Discuss the pros and cons of working with a surrogate in sex therapy
People are drawn to sex therapy for a variety of reasons—sometimes to repair communication within a pair-bonded relationship and other times to gain confidence and to learn skills to better function in future relationships. When an individual does not have a partner and/or lacks the confidence or social skills to sustain a relationship, then the services of a surrogate might be employed. Surrogates work under the supervision of a licensed sex therapist; they are not allowed to function as therapists themselves, but rather as adjuncts to the therapy process (SSSS 1991). Ultimately, a triadic relationship is created between the therapist, the surrogate and the client. The therapist and surrogate create a (quasi-parental) nurturing environment so that the client can learn the skills to independently create loving relationships (Blanchard 1999).
Why has the use of surrogates been controversial? Perhaps because the structural dynamics look like prostitution where an outside intermediary procures a sexual partner for a paying client. The differences, however, are many. Surrogates are professionals who undergo extensive training and like sex therapists, adhere to a code of ethics (IPSA 2002). While they may engage in genital contact with a client, this isn’t de rigueur for all sessions or all clients. While a prostitute might be hired for a single encounter, partner surrogates typically work with clients for an extended series of sessions.
Sex Therapist Wardell Pomeroy (Sutton 1983) recalled that when he began using surrogates, results that might have taken might taken many months of talk therapy, occurred within weeks. Touch, and particularly erotic touch is a very powerful tool. Due to the subordinative nature of the relationship between therapist and consumer, professional organizations including the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality (1991) and the American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors and Therapists (2002) have clearly stated codes of ethics that disallow such touching.
When Hartman and Fithian (1972) engaged in their pioneering sex therapy work with couples they would on occasion touch their clients to point out anatomical features and functions. Being a professional male-female team they believed (and presumably the their clients did as well) that ethical standards were being upheld. Ultimately, their two-week intensive therapy program was couple-based and genital-genital contact only occurred between the consumer-couples themselves.
In some ways it is quite ironic that sex therapists cannot touch their clients. It is presumed that with such a pronounced power differential that the client might be indelibly seduced. Using surrogates who are make themselves available as pseudo-partners, but maintain a separate social and emotional life is viewed as a reasonable compromise. Such an arrangement certainly conforms to Western cultures’ separation of the mind and body. The only times we allow the complete integration of mind body, and soul is with a veritable lover. Using sexual surrogates enables a socially acceptable separation.
Under what conditions might using a surrogate not be advised? When the consumer’s needs are for permission, information, or specific suggestions, then using a surrogate would probably not be necessary. When a client is in need of sexual and relationship enhancement techniques, then workshops in tantra or such as those offered by the Human Awareness Institute would be most effective (Blanchard 1999). Finally, consumers who believe that seeing a surrogate could be a means to access a “legal prostitute” for immediate sexual gratification would be inappropriate as well.
Surrogate and prostitute goals differ. Many prostitutes endeavor to satisfy their clients as quickly as possible. They may work on a clock wherein the more clients they can see, the more money they can earn. While they may endeavor to have repeated customers, their primary goal is to expend minimal energy for maximal profit. While surrogates are certainly paid for their time, their ultimate goal is to educate their clients. They may provide a client the luxury of time, wisdom and understanding; something performance oriented partners and on-the-clock-prostitutes don’t have. Moreover, it is the therapist, not the surrogate or the client, who determines what activities may be undertaken in terms of the overall therapy (Roberts). While the surrogate experience creates the opportunity for a client to experience a sexual-emotional bond, the therapist assures that the bond remain temporal and therapeutic (Blanchard 1999).
Apart from surrogate therapy’s close brush with prostitution, Szasz (1990) contends that because sex is by nature dangerous and unpredictable, sex therapists can not reliably train their clients to be safe and fulfilled. Given sex therapy’s courtship with repairing dysfunction (e.g. ejaculatory control), there’s an underlying edict that particular processes can be reliably employed to fix what ever is wrong. Here a surrogate might function as a technician, engaging the client in prescribed ways to achieve predetermined results. Ultimately, the truly transformative aspects of sex: power, synergy and seduction may never hit the wide-screen.
