"there was a right way to experience sexuality and alternative ways were psychological disorders."
There is sustainable way or not sustainable. Unsustainable causes intense difficulties in personal, relationships and/or psychological distress.
"This is the beauty of the market system: demand tends to provide the market with signals for creating supply."
Please stop constantly repeating yourself with your monetary system worshipping mambo jumbo.
"Actually, from a scientific point of view, fetishes are not considered pathological as long as they are not the cause of psychological distress or limited personal functionality".
No, this not scientific perspective but perspective of psychologists. Psychology is in large part still made up of pseudoscience.
I am not interested in monetary astrology.
There are different fetishes in different cultures which clearly points out their cultural conditioning. No one is born with having sexual of having her face being urinated on or having his testicles being stomped on. As much as they are free to express them does not mean that it is psychologically sustainable. There is nothing psychologically healthy in someone being more interested in partners piece of attire than her/his body.
"How is this person to dealt with after the attack and how are eventual victims to compensated?"
No one is getting compensated for anything! It is not monetary system, it is RBE! Get our of thus box of market based system finally. We are talking about moneyless system.
No one has a need for compensation. They have their needs provided and have no need to revenge, be vindictive or demand compensation for something that no one had really had a fault in. Psychotic behaviour is not a matter of willing choice.
They would be segregated from society to live in isolation if they are beyond therapy.
"There are, however, many people working in the sex and porn industries which do it free from any coercion"
This is a lie. I have not heard or met a single woman who do it free of monetary reward. (I personally know many sex workers and I was regular participant in London" fetish and BDSM scene for years). All sex workers do it for materialistic reward due to economic circumstances. There are some man who may do it for free obliviously enjoying themselves in their support of this exploitative culture of womens' bodies
About alleged women who would I do it for free anyway - This an absolute myth. Complete bullshit. All these people are coerced to doing this profession by economic (survival) reasons or conditioned materialism. I can assure you that none of these people (who are mostly women) would be still doing these activities of their basic needs or even their materialistic wants (that are conditioned by culture)were satisfied.
There may be some vey rare hypersexual people, but those would be having certain sexual activities regardless of getting paid or not. Also such hypersexuality is a disorder (psychologically unsustainable cognitive disfunction) that has serious negative impact on their life, especially personal.
I have started having an impression that you enjoy or support idea of paid sex services, hence it is so important for you to defend or keep up such activities due to personal reasons.
When we speak about the sustainability of natural resources, we refer to us using them in a way which guarantees that future generations will still have access to them. You speak about sustainable and unsustainable ways to experience sexuality, saying that unsustainable ways cause "intense difficulties in personal, relationships and/or psychological distress". I'm not sure if this is a matter of sustainability or not. You also state that "there is nothing psychologically healthy in someone being more interested in partners piece of attire than her/his body". Psychological disorders have social and systemic dimensions, and are not defined solely on the basis of behavior patterns or cognitive processes. We all have traits which reflect a more suitable adaptation to the environment or not. Disorders are defined, in a significant part, by the degree to which our maladaptative traits impede us to function as is expected within a normative society. My point is that there is no intrinsic concept of a disorder (or unsustainability) in someone who enjoys odd sexual behavior like some of those that you have mentioned (like urolagnia). It only makes sense to speak about a disorder if this behavior or taste effectively impairs the functionality of the person in a meaningful way.
You have stated an amazing thing saying that "Psychology is in large part still made up of pseudoscience". That might be true of pop psychology which abounds throughout the general and entertainment media. That might have been true of early proposals like Freud's psychoanalysis or Jung's analytical psychology. But you saying that demonstrates a profound ignorance about the field. From neuropsychology to behavioral economics, from psychopharmacology to psycholinguistics, there is a vast body of valid and valuable work which is highly interconnected with several other disciplines. And with respect to your insistence on sustainable and unsustainable sexual behaviors, I urge to read what is probably regarded by most as the reference and most comprehensive work in human sexuality: «Human Sexuality and Its Problems», by John Bancroft. There is absolutely no consensus regarding the pathological classification of deviant sexual behaviors or paraphilias. Reflecting our psychological and social complexity as individuals and as communities, it should not be surprising that human sexuality manifests in many different ways, with many different tastes and practices. To arbitrarily reduce a substantial set of these practices to a pathological status is completely unsubstantiated besides moral judgements.
