I think that’s the problem too; harm will change depending on the person. What hurts one person won’t necessarily hurt another. People think that LGBTQ+ identities are harmful to children, even though everyone in that community knows that denying themselves is the most harmful thing they’ve ever experienced. The problem, I’d argue, lies more with education and protection. If we don’t reinforce education and rights, we will see them erode.
Then there’s also more complex questions, like self-harm. We tend to frame the question around that as “what’s more important, the person’s physical health, or their agency?” In reality, I would say that the question should be rephrased as “what does the person need? How could we better support them?” This way we can both address the person’s physical health and respect their autonomy.
I do appreciate the message and intent behind the comic, but I find vague words like “good” and sayings like “do no harm” to be too vague. IMO, we need to focus on communally building resources and support that can be adapted and tailored to individual needs. To avoid the aforementioned vagueness, I would define that as things like training healthcare and education workers to always seek to understand the individual they’re treating/teaching, to get to the root of what they need. It’s been my opinion that we only ever serve the good of either that which serves the mean (in a statistical sense,) or the few in power. By letting go of our social expectations and focusing on what we experience in the moment, on the state of being, we would drastically reduce suffering.
Shit sorry that was a long ass rant for a cute comic my bad
What i think works is "minimize suffering" and "maximize happiness", if those are your guiding values it's hard to go wrong.
Do they really think it harms the children though? I mean, if their child is LGBT and says "I'm happy", the bigoted parents wouldn't go "ah okay then, I thought it would hurt you". The truth is that when queer people "makes their child queer", the PARENTS are the ones hurting.
I am reminded of "The Interrogation of the Good" by Bertolt Brecht.
Step forward: we hear
That you are a good man.
You cannot be bought, but the lightning
Which strikes the house, also
Cannot be bought.
You hold to what you said.
But what did you say?
You are honest, you say your opinion.
Which opinion?
You are brave.
Against whom?
You are wise.
For whom?
You do not consider your personal advantages.
Whose advantages do you consider then?
You are a good friend.
Are you also a good friend of the good people?Hear us then: we know.
You are our enemy. This is why we shall
Now put you in front of a wall. But in consideration of your merits and good qualities
We shall put you in front of a good wall and shoot you
With a good bullet from a good gun and bury you
With a good shovel in the good earth.It's dangerous to let people dilute the term good. It must be called out.
I've seen Nazis trying this in my region, because it helps them when people are confused about good and bad.
