Appendix: Stallman on sexual assault

Stallman defines sexual assault in his “anti-glossary”¹ as follows:

Sexual assault: The term is applied to a broad range of actions, from rape on one end, to the least physical contact on the other, as well as everything in between. It acts as propaganda for treating them all the same. That would be wrong.

The term is further stretched to include sexual harassment, which does not refer to a single act, but rather to a series of acts that amounts to a form of gender bias. Gender bias is rightly prohibited in certain situations for the sake of equal opportunity, but that is a different issue.

I don’t think that rape should be treated the same as a momentary touch. People we accuse have a right to those distinctions, so I am careful not to use the term “sexual assault” to categorize the actions of any person on any specific occasion.

The following primary sources are illustrative of Stallman’s political campaign to erode the legal and social norms around sexual assault.

At the end of the first encounter between the two main characters, Ms Scott steals a kiss from Mr Thacker. Would you call that a “sexual assault” and comparable to rape? Do you think she should be prosecuted for that? I can imagine the scene in which Thacker testifies at Scott’s trial and falsely claims to have given verbal consent in advance, thus sparing her a prison term. After hearing the verdict, she runs over to him and kisses him, and they arrest her again.

– stallman.org, 1 March 2024 “The neighborhood of Notting Hill”

I warned that the stretchable term “sexual assault”, which extends from grave crimes such as rape through significant crimes such as groping and down to no clear lower bound, could be stretched to criminalize minor things, perhaps even stealing a kiss. Now this has happened.

What next? Will a pat on the arm or a hug be criminalized? There is no clear limit to how far this can go, when a group builds up enough outrage to push it.

– stallman.org, 15 October 2023 “Sexual assault for stealing a kiss”

The article states clearly that what he did was coerce her to have sex with him. The simple and clear term for that is “rape”. But the article avoids that term entirely and replaces it with the vague term “sexual assault”. Why do this?

In the antiglossary entry linked to just above, I propose an explanation for this.

– stallman.org, 30 August 2023 “Ex-Alabama deputy sherrif sentenced for rape”

Dozens of women who worked for the CIA have accused it of disregarding accusations of some sort of sexual pressure on them.

It is not clear to me what the bounds of the term “sexual assault” are. The term is so loose that it is inherently misleading. But whatever it includes, the CIA should have handled these accusations properly.

– stallman.org, 5 May 2023 “Sexual pressure on women in the CIA”

I don’t see any description of what Peng said the official did, other than “sexual assault”, which is not specific. It covers a wide range, so we don’t know what kind of act she is talking about. However, in this case I expect it had to be rather grave, to motivate her to take such a risk.

– stallman.org, 24 December 2021 “Peng Shuai recorded announcement”

“Sexual assault” is so vague that it makes no sense as a charge. Because of that term, we can’t whether these journalists were accused of a grave crime or a minor one. However, the charge of espionage shows this is political persecution.

– stallman.org, 21 July 2021 “Imprisonment of journalists”

I object to the vagueness of accusing a person of “sexual assault” — people have a right to a more specific accusation. However, in this issue we are not talking about any specific person or any specific alleged action. Rather, it is a proposal for how to handle trials for all crimes of a sexual nature. That doesn’t constitute vagueness about any individual.

– stallman.org, 25 April 2021 “Sexual assault investigation”

AOC referred to a past experience by saying that she was a “survivor of sexual assault.”

AOC would not exaggerate. The attack that she refers to must have been a grave and traumatizing one, one that justifies the term “survivor.”

I suggest therefore that “sexual assault” is not a good term to describe it, because that term covers a spectrum of actions that stretch from the most grave, such as rape, to minor things like a stolen kiss on the forehead, along with all the territory in between. Between the ends of that spectrum there is a great gulf: it would be ridiculous to call someone a “survivor of a stolen kiss.” We should not equate a kisser to a rapist.

Therefore, when we talk about grave and traumatizing attacks, let’s use a term which is limited to grave and traumatizing attacks.

– stallman.org, 3 February 2021 “Fleeing for her life”

The injustice [done to Minsky] 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 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.

