Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff Mob Never Told You from how stupp
Speaker 1: works dot com. Hello, and welcome to the podcast. I'm
Speaker 1: Kristen and I'm Caroline, and Caroline, we gotta start this
Speaker 1: episode with a shout out that's right to listener Katrina. Yeah.
Speaker 1: We've got Katrina at our meet up in l A
Speaker 1: a little while ago, back at the beginning of February,
Speaker 1: and she had emailed us previously about issues surrounding people
Speaker 1: with disabilities, all sorts of different issues, really great ideas
Speaker 1: for some sminty episodes. And so after we met her,
Speaker 1: she re emailed us that, which we're very grateful for,
Speaker 1: and we have chosen from her list of topics. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so today we're going to talk about the de sexualization
Speaker 1: of people with disabilities and all of the history and
Speaker 1: culture and political issues today surrounding that. Um. And again
Speaker 1: Katrina to thank you for this fantastic idea, because really
Speaker 1: we have not talked all that much at all about
Speaker 1: people with disabilities on the podcast. It's high time that
Speaker 1: we cover this. Yeah, absolutely, particularly because this is a
Speaker 1: growing conversation and it has been a growing conversation and
Speaker 1: I think more recently it entered this topic entered the
Speaker 1: public conversation UH in ten when Rochelle Friedman Chapman, who
Speaker 1: had been paralyzed from the chest down at twenty four
Speaker 1: UH post and laundry to combat a bunch of assumptions
Speaker 1: around the idea that people with disabilities can't be sexy.
Speaker 1: But even before that, in Jess Soxy, who has Freeman's
Speaker 1: Sheldon syndrome, posed in American apparel esque shots to counteract
Speaker 1: the mother ing and de sexualization of people with disabilities.
Speaker 1: And I remember sharing those photos of Saxy on the
Speaker 1: stuff mob never told you social media because was I mean,
Speaker 1: it was just very clever, because those American apparel poses
Speaker 1: are so just kind of idiosyncratic to that brand and
Speaker 1: so hyper sexual, and I mean it was it was
Speaker 1: just such a smart way to do that and such
Speaker 1: an important campaign for raising that visibility. And then Jess,
Speaker 1: who prefers the pronoun, they posted this photo series depicting
Speaker 1: themselves on naked on a crane or posing with a crane,
Speaker 1: and they said that they wanted to sort of grapple
Speaker 1: with this idea of people are always staring at me?
Speaker 1: What are they staring at I'm finally going to really
Speaker 1: really look at myself naked, and you are going to
Speaker 1: look at me naked as well, just to again sort
Speaker 1: of helped to fight that stigma of you don't look
Speaker 1: like the general population at large, so you must be
Speaker 1: different in every way. Well, and that it's also the
Speaker 1: polite thing to do to look away from people with disabilities.
Speaker 1: Don't draw attention to it, which is kind of politely
Speaker 1: in quotes, ignore it. Um. And one bit of history
Speaker 1: that I did not know going into this podcast was
Speaker 1: that twenty five years ago a woman named Ellen Stole,
Speaker 1: who had been paralyzed from the neck down, became the
Speaker 1: first woman with a disability to pose in Playboy. And
Speaker 1: she said, the reason why I chose Playboy magazine for
Speaker 1: this endeavor is its sexuality is the hardest thing for
Speaker 1: a disabled person to hold on to. Helf was really
Speaker 1: adamant that I had their right to have the same
Speaker 1: sexual voice as women without disabilities. And I took a
Speaker 1: look at the photos and I mean, it does look
Speaker 1: like a typical Playboy spread. I mean, Stole is naked
Speaker 1: on a bed and you have the kind of glossy
Speaker 1: filter across her, and um, yeah, I mean it looks
Speaker 1: just like any other centerfold. Yeah, And there was an
Speaker 1: interview with both Hef and Stole, and he said that
Speaker 1: her disability had made her feel like a non person,
Speaker 1: like a non sexual being, and she was very articulate
Speaker 1: at expressing exactly that the pictorial could serve not only
Speaker 1: her but other people with disabilities as a way of saying,
Speaker 1: we're human beings too, and sex is a natural part
Speaker 1: of being alive with a disability or without. And the
Speaker 1: thing is, if we look back at the history of
Speaker 1: how we as humans have treated people with disabilities, I mean,
Speaker 1: this kind of stuff happening is downright revolutionary, you know,
Speaker 1: because we're having to unearth centuries and centuries of this
Speaker 1: kind of marginalization and de sexualization. Because, as Catherine Quarmby
Speaker 1: wrote about over in a really in depth piece at Mosaic,
Speaker 1: there are some deeply ingrained and dehumanizing tropes about people
Speaker 1: with disabilities. Yeah. She cites author Tom Shakespeare, who wrote
Speaker 1: The Sexual Politics of Disability, and he points to a
Speaker 1: bunch of threads from mythology, from literature, which of course
Speaker 1: reflect attitudes in the popular culture at large, stretching back
Speaker 1: hundreds of years. And of course one of the biggest
Speaker 1: tropes is that people with disabilities are just completely one
Speaker 1: a sexual there's the idea that women and men are
Speaker 1: viewed as impotent, sexless, and unattractive, and this makes them
Speaker 1: vulnerable to mockery. It was Cicero who wrote in Deformity
Speaker 1: and Bodily Disfigurement there is good material in making jokes.
Speaker 1: So we are now in the twenty first century, I
Speaker 1: feel like just still at the very beginning of unraveling
Speaker 1: all of that other ing and all of the dismissal
Speaker 1: of people with disabilities, and that other ring is very
Speaker 1: much present to in ancient mythology. I mean, if we
Speaker 1: look at the story of haffaced Us, the blacksmith god
Speaker 1: with a shriveled foot who marries Aphrodite. Aphrodity ends up
Speaker 1: carrying on all these affairs because his disability makes him unmanly.
Speaker 1: There's that emasculating aspect as well. And then if we
Speaker 1: fast forward to something I had not thought about while
Speaker 1: reading this book, if we look at Lady Chatterley's lover Constance,
Speaker 1: the main woman takes up with the gamekeeper after her
Speaker 1: husband is paralyzed from the waist down during World War One,
Speaker 1: and this develops into a concept known as Chatterly syndrome,
Speaker 1: where a disabled man's loss of sexual power gives his
Speaker 1: wife freedom to get her satisfaction elsewhere. Wasn't this side
Speaker 1: note Caroline kind of a subplot a little while back
Speaker 1: in Downton Abbey when Matthew is injured in the war. Uh,
Speaker 1: do we have a little Chatterlee syndrome happening? I think?
