Jeff Russell

The line between self-harm and taking risks is to my mind a reflection of the probabilities. Self-harm is 100% probable once committed, but volunteering for something with a positive chance of no harm is something quite different, and I think you are right in seeing them differently. I think there is a good reason that self-harm is seen as a negative or out of the ordinary (ie those 19C Russian Christians who flogged themselves) in many cultures. Where it gets interesting is when the harm is low level - i.e. tattooing (or does the shift in its acceptability reflect a shift in the acceptability of self-harm?). What distinguishes tattooing from branding except a pain threshold and cultural mores (or historical use)?