– Email to MIT CSAIL mailing list, September 2019²

If it is true that he persistently pressured her to kiss him, on stage and off, if he stuck his tongue into her mouth despite her objections, that could well be sexual harassment. He should have accepted no for an answer the first time she said it. However, calling a kiss “sexual assault” is an exaggeration, an attempt to equate it to much graver acts, that are crimes.

The term “sexual assault” encourages that injustice, and I believe it has been popularized specifically with that intention. That is why I reject that term.

– stallman.org, 30 July 2019 “Al Franken”

US citizens: phone your congresscritter to call for investigating the accusations of rape and attempted rape made by women against the bully.³

I saw a petition for this, but it uses the term “sexual assault” in such an essential way that I won’t sign or promote it.

– stallman.org, 27 June 2019 “Urgent: Investigate accusations against bully”

Should we accept stretching the terms “sexual abuse” and “molestation” to include looking without touching?

I do not accept it.

– stallman.org, 11 June 2019 “Stretching meaning of terms”

Virginia’s lieutenant governor faces two accusations of rape.

I believe these accusations, because most accusations of rape are true.

The term “sexual assault” which lumps together less grave acts together with rape, in effect downplaying the difference. That can lead to underestimating the gravity of rape. I’ve decided not to use that term.

– stallman.org, 26 March 2019 “Virginia Lt Gov faces rape accusations”

Cody Wilson has been charged with “sexual assault” on a “child” after a session with a sex worker of age 16.

I have never been the customer of a sex worker, because I would not want sex with a woman who did not feel desire and affection for me. However, I have been friends with people that sometimes did sex work by choice.

There are other prostitutes that have been enslaved and forced into sex work. It is possible that the prostitute Wilson did business with was enslaved. We don’t know, and Wilson probably didn’t know.

Some people reading earlier versions of this note seem to have got the idea that I condone enslavement of prostitutes. Quite the contrary — I consider enslavement a grave crime, regardless of what work the slave is forced to do, and I support campaigns against enslavement provided they don’t use unjust means.

Where I part company with the mainstream view is in regard to laws that make it a crime to do business with someone who turns out later to have been enslaved, or someone who might have been enslaved. This is why I oppose FOSTA, for instance. There are non-repressive ways to oppose trafficking, ways which don’t punish anyone except traffickers, and we should use them energetically. (Those who participate in an activity, knowing someone else in it was enslaved, are accessories, so there is a legitimate basis to punish customers if they know.)

To help prostitutes who have been trafficked, or have fallen under the control of pimps, or simply would prefer not to do sex work, we need to stop prosecuting them or their customers, since driving them underground makes them more vulnerable, then provide them with the support they need to get out. That may include another source of money to live on. We can afford all of that, and the many other things we need to do for a just and kind society, if we tax the rich as we should.

The article refers to the sex worker as a “child”, but that is not so. Elsewhere it has been published that she is 16 years old. That is late adolescence, not childhood.

Calling teenagers “children” encourages treating teenagers as children, a harmful practice which retards their development into capable adults.

In this case, the effect of that mislabeling is to smear Wilson. It is rare, and considered perverse, for adults to be physically attracted to children. However, it is normal for adults to be physically attracted to adolescents. Since the claim sbout Wilson is the latter, it is wrong to present it as the former.

The term “sexual assault” is stretchable but usually means forcing something sexual on someone. It is not impossible that he did such a thing, but a priori it is unlikely. In general a customer does not force a prostitute into sex, but rather pays the agreed-on price. To associate this with the word “assault” is another smear. Whatever our views about what Wilson (or anyone) actually did, we should not smear people.

– stallman.org, 28 September 2018 “Cody Wilson”

US citizens: call on the Indian Health Service to implement its protocols for dealing with reported “sexual assaults”.

I object to the term “sexual assault” because it lumps together rape with other crimes that are much less grave. I support this campaign because it will help deal with those crimes.

– stallman.org, 10 July 2018 “Urgent: Indian Health Service protocols”

US citizens: call for investigating all the rape and groping accusations against the bully.

I signed this despite the use of the harmfully vague term “sexual assault”.

– stallman.org, 6 January 2018 “Urgent: Rape and groping accusations”

I do not use the term “sexual assault.” Just because raping and groping are both wrong, and both related to sex, is no reason to lump them together.