Speaker 1: Didn't he like encourage her to go They weren't married yet,
Speaker 1: he encouraged her to go find another husband or man
Speaker 1: or something because he's like, oh, I'm not a whole
Speaker 1: real man anymore, and she's stuck with him. Yeah. Well,
Speaker 1: and I from what I remember too from Lady Chatterley's
Speaker 1: Lover Besides all of the titillating bits was how they
Speaker 1: characterized her husband as an unlikable guy too, like the
Speaker 1: disability not only made him impotent, but also seemed to
Speaker 1: make him devoid of any kind of decency. Yeah well,
Speaker 1: I mean, and then that ties into another one of
Speaker 1: the tropes that Cornby and Shakespeare talk about, which is
Speaker 1: that disabled people are perverse. This was especially a thing
Speaker 1: during the seventeenth century. Wind Witch hunts everybody, from women
Speaker 1: with mental health problems, older people with dementia. Two people
Speaker 1: with cancerous growth faced the stigma that they were somehow twisted,
Speaker 1: and this was tied in with the idea that disability
Speaker 1: was sometimes considered a punishment for sins uh, and that
Speaker 1: a person with a disability was an unsuitable partner, perhaps
Speaker 1: because he or she supposedly evil powers of some kind. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, if we look at the literary example of
Speaker 1: Shakespeare's Richard the Third, Uh, he's described as having twisted
Speaker 1: body and mind. Yeah. But then but then, so, so
Speaker 1: you've got the tropes of people with disabilities being completely
Speaker 1: a sexual or their perverse in their sexuality, but then
Speaker 1: you have the horrific hyper sexualization of people with disabilities. Yeah.
Speaker 1: So this assumption has been used particularly against women with
Speaker 1: learning disabilities, and it was largely used as a justification
Speaker 1: to abuse women in mental institutions, and even in the
Speaker 1: nineteenth century, whistleblowers were drawing attention to rape, abuse, and
Speaker 1: even murder, all based on this concept of you know,
Speaker 1: I guess hyper sexuality being a part of their mental disability, right,
Speaker 1: And I'm sure that there's a power element in that too,
Speaker 1: of like, um, using hyper sexuality to justify your thinking
Speaker 1: that uh, this this woman is loose, you know, she
Speaker 1: she will submit to my power because she's obviously weak.
Speaker 1: And then finally we have the whole contamination fears around
Speaker 1: people with disability, this worry that people with disabilities might
Speaker 1: pass it along to their offspring. And this is something
Speaker 1: too that ends up essentially being codified into American law
Speaker 1: with a Supreme Court decision that we're going to talk
Speaker 1: about in just a second, as part of the heyday
Speaker 1: of the eugenics movement in the United States. Yeah. So,
Speaker 1: in case you're wondering why these tropes about people with
Speaker 1: disabilities are such a big deal, you all you have
Speaker 1: to do is look at the very real consequences that
Speaker 1: came out of them. And like Kristen said, I mean,
Speaker 1: we get the eugenics movement in the late nineteenth century
Speaker 1: in early twentieth century. Yeah, I mean, this was something
Speaker 1: that we talked about in our two parter on the
Speaker 1: legal history of abortion. It ties into that um, but
Speaker 1: it also initiated starting in the eighteen eighties, these things
Speaker 1: called ugly laws or unsightly beggar laws that literally made
Speaker 1: it illegal in certain cities for people who were deemed
Speaker 1: unsightly from being seen on the streets at all. And
Speaker 1: this caroline reminds me of modern day anti panhandling laws,
Speaker 1: which are also sort of a legal way to get
Speaker 1: unsightly homeless people off of the sidewalks as well. Um,
Speaker 1: And it wasn't just though, the discomfort around people with
Speaker 1: disabilities begging and possibly upsetting people on the street and
Speaker 1: maybe driving away potential business, but also fears around what
Speaker 1: reaction it would cause in pregnant women. Yeah, it was
Speaker 1: believed that a mother encountering these unsightly beggars would have
Speaker 1: a quote equivalent impression made on the fetus, so somehow
Speaker 1: her unborn child would catch a disability, but just by
Speaker 1: virtue of the fact that she saw someone with a
Speaker 1: disability on the street. And then finally, in the mid
Speaker 1: twentieth century, those quote unquote ugly laws are largely replaced
Speaker 1: on a state by state basis with state directed institutionalization
Speaker 1: and treatments. But if we go to nineteen fourteen, it
Speaker 1: was illegal for the classified quote feeble minded and insane
Speaker 1: people to marry. I mean, if we if you think
Speaker 1: of words like dumb, idiot, feeble minded, I mean those
Speaker 1: were actual groups of people according to medical signs of
Speaker 1: the day. Yeah, you could look back at old census
Speaker 1: records and see people classified in that way. Um. And
Speaker 1: so from nineteen o seven to ninety thousands of Americans
Speaker 1: were sterilized as part of this growing eugenics movement, and
Speaker 1: in Virginia, law, for instance, allow the forced sterilization of
Speaker 1: quote feeble minded, insane, depressed, mentally, handicapped, epileptic, and other individuals.
Speaker 1: And learning about this, Caroline, I'm really interested to read
Speaker 1: a new book by Adam Cohen called Imbeciles, which is
Speaker 1: all about the Supreme Court the eugenics movement in the
Speaker 1: United States, and it centers around that Virginia case and
Speaker 1: the for sterilization of a woman named Carrie Buck. And
Speaker 1: what happened with Carrie Buck was that she was raped
Speaker 1: and impregnated as a result of that, and after the
Speaker 1: child was born, her family or just you know, completely
Speaker 1: incensed by the whole situation, and so they had her
Speaker 1: deemed feeble minded and sent away to a colony for
Speaker 1: epileptics and the feeble minded. And they wanted the people
Speaker 1: who were pro for sterilization, We're looking for some kind
Speaker 1: of test case in order to legalized this whole thing.
