He's acting in accord with one of your preferences (listening to music he likes) but not another of your preferences (listening to music you don't like).
What relevance is what music I like to listen to, when judging what music Johnny should listen to?
When it comes to analyzing morality, there seems to be only one preference under consideration...
Not so. There are two just like music, 1) whether I like abusing children - equivalent to music I like and dislike, and 2) whether I like people abusing children - equivalent to what music I like Johnny to listen to.
And we come back to why such-and-such is your preference...
And my old answer suffice - there is no accounting for taste, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Classical music is your preference because you prefer certain sounds, rhythyms, etc. People making music-listening choices based on their preference is your preference because you prefer what?
I prefer harmony, happy people.
*For me, "people making music-listening choices based on their preference is my preferences because unless there is a fact of the matter that dictates another choice, I value personal freedom and expression of one's own subjective preferences.
Well there we go, in your own words, you affirm that you judge other people's music taste by your own preference, just like I do with music and morality.
Why is it different for you when talking about their music-listening choices versus their moral choices?
As we can see, it's not different at all.
If it is because harm is being done, then how are you judging that?
By how much I like/dislike harm, in short, according to my own preference.
If "harm" is a subjective preference, then "harm is being done" is a synonym for "I don't like it." If those are synonymous, then you haven't adequately answered why you prefer people following their aesthetic tastes but not their moral tastes.
There is no explaining that any more than you can explain why you prefer certain sounds and rhythms over other sounds and rhythms. Suffice to say I like people making music, I don't like people abusing children.
I think you are mixing two judgments I have made together here:
(1) I judge that "I like indie folk music the best." I do believe there is one standard for this judgment: my subjective preferences.
That's what I am talking about. I am not referring to the other judgement at all. So you do believe there is only one standard for judging music. That changes things quite a bit. In light of this way of thinking, there is only one standard for judging morality: my subjective preference.
(2) I judge that "indie folk music is not the objectively best music for all people." This judgment is made because I believe that "there is no one standard to judge the objective aesthetic value of music by."
I do the same for music and morality.
My comments you just quoted (and what I'll say next) refer to judgment (2) above. Based on the "standard" that there is no objective fact to aesthetic value, I make the claim that the aesthetic value for Johnny should be based on Johnny's aesthetic preferences.
That is inconsistent with your earlier statement, you said people making music-listening choices based on their preference is your preferences
because you value