This essay first appeared on Cliterati on January 27th; I have modified it only slightly so as to fit the format of this blog. I figured it might be a good idea to republish at least some of my Cliterati essays here so they can be discovered by future readers in the index.
Few people would deny the importance of skin-to-skin contact in the psychological, emotional and even physical health of the newborn infant; study after study since Harlow’s seminal work with Rhesus monkeys in the 1950s have demonstrated that even if all of a baby’s physical needs are met clinically and dispassionately, it will not thrive in the same way as one whose bare flesh is pressed against that of its mother. Indeed, in some cases an infant deprived of this contact will actually sicken and lose weight. As time goes on, the need becomes less critical; adults can survive without it for much longer periods than babies, and some people manage to go years without touching the naked skin of another person. But though an adult deprived of such contact is not likely to die, the effect can still be quite harmful; despite the denials of prudes and others who wish to control sexuality, physical intimacy with others is indeed a basic human need, and denying people the right to obtain it from consenting partners is a cruelty verging on barbarism.
In some countries, these statements would be wholly uncontroversial and it would be difficult to find a health professional, lay person or even politician who disagreed with them. But in others (especially the United States and United Kingdom) the idea of sex as more closely akin to food, sleep and shelter than to television watching is a politically unpopular one, and I won’t be at all surprised to see comments insisting that sex is no more vital to health than candy. I’m afraid I must politely disagree with them in advance; even in my private life I’ve seen too many examples of the erratic behavior of men long deprived of sex to ignore it, and as a sex worker I was privileged to be a regular witness to the profound restorative effects of simple human touch. The power was demonstrated to me most dramatically after Hurricane Katrina, when the male population in New Orleans outnumbered the female by a substantial margin and many a client was willing to pay me just to hold and touch him gently, without anything a literal-minded person would describe as “sex”.
For most healthy, socially-adept adults – especially women – the distinction is at best an academic one, because they have little or no trouble securing voluntary sex partners on a regular (or at least occasional) basis. But this is not so for everyone; some people (a highly disproportionate fraction of them male) have a great deal of trouble attracting partners willing to give them sex for the usual “socially acceptable” reasons such as love, lust, gratitude or even pity, leaving them unable to obtain it except by purchase. And if a society criminalizes that option (or creates so many impediments to commercial sex that it might as well be illegal), even that route is closed to the man who is too afraid of the police or social censure to take the risk.
Because of the movie The Sessions and the news of retired madam Becky Adams’ plan to open a brothel for the disabled, the topic of sex work and disability is a trending one right now; I’ve probably seen more articles on the subject in the last two months than I had in the preceding two years. And while I think this is an extremely important subject, I’ve written about it elsewhere and there are some very good charities (and in some countries, even government agencies) working diligently to raise public consciousness on the matter so that the skeptical can be helped to recognize that disabled people have the same need for intimacy as everyone else. What I’d like to call your attention to now is a fact that may seem obvious, yet tends to get lost in the shuffle whenever the topic comes up for discussion: not all disabilities are physical. In my first essay on the subject over two years ago, I primarily discussed physical disabilities such as paralysis, blindness, cerebral palsy and even extreme obesity. But in the months that followed the majority of men who wrote to thank me for speaking up for them, either in the comments or via email, suffered from “invisible” disabilities such as autism, stuttering, schizophrenia or even crippling social anxiety. Like those with more obvious problems they found it difficult or even impossible to interact with women in the way most men take for granted, and as a result relied on sex workers for that contact. A number of them asked my advice in finding the right sex worker for their needs, and one corresponded with me about his plans to travel to Nevada to lose his virginity in a legal brothel, and shared his joy with me afterward.
If someone were to seriously argue that it was wrong to pay for food, and that the restaurant business was by its very nature exploitative and demeaning, we would dismiss him as a crank or a lunatic; if a politician were to propose laws against the buying and selling of shelter, clothing, entertainment, medical care or other needs he would be ridiculed in the press and his chances for re-election would be seriously in doubt. Yet sex workers are attacked thus every day; our agency is denied, our clients and employees are demonized, our profession is ridiculed and the very real social value of our work is dismissed. And though we ourselves are the chief victims of this persecution, we should never forget that there are others as well: those people who rely upon us to provide a basic human need which, if not strictly necessary for mere biological survival, is nonetheless vital to make life worthwhile.
