Just because something has been done for a long time doesn't mean it's good. We also shouldn't confuse self-mutilation with healthy activities like exercising simply because both "shape one's own body".
> Just because something has been done for a long time doesn't mean it's good.
This is true, although it is a good start, right? If a cultural practice has survived for many generations, this alone already indicates that the practice might be compatible with human society, morals, sustainability, etc.
> We also shouldn't confuse self-mutilation with healthy activities like exercising simply because both "shape one's own body".
True! We should indeed not confuse self-mutilation with healthy activities just because they share some similarities.
But would you classify scars or tattoos motivated by aesthetics as self-mutilation? What about piercings, such as holes for earrings or laser hair removal?
I believe that is an interesting and unusual position. Do you have an argument in favor of your (so far implicit) take?
> If a cultural practice has survived for many generations, this alone already indicates that the practice might be compatible with human society, morals, sustainability
Does it? This sounds like a disingenuous take that doesn't even pretend to bother with reality.
> But would you classify scars or tattoos motivated by aesthetics as self-mutilation?
Disingenuous question - the person you're replying to called you out for very obvious collating of body mutilation and fitness/medicine.