– stallman.org, 9 November 2017 “Hush money”

Saboteur of Energy⁴ Perry said that fossil fuels were needed to reduce “sexual assault”.

The term “sexual assault” is not suitable for a serious discussion, because it covers crimes of varying severities which call for different responses, plus sexual harassment which is not a crime.

If we want to discuss why Perry’s claim is mistaken, let’s not let him sweep us into another confusion.

As far as I can see, it is mistaken because rapes are usually committed by someone who knows the victim, and that doesn’t require darkness.

It is also mistaken because, to whatever extent light is useful, it is equally effective if made from renewable power generation as if made from fossil fuels.

If we keep burning fossil fuels as now, that could reduce the rate of rape by 50% by 2100, if it reduces the human population by 50%.

– stallman.org, 3 November 2017 “Saboteur of Energy”

DeVos authorized colleges to follow a more strict standard of evidence when judging accusations of rape or groping.

The term “sexual assault” is a bad term to use in formulating rules for judging or punishing people, because it lumps together rape with the much lesser crime of groping. We would not judge those the same, so we shouldn’t lump them together in our discourse. Any policy that uses the term “sexual assault” will tend to be bad.

The way people are punished when a college declares them guilty of rape is sufficiently grave that I think they must be judged by the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”. I expect most of such accusations are true, but certainly some are false.

However, it is a mistake for a school to conduct a substitute for a trial. The legal system exists for that, and schools can’t do that job. Someone who has been raped and wants something like criminal prosecution should go to the state, not to the school.

What schools could usefully do is teach sexual respect that goes beyond merely not committing a crime. The school could have a stricter standard of sexual respect, as a school rule, not as a criminal law. Breaking that rule would not mean one is a rapist, or a criminal at all, but the school would insist one never break it again.

Students that push too far sexually, even if not to the point of crime, could be required to do counseling and make a strong and visible effort to change their way of approaching sex. Most of them would not be rapists, so doing the counseling would not label them as rapists. Rather, they would be making sure they will not be rapists. The school might also require them to avoid for some time campus events where there is alcohol, and subsequently to follow rules so that they don’t drink to excess.

A system like this could prevent rape by teaching students to avoid the sort of behavior that could turn into rape.

– stallman.org, 23 September 2017 “Teaching sexual respect”

Republicans are attacking inmates of nursing homes by eliminating the rule that prohibits the nursing homes from forcing inmates into arbitration.

The article uses the term “sexual assault” which is defined to stretch from groping to rape, and includes other things too. In general it is a grave mistake to use that term, so I have decided never to use it. In this particular case, no actual error results, since inmates ought to be able to sue the company if the management tolerates any of those acts. But I still reject that term.

– stallman.org, 15 August 2017 “Attack on inmates of nursing homes”

Gayle Newland has been convicted of “sexual assault” because the woman who willingly had sex with her had been led to think Newland was male.

Is using a dildo instead of a real penis “assault”??? How absurd.

– stallman.org, 6 July 2017 “Convicted of ‘sexual assault’”

Women’s rights activists disagree with Sanders’ position that schools should report all “sexual assault” cases to the thugs.

I don’t know what “sexual assault” includes, so I won’t use that term. In regard to rape, I agree with the women’s rights activists that the victim should have a choice about how to pursue it.

We can’t demand that our candidates be perfect and never mistaken.

– stallman.org, 16 Janaury 2016

A woman in the UK has been convicted of sexual assault because she had told her lover she was male.

Whatever we think of this pretense, it clearly was not “assault”. If they want to make gaining sexual consent via misrepresentation a crime, they should pass another law and call it something else.

But what kinds of misrepresentation should be criminalized? Claiming to be over 16? Claiming to be under 30? Claiming to be a virgin? Claiming lots of experience? Claiming to be unmarried? Claiming not to have other lovers? Claiming to have been at work the previous Tuesday night? Claiming a high income? Spending like a person with a high income? Claiming to have read a certain book? Pretending to have read it but without an explicit claim? Wearing a padded bra or platform shoes? Wearing a wig? Dyeing hair? Cosmetics?

If a prostitute lies about what is on offer, that is false advertising, but not assault.

– stallman.org, 17 September 2015 “UK sexual ‘assault’ conviction”