I haven’t had intimate contact with anyone in many years. In fact, I encounter the attitude that men like me shouldn’t even be allowed out in public all too often. And while you seem to deal honestly with customers, most of the professionals I’ve encountered in the U.S. are nothing but scammers who want money without providing any services. It’s the American way. So, since my finances aren’t up to travelling overseas, I’ve been doing without for a long time. I don’t have any particular disabilities, other than not being an abusive and manipulative asshole.
You are obviously finding your hookers in the wrong way; though most regular clients report occasional scams, I don’t know of any who have found almost nothing else. You need to find a small group of well-reviewed quality escorts (not $100 Backpage specials) and stick with them.
That’s the common thread I’ve seen behind all men who report “scammers” in high numbers. They are surfing the bargain basement Back Page.
If I may jump in here. This fellow doesn’t say where he lives, but it’s possible he lives in a more rural area where the population is smaller and therefore there aren’t any ‘well-reviewed’ escorts to be had. Not every location is listed on ECCIE.
Absolutely. Even if that means saving a little bit more of his paycheck a couple of pay periods.
And $100 Backpage specials? HA! No, it’s gone much lower than that. I’ve seen $30 and $20 specials.
Backpage is pretty fucking ridiculous. However, I DO think that somehow it fits an “evolutionary” need for some men. In that … finding sex that way is difficult and fraught with peril – exactly the same as the cave man days! 😛
I agree! We agree! *pops champagne bottle*
$30 and $20 specials?
Those must be “Blue Light Specials,” if you know what I mean.
I can see you wiggling your eyebrows from here. 😛
Women seem to live in a world of hugs and kisses, of friends and boyfriends and babies to hold. I wonder how many truly grasp the fact that a man can go for decades, literally, without touching another human being beyond the occasional handshake?
Touch deprivation is devastating to children, but some parents are so jealous they wouldn’t think of allowing their child to have any kind of skin-to-skin contact with anybody. Who knows what auto-immune diseases or mental disorders are the result of touch deprivation in childhood.
A look at the Romanian orphanages certainly buttresses that position.
My sister did her masters’ work with severely abused children. She says that it is essential for babies and children to be touched – those who a chronically without that kind of contact have difficulty establishing their boundaries – where they leave off and the outside world begins. It leads to all sorts of pathological and dangerous behaviors.
Radical feminists tent to interpret the statement that men need skin to skin contact as a demand. Men, they declaim, do not have a *right* to sex! Blah blah blah a woman is not just a convenience for man’s needs etc etc. Entirely missing the point, of course.
“Missing the Point” … is probably why radical feminazis are the way the are. If you catch my drift! 😛
I see what you did there, Krulac :D.
Maggie, thanks for re-publishing this. I know you’re writing articles all over the net for a lot of people and I rarely find them.
Which brings up a question … Annie Sprinkle “thanked” you the other day in the comments for your work at kink.com. Are you writing articles there? I Googled and could not find any.
Not that I know of; in fact I asked Annie what she meant but she hasn’t replied yet. I suspect it has something to do with the fact that a spanking website quoted and linked my original Valentine’s Day essay in a post called “Whip a Girl for Lupercalia“. I thought perhaps Kink.com picked that up and reblogged it (or another column), but I haven’t seen it confirmed by any incoming links.
>I haven’t had intimate contact with anyone in many years. In fact, I encounter the attitude that men like me shouldn’t even be allowed out in public all too often.
what, are you a Wall Street Banker, member of the Westboro Baptist Church, or Republican politician?
Back in my working days, I had several “handicapped” clients. One of which was one of my favourites.He was a really great guy, and I used to think how sad it was that some woman couldn’t look past his condition to see really great mate potential.
But women, like men, are locked into the brain patterns formed over ten thousand years of hunting and gathering. We look for the physically fit and strong as good reproduction material, just as men are attracted to women who look to have good baby-bearing potential. We may not know we are doing that, but our brain on some level is.
It’s a true pity that our society is so superstition ridden that any of us can’t just get that human touch when we need it.
