Drew DeVault
"Richard Stallman's problematic behavior, particularly with respect to his views on sexual harassment, sexual assault, and sexualizing minors, are best explained by his (supposed) neurodivergence, and to call for his censure on this basis is discriminatory and ableist"
I've heard this argument (paraphrased) many times. Neurodivergent folks on fedi: can you chime in with your thoughts? Please refrain from replying if you do not have a personal experience with neurodiversity.
Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
Drew DeVault
Also, while I have your attention, do you feel that terms "neurodiverse", "neurodivergent", and "neurotypical" are the most appropriate contemporary vocabulary for this discourse?
Drew DeVault
Also is there a -phobia sort of word for fear or hatred towards neurodivergence
PuddleOfKittens
@drewdevault neurodiversity is orthogonal to being an asshole. I learned that the hard way, be very careful not to excuse all asshole-ish behaviour with "it's just their mental problems", or they'll use it against you and you'll end up stepping on the rusty nails they left pointing face-up on the living-room floor you both frequently walk through barefoot despite you SPECIFICALLY telling them not to, and then they'll try to gaslight you and act like you're crazy.
Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
Drew DeVault
If no one offers a better term I'm going to coin the word "neurotypicalism"
翠星石
Blurry Moon
Peter Bindels
@drewdevault That argument makes about as much sense as "I am in a wheelchair therefore I deserve to beat up others with a stick".
Mark Shane Hayden
@drewdevault I think that this argument borders on being offensive to neurodivergent people. It suggests that ND people can't help themselves or strive to improve and correct harmful behaviour. Whether the people making such a statement intend to or not it suggests they view ND people as forever something like a child or pet, but maybe worse because even children and pets can learn from mistakes.
Drew DeVault
Another question to stimulate discussion:
If we take at face value that sexist and problematic behavior in FOSS is, at least partially, explained by a high incidence of neurodivergence in this community, and it's ableist to condemn behavior which is explainable by neurodivergence: is avoiding such criticism and censure on this basis putting the comfort of neurodivergent participants ahead of the comfort of women in our spaces, and if so, is that appropriate?
Drew DeVault
@Huubje he didn't actually meaningfully apologize, and, importantly, did not change his behavior
Huubje 🔜#39c3
@drewdevault while it doesn't excuse behaviour, I think it does grant people a do-over if they fuck up and apologise. Stallman apologised and admitted he was wrong, so for me that's enough.
SuperDicq
@drewdevault@fosstodon.org Stallman has the firm belief that teenagers are mentally the same as adults and treating them like children is infantilizing. This is a viewpoint that is very relatable for a lot of neurodiverse people, including me.
A lot of high functioning (not sure if that is the correct word) neurodiverse people are often said to be "very mature for their age" and that is true. As such my decision making and self sufficiency did not significantly change during puberty, as I could in fact already be considered "mentally adult" as a teenager. It's very likely that Stallman was once of also one those children who fits into this category because I can relate to a lot of arguments Stallman makes quite well.
For example I thought it was stupid that I had to wait until 18 to be allowed to vote. I was definitely already mentally mature enough to make an informed decision on politics way before that time, this is proven by the fact that most of the political ideals that I've had since being a young teenager have stayed pretty consistent with me throughout my adulthood.
I know people don't like to hear this, but you can apply the same reasoning to sexual consent. Some people are mentally mature enough to be able to make informed decisions when it comes to sexual consent before they reach their respective region's acceptable age of consent. They will then feel infantilized by the system and I think those feelings are valid.
There are also definitely cases where a relationship between a teenager and an adult work out completely fine. For example my father started dating a 15 year old teenager at age 27. This was definitely not considered socially acceptable at the time, but they have been together for nearly 25 years now.
Anyway back to the point, I am aware that age based laws and regulations exists because not every teenager is mentally mature enough like I was. We as a society decided to make some kind of cut-off point to protect the ones that aren't ready yet so teenagers do not make decisions that they regret or get taken advantage of.
I personally do not think this is the best solution, because I agree that this way of thinking does unfairly exclude mentally mature enough teenagers from a lot of things that life has to offer (like voting, driving a car, viewing certain types of media and having consensual sex).
I don't try to argue against this as harshly like Stallman does, because I consider the current solution imperfect but still adequate for the problems we're trying to solve.
Anyway back to the point I think Stallman, due to his neurodivergence, probably has an underdeveloped ability to look at situations like this from the viewpoint of other someone else's experience being a teenager.
He probably assumes that all teenagers are as mentally mature as he was back then and that's probably where most of his viewpoints come from.
SuperDicq
@drewdevault@fosstodon.org And probably the most important point that I want to make is that when people without similar neurodivergence read what Stallman is saying the red flags go off and people immediately think "He wants to lower the age of consent because he wants to touch children".
