Guardian article on sex workers and disabled people

Genuine reply.

Do you think the name checking in this instance was for useful purposes ?

We have unique user names, granted.

And also a pm function to draw people's attention to a thread if we have genuinely altruistic reasons to draw an individual's attention to a thread.

Naming someone applies un necessary and undue public pressure, and could be described as arrogance in a "my post deserves a reply from this person" kinda way

Genuine question. Why is name checking 'not cricket'?

Not cricket in any circumstances? Either to blame or praise?

If it is so undesirable, why are we given the opportunity to create unique user names?

It obviously serves some need, like people getting all upset when Diana died. People obviously feel less inhibited about being blunt/rude whatever.
I have noticed some people getting really upset and that is sad. I wonder what goes on in their 'real lives' that this kind of engagement can so profoundly distress them.

Anyway, thanks for the link, I am sorry and surprised I was so ignorant of the man and his writings. This especially
'Why do rehabilitation hospitals teach disabled people how to sew wallets and cook from a wheelchair but not deal with a person?s damaged self-image? Why don?t these hospitals teach disabled people how to love and be loved through sex, or how to love our unusual bodies? '

I am quite sure many of my problems stem from my own script about disability which I adopted at an early age because sadly without exception ALL the adults around me were so utterly piss poor at dealing with it. Nobody wanted to talk about it, everyone was embarrassed for whatever reason. He deals with that very well.

Why can't we just talk to each other and be honest? What holds us back?

It's quite simple really, LL

name checking is not cricket

no mulling over required

A good example AF of us not agreeing, and I respectfully hold to my view and disagree with you. But I will be mindful of what you say and try and adjust my style. It might be my male brain, or maybe just part of my thought processing but I am not sure I could make a post without referencing another post if I thought it was pertinent. I know maybe this comes over as whinny or "poor me" I accept that could be the case. So again I will take what you said and mull it over.

Sorry Spero, you have only now reminded me where I have seen you before, and I have to say that I am an admirer of your work in defending both the principle and the practice of family law, and child protection issues. A bear pit is a good metaphore for these boards at times, especially when the crowd gets up a head of steam. Not just an MN thing but a "human" thing, you do a great job of sticking to your point.

Thanks for the link.

'I wanted to be held, caressed, valued'.

Yes indeed. That is what it is all about isn't it?

Shame on all of you who have attempted to reduce it simply to male ejaculation.

LL, you are not getting what I am saying.

Respect means sometimes not wading in with a POV that would be quite obvious based on previous exchanges

Silence should not always be taken as a tangible contribution. Which when you look at it logically, is exactly what you did. Which is highly illogical bearing in mind that such shout outs as "well, where is X, Y, Z on this issue then..." is counterproductive

Just get on with it, in your own way. Why do you need the "usual suspects" to argue your point with ? Is it any more or less valid ?

noteasybeingred.tumblr.com/post/16646893808/on-seeing-a-sex-surrogate-mark-obrian

noteasybeingred.tumblr.com/post/16646893808/on-seeing-a-sex-surrogate-mark-obrian

This is the link spero, although it may not be the best article about the issue of him exploring his sexuality.

O yes this 'lumping' thing is incredibly tiresome. It must answer some deeply buried human need to belong and feel part of a tribe. What I don't understand is all the pain and angst it causes.

Time and time again I will leap into a social services type thread and be designated the apologist for the corrupt state. But I carry on because I think it might help anyone lurking who is otherwise being fed quite dangerous and wrong information. But it doesn't upset me.

I guess this is the one disadavantage to being born disabled. You have to deal early on with other people's revolting behaviour right in your face and the words on a screen stuff seems frightfully tame now.

Its a shame however if it gets in the way of a frank exchange of views from which people could get a new perspective on old ways of thinking. This is what is so amazing about the internet and what we can do with it.

AF: please do go back an re read that very post, I named checked TWO posters not just one. I admitted and and acknowledged that a well known,
(equal opportunity opposer) had made a comment. The representative name, of the posters who have not posted was not me being goady. It was if anything a reflection on your last point, which I agree entirely with btw. A debate, a proper full on, adult cross exchange of ideas and thoughts that does not degenerate in to name calling or personal insults. Or just repeats the same line over and over, is very much what I would welcome. I speak for no one else, since though myself and other posters have said very smiler things I would not be in the least surprised if a proper and respectful debate was to start, they would enter in to it also.

One other thing interested me about your point and it is the assumption that you were "lumped" in to a general category. Firstly as someone who has been told that I too am lumped in to a general category and that rather dubious honour means that my views on anything are to be seen as problematic and that no one out side my imposed designation would ever voluntarily look at anything I say, I feel smiler to you that being "lumped" in to a group is basic a silencing tactic. (OK you did not say that but your reference lead me to extrapolate that.) So I do want to you to contribute, even though it might well be anti my stance the only way that we can debate as I said earlier is to have a range of views. We might possibly never agree, what that means though is not that either one of us is wrong. The moral certinity often expressed on these pages often turns in to the argument of right and wrong when in fact human behaviour is probably wrong for some people most of the time.

