If you electrocuted a person with high voltage they will burn to a crisp long after their dead.
What does that have to do with conversion attempt shocks?
As much as getting tased has to do with pleasure.
He was talking about his pleasure, not being burned to a crisp lol.
What does that have to do with conversion attempt shocks?
As much as getting tased has to do with pleasure.
He was talking about his pleasure, not being burned to a crisp lol.
That's the nature of being electrocuted/tased/zapped.
For Nathan's sake. It really wouldn't be a good idea to zap his penis while expecting any pleasure out of it.
There is no singular “nature” of being electrocuted, tased, or zapped where the result is automatically being “fried to a crisp.” Electrical injuries depend on things like current, duration, waveform, pathway through the body, and the equipment being used. You're lumping completely different electrical exposures together as though they're physiologically identical. That makes your comparison to the specific aversion procedure meaningless.
There is no singular “nature” of being electrocuted, tased, or zapped where the result is automatically being “fried to a crisp.” Electrical injuries depend on things like current, duration, waveform, pathway through the body, and the equipment being used. You're lumping completely different electrical exposures together as though they're physiologically identical. That makes your comparison to the specific aversion procedure meaningless.
If left on at high voltages, sure that will happen.
There's a thermal effect, and the more subtle effects from lower voltages are still present.
It's possible to kill someone with a taser too.
This bottom line, it's not pleasurable or even a good idea for Nate to invest in a taser for the sake of masturbating.
Nobody is arguing that Nate should use a Taser for masturbation, so that analogy is irrelevant. The point was that you described “electrocuted/tased/zapped” as though they have one inherent physiological nature, then jumped to thermal effects and being “fried to a crisp.” They don't. Different electrical exposures produce different effects depending on the current, voltage, duration, waveform, pathway, and device.
And saying that sufficiently severe electrical exposure can kill or cause thermal injury doesn't establish anything about the specific aversion procedure we were discussing. You're still substituting extreme electrical injury for the actual stimulus under discussion. The masturbation example doesn't establish anything about the therapy either.
And even your hypothetical about Turncoat doesn't imply he'd be “fried to a crisp.” Saying that a Taser can potentially cause serious injury or death is not the same as saying every exposure produces catastrophic thermal injury. You're repeatedly moving from “this electrical device can cause severe harm under some circumstances” to “this is inherently what happens when someone gets zapped,” which is simply not true. A specialized electrical-stimulation device for sexual use is not physiologically equivalent to a TASER, and neither is equivalent to prolonged high-energy electrical injury. You keep treating “electricity” as one uniform thing when the actual effects depend on the device and exposure conditions.