I do not think that is true, that's the message that I see in what Stallman is trying to convey. Maybe it's controversial but is definitely not anything that should be considered problematic or invalid to talk about.
Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
Drew DeVault
@SuperDicq there's a lot to unpack in this (and thanks for writing it, I agree with some parts, not with others, but it's articulate and reasonably stated), but I can't help but assume you're responding to a best-faith interpretation of Stallman's remarks. What I'm curious is whether or not you can draw *patterns* from the long-term trends in his speech: the cases he remarks upon, the people he defends, the details he fixates on. (maybe a good opportunity to review my earlier article on him)
Drew DeVault
@lanodan @SuperDicq there is also a throughline in RMS's remarks generally wherein he does not understand power dynamics with respect to sex: between a minor and an adult, a teacher and a student, an employer and an employee
Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell:
Mark Shane Hayden
@drewdevault suggesting that the comfort and safety of women must be compromised to accommodate ND people is a pretty messed up take. Calling out inappropriate behaviour of a ND person, when done appropriately and offering help to resolve the situation, *is* being supportive of ND people as well as others.
Unfortunately what happens all too often is that the toxic person in question refuses to acknowledge what they are doing is wrong and is unwilling to improve the situation and uses this "ableism" argument as an excuse to do so. This is BS. If a sociopath kills someone they still go to jail to be separated from society to protect us from harm, and hopefully undergo some degree of rehabilitation. Perhaps it is an extreme comparison but the same logic holds true here.
We cannot provide a safe environment by excusing toxic behaviour from *anyone*. When that behaviour comes from a ND person it means we may have to address things differently but they still have to be addressed.
Drew DeVault
@SuperDicq and if these patterns support the interpretation that RMS displays problematic behaviors for which he should be held accountable
SuperDicq
@drewdevault@fosstodon.org Personally the only pattern that I see here is Stallman's hyperfixation on words and their meanings in a similar trend to GNU's famous "words to avoid" list.
I'm think he is aware of power dynamics and coercion. But those things are not physical violence, so he does not consider them to fit under the umbrella of (sexual) assault because in his mind assault is a word used for exclusively physical violence.
While Stallman is hyperfixated on getting other people to start using the correct words for stuff he sounds like he's defending people who have committed crimes. But all he's doing is just trying to get people to use the correct words, which I consider very neurodivergent behavior.
In your post I have the most issues with this statement:At these events, in these private homes, he may be afforded many opportunities to privacy with vulnerable people, including minors that, in his view, can consent to having sex with adults.I think this specifically is a very disingenuous and unacceptable statement. I think if you knew Stallman you would not be making implications such as this. He definitely does not want to take advantage of vulnerable people.
Drew DeVault
One more note: I will be drawing from this discussion in future writings. I will assume that anyone participating is comfortable being anonymously paraphrased, if you are comfortable being quoted verbatim or being cited as the source of a quote please let me know (bearing in mind that this is going to open you up to a lot of reactionary abuse)
Drew DeVault
Neurodivergent members of the free software community: what are some forms of discrimination and ableism that you have experienced in our community? What are some steps that have helped, or could help, ease your participation?
anna
Drew DeVault
@SuperDicq I agree that he has a common pattern of word fixation, but I will state that even when his remarks are interpreted as such it is harmful. However, he justifies and re-enforces his word fixations from beliefs rooted deeper: for example, his defense of Roy Moore endorses grooming of minors. Moreover, when he downplays sexual assault, it is not only because of his word fixation, but re-enforced by beliefs that erode the norms of consent: he thinks, for example, that "stealing a kiss"[..]
Drew DeVault
@SuperDicq is not wrong. He also definitely does *not* understand how power dynamics erode consent: he dismisses a clear case of quid-pro-quo, for example.
SuperDicq
@drewdevault@fosstodon.org Power dynamics can erode consent, but they don't have to if the power dynamic does not get abused.
I agree that is a reason that for example teacher/student relationships are heavily looked down upon in society, because in most cases there is some form of abuse. But not always, a very small percentage teacher/student relationships are consentual healthy relationships.
So what I think is happening here is that Stallman is really counting on this "but not always" notion for all these heavily suspicious situations, that ordinary people would already have taken a conclusion from.
Stallman really believes in "innocent until proven guilty" and dislikes making any assumptions until there is very clear and conclusive evidence that some sort of crime got committed. And of top of that he's probably someone who's harder to convince than a criminal court judge, which does not do his statements any favors.
Blurry Moon
Drew DeVault
@sun @SuperDicq an unwanted kiss is sexual assault, and has been prosecuted as such before the law. Consent and bodily autonomy *matter*.
