[net.news.group] request for net.theraputical-discussions

djw@lanl.ARPA (02/08/85)

% net.malthusian-response ( why not anger? )
% net.love&lust
% net.suicide.redirection (for reasons too obvious to mention)
% net.lisa (The famous nondirectional therapist program)

Jerry Hollombe recently asked if there were any interest in a group to discuss
such things as one would pay a therapist to discuss.  I replied that I was
quite interested.  I feel that a combination of porn discussion would also
fit in that place since porn is evidence of an abberation.  It is to be
learned whether the abberation is in the mind of the pornographer or of
the victim (model) or of the hapless individual spending his last $5.00
for a jug of Tokay and a copy of Hustler and a stall in the Greyhound
bathroom...  Jerry proposed asking a qualified Therapist to oversee the
discussion as an experiment.

1) Will there be a qualitative difference in theraputical conversations if
the normal methods of transferance are thwarted? ( we can't see the therapist
therefore can't become "attached" to her.)

2) Will there be a quantitative difference in theraputical conversations if
many "normal" "healthy" individuals can also contribute to the discussions?

3) What is the definition of "sane" in a universe of individuals such as we?

4) Why can't we admit that we "love" each other and very few people will
be bothered if there is a place the "sicko's" can go and bleed all over
themselves without bothering those of us who are "normal in every way!".
Especially if we can UNSUBSCRIBE like we do to net.abortion...

> 
> I for one don't think that the network is the right forum to discuss such 
> matters. I prefer to talk about sex with some of my friends, mostly because
> it's too personal for me to just burst out with to total strangers! and an-
> other reason is that you can better do such discussions when you can see and
> judge the other persons interpretation of what you've just told him/her.
>                               Kim Chr. Madsen.