Total Posts:38|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Obamacare: Free sex for the disabled

Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:39:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
The topic I would like to discuss is whether Obamacare should pay for the disabled to have sex with hookers. I would debate this, but can't find time to at the moment. This article may start as a good jumping off point for this topic- http://m.mic.com...

Quote from article:

"But why sex? Besides the obvious pleasure, intercourse is a form of mental and physical therapy. In psychology, many experts cite its ability to fulfill needs for intimacy, validation, stress relief or stronger self-esteem. In health circles, it's a known antidote to stress and even pain management. Citing this research and personal testimonies, social workers, caretakers and affected individuals are calling for increased access to sex services for citizens with disabilities."
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:58:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:39:31 AM, Wylted wrote:
The topic I would like to discuss is whether Obamacare should pay for the disabled to have sex with hookers. I would debate this, but can't find time to at the moment. This article may start as a good jumping off point for this topic- http://m.mic.com...

Quote from article:

"But why sex? Besides the obvious pleasure, intercourse is a form of mental and physical therapy. In psychology, many experts cite its ability to fulfill needs for intimacy, validation, stress relief or stronger self-esteem. In health circles, it's a known antidote to stress and even pain management. Citing this research and personal testimonies, social workers, caretakers and affected individuals are calling for increased access to sex services for citizens with disabilities."

I don't see why it would, when Medicare does not pay for sex pills.
My work here is, finally, done.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:02:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:58:30 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:39:31 AM, Wylted wrote:
The topic I would like to discuss is whether Obamacare should pay for the disabled to have sex with hookers. I would debate this, but can't find time to at the moment. This article may start as a good jumping off point for this topic- http://m.mic.com...

Quote from article:

"But why sex? Besides the obvious pleasure, intercourse is a form of mental and physical therapy. In psychology, many experts cite its ability to fulfill needs for intimacy, validation, stress relief or stronger self-esteem. In health circles, it's a known antidote to stress and even pain management. Citing this research and personal testimonies, social workers, caretakers and affected individuals are calling for increased access to sex services for citizens with disabilities."

I don't see why it would, when Medicare does not pay for sex pills.

I'm starting to think that it should. I'm against it's existence, but if it does exist, it should atleast be of some practical use, such as helping me to get my rocks off.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:05:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 4:02:44 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:58:30 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:39:31 AM, Wylted wrote:
The topic I would like to discuss is whether Obamacare should pay for the disabled to have sex with hookers. I would debate this, but can't find time to at the moment. This article may start as a good jumping off point for this topic- http://m.mic.com...

Quote from article:

"But why sex? Besides the obvious pleasure, intercourse is a form of mental and physical therapy. In psychology, many experts cite its ability to fulfill needs for intimacy, validation, stress relief or stronger self-esteem. In health circles, it's a known antidote to stress and even pain management. Citing this research and personal testimonies, social workers, caretakers and affected individuals are calling for increased access to sex services for citizens with disabilities."

I don't see why it would, when Medicare does not pay for sex pills.

I'm starting to think that it should. I'm against it's existence, but if it does exist, it should atleast be of some practical use, such as helping me to get my rocks off.

I think keeping you full of other pills that are keeping you alive is quite practical.
So many prescriptions do I see....
My work here is, finally, done.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:09:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
"I think keeping you full of other pills that are keeping you alive is quite practical.
So many prescriptions do I see...."

Oh, but there is a difference between living and surviving, and the field of medicine decided years ago that quality of life is as important as quantity of life. This is why there is such a large focus on pain management at the moment. Given the fact that medicine also acknowledges the importance of life quality, and sex is so important to life quality, should it not also be a concern right up there with prolonging life and managing pain?
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 12:12:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 4:09:59 AM, Wylted wrote:
"I think keeping you full of other pills that are keeping you alive is quite practical.
So many prescriptions do I see...."

Oh, but there is a difference between living and surviving, and the field of medicine decided years ago that quality of life is as important as quantity of life. This is why there is such a large focus on pain management at the moment. Given the fact that medicine also acknowledges the importance of life quality, and sex is so important to life quality, should it not also be a concern right up there with prolonging life and managing pain?

