Anyone watching the Louis Theroux programme?

[Doyoumind]

Not the first he's done on the subject but I'm interested on his take.

but isn’t the same also true that thanks to past trauma a lot of these women have endured they have similarly missed out on genuine human loving intimacy?

Dervel that's not something I'd realised, but you're right - and it's heartbreaking.

Watched this last night with interest. The husband and wife I agree was a very strange dynamic. Both looked very unhappy. I wondered if in fact the husband went along with it all as he feared losing his wife if he didn't. She came across as the harder faced of the two some how. Just my opinion

The mum Victoria I really identified with her. I don't believe she's routinely earning £250 an hour 4 times a day in Nottingham however being early 30s with four children. I simply don't believe that figure. Would probably stake it at more around the £100-150 an hour max figure. That's by the by.

I really felt for her and identified with her. But she should have kept her activities hidden from the wider community and especially her children. The bullying and abuse they will probably suffer now is awful to think about. She doesn't work from home so there's no reason for people to know. And ok why should she have to hide it and feel ashamed . You wouldn't in any other job but it's other people and their attitudes. There's no way her kids should ever know and certainly not at 13 .

The more I think about this the more I think it's about capitalism and not sex. Capitalism in general gives this false sense of choice, and they have become commodities but have this false conscious about it... On the other hand I guess it is about each individual encounter and the energy the two people bring to that. 1 encounter could be blissful, another could be horrific. It's the unknown I couldn't deal with.

The more I think about this the more I think it's about capitalism and not sex.

Yes - neoliberalism, in fact. Everything is a commodity to be bought and sold and profited from - including sex and women's bodies.

Yes the financialisation of sex, will always continue as long as we are all trapped in this neoliberal web and will increase as things get more precarious.

The only anomaly here seemed to be the older couple who weren't doing it for financial reasons.

The more I think about this the more I think it's about capitalism and not sex.

See: Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State.

Lol I don't have time to read Engels! Can you summarise his idea?

I also wondered if the husband in the married couple was gay..

I haven't seen the documentary yet but on the subject of the older couple...for work-related reasons there was a spell a few years back when I had to analyse the output of certain UK-based porn story-sharing/chat sites for a few months. One of the recurring themes was how many men fantasise about 'sharing' their wife with other men, and how much effort they put in to 'persuading' them to try it. I wonder if that's how this couple started and now the genie is well and truly out of the bottle for them.

(Incidentally one of the other most common themes was men fantasising about - and in some cases apparently trying for real - being 'cissified' [their term] which is why I have no problem believing the transwidows thread, because if even 1/10 of the men talking and swapping fantasies about wearing panties, tights etc is trying it for real, the issue is on a far greater scale than most people realise, even those who are aware of the predilection.)

His lack of sexual experiences prior to paying for sex comes across as a tragedy he had been unable to engage in a the fundamentally human experience of sex

I have wondered in the past if part of the reason we feel this way is that we no longer have a way to think about a sexless life that is positive or constructive. It's just a tragedy. Who thinks others deserve a tragedy, that anyone should live that way? Who feels positive about living a tragic life?

Having a balanced attitude to sex in society has to mean a balanced attitude as a whole, not just when we don't like the logical outcomes. Our attitudes don't just stay in little boxes, if we see a shared sex life as necessary to be fulfilled, as the only kind of true intimacy, we will almost inevitably have a sector of society who is shut out from that.

I don't have time to read Engels! Can you summarise his idea?

Um... it's not a single idea, it's the basics of Marx and Engels theories from a capitalism and women point of view.

If I had to write one sentence: raising children is the production of our future economy and capitalism therefore requires sexual and domestic labour from women if they are to have financial security for their children, be that via marriage or prostitution.

What struck me about the group of young friends talking about sex was that there was almost a 'stiff upper lip' attitude towards it, that you weren't supposed to talk about the emotional, intimate side of sex or to let it have any significance. People's needs for intimacy, affection and to be valued for their unique selves has not changed, it's a part of human nature, but they have been brought up on pornified ideas of sex so that it seems they are repressed from even talking about the emotions involved. That's not to say I don't think people can't have one-night stands etc, but the way that they seemed to feel a need to be united on this idea of sex being meaningless, was quite sad for me, as they seemed like they were trying to convince themselves.

that you weren't supposed to talk about the emotional, intimate side of sex or to let it have any significance

This. It's why App dating in your twenties is total hell. My mother's generation would go out with a boy for ages, then gossip to their girlfriends about when they should sleep with them or not - now you're expected to have sex on a first date and agonize for months over whether you're allowed to admit you like the person or not. It's gross and exhausting.

