To wonder what you think about people with disabilities buying sex

[huha]

Here is a link: tlc-trust.org.uk

I personally was at first 😲😲😲 but now am thinking 🤔...maybe this is a good thing?? AIBU?

@Branleuse that's because it takes a certain level of denial and delusion.
While not a lot of men are deluded enough to believe "loved and wanted" plenty are in voluntary denial "it's a choice,they do it because they want to,i'm helping her put food in the table" so they can sleep at night and keep claiming "but I'm a nice guy".

Theres nothing wrong with enjoying sex...in fact I'd go so far as to say you should only participate in sex when it is enjoyable. Otherwise... why are you doing it?

And yes there is a huge difference between sex and intimacy, otherwise why do some prostitutes offer/some men buy 'the girlfriend experience' and not just sex? Intimacy doesnt equate to sex and vice versa, you can have one without the other, or as you do, hit the jackpot and have both, but there is a definite distinction.

I just said it seems odd to me to feel anxious and unsettled by not having it -unless it is a huge change in your normal routine as a couple, and even then surely what youre really unsettled by is the cause rather than the effect?

At the end of the day, you do you, but its inflammatory to say you pity people who dont think sex is a priority and you know why that is; it just feeds into societal pressures and leads people who are having little/no sex to infer that there is something wrong with that or with them when neither is true. I hasten to reiterate, there is nothing wrong with having lots of sex either.

Regarless of all that, I still believe sex is not a need and my happiness is not contingent on that and you still believe it is and it does; we're not going to agree on that but it appears we both agree that it is not a right and shouldnt be provided to anyone for money, which is of course the much bigger picture.

Poor I apologise if you feel I implied you were in any way 'fucked up'. I dont think that for a second, but your feelings about what sex means to you are just so far removed from my own that I was wondering if theres something else that influences the way you feel that maybe I dont 'get'.

But that's the whole point of a discussion board right, to see alternative perspectives?

FWIW I consider myself to be a pretty normal person too. Generally quite fun at parties unless they are karaoke based. Lots of things make me happy. Also enjoy sex with a loving partner.

Ok, I've reread your first post and this one and nah. I take into account the 'blah blah sex is not bad of course' (I realise you don't want to sound like a prude). But it was still you deciding that because sex is a need for me, I must be a victim of society, trauma or a shitty relationship. And that's, well, far more fucked up than anything I've ever got up to.

Regarless of all that, I still believe sex is not a need and my happiness is not contingent on that and you still believe it is and it does;

No, this is bollocks. I haven't told you what sex means to you. You dictated my sexuality, I didn't dictate yours. You say sex doesn't make you happy and based on your posts, I absolutely, absolutely 100% believe you. Really, I SO believe you. Please don't worry on that score.

I know it was glib, but I do stand by the 'doing it wrong' comment. Sex drive waxes and wanes, like anything else (I didn't feel at all freaky in the first year after my baby was born). And I suppose for a lot of people (not everyone), age can be a mellower. But anyone who really, sincerely doesn't understand what it can be capable of doing and why that's important for people is, in my view, 'doing it wrong'.

They may well be happy doing it wrong (in which case they won't be so offended by the idea that I'm doing it better), but that's still my feeling.

You don't need to apologise, honestly you don't.

But that's the whole point of a discussion board right, to see alternative perspectives?

Of course. I haven't demanded anyone shut up or stop disagreeing. I'd be a right twat if I did that.

Theres nothing wrong with enjoying sex...in fact I'd go so far as to say you should only participate in sex when it is enjoyable. Otherwise... why are you doing it?

Indeed. In fact, my bar is set at enthusiastic participation - who wants to have sex with someone who has just managed to nudge themselves over the threshold of consent but isn't exactly engaging in it?

I think we're talking at crossed purposes. I dont understand how Ive dictated your sexuality, you said you have a need for sex to feel happy and fulfilled? That was my understanding. I also agree with you on the potential and benefits great sex can have for a relationship. But I don't think the issue is that people are not recognising that, but rather trying to find ways to tackle the fact they might never have an opportunity to experience it despite wanting to - how do we support one group in regards to this issue, without exploiting another?