Speaker 1: So there's this guy who came in to the epileptic
Speaker 1: and feeble minded colony where Carrie Buck was and saw
Speaker 1: her and said, oh, this is perfect because her mother
Speaker 1: had also been classified as feeble minded. She was classified
Speaker 1: as feeble minded, and she now had this baby who
Speaker 1: could possibly be shown as feeble minded too, in order
Speaker 1: to prove that whole contagious aspect to it. So they
Speaker 1: essentially had a sham case and it allowed for her
Speaker 1: forced sterilization. So then in Carrie Buck brings this case
Speaker 1: again to the Supreme Court to challenge that decision, and
Speaker 1: famed Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes rights in his Supreme Court
Speaker 1: decision upholding that for serialization law that quote, three generations
Speaker 1: of imbeccles is enough, Oh lord. Yeah. And as a result,
Speaker 1: as Cohen talks about two Terry Gross in this Fresh
Speaker 1: Air interview that I was listening to, that now has
Speaker 1: me wanting to read his new book, Imbeciles. As a
Speaker 1: result of that Supreme Court decision seventy thousand for sterilizations
Speaker 1: then happened across the United States. Yeah, because in the
Speaker 1: wake of that decision, twenty seven other states began sterilization program. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean and all of that too. We need to
Speaker 1: come back, Caroline and do a whole episode just on
Speaker 1: the for sterilization issue, because it was something directed not
Speaker 1: only at the so called people minded, but also especially
Speaker 1: women of color. I mean, they're all sorts of really
Speaker 1: disgusting layers to the whole thing. Um. And it culminated
Speaker 1: to in the murders of two hundred thousand people with disabilities.
Speaker 1: If we had over to World War two, two or
Speaker 1: thousand people with disabilities who were killed by the Nazis.
Speaker 1: And so this is the base of where we are today.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the history that we're coming out of.
Speaker 1: And so these days the fallout from all of those
Speaker 1: stereotypes and tropes and fears is still evident. Uh. And
Speaker 1: I know that, having just talked about eugenics and for sterilization,
Speaker 1: dating seems almost like it seems almost flippant to talk
Speaker 1: about dating. But this is a real consequence of our
Speaker 1: history of marginalizing people with disabilities. So you've got the
Speaker 1: dating issue right. People with disabilities are less likely to
Speaker 1: marry or have long term partners, but of course that
Speaker 1: varies depending on impairment type according to research, And there
Speaker 1: was a Guardian poll UH that found forty four percent
Speaker 1: of respondents had never had sex with someone with a
Speaker 1: disability and said that they did not think they ever would.
Speaker 1: So like, that's where we are. Those are the attitudes
Speaker 1: that we are dealing with. And one thing that activists,
Speaker 1: you gos Ling, who wrote Abnormal, How Britain became Body
Speaker 1: dysmorphic and the Key to a Cure, discusses is the
Speaker 1: issue of family and friends of people with disabilities over
Speaker 1: protecting them out of a fear of exploitation, because you
Speaker 1: have not only this sexualization, but also to this infantilization. Yeah, exactly,
Speaker 1: of of protecting people with disabilities as if they are
Speaker 1: permanent babies, permanent children. Yeah, I mean, and that's regardless
Speaker 1: of whether we're talking about people with mental disabilities or
Speaker 1: physical disabilities, right exactly. And Gosling points out, you know,
Speaker 1: most women we know are looking for a relationship, and
Speaker 1: disabled people are no different. Um, And she talks about
Speaker 1: how those fears of exploitation could potentially explain this assumption
Speaker 1: that it's better to shield people with disabilities from reaching
Speaker 1: out for sexual relationships rather than have them risk rejection.
Speaker 1: So we're trying to protect we I mean families are
Speaker 1: trying to protect them on every front, like, oh, you're
Speaker 1: you're too again, like feeble to handle rejection or trying
Speaker 1: to date on your own, and we are also maybe
Speaker 1: a little scared of your sexuality because you're so different. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, and you could say that for those those
Speaker 1: family members. I mean, the the motive is benevolent, but
Speaker 1: it's all, you know, symptoms of this much larger and
Speaker 1: deep rooted issue. Um. But one of the brighter sides
Speaker 1: of this growing conversation that has been helped along, I
Speaker 1: think a lot by social media and you know, visibility projects, um,
Speaker 1: is how those layers of discrimination are even further compounded
Speaker 1: for people with disabilities who are also lgbt Q, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: because you've got the whole issue of conflict that can
Speaker 1: potentially arise when you, as a person with a disability
Speaker 1: who also is lgbt Q, have a personal assistant or
Speaker 1: a caregiver who maybe doesn't approve of your sexuality and
Speaker 1: or then tries to control it. Yeah. And they're also
Speaker 1: since it's too of opposite sex partners being allowed to
Speaker 1: stay overnight in supported housing whereas same sex or trans
Speaker 1: partners aren't. So we have homophobia and transphobia at work
Speaker 1: as well. Yeah, all of this stuff is very layered
Speaker 1: and wrapped up with all of these fears, and another
Speaker 1: huge consequence of that with its own further consequences. Because honestly,
Speaker 1: this discussion is like knocking down dominoes of terrible UM
Speaker 1: is lack of access to appropriate sex aid. And when
Speaker 1: I say appropriate, I don't mean like, don't don't talk
Speaker 1: about too much. You've got to keep it appropriate. I
Speaker 1: mean like literally sex sex education that is appropriate for
Speaker 1: the audience, because people with disabilities don't necessarily have the
Speaker 1: same concerns or needs as their able body peers. Yeah,
Speaker 1: healthcare providers typically aren't equipped to address sexual health and
Speaker 1: function concerns. And then we have the complicating factor of
Speaker 1: individual disabilities requiring different aids and information. But even though
Speaker 1: that might be a complicating factor, of course, that shouldn't
Speaker 1: be an argument to just dismiss it entirely. I mean,
Speaker 1: which is essentially historically what has happened, I mean, sex
Speaker 1: ed in schools, as poor as it generally is an
Speaker 1: our country. Um, still when it happens is for the
Speaker 1: most part directed toward able bodied students. Um. There was
Speaker 1: a Canadian Council for Learning study talking to people with
Speaker 1: disabilities that found one hundred percent of them said that
Speaker 1: their education had been inadequate and that educators didn't have
Speaker 1: sufficient resources to deal with the topic. And it's been
Speaker 1: a problem despite the nineteen Education for All Handicapped Children Act,
Speaker 1: which is PS now called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act,
Speaker 1: that required school districts to provide students with disabilities access
Speaker 1: to the same information and classes as their peers. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and in a lot of the articles and sources we read,
Speaker 1: many men and women with disabilities are quoted talking about
Speaker 1: their horrific experiences with sex ed and Tim Rose is
Speaker 1: no different. He's the founder of the Rose Center for Love,
Speaker 1: Sex and Disability, and he was born with spastic quadriplegic
Speaker 1: cerebral palsy. He said that his school growing up largely
Speaker 1: denied him access to sex ed information at all, completely,
Speaker 1: even asking him to leave the room when it was discussed,
Speaker 1: and he brought up a point that you will see
Speaker 1: in a lot of articles about this topic. He said,
Speaker 1: sex ed for me was mostly trial and error, a
Speaker 1: mix of getting what information I could from friends and
Speaker 1: from TV. And this seems to be really key you
Speaker 1: hear a lot of people disabilities talking about like well,
Speaker 1: it just kind of came down to watching porn or
Speaker 1: watching like movies where people were having sex, or just
Speaker 1: talking with other people with disabilities. Because there's not a
Speaker 1: base of information for a lot of these people, they
Speaker 1: tend to be completely ignored. And that in and of itself,
Speaker 1: of course has consequences too. If you're not educating people
Speaker 1: about sexuality, sexual function, and safety, whether you have a
Speaker 1: disability or not. UM children with disabilities, for instance, are
Speaker 1: at a much higher risk of sexual abuse. UH and
Speaker 1: doctors screen people with disabilities for S t I, S,
Speaker 1: certain cancers, and other reproductive health issues at much lower rates.
