it doesn't matter. If we medicalise socially unacceptable behavior, it hurts the victims while victimizing the transgressor. He needs to be banned from any conf and ignored by PR. The right thing to do is send him back to his mum's basement from whence he came while crucifying the ghouls at the FSF appointing him
Being a bit of a weirdo - which is really the only allegation so far that has had any real merit, to my knowledge - is not sexual harassment. Claiming otherwise does a massive disservice both to neuroatypical people and to actual victims of sexual harassment.
> Finally, does he have an autism diagnosis?
Does he need one? This is the US we're talking about; considering how frequently and harshly even the slightest mental irregularity gets ostracized in this country - as exemplified in this very thread - I wouldn't blame him for being undiagnosed, whether due to not knowing there's something different about himself in the first place or due to actively wanting to avoid the stigma such a diagnosis would carry.
> The responsible thing to do, if Stallman were autistic, would be to seek treatment for autism.
Right, I'm sure there's some pill he can take, right? Oooh, or maybe hypnotherapy! Or lobotomies! Or electroshock therapy!
Imagine calling me ableist in the same breath used to insist that neuroatypical people should submit themselves to some sort of conversion therapy if they want to be accepted in society.
this is literally the "we need better mental health facilities because of gun violence" argument. the vast majority of autistic people do not behave like stallman. it's not a pass. if he's so fucking smart why didn't he figure out how to comport himself better amongst the normies?
> Yes, strange people say socially uncomfortable stuff and behave weirdly. Often they say stuff that is not socially acceptable. We can manage this, I hope. Especially considering his real contribution to changing computing as we know it.
Sure, but I'd also rather not have a person like this represent the community I'm a part of. I also don't think we should discriminate against blind people, and we should go out of our way to accommodate them when we can (by making accessible websites for example). But I'd rather not be chauffeured by a blind person.
Stallman is a person like all of us: with his strengths and weaknesses. You can accept him as a person as he is, "warts and all" so to speak, while also declaring he's not a good person to do a particular job.
Autism isn't a catch-all excuse for his behaviour and using it as one spits in the face of people with autism who face the same challenges and work hard to improve.
Sad to see that you're being downvoted. Richard Stallman's insane statements about child abuse have nothing to do with autism. The man has defended pedophilia and apparently also harassed women throughout his career. Absolutely disgusting behaviour that has nothing to do with being neuro-atypical.
>But the problem of course is that Stallman has a room temperature social IQ. I hate to phrase it so bluntly, because it’s like staring into my future when I’m 60.
He's autistic. Apologised afterwards. etc Which one would expect a crowd championing (neuro)diversity would keep in mind.
The author of the original accusations for the petition latched onto every bit of tone-deafness they could tho. Saying he was transphobic since at some point where pronouns were only just becoming a thing in public discourse he discussed about the use of a default since something else seemed linguistically better to him. This because....well he was/is around a decent amount of trans people given he's very much not transphobic. He had again apologised publically about that one but it didn't matter.
>You wouldn‘t call a child abusive if it shouts out some words that it doesn‘t understand.
Are you implying that Richard Stallman is so cognitively impaired that he literally cannot comprehend the meaning of the language he uses, or control his behavior? That he has the mind of a child?
If that's the case, he should be assigned a legal guardian, not given a position of leadership and role as spokesman for the FSF.
First, nobody is ostracizing Stallman for being socially awkward. He is being ostracized for sexual harassment.
Second, neurodiversity and social awkwardness don't excuse you being an asshole, from being a bully, or from being a danger. I think most people, whether neurodiverse or not, understand that.
Finally, does he have an autism diagnosis? Just like with the recent tragic Atlanta shooting, we as a society have to stop excusing monsters by inventing autism diagnoses for them. The responsible thing to do, if Stallman were autistic, would be to seek treatment for autism. Entirely separately, like every person, he needs to learn to not sexually harass women.