Lastly and still with the lumped in issue, this is the first thread that I have been able to explain my understanding and belief of what the specific issues of impaired people and SEXUALITY, not prostitution are. However being lumped means that I have never been able to explain my point of view as being lumped means that I get attacked and end up defending myself more than explaining myself. The point I am making here is that being lumped is an issue of respect, I respect your view, I would like to have it put forward, I will always try and debate fairly and opnely on the facts (I know others would disagree with that but again not being listened to or offered respect leads to playing up, childish I know). So I am asking you a serious question, how do we unlump each other and get back to a situation where you seeing my name means you know what I will say but at least give me the chance to say it and explain it, and vice a vera for yourself. (Although and this might sound like sucking up, your style is often much more abrasive than the content of what you say. This at least I and I think others can cope with as it does not in it's self cause hurt feeling. Being called a rape apologist does though)

Sorry for the essay folks.

Hello.

I didn't comment because I was busy buying a dress online, making soup, writing my thesis, and wittering on with a lovely bunch of people about the Great British Sewing Bee. As this thread has 95 posts and as, last time I looked, no-one has lumbered me with the job of official spokeswoman for things I've already said many times, this will be my first and last post here.

Take care everyone.

Indeed, spero

I am in complete agreement with you, again

And I have down been the rabbit hole far enough to understand that these "throw away" comments are very rarely as innocent as they may seem

LL, can you explain the name checking ?

it's one thing to speculate on why a group of people with a well-worn approach to certain debates is missing...but naming individuals is just not cricket

is it ?

I don't see why it is so inappropriate to wonder, if there are people who are enthusiastic contributors to certain subjects but who steer clear of certain threads. I am certainly musing as to why the person who started it never came back!

I fail to see how such speculation is horrible goading.

Sigh. Maybe I just don't 'get' the whole culture. I thought I had gone down the rabbit hole far enough with all the angst over the 'funny' threads. But it seems there are layers and layers.

Perhaps I am just unusually well balanced and full of zen like calm. I find these discussions interesting as far as they go but the day the internet makes me feel 'goaded' is the day my lap top goes out the window.

Indeed, spero

I am in complete agreement with you

So why would it be appropriate to comment when individuals are not on a thread ?

Just leave it and get on with a debate. Is that too much to ask ? I am looking at you, LL. Just so we are clear.

Yes please to link.

I don't know who are the people who are 'supposed' to be contributing to this thread. I don't know why it is bad form to mention it either way. Contribute or don't. Can't see how this is 'goading'.

I am quite tired of what seems to be a recent culture of either lauding or criticising people who have acheived some degree of prominence on this site by posting frequently. I find it hard to care. I like posters who have something interesting to say and who are open minded and take account of what others say, not simply repeating the same tired old arguments.

The only name I have ever made note of was the one who followed me from thread to thread to call me a rape apologist and a man. Fortunately she seems to have buggered off the past year or so.

It is indeed the "Iron Lung" guy. He was a relatively famous poet and author. You want the link?

Just a minute

Are the people who oppose the sex industry for anyone (thus being equal opportunity opposers) being criticised for not contributing to this thread ?

There has been a person name checked here, and I am not speaking for her, although I expect I am "lumped in" with her in certain quarters

I haven't contributed to this thread. Not because I don't have anything to add, not because I have any double standards, but because in direct contrast to some respondents sometimes I think it appopriate to keep my big trap shut

name checking is out of order, as is goading people you know will often rise to such calls to arms

it seems to me that this thread, despite being lauded as great debate by the absence of certain posters is actually just like lots of others I have seen

And yes, i completely agree with you about the dangers of idealising what we never had. I have had enough sex to appreciate that I am not necessarily missing out on the most sublime experience known to man and womankind ... but that is lucky for me, not a reason to dictate what others can and cannot explore.

I think the reason I have never gone down the male escort route is that I would find it just too sad. I value the emotional connection more highly than the rubbing of genitals and of course you are unlikely to get much of that in a commercial transaction.

Hang on, is this the recent film that has just come out about the bloke in the iron lung? Yes, I have heard of it, will definitely go and see it.

that is quite encouraging, if I am thinking about the right film. No one appears to be picketing the cinemas spluttering about rape. Maybe we are moving to more mainstream acceptance.

Trolls are lovely aren't they. Come back ramiol, I want to PLAY. Only your razor sharp mind stands between me and the gharstly prospect of actually doing some work this evening.

You got to love the way that trolls are not discriminatory, a thread that mostly disagrees with the feminist line is trolled by an anti feminist probable MRA type. Thats what I call inclusive trolling, and highly stupid of course.

Spero the film I spoke of comes out of a real life experience, I will try and find a link not to the film but the disabled guy who's writing inspired the film. As a matter of interest after using a surrogate he was left feeling that what he wanted was a loving relationship not just sex. I think this is crucial, people want the full deal not to abuse or be abused. However in order to learn what they want or how they can come to some kind of mental adjustment to cope with their life, the chance to experience the intimacy of sex is crucial. People will always want what they have never had, people will always imagine that what they are missing is the thing that will change their life.

Sorry. But as this thread has established, I am not having any sex so I have to find outlets for my growing rage and frustration.

Come back sweet ramiol - I was enjoying the cut and thrust of your debate.

Your mum must be very proud.

Spero - let the idiot go. Come back later when his mum has put him to bed.

Marilyn and I may have similar genitals. But we clearly don't have similar views. This is allowed you know.

I hesitate to ask what kind of point you are making as I am prepared to bet your answer will make very little sense.