I also didnt decide it must be because of those reasons that you value sex highly, I asked the question, was it for any of those reasons. You said no and said it is because its pleasurable - fair enough. I have not asked any further questions about why you feel that way, just reiterated my understanding of the word 'need' vs 'want / desire'. You have a different interpretation.

I also never said that sex doesnt make me happy. I said lots of things make me happy but I dont feel unhappy if I dont have sex.

In the end though, this is quite a tangent from the OP and our individual sex lives aside, what I would really be interested in discussing is what is the best way to support people in this situation; we're fairly widely agreed its not prostitution, so what other options could be put forward? Are we even morally/ethically obliged to put anything in place?

As I mentioned upthread, if we are, then how does that translate to other groups that may identify a need for sex?

No, we aren’t morally or ethically obliged to provide any groups of people with sexual release. It’s an abhorrent and shocking idea.

@CaptainBrickbeard

men like larry so bizarrely invested in defending the rights of these mythical happy hookers to enjoy their chosen career

Just spat out my morning coffee

It's so obvious that Larry either wants to or currently does use sex workers, and is using this disability red herring as a way to deal with his cognitive dissonance. I'm still waiting for the "maybe prostitutes just ENJOY sex!!!!"

Gold, it’s worse than that. larry doesn’t care if they enjoy sex because hairdressers may not enjoy cutting hair and cleaners may not enjoy cleaning toilets and some people may not enjoy drinking tea but do it anyway - and these things are somehow akin to having sex that you don’t want at a risk many times higher than the general population of suffering rape and assault I the course of the job, not to mention the increased possibility that you have previously suffered sexual abuse and have been coerced into the job. larry isn’t buying into the ‘nympho’ justification; he is quite happy for prostitutes to be miserable in the course of their work because he equates the human suffering of prostitution to the ennui or reluctance of a minimum wage worker who doesn’t feel like getting out of bed. And he can’t see how appalling, offensive and outragthat comparison is; in fact he twists our horror into us judging and condemning prostitutes when in fact we deserve our contempt for the buyers, the pimps and the apologists.

reserve, not deserve our contempt! Sorry for typos but I think I got the gist across!

And I have no idea if larry has, would or wants to use prostitutes, but men like him and Nigel seem to find it incredibly important to believe that prostitutes routinely choose it as a job - for reasons like funding university which is an appalling reason btw and why aren’t male students having to fund their degrees with stripping and selling sex?? - and that whilst it’s not super fun, it’s no more degrading or dangerous than any other job and our objection to it is anti-feminist and totally oppressing their right to consent. All of that I the face of overwhelming evidence of the brutality and misery of prostitution, the testimony of survivors, the fact that this country is seen as a low-risk high-profit haven for those who want to exploit women in this way. Oh, but if you’ve bought a iPhone or a cheap outfit then you’re supporting slavery ergo women should continue to be enslaved for sex and you can’t complain until you’ve solved every other problem in the world. And disabled people are putting themselves at risk seeking sex, so let’s run the risk of hiring trafficked women to be raped so that they don’t feel lonely anymore. Never mind the woman who posted on this thread describing the sex she was forced into with disabled people - some of whom hadn’t even requested it but were being ‘treated’ to it anyway whilst carers watched. I can’t unde why anyone wants to defend an industry where this is overwhelmingly the majority of experiences for women: rape, violence, enslavement. But let’s justify that because a tiny handful of women just might be doing it by choice - never mind the odds that keep on stacking up, let’s focus exclusively on them and defend their rights above the hundreds of thousands of sufferers.

@TheLastNigel

The amount of sympathy I have for the individual you described is precisely 0, just the same amount as I would have for anyone who wants to pay for sex.

And can't people just think like adults and realise that the whole tea argument is a load of shite?????

Does the odd cup of unwanted tea give you PTSD, injuries, and a whole host of other emotional and physical problems?!?!?

the thought of ANYONE paying for sex creeps me out a bit. But its not my life so, as long as theyre not hurting anyone or being ripped off, go for it

sockunicorn they are hurting someone. Prostitution hurts women. It doesn’t matter if the client is disabled or not - women suffer as a result of prostitution as has been explored at length on this thread including someone coerced into providing exactly this service.