Blurry Moon
Drew DeVault
@asthargf it doesn't, but I stated the argument at face value to avoid colouring the discussion
Ásthar con té 🍵⛤ (Elle/They)
@drewdevault As a neurodivergent person myself, you lost me in the first bit, so I'm going to ask: in which way does neurodivergence explain his harmful behaviours?
Alexandre Oliva
Blurry Moon
Drew DeVault
@sun @SuperDicq the majority are not wrong. It is wrong to kiss someone without their consent. It is wrong to violate someone's boundaries and violate their bodily autonomy.
Drew DeVault
Okay, I think the article is almost ready
Drew DeVault
ship it
josh susser
@drewdevault I have been using the word "neurosupremacy" for a while. I think it does a better job of capturing the extreme power imbalance and abusively oppressive nature of things than a simple -ism does. Similar terms seen: the Stimpunks Foundation uses the word "neurocentrism", and recently YouTuber ProudlyAutistic coined "neuroism". I think there's room for more than one term because there are subtle differences, but also I'd like to see some convergence.
Drew DeVault
@tyil @goku12 @cafkafk it's not new. The story is quoted here:
https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/richard_stallmans_disgrace
Stallman has acknowledged that this story is legitimate in a non-apology here:
https://stallman.org/archives/2020-jul-oct.html#19_July_2020_(A_note_to_Betsy_S.)
(let me know if you need me to explain why this is not a good apology)
tyil
@cafkafk@catgirl.farm @goku12@fosstodon.org @drewdevault@fosstodon.org I have a problem with him telling students that if they don’t go on a date with him he will kill himselfMan, this one is new. Any source for this claim?
Gokul Das
@cafkafk @drewdevault Agree with the 'not being an asshole' part. But remember that some NT people - especially autistic ones, have no clue about social norms. They just talk in facts w/o thinking about the consequences of others' interpretation. Meanwhile, NT people misinterpret it as rudeness or arrogance. In fact, this disconnect b/w NT and ND people even has a name - double empathy problem. It may be wise to consider this too while judging.
PS: This isn't about RMS. It's personal experience
cafkafk
@goku12 @drewdevault fwiw I don’t have a problem with his rudeness or arrogance, I have a problem with him telling students that if they don’t go on a date with him he will kill himself
if he said the same stuff in a polite way I’d still think he’s massively problematic. I totally agree that if your problem with Stallman boils down to just tone critique, then the caveats of tone critique being harmful in a lot of cases are very valid, but in Stallmans case that’s not what it’s about at all IMO, not at all
cafkafk
@drewdevault it’s not about being neurodivergent it’s about being assholes tbh, we don’t have to shit on one minority for the sake of another, regardless of your intersectionality you’re on the line for your behavior, and the actual ableist thing is to excuse it as just neudivergence.
there is no such thing as putting neurodivergent people above women, not only because women can be neurodivergent, but also because being neurodivergent never excuses you being an asshole, it just doesn’t that’s not like a diagnosit criteria
tyil
@drewdevault@fosstodon.org @goku12@fosstodon.org @cafkafk@catgirl.farm
I'm not sure how this is an acknowledgement that Stallman has tried to get people to be with him under the threat of suicide. Stallman explains that he never intended this, but if it came across this way he does feel sorry about that. Sounds like someone took one of his remarks wrong, and decided to make a big deal out of it when it became hip to shit on Stallman.
Is trying to be a good person and apologize _even when you didn't do anything wrong_ somehow an acknowledgement of being wrong? This kind of reasoning makes no sense to me. If this is what you're arguing, you're arguing to never ever try to be a better person, because the hate mob will use this as "evidence" of wrongdoing.
Drew DeVault
@tyil @goku12 @cafkafk he acknowledges her description of events as true, " I am sure her recounting of her recollections is sincere", but says that he must have been misunderstood. Saying that you'll kill yourself if someone doesn't go out with you is not something which is easily misunderstood. He does not take responsibility for what he said or demonstrate knowledge of why it is wrong. He apologizes not for what he did but for how she feels about it -- a classic non-apology tactic.
tyil
@drewdevault@fosstodon.org @goku12@fosstodon.org @cafkafk@catgirl.farm He acknowledges that she might have interpreted it that way, which seems reasonable. It acknowledges that multiple people can interpret a situation or expression in different ways. He says he would not have interpreted it that way himself.
I am unsure why he should be responsible for other people interpreting him in a way he did not intend.
Drew DeVault
@tyil quoting stallman: "I am sure her recounting of her recollections is sincere"
Drew DeVault
@tyil @goku12 @cafkafk (1) RMS explicitly endorsed her recollection of events (2) RMS's behavior taken as a whole establishes a pattern which lends credence to this interpretation regardless
tyil
@drewdevault@fosstodon.org @goku12@fosstodon.org @cafkafk@catgirl.farm (1) no, he didn't, he confirmed they were together and that he "expressed despair". He does not confirm he told a woman that she must date him under the threat of suicide.
