[foobar_]

> Because finding accounts of women who dislike his creepy sexual advances is not hard.

Sexual advances? I doubt it. Women confuse friendly behaviour with sexual intent all the time. Men do too. Friedly behaviour from ugly people is considered creepy. Most ugly people learn to not do that ... but Autistic people present a problem in this regard.

> Your argument, if it makes any sense, means that Stallman should have been kicked out long ago because he was being surrounded by enablers and yes-men who didn't provide the feedback he needed for his position.

It takes two google searches to find feminist popes who support paedophilia and incest. Let's ruin their entire careers, dreams, ambitions and piss on their graves if they are dead.

[eesmith]

Do I take it that you don't want to address any of the other issues I raised?

If you really think that "creep" means 'fat and ugly', then why do you think Stallman is ugly while I don't? A lot of people are fat and ugly. Most aren't considered creeps. You called out Bieber's creeping behavior, so what's your definition of creep that doesn't involve being fat and ugly?

Congratulations on your doubt. What evidence would change your mind?

Are you one of those men who like to leer at attractive women's breasts, give wolf whistles to women walking by, and tell women 'they need to smile more; they are too pretty to be sad", and say it's meant as friendly compliment?

Because if so, you are one of the misogynist problems in this world.

If not, then there's plenty of examples right there of women who do not consider those to be 'friendly behavior' even when the men regard it as such.

Again, "Autistic people" is not an excuse for 30 years of continued behavior in Stallman's position. The vast majority of autistic people are not sexual creeps.

So what? It takes two Google searches to find Nazis living in Antarctica, Flat Earthers, and Moon Landing denialists. As far as I can tell, there have been no pope which advocated for the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes, and especially not at the time of Galileo.

FWIW, I looked and didn't find what you were talking about.

[foobar_]

Ah ... you must be on the spectrum. I'm not a misogynist. I don't care about a majority of the men and women. I just don't pretend to be a humanist.

[eesmith]

"then there's plenty of examples right there of women who do not consider those to be 'friendly behavior' even when the men regard it as such."

Which undermines your earlier thesis.

[foobar_]

It's right there ...

https://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/simone-de-beauvoir-a-n...

My thesis is fairly simple.

1. Autism, Asperger types have a hard time interpreting sarcasm, body language, talking behind people's back while keeping a tactful appearance, reading the emotional atmosphere of the room and verbal communication which is not literal. These are called social skills and women are better at it. It takes a whole lotta time for Autistic types to develop these.

2. Ugly people will be considered creepy if they flirt, the thesis of the OP. It is very uncomfortable to watch Autistic types flirt and they are most likely to not understand body language cues.

3. You don't have to give them a pass at being dicks and lacking manners, but again you have to tell them in their own language ... but expect whole lotta whys. Silencing people, bullying them for their independent thoughts is a pathetic solution to a shitty problem.

[eesmith]

There is nothing there about "feminist popes", or Galileo.

Your thesis, as presented here, is internally inconsistent, weakly supported, and depends on overgeneralized extrapolations.

As I wrote earlier, if your #1 is, then it "means that Stallman should have been kicked out long ago because he was being surrounded by enablers and yes-men who didn't provide the feedback he needed for his position."

Which is one of the arguments presented in this link.

Your #2 is unsupported because you haven't shown that most women thought Stallman was ugly. While I've been able to demonstrate places where women thought Stallman was a creep.

Your #3 is irrelevant because Stallman is not being silenced. He can continue to speak as he wishes. He is just not able to use his associations with MIT or the FSF to support his speech.

This is part-and-parcel of the right of free association, which is an essential liberty.

[foobar_]

Sure I'll take criticism .... you don't even have a thesis to begin with. You don't even have evidence other than tweets of who are they even? Some two yes-men for women? Haven't we seen that before.

You can research these ... conditions.

And you conveniently ignore pedo feminists for your own political victimhood narrative.