Pra quem não está sabendo do caso:
- Em inglês: matéria do it’s FOSS (prefira essa, mas se você não souber inglês, veja a página do link abaixo)
- Em português: matéria do Olhar Digital
E aqui está o e-mail que causou toda essa polêmica:
The announcement of the Friday event does an injustice to Marvin Minsky:
“deceased AI ‘pioneer’ Marvin Minsky (who is accused of assaulting
one of Epstein’s victims [2])”
The injustice is in the word “assaulting”. The term “sexual assault” is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation: taking claims that someone did X and leading people to think of it as Y, which is much worse than X.
The accusation quoted is a clear example of inflation. The reference reports the claim that Minsky had sex with one of Epstein’s harem. (See https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-epstein-sex-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed.)
Let’s presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it).
The word “assaulting” presumes that he applied force or violence, in some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing.
Only that they had sex.
We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates.
I’ve concluded from various examples of accusation inflation that it is absolutely wrong to use the term “sexual assault” in an accusation.
Whatever conduct you want to criticize, you should describe it with a specific term that avoids moral vagueness about the nature of the criticism.
O curioso é que são poucos os sites que disponibilizaram o e-mail na íntegra, apenas conclusões do que foi dito. Mas vamos lá.
Cara, o Stallman só pediu que as pessoas fossem mais claras! Ele não defendeu ninguém aqui!
The injustice is in the word “assaulting”. The term “sexual assault” is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation: taking claims that someone did X and leading people to think of it as Y, which is much worse than X.
Ele nem sequer nega que o caso é falso
Let’s presume that was true (I see no reason to disbelieve it).
E francamente eu concordo que deve-se ter cuidado com as palavras, eu mesmo quando escuto/leio a palavra “estupro”, logo penso numa ação que envolveu violência física, aquela clássica cena de um homem agarrando uma mulher a força e tirando/rasgando a roupa dela
Whatever conduct you want to criticize, you should describe it with a specific term that avoids moral vagueness about the nature of the criticism.
O único ponto que pode causar alguma confusão é o parágrafo logo abaixo, que não está escrito de forma clara. Stallman não disse que a garota estava disposta, mas que ela havia se apresentado como disposta, de forma que o Minsky teoricamente não sabia que a garota não queria estar ali.
We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates.
Estou dizendo que o Stallman é um santo? Não, mas acho que o resultado dessa mera opinião (pô, o cara nem sequer está minimamente envolvido com esse caso!) teve consequências desproporcionais.