Speaker 1: And I'm really hoping that we hear from some special
Speaker 1: teachers and experts listening to this podcast, because I am
Speaker 1: curious to get the first and information of what is
Speaker 1: happening in schools. Because Caroline, my mom was a special
Speaker 1: ed teacher. I spent a number of summers working with
Speaker 1: UM a special ed day camp and that was mostly
Speaker 1: run by special ed teachers, and it seemed like a
Speaker 1: there were so few resources for them. I mean, we're
Speaker 1: talking about public schools here, so you have that whole
Speaker 1: factor compounding things and also the focus of I think
Speaker 1: one argument, depending on the level of disability that we
Speaker 1: would be talking about, there's a lot more focus on
Speaker 1: just daily skills that I have a feeling that it
Speaker 1: might be an issue of prioritization, where it's like, well,
Speaker 1: we have to make sure that this person can feed
Speaker 1: and clean themselves versus you know, sex education. But that
Speaker 1: doesn't answer the question of why in some schools when
Speaker 1: sex said classes happen, the special kids are then taken
Speaker 1: out of the room. Well yeah, and then you've got
Speaker 1: the issue too of people who have become disabled later
Speaker 1: in life due to injury, your illness um, and that
Speaker 1: the fact that there's even an interesting gender division in that.
Speaker 1: So we you suffer a spinal injury, for instance, and
Speaker 1: have to go to rehab um, the counselors and therapists
Speaker 1: are again like quick to educate about how you take
Speaker 1: care of yourself. Let's let's focus on learning to walk
Speaker 1: again and how you can get around your house and
Speaker 1: deal with daily life. And sexual education and discussions about
Speaker 1: sexual functioning are often left out or like maybe they'll
Speaker 1: pop in a DVD to avoid any awkward conversations, Like
Speaker 1: here's some sex said for you. Now, yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: and I do want to quickly go back and clarify
Speaker 1: in terms of talking about uh special ed classes, that
Speaker 1: I don't want to conflate physically disabled people from mentally
Speaker 1: disabled people, but just to emphasize how like, yes, this
Speaker 1: is a diverse group of people who are often just
Speaker 1: like conflated into one monolithic disabled pool. But even if
Speaker 1: we are talking about people with mental disabilities, because of
Speaker 1: all those issues that you talked about, Caroline in turn
Speaker 1: terms of consent and sexual abuse and the lack of
Speaker 1: screening for STDs and s t i s and their
Speaker 1: existence of sexuality, that they need to be educated too.
Speaker 1: But going back to looking at physical disability and sex education,
Speaker 1: there's also a gendered aspect to this as well. Um
Speaker 1: Christine Sellinger, who works at sci Canada, which works to
Speaker 1: empower and inform healthcare professionals to answer questions about the
Speaker 1: sort of stuff, talks about how after spinal court injuries,
Speaker 1: men tend to inquire about their ability to get an
Speaker 1: erection almost immediately. Yeah, it's like top of mind, It's
Speaker 1: one of the first things they asked about, Like, yes,
Speaker 1: I need to I wanna, you know, try to increase
Speaker 1: my strength. I want to learn how to get around
Speaker 1: my house, but I need to know will I have
Speaker 1: an direction? Yeah, totally understandable. Um. Whereas though women's questions
Speaker 1: about sexuality and vaginal functioning and all of that come
Speaker 1: later during the rehabilitation process and tend to focus or
Speaker 1: around the relationship aspects like whether they can just date.
Speaker 1: So Sellinger asks like, why can't we make this part
Speaker 1: of the initial rehab process for everybody? Right? And because
Speaker 1: Sellinger at nineteen suffered a spinal injury, and she said
Speaker 1: too that, you know, when she was going to rehab
Speaker 1: and going through therapy and talking with doctors, you know,
Speaker 1: her first concern was, I'm I'm having to say goodbye
Speaker 1: to my life as it was. I'm having to you know,
Speaker 1: give up many activities. My life will never be the same.
Speaker 1: You know, sex wasn't top of mind. She's like, maybe
Speaker 1: dating was, you know, will anyone ever want to date me?
