Why don't legitimate spas and massage places have video cameras, to avoid accusations of impropriety, such as the accusations against John Travolta?
Asked by
jca (
36062
)
May 10th, 2012
In the news the past few days have been articles about John Travolta being accused of groping men who he went to for massages. These were supposedly legitimate spa services, and the male spa workers are saying he said lewd things and wanted some services they were not prepared to offer.
Whether or not you believe John Travolta is not the issue. This is probably not the first time that accusations have been made either by clients or by spa workers.
Why would a spa not have video cameras, to avoid any accusations of impropriety?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
11 Answers
Well, the customers might object to being filmed in the altogether.
I think @marinelife hit the nail on the head. It’s an issue of privacy for the customers. Personally, I would want to go for a massage, where I am basically naked except for a towel, if they had video cameras. And I’ve never been to a spa but I don’t think I’d like having myself videotaped have any spa things done to me.
It’s probably highly illegal.
This same type of thing occured with Al Gore when he had massages in his hotel rooms. This type of thing happens whether the services are rendered in a spa setting, office, hotel room-etc.
Cameras are not the solution to this issue. Better training for the masseuse on handling sexual advances, and sexual requests might be a wiser idea. It also might be wiser for massage therapists to work in pairs.
I only read one article briefly about this, but it seems Travolta brought the masseurs to private locations, such as a bungalow at the Beverly Hills Hotel. These places do not have cameras or other kinds of surveillance that you’re mentioning (at least not as far as I know. I’ve passed by the Pink Palace many times, but never had enough $$ to stay there!).
Privacy. If you are John Travolta, do you want to be filmed by a video camera? Most probably not.
I understand John Travolta might not prefer to be on camera, but in the case of the recent accusations against him, it might protect him if he didn’t do it, and if he did do it, it would back up the stories of the accusers.
It might not be a bad idea, if there were a way of having the film image directly stored on a computer and only be accessible in cases of accusations of impropriety. I could see a security company in the business of providing the cameras and storing the images.
@jca A friend, spouse or assistant sitting with him while he rec’d his massages would have done the same for him as a camera.
I would not be relaxed having a massage while being filmed. I’m not a celebrity. I wouldn’t want the videos leaked (even if it was just a plain ol’ massage) if I were one. Privacy is important to me.
Spas often use the same rooms for other services there is no way I would ever go for another bikini wax if a camera of any kind was involved.
Response moderated (Spam)
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
