When we talk about Tantra we are enunciating a Sanskrit term that is framed within a culture, a tradition with a rigorous foundation. We can agree or not, but it is not correct within a methodology and within what would be the "science" of a philosophical or theological exposition of something and ignore its sources and roots.
In all traditions there are many controversies about the teachings of this or that teacher who establishes this or that spiritual current.
Taking into account that all spiritual thought cannot be demonstrated, but if we make it rigorous, when we turn it into a matter of study, that matter has parameters that must be seriously respected by those who study it.
A Catholic theologian will study theology doing epistemology knowing the meaning of the terms, studying the scriptures, diving into history to see whether or not there was concordance between the chronology and from there a thought is formed; In addition to the faith that person may have of what she understands or feels or even what she would like it to be. The vision of Christ, for example, can be in a way for many people, but a theologian or a priest investigates the figure, the same goes for Tantra.
Tantra is not a nonsense for people to manifest their sexual repressions nor is it all that a person would like it to be to justify their life.
Tantra is what Tantra says and from there we will study it rigorously. But for that we must approach his writings as well as those who know him; and on that we establish the science of what Tantra is.