OK, boys and girls, what are your views? I shall refrain from commenting: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7057929.stm The website has readers' comments.
Lets take the first issue: legalised prostitution. i think it should be legalised with the girls (and a few boys) protected and cared for in registered brothels. Its going to happen no matter what, so why not do it on the Holland/Australia etc rules where monthly medical checks are done and its all in a safe environment. And keep all the workers clean of drugs. Second Issue: disabilty rights to sex. Why not? they are as human as the rest of us. If an individual wants to pay for it then allow them to and the knowledge they will get a good product (i am not going to say service.......oh dammit). Overall, why not? Just our outdated thinking thats standing in the way.
My thoughts exactly, its going to happen, so let it in a controlled environment where taxes get paid, as they say its the oldest proffession in the world and you will never stamp it out. There are plenty of girls and boys who enjoy providing the service and many willing to pay. Disability is not an issue, if they want it too go get it!
Quick answer yes, why ever not? I have never understood why prostitution isn't legalised and regulated to remove the criminal element. This to me would also remove the "enslavement of women" argument since they could not be trafficked or drugged. Not sure that I would have been delighted if it had been my daughter's career choice though! CTNana
The problem with the legalisation of prostitution is just like drugs. There are many arguements why they are dangerous and bad, but the bottom line is that it's a overt way of government to control society. We know that prostitution and drugs exist, we know that people will use them, and also know that the very nature of their criminalisation is what causes most of the problems for society. And yet, they are also great headline grabbers for the politicos when they can't deal with issues that really matter. Personally, my only concern with prostitution is whether the individual (because men are invloved too) has made a choice, and hasn't been forced into it by anyone else. I see no difference between the commodification of sex, and anything else. We commodify life itself when the government turns around and says a medical treatment is not cost-effective. So if we can put a price on life and death, then everything else sort of pales into insignificance. Besides, I'd rather be able to pull out my wallet than my current situation of endless begging on my knees :becky:
Is it an age thing or maybe I'm just a hypocrite but I feel totally differently about drugs. Catching nasty diseases aside and possibly financially, the choice to visit prostitutes, male or female, does not impact on other members of the family or wider society. Having witnessed first hand the devastating effect of drug use / abuse on our best friends when their son became involved, I see the situations very differently (even as an ex-smoker who would smoke again tomorrow). CTNana
Before replying to this I watched tonight’s “One Life” programme on BBC1 about three English people with disabilities going to a brothel in Spain; one had been once before; for the others it was their first time and they had never experienced sex before. Whatever we may think about the morality of this, it must be wrong to apply different standards to disabled people than to everyone else. The problem is that the morality of using prostitutes is about far more than the morality of what people do with their genitals. In London, only 19% of prostitutes were born in the UK. Therefore, a high proportion of these will be unwilling victims of the people trafficking, or at least be illegal immigrants left with few other means of making money. And a high proportion of both UK and other prostitutes are addicted to drugs; the sex trade is controlled by organised crime. I’m not sure how legalising brothels will help, unless the government becomes so heavily involved in regulating them that it is virtually in the role of brothel proprieter (leading to government control, as Kyt says). The prostitutes most likely to be doing the job voluntarily, and to be free of diseases and gangster-control, are the posh high-class ones, and I don’t think anyone will be able to afford those on Disability Living Allowance. (One of the men in tonight’s programme ruled out regular brothel-use due to the cost). Disabled people in such a setting would be even more vulnerable to exploitation and intimidation than anyone else, as well as compromising with a sector of society that is normally even more prejudiced against them than mainstream society. The other question is, how happy will it make disabled people? Sex is good, but its not that good. If you are insecure and lonely before you have sex you will be insecure and lonely afterward. In the film “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” [author Ken Kesey was definitely not religious], the inmates take over the asylum (to use the 1970’s American terminology