--- In [email protected], obbajeeba <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "bobpriced" <bobpriced@> wrote:
> > >
> > > As I'm sure he knows, I'm a huge fan of Turq's posts; so I'm
> > > wondering if anyone would be kind enough to translate this
> > > one for me, particularly the last paragraph.
> >
> > Basically, he's questioning a premise that I'm not sure was
> > ever proposed, i.e., how women could have found Maharishi
> > sexually attractive ("bonable") when he, as a straight man,
> > did not. (Do not think too hard about that or you'll get
> > confused. Just take it as it comes.)
> >
> > In the last paragraph, "because" refers to "want to bone him,"
> > not to "find it difficult to imagine."
> >
> > Does that help? As you know, Barry has explained to us that
> > he writes as fast as he thinks, and every now and then that
> > creates a bit of a wrinkle in his syntax.
> >
> > Also, in his usage, "to bone" is an equal-opportunity verb,
> > applying to both boneur and bonee. Seems like he may have
> > encountered some rather strange...uh...women in his time.
> >
> Thanks for the clarification. I was confused until Judy made it really clear
> of Turq's um, meaning and desires. :)
>
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhSjwU8gEsI
> >
> > Not bonable...
> >
> Agree.
> >
or evendonovanforthatmatter..
> >
> >
> > > --- In [email protected]
> > > <mailto:[email protected]> , turquoiseb wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected]
> > > <mailto:[email protected]> , Michael Jackson mjackson74@
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > That is interesting - I don't understand why you deplore
> > > > > the act because of who he did it with? You know the
> > > > > women and don't like them or what?
> > > >
> > > > I'm going to steer your thread in a slightly different
> > > > direction, if you don't mind. For me, one of the most
> > > > puzzling things about the whole spiritual-teachers-
> > > > boning-their-students thang is that often I really,
> > > > really don't "get" the attraction, from the woman's
> > > > side.
> > > >
> > > > Call me guilty of being a lifelong straight guy, but
> > > > I simply don't understand women who would find Maharishi
> > > > Mahesh Yogi sexually *attractive* enough to want to have
> > > > sex with him. Charismatic, maybe, depending on your stan-
> > > > dards for that concept. The next thing to god in their
> > > > minds, possibly.
> > > >
> > > > But sexually attractive? I just don't get it.
> > > >
> > > > With some *other* teachers, of both sexes, I can definitely
> > > > see them being considered sexually attractive by their
> > > > students. I mean, like all of her male followers, I sprung
> > > > a woodie for Gangaji when I met her. :-) And I've certainly
> > > > met male spiritual teachers who would be swooned over even
> > > > by women who had no idea they were spiritual teachers,
> > > > because they were hot!
> > > >
> > > > But I honestly don't get it with Maharishi. I can see many
> > > > reasons for a woman devotee wanting to have sex with him,
> > > > most of them closely tied to the word "devotee," but I
> > > > find it difficult to imagine many of them wanting to
> > > > bone him because he was...uh...just so bonable.
> >
>
