• t3rmit3@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    There is a very real discussion of the way that we have conflated “minor” (a legal status) and “child” (a developmental state), and used that to infantilize adolescents who are very much not children…

    but that discussion is not about sex, it’s about the way that people abuse that legal status in order to deny adolescents normal choices that they are developed enough to make, such as what books to read, medical decisions, what they do with their property (or even the ability to own property), etc.

    Stallman is using that very legitimate discussion as cover to argue about whether children (i.e. pre-adolescents) should be able to have sex with adults.

    He is, at best, the worst kind of provocateur, doing this because he knows it riles people up, so that he can feign some position of superiority about not being upset about his very intellectual /s take, and at worst, desiring to enable or normalize pedophilia and hebephilia.

    • rah
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      so that he can feign some position of superiority about not being upset about his very intellectual /s take

      Uhh… I think that says more about you than it does about Stallman.

      at worst, desiring to enable or normalize pedophilia and hebephilia

      That doesn’t follow from what Stallman’s said. I mean unless you just make stuff up. You could say that at worst Stallman is an intergalactic overlord who comes down to planets and drinks babies’ blood while pretending to be a software engineer in order to mock the planetary occupants’ stupidity. I’m sure you make up whatever dark fantasy you wanted and say, given what Stallman has written, he’s at worst that dark fantasy. But just because you say “at worst” Stallman is something, doesn’t mean it’s true. Dark fantasies don’t help here.