Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

let me take you to school, kid.

see, you can't just randomly drop few latin words without understanding what they mean, the chance you would drop them into sentence correctly by pure chance is quite small.

so ad hominem is when you attack the speaker instead of their argument. as if i started shouting "you commie", or "you libtard", at you instead of explaining why what you said is nonsense.

let me do exactly that.

now, by a funny coincidence, this whole post is actually example of sort of reverse ad hominem. we call it argument by authority (or argumentum ad verecundiam, so we can appear smart!).

it is when you present your argument in a form of "famous person thinks x, therefor x must be true". which is of course not how it works, famous person's opinion is largely irrelevant, unless the discussion is in their field of expertise.

and in such case, it is perfectly logical to point out that said famous person has some really shitty takes and they are by no means an arbiter of moral; and that is the point of the discussion, because it s you (the one who made the argument, not literal you) who tried to make them the arbiter.

hope this helps in your future keyboard wars, bro 😂

It's like asking if schizophrenia is okay.

Now, if you're talking about child molestation, that is clearly and unequivocally wrong, but if that's what you mean, you should say that.

It should never even be questioned. Pedophilia will never be okay. Children cannot reasonably consent and if anyone thinks they do, don't care to know what 'grooming' is or probably is a groomer to make a child believe that.

Huh?

The Daily Beast first reported that Stallman wrote in 2003, "I think that everyone age 14 or above ought to take part in sex, though not indiscriminately. (Some people are ready earlier.)" In 2006, he wrote, "I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily [sic] 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."

he also said this on account of epstein's victim Virginia Giuffre:

"We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing." When a person on the email chain noted that the girl was 17 at the time, and that sex with a minor is statutory rape, Stallman replied, "I think it is morally absurd to define 'rape' in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17."

https://www.google.com/search?q=stallman+pedophilia

edit: jeez, that's a lot of pedophiles we have here on lemmy.

you sick f.cks carefully choose fraction of the quotes i presented and try to spin it and you are not good at it.

all of you trying to steer the debate about 17 or 18 and "oh, each limit is kind of arbitrary, i see where he is coming from": the 17 girl was victim of rape and human trafficking, her age does not matter at all; on top of that he dismisses her with "she presented herself to him as entirely willing". i wouldn't touch this asshole with 10 meter pole.

he also uses term "voluntarily pedophilia", pedophilia is when adult person is attacted to kid. and there is no such thing as vuluntary pedophilia because the kid cannot give informed consent.

pedophilia is not case of [age of consent] + 1 having sex with [age of consent] - 1. it is adult person having sex with 14 yo (and some of them are ready sooner!) - his words.

whatever is in your heads guys, please know it is not acceptable for adult man to fuck a kid younger than 14 years, under any circumstances.