from the film), and the shy, anxious young man loses his virginity. For a few hours he is confident and dynamic - then the Matron regains control, she threatens to tell his mother, and he crumbles again. Society peddles a delusion that there is a perfect sexual experience, or a perfect partner, somewhere just round the corner, and we are missing out if we don’t find it. And one sexual experience just leaves you wanting more (ok, not straight away necessarily!). You don’t have to be a Christian moralist to believe that sex is best with someone you mutually love or at least respect; most Advice Columns in the popular press say that, and one of the men on tonights programme (Rashid) opted out of sex with a prostitute for that reason. Even Asta, the disabled young man who organised the trip, said that he enjoyed the sex, but said: “its nice to have someone who really wants you, even if they are faking it” - a contradictory statement. And tragically, at the end of the programme, he said “it leaves you feeling empty - what I really want is someone to love me”. So, if society thinks prostitution is ok for people generally, it should be ok for disabled people, but that doesn’t mean its going to solve all their problems. What I’ve said above is coloured by my Christianity, but I think I’ve seen enough, even just from the programme, to be certain that you don’t have to be religious to doubt that brothels are the answer to rejection and loneliness. I understand the anguish of disabled people being unable to get loving relationships, and/or sex. But the answer to this has to lie with the rest of us, to treat everyone with respect, not to judge by appearances, not to focus on what they cannot do (sorry if this sounds preachy!) And lastly, we need to challenge media portrayals of disability, and of anyone who isn’t young and beautiful. The BBC is as bad as the rest, and worse because of it’s self-righteousness. The BBC wouldn’t dream of discriminating against black or gay people, and rightly so. By they sure as hell discriminate against disabled or ugly people - the portrayal of disability in “Little Britain” was highly questionable, and in Eastenders, Heather is fat and ugly, and therefore is portrayed as stupid, clumsy, a figure of fun, desperate to find love.
All very good points, Adrian. There are two elements in this discussion - prostitution and disabled sexuality. The question of prostitution is a tricky one, and is basically the same for disabled and non-disabled people. However, Adrian has brought a few points about disability and sexuality that I'd like to cover. What is sex and what part does it play in individuals' lives? I think there's two core elements to sex - the physical act, and intimacy. Both are important to most humans, and disabled people are no different. However, for many disabled people both are difficult to obtain. This can be due to the nature of their physical (dis)abilities, lack of opportunities, self-confidence, and most importantly, social stigma. Stigma plays a major part in the lives of disabled people because it can be seen in the reactions and faces of the non-disabled people that they interact with. For those born with a disability, the psychological affect of continually having to face and confront other peoples' actions and reactions, can be very detrimental to their "development". Just taking a random example, whilst teenagers are "fooling around" and learning about social interaction, about themselves, about sex, and everything else, a lot of disabled kids are not getting the same opportunities to do so. Even those who are "integrated" into society are often left out, or their peers are reluctant to include them when things go down that intimate route. As they reach adulthood, certain experiences that others take for granted become focal points for some disabled people. They haven't experienced it but keep hearing about. At the same time as everyone around them is being PC and telling them thatthey are "normal", they know this not the case. This can sap their self-confidence to the point that they are no longer willing to initiate any attempt at forming a relationship because of the continued fear of rejection. The rejection is the key to this whole mess. Even trying to get help and advice is usually not worth the effort. Disability Now magazine had a series of articles a few years ago after they asked readers about their experiences related to this thread. Well worth a read: http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/timetotalksex/index.htm
