@cwebber@octodon.social @fossandcrafts@octodon.social

Thanks for talking about this very important issue.

Having listened and thought about it for a while, I want to voice my disagreement regarding the open letter.

You said that one of you signed and one of you did not sign, but might end up signing after all. So overall that signals that you think it is probably a good idea to sign the open letter.

I object to this. Please hear me out.

(to be continued)

@cwebber@octodon.social @fossandcrafts@octodon.social

The open letter labels RMS as "misogynist", among other things.

You did mention that one of you found that problematic, but still you seem to look at it as a minor issue since you say you might anyway sign the letter.

Let me explain why it should not be considered a minor issue.

We live in a patriarchy, prejudice against women is everywhere and we are all part of it, we all need to think about how we act.

(to be continued)

@cwebber@octodon.social @fossandcrafts@octodon.social

The open letter, in labeling RMS as "misogynist" and so on, as if that is his identity, makes a serious mistake.

Apparently, according to the letter, the fight against misogyny is about classifying people into two groups: some are misogynists, others are not misogynist. The people who signed the letter want to tell the world that RMS is a misogynist, while they are not misogynists.

(to be continued)

@cwebber@octodon.social @fossandcrafts@octodon.social

The people who signed the letter think that this is how the fight against misogyny is to be done: find the misogynists and remove them. This is problematic in several ways.

To understand why this is bad, consider the future. Assume that you succeed in removing RMS, that terrible misogynist.

(to be continued)