(2) As stated elsewhere, the existence of accusations does not imply guilt in my mind.
Drew DeVault
@tyil @goku12 @cafkafk it is most certainly not impossible to take this into consideration, and moreover all of these factors are a lot more easily managed when one person speaks directly to another person, as is the case in this example, rather than the goal-post-moving case of addressing the entire world and all of its contexts and cultures.
And regardless of the intent to cause harm -- the effect was causing harm. And he didn't apologize for that: he sought to be absolved by his intent.
Drew DeVault
@tyil @goku12 @cafkafk moreover, I'm not prepared to take him at his word regarding his intentions. People do not always represent their intentions truthfully. He intended to pressure someone who was not interested in him into dating him. There is no other possible interpretation.
tyil
@drewdevault@fosstodon.org @goku12@fosstodon.org @cafkafk@catgirl.farm I'm not prepared to take him at his word regarding his intentionBut you are prepared to take the other side at their word. Don't you think this discrepancy is unfair?
tyil
@drewdevault@fosstodon.org @goku12@fosstodon.org @cafkafk@catgirl.farm @llwyn@hachyderm.io You are responsible for how other people interpret your speechThat's very dangerous territory. Interpretations vary wildly by tone, context, culture, and probably many other factors I cannot comprehend in my small mind. It is impossible to take all of this in consideration.
Intent is what matters a lot more to me (and most legal systems), and from the apology I can read, there was no harmful intent from Stallman's side.
Drew DeVault
@tyil @goku12 @cafkafk "I am unsure why he should be responsible for other people interpreting him in a way he did not intend."
Oh boy. You are responsible for the consequences of your actions, and speech is an action. You are responsible for how other people interpret your speech. If you want a dense philosophical rebuttal of this idea, see this excellent blog post by @llwyn
https://llwyn.srht.site/posts/responsibility-for-unintended-interpretations/
Phil M0OFX
@drewdevault @leon_p_smith @jonathan Coming back to an earlier point, I do think sometimes, some people jump to the conclusion of "X is offending me = X must be bad" (black-and-white thinking), when in 99% of cases X doesn't realise what they're doing. This is especially the case with neurodivergents.
I've yet to have a private exchange with another ND about a minor behavioural issue which didn't end with "I'm sorry, I didn't realise" and the group being Generally OK(tm) after that.
Leon P Smith
@drewdevault @philpem @jonathan
Personally, odor hasn't been a huge or recurrent problem for me, but you do realize that most (everybody?) sincerely aren't capable of smelling themselves?
I've certainly remember the smells of classmates who probably don't deserve such a memory.
Not to mention that any memory of body odor has a natural advantage for rememberance, at least for most people.
The question I think is most ciritical, is how do you extend grace to others?
Drew DeVault
@leon_p_smith @philpem @jonathan do you realize that most people shower daily and use deodorant to manage their body odor, and most people don't smell bad as a consequence of this?
We should extend grace to others, but not indefinitely. We should expect people to learn and improve.
Leon P Smith
@drewdevault @philpem @jonathan Soft Rejection is in my estimation way too overused in US Culture. It's certainly warranted in a few circumstances, but it's also fetishicised by popular culture, and almost never leaves any room for reconciliation.
I mean, not all people are seeking reconciliation, and sometime total estrangement is the appropriate and necessary course of action, but it's also an option that in my estimation is too eagerly chosen in modern society.
Why can't we recognize and uplift each other's humanity? Why can't we find a way to use shame to bring reconciliation instead of fuel for estrangement?
Drew DeVault
@leon_p_smith @philpem @jonathan the other side of this coin is that freedom of association is important and you are not entitled to an explanation if someone doesn't want to associate with you. It might be *nice* to help others understand but it's by no means required, and it's important to respect people's autonomy and choices with respect to association.
Drew DeVault
@leon_p_smith @philpem @jonathan the common theme in both of these objections is that you presume if a person is causing problems for someone else, it is "someone else's" responsibility.
Leon P Smith
@philpem @jonathan @drewdevault
On the other hand, _some_ of the "ground" rules are incredibly inane and counterproductive. Not all, by any means.
I do agree that we cannot tolerate (most cases of) intolerance.
Drew DeVault
@leon_p_smith @philpem @jonathan vaguepost
What ground rules do you object to
Phil M0OFX
@jonathan @drewdevault I'm not even sure the "intolerance paradox" is a good description. At the end of the day any group of people needs to agree on a set of ground rules to exist - "keep a minimum standard of hygeine", "don't chew with your mouth open", "don't talk while you're eating", etc. Point being, everyone has to compromise to get along. And some things can't be compromised on.
Jonathan Cremin
@drewdevault isn't that a twist on the tolerant of intolerance paradox?
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.