[justaguyhere]

Just curious, why? For example, if one wants to enjoy Picasso's paintings without getting bothered about how he treated people in his life, it is their choice, isn't it? If someone wants to concentrate only on the tech and ignore the rest, that is also their choice, isn't it?

Not saying one view is better or worse than the other. Simply pointing out people choose to get involved at different levels...

[SpicyLemonZest]

We are still enjoying Stallman’s software, right? I cant imagine we’re going to eradicate gcc and Emacs from mainstream development.

[ryguytilidie]

I think it's pretty disingenuous to equate how political paintings are to how political technology is.

[falcolas]

Have a look at your local paper's political cartoon, and tell me how apolitical art is.

[globuous]

The you don’t understand art nor technology :(

[mantoto]

I personally try to avoid art from pedophiles and murderer and rapists.

I argue that art always happens in context and one context is who did it. Appreating art from someone who is clearly hurting others can't have done something so important to me to still enjoy it.

If a case is made which has some very rare and difficult scenario I'm not sure what I would do.

[rnernento]

I hope you're also avoiding any sort of medical treatment pioneered by people with questionable histories. Or any medical treatment derived from research pioneered by people with questionable histories.

That would be problematic.

[mantoto]

This decision was made by others. I'm not in a position to research the history of alledical procedures.

It is much easier for me to avoid art though.

[rnernento]

"It is much easier for me to avoid art though."

Pretty much sums it up doesn't it.

[falcolas]

What are your thoughts on the philosophy of Ghandi? A man who tested his devoutness by sleeping next to a 12 year old girl.

[mantoto]

I know not much about him and would need to read up on him to make a proper thought.

Not sure why I would do that. Ghandi doesn't really affect s my life

[benj111]

Is art necessarily about enjoyment? Should we not try to understand, if only to try an prevent it in the future?

I think theres a debate to be had over whether they should profit from those actions though.

Also keep in mind that Homosexuality was put in the same box as paedophilia and rape ( probably worse than rape). Social mores change, and are different from country to country. The girl involved was 17 as I understand it, which would be over the age of consent in my country.

[seanmcdirmid]

Sex trafficking was involved, so the age of consent is legally higher.

[benj111]

Again in my country (UK) the age of consent doesn't vary, sex trafficking is illegal in its own right. So this still wouldn't be paedophilia, rather it would be rape.

My point is I could have consensual sex with a 17 year old, paint a picture and the GP would be happy to view it(?). You could have sex with a 17 year old, get arrested for paedophilia, paint a picture, and the GP would not be happy viewing it. Theres a legal line and a moral line both can change so its weird getting absolutist about it.

To be clear I wasn't aware of the sex trafficking element, I thought this was a question of statutory rape, which would seem to yield very different legal answers based on location.

Edit: 'Interestingly' I seemed to have circled around to making the same point RMS made. Except I'm not denying the rape, and I'm not a representative for another organisation.

[seanmcdirmid]

The same is true in the USA, sex trafficking is always illegal, but the additional charge of rape will be added if the provider is under 18. Think of it as an add-on that makes the crime worse.

This whole thread has gotten side tracked on statutory rape, when in reality the criminal charges hinge on sex trafficking with age only as a modifier.

[toyg]

> I personally try to avoid art from pedophiles and murderer

Guess you avoid Caravaggio too, then.

[mantoto]

Sooo you mean Michelangelo right?

At least on Wikipedia there it is stated that there is no proper source.

Also I try to. If it is very significant part of history I would try to be aware of it and still have a look.

I'm also very unsure about Alice in wonderland for the same reason.

But at least it's not someone still alive which would benefit from his/her art and being pedo right?

[akamaozu]

What about non-art?

Do yo actively avoid using technology invented or heavily influenced by problematic people?

[mantoto]

Do you have a proper relevant example?

[akamaozu]

I don't have a proper example.

I don't have the same reservations about using the work of problematic people, so I don't typically check for that info.

Off the top of my head, an example might be accepting opiods to manage pain, despite the tons of damage pushing the drugs has caused Americans as a whole.

[mapcars]

But why you decided to put a line on a person? The surroundings, the social situation, the political situation, the nature, whole universe is a context of everything.

[lostjohnny]

You should never come to Rome then...

[magduf]

Probably Greece too, or any other ancient place.