The point of anti-choice feminism seems pretty clear: if choices are of no value, taking them away is no harm. Obvious implications.
-
-
Replying to @St_Rev
@St_Rev a choice can often be a harm (J. David Velleman) http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/philosophy/undergraduate/modules/ph137/2014-15/velleman_-_against_the_right_to_die.pdf …pic.twitter.com/nBqhuR6E44
3 replies 2 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@St_Rev another good sectionpic.twitter.com/y4WDqoyvEm
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@St_Rev canonical example is the night cashier at a liquor storepic.twitter.com/uowADJ9XIR
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@St_Rev being harmed by the option to open the safe, because having that option attracts robbers - similar logic to anti-slavery/organ sale1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@St_Rev as in, you're better off without the option to sell self into slavery/sell organs, because that would then likely be demanded of you1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
@St_Rev AN is this taken to 11 - suggesting even the choices given to us by being alive often/always harm us
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.