@szam @Siphonay Then we are in (strong) disagreement.

I believe that when people are reading the documentation, they are expecting... documentation on what they are reading.

This doesn't spark debate, change, or thinking about basic rights, because this is not a place made for such statements : it is a place to document glibc. Therefore, there's no gain from it, it's gratuitous shock value. And it will cause distress to people sensitive about this issue.

@Jenkar @Siphonay yeah in fact "where/when/how is it appropriate to defend abortion" can be debated (not by me ofc i'm a man) but at least we moved on from the reason the maintainers gave "this statement is useless" and the one that started this thread "this is sexist/offensive"

@szam @Siphonay Ftr, this was only the reason given to motivate the patch in the first place. Further discussion down the line seems to indicate that part of the motivation to indeed apply it was that it would be insensitive, from what i'm reading.
(see https://lwn.net/Articles/753653/ )

Though this is after the fact statement, so... *shrugs* :s

@Jenkar @Siphonay this story could be told that way: a man decided to remove a pro abortion rights joke because he thinks it's useless, the man who wrote it thinks the fight for abortion is more important than ever, and *the other men suddenly decide that PTSD give them the right to remove a pro abortion rights statement* (!!!)

RMS is an authoritarian asshole but holy shit those men who just want to remove an pro abortion rights statement by any mean seem even worse

@Jenkar @Siphonay I just read the following mails and RMS even proposes to put content warnings in necessary places