Guardian article on sex workers and disabled people

[fllowtheyellowbrickroad]

m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/10/sex-workers-disabled-people

Has this already been done? Will put together something literate soon. An currently choking and splitting too much.

Ah it sounds like the sex workers are paid direct or my extensive research suggests so.
www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4767106/investigation-into-nursing-home-for-allowing-prostitutes.html

that in most cultures men want a lot more sex than women do so men tend to have to pay to get it whereas mostly women can have it when they want it despite female salaries, equality and the like.

Xenia, I am no anthropologist, but I don't think women in most cultures have the freedom to have sex 'when they want it'! Have a little think and it might occur to you that this has generally been a male-only privilege. 'In most cultures', that is.

I guess either you are ok with prostitution or you're not. I'm not...for anyone. Many people find it difficult to get sex partners, both disabled and not but I can understand those with physical disabilities are overrepresented in this group. Is paying for it, the answer? I don't think so. But this does not mean I find the idea of disabled people having sex disgusting

I would be supportive of the idea of support workers assisting masturbation, though. I've worked in independent living homes and have supported service users prepare for personal time with correct positioning/ removing splints etc (not contravening any guidelines I hasten to add!) but going one step further by facilitating with sex aids etc. by trained staff would be a viable option. I think this is different to the proposals in the OP and a is helluva lot more dignified.

I currently work in a college for young adults with physical disabilities and learning difficulties and it's like a soap opera with all the relationships and drama It's quite difficult balancing safeguarding the students and enabling a personal/social life due to the presence of learning difficulties. Does this scheme just deal with physical disabilities?

Youmake melala: The problem with support workers being involved in the the process is twofold. One, the "term support worker" covers a range of jobs so we would need to be clear which support workers we are talking about. Also clients with support workers expect them to behave in a professional and careing capacity, this is not the same as sex friend. masterbating a client would in some, possibly a lot of cases cross the boundary between routine depersonalised relief and so still leave the client emotionally unsatisfied. Surrogates at least engage the person as a human not a just a biological function.

2nd. You say yourself that in your own workplace that young adults no matter what type of impairment ot even level of impairement they have, are intent just as non disabled youngsters are of finding someone to be intimate with. No one here has suggested that paying a prostitute is going to give anything other than the most fleeting glimpse of what it might be like to share intimacy with someone. A properly trained sex surrogate such as the one featured in the film "The sessions" which is spoken about in one of the articles I linked to, does at least engage not just the physicle but emotional and mental aspects of the clients sexual desire and needs. Often allowing the client to see that using prostitutes is not any kind of answer for their own needs. This might sound fine and dandy, but these surrogates are still paid, they have more than one client, they do not see themselves as prostitutes but I am sure people from across the political and social spectrum will still apply that label. Again your discomfort about prostitution is rooted in some stereotypical notion of what sexworkers do, where they work, how they work, and how sex should be defined. Not trying to pick a fight only suggesting as others have said that the whole issue of prostitution is always put in to very black and white which get us no where.

Are you at Treloar, lala?

I have no problem with people spending money they have earned on prostitutes or even wives from a political point of view.

So back in January when I had a part time job it would be OK for me to pay a sex worker but now I'm out of work I can't spend my DLA on one?

OK that's me told.

Sashh: I think your safe to spend your hard for for and soon to be replaced DLA on your needs whatever they are. If you check back I did ask X if she had an issue between earned income and other income like benefits, pensions, expenses from the house of lords etc.

Seriously though and as a side bar to this discussion, if those who think disabled people should do anything other than pay for sex, need fear no more. The ability to pay for a lot of stuff will soon be removed from disabled people. Of course the amount spent by the tax payer dealing with higher rates of depression, body image disorders, anti social behaviour linked to feelings of alienation and isolation. These are not just emotive words but we only have to look at history to see how many diffrent types of people have reacted to being positioned as less than human.

Why is 'sex' equated with help with masturbation? Why this focus on male orgasm throughout most of this discussion?

Agree with leith lurker - lack of sex doesn't mean you are just missing out on an orgasm. That's a very sad, narrow and limited view of what the sexual experience can mean for many.

But fair to say, worrying about paying for sex is probably going to bumped off the list of concerns for many disabled people soon, to be replaced by worries about eating or keeping warm.

As a disabled person, I find the idea of not being able to find willing sexual partners distasteful at best, and downright untrue in all my friends that have disabilities.

Why would anyone 'need' to pay a sex worker just because they have disabilities?

Couthy if you read back across the thread and the articles written by disabled people reflecting the real life experiences of other disabled people, that I have linked to. You will see that you and your friends are not typicle of other women and men with disabilities. I do not mean this in a argumentative way but just becouse it is something you and your circle of friends have not come across does not stop it being the case for large numbers of disabled people.

Couthy, that is great for you and your friends, and I am happy to hear it.

But it is not my experience, and it is not the experience of the disabled people I know.

bump

If benefits are so generous people can afford to pay for sex on them which tends not to come very cheap perhaps we need to look at benefits levels in a recession. Surely someone aged 75 - 105 missing human company and having to pay for their cat to get something to touch is just as deserving of state provided company, touching or sex as someone disabled? I suspect if free sex on the state were provided there might be huge demand from all kinds of sources including hard working male (and sometimes female) tax payers who perhaps should have first dibs as it may well keep them working happily supporting those who need benefits.