Well Goldmonday, then I'm sincerely hoping you don't have any contact with people who are disabled and who face issues that stem from lack of human relationships as a result

it’s worse than that. larry doesn’t care if they enjoy sex because hairdressers may not enjoy cutting hair and cleaners may not enjoy cleaning toilets and some people may not enjoy drinking tea but do it anyway

I think the response is that we are all coerced into working. 90% wouldn't do the job we are doing unless we are being paid for it.

I agree, the nature of the work makes it different, as well as the danger involved. I am less concerned about the nature of the work and more concerned about the effects and danger. But then it begs the question: does banning it make it safer? does it reduce the number of women in it? how and when does banning help?

Also, to the point about men not doing it: I imagine it's because they wouldn't make any money.

There are people that don't like prostitution because of the many ill effects of it, on society and the women involved. Then there are people who are against it even if we could successfully solve these problems (i.e. make it as safe as most other jobs).

CaptainBrick-in point of fact I'm not a man.
And I've no idea how many Male students Fund their way through university by doing work they consider to be degrading, whatever that might be. And I doubt you have either.
I'm well aware that the large majority of sex workers aren't doing it as a positive choice. But some do exist that have chosen that sort of work for their own reasons as a proactive decision. The woman speaking on the radio was one of them. my mother in law in fact is another... it's not a correct blanket assumption that all sex workers have been coerced (though I accept that in a deregulated industry there are a lot of people in desperate situations that might not want to be there).

Wok they consider degrading isn’t the point. This is about the sex industry which unequivocally degrades women. I just don’t understand why your concern for safeguarding extends only to disabled men who want sex and doesn’t cover the women who are expected to provide it. Prostitution is a far bigger ‘safeguarding nightmare’ than someone who goes out kerb-crawling, wheelchair or not.

Additionally the women my disabled service user attempted to solicit then went on to to rob him, and three of my other service users (having taken his front door key). When of My staff caught them exiting the building in the middle of the night they threatened her with a knife. So I didn't have that much sympathy for them at that point no.

None of them had been trafficked at any point as it goes. They were all London born and bred. The details of their names etc were given as part of the court proceedings. All three were known drug users with long records for various crimes. I don't especially judge that either, the circumstances around it are probably equally tragic. But at some point in their lives they had made choices and those had led them to where they were.

I wasn't at any point congratulating my service user on his behaviour. I wasn't saying what he did was right at all. But I am saying I understood his motivation and how shit in general his life was, lack of any human warmth being a bit part of that. I think you'd have to be a bit inhumane yourself not to.

Years ago some of my friends were can girls. Some of the guys using the sites were indeed disabled . Turns out that most of them were also awful dicks , from treating the girls like shit,to becoming (or trying to ) controlling,feeling entitled ,escalating demands and some being down right threatening,stalkerish and dangerous.

They weren't any better (or worse) ,they weren't any safer.

At least my friends were behind the screen so no physical threat was imminent but I have to say that in some cases their mental health did suffer . I can't imagine actually having to be in the room with a man like that.

If disabled people men have problems getting into relationships, then help them find and maintain relationships.

Don't encourage and enable the use of a person as a human wank sock.

(for clarity, that term is aimed at the user and not the person who is being used - as frequently gets claimed on prostitution threads)

All three were known drug users with long records for various crimes

(Head-desk at Nigel).

Sex is not a human right.

I love sex, in a certain loose sense, I "need" it (in the sense that my mood and sense of well-being take a hit without it).

But - here's the thing - I'm post-menopausal, middle aged, a bit wrinkly, everything's heading south... and most importantly female. This means no-one wants to have sex with me any more. It's over 10 years since anyone so much as made a pass at me.

So what do I do about it? Good vibrator, good circle of friends, fulfilling work life and hobbies. I do not attempt to circumvent someone's consent by taking advantage of their financial desperation to coerce them into sex they clearly would not want. Because that would be morally wrong. And it is similarly morally wrong for anyone who finds themselves, for whatever reason, unable to attract a partner who actually wants to have sex with them. Shit happens. Life is not fair. Live with it you grubby little bastards incels, punters and assorted whingers of the world.