My ideal society would have establishments everywhere, accessible to all, where one could go when wanting sex/touch. Just go, be there, see if there’s anyone in a similar mood striking your fancy. A relaxed atmosphere. Now in early days, before women can unlearn all the “good girls don’t” baggage, there would probably need to be a paid staff of women to balance things out. Nothing wrong with that. But in the long run, our sexual capacities are much greater than mens, so it may have to switch.
But women, like men, are locked into the brain patterns formed over ten thousand years of hunting and gathering. We look for the physically fit and strong as good reproduction material, just as men are attracted to women who look to have good baby-bearing potential. We may not know we are doing that, but our brain on some level is.
Good point.
I tend to look at other people’s kinks as somewhat derivative of this, but more based in experience than necessarily genetics. (Not denying that genetics plays a part just think there may be epigenetic, environmental and experential issues as well.) For instance, I like a particular body type and while I can intellectually appreciate other body types, they just don’t get it done for me. Yet I have never recalled sitting down and saying to myself that “this is what I like and this isn’t.”
So, for those people who argue that sexual orientation is a “choice” I ask them what kind of person they like, physically. Then I ask them when and where they made that “choice.” To me the issues of sexual orientation and sexual preference within that orientation seem to be matters that are not under our direct control except by means of repression. And I would included questions of dominance and submission – not just role play but in terms of “what gets it done” – in that same general spread of factors.
The body type thing doesn’t work for me … cuz I like ’em all. Big boobs, small ones, long legs, short legs, flat ass, bubble butt. amazonian’s and spinners and … under the right circumstances … yes, even BBW.
Amen. If there is one thing men like… it’s variety.
Also, many men could benefit from being with different types of ladies; they could appreciate just how good some conventionally unattractive women can be.
No, I’m kind and caring. I’m polite and well-spoken. I’m a geek. That’s my handicap i today’s world. Thirty years ago engineers and scientists were cool. Now we are shunned.
I’m HATED by the narrowminded, intolerant liberals that dominate the city I live in. Even my church preaches against straight white males.
I live with an almost overwhelming pain every day of my life. I will never be allowed to marry. I will never have a family. I am required to spend my life in isolation. That’s the feminist narrative for men like me. I refuse to break and become a violent, abusive, exploitive, dishonest asshole that would appeal to women’s baser nature, because that’s all that is left in today’s society.
If I ever show any weakness or pain, I will be attacked by the jackels of our society. I have learned that my only purpose is to be abused, ridiculed and exploited. That’s what we have built over the last couple of generations.
I enjoy reading Maggie’s work, I think she is a fairly talented writer. In today’s world even saying that seems to mark me as a loser. The American way is to tear down those around you, being supportive is punished.
I don’t know where you live but …
Hell, my son is a software engineer and he lives with two chicks. He’ll call before coming over and I ask him … “are you bringing your harem?”
Point being is … I don’t know but at least where I live … engineers aren’t shunned.
Also – I don’t know how old you are but bro – you get one shot at thing. if you don’t like your life then you have to change it – get a new line of work if you need to. I always thought the coolest job for me would be simply a road crew worker. Outside all day – you have a perma-tan … hell, whip your shirt off even. Nice physical labor, operate a jack hammer … or a steam roller … only problem is – it doesn’t pay very well.
I don’t give a shit who you are – you can CHANGE your life. I get the feeling you also believe that you are physically disgusting. You can change that too if that’s the case.
Move to Texas … I recommend the Dallas area. If you can’t find an ECCIE lady in Dallas … hell, you can’t swing a dead cat anywhere in the Dallas / Ft Worth area without hitting a HOT BEAUTIFUL ECCIE GIRL. It’s the male Disneyland of escorts.
But dude – don’t accept this as your life.
I’ll just say that if “my church preaches against straight white males” I would have already found a different church.
I’m an engineer, and it’s definitely more desirable to women than it was 20 yrs ago.
I think you need to talk to a therapist. What I’m getting is a wave of depression coming out in various ways.
And as an engineer, you can afford to save up and spring for the best reviewed girl. Given you are surrounded by liberals, there must be a city nearby, look for its discussion board.
