[dependenttypes]

> please stop saying that

This is the first time that I said that...

> He was arguing that the definition of rape should not change based on the country you're in, or to put it in other words: if you are 16 in Italy, you can give consent to have sex, if you are 17 years and 364 days old in U.S.A., you can't.

Yes, just because having consensual sex with a 17 and 364 days years old is illegal in some places and the law there calls it rape it does not make it rape in reality. Same thing applies here. Just because the Swedish law calls it rape it does not mean that it really is rape.

> That's not what she says.

This is what Guardian says https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange... - can you show me your source where she says that he raped her?

[mariorossi666]

> This is the first time that I said that...

many have done before you, and still doing it.

So, please stop.

It never happened.

> Yes, just because having consensual sex with a 17 and 364 days years old is illegal in some places and the law there calls it rape it does not make it rape in reality

Stallman was arguing exactly on the opposite: just because it is of legal age in some country, it doesn't make rape any less rape.

He was talking about Minsky, who he was not defending.

> can you show me your source where she says that he raped her?

Here: https://web.archive.org/web/20190502114026/https://www.aklag...

[dependenttypes]

> Stallman was arguing exactly on the opposite: just because it is of legal age in some country, it doesn't make rape any less rape.

Stallman was replying to "Giuffre was 17 at the time; this makes it rape in the Virgin Isiands." with "Does it really? I think it is moraily 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. i think the existence of a dispute about that supports my point that the term "sexuai assault" is slippery, so we ought to use more concrete terms when accusing anyone."

> https://web.archive.org/web/20190502114026/https://www.aklag...

They use rape as to include breaking a condom -- which is exactly why Stallman and I are against using terms like rape to describe a much less serious (or a much more serious) offence, because it confuses people.

[jeremyfranco]

> They use rape as to include breaking a condom

They use any definition their law uses to define rape.

If it is rape for them and you do it in their country, it is rape.

> which is exactly why Stallman and I are against using terms like rape to describe a much less serious

I don't think you and Stallman agreee at all.

Stallman was against using "sexual assault", because it can be conflated with opinions like "assault means using violence" while it's not necessary to be sexual assault.

Stallman was in fact in favour of using "statutory rape" which is not ambiguous.