Quality of life is in reference to end of life and chronic pain.
We don't expect doctors to prescribe patients with medications they want, just because they want them. There still needs to be a medical reason.

Now, I suppose I am confused by what you mean by Obamacare. If you are referring to what private insurers cover by choice, that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about what the government mandates/covers directly.
If it covers sex, then why not hair growth? Why not vitamins? Why not protein shakes so I can lift, bro?
My work here is, finally, done.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 12:48:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 12:12:09 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:09:59 AM, Wylted wrote:
"I think keeping you full of other pills that are keeping you alive is quite practical.
So many prescriptions do I see...."

Oh, but there is a difference between living and surviving, and the field of medicine decided years ago that quality of life is as important as quantity of life. This is why there is such a large focus on pain management at the moment. Given the fact that medicine also acknowledges the importance of life quality, and sex is so important to life quality, should it not also be a concern right up there with prolonging life and managing pain?

Quality of life is in reference to end of life and chronic pain.
We don't expect doctors to prescribe patients with medications they want, just because they want them. There still needs to be a medical reason.

Now, I suppose I am confused by what you mean by Obamacare. If you are referring to what private insurers cover by choice, that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about what the government mandates/covers directly.
If it covers sex, then why not hair growth? Why not vitamins? Why not protein shakes so I can lift, bro?

The word Obamacare was just click bait. Get with the program Khaos. This is about whether health insurers should cover my tab for prostitutes if I become disabled, and giving people what they want, does not necessarily or even usually equate to increasing the quality of their life. I pull head coming in asking for free pills, is not bettered by getting free pills. However I am bettered by getting free vagina.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:00:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 12:48:52 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 12:12:09 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:09:59 AM, Wylted wrote:
"I think keeping you full of other pills that are keeping you alive is quite practical.
So many prescriptions do I see...."

Oh, but there is a difference between living and surviving, and the field of medicine decided years ago that quality of life is as important as quantity of life. This is why there is such a large focus on pain management at the moment. Given the fact that medicine also acknowledges the importance of life quality, and sex is so important to life quality, should it not also be a concern right up there with prolonging life and managing pain?

Quality of life is in reference to end of life and chronic pain.
We don't expect doctors to prescribe patients with medications they want, just because they want them. There still needs to be a medical reason.

Now, I suppose I am confused by what you mean by Obamacare. If you are referring to what private insurers cover by choice, that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about what the government mandates/covers directly.
If it covers sex, then why not hair growth? Why not vitamins? Why not protein shakes so I can lift, bro?

The word Obamacare was just click bait. Get with the program Khaos. This is about whether health insurers should cover my tab for prostitutes if I become disabled, and giving people what they want, does not necessarily or even usually equate to increasing the quality of their life. I pull head coming in asking for free pills, is not bettered by getting free pills. However I am bettered by getting free vagina.

That's great.
Care to make an analogy that makes sense with the current system?
Even if you believe that quality of life equates to enabling the ability to have sex, it is still a far cry from literally supplying it.

To have this, obviously, there needs to be many changes, but explain your theory that a non-medical service should be supplied and/or facilitated by insurance.
Quality of life =/= medical procedure/service, even if doctors are concerned about it.
My work here is, finally, done.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:39:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Yes! All the statistics on sex show that even when they're in romantic relationships, a large proportion of women are not achieving regular sexual satisfaction and actually it's a disgrace. There should be fit trained specialists available for all, and satisfaction should be a citizenship right.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:41:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:00:47 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/29/2015 12:48:52 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 12:12:09 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:09:59 AM, Wylted wrote:
"I think keeping you full of other pills that are keeping you alive is quite practical.
So many prescriptions do I see...."

Oh, but there is a difference between living and surviving, and the field of medicine decided years ago that quality of life is as important as quantity of life. This is why there is such a large focus on pain management at the moment. Given the fact that medicine also acknowledges the importance of life quality, and sex is so important to life quality, should it not also be a concern right up there with prolonging life and managing pain?

Quality of life is in reference to end of life and chronic pain.
We don't expect doctors to prescribe patients with medications they want, just because they want them. There still needs to be a medical reason.

