More Sex Scandals at Microsoft

Referencing: http://techrights.org/2011/09/01/sexual-abuse-msft-uk

Roy is showing how much he cares about appropriate views of sex. Excellent. Microsoft has been accused (note, merely accused) of having some “Sex Scandals”. He quotes some accusations of “excessive drunkenness” and “lewd behavior”. He then concludes:

One needs to be somewhat of a sociopath to work for a convicted monopolist with a proven history of crime. It’s like seeking a job at Blackwater, it’s not “just a business”. That’s why many people do refuse to work for Microsoft. There is ethics mismatch. It’s not that Microsoft turns people into sociopaths, it just tends to attract sociopaths. It’s a cultural thing.

So now Roy is very concerned with the views of those who support software and what it says about their morality. Well, let us look at what Richard Stallman says on his own personal pages.


I am skeptical 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. [link]


If people are seriously concerned not to let children have sex in making porn films, they could use the approach that has succesfully eliminated cruelty to animals in films. You have seen the statements certifying that “no animals were harmed in making this film.” There could be a similar certification that “no minors had sex or were nude with adults in making this film.” [link]


Internet filtering in schools blocks access to educational materials. While that article focuses on blockage of the educational materials that prudes would admit, porn is also very important for education. Blocking adolescents’ access to porn, or keeping them ignorant of sex in any way, is likely to stunt their emotional growth and make them vulnerable to mistakes that can hurt them badly. [link]


It is absurd to punish anyone for having sex with someone of age 15 — it is normal for Americans of age 15 to have sex. [link]


The concept of “sexual interference with a human corpse” is curious. All a corpse can do is decay, so the only possible kind of interference is to prevent its decay. Thus, “sexual interference” ought to mean playing with the corpse’s genitals while injecting embalming fluid, or while putting it into a refrigerator. However, I doubt that the censors interpret this term rationally. They will have cooked up an excuse for some twisted interpretation of the term.

This censorship cannot be justified by protecting corpses from suffering. Whatever you do to a corpse, it can’t suffer, not even emotionally. [link]


On and on and on. Richard Stallman, on his own website, repeatedly speaks about how he thinks it is fine for people to be having sex with 15 year old children, how he thinks porn is acceptable in schools and should even be considered educational, and more. The above quotes are just the tip of the iceberg when you look at Stallman’s site.

If Roy were being honest in his having moral problems with inappropriate sexual views and the like, he would be utterly repulsed by the comments of Richard Stallman. But Roy never says a word against Stallman on this.

Worse than that, Roy ties the accusations against Microsoft with his view that people who work there must be “sociopaths”. If Roy is to be consistent, he would have to say that all people who support GNU/Linux must be supportive of sexual abuse of children.

UPDATE: Response to Roy on this

Roy responded to some of my comments.

> Richard Stallman never actually said such things, right? The
> RMS quotes the troll posted must, surely, be terrible lies…

He took them out of context completely. He got nailed for it in IRC where he first did this a few weeks ago.

> I always knew RMS was a little eccentric, and most certainly
> has never raised children, but he couldn’t possibly be stupid
> enough to make such statements.

The context and links were removed.

> I know…I can do my own research into those quotes, but if
> RMS really did say those things, I will lose respect for him,
> entirely.

That’s what the trolls are hoping to do.

Roy is denying Stallman said the above things… or saying that when he did they were taken out of context. Well, now I have links to Stallman’s own pages where he says these things. You may need to use the find feature of your browser to find the quotes (Control+F on most browsers; Command+F on OS X)- the pages are long.

http://stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html

Dutch pedophiles have formed a political party to campaign for legalization.

I am skeptical 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.

Yes: Stallman is supporting a political party that wants to campaign for the legalization of pedophilia. And clicking on Stallman’s own link we get this:

Dutch paedophiles are launching a political party to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and the legalisation of child pornography and sex with animals.

Yes: that is what Stallman is supporting! Nothing taken out of context… and no commentary on my part needed to see how repulsive that is.

I also added links to the above quote within the body of the story. The sad thing is there are many more such quotes from Stallman.

 

This entry was posted in ResponseToTechFUD and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to More Sex Scandals at Microsoft

  1. Bill Holland says:

    I’m very disappointed that RMS seems to be a pervert, but the evidence you provided is overwhelming.
    Thanks Mr. Snit for this article, I suppose that this “Roy Schestowitz” is in denial. His “hero” was knocked off his pedestal, I guess, but the truth must be said!
    It must be hard for Roy to face it. Keep up the good work on “Techrights watch”!!!!

  2. matt says:

    A few things to note… Pedophilia is defined as an attraction to PRE-pubescent individuals under age 11… Hebophilia is the attraction for pubescent individuals between the age of 11-14.. Both of these are considered psychological disorders… Ephobophilia is the attraction to individuals age 15-19.. This is not considered a disorder as the individuals in question are of child bearing age. Those are the facts.. The morality we place upon ourselves as a society need not have any bearing to this, even if perhaps it should.. But biologically and psychologically there is nothing abnormal about being attracted to a 15 year old.

    As to the morality.. The logic behind disallowing adult/adolescent relationships is that it’s a form of rape in that the adult has undue influence.. If on the other hand the 15 year old is already having sex with other 15 year olds, and wishes to have sex with a 70 year old then no undue influence is being given.. The counter argument is that there is no sure way to know, better just to outlaw the whole thing.. But there is no way to know if a college professor, doctor, or family friend has undue influence with an adult and yet these relationships are not against the law. Even if they are frowned upon.. I honestly don’t care either way so long as we as a society are consistent and unilateral in our rulings… To do otherwise is to be hypocritical.

    • Snit says:

      You find nothing wrong with someone, say, Stalllman’s age wanting to have sex with 15 year olds? Interesting.

      But that is not even my primary concern with him (assuming he is not being a predator, and I have no evidence he is). The biggest problem I have with his comments is wanting to disallow any form of censorship – even in public schools, and his desire to dishonestly mislabel uncensored porn (of *all* sorts) as “educational material”, as if there is nothing wrong with school children watching this stuff in public schools.

      To follow such a policy would be to allow sexual abuse of children – not physical abuse, but psychological. And Stallman supports this form of child sexual abuse. I find that utterly repulsive.

Leave a Reply