Speaker 1: Or being a relationship with me? But now that she
Speaker 1: works for U s c I Canada or I believe
Speaker 1: s c I Ontario, maybe Um, she really advocates strongly
Speaker 1: for these questions and concerns to be part of that
Speaker 1: initial process. But it's part of batting, whether you have
Speaker 1: a disability or not. It's part of combating that larger
Speaker 1: social ick factor that we have around sex and sex said,
Speaker 1: we're also uncomfortable talking about it regardless of our abilities. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, especially especially in the United States. But we
Speaker 1: do have some good news to share because there has
Speaker 1: been so much disability activism that has truly radically changed
Speaker 1: the environment, both literally and figuratively around disability in the
Speaker 1: United States. And we're going to talk about that when
Speaker 1: we come right back from a quick break. Caroline. You
Speaker 1: do whatever it takes to make sure your business runs efficiently,
Speaker 1: but constant trips to the post office can get in
Speaker 1: the way. But with stamps dot Com, you'll be able
Speaker 1: to spend less time at the post office and more
Speaker 1: time growing your business. That's because stamps dot Com may
Speaker 1: smiling and shipping easy. You can use your own computer
Speaker 1: and printer to buy in print official US postage for
Speaker 1: any letter in any package. It's like stamps dot Com
Speaker 1: does the thinking for you. Join over five hundred thousand
Speaker 1: small businesses that use stamps dot com and never go
Speaker 1: to the post office again. And right now sign up
Speaker 1: for stamps dot Com and use our promo code stuff
Speaker 1: for a special offer. It's a four week trial with
Speaker 1: a one dollar bonus offer including postage and a digital scale.
Speaker 1: So don't wait. Go to stamps dot com before you
Speaker 1: do anything else. Click on the microphone at the top
Speaker 1: of the homepage and type in stuff that's stamps dot com.
Speaker 1: Enter stuff, and now back to the show. So it's
Speaker 1: interesting to watch the trajectory of the disability rights movement,
Speaker 1: and we want to really focus on how sexual politics
Speaker 1: became part of that movement and part of that discussion.
Speaker 1: But to back up a little, to give you a
Speaker 1: little perspective, the movement really gained steam in the wake
Speaker 1: of the World Wars. In Vietnam. You have disabled veterans
Speaker 1: returning home, needing services, needing to be seen and heard
Speaker 1: and recognized, but also like needing to be able to
Speaker 1: get into a building, and so needing to be able
Speaker 1: to get employment right exactly. And so while you did
Speaker 1: have people with disabilities returning from World War One and
Speaker 1: World War Two, it really wasn't until post Vietnam or
Speaker 1: or mid Vietnam um that it really became part of
Speaker 1: the political climate, because you already had the fight for
Speaker 1: civil rights and women's rights going on, and so the
Speaker 1: fight for civil rights of people with disabilities fit naturally
Speaker 1: into that political climate. Yeah, I mean, and this is
Speaker 1: one of those movements two of the sixties and seventies,
Speaker 1: I think, along with gay rights that were starting to
Speaker 1: learn more out. But I feel like we still in
Speaker 1: our popular understanding. I don't know that much about the
Speaker 1: disability rights movement that was happening, um. But there was
Speaker 1: a range of organizations that were developing during this time,
Speaker 1: including the National Center for Law and the Handicapped, the
Speaker 1: Disability Rights Center, the American Disabled for Public Transit Group,
Speaker 1: and the National Center for Law and the Deaf. And
Speaker 1: keep in mind too that during this time, some of
Speaker 1: those so called ugly laws that we talked about earlier
Speaker 1: in the podcast, we're still in the books in certain
Speaker 1: major cities. I mean, if they weren't, if they already
Speaker 1: had been removed, we were still left with the stigma
Speaker 1: of that absolutely. Um. And so then you see sexual
Speaker 1: politics very naturally becoming a part of this movement. Advocates
Speaker 1: challenging those tropes we discussed at the top of the
Speaker 1: podcast by pointing out, for one, hey, listen, not all
Speaker 1: sex is about procreation. So if I can't actually procreate,
Speaker 1: or if I have to have sex in a different
Speaker 1: way than what you consider normal, that should be okay. Um.
Speaker 1: You also have advocates trying to educate people still in
Speaker 1: the sixties and seventies, trying to educate people that not
Speaker 1: all impairments are inheritable, stop being so afraid and even
Speaker 1: if they are. Though, a lot of communities, particularly the
Speaker 1: Capital d Deaf community, have embraced their differences as being
Speaker 1: part of a larger culture, and the University of California
Speaker 1: responded around this time to student activists by founding a
Speaker 1: Sexuality and Disabilities Center staffed with sex therapists who could
Speaker 1: not only give advice, but also connects students with sex surrogates.
Speaker 1: And sex surrogates actually gained a lot of attention a
Speaker 1: few years ago thanks to two films, Breathing Lessons and
Speaker 1: The Sessions, which were inspired by Marc O'Brien's encounters with
Speaker 1: surrogate Cheryl Cohen green Um. And so a lot of
Speaker 1: people are a little bit confused, and this is understandable
Speaker 1: of out what a sex surrogate is versus a sex
Speaker 1: worker in this country. And it's interesting because the legal
Speaker 1: territory is a little murky in the US, for instance,
Speaker 1: sex surrogates their services are neither legal nor illegal. And
Speaker 1: as the Kinsey Institute explains, that surrogate sex partners are
Speaker 1: trained by the International Surrogate Partner Association to address specific
Speaker 1: sexual difficulties that a client might have, not necessarily emphasizing
Speaker 1: genital based pleasures. So, for instance, a sex surrogate might
Speaker 1: help expand a client's ideas of what sex is beyond
Speaker 1: penis and vagina, which that's just like good to do
Speaker 1: period exactly. And and they also help clients build self
Speaker 1: awareness and skills around both physical and emotional intimacy. Really
Speaker 1: just a small minority of the time is spent on
Speaker 1: actual physical interaction, and surrogate partners often work with people
Speaker 1: who don't have partners for whatever reason, in uh that
Speaker 1: they could practice these sexual and emotional intimacy issues with.