Reblogged this on GFE Desires.
Long ago, Dr Truby King advocated a very detached method of baby care; feeding by the clock and not “on demand”, and a distinct absence of emotional bonding. It was a very cold, impersonal form of rearing; the baby was an “it”, not a real person. I wonder how many men have been permanently damaged by this approach. You might argue that the nurture component isn’t that important, for it’s all in the genes, yet experiments such as Maggie reports do seem to indicate just how important emotional support is for the young. You could theorise further; do men, whose earliest experiences of women (their mother) is a form of abandonment suffer in adult life from relationship difficulties with women? Suppose such men seek comfort or release with a professional; will they think that this is something real, or is it just for the money? Will such an experience reinforce their belief that women will take what they can get from men, give them as little as possible in return, and then abandon them? Or am I just too cynical?
(And before you ask, yes, I was reared under Dr King’s regime; and, yes, it was very hard to ignore my screams for attention: but they were mostly ignored.)
That’s horrible. But that would explain a lot of people out here, not just men, but women too. Actually, this would explain some neofeminists and their cold, impersonal view of how they think human interaction is.
It has been some years but I read (I think it was in the Economist, mid ’90’s) that the group child rearing practiced in the Kibbutzim in Israel had led to a signficant portion of those children reporting problems with emotional intimacy, depression, etc., in their adult years that was considerably in excess of the general population. I think this tends to support your point, Korhomme.
Damn I hate to be the lone dissenter here but … yeah I DO think “nurturing” is kind of important but too much of it with little boys produces a “momma’s boy”.
There’s a difference between nurturing and overindulgence/overprotection. The latter is the causative agent of what you speak because positive nurturing engenders exploration and self confidence, whereas overprotection conditions the child’s uncertainty and insecurity to operate autonomously.
Like Matt, I too have gone a long time without intimacy, and I keep reading how men are dangerous or have “erratic behavior” when they don’t have sex, I think it’s hog wash, if a man can’t keep himself in check it’s because he bought into the male stereotype and thinks he suppose to be on the prowl every waking moment, it’s the B/S forced on us by every form of media.
Or he’s simply not cognizant of the person he is, like you and I. Few people take personal responsibility for their actions and feeling – we may realize no one has the capacity to ‘make’ us feel one way or another, yet the vast majority take no such personal responsibility for they way they choose to feel and interact with the world. Our intellect is what separates us from the animal world, but it has to be employed not just analytically, but emotionally.
Consider that the primary purpose of life is to reproduce. Couple that with an individual’s inability to govern their feelings consciously; you have an animal. It’s not at all surprising to me that many men who are sexually frustrated behave aggressively or commit atrocities; their angst is largely biological.
I truly believe our society would be much more peaceful if people were able to get their rocks off whenever they feel the urge. I was just in Thailand, and while prostitution is officially illegal, it’s pervasive and largely unpoliced. It’s also a Buddhist monarchy. You don’t see Buddhists waging holy wars. It seems not surprising that most institutionalized religions make sex taboo; it serves their purpose of conquest.
Isn’t that special? And how is someone supposed to argue that? How many men are going to come on here and post, “Oh, I’ve gone years without sex with a woman, and I can feel myself turning crazier by the week”?
The fact with me is, sex doesn’t only mean sexual release, it means that at least one woman on this planet cares for me as a person, at least a little. If a woman tells me she cares for me but won’t even give me a handjob, what she’s said are just empty words to me. I can masturbate to get rid of the sexual tension, but I cannot abide the continual worldwide female rejection.
But … well what could you do about it?
I can feel myself becoming crazier by the week. It’s great for Tism that he’s adjusted to life without it.
If every man who went a long time without sex turned to violence—either against himself or others—not even the most conservative prudes would be able to deny the evidence. But some people manage to channel their sexual frustration into other areas. Maybe for some it’s religious piety, for others collecting comic books, and still others it’s going to Hooters and snapping photos of pretty waitresses. But just because some people can do it doesn’t mean that everybody can or should. Also keep in mind that while the male sex drive does not shut down like it apparently does for many women after menopause (Maggie, please correct me if I’m wrong) but it DOES weaken as you get older.
