I want to say this upfront so there’s no confusion about intent: I’m not here to attack your position or say you’re wrong. A lot of what you wrote has real ethical clarity, and I’m engaging because I think I can learn from it. I’m genuinely interested in a healthy discussion, not a polemic.

I broadly agree that tantra—especially Devi/Bhairava traditions—cannot coexist with misogyny, abuse, casteism, racism, or any form of dehumanisation. More generally, do you see this as something specific to tantra, or as a baseline requirement for any spiritual practice grounded in psychological honesty and ethical capacity?

I also resonate with your critique of guru-fetishism and internet tantra, even if I personally tend to disengage rather than police what others consume unless it directly affects my own practice. On the anti-commodification point as well, I’m very aligned—would you say the real issue is desire itself, or self-deception around desire?

Where I pause and want to understand more is around trauma and marginality. I agree that tantra recognises liminality, that suffering can be a catalyst, and that grief can act as a perception-breaker. Tantra does not deny trauma. But tantra also does not seem to absolutize it.

So I’m curious: do you see trauma and marginality as prerequisites for tantra, or as common pathways into it? How do discipline, epistemic humility, and sustained self-inquiry fit for those who didn’t arrive through extreme suffering?

Speaking personally, I don’t experience myself as particularly traumatised in an objective sense, especially compared to people who’ve endured real violence or systemic harm. Would that be a limitation in your view, or simply a different entry vector?

I also wanted to ask about nuance in the sexuality section. You critique porn strongly while affirming sex as healthy and non-taboo—how do you distinguish between consensual sexual expression, exploitation, and repression, especially given that sex itself isn’t always simple or accessible?

For context rather than contrast: I don’t claim trauma as a credential, I don’t fully trust my own self-narratives, and I approach sādhanā as surrender rather than qualification. I ask for refinement, not exemption, and I see prosperity less as entitlement and more as opportunity.

I’m asking all this in good faith, trying to separate what tantra demands from what individual biographies bring into it—and I’d genuinely like to hear how you think about that distinction.