K(H)ELP

-ancient roman posca: water, red or white wine vinegar, honey, salt, herbs (coriander, mint, thyme)

-switchel: water, ginger, vinegar, sweetener, lemon, salt

-ayran: yogurt, water, salt, mint

-sees the reports of the heatwave in Europe-

And of the four people present I was the only one who was shocked. The others all nodded as if to say, yes yes, we know, the chicken fucking.

So he explained, when a progressive person is analyzing a behavior they will typically use the metric, Harm/No Harm. They may not like things in the No Harm category but they wouldn’t object.

Conversely, a more conservative mindset used something like eight metrics. Authority/No Authority Moral/Not Moral, things like that.

So, he posited if you want to sound out someone’s mindset (and you’re willing to live with the repercussions) you can ask: if a man buys a dead chicken from the store, cleans it thoroughly, then fucks it, and then eats it himself…?

I listened in dawning horror, both rapt and disgusted. But into the growing pause I whispered, “No harm…” because it really has no effect on me or anyone else if a man fucks a dead chicken. I don’t like it, I think he’s a weird dude, but like. That’s his dick. But a more conservative person will hear that and object on moral grounds despite not being harmed.

In the current climate sex has so many moral judgements applied, and I can tell you that perfectly bland every day people do some Crazy Sex Stuff. When I worked at a sex shop they’d tell me all about it. It didn’t preclude them to murder or being serial killers. If someone wants to fuck a warm cantaloupe or a dead chicken it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t harm me or anyone else.

Care/Harm

Fairness/Cheating

Loyalty/Betrayal

Authority/Subversion

Sanctity/Degradation

Liberty/Oppression

One of the features of conservative populism is that it leans heavily on Sanctity/Degradation for its emotional hook. You can see this in their revulsion at queer sex acts, for example, but it's also a feature of propaganda that casts some races/ethnicities as "dirty" or "filthy" or "animals". Mis-casting these feelings of revulsion as something they should have the Liberty to put into law - rather than something which writing laws about would constitute Oppression of others - is a key feature of modern conservative/traditional movements.

Dr. Jer Clifton has done similar work on a 26-dimensional measurement of attitudes that he calls "Primal World Beliefs" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primal_world_beliefs). In one sense these theories are both really reductive... but in another they're incredibly useful for understanding what makes an argument so compelling to others when it sounds preposterous to you.