I believe that what Maggie has written on this subject has a great deal of truth. Nothwithstanding that you or I have managed to restrain ourselves from committing violent acts, it’s a dangerous mistake on the part of society to assume every man can, and that it is OK for thousands of men not to have any means of sexual release because others disapprove.
I don’t really like the argument that we need to decriminalize prostitution because … “men need it”. I’m pretty much with you … if I didn’t get sex, I would not turn in the Incredible Hulk or something and start smashing things to pieces.
The argument to decriminalize is merited simply based on the premise of individual freedom of association. THAT should be good enough.
I won’t deny that sex plays an important role in men’s lives. For me, it makes me confident, outgoing, humorous, and happy – like most nothing else on the planet does. If sex evaporated for me tomorrow though – I could pour that energy into other endeavors.
On male sex drive and aging … well I’m in my early 50’s and my drive is still as strong as it ever was. My function is also the same (knock on wood) but my “refractory” time is NOTHING like it was in my 20’s. 🙁
Now – the other difference I’ve noticed is that I like to look at girls more and talk to them. I’ve always looked and talked but never to the extent I do these days. I love admiring a woman and I also love talking to them … and I actually get mentally invested in hearing their problems or issues. As a kid – I did these things mostly as a form of “foreplay” only – something you just had to do to get the girl in bed.
I’d also agree with Tism & Matt. I’ve gone as long as 20 years without any intimacy and I didn’t turn into some kind of monster or develop any behavior problems. I’m not really disagreeing with Maggie either though. I have always been a loner and have never been very good at socializing. Because of this I’ve always lived a life by myself without any real interaction with others. Presently I’ve partially solved the problem of intimacy by seeing escorts on a regular basis. I’ve found that this intimate interaction gives me a more positive mental attitude and somehow it more “completes” me.
Because I raised kids for fifteen years, I felt an obligation to their rearing to not have any girlfriends around. I didn’t like them getting the wrong ideas (although, admittedly, I have plenty of those!) or have to put up with the “Babe of the Day.”
After the last kid left the roost, I did not find it particularly difficult to find the exact type of relationship I wanted. I live in a completely rural area, more cows than people, and I found out that even us farmer types have a great capacity for touch and intimacy. Intimacy of all kinds, I might add.
Armed with this device – the Internet – I think you can find the kind of long or short term intimacy you need. Be a geek or a farmer or a Hill William, someone out there wants to feel your touch. All you have to do is look.
While I can understand you wouldn’t want to bring a new woman home every week or even every month, completely ceasing to look for intimacy (of any kind) seems way over the top.
[…] McNeill (The Honest Courtesan)– Skin to Skin, St. Valentine’s Day, Valentine’s DayDid you know that V-day originated has dark […]
Unfortunately, the mental health professionals have only recently even begun to study “involuntary celibacy” and it’s often difficult to get people who don’t suffer from it to take it seriously. And for guys with little money, or trapped in areas where professionals just don’t exist, finding one is impossible.
Not to mention trying to find out things like the going rate, which ones are and are not worthwhile, and avoiding the police. I haven’t been laid since 1985, and due to being behind my age group in these matters, wasn’t exactly wildly successful before. If I had the cash, I’d move somewhere like Thailand, but that’s just not on. So I’m resigned to never, ever being laid again.
[…] Skin to Skin […]
I read this on Cliterati and it was good. It’s just as good here, of course, and I’m glad more people are getting to read it.
Though a well-balanced man won’t become a monster no matter how much sex* he isn’t getting, and some men will be monsters no matter how much sex they are getting, what about those borderline cases? Those cases where Dr. Jekyll needs only a little nudge to become Mr. Hyde? Those are the ones I worry about.
I may be out of state for a while, and I’m not sure when. It should only be a couple, maybe a few days. I’ll try to get caught up before I leave, and again when I get back.
* Or other meaningful contact, and let’s not forget that.
If anyone wants to know how you are, etc., while you’re gone (if you need to be gone which we hope won’t happen) they’re welcome to ask me.
I’ve no objection to that,and in fact I thank you for it.
You are so right about the need for touch. Animals need it also. A dog which is stroked and loved is a happy animal, likewise a man who receives the same is full of joy.