Now, I suppose I am confused by what you mean by Obamacare. If you are referring to what private insurers cover by choice, that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about what the government mandates/covers directly.
If it covers sex, then why not hair growth? Why not vitamins? Why not protein shakes so I can lift, bro?

The word Obamacare was just click bait. Get with the program Khaos. This is about whether health insurers should cover my tab for prostitutes if I become disabled, and giving people what they want, does not necessarily or even usually equate to increasing the quality of their life. I pull head coming in asking for free pills, is not bettered by getting free pills. However I am bettered by getting free vagina.

That's great.
Care to make an analogy that makes sense with the current system?
Even if you believe that quality of life equates to enabling the ability to have sex, it is still a far cry from literally supplying it.

To have this, obviously, there needs to be many changes, but explain your theory that a non-medical service should be supplied and/or facilitated by insurance.
Quality of life =/= medical procedure/service, even if doctors are concerned about it.

Well recognizing physical pain as medical is arbitrary. Where is the dividing line between medical and non medical? And since medical insurance usually covers the psychological health of an individual, and sex is really great for psychological health, what is the difference between paying for sex and paying for a psychologist?
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:43:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:39:51 PM, Garbanza wrote:
Yes! All the statistics on sex show that even when they're in romantic relationships, a large proportion of women are not achieving regular sexual satisfaction and actually it's a disgrace. There should be fit trained specialists available for all, and satisfaction should be a citizenship right.

I feel so bad for women, that so many men are clueless on how to satisfy them. I almost feel as if I have a moral obligation to satisfy as many women as possible to make up for it.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:44:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:39:51 PM, Garbanza wrote:
Yes! All the statistics on sex show that even when they're in romantic relationships, a large proportion of women are not achieving regular sexual satisfaction and actually it's a disgrace. There should be fit trained specialists available for all, and satisfaction should be a citizenship right.

You can tell when somebody has a significant other that is bad at satisfying their sexual needs, those women walk around with bad attitudes, while my woman constantly has a smile on her face
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:51:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:44:21 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:39:51 PM, Garbanza wrote:
Yes! All the statistics on sex show that even when they're in romantic relationships, a large proportion of women are not achieving regular sexual satisfaction and actually it's a disgrace. There should be fit trained specialists available for all, and satisfaction should be a citizenship right.

You can tell when somebody has a significant other that is bad at satisfying their sexual needs, those women walk around with bad attitudes, while my woman constantly has a smile on her face

You could retrain as a specialist maybe.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:58:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:51:02 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:44:21 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:39:51 PM, Garbanza wrote:
Yes! All the statistics on sex show that even when they're in romantic relationships, a large proportion of women are not achieving regular sexual satisfaction and actually it's a disgrace. There should be fit trained specialists available for all, and satisfaction should be a citizenship right.

You can tell when somebody has a significant other that is bad at satisfying their sexual needs, those women walk around with bad attitudes, while my woman constantly has a smile on her face

You could retrain as a specialist maybe.

As long as I get to pick my clientele. I don't want to have to perform oral sex on Rosie O'donnel or anything
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:03:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:58:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:51:02 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:44:21 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:39:51 PM, Garbanza wrote:
Yes! All the statistics on sex show that even when they're in romantic relationships, a large proportion of women are not achieving regular sexual satisfaction and actually it's a disgrace. There should be fit trained specialists available for all, and satisfaction should be a citizenship right.

You can tell when somebody has a significant other that is bad at satisfying their sexual needs, those women walk around with bad attitudes, while my woman constantly has a smile on her face

You could retrain as a specialist maybe.

As long as I get to pick my clientele. I don't want to have to perform oral sex on Rosie O'donnel or anything

Maybe you could charge more for challenging clients. Disability shouldn't be a barrier to sexual satisfaction, and so citizens shouldn't be excluded from the service because of their physical characteristics.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:06:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 4:03:54 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:58:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:51:02 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:44:21 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:39:51 PM, Garbanza wrote:
Yes! All the statistics on sex show that even when they're in romantic relationships, a large proportion of women are not achieving regular sexual satisfaction and actually it's a disgrace. There should be fit trained specialists available for all, and satisfaction should be a citizenship right.

