Excellent points, Peter. One of the things that made me extremely uncomfortable with the Higgins example is that he was talking about sexual relations as a business situation. That's what set my "alarm" off. The idea of bondage or sexual play for a commited couple with an established relationship where metta is present is very different from a situation where one is paying for sex with a complete stranger, imo.
To encourage prostitution without consideration for its effects on the people involved in that as employment just seems well, counter to Buddha's position, for me. Maybe not in all cases but in many (perhaps most)... Kitty's club may employ enlightened staff who do their work as a form of dharma practice, but i tend to think that's quite unlikely. The "statement of ethics" was very good, but can be deceptive if one thinks this somehow means all employees there are adopting these ethics mindfully, or really wish to be doing what they are doing as a profession. Sex slavery is a big problem in our world now, and many women are forced into prostitution. A statement of ethics can make it sound like Kitty's is different, and serve as a good cover.
It's one thing to talk about masterbation, and the dangers there. Once we start bringing in prostitution and presenting it as exemplary and "positive" it just sounds like self-deception to me, no offense, Tilt. That's in large part why i felt that encouraging such behavior (especially to pay for sex) can turn out to be such a "slippery slope"...
Last edited by christopher:::
on Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009