Many people simply may not have seen anything wrong with that comment back then,
Dear God I hope not. I really hope that is not true.
considering it as an analogy
I really don't understand this "analogy" point. Analogy to what?
Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard said what he said.
To recall, this is what Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard said:
* * * * * BEGIN QUOTATION * * * * *
There are two axioms about mind function with which the auditor should be familiar…The first axiom is of interest to the auditor in his work because with it he can clearly establish whether or not he is confronting a rational reaction. The seven-year-old girl who shudders because a man kisses her is not computing; she is reacting to an engram since at seven she should see nothing wrong in a kiss, not even a passionate one. There must have been an earlier experience, possibly prenatal, which made men or kissing very bad.
* * * * * END QUOTATION * * * * *
THIS is what Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard said.
NOT something else.
According to Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard, if a man kisses a seven-year-old passionately -- to be blunt and actually confront the reality of what Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard said, if during that process the man sticks his tongue in her mouth -- and she has a negative reaction ("shudders"), it is only because "she is reacting to an engram since at seven she should see nothing wrong in a kiss, not even a passionate one. There must have been an earlier experience, possibly prenatal, which made men or kissing very bad."
without any inappropriate intent.
I am not, for the purpose of this particular comment, concerned about Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard's intent. I do not give a shit. What he said, what he specifically said, is correct, or it is incorrect.
There are potential consequences -- potential very serious consequences -- if what Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard said is incorrect but is nonetheless believed by Scientologists or others.
Particularly if they act on such belief.
Finally, I'm mystified by people (not necessarily you, The Fixer) who appear to be arguing that Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard didn't
really mean precisely what he said. Such an argument is particularly odd concerning a book that is prefaced with an admonition warning to reader to look up in a dictionary any word or symbol the reader may not understand. Such an argument is galling concerning a religion that not only teachers, but enforces, word clearing. In addition, has anyone heard of a policy called KSW? If so, does the KSW policy really mean that one is not supposed to take Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard literally?
EDITED TO ADD:
Even now still leaving aside the issue of Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard's intent, I will add this. What Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard described is a criminally illegal form of sexual assault on a minor. What Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard said about the reactions of the victim has the effect of blaming the victim, and exonerating and immunizing the perpetrator.