There Kyt has beaten me to it again and said much of what I wanted to say so much more succinctly! Adrian, whilst I don't necessarily disagree with anything that you have written, the question was "Is it ok for disabled people to visit brothels". All of your points could just as easily apply to non disabled people. It seemed to me that Kyt wasn't questioning the motive and its potential fulfilment, merely whether the same rules should apply. I am a conservative with a small "c" in that I believe that state intervention should be kept to a minimum. Whilst this is not an area of my own expertise, one reads that other countries manage to regulate this industry to at least ensure that those involved are there voluntarily, safe, clean and free of the criminal element. Is this not the case? Kyt the points that you raise equally apply to many non disabled people who for all sorts of reasons don't experience the "normal" route to intimacy or sex. I get a little uncomfortable with blaming media portrayal. Why do we have this constant need to label people. I wish I was convinced that it helped us to understand but I am inclined to believe that it is divisive. When do we lose that wonderful accepting innocence of childhood which does not differentiate between its peers even if a so called difference registers? Why can't we try to re-learn from them how to make our society more inclusive? It's probably too late for that to make any sense at all! Best wishes CTNana
CTNana, your post made perfect sense And I agree with both you and Adrian. Both of you have made valid points and it is true that many of the issues that affect disabled people affect non-disabled people too. However, whereas non-disabled people can visit a prostitute and its's seen as OK or a criminal offence, when it's discussed in relation to disability, it becomes an "issue". And I really hate that word. I also forget to mention an excellent book on this subject by one of the most outstanding disability researcher in the country: The Sexual Politics of Disability by Tom Shakespeare (I leant out my copy a couple of years ago and never got it back - must replace it at some point). However the book is available online from the Centre for Disability Studies: Contents Chapter One Chaper Two Chapter Three Chaper Four Chapter Five Chaper Six Chapter Seven Chapter Eight Appendices and Bibliography
It saddens me to watch this very same 'issue' (a bastard word that will rent itself out to any old cause) happening with one of my friends at uni. She's just turned 21 and is in a wheelchair. I treat her as i treat everyone else, but i stilll see people making adjustments for her. i shift a chair or a table for her chair to get through, but that is it. She goes out clubbing and is regularly drunk in charge of an electric wheelchair. Shes full of confidence and laughter. But she has had 2 relationships, both with a disbaled individual, and she finds it hard as she can only cuddle up to them if she is on the bed, and for that she needs the aid of her helper to get out of her chair and onto the bed. So should she be denied the chance of love and affection merely because she needs a little help to get close to someone? No. should a disabled individual be denied the use of a professional person for a little bit of physical gratification? No. That for me is the basis of it. The sociological and moralistic arguments can come later.
Kitty As to your friend: you say: "needs the help of her helper" to get onto the bed, so presumably she has a regular helper. Is this helper prepared to help her get on the bed if they know its for sex? Does it make a difference if its for sex with a committed partner or for a one-night stand? [I'm not asking you to say which of these two she has]. We're being very hypocritical if we don't allow her the same choices as anyone else. But if the helper is supplied by the NHS, or even by the Local Authority via a grant, then as an NHS employee myself I can see this leading to some very interesting discussions among the teams involved. There will be a lot of talk around "is she giving informed consent" [even if she is a university student - but especially if she's just come out of a club drunk]; "Does the 'Vulnerable Adult' policy apply"; "what happens if she changes her mind afterward and alleges rape?" All of which boil down to "Can we be sued"; "can we be accused of negligence/malpractice/abbetting sexual assualt?" etc etc. The same arguments that come into play if two clients have sex on a psychiatric ward. I suspect the rights of individual will take second place to the reputation of the NHS Trust or of the Nursing Profession, or to the Chairman having to explain events to the Daily Mail.
The helper is there to help her out of bed in a morning and into bed at night. But if she just wants to cuddle up to her boyfriend why should she not have their help? If its for sex, well that is up to the helper if she will help her out of the chair, after that its none of her business. If she is drunk then believe me there is no option for funny business. She passes out, in the chair usually. if she is drunk then I cannot see anyone willing to help her into that kind of situation. besides she is not stupid enough to go in for one night stands. If she is in a state of mind to make an informed decision, be it just a cuddle or more, then it is up to the helper on a personal note if she helps her out of the wheelchair and then leaves. Why should they be sued if they left the person they are helping in a safe situation where they are in a mental state to make that informed decision? its when they do something stupid that it gets sticky.
