so odd that the strong zeal for revenge and punishment if someone says anything that is perceived to be sexist or racist or discriminatory comes from liberals and progressives. There are so many violations [in cases like Stallman’s] of such fundamental principles to which progressives and liberals cling in general as to what is justice, what is fairness, what is due process.
One is proportionality: that the punishment should be proportional to the offense. Another one is restorative justice: that rather than retribution and punishment, we should seek to have the person constructively come to understand, repent, and make amends for an infraction. Liberals generally believe society to be too punitive, too harsh, not forgiving enough. They are certainly against the death penalty and other harsh punishments even for the most violent, the mass murderers. Progressives are right now advocating for the release of criminals, even murderers. To then have exactly the opposite attitude towards something that certainly is not committing physical violence against somebody, I don’t understand the double standard!
Another cardinal principle is we shouldn’t have any guilt by association. [To hold culpable] these board members who were affiliated with him and ostensibly didn’t do enough to punish him for things that he said – which by the way were completely separate from the Free Software Foundation – is multiplying the problems of unwarranted punishment. It extends the punishment where the argument for responsibility and culpability becomes thinner and thinner to the vanishing point. That is also going to have an enormous adverse impact on the freedom of association, which is an important right protected in the U.S. by the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court has upheld freedom of association in cases involving organizations that were at the time highly controversial. It started with NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) during the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 60s, but we have a case that’s going to the Supreme Court right now regarding Black Lives Matter. The Supreme Court says even if one member of the group does commit a crime – in both of those cases physical violence and assault – that is not a justification for punishing other members of the group unless they specifically intended to participate in the particular punishable conduct.
Now, let’s assume for the sake of argument, Stallman had an attitude that was objectively described as discriminatory on the basis on race and gender (and by the way I have seen nothing to indicate that), that he’s an unrepentant misogynist, who really believes women are inferior. We are not going to correct those ideas, to enlighten him towards rejecting them and deciding to treat women as equals through a punitive approach! The only approach that could possibly work is an educational one! Engaging in speech, dialogue, discussion and leading him to re-examine his own ideas.
Even if I strongly disagree with a position or an idea, an expression of an idea, advocacy of an idea, and even if the vast majority of the public disagrees with the idea and finds it offensive, that is not a justification for suppressing the idea. And it’s not a justification for taking away the equal rights of the person who espouses that idea including the right to continue holding a tenured position or other prominent position for which that person is qualified.
But a number of the ideas for which Richard Stallman has been attacked and punished are ideas that I as a feminist advocate of human rights find completely correct and positive from the perspective of women’s equality and dignity! So for example, when he talks about the misuse and over use and flawed use of the term sexual assault, I completely agree with that critique! People are indiscriminantly using that term or synonyms to describe everything from the most appaulling violent abuse of helpless vulnerable victims (such as a rape of a minor) to any conduct or expression in the realm of gender or sexuality that they find unpleasant or disagreeable.
So we see the term sexual assault and sexual harrassment used for example, when a guy asks a woman out on a date and she doesn’t find that an appealing invitation. Maybe he used poor judgement in asking her out, maybe he didn’t, but in any case that is NOT sexual assault or harassment. To call it that is to really demean the huge horror and violence and predation that does exist when you are talking about violent sexual assault. People use the term sexual assault/ sexual harassment to refer to any comment about gender or sexuality issues that they disagree with or a joke that might not be in the best taste, again is that to be commended? No! But to condemn it and equate it with a violent sexual assault again is really denying and demeaning the actual suffering that people who are victims of sexual assault endure. It trivializes the serious infractions that are committed by people like Jeffrey Epstein and Harvey Weinstein. So that is one point that he made that I think is very important that I strongly agree with.
Secondly and relatedly, [Richard Stallman] never said that he endorse child pornography, which by definition the United States Supreme Court has defined it multiple times is the sexual exploitation of an actual minor. Coerced, forced, sexual activity by that minor, with that minor that happens to be filmed or photographed. That is the definition of child pornography. He never defends that! What the point he makes, a very important one, which the U.S. Supreme Court has also made, is mainly that we overuse and distort the term child pornography to refer to any depiction of any minor in any context that is even vaguely sexual.
So some people have not only denounced as child pornography but prosecuted and jailed loving devoted parents who committed the crime of taking a nude or semi-nude picture of their own child in a bathtub or their own child in a bathing suit. Again it is the hysteria that has totally refused to draw an absolutely critical distinction between actual violence and abuse, which is criminal and should be criminal, to any potentially sexual depiction of a minor. And I say potentially because I think if you look at a picture a parent has taken of a child in a bathtub and you see that as sexual, then I’d say there’s something in your perspective that might be questioned or challenged! But don’t foist that upon the parent who is lovingly documenting their beloved child’s life and activities without seeing anything sexual in that image.
This is a decision that involves line drawing. We tend to have this hysteria where once we hear terms like pedophilia of course you are going to condemn anything that could possibly have that label. Of course you would. But societies around the world throughout history various cultures and various religions and moral positions have disagreed about at what age do you respect the autonomy and individuality and freedom of choice of a young person around sexuality. And the U.S. Supreme Court held that in a case involving minors right to choose to have an abortion.
By the way, [contraception and abortion] is a realm of sexuality where liberals and progressives and feminists have been saying, “Yes! If you’re old enough to have sex. You should have the right to contraception and access to it. You should have the right to have an abortion. You shouldn’t have to consult with your parents and have their permission or a judge’s permission because you’re sufficiently mature.” And the Supreme Court sided in accord of that position. The U.S. Supreme Court said constitutional rights do not magically mature and spring into being only when someone happens to attain the state defined age of majority.
In other words the constitution doesn’t prevent anyone from exercising rights, including Rights and sexual freedoms, freedom of choice and autonomy at a certain age! And so you can’t have it both ways. You can’t say well we’re strongly in favor of minors having the right to decide what to do with their own bodies, to have an abortion – what is in some people’s minds murder – but we’re not going to trust them to decide to have sex with somewhat older than they are.
And I say somewhat older than they are because that’s something where the law has also been subject to change. On all issues of when you obtain the age of majority, states differ on that widely and they choose different ages for different activities. When you’re old enough to drive, to have sex with someone around your age, to have sex with someone much older than you. There is no magic objective answer to these questions. I think people need to take seriously the importance of sexual freedom and autonomy and that certainly includes women, feminists. They have to take seriously the question of respecting a young person’s autonomy in that area.
There have been famous cases of 18 year olds who have gone to prison because they had consensual sex with their girlfriends who were a couple of years younger. A lot of people would not consider that pedophilia and yet under some strict laws and some absolute definitions it is. Romeo and Juliet laws make an exception to pedophilia laws when there is only a relatively small age difference. But what is relatively small? So to me, especially when he says he is re-examining his position, Stallman is just thinking through the very serious debate of how to be protective and respectful of young people. He is not being disrespectful, much less wishing harm upon young people, which seems to be what his detractors think he’s doing.