Speaker 1: And so it's not just that surrogate sex partners are
Speaker 1: working with people with disabilities, They're working with a range
Speaker 1: of clients who have really widely varying needs. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: so this brings us to the sex worker question because
Speaker 1: there have been some arguments more recently that sex work
Speaker 1: should be decriminalized specifically for people who can't have sex independently,
Speaker 1: and perhaps some have proposed those services should even be
Speaker 1: funded by governments. Yeah. And for instance, a lot of
Speaker 1: people cite a two thousand five Disability Now survey that
Speaker 1: found that thirty seven point six percent of men with
Speaker 1: disabilities and sixteen percent of women with disabilities would pay
Speaker 1: for sex. And while that's not a majority by any stretch,
Speaker 1: it still is a larger number than people in the
Speaker 1: general population. And there have also been studies into motivations
Speaker 1: for paying for sex, h for hiring sex workers that
Speaker 1: have found, I mean not surprisingly that men with disabilities
Speaker 1: pay for sex for reasons that go beyond just like
Speaker 1: men needs sex. It's a thing that men need. Uh.
Speaker 1: Sociologist Kirsty Lilliard from Sheffield University in the UK found
Speaker 1: that men cited the reasons of, yes, gaining sexual skills
Speaker 1: and experience, but also invigorating the body, having something to
Speaker 1: talk with male friends about, and gaining a sense of independence.
Speaker 1: And I think it's important to note, and we will
Speaker 1: note this a little bit later, that this is mostly
Speaker 1: focusing on men, like the sex work conversation is mostly
Speaker 1: you know, mostly focused on men. And and maybe the
Speaker 1: sex surrogate conversation is different. Um, I'm not you know,
Speaker 1: I'm not aware of that, but it is worth noting that, like, okay, this,
Speaker 1: this is a thing to bookmark that men are a
Speaker 1: basis of this conversation. Well, and a lot of these
Speaker 1: dynamics are reflective of how we perceive and assume things
Speaker 1: about sexuality and gender in the able able bodied population
Speaker 1: as well. Yeah, but there are a lot of people
Speaker 1: working to make this happen. You've got Australian sex worker
Speaker 1: Rachel Watton, who founded the group Touching Base to connect
Speaker 1: people with disabilities to sex workers. And one's main argument
Speaker 1: is that basically people with disabilities should have all of
Speaker 1: the same rights that able bodied folks have and it
Speaker 1: shouldn't be some kind of all or nothing thing. And
Speaker 1: she said, quote, for some people with disabilities, they only
Speaker 1: have one life and to wait around for society to
Speaker 1: say I will date someone with cerebral palsy, Well, when
Speaker 1: you see some of my clients, their prospects of getting
Speaker 1: a partner are limited, if not nil. Yeah, And so
Speaker 1: she basically says, yes, society should change, should all be
Speaker 1: more accepting, We shouldn't ignore a marginalize, er and fantilize
Speaker 1: people with disabilities. But until society has a radical shift,
Speaker 1: I want to be here to provide these services. UM
Speaker 1: related services also exist in Japan. For instance, there is
Speaker 1: a masturbation service only for men, exclusively for men, called
Speaker 1: White Hands, And in places like Holland and Denmark, where
Speaker 1: there are more permissive laws around sex work, you've got
Speaker 1: this sexual assistant model UM. Basically, social workers will ask
Speaker 1: clients with disabilities whether they need help with their sexuality
Speaker 1: or their sexual function, and they may fund visits to
Speaker 1: sexual assistants or sex workers. And this was pioneered by
Speaker 1: Dutch sex assistant Nina Duvries, whose clients started requesting erotic
Speaker 1: massages in the nineties and the work basically grew from there.
Speaker 1: You know, she doesn't have intercourse with them, but she
Speaker 1: works with clients with dementia, people with earning difficulties. But critically,
Speaker 1: and this is a major part of its discussion, she
Speaker 1: will not work with people who can't give clear consent.
Speaker 1: This is a huge concern for people in this community
Speaker 1: that you know, whether you're a sex worker, a politician,
Speaker 1: someone with a disability. This is a huge part of
Speaker 1: the conversation the issue of consent. Yeah, and and also
Speaker 1: not everybody is buying the argument to legalize sex work
Speaker 1: specifically for people with disabilities, but it's not necessarily because
Speaker 1: of concerns around sex work itself, right exactly. Um, A
Speaker 1: lot of people are concerned about issues of commodifying sex
Speaker 1: and commodifying women's bodies. Um Alex Guinness, for instance, who's
Speaker 1: an American disability advocate and a former dating and relationship columnist,
Speaker 1: said that it also helps us ignore bigger societal issues,
Speaker 1: those things that Rachel Watton was addressing in her quote
Speaker 1: that we talked about earlier. Um Alex writes, it makes
Speaker 1: it so society can check this box that men are
Speaker 1: getting laid, so we don't have to have broader social change.
Speaker 1: We're giving them sex through a brothel, so we don't
Speaker 1: have to change our social attitudes around socially excluded people
Speaker 1: with disabilities. And she says it pities and coddles us,
Speaker 1: as if we are being given things that will assuage us,
Speaker 1: rather than having society change around us. And that was
Speaker 1: something echoed by a musician and TV presenter, Mixed Scarlett,
Speaker 1: who is not a fan of this idea either. Because quote,
Speaker 1: apparently that's the only way I'm going to lose my virginity.
Speaker 1: And he disagrees that it's a natural right to have
Speaker 1: sex and argues instead that all of this just distorts
Speaker 1: people with disabilities relationships with sex, because if you set
Speaker 1: up this system where people can people with disabilities can
Speaker 1: go and pay for sex and it's perfectly fine and legal,
Speaker 1: but not for anybody else exactly, Scarlett says, then this
Speaker 1: is gonna just create this whole idea that people with
Speaker 1: disabilities if they have had sex and you've paid for it,
Speaker 1: and it further marginalizes, Scarlett argues, people with disabilities because
Speaker 1: on top of the layer of oh, well you're disabled
Speaker 1: and therefore unattractive and probably not sexual anyway, but also
Speaker 1: too you frequent sex workers, right, yeah. He takes major
Speaker 1: issue with this idea that quote, some people are too
Speaker 1: hideous and too disabled to have sex like the rest
Speaker 1: of us, and so they have to pay for it.
Speaker 1: And he says, on top of that, why is it
Speaker 1: okay to oppress women and make their bodies a commodity?
Speaker 1: Of course, that you know, it's a whole separate discussion about,
Speaker 1: you know, choosing to be in sex work and having
Speaker 1: that be an empowering thing that you choose to do.
