YourSlave

Documentary, "can Have Sex Will Have Sex" Has Mumset Choking And Spitting In Anger

56 posts in this topic

The documentary is about disabled people, sex and sex workers.

 

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/1730197-Guardian-article-on-sex-workers-and-disabled-people

 

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

 

I truly hate this idea.

It fuels the myth that disabled people cannot find consenting lovers.

It promotes the sex industry and the idea that buying womens bodies to wank into is fine (the article says even disabled women go to female sex workers).

It promotes the idea that sex is more important than decency (i.e. not paying for the use of orifices).

 

There is no right to sex. There is no human right to sex. I find it scary that anyone, anywhere maintains that.

 

And basically every comment on the thread is along these lines :(

 

I agree noone has the right to do anything to another person without their consent. But if 2 adults are consenting and in private what's the problem?

Edited by YourSlave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am tempted to ask why they think that people shouldn't have a right to sex. What does she find so scary about that? I find it scary to think that my (and anyone else's) sex life is any of her business. The only sex life that is her business is her own.

 

I assume there will much Chardonnay drunk tonight in Mumsynetland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if 2 adults are consenting and in private what's the problem?

 

Mumsnet is the problem.

 

Actually nothing as far as I can see.  The internet is full of bigots who will push their views on everyone else until they are blue in the face and I'm starting to feel that Mumsnet harbours and breeds this type of attitude.

 

Whatever happened to the phrase "live and let live"?

 

Must go clean tea off laptop now... "There is no right to sex." had me spluttering, myself!  I have and maintain the right to have sex as and when I want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't classify Sex as a 'right', more a human need which can go unfulfilled, but when fulfilled can contribute massively to a person's well-being. I don't believe it should be demanded, but it can be agreed between two people. A person may require sex but not have a willing partner, another person may be more than willing to provide that pleasure by arrangement in exchange for payment - and in doing so provide that service in a controlled and safe manner for both parties. Sex often isn't safe and controlled which brings risks to either partner, minimising these risks can be mutually beneficial to all concerned whilst fulfilling this basic need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't classify Sex as a 'right', more a human need which can go unfulfilled, but when fulfilled can contribute massively to a person's well-being. I don't believe it should be demanded, but it can be agreed between two people. A person may require sex but not have a willing partner, another person may be more than willing to provide that pleasure by arrangement in exchange for payment - and in doing so provide that service in a controlled and safe manner for both parties. Sex often isn't safe and controlled which brings risks to either partner, minimising these risks can be mutually beneficial to all concerned whilst fulfilling this basic need.

Very nicely put

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't classify Sex as a 'right', more a human need which can go unfulfilled, but when fulfilled can contribute massively to a person's well-being. I don't believe it should be demanded, but it can be agreed between two people. A person may require sex but not have a willing partner, another person may be more than willing to provide that pleasure by arrangement in exchange for payment - and in doing so provide that service in a controlled and safe manner for both parties. Sex often isn't safe and controlled which brings risks to either partner, minimising these risks can be mutually beneficial to all concerned whilst fulfilling this basic need.

 A very clear, concise and intelligent point, Strawberry. You are clearly a menace to right-thinking people everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone who declares their horror at the thought of human sexuality being a core need for others is either:

1) getting satisfaction themselves and hasn't had to do 'without'

Or

2) one of those who is happy with a (relatively) celibate life. It's possible but not instinctively natural.

I make no judgement of their experiences/comfort zones but expect the same curtesy in return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone who declares their horror at the thought of human sexuality being a core need for others is either:

 

or just deeply repressed!

 

I just hope non of them are carers for a disabled person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 A very clear, concise and intelligent point, Strawberry. You are clearly a menace to right-thinking people everywhere.

Ta, just so happened I've been reading and thinking about something similar recently (human needs), tallied in nicely and no I didn't find it on Google. <_< Well actually I did find a helpful website on t'internet but those words definitely my own :cool: .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

or just deeply repressed!

I just hope non of them are carers for a disabled person.

I think those who are deeply sexually repressed live pseudo-celibate lives (holidays and high days only and very vanilla). Whether they're happy with that is their own business and nothing to do with me. I am, conversely, uninterested in their opinion of my sexual needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.............................And basically every comment on the thread is along these lines :(

 

I agree noone has the right to do anything to another person without their consent. But if 2 adults are consenting and in private what's the problem?

I'm sorry, YourSlave, but I don’t think you’ve read the thread at all. You’ve reacted to the opening post and a couple of quick replies, and because it’s on Mumsnet you assume all that follows is in a similar vein. Well, I admit they have form on this, but as I write this, if you follow the posts from the likes of Leithlurker, Spero, Xenia (not ours, I assume!) and others,  I think you’ll find a pretty balanced discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't classify Sex as a 'right', more a human need which can go unfulfilled, but when fulfilled can contribute massively to a person's well-being. I don't believe it should be demanded, but it can be agreed between two people. A person may require sex but not have a willing partner, another person may be more than willing to provide that pleasure by arrangement in exchange for payment - and in doing so provide that service in a controlled and safe manner for both parties. Sex often isn't safe and controlled which brings risks to either partner, minimising these risks can be mutually beneficial to all concerned whilst fulfilling this basic need.