You can tell when somebody has a significant other that is bad at satisfying their sexual needs, those women walk around with bad attitudes, while my woman constantly has a smile on her face

You could retrain as a specialist maybe.

As long as I get to pick my clientele. I don't want to have to perform oral sex on Rosie O'donnel or anything

Maybe you could charge more for challenging clients. Disability shouldn't be a barrier to sexual satisfaction, and so citizens shouldn't be excluded from the service because of their physical characteristics.

You make a good point.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:06:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Oh wait. Charging more for ugly clients is probably against the law. Sorry. You'd just have to suck it up. Be a professional about it.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 5:55:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 4:06:35 PM, Garbanza wrote:
Oh wait. Charging more for ugly clients is probably against the law. Sorry. You'd just have to suck it up. Be a professional about it.

I don't mind ugly so much, but it's the gruesome Imm concerned about.
BlackFlags
Posts: 904
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 6:17:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:39:31 AM, Wylted wrote:
The topic I would like to discuss is whether Obamacare should pay for the disabled to have sex with hookers. I would debate this, but can't find time to at the moment. This article may start as a good jumping off point for this topic- http://m.mic.com...

Quote from article:

"But why sex? Besides the obvious pleasure, intercourse is a form of mental and physical therapy. In psychology, many experts cite its ability to fulfill needs for intimacy, validation, stress relief or stronger self-esteem. In health circles, it's a known antidote to stress and even pain management. Citing this research and personal testimonies, social workers, caretakers and affected individuals are calling for increased access to sex services for citizens with disabilities."

Obamacare doesn't actually pay for anything.

A health benefit to the disabled would likely fall under medicare.
MackTurpen
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:01:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Is there any way in hell that we can take into consideration that maybe disabled women would like to also have these benefits......... also the affordable health care act in for HEALTH CARE and not sexual pleasure......... third why the heck are you all advocating for the idea of having sex trafficking legalized!?!?! this strips women of their human ontology and makes them lose their basic human rights. you know how your boss can make you write a report for last years sales?? well Human sex workers bosses make them have sex with people they don't want to have sex with. how can you all be so short sighted not to see that other human beings are seriously affected by this idea.......
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 10:29:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:39:31 AM, Wylted wrote:
The topic I would like to discuss is whether Obamacare should pay for the disabled to have sex with hookers. I would debate this, but can't find time to at the moment. This article may start as a good jumping off point for this topic- http://m.mic.com...

Quote from article:

"But why sex? Besides the obvious pleasure, intercourse is a form of mental and physical therapy. In psychology, many experts cite its ability to fulfill needs for intimacy, validation, stress relief or stronger self-esteem. In health circles, it's a known antidote to stress and even pain management. Citing this research and personal testimonies, social workers, caretakers and affected individuals are calling for increased access to sex services for citizens with disabilities."

The alleged benefits of 'intimacy, validation... or stronger self-esteem' that come from ordinary sex would likely not be present with hooker-sex. Intimacy is emotional as well as physical, and no man is going to feel emotionally intimate with someone that is only interacting with them because the Government paid them to.

Validation from sex largely comes from the feeling that one has 'still got it' and is still able to attract and bed women. People feel validated because it isn't particularly easy (despite what people say) to sleep with an attractive woman, and hence they are proud of their achievement. But sleeping with a hooker isn't an achievement at all. So there is no source of validation.

Similarly, self-esteem from sex comes from the aspect of appreciating that an attractive woman finds you attractive enough to choose to have sex with you. Again, this simply isn't the case with hookers.

All in all, I struggle to see how serial usage of prostitutes will do anything to help disabled people. Furthermore, if the government pays for this, then it would be a blatant endorsement or a harmful and (rightfully) illegal industry.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 10:59:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 10:29:19 PM, Philocat wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:39:31 AM, Wylted wrote:
The topic I would like to discuss is whether Obamacare should pay for the disabled to have sex with hookers. I would debate this, but can't find time to at the moment. This article may start as a good jumping off point for this topic- http://m.mic.com...