But this was not a conversation about sex, this was about RBE, and I initally brought up this topic as an example of something which might be controversial within the model which RBE proposes to supply services to people. And it turned out to be very controversial indeed. Just to be clear, I neither support nor reject the idea of paid sexual services. I have watched porn (as I believe most people have at least once in their lifetimes); besides that, I've never resorted to any kind of sexual service, nor am I particularly interested in doing so in the future. But I also don't object to it as long as it is done voluntarily by both parts. If, like you say, everybody who is a sex worker is coerced to do so, why is it that there are famous pornstars (both male and female), for example? Having financial difficulties and choosing to perform sexual services because of that is not exactly the same as being coerced through human trafficking, slavery and exploitation without any regards for basic human rights and dignity. Being paid is not the same as being coerced, my friend, because you have a legitimate choice in the former case. Now, in RBE, this service is not supposed to be available, not because of scientific reasons, but moral ones. In the real world, there is a demand for this service, and in the real world supply usually follows demand, so that people may expect to be able to fulfill their wishes and needs. We just have to properly regulate and audit this activity, as we do we so many others.
I am also not a money system worshiper. I'm not much of a worshiping person; the last time I worshiped something I was around 8 years old and still went to church, but fortunately I woke up early from the deception. But what I want to say in respect to this is that I always referred to the market system in my comments, not the monetary system which is a related but distinct thing. Markets are much older than money; people just happened to find the concept of money a convenient way to perform transactions within the market system. Furthermore, I'm critical of both of them because I them both flawed, at least their current implementations. But I understand their raison d'être, and I think that much can be done within them both to make them work much better and for the benefit of a much wider range of people. Are you sure you are familiar with the basic concepts of market and monetary systems?
I totally agree that the victims of an aggression don't necessarily need compensation, just proper care. I also agree that the aggressors need to be (at least temporarily) isolated from the rest of the population and cared for. I was just wondering if, from an efficiency point of view, it wouldn't be defensible to just kill them off and spare those resources which would have been allocated to someone who clearly wasn't contributing to the collective well-being of the society?
"It only makes sense to speak about a disorder if this behavior or taste effectively impairs the functionality of the person in a meaningful way."
That's what I said above - intense difficulties in personal relationships and/or psychological distress.
Also need to add abuse/exploiting factor towards society around. Sociopaths may not have distress or difficulty in personal relationship (as they may have no need to create any - subjectively feel content about it) but their behaviour is violent-exploitative towards society/others.
If the person does not suffer from these while being urinated on then it is not unsustainable psychologically or part of the disorder.
"everybody who is a sex worker is coerced to do so, why is it that there are famous pornstars (both male and female), for example? "
Please, go back to read what I wrote again - letting your body being exploited for economic reasons (economic coercion, survival reasons).
Besides your argument is logically fallacious. You can achieve success or mastery in your own slavery or coercion, especially when you are so oblivious to the fact that you are coerced or exploited to that you start cherishing your own exploitation.
"That might be true of pop psychology which abounds throughout the general and entertainment media. That might have been true of early proposals like Freud's psychoanalysis or Jung's analytical psychology. "
Yes, that is psychology I meant. It is not completely pop as it is still partially practised by so called psychologists. Of course, I do not mean mean scientific behavioral faculties such as behavioral biology, behavioral genetics, behavioral evolution, neuroscience etc.
"Are you sure you are familiar with the basic concepts of market and monetary systems"
Yes, I know the difference between market (or barter) system and monetary system.