There was no sense of anything joyous in what they were saying either, it wasn't that sex was 'just a bit of fun', but that sex was 'meaningless'. It seemed like they were trying to lessen the impact of unpleasant experiences they'd had by brushing it off and repressing their emotions around sex. 20 years ago when I was their age, within a group of friends people would have casual sex with each other too, but there wasn't this idea that sex was meaningless by default. If a couple of friends/acquaintances had sex that it meant things were up in the air - maybe a one off, maybe friends with benefits, maybe something more. By making 'meaningless' the default, it allows for abusive behaviour, for someone to string someone else along and use them without anyone being allowed to object. Sex is also by many accounts far more brutal now too, in terms of painful acts women are expected to endure. I don't know that you can really call this attitude they showed of sex being meaningless 'sex positivity', because there's nothing very positive about it, but it seemed like it's the official line that they've gone along with from a young age and don't know any different.

I've just caught up with it and I'm feeling a horrible combination of depressed as fuck by the attitudes of Ashley and her friends, and desperately sorry for young people who have to try to find a serious partner in this atmosphere. You see thread after thread on the relationships board from women trying to work out if some bloke likes them or not, and being advised that they mustn't admit to having any feelings for them until they've been sleeping together for at least two years. Women aren't benefiting from this liberalisation of sexual attitudes, they're merely being expected to give up their whole selves and to ask for nothing in return - no commitment, no affection, nothing.

I like Louis but I wish he'd looked a bit harder at how gendered this issue is. Male college students aren't selling sex to make ends meet. Women with disabilities don't feel entitled to use somebody else's body to orgasm into. I understand he has to be non-judgmental to get people to open up but it's frustrating when he doesn't go deeper into an issue.

being advised that they mustn't admit to having any feelings for them until they've been sleeping together for at least two years.

Wow that's some pretty awful advice and an unrealistic timetable to live up to! People shouldn't have the time for these kinds of cat and mouse games.

Seems like the pendulum has swung from being very repressed and looking down on women who might enjoy casual sex to an expectation that every women has to enjoy casual sex and any desire for a relationship should be avoided.
I've always thought the focus should be about women learning to feel confident enough in themselves and comfortable with their desires so that whether they want a casual encounter or a serious relationship, they are able to pursue it without feeling guilty or ashamed for doing so.

Watched the documentary today...desperately sad for all these woman.
The older couple though, their relationship was so strange in a way I just can't explain.

I thought it was a really thoughtful, sensitive programme, which exposed the realities of of sex work and the fact that many women who get involved often have deep seated emotional and mental health issues, but for me the elephant in the room was the fact that the demand for these services is created and driven by men - and the reason that many of these women are involved in prostitution is because of abuse they've experienced at the hands of men.

I think perhaps it was a little too sympathetic in its portrayal of the punters (offering 'excuses' such as coming to terms with the end of a relationship) and seemed to normalise the concept of paying for sex rather than questioning why so many men are doing it.

It was interesting but disturbing, they were all vulnerable in different ways

I read the review of it today in The Guardian, I thought it was unusually thoughtful for them.

But on the other hand we are all pimping out our bodies in a way aren't we? I work in a cerebral job, but essentially I'm renting out my brain and time for money in an all consuming way where I sit in a box all day and stare at a screen. That's also exploitative in a way. I don't get to think my own thoughts. I don't have free bodily movement. I have no energy when I get home everyday and many verbal exchanges in work are micro aggressions and sometime verbal abuse.

Are we really so different or is it just that we are pathologising the use of sex organs to make money whilst valorising the use of the brain to make money. Just being devils advocate!

Are we really so different or is it just that we are pathologising the use of sex organs to make money whilst valorising the use of the brain to make money.
Presumably, you're not doing your job as a response to trauma from abuse inflicted by violent and coercive men? That's one big difference.
Presumably you're not running the risk of contracting STDs or getting pregnant in doing your job every day? That's another difference.
There are presumably measures in place to prevent staff being verbally and physically abused where you work, no? Or at least a system of support if this were to happen.
You're not at risk of being raped or violently abused at work, I would imagine.
You're not renting out your genitals for someone to do as they will with for an hour - do you really think your brain has the same function as your genitals?
It's true that many 'McJobs' lead to people feeling exploited, this is no argument for exploit themselves even further.

"Presumably, you're not doing your job as a response to trauma from abuse inflicted by violent and coercive men? That's one big difference."

@upfield that's not strictly true. My father was both of those things. My job is a response to that in a subtle way. More about keeping a 'good' job to pay the bills, even if that depletes me. The link isn't so obvious, but it's there if I was psychoanalyzed!

"There are presumably measures in place to prevent staff being verbally and physically abused where you work, no? Or at least a system of support if this were to happen."

Very naive for you to think these systems work in most jobs. They dont. I.e. the recent sticks and stones drama.