The point of my post was not that the operator can induce an orgasm in the target but in him- or herself. The alternative is an exciting possibility, for example in the case of repulsive politicians in the middle of giving speeches.
The notion that this partakes of sexual predation or abuse is a mistake caused by the importation of the perverse morality of mainstream Western culture. This morality posits that any messages, gestures, or even thoughts with sexual content is somehow abusive. This false and repressive moral posture comes in a direct line to us from the Inquisition.
In fact sexual content should be as value neutral, for a healthy, evolved seeker, as the idea of blueberry pie.
In fact, sexual content in an operator's mind may be a correct reading of the the target's mind if the operator is an empath.
A well meaning operator, therefore, might theoretically generate sexual content in order to accomodate the target's desires.
Well-meaning operator? What about an operator with less well meaning than that? Inquisition is history.. and bordering on what people call "fluffy?"
This argument once again falls in the line of having the idea that psionics can be used to manipulate desires and thoughts.
If such an objective reading, much less accomodation, is invariably deemed predatory, then it is a sign the accusers have internalized the superficial power-oriented pseudo-morality of the Western power structure. This is part of a general demonization of sexuality, mainly male, in an effort by the authorities in our societies to exploit that sexuality for their own moral (read economic) motives. For example--if you suppress free healthy sexuality in a society, you turn sexuality into a commodity that must be paid for (like almost everything else in market economies). The sexual morality of the West is meant to accomodate the economic motives of the affluent:
As is most social control in capitalism - yes, the occult is used in positions of power to manipulate others in various ways, not just sexually.
I can post through the messaging system to you sarpesius, a few rather personal experiences with manipulation in that department from someone else that really scared me.
The entire idea of psionics being used to manipulate others is something hitler did isn't it? We rationalists aren't supposed to believe in something without a proper explanation or evidence we've seen yet I've been around plenty a manipulative empath who doesn't even know they're an empath and whom have glibly remarked on being sociopathic about it. Yes, the sort of person who attracts people to them.
The use of sexuality in a program of control of the individual in Western society dates from the latter half of the 16th century, according to Michel Foucault writing in "History of Sexuality," vol. 1. It is part of control system of which the Catholic confession and modern psychiatric practice also partake.
I know you would prefer to stay away from personal choice issues, but I am an empath/intuitive/sensitive who actually has to deal with the fall-out in my work as an average person whom people talk to about abusive situations, not just with significant others, or who have dealt with assholes who won't give them their stuff back.
These are the risiduals of when someone has misused manipulative/psionic abilities. (or perhaps natural human skills of persuasion and influence multiplied by mind-power), I'm talking people down from the ledge of wanting to misuse skills like that but if people get their kicks, I will still make my case since guess who the people who are hurt by that behavior talk to? me. the empath. i'm a sponge. I'd prefer people clean up after themselves more often than not but they find this difficult at times.
I'm interested in reading that book on sexual control of society. The truth is that psionics or not, no one can control anyone else's behavior nor what is going to come out of someone's mouth or head much less who wants to control whom with psionics when some people wouldn't know an intuitive feeling if it hit them in the face.
I'd hold off though on not defining abuse as something of an "unwanted or threatening gesture." If someone finds someone else mutually attractive enough to psionically induce orgasm, okay.. then go for it if they feel it too. I'm talking about people who may be threatened by that behavior if they do not posess sensitivity to pick up on it thus having skills to deflect it or shield but wonder why the hell they feel so uncomfortable around somebody giving them flirtatious looks while making them feel a certain way; intensive attraction. Oh wait, they were forced to feel that way... it wasn't their choice. Aha! therein lies what is difficult to confront, the human desire to do harm to others. Yes, to avoid the issue someone would say that "morality isn't grey, " or "morality isn't clear cut", and as you said "some people like this energy" so it is important to stick to doing this to the people who like it.
I would have to counsel women who deal with bad situations far less. I would also pick up on far less neurotic feelings not my own. Yes, I'm an empath, a slightly more skilled one than I was when I first found Veritas to keep this on the topic of psionics. BTW, in terms of politicians to give an orgasm to, I don't think you have to worry about that with Arnold Swchartzeneggar, he's cute enough for the sex telepathy to be happening the other way around.