"impede us to function as is expected within a normative society. "
You must have heard that saying.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to profoundly sick society"
I've heard that phrase many times ("It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to profoundly sick society"), and I quite agree with it, but not completely. I mean, if a large number of people feel maladjusted to the social constructs by which they are bound, that should certainly signal that something is wrong with those constructs. However, I still believe that, in many cases, the healthiest attitude is to adapt as best as you can without abandoning a critical stance towards your environment. Those are usually the people who most contribute to social changes, not the ones who are too maladapted to function properly.
You point regarding sociopaths is also fair. I was just considering psychological disorders which concern the individual, but those who violently disrupt social order may also be often considered within the spectrum of a psychological disorder.
There are doctors which are proponents of such things as reiki and homeopathy. Does that make medicine a pseudoscience? Certainly not, because personal beliefs and practices of certain doctors are not what makes up medicine. In the same fashion, the fact that there are psychologists using tarot readings or rudimentary Freudian psychoanalysis does not mean that the majority of the scientific psychological community endorse or find these practices scientifically justified. Psychology is not pseudoscience; it may be a young science, and it may sometimes suffer from difficulties in experimental design and replication (as may any other scientific field), but it is a science, and a very relevant one.
Back to the RBE topic, you have not responded to my several statements regarding the fact that a RBE chooses to provide certain products and services or not based on moral judgements in addition to scientific considerations. I think this should be clear by now, and I bring it up again because moral decisions have a large political dimension. I wish to stress this point again: there is no feasible way to eliminate political discourse altogether from a social system, because science may inform moral decisions, but it does not settle them. Science may provide solutions regarding the efficiency and sustainability of production and distribution means, but it has a very hard time objectively deciding which products and services are legitimate or not. Also, how much should be available of each thing to each person? Is it an "all-you-can-eat" sort of thing, or would there be quotas? If so, who establishes them? Would quotas be equal for everyone? Again, while science may inform these questions, their decisions are ultimately political in nature.
You also haven't addressed one of my previous questions which concerned the publication of peer-reviewed literature of RBE ideas and proposals. All I am aware of is TVP website and a couple of totally one-sided books. How is RBE to be seriously taken as a scientific endeavor if it does not participate in the scientific ecosystem? How are RBE ideas to garner interest from governments to invest in them if they do not present concrete and comprehensive experimental protocols to the scientific community and to political institutions?
Finally, there was someone else commenting in this article in these terms: how is the simple introduction of automation going to transform finite resources into abundant ones? This is something which totally baffles me. I get the efficiency gains, which can prolong the sustainability of certain resources, but it will never change the fact that they are finite.
Those doctors and psychologists bring bad name and disgrace to these professions and fields.
Anyway, All your points are valid. I will need to figure out scientific way to solve these problems. RBE is not perfect system and it can't be due to its constant change.
Of course RBE is not perfect. There is no such thing as a perfect system. And perfection is made even more unattainable if you consider that things tend to change overtime, requiring that the system changes somewhat with them. I praise your willingness to better develop the RBE ideas.
The problem is that many systems are established (like current) one which means that they are very resistant to change. Also guardians of the status quo of these systems claim that they are perfect or they try to reach perfection (which is utopian thinking). Current system is an utopian one. It reached a point where there is little change, just repetitiin of thr same mistakes over and over again.
About RBE "politics". Let me quote something short from
the book " The Best That Money Can't Buy" by J. Fresco.
"The conflict today between human beings is about opposing values. If we manage
to arrive at a saner future, conflicts will be about problems common to all humans. In a
vibrant and emergent culture instead of conflicts between nations, the challenges will be
overcoming scarcity, reclaiming damaged environments, creating innovative
technologies, increasing agricultural yield, improving communications, building
communications between nations, sharing technologies, and living a meaningful life."
About performing peer reviewed, replicated studies of RBE by scientific community. It does not make sense. You cannot test whole social system in a lab, same as you cannot test in a lab or computer communism, socialism, fascism, capitalism etc. You can test certain technologies and designs that are part of RBE city. That is why TVP proposes building whole experimental city to research and test it and use it to learn and improve. Just like Eden Project but on much larger scale. It would require inhabitants identified (RBE values) with updated value system though, which is the hardest part to find.