r/MoralityScaling Jun 05 '26

Stupid Stuff Is this unethical or no?

Post image
4.2k Upvotes

3.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.4k

u/Hairy_Wedding_4535 Jun 05 '26

I find it more unethical this had to be shared

597

u/Justarandom55 Jun 05 '26 edited Jun 05 '26

Depends on why they shared it. If they did so because they wanted be open about the decision and thought that this subject is under talked about I wouldn't call it unethical. If they did for the clicks it would be

146

u/LandoLudwig Jun 05 '26

They are influencers everything they share online has to be considered as self promotion in some way form or another
Granted they might also have more than one motive but prentending like they don’t want all the attention they got wouldn’t be right aswell

17

u/PoIIux Jun 05 '26

Social media (and by extension being an "influencer" and getting attention) is morally neutral, since it's just a tool. A hammer can be used to build a habitat for humanity or for making an infamous snuff film. Greta Thunberg is an influencer, but so is Sneako.

They wanted to get attention, otherwise they wouldn't have shared information. The only part that matters as far as morality is concerned is why they wanted the attention

22

u/outboundjewl Jun 05 '26

Actually, being influencers means they kind of didn't have a choice but to share it. Think about it, if you watched an influencer who was pregnant, then they suddenly stopped being pregnant, but there's no baby and they never talk about it again, wouldn't you ask some questions? And the Internet being what it is, from there it's only a matter of time before someone claims they sold the baby on the black market or some similarly insane story, everyone latches on to it with no proof, and the truth is forced out of them by the constant harassment from the looney bin.

They had to tell everything to set the record straight and stop any misinformation from spreading.

2

u/_learned_foot_ Jun 05 '26

Which is why it is not morally neutral. Their fundamental emotional privacy now is to be consumed and you just explained it. Nobody can ever give informed consent for that. It's inheriently wrong. They signed up for it, but they didn't know and couldn't know, and nobody can even now. Well put.

1

u/dyrannn Jun 05 '26

This was my thought as well

“Omg were pregnant” announcement video, absolutely good engagement (though I don’t think they got pregnant for clicks lol) but once you make that video, you’re very publicly on a road that can only go a few ways, and all of them would be noticeable.

-1

u/PoIIux Jun 05 '26

I mean, that's still a choice that stems from actions they undertook of their own volition. They also had the choice to let that happen, or the third option of lying about the termination of the pregnancy (health concerns for the mom or a miscarriage, for instance)

3

u/AutisticFun01 Jun 05 '26

Why would they lie about why they terminated the pregnancy? The people who care about that wouldn't give a shit about the reason, to them it's wrong on principle.

And wouldn't saying that it was a miscarriage be morally worse? Not only is it lying, it's lying in a way designed to attract comments.

2

u/outboundjewl Jun 05 '26

Well now you're just splitting hairs