Also, the word 'nonharmful' is lifting a lot of weight. Everyone will say yeah, nonharmful things are fine! yet find ways of explaining how the things they don't like are harmful, actually. e.g., anti-gay people are very concerned about the harm to the 'fabric of society.' 1/https://twitter.com/Aella_Girl/status/1414664208482934785 …
-
-
1. if the harm is abstracted (e.g., damage to society! confusion around natural roles!) 2. if it's based on horror or disgust to others ("they're fucked up in the head!") 3. if the harm is *created by the belief it's harmful* ("if they do it they'll be outcast/lowlife")
Show this thread -
If your concept of harm is abstracted or driven by disgust or stigma, then there's a good chance your concept of harm isn't *really* based on harm; it's based on something else that you're subconsciously tagging as 'harm' because it's much more morally defensible.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.