By restricting the function of touch, by codifying to the extreme, by opposing taboos to it our culture has muzzled body language.
In the East, it is absurd to state that women are more sensitive to caresses than men, just as tantric masters would be dumbfounded to see the dearth of what we have decided to consider as erogenous zones.
In India, for example, massage is a daily activity that everyone practises: women massage their babies for long hours and children learn to do the same with their parents.
In Asia, massage has taken its place in the social sphere as a manifestation of mutual attention for thousands of years.
The Greeks and the Romans shared this view, as they readily went to the Balneum or to the thermal baths, to wash but also to be rubbed down and caressed by slaves.
It was therefore not until the end of the 19th century that massage reappeared in Europe, introduced by the Swede Per Henrik Ling.
Paradoxically, it is in the middle of the reign of Puritanism that he knew the greatest success. It must be admitted that he found an ironclad alibi: its therapeutic effects. Massage is not sought for pleasure but as a therapy. When taking a closer look, would the opposite not be true?
Enjoy! Marie et Thierry Raes
