He's entitled to have an opinion. He's not promoting pedophilia, merely stating that he's skeptical to the current opinions about pedophilia. It could be that in 300 years from now, pedophilia or rather hebephilia (what most people mean) is perfectly accepted by society. I honestly hope it won't, and I don't agree with RMS on these points, but he's allowed to be skeptical.
Re:In Defense of Richard Stallman
by CathedralBorrow on Monday September 30, 2019 @07:40AM
(#21114124)
Oh absolutely he's allowed to be skeptical. He's allowed to say whatever he wants, and he certainly has used that freedom.
>Oh absolutely he's allowed to be skeptical.
Just not to be skeptical and keep his job...
Oh, the hypocrisy...
Re:In Defense of Richard Stallman
by CathedralBorrow on Tuesday October 01, 2019 @04:42AM
(#21123294)
Yeah you can lose your job if you say stupid things in public. This is how it works in the real world at least.
“I am sceptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren’t voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing.”
“There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children.“