SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lane3 who wrote (75338)9/22/2003 6:19:58 PM
From: one_less  Respond to of 82486
 
"My sense has been, though, that that was not the primary goal. The primary goal was as you state.

You should have trusted your senses instead of trying to find a particular culprit/victim. However, Xs statement was not complete. Mojo goal is expressed in his belief statement. You know that it is not his goal to eliminate sexual arousal. I doubt that X meant that literally, but who knows. If she did mean it that way it is a very immature and unsubstantiated assumption to be making in the context of everything else that has been said. You know that he does not expect to absolutely eliminate inapropriate sexual arousal in a therapeutic setting either.
You also know that he believes, as the evidence suggests, that devastating harm is occuring at increasingly alarming rates and that his approach is responsive to that evidence.

"...under the general framework of protecting women...The other was Mojo's concern about the incidents of sexual misconduct by massage therapists given that almost all the victims are women.

No. That is a far to limited view to attribute to mojo. We may have an irreconcilable communication barrier here. It has been a thread, at least from you and yours throughout this discussion that there must be a harmee and a beneficie of the harm. That there must be a bad perp and a good victim in all of these circumstances. Anyway, I am having a difficult time figuring your perspective any other way.

Mojo doesn't figure harmful events such as this to be harmful to one and beneficial or even innocuous to the other.



To: Lane3 who wrote (75338)9/22/2003 6:45:25 PM
From: Solon  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 82486
 
I found this sort of interesting and fun. My score was quite apart from the average...

philosophers.co.uk



To: Lane3 who wrote (75338)9/22/2003 7:45:16 PM
From: epicure  Respond to of 82486
 
It doesn't matter anyway. Don't worry about it.