Quote from article:

"But why sex? Besides the obvious pleasure, intercourse is a form of mental and physical therapy. In psychology, many experts cite its ability to fulfill needs for intimacy, validation, stress relief or stronger self-esteem. In health circles, it's a known antidote to stress and even pain management. Citing this research and personal testimonies, social workers, caretakers and affected individuals are calling for increased access to sex services for citizens with disabilities."

The alleged benefits of 'intimacy, validation... or stronger self-esteem' that come from ordinary sex would likely not be present with hooker-sex. Intimacy is emotional as well as physical, and no man is going to feel emotionally intimate with someone that is only interacting with them because the Government paid them to.

Validation from sex largely comes from the feeling that one has 'still got it' and is still able to attract and bed women. People feel validated because it isn't particularly easy (despite what people say) to sleep with an attractive woman, and hence they are proud of their achievement. But sleeping with a hooker isn't an achievement at all. So there is no source of validation.

Similarly, self-esteem from sex comes from the aspect of appreciating that an attractive woman finds you attractive enough to choose to have sex with you. Again, this simply isn't the case with hookers.

All in all, I struggle to see how serial usage of prostitutes will do anything to help disabled people. Furthermore, if the government pays for this, then it would be a blatant endorsement or a harmful and (rightfully) illegal industry.

I think you have a misunderstanding of what any prostitute who isn't working a corner does. A lot of these guys really are just hiring them for a form of intimacy. The girl cuddles or has a deep emotional conversation with them. This isn't a myth, go email a few high end hookers.
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 11:50:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 10:59:39 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 10:29:19 PM, Philocat wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:39:31 AM, Wylted wrote:
The topic I would like to discuss is whether Obamacare should pay for the disabled to have sex with hookers. I would debate this, but can't find time to at the moment. This article may start as a good jumping off point for this topic- http://m.mic.com...

Quote from article:

"But why sex? Besides the obvious pleasure, intercourse is a form of mental and physical therapy. In psychology, many experts cite its ability to fulfill needs for intimacy, validation, stress relief or stronger self-esteem. In health circles, it's a known antidote to stress and even pain management. Citing this research and personal testimonies, social workers, caretakers and affected individuals are calling for increased access to sex services for citizens with disabilities."

The alleged benefits of 'intimacy, validation... or stronger self-esteem' that come from ordinary sex would likely not be present with hooker-sex. Intimacy is emotional as well as physical, and no man is going to feel emotionally intimate with someone that is only interacting with them because the Government paid them to.

Validation from sex largely comes from the feeling that one has 'still got it' and is still able to attract and bed women. People feel validated because it isn't particularly easy (despite what people say) to sleep with an attractive woman, and hence they are proud of their achievement. But sleeping with a hooker isn't an achievement at all. So there is no source of validation.

Similarly, self-esteem from sex comes from the aspect of appreciating that an attractive woman finds you attractive enough to choose to have sex with you. Again, this simply isn't the case with hookers.

All in all, I struggle to see how serial usage of prostitutes will do anything to help disabled people. Furthermore, if the government pays for this, then it would be a blatant endorsement or a harmful and (rightfully) illegal industry.

I think you have a misunderstanding of what any prostitute who isn't working a corner does. A lot of these guys really are just hiring them for a form of intimacy. The girl cuddles or has a deep emotional conversation with them. This isn't a myth, go email a few high end hookers.

To an extent, some intimacy can be gained yes. But it would be far inferior to being intimate with someone who generally likes you and isn't just being paid to pretend.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 12:40:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
To an extent, some intimacy can be gained yes. But it would be far inferior to being intimate with someone who generally likes you and isn't just being paid to pretend.

Yes obviously, but handicapped people sometimes have a hard time finding anyone to gain that type of intimacy with. (Depending on the handicap) So what about the fact that if the best option is available, they can still satisfy that basic human need on some level, if this service exists.
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 4:02:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 12:40:40 PM, Wylted wrote:
To an extent, some intimacy can be gained yes. But it would be far inferior to being intimate with someone who generally likes you and isn't just being paid to pretend.

Yes obviously, but handicapped people sometimes have a hard time finding anyone to gain that type of intimacy with. (Depending on the handicap) So what about the fact that if the best option is available, they can still satisfy that basic human need on some level, if this service exists.

