Podcast Episode · Musical Podcast · 11/07/2025 · 12m
Listen new episode on Apple Podcasts
seen from China
seen from China
seen from Russia
seen from China
seen from China
seen from Mexico
seen from Ireland
seen from India

seen from Australia
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from United States

seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Malaysia
seen from China
seen from Maldives
Podcast Episode · Musical Podcast · 11/07/2025 · 12m
Listen new episode on Apple Podcasts

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
all the core values in one photo
Unfortunately I'm acquainted with someone who is a pedophile. And they've been using your post on harm/nonharm and Moral Foundations that was recently reposted to r/CuratedTumblr to justify their attraction to drawings of children and gooner 20+ yo vtubers pretending to be children for an audience of pedophiles. They claim not to be attracted to actual children and only the fictional visage of them which in their opinion makes it non harmful therefore OK to do. I would really like to be advised on how to deal with this
Moral Foundations has a "care/harm" valence which talks about how much someone's values are influenced by a desire to care for people or harm people. It's one of five (or six) Moral Foundations in the theory. It has nothing to do with justifying one's actions, only with measuring what kinds of moral arguments will be most persuasive to others because of their value systems. There's nothing in the theory about harm reduction, or any connection with justifying behavior. Your acquaintance wildly misread my writing and/or the Moral Foundations theory.
I wrote a summary of someone else's theory on tumblr, for a totally different reason; your friend misread the re-posted words on reddit and is applying the theory badly. I can't make any of that my responsibility and all I've got to go on is your description of their behavior. So I'm not going to float an opinion about your friend except to say that Moral Foundations doesn't apply here.
But I can tell you're upset and - for whatever reason - you reached out for advice so I'll try to advise you. It sounds like your acquaintance is sharing things about their sex life with you that make you uncomfortable, so for your part, maybe tell them "hey, you're not going to convince me that the things you find arousing are good and normal, so just please don't share those details with me". If they're sharing those things because you're actually in a romantic or sexual relationship then I think you two are incompatible.
This test will give you your moral foundations.
Moral Foundations Test
Social scientists such as Ravi Iyer and Jonathan Haidt argue that there are substantial variations in human morality and that these differences influence not just a person's decision making and reasoning processes but also their political outlook.
I’m reading Jonathan Haidt’s The Righteous Mind.
I haven’t fully discerned how I feel about it, despite having read some of his (and his coauthors’) research that the book is based on (Moral Foundations theory).
But what I do find striking is that I’m only a chapter in and I already suddenly feel like I understand fandom discourse / fandom purity culture so. much. better. than I did before. From the bizarre rationalizations about harm that don’t hold water to the way some fandom folks approach taboos as if they are pure (moral) evil to how someone might end up on one side of these debates vs. another.
So that’s.... something?

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I took the test on YourMorals.com based on Jonathan Haidt’s theory of moral foundations. According to Haidt, there are five aspects of morality: care/harm, fairness, loyalty to one’s in-group, respect for authority, and purity/disgust, which includes ideas you find repulsive. Liberal morality (shown in blue) is centered primarily on care and harm reduction, and conservative morality is more evenly distributed, but compared to liberals have a greater respect for authority and in-group loyalty, and a reduced tolerance for disgust.Â
There are a few criticisms that can be made. Authority here refers to traditional institutions of authority: the church, the military, etc. Had academia or science been included I assume liberals would score higher, but overall I find this to be sound.
A big part of what drove me to his work was my own alienation from my “tribe.” My results are in green, a typical liberal’s are in blue. Like most liberals, my highest scores were in fairness and harm reduction, though still decidedly lower than the average liberal who took the quiz. More importantly, I think I’m defined by what I’m not. My scores in loyalty, authority, and purity were abysmal. This rings true with my experience. I have no problem questioning my own tribe when they act like idiots. I have no love lost for traditional authority (though I do frequently defer to experts), and there really isn’t a whole lot that disgusts me. (Maybe I’m a bit of a germaphobe.) So I think this represents me pretty well.
I took a moral foundations test. Results unsurprising. I’m proud of my virtually nonexistent Purity foundation.
I suspected as much.