"Sex Surrogate": your opinion about the movie "The Sessions"

[Helena D'Orville 33237]

"The Sessions" (2012) is a movie directed by Ben Lewin with John Hawkes, Helen Hunt, and William H. Macy. Inspired by a true story: "A man in an iron lung who wishes to lose his virginity contacts a professional sex surrogate with the help of his therapist and priest." (Source: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1866249/?ref_=nv_sr_1)

 

This movie is available on Netflix and I watched it last week. This is a simple movie, well made (not "amazing") but the topic is interesting enough that it attracted my attention, of course. What I find particularly interesting is that the character played by Helen Hunt introduces herself as a "Sex Surrogate" the first time she meets with the character played by John Hawkes. She also mentions that she is not a pros-itute. But at the end of the day, what she offers and does makes no difference with what other ladies offer.

 

If the term "Sex Surrogate" certainly fits the context of this movie, I find it a bit cold though. I wondered why/what makes her really different from any other lady that would do the same job as hers in another context, a more "usual one" let's say. But I have my ideas about it.

 

If you have seen the movie, I would be interested to know your opinion about it, about this term versus the ones we would usually use here etc...

 

Thank you!

 

(p.s: I also wrote a post on my blog after viewing this movie, that can be read here http://www.miaadore.com/#!What-About-The-Concept-of-Body-Mind%E2%80%99s-Rights/c1zwm/56b2f77f0cf2b4e0b6193522 )

[Guest st*****ens**ors]

Hello Mia

 

I tried to read your blog post, but my phone can't handle the format evidently.

 

The character Helen Hunt plays terms herself a surrogate, but the word means stand-in or replacement. There are sex surrogates who provide intimacy on behalf of someone unable to participate in an activity with their partner. However someone who provides intimacy to someone with limited ability to participate isn't a surrogate but a provider.

 

However, that would play badly with box office revenues, so the more abstract term of surrogate is employed.

[mrgreen760 37785]

I know a woman who is working toward being a sexual surrogate as part of a therapy team. I had seen The Sessions (huge Helen Hunt fan) and asked it this accurately portrayed what a surrogate is. Her response was that it was a pretty close representation. She would see herself as part of a team and that the relationship is not an ongoing one. I found the film quite clinical in nature which seemed to be the point she was making when explaining it to me.

 

Peace

MG

[MightyPen 67414]

I watched "The Sessions" quite a while ago and really liked it. I think that the script portrays its client/provider interaction as a clinical one on purpose, to make it more palatable to mainstream audiences.

 

Helen Hunt's character, when asked "what makes you different from a prostitute," says (I think twice) "a prostitute wants to see you more; I only ever see you six times." I think that's a pretty weak distinction, but the script has everyone satisfied by it. The most generous interpretation I can come up with for what the writer intended by this is "a prostitute is in this for her own profit; the sex surrogate is in this for your health." But the sex surrogate still charges for her six sessions, which weakens even this distinction.

 

The movie also seems to insist that sexual encounters create an unavoidable intimacy that is unhealthy for both parties because of the boundaries built into the relationship. John Hawkes' character falls in love despite the agreement up front, and it causes issues. Helen Hunt's character has feelings for her client that cause her to struggle too (there's some sobbing and distress on her part as they part the last time, and as I recall later when she's at home alone). While it's true that there's a balance to maintain in such encounters, in my experience two adults who know the terms up front are perfectly capable of enjoy the benefits of this relationship, and avoiding the pitfalls. But hey... a provider and client just getting along well wouldn't really be good fodder for a dramatic film.

 

In the end: I give the movie a good score for trying to show that intimacy can occur outside of the tired and familiar situations we're trained to expect from stories we're told, read, and watch in popular culture. It shows two people sharing and enjoying intimacy as a series of encounters with built-in personal boundaries. It acknowledges that sexual intimacy doesn't have to be "magical", some undefined elixir only found in the depths of True Love. It can also be something that can be sampled, learned about, and enjoyed.

 

The movie trips, though, whenever it can't escape conventional sexual scripts as I described above (sticking with a palatable "sex surrogate" vs. pop culture's unease with plain old prostitution; and showing intimacy with boundaries as harmful as well as joyful). But that's the kind of compromise you need to make when you're trying to entice a mainstream audience into the theatre seats.

 

EDIT: Huh. The censor turned every instance of the P-word into "escort". As a result, there's some grammar weirdness in my post.

[Regent 35404]

It's not a bad movie. I watched it a while ago on recommendation of a sexologist friend, as part of a discussion on the legal grey area of surrogacy, and the complexities of therapists recommending and working with surrogates in the context of their professional organizations/licensing bodies' code of ethics, and the general sex negativity pervasive within the culture of Marriage and Family Therapists. I did find the surrogate's behaviour and demeanour a bit unprofessional at some points in the movie, though I overall enjoyed it.

 

There are a couple of big differences between surrogates and other sex workers. One is that surrogates are part of a team, and work with a therapist who provides talk or other hands-off therapy to the client. Another is that there's a professional organization for surrogacy, that includes training, professional standards, membership and professional support that lends a degree of "legitimacy" and "respectability" to the profession in the eyes of the law and other medical and mental health professionals. So while I might be a breach of ethics for a therapist to recommend a client see a sex worker, connecting them with a surrogate would not (necessarily) be.

 

IPSA provides training and membership for surrogates, if anyone is interested in more info: http://www.surrogatetherapy.org/