Speaker 1: But I mean, he has a point that there are
Speaker 1: so many layers too. You can't just say, yeah, it's
Speaker 1: just let's just legalized sex work, but just for this
Speaker 1: group of people. And that's something that Jessin Nicole, writing
Speaker 1: for Exo Jane points out. She's like, whoa, I'm totally
Speaker 1: on board with the idea of normalizing, legalizing and making
Speaker 1: safer sex work, But why are people with disabilities considered
Speaker 1: like this special group who it should only be for
Speaker 1: them if we're going to have sex work. Shouldn't people
Speaker 1: with disabilities just be another normal client base for sex workers? Yeah?
Speaker 1: I mean, because she argues that quote casting disabled clients
Speaker 1: is somehow more legitimate than other clients, does it as
Speaker 1: service to everybody, because by doing that, it holds up
Speaker 1: the idea of disability granting some innate nobility, as she
Speaker 1: puts it, while at the same time automatically casting quote
Speaker 1: unquote other clients in a negative like so it's still
Speaker 1: mothering in other words, Yeah, well yeah, it's yeah, it's mothering.
Speaker 1: It seems to be mothering for everyone. Yeah. I mean,
Speaker 1: I feel like there's like no no way around that
Speaker 1: at this point in the conversation. But the thing is
Speaker 1: sex work aside. These kinds discussions around sexuality and sex
Speaker 1: said and how it relates to disability are beneficial for
Speaker 1: all of us. Yeah. So, Penny Pepper is the author
Speaker 1: of a two thousand three book, Desires Unborn Erotic Short
Speaker 1: Stories featuring people with disabilities. Uh points out that this
Speaker 1: is really working too open conversations and improve communication, and
Speaker 1: as we've talked about on the podcast before, open communication
Speaker 1: can only be positive when it comes to sex and
Speaker 1: relationships in general at all. Um, And she says, I
Speaker 1: do feel I can talk about sex in an open
Speaker 1: and relaxed way that I don't see with many non
Speaker 1: disabled people. I think it's because we've had to confront
Speaker 1: these issues about body image, and that's a good place
Speaker 1: to be, um. Because she goes on to further point
Speaker 1: out that like, look, whether you have a physical or
Speaker 1: mental disability or not, if you don't look like a supermodel,
Speaker 1: it's hard for a lot of us out there when
Speaker 1: it comes to body image and sexuality. Well, I mean,
Speaker 1: in two if we just take a kind of bird
Speaker 1: side view of all of the different layers of discrimination,
Speaker 1: and marginalization, you know, as it applies to sexuality, whether
Speaker 1: it's on the basis of gender or ethnicity, obviously ability
Speaker 1: in this case, or even socioeconomic status. I mean, there's
Speaker 1: so much discomfort and also just erasure on so many
Speaker 1: different levels too. So I think that's another reason why
Speaker 1: these kinds of conversations are important, because it opens up
Speaker 1: the door to more of these important conversations. Um. And
Speaker 1: that's something that the Disabled Students Union at UC Berkeley
Speaker 1: is really doing. They push the boundaries with super open
Speaker 1: and human panels discussing with students and academics alike issues
Speaker 1: around sex, love, and disability, addressing sex as a natural
Speaker 1: part of life and sexuality as a healthy thing to explore. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and there were actually there was actually a documentary made
Speaker 1: about these panels that you see Berkeley, and they talked
Speaker 1: to one young woman who said that sex was anything
Speaker 1: she could get off on, and the quote was this
Speaker 1: brings us back into the human race because, like you said, sex, sexuality, desire,
Speaker 1: these are all parts of normal human existence, and advocates
Speaker 1: discussions around these things are really valid for a larger
Speaker 1: audience and help us to remember that sex doesn't have
Speaker 1: to revolve around these heteronormative notions of sex equals penetration. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean this is something too that we've talked about,
Speaker 1: especially in terms of sex within lgbt Q communities, and
Speaker 1: how we have elevated penis and vagina intercourse to be
Speaker 1: what sex equals and how a damaging and just straight
Speaker 1: up limiting that is as well. Yeah, and so this
Speaker 1: idea that sex is and can be more than just penetration.
Speaker 1: It benefits older people, It benefits women who might not
Speaker 1: enjoy it because of either vaginal pain or because of
Speaker 1: sexual assault related trauma, and also benefits men, for instance,
Speaker 1: whose penises have been amputated or damaged because of cancer
Speaker 1: and injury. And the idea then that your orogenous zones
Speaker 1: can be all over your body. It can be your
Speaker 1: era loads, it could be your neck and give you
Speaker 1: behind the knees. That benefits all of us, anyone who
Speaker 1: wants to expand their own sexual pleasure or better understand
Speaker 1: their own sexuality period. Yeah. And so as we close
Speaker 1: out this episode, we want to leave you with some
Speaker 1: thoughts from Kirstie Lidiard, who we've sided earlier from Sheffield University,
Speaker 1: who said disability and impairment can invigorate sexuality and disrupt
Speaker 1: our standard norms of gender and sexuality. Disabled bodies give
Speaker 1: us a chance to think outside of the box, outside
Speaker 1: the vision of penetration and the Hollywood view of sex,
Speaker 1: and that, to me, Caroline, sounds like a mighty empowered vision. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's that's the that's the sexual world I want to
Speaker 1: live in, exactly. And so I think all of these
Speaker 1: photo projects, photo essays, like visibility efforts on the part
Speaker 1: of activists and advocates are so important because people with
Speaker 1: disabilities are just as normal as anyone else and just
Speaker 1: as big a part of life as anyone else, And
Speaker 1: so why would we not have these conversations They do
Speaker 1: benefit everyone. And Caroline, one thing that we didn't address
Speaker 1: in this episode that we could probably go back and
Speaker 1: do another podcast on our representations of people with disability
Speaker 1: and pop culture and specifically how their sexuality is portrayed,
Speaker 1: if at all, If at all? Yeah, because going back
Speaker 1: a little bit, the first two things that come to
Speaker 1: mind are a The Other Sister starring Juliette Lewis, where
Speaker 1: the whole thing kind of revolves around her wanting to
Speaker 1: have a relationship with that when she has a mental disability,
Speaker 1: and she wants to have a relationship with a guy,
Speaker 1: Giovanni Rivisium, who also has a mental disability, and like
Speaker 1: all the concerns around that, which echo a lot of
Speaker 1: what we were talking about. And then two and listeners
Speaker 1: might have to correct me on the details of this,
Speaker 1: But I remember watching Life Goes On when I was
Speaker 1: a kid, and Quirky who has down syndrome. In the show,
Speaker 1: I want to say, at some point in later seasons,
Speaker 1: he starts dating or he wants to date. So there
Speaker 1: was that, I mean, where they were still like they
Speaker 1: were kind of these precious representations. Yeah, exactly, if that
Speaker 1: makes sense. Um, But it does seem like, at least
Speaker 1: in the past few years, we have been getting some
Speaker 1: better representations. UM. Already Ugly comes to mind. I mean,
Speaker 1: he's a fully formed character, he dates, he has a
Speaker 1: fabulous singing voice. UM. So that seems like a step
Speaker 1: in the right direction. You've got the real life story
Speaker 1: too of Stephen Hawking and Jane Hawking. UM. And then
Speaker 1: more recently, I don't even know if it's out yet,
Speaker 1: but you've got the film adaptation of the book Me
Speaker 1: Before You, which is a romance between In the movie,
Speaker 1: it's going to be Amelia Clark, also known as the
Speaker 1: Queen of Dragons, nearest targarian from Game of Thrones who
Speaker 1: falls in love with a recently paralyzed man who is
Speaker 1: incredibly handsome and whose name is escaping me at the moment.