Setting aside the flippancy of my earlier response, it's worth noting that the words "right" or "entitlement" do not appear at all in the article the mumsnetters are frothing about. The whole notion is something that they themselves have introduced, purely for the purposes of railing against it. It is, in short, what's known as a straw man.

 

I personally agree 100% with what you said: it may not be a right as such but it's definitely a need - and I think I'd go a bit further and argue that non-fulfilment of that need can be actively damaging to a person's well-being and quality of life. (Clearly the kind of notion that would be anathema to the mumsnet brigade or the Harmans of this world.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Setting aside the flippancy of my earlier response, it's worth noting that the words "right" or "entitlement" do not appear at all in the article the mumsnetters are frothing about. The whole notion is something that they themselves have introduced, purely for the purposes of railing against it. It is, in short, what's known as a straw man.

 

I personally agree 100% with what you said: it may not be a right as such but it's definitely a need - and I think I'd go a bit further and argue that non-fulfilment of that need can be actively damaging to a person's well-being and quality of life. (Clearly the kind of notion that would be anathema to the mumsnet brigade or the Harmans of this world.)

 

Amen to that and I pretty much said as much myself on the disabled thread here.  Strawberry put yet another excellent post.  Myself I'd rather go over there and tell them they are only posting there because they live frigid unfulfilled lives in the first place. :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amen to that and I pretty much said as much myself on the disabled thread here.  Strawberry put yet another excellent post.  Myself I'd rather go over there and tell them they are only posting there because they live frigid unfulfilled lives in the first place. :o

Please go and tell them! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mumsnet are a bunch of female wankers!!

 

Loving the way they have been seriously put in their place by the disabled woman x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One major problem is prostitution in itself, quite a few people have the preconceived idea that prostitutes have no respect for themselves - that their clients just walk all over them, are abusive and that we block out what they do to us because we want their cash so much.

 

People with these ideas usually do not know how a lot of sex workers operate, that they actually do take their safety and security seriously, and that 99% of their clients are not horrid and abusive. They are simply polite, genuine men who want something uncomplicated and pleasureable and we have the ability to offer this to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mumsnet is the problem.

 

Actually nothing as far as I can see.  The internet is full of bigots who will push their views on everyone else until they are blue in the face and I'm starting to feel that Mumsnet harbours and breeds this type of attitude.

 

Whatever happened to the phrase "live and let live"?

 

Must go clean tea off laptop now... "There is no right to sex." had me spluttering, myself!  I have and maintain the right to have sex as and when I want to.

 

100% correct, if you don't already hate or distrust your husband / partner /men in general before you join them they will convert you pretty quickly.

 

 

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A rather interesting and revealing quotation from halfway down the second page of this Mumsnet thread:

 

The disgust towards disabled men you mention is not disgust (if that is the right word) with their disabled-ness, but rather with their male-ness. This board will tend to hone in on male privilege first and foremost in any discussion. The exchange of money between an adult couple for sex will primarily be viewed as a man paying for a woman's time/body, rather than the other way round, hence the assumptions and attitudes that you have detected. The fact it might happen the other way round is a bit troublesome for feminist theory, I think.

 

I've taken it out of context here, obviously, but still...

Edited by Beauregard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mumsnet isn't that where women have their vagina stitched up and have all year round headaches then cut off their husband's balls for looking for it elsewhere (some people you just can't win, make up your flipping mind)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it isnt. It is where women who before they were married and had kids were promiscuous tarts who got pissed at week-ends got laid and love it, then got older, married, had kids, lost their figure, developed a complex as a result and can't satisfy their man so whine about escorts being there to keep men sane, and resent the fact that they wish instead of being slappers in their youth, they should have been escorts themselves so now like to criticise ladies who have a bit more about them

mumsnet isn't that where women have their vagina stitched up and have all year round headaches then cut off their husband's balls for looking for it elsewhere (some people you just can't win, make up your flipping mind)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In The Netherlands certain disabled people get an allowance from the government to pay for sex. I think it's where their situation severely hinders their possibility of meeting partners elsewhere. And like most things in The Netherlands, they just get on with it discretely and no one cares.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't classify Sex as a 'right', more a human need which can go unfulfilled, but when fulfilled can contribute massively to a person's well-being. I don't believe it should be demanded, but it can be agreed between two people. A person may require sex but not have a willing partner, another person may be more than willing to provide that pleasure by arrangement in exchange for payment - and in doing so provide that service in a controlled and safe manner for both parties. Sex often isn't safe and controlled which brings risks to either partner, minimising these risks can be mutually beneficial to all concerned whilst fulfilling this basic need.

 

Oh Strawberry - a concise and perfect articulation - I think I'm in love (again)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ok xxxx

No it isnt. It is where women who before they were married and had kids were promiscuous tarts who got pissed at week-ends got laid and love it, then got older, married, had kids, lost their figure, developed a complex as a result and can't satisfy their man so whine about escorts being there to keep men sane, and resent the fact that they wish instead of being slappers in their youth, they should have been escorts themselves so now like to criticise ladies who have a bit more about them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50 years ago if a woman wanted to spite her neighbour, she threw mud at her washing. now we have mumsnet, and a lot more unhappy women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now