Unfortunately, I don’t think the Anti-Harassment Team of Debian and others of the usual group of warriors will ever read – less understand – what is written there. So sad.

14 Responses

  1. Anonymous says:

    thank you for posting. This is a super interesting comment, and yes. sad, very sad sjw will never read, not understand this.

  2. says:

    It’s frightening to see that in 2021 a community can be made into a judge-mob w.r.t. any person well-known in this community.

  3. Peter Ehlert says:

    Thank you for posting this voice of reason. I don’t agree with her 100.000% on all points but that is My Opinion.
    The drama within Debian-Vote has gotten out of hand.
    Hopefully the Debian Organization will choose to Not comment on the workings of another group.

  4. Antonio says:

    Hi,
    I’m happy to see I’m not the only one seeing all this rage and fury as a witch hunting. I’m sorry to see the vast majority thinking otherwise.

  5. Steve says:

    Thanks for this very sane analysis of the situation.
    I wish they were a lot more of sane people out there.

  6. Get Over Yourself says:

    Stallman is not being “punished” for his “views”. He has (allegedly) engaged in a variety of creepy behaviors, and for the good of the little club he founded (FSF) and that of the larger movement against unjust software, he’s been asked to step back. At first he acquiesced, and then he (and the FSF board) pulled some shady shit to run a power move on the rest of the membership. He can and should retire. Retirement is not a punishment, snowflake.

    • Khol says:

      Sure, if your employer lay you off, you will see nothing wrong with that, and not feel the least punished…
      He has not been asked to step back, the tone of the letter leaves no place for ‘asking’, it’s an order, and a smear campaign towards Stallman and the whole board of FSF.
      Re-read the letter, and stop lying to yourself.

  7. Ex DEB says:

    I’ve left Debian a while ago for exactly this reason, in Debian you found once cool devs with amazing mindsets/skills. Today Debian following commercial interests and give non technical persons a FUD platform(why they are still so-called ‘maintainers’ ? People like RMS are needed to keep the remaining people awake. If you know RMS, he give a f*ck what people thing about him and fight his lifetime for free software. Again, it is all about loosing $$$. Check Debian vote and check what those called Supporters exactly do.
    Debian today is a Monkey Organization where the devs work for free for other devs business models . Amen.

  8. Peter Ehlert says:

    I sincerely hope that the Debian Organization does Not make any press release.
    I do find it interesting that the current DPL candidates favor making a Public statement in support if the witch hunt. the future of Debian does Not look Good.

  9. Jay says:

    thanks for sharing this

  1. 2021/03/29

    […] Source link […]

  2. 2021/03/29

    […] Norbert Preining: RMS, Debian, and the world […]

  3. 2021/03/29

    […] "Unfortunately, I don’t think the Anti-Harassment Team of #Debian and others of the usual group of warriors will ever read – less understand – what is written there. So sad." https://www.preining.info/blog/2021/03/rms-debian-and-the-world/ […]

  4. 2021/04/07

    […] "Unfortunately, I don’t think the Anti-Harassment Team of Debian and others of the usual group of warriors will ever read – less understand – what is written there. So sad." https://www.preining.info/blog/2021/03/rms-debian-and-the-world/ […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>