Speaker 1: I think its character's name is Will Trainer. I don't
Speaker 1: know the actor's name, but so slowly getting representations in
Speaker 1: in popular culture, but I don't know what what movies
Speaker 1: and TV shows and characters are we missing. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: because we are just talking off the top of our
Speaker 1: heads right now, so you know, if this is an
Speaker 1: episode that you would like to hear, and I think
Speaker 1: that we should absolutely do it. Please send us all
Speaker 1: of those, um all those pop cultural representations, and it
Speaker 1: can even be beyond film and television um that come
Speaker 1: to mind. And I have a feeling that what we've
Speaker 1: talked about today resonates personally with a lot of our listeners,
Speaker 1: not just Katrina. Shout out to Katrina again for this
Speaker 1: fantastic episode. And we definitely want to hear from you
Speaker 1: on this because this is something first of all, that
Speaker 1: Caroline and I as able bodied people, we don't have
Speaker 1: a firsthand experience with it, and we need your help
Speaker 1: sort of filling in all of the all the nuances
Speaker 1: and experiences that um that we missed in talking about
Speaker 1: this very very important topics. So we want to hear
Speaker 1: from you. Mom Stuff at how Stuff Works dot com
Speaker 1: is our email address. You can also tweet us at
Speaker 1: mom Stuff podcast or messages on Facebook, and we've got
Speaker 1: a couple of messages to share with you right now. Okay,
Speaker 1: So I have a letter here from Brittany from our
Speaker 1: guesting episode and it's real funny. Brittany, I enjoyed your email.
Speaker 1: She says, here's a true story. I was using one
Speaker 1: of the popular dating sites and set up a coffee
Speaker 1: with a nice young dude. We met, talked, and instantly
Speaker 1: knew there was no attraction, but we got along really well.
Speaker 1: We talked for almost two hours. He was in the military,
Speaker 1: very polite, and his friends had set up the stating
Speaker 1: profile for him. He told me he was flying to
Speaker 1: California the next day for an interview with the FBI.
Speaker 1: We exchange phone numbers, give a buddy hug, and win
Speaker 1: our separate ways. The next day I texted him, good
Speaker 1: luck with your interview. He replied, thank you. I will
Speaker 1: let you know how it goes well. A day passes,
Speaker 1: so I jokingly sent in another text that said, Hope,
Speaker 1: it went well. Did you already get sent on a
Speaker 1: secret mission? Never heard from him again? Pretty sure my
Speaker 1: name is in a file somewhere. True story. Thank you
Speaker 1: for your excellent research and more importantly, your passion. Keep
Speaker 1: rocking socks, and Brittany, you keep rocking socks as well.
Speaker 1: I like to imagine that he did get sent, like
Speaker 1: to some strange country and he's on some secret mission now,
Speaker 1: although that sounds more CIA than FBI, but you know, yeah,
Speaker 1: I like to imagine he was already in the FBI
Speaker 1: and he was undercover, and it was like, I can't
Speaker 1: text are back all of the all the ghosting narratives
Speaker 1: and fill ins. I let's make that TV show. I've
Speaker 1: got one here from Hope about her episode on mechanics,
Speaker 1: and she writes, well, I don't know much about card
Speaker 1: mechanics specifically. My first job out of college involved me
Speaker 1: working as an industrial maintenance supervisor and engineer. I was
Speaker 1: the only woman in the maintenance department of a multibillion
Speaker 1: dollar company, and I was only on temporary assignment, I
Speaker 1: had to win over a big group of older men
Speaker 1: who frequently referred to women in the maintenance field being useless, weak,
Speaker 1: and unwilling to do the dirty work to respect me
Speaker 1: as a technical consultant and leader. After a few months
Speaker 1: of getting under machines with the guys and providing them
Speaker 1: technical training based on my larger engineering projects, we developed
Speaker 1: some great friendships. Some of them even admitted being impressed
Speaker 1: and learning something while I was there. I'm so happy
Speaker 1: to hear about more women getting out there in this
Speaker 1: industry because I definitely found it challenging and a little lonely.
Speaker 1: I'd love to see more eighties fixing machines, will hope
Speaker 1: all the gold stars to you for doing that, because hey,
Speaker 1: that's a really cool line of work that you are
Speaker 1: in that my brain cannot entirely process and be. I
Speaker 1: mean just that you have the people skills in order
Speaker 1: to to do that, to lead that group of dudes
Speaker 1: is super impressive. So, folks, now I want to hear
Speaker 1: from you. Mom Stuff at how stuff works dot com
Speaker 1: is our email address and for links all of our
Speaker 1: social media as well as all of our blogs, videos
Speaker 1: and podcasts with our sources. So you can learn more
Speaker 1: about people with disabilities and sexuality. Head on over to
Speaker 1: stuff Mom Never told You dot com or yet for
Speaker 1: more on this and thousands of other topics. Is it
Speaker 1: how stuff Works dot com