I had said usually women can get sex and men can't. I did not mean loads of cultures are happy with women who commit adultery etc but it is relatively common even in places like Iran and India and Saudi. Hakim's view which is probably consistent with what most of us see is that men want more sex than they get and women often don't give it to them (see countless mumsnet threads and a very few about women wanting more from a husband who does not oblige www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/8734868/Honey-Money-The-Power-of-Erotic-Capital-by-Catherine-Hakim-review.html.

Very well said, Spero. It's also true that there are some sex workers who seek out this sort of work because they see themselves as therapists. Why should it be such a terrible thing for them to recieve payment for providing a service willingly? 'Talking'-type therapists get paid, after all.

There seem to be lots of different arguments going on here.

I don't think sex is a 'right' just as I don't think having a child is a 'right'. Both can be a wonderful (or horrible) part of the human experience.

Therefore I don't think the state is under any obligation to fund anyone to have a sex life. But I do think it s more difficult for disabled people to find sexual partners, and if a consenting adult is willing to enter into a transaction with them to provide sexual contact in return for money, then this should be a matter left to the two people in the transaction.

There are valid concerns about exploitation in such transactions but I am disappointed that discussion gets shut down so quickly because some people have a visceral distaste for concept of prostitution or so little regard for the desires and feelings of others.

Why do we give the penis in vaginasexual act or men ejaculating so much power as a tool of degredation of women? Men oppress women in countless ways, I simply don't understand why their penis is elevated so highly. I wonder if it is a hangover from the days when women were seen as 'ruined' or defiled if they were raped - still an active concept in many societies.

The only shame in rape should be the shame of the rapist. If a woman decides she wants to make money from her body, free from pressure or exploiation from others, I will respect her decision as a consenting adult. It seems an odd state of affairs to be either angered or disgusted by such a choice, just because it is not one you would make for yourself.

Well that did not take you long Xenia to revert back to your normal stance re benefits, I did wonder if you had caught some kind of caring conservatism bug.

However lets not derail this thread about how one pays for a service, although I would remind you that DLA is specifically given to people with impairments both in work and not, to allow them to overcome some of the difficulties they experience. It is their choice, a choice you agreed earlier that they had just like other people, so what they do with their money is not for you or anyone else to pontificate or allude that they get to much money just as a result of what choices they make.

Spero: I agree entirely with your last set of points. In particular and I said this earlier even if a male cannot respond to masterbation, they can still be an active participant either by directing, touching, or by giving pleasure till completion even if that is something he cannot have for himself. Here again though I end up focusing on the man and his member, this excludes talk of women and their feelings and their desires.
Most often we are left in no doubt on this board that women are second class citizens by the actions of men. It seems that when it comes to disabled women having the same access to a human function and need as a male, the only response is to shut down discussion because it involves men raping women because they pay for it. Disabled women are thus excluded from the discussion even though they are in exactly the same situation as men.

Yes, it is this emphasis on sex as an act of male oppression using a penis, rather than considering the desires and wants of all human beings, regardless of gender or sexual orientation.

And maybe I am being over sensitive due to my life experiences, but I also do detect an undercurrent of distaste for idea of disabled people as wanting sex.

I think most of us 'need' to be touched, hugged etc and sex is an obvious expression of this.

I found the Harlow experiments on baby monkeys heartbreaking - they were separated form their mothers and given a choice of a cold metal mother and food or a soft cuddly fake mother with no food. They chose the cuddly fake mother.

I noticed earlier that someone started a thread with a very offensive heading that pointed to the fact that this thread has been highlighted and spoken a part about on another site. The site needless to say is a part ad board for sex workers part chat board. Needless to say that this site and others receive a lot of hate from some posters on this forum. Indicated by the reference in the title.

It is also noticable that we have not had any input from some of the regular contributers like LRD and others, although to be fair Couthy has added to this thread.

That just sadly confirms my suspicions that for some posters on this site, they don't want a discussion or debate or any attempt to engage with people who don't share their world view. They just want to bolster and affirm each others prejudices.

I too have been called a rape apologist. It's sixth form debate at its most tedious sometimes.

You wont get a contribution in here from certain regular posters, primarily because Spero is a woman. Had she been a man articulating the same views, it would be a different story.

There is another thread on here about someone wanting to view porn. Lots of support and suggestions. Imagine a man asking the same question?

Indeed I have been to dry by MNHQ several times because of my "argumentative" posting style. Which seems absurd as, as you say lled a rape apologist is probably one of the worst things I have ever been called, worse than "mong" or "spas" or cripple. All of which I have had several times.

Spero what do you think of my proposal of "surrogate"? Have you sean or heard about the film "The sessions" ?

obviously the word "hung" should be in the first line, just before the word dry.

I haven't heard of the film, but the idea of surrogates fits well with my view of what should be mainstream and acceptable in society. I assume wider recognition, better regulation etc will also go a long way to deal with legitimate fears that sex workers are often exploited or not exercising real choice.

Interestingly, the poster who called me a rape apologist thought I was a man.

My dad isn't. My brothers aren't. What a ludicrous and stupid thing to say.

Unless its meant to be a joke.

No, still stupid and ludicrous.