*Sex Should be Provided by Govt. for AS/other Disabled*

Post Reply New Topic

Does it? How? You mean if you slip it into a woman's drink?

No, coke wouldn't knock someone out as it's a stimulant (unless you try and make them OD).

I'd assume that if you are socializing with female cocaine users, you are likely to get the opportunity to have sex with them. What am I talking about, I did socialize with female cokeheads... yeah, they're sluts.

That is the impression I get from the "Love and Dating" forum, which is why I started thinking about all this in the first place.

Apparently "touch" is increasingly recognised as a crucial part of health, ( mental and physical ), for many people. There are two kinds; regular supportive/loving touch, ( from a partner/friend or even a therapist ), and sexual activity, especially with a "loved one", because of the oxytocin released.

Here is quite a good article on the subject:

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 19462.html

NB. Hope that link doesn't stretch the page out; it looks alright on my browser.

Some excerpts from another article:


It seems to me that some sort of ( free or inexpensive ) physical/touch therapy provided as part of government funded health services would be perfectly reasonable. Although specifically sexual activity does apparently have its own significant effect on men's health regular sustained touch therapy would be an improvement on the current situation, in which many/most men depend on their success in the mating game for a dose of "human touch".

.

Sarah Palin?


Hmmm, well, there are people who will always claim to fight for their rights, the right of something, gay marriage, women's rights, etc. Probably some would argue that getting laid to be a right, which I would disagree, and they would think that the government should provide said 'right' for the physical, mental and social disabled.

I agree with others who have said that sex is not necessary for survival, anyone can live a lifetime without sex and survive, there are always alternatives, besides, there are other things you can put your mind to.

lol... what a load of crap. It's not like it's impossible for someone on the spectrum to get laid. I can see you having a case for like cerebral paulsy, either way, it's crap.

It's not like it's crucial to anyone's health.

Did you read the article I linked, ( two posts before yours ) which talks about studies showing how crucial human touch, if not sex, is in fact for health?
.

So it is exercise and a good diet, besides, you can masturbate (which would be the crucial on health, at least for men that I know of), I believe everyone is capable of that, you don't need to be master on socialization for that

I wanna say I read a study done in Denmark about how there were "home-health" nurses who would go and sexually please men who weren't able to function socially. Apparently it was some sort of success, so I support it.

That's true, so long as people continue to eat things which cause heart attacks, anxiety and depression, hypoglycaemia and diabetes, obesity, etc, and not exercise or get out into the sun enough each day, so that they end up suffering from cardiovascular problems and increased stress, and Vitamin D deficiency, etc, etc, etc, the government shouldn't provide any kind of therapy or medical treatment for people, at least not at low prices. Because their ill health is all their fault ... they should just get their act together.

Edit: NB. Heavy sarcasm, for anyone who didn't notice.

.

Last edited by ouinon on 16 Dec 2008, 6:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

And for someone who is hyper-sensitive, physical contact can be one long heart-attack inducing stress-fest.

Absolutely.

Which is why I still think a lot of the depression, despair, low-self-esteem, etc which many are experiencing, ( and expressing on WP ), as a result of not finding a sexual partner, is likely to be the result of social pressure, the widespread message that if aren't in a couple there is something wrong with you, rather than because they aren't getting enough human touch, because so many AS do find social contact/company exhausting, and, as you say, human touch itself can, ( very often ), be problematic/too intense for comfort or pleasure.

.

It seems to be something which makes the whole experience more intense, perhaps adding to the reason why Aspie relationships can fall down so badly.

I agree that many present social forces (including religion) would not permit the subject. But this subject is an ideological one, thus comes under the jurisdiction of ideological forces and not social forces, and since ideological forces have higher priority than social forces (social force is about allowing mass community to survive, whereas ideological force is about harnessing civilisation in the manner most beneficial to the species, it's individuals, necessities and it's environment), allowing religion to dictate ideological policy is wrong.

I'm for it, as a theory.

Who would provide the sex, and how often? who would fit the bill? what degree of disability would be necessary to qualify? how do we measure and quantify the effects (to see if it is actually working)?