EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona • Hacker News Board

Re: EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

#351

Post by usernew » Wed, May 17, 2023, 5:36 AM UTC

simondw wrote: post #292

usernew wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly gotta ask. Why is it that half the planet commenting on young sex with very strong, very critical opinions, keeps confusing the age of consent with the age you're allowed to vote? On 99% of the planet, if a 17yo acts like, and is willing to screw your brains out, you're good to go and quite legal. In fact, same for a 16yo. In fact, on half the planet including a large portion stateside, that works for 15 t…

> women find powerful men attractive You're conflating "is powerful" with "has power over me." The latter can be used for coercion, and it's not always sexy for someone to threaten you.

I love how you make up this fake scenario in your head where the guy is threatening the woman with his power. Yes, the scenario where a powerful guy is threatening the little girl is unsexy. Good thing the only brain conflating the article and discussion thread with this little world you've created in your head, is the person who created this little world in your head.

The guy was on an island with a horny 17yo who was all over him. He wasn't threatening anyone. Now maybe the owner of the island was - and that guy went to jail and died.

Now the real question is, why would you run over a puppy with your car? You see, if running the puppy over with your car is wrong, then I'm right.

Re: EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

#352

Post by usernew » Wed, May 17, 2023, 5:36 AM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #300

usernew wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly gotta ask. Why is it that half the planet commenting on young sex with very strong, very critical opinions, keeps confusing the age of consent with the age you're allowed to vote? On 99% of the planet, if a 17yo acts like, and is willing to screw your brains out, you're good to go and quite legal. In fact, same for a 16yo. In fact, on half the planet including a large portion stateside, that works for 15 t…

"You did nothing wrong, neither did the hooker, nor is sex work "immoral." " This is one opinion, not held by the majority globally.

[flagged]

Re: EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

#353

Post by usernew » Wed, May 17, 2023, 5:40 AM UTC

jjeaff wrote: post #281

1827163 wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so true. The "morality" when it comes to sex, is thinly disguised religious dogma, that has been passed down the generations unquestioned. A 17 year old is absolutely capable of consent. However I feel if she has been manipulated in any way then it should be illegal.

It's quite the opposite. Religious dogma is quite comfortable with young women marrying old men and sleeping with them. It is modern morality with out better understanding of psychology and brain development that lead many people to believe that sex in extreme age differences and extreme power imbalances is fraught. And in many cases, immoral. Regardless of whether the young person is a day under or a day over the "a…

Then you need to leave Alabama, where the 17yo marries the 55yo first, and go to a nightclub in half the European and most of the Asian countries, pick up a 17yo, and do her in the bathroom. You won't succeed the first night. If you're overweight you won't succeed at all. But if you're a decently aged 55yo who looks good but old, and takes care of his appearance and is a fun person to hang with, you will succeed the second night.

So "posit" what you like, the rest of us live in the real world where 17yo girls at a nightclub are crazy, rebellious, and very horny.

You do need to be able to dance well, you need to pay the bill for the whole table, and you need to be fun. That's what going out is for, that's why people are there.

Me, I'm old and married now but not a karaoke trip to Cyprus goes without some 17yo trying and repeatedly failing to go back to my hotel despite the ring. That's because this old dude can sing sensitive french ballads, rap-up some jay-z, or dance well while singing k-pop reading native hangul. If that doesn't work, I'll do a russian song w/o an accent, and we all know those girls are easy. I'm fun, I'm not fat, and that's all it takes.

That 17yo btw. That's probably your daughter, and the more you lock her in to a repressed life, the more she'll shack up with guys like me. Choo-choo!

Re: EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

#354

Post by guilhas » Wed, May 17, 2023, 11:50 AM UTC

Fordec wrote: post #15

post-it wrote: post #5

Anyone have a background summary? Last I heard he kept a mattress in his office and asked people to lay on it, and he had a stupid neutral pronoun idea he was very insistent on using. Has something stranger come up?