> What’s most disturbing about this is how many of my friends and peers support Stallman’s removal. At first it was because they took the false accusations at face value. When I pointed out that these accusations were lies, they supported Stallman’s removal for other reasons. They focused on his tone deaf communication style and awkward demeanor. They spoke of behavior from decades ago and pointed out the fact that he had a mattress in his office. (Apparently that’s where he often slept.) As far as I can tell, the worst allegations against Stallman involve him being a socially clueless aspie. He held his positions at MIT, GNU, and the FSF for over thirty years, and in that time nobody accused him of coercion, unwanted touching, or verbal harassment. If an occasional social gaffe or failed attempt at humor is all it takes to get thrown out on the street, nobody is safe.
> When applied to autistic or neurodivergent individuals, however, PC norms work to disadvantage an already disadvantaged minority against groups that are both larger and often more economically and culturally free.
are you saying that the undergrads that Stallman harassed at MIT are more economically and culturally free than he is? Are you saying that we should give a pass to bad bosses who turn their subordinates lives' into a tower defense game?
I'm against Stallman's dogmatic positions as well but to dismiss his views by saying he's on the autism spectrum is an ad hominem attack. I've seen this argument used a lot against technologically sophisticated people but that only shows that the respondent can't rebut the arguments and hence resort to personal attacks.
There is absolutely zero evidence Stallman has autism, none whatsoever, and absolutely no evidence that he has any neurological disability. The fact that he once described himself as “borderline autistic” isn’t evidence of anything (except perhaps that Stallman is a jerk who doesn’t care about people who actually have autism).
As someone who actually has schizophrenia and struggles with it in the workplace and in society: it honestly makes me sick to see people defend Stallman’s reprehensible behavior with some bullshit about “neurodiversity.”
You are throwing an entire population of people under the bus because you’re too immature to accept that RMS is a bad person. It’s pathetic.
>Well, hopefully this will help clean the free software movement from all those people who think no non-neurotypical person should be in a position of power.
Literally no one has argued that.
People have argued that Richard Stallman shouldn't hold positions of power because his behavior and his beliefs make people feel unwelcome and uncomfortable. No one has ever claimed that Richard Stallman shouldn't be in a position of power because he is non-neurotypical, assuming that he is.
> Because finding accounts of women who dislike his creepy sexual advances is not hard.
Sexual advances? I doubt it. Women confuse friendly behaviour with sexual intent all the time. Men do too. Friedly behaviour from ugly people is considered creepy. Most ugly people learn to not do that ... but Autistic people present a problem in this regard.
> Your argument, if it makes any sense, means that Stallman should have been kicked out long ago because he was being surrounded by enablers and yes-men who didn't provide the feedback he needed for his position.
It takes two google searches to find feminist popes who support paedophilia and incest. Let's ruin their entire careers, dreams, ambitions and piss on their graves if they are dead.
I'm not sure how you can claim to know his intent 18 months after the fact. Do you have an interview or personal relationship to back that claim up? A whole lot of people he directly worked with definitely don't agree with your assessment of his intent.
I don't believe in the time since that he has acknowledged the comments or suggested he didn't mean to offend or that he understands why it was probably a pretty horrible thing to say in light of all the things we know about Epstein.
Accepting someone for their differences: sure. But to imply Stallman is incapable of acknowledging wrongdoing because of autism while simultaneously being qualified to represent the FSF feels like a reach to me.
You can have a conversation whether Stallman is the best person to be a leader, but let's keep false accusations and blatant misinterpretations of his words out of that please. Especially if those words are part of perfectly reasonable thought chain that lots of people on the spectrum would easily agree with (at least when being at the same point in the chain). When I read those attacks, it's not about Stallman anymore to me - it's about me and all the people like me (a group that just happens to include Stallman).
If someone lacks enough empathy and social skills to be able to put his words into appropriate context, then maybe they should refrain from interpreting those words (and yet they say that those are qualities that autistic people lack...)
it doesn't matter. If we medicalise socially unacceptable behavior, it hurts the victims while victimizing the transgressor. He needs to be banned from any conf and ignored by PR. The right thing to do is send him back to his mum's basement from whence he came while crucifying the ghouls at the FSF appointing him
reply