There is no such thing as the right to sex

I see in the UK a court has ruled that it is lawful for carers of severely disabled men to help source prostitutes and aid the disabled men to achieve paid sexual intercourse with a prostituted woman – including helping that interaction to actually take place, including aiding physically facilitating the act.

Let me make this clear – the court in an act of absolute misogyny ruled it is legal for a carer of a disabled man to source a prostitute, and help that man have sex with her.

I am deeply saddened, but hardly surprised. Men seem to think they have the right to sex, the right to women’s bodies, the right to a relationship. The incel movement is insistent that access to the inside of women’s bodies is a human right, in a disgusting display of entitlement. This is a slither away from legalizing rape. Many of these women are forced into prostitution by being sex traded or pimped, others are the victims of child sex abuse, addicted to drugs and let down by a system that fails to help them. They are herded into being unwilling victims of male sexuality by their poverty, damage and desperation.

What about the carers? Are these workers going to be forced into the sex trade too, by being required to source women for these men to abuse? If they refuse to source or aid the transaction will they lose their jobs? What if they do not feel comfortable maneuvering bodies into place to aid the contact? What if they find this act deeply upsetting? Who is going to clean up after the fact? Why should carers be forced to clean up bodily emissions?

Listen boys, if you can’t find a woman to willingly sleep with you, then that is that. Women do not owe you sex. They do not owe you access to their bodies. Sex is not a human right, but the freedom not to have sex with men if you don’t want to sure is.

If an individual is incapable of forming sexual relationships alone, in the test case over the pond that I mentioned, the male is mentally disabled, surely then he is also incapable of fathoming whether such behavior is safe or beneficial to him. By seeing women as things to be purchased that make him feel good, as objects not people, this surely is not safe or decent, let alone psychologically beneficial to him!

Disabled people who are mentally capable, but have physical difficulties are perfectly capable of forming consensual relationships, and moreover it is disablist to suggest that disabled people cannot form meaningful relationships and have to pay for sex. This ruling is more misogyny, more patriarchy. It fails to see women as people and instead paints us as commodities for men to buy and sell. Just as damaging is the forcing of carers of the disabled into the sex trade.

The last thing society should be doing is pushing the idea that men are entitled to sex. Men do not need any more encouragement down that path. SEX IS NOT A RIGHT.

I firmly believe the Nordic model in criminalizing the buyers and decriminalizing the prostitutes is the way forward, not this destigmatizing of the purchase of human bodies by other humans, human bodies that are forced into being sold by either circumstance or downright sex slavery.

Most prostituted women work for pimps and are not free to leave, for them to then also be forced to have sex with men with such complex needs who may not have the emotional development necessary to see them as human beings, or else have physical needs which require a third party present, is downright rape. Any paid sex is rape. All of it is transactional. All of it is abuse. All of is is misogyny.

My heart goes out to my British sisters, there is such a huge fight ahead of them. When women’s bodies are seen as just another commodity that men are entitled to buy and be helped to procure, and the flawed patriarchal legal system aids yet again in the abuse of women, I fear the feminist fight ahead is going to be a long one.

Leave a Reply