Even if some vague resemblance of intimacy can be replicated by prostitutes, it still doesn't justify the government spending tax money on it. It would also involve the government endorsing the prostitution industry.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 5:04:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:58:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:51:02 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:44:21 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:39:51 PM, Garbanza wrote:
Yes! All the statistics on sex show that even when they're in romantic relationships, a large proportion of women are not achieving regular sexual satisfaction and actually it's a disgrace. There should be fit trained specialists available for all, and satisfaction should be a citizenship right.

You can tell when somebody has a significant other that is bad at satisfying their sexual needs, those women walk around with bad attitudes, while my woman constantly has a smile on her face

You could retrain as a specialist maybe.

As long as I get to pick my clientele. I don't want to have to perform oral sex on Rosie O'donnel or anything

ohh Rosie O'Donnell. She's the one that Trump hates!
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 7:45:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 5:04:06 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:58:27 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:51:02 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:44:21 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:39:51 PM, Garbanza wrote:
Yes! All the statistics on sex show that even when they're in romantic relationships, a large proportion of women are not achieving regular sexual satisfaction and actually it's a disgrace. There should be fit trained specialists available for all, and satisfaction should be a citizenship right.

You can tell when somebody has a significant other that is bad at satisfying their sexual needs, those women walk around with bad attitudes, while my woman constantly has a smile on her face

You could retrain as a specialist maybe.

As long as I get to pick my clientele. I don't want to have to perform oral sex on Rosie O'donnel or anything

ohh Rosie O'Donnell. She's the one that Trump hates!

Who doesn't hate her?
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 7:53:17 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/30/2015 12:40:40 PM, Wylted wrote:
To an extent, some intimacy can be gained yes. But it would be far inferior to being intimate with someone who generally likes you and isn't just being paid to pretend.

Yes obviously, but handicapped people sometimes have a hard time finding anyone to gain that type of intimacy with. (Depending on the handicap) So what about the fact that if the best option is available, they can still satisfy that basic human need on some level, if this service exists.

But ugly people also have a hard time finding a partner to be intimate with, often moreso than disabled people (who can be very attractive). Given your reasoning, wouldn't that entail that ugly people should also get their prostitutes paid for by the government?
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 9:19:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/31/2015 7:53:17 AM, Philocat wrote:
At 10/30/2015 12:40:40 PM, Wylted wrote:
To an extent, some intimacy can be gained yes. But it would be far inferior to being intimate with someone who generally likes you and isn't just being paid to pretend.

Yes obviously, but handicapped people sometimes have a hard time finding anyone to gain that type of intimacy with. (Depending on the handicap) So what about the fact that if the best option is available, they can still satisfy that basic human need on some level, if this service exists.

But ugly people also have a hard time finding a partner to be intimate with, often moreso than disabled people (who can be very attractive). Given your reasoning, wouldn't that entail that ugly people should also get their prostitutes paid for by the government?

No, my brother and his wife are extremely ugly and have found love. Ugly people have no problem finding love, but the guy who has elephantitus all over his face, will often struggle to find sex and need it paid for.
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 6:52:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/31/2015 9:19:34 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/31/2015 7:53:17 AM, Philocat wrote:
At 10/30/2015 12:40:40 PM, Wylted wrote:
To an extent, some intimacy can be gained yes. But it would be far inferior to being intimate with someone who generally likes you and isn't just being paid to pretend.

Yes obviously, but handicapped people sometimes have a hard time finding anyone to gain that type of intimacy with. (Depending on the handicap) So what about the fact that if the best option is available, they can still satisfy that basic human need on some level, if this service exists.

But ugly people also have a hard time finding a partner to be intimate with, often moreso than disabled people (who can be very attractive). Given your reasoning, wouldn't that entail that ugly people should also get their prostitutes paid for by the government?

No, my brother and his wife are extremely ugly and have found love. Ugly people have no problem finding love, but the guy who has elephantitus all over his face, will often struggle to find sex and need it paid for.

Well, there are disabled women probably in the same position as disabled men. Same as is the case with ugly people.