Why then are surrogates needed in Western society? Our culture provides few practical avenues for sexual initiation and sexual learning. Typically, our young people absorb information about sex from movies, books, pornography and the Internet. Unlike South Pacific islands such as Mangaia where the youth receive hands-on expert sexual initiation and training by experienced elders (Ford and Beach 1951), here erotic contact between adults and children/adolescents is considered dangerous and potentially criminal. Sexologist Barbara Roberts recalls several parents who challenged our culture’s status quo and arranged for their sons to be initiated through a full course of surrogate therapy. Considering the responsible and positive experiential learning that surrogate therapy affords, these parents may have made a very wise choice.
What is there to gain? Surrogate therapy enables the creation of a pseudo pair bond from which one can gain the confidence to function in “real life” situations. Considering that about 50% of the consumers of surrogate therapy are late-life virgins (Blanchard 1999), this practical hands-on-experience is often very useful. Ultimately the consumer might learn how to function in a relationship, how to successfully initiate sexual contact, and to gain experience in generating an erotically positive encounter.
Perhaps the greatest challenge to professional sex therapy is the growing number of goddesses and gods trained in tantric sex techniques that offer their own spiritually inspired therapies. Perusing the Temple Goddess web site one can find voluptuous women throughout North America, Europe and Australia who offer training in erotic enhancement. Their specialties include “ejaculatory mastery,” “heightened pleasure and sexual response,” “increased vitality and libido,” and “expanded and full body and multiple orgasms for men and women.” These goddess sex workers present a fascinating dual image. In one moment they are drop-dead gorgeous babes and then simultaneously they claim that their healing ceremonies “are not for the purpose of sexual gratification, but rather to expand [ones] pleasure potential to reach new heights of fulfillment on a mental, emotional, physical and personal level.”
Having spoken at length with one of the goddesses (Shama 2002), it is clear that they walk a very thin line. In one moment I’m told about the unique array of tantric skills they offer and in the next moment I hear how most of their clients are men who, while seeking “something different,” do not necessarily become repeat customers. In an effort to legitimize its activities, the Temple of the Goddess web site warns consumers that it “does not provide or participate in any illegal transactions or activities. In order to qualify for more focused, intensive work with a certified sexual surrogate, you must have a referral from a licensed psychologist or accredited psychotherapist.”
Of course in traditional sex therapy, surrogates do not blatantly advertise their services independently of a supervising sex therapist (IPSA 2002). Considering that the links to each of the goddesses and gods include direct email addresses and phone numbers, if a referral from a psychologist or psychotherapist were obtained, it would certainly be just a formality. Being that the Temple of the Goddess web site is brimming with tantalizing offers like, “little known sexual secrets will be revealed,” it’s quite apparent that a supervising sex therapist’s directives would hardly be welcome.
Unlike the exploited and abused prostitute with little other recourse, women who proudly own their bodies and their skills inhabit the world of tantric goddess sex workers. Often coming from massage and bodywork backgrounds, they’ve discovered that they can triple their fees by including genital touch. Moreover, a “full body” treatment is where the real power lies and where the potential for transformation occurs. Considering the fees that they typically charge ($600 for a three-hour session) plus the freedom to set their own agendas, it’s unlikely that they would find traditional surrogate work appealing. Ultimately they live in a netherworld where, despite the fancy window dressing, they are engaged in an admittedly illegal activity. Returning to non-sexual massage might mean that they would have to find six times as many clients and work many more hours a week.
The many ways that our culture obfuscates sexual learning and sexual access has created a blaring void. While the therapist – surrogate – consumer triad offers valuable protections for the surrogate and consumer alike, today’s wave of sex worker goddesses nonetheless satisfy compelling interests as well. Ultimately, all of these modalities may buffer consumers from the dangerous and unpredictable aspects of a full mind/body connection; nonetheless they can open the door to deeper living and loving.
Blanchard, V. “An Interview with Vena Blanchard,” Sexuality.org: Society for Human Sexuality, 1999.
Code of Ethics AASECT American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors and Therapists
http://www.aasect.org/codeofethics.cfm
Code of Ethics (IPSA) International Professional Surrogates Association, 2002
http://members.aol.com/Ipsa1/ethics.html
Ford, C.S. and Beach, F.A. Patterns of Sexual Behavior, New York: Harper and Row, 1951
Goddess Temple web site, 2002
http://www.goddesstemple.com/
Hartman, W.E. and Fithian, M.A., Treatment of