My first thought is that it's ok as long as there is consent but then the issue with full servicing is the potential for children which then leads to child support/rearing, etc. They need to keep it to heavy petting and make sure everybody is tested for STD's especially herpes. <shudder>Ok, I was on board until dude said he took his clothes off and got into bed with the disabled girl. They said it was just masturbation but it seems like a "full" service
I didn't watch the video in the OP, but there was a movie based on a true story released about this a few years ago called The Sessions. It was about a disabled man who hired a sex surrogate so he could lose his virginity. It was an interesting movie.Hmm, I get it tbh. Being disabled doesn't mean that you cease to be a sexual being.
This is such a touchy subject. I was listening to a podcast recently about two disabled people who got together, ended up having a kid because they had both been told they couldn't have kids. They were very candid about sex and how important it is to their relationship. It is definitely a very real need that is often overlooked. This service though, seems like it could be problematic in a few ways.
Not necessarily, usually the severally disabled are barely making ends meet and get a lot of state assistance. I am speaking of ones that have motor impairment or learning impairment. They live in state run facilities because families give them away in a sense, or they can be to much to handle if older and have elderly parents, etc.I am sure disabled who can afford it hire prostitutes for their needs.
What makes this different is that the "service" is provided by volunteers. I suspect those volunteers get some sexual kick in doing this, they might have a fetish about sex with disabled.
Me tooI'm clearly a 12 year old.
As they are simply performing a service and aren't in a sexual relationship with their clients, I wonder why those utilizing the service didn't hire prostitutes?
I remember an episode of Secret Diary of a Call Girl where Belle is hired by a father who wanted her to give his disabled son his first sexual experience. It ended up being a pretty depressing episode and really brought to light the sexual issues disabled people face. And it's even worse for disabled women.
That's interesting, I wonder why. I thought it would be the other way around.
I remember either reading a book or watching a documentary on the subject for a class in college, and the general consensus was that women naturally gravitate towards the caretaker role so they have less hang-ups about being in a relationship with a disabled man. Able-bodied men, on the other hand, are generally not as open to the idea of being with a disabled woman.
I have no issue with it but I'm just curious why this isn't considered sex work but "charity." Is it free?