The main one, amoung many smaller things, were his comments around Jeffrey Epstein in 2019.

The amount of celebrities and politicians connected to Epstein you might as well cancel holywood and the government

Re: EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

#355

Post by rayiner » Wed, May 17, 2023, 12:03 PM UTC

arp242 wrote: post #343

rayiner wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why does the age of consent just keep going up? Human brains aren’t fully developed until the mid-20s. Historically, people got married and had sex long before that, but those relationships were arranged by family that at least in theory was supposed to make good decisions for the young person. As society has moved to an individualistic model, where adults are taken out of the loop, it makes sense that the age of c…

By this reasoning a 21-year old also cannot consent to sex with another 21-year old, or indeed, can consent to anything else. You're correct that human brains aren't fully developed until the age of 25 or so, but that doesn't mean humans are blubbering morons who can't consent to anything before that age. Also it's not at all established that anything actually happened with Minsky; from the testimony it's only clear…

[flagged]

Re: EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

#356

Post by historygurl » Wed, May 17, 2023, 1:26 PM UTC

freejazz wrote: post #335

historygurl wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which just demonstrates how nuts this all is. You’re in this jurisdiction on day X it’s one crime, another jurisdiction on day X+1 it’s another crime. There are real crimes happening you can get upset about (and maybe even do something about). This is about internet points for people that want to be seen to be upset. They are trading on the suffering of the very people they purport to represent.

Age of consent != Age where one can legally prostitute themselves Simple as And real crimes? Like trafficking teenaged women around the world to be used as sex slaves to please one's powerful male associates?

Yes those are indeed real crimes and there are real ways to effect change with respect to those issues.

RMS being a bozo isn’t a crime and internet outrage about it has no effect on real crimes.

If you donate $5 to a charity helping those affected, for instance, you’ll have done more than all the virtue signaling outrage in the world. You’re not raising awareness, you’re not changing opinions, it’s not “problematic”, you’re just getting your anger/attention rush. It has negative utility and value for the world, and you’re making things worse.

(You in the general sense, you understand. Not you specifically).

Re: EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

#357

Post by themaninthedark » Wed, May 17, 2023, 2:00 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #207

asdfman123 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re right, that is a misquote. But what he actually wrote honestly wasn’t that much better. The problem with a lot of these sorts things is intentionally making yourself blind to the emotional impact, pretending not to know, when some part of you does understand what you’re doing. It’s all just plausible deniability. We get it quite clearly, we don’t need it explained to us. You might say this is tone policing but…

> You’re right, that is a misquote. But what he actually wrote honestly wasn’t that much better. “Much better” in what sense? I think Minsky is guilty because using sex workers is categorically immoral. But most on HN don’t agree with me, and think that it would’ve been no problem had Virginia Giuffre been 18 and willing. In that case, doesn’t Minsky’s moral culpability turn on whether he knew Giuffre was 17 and unwi…

Guilty of what?

Even if I accept the premise that sex work is categorically immoral, which is an interesting position and maybe even the right one for society.

The situation that Minsky found himself in was not one where he knew that Virginia was a sex worker nor one where he was paying her or having her paid by proxy. The situation was one where he was approached by her and she acted interested in him.

I suppose you could argue that he is morally guilty of sex outside the marriage or cheating(don't know if he was married or not).

Re: EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

#358

Post by anonymouskimmer » Wed, May 17, 2023, 2:24 PM UTC

prepend wrote: post #346

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are kinks which deserved to be shamed, and these are the kinks in which grooming and ratcheted boundary violations exist. This includes relationships which weren't always seen as kinks, but have become so as society has evolved. Age is a parameter which can sometimes be shamed because of possible differentials in experience. It can't be shamed all of the time, but there are valid reasons to use it as a first-li…

All right church lady. I’m not sure how you choose which kinks are shameworthy. I’ll stick to what’s illegal, thanks- pedo, necro, beast, etc. And then a simple heuristic like if it’s consenting adults and legal then that’s enough for me.

Sure man: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Moore#Sexual_misconduct_al...

Totally legal:

> https://www.statista.com/chart/11848/americas-youngest-child...

As our infographic shows, the youngest to marry since 2000 were three ten year olds. According to Frontline, the three girls married men aged 24, 25 and 31 in Tennessee in 2001.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/02/10/...

> We learned that in 38 states, more than 167,000 children — almost all of them girls, some as young 12 — were married during that period, mostly to men 18 or older.

> Minors such as Siddiqui can easily be forced into marriage or forced to stay in a marriage. Adults being pressured in this way have options, including access to domestic-violence shelters. But a child who leaves home is considered a runaway; the police try to return her to her family and could even charge our organization criminally if we were to get involved. Most domestic-violence shelters do not accept minors, and youth shelters typically notify parents that their children are there. Child-protective services are usually not a solution, either: Caseworkers point out that preventing legal marriages is not in their mandate.

> Women who marry at 18 or younger face a 23 percent higher risk of heart attack, diabetes, cancer and stroke than do women who marry between ages 19 and 25, partly because early marriage can lead to added stress and forfeited education. Women who wed before 18 also are at increased risk of developing various psychiatric disorders, even when controlling for socio-demographic factors.

> Sherry Johnson of Florida, who said she was raped repeatedly as a child and was pregnant by 11, at which time her mother forced her to marry her 20-year-old rapist under Florida’s pregnancy exception in the 1970s.

Such a church lady of me.

Re: EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

#359

Post by anonymouskimmer » Wed, May 17, 2023, 2:30 PM UTC

prepend wrote: post #347

sph wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are kinks which deserved to be shamed, and these are the kinks in which grooming and ratcheted boundary violations exist. Oh yeah, and who decides? Stop acting as if there is an absolute universal moral. There's none. Everything apart "don't hurt people and living beings" are arbitrary rules we have agreed upon over time. And in any case, even that is just as arbitrary, but pretty much everyone is in favour o…

> Oh yeah, and who decides? I think there’s a game theory where whatever people think others think is bad are shameworthy. It doesn’t seem principle based and instead works backwards from disliking someone and the working backwards to find something wrong. That seems like a bad way to set moral standards and social norms. And sets us up for a constant second guessing of what to do or say, etc etc. I think having a cl…

An issue with "don't kink shame" is when that is used to castigate people who don't want kinks happening around them.

This can be as minimal as PDA, to stuff as egregious as Key & Peele's skit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3h6es6zh1c

If you're discussing about furry sex or 50 shades of Grey, maybe keep it to the privacy of an adult furry community or a book club.

Re: EPFL cancels Stallman's lecture citing “the situation regarding” his persona

#360

Post by anonymouskimmer » Wed, May 17, 2023, 2:32 PM UTC

sph wrote: post #342

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are kinks which deserved to be shamed, and these are the kinks in which grooming and ratcheted boundary violations exist. This includes relationships which weren't always seen as kinks, but have become so as society has evolved. Age is a parameter which can sometimes be shamed because of possible differentials in experience. It can't be shamed all of the time, but there are valid reasons to use it as a first-li…

> There are kinks which deserved to be shamed, and these are the kinks in which grooming and ratcheted boundary violations exist. Oh yeah, and who decides? Stop acting as if there is an absolute universal moral. There's none. Everything apart "don't hurt people and living beings" are arbitrary rules we have agreed upon over time. And in any case, even that is just as arbitrary, but pretty much everyone is in favour o…

> > Every kink deserves nested evaluation as to whether it should be totally shamed

> Fuck no, keep your morality ideas for yourself. Who are you to judge?

You're judging that no one should judge.

I'm not a Libertine. I have a right to be in this world too. I don't have to just go by your standards. I'll live and let live as long as you give me space for my preferences, but that is never where it ends. Because libertines don't like me asserting my boundaries when they are in my space.

If I don't know about it, I can't kink shame it. If I do know about it, then you pushed it into my space.