'Freeware'.

Freeware was never the correct term. Yet the term freeware captures the sense of my intention. When I finally found enough courage to write to the therapist asking for some kind of resolution process (February 2024) he maintained that as he hadn't done anything unethical, there could not be a legitimate problem. He told me that I needed to 'let it go'. I said that unless there was a resolution process the whole thing would be 'freeware'. In retrospect, this is how I let it go. 

Creative Commons doesn't sound as exciting as freeware. This blog is CC, not freeware exactly, but my intention is the same. It means no copyright restriction. This story can't belong to me alone...it would live and die with me, and that wont do. As I have said elsewhere:

copy and paste - this is the original. 

From here on, the 3lack 3ox is Kit-less. Outcome - he now stands as a symbol for any therapist who makes it impossible for their client to understand what is occurring in the therapeutic relationship, when there is Eros. The Kits perpetuate epistemic injustice, thereby dishonouring their clients as they actively prevent them from making an informed choice about the situation. 

'Epistemic injusticePersistent intellectual undermining causes the person to lose confidence in their beliefs and/or his justification for them, he literally loses knowledge'. Miranda Fricker. 

Personally I felt blamed, I felt denigrated. I could not speak openly with the therapist after being totally honest with him about my feelings. My already shattered sense of trust was crushed further into the earth by his response. I couldn't make sense of me without clarity on his part in it. But to recognise playing a part in how a client feels is easy to avoid when there are so many untested theories to justify it. Nor could I tell anyone about the experience for over two years, I just blogged. I have never spoken to another therapist about it. Three years later, I've only just started to get a perspective on what actually happened.

It was that bad.

And unfortunately if I head towards being scrutinised by other professionals I have to be careful. The ethical code is a part of the problem. It creates a sense of dread about Eros. The problem is how words are used, for the underlying intention is good, but words create and shape thoughts. Though Eros includes sexual feelings, Eros contains deep sensual and intuitive needs for contact, it is more than sex and does not lead to sex when there is agreement for it not to. 

One thing Eros is not, it is not sexual misconduct.

Ethical sexual conduct as I understand it from Tibetan Buddhism means refraining from committing any emotional, or psychological harm within the domain of sexuality. 

This is more complex than refraining from physical contact. By this definition sexual misconduct occurs when the therapist blames the client for falling in love with them, thereby causing emotional harm to the client. It is also sexual misconduct when the therapist knows that a client wants to hear the truth about the therapist's feelings and the therapist wont answer. And it is sexual misconduct under this definition if a therapist says certain things under his breath - or even directly to the client such as calling them a minx.

In most ethical codes, only sexual contact is regarded as a harm. 

And the silence, zero dialogue -  surrounding Eros in our education is deafening!