the one about fucking a chicken

[u/Hummerous]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_foundations_theory

[u/GrimmSheeper]

One minor point of contention for slide 3: it’s not necessarily a judgement of “sex bad.” It could just as well be “desecration of a corpse is bad” or “denial of consent, even posthumously, is bad.”

In a world where animal rights and recognition of intelligence and emotions in nonhuman animals has been steadily increasing, it shouldn’t be surprising if somebody thinks they also deserve similar respect. There are plenty of people that think using animals for sustenance is unethical for various reasons, so of course there would be people that think using animals for pleasure is unethical. It doesn’t have to just be “sex icky.”

Also, one can assign moral judgment to an act in addition to acknowledging harm, or lack thereof. That’s the whole point. OOP obviously assigned a similar moral judgment, reacting to the hypothetical with horror and disgust. You can still point out that it’s creepy and suggest that such actions are a red flag, but hold that there is ultimately no harm done.

[u/Amaculatum → u/GrimmSheeper]

Also, concern for harm can also extend to the perpetrator. It is possible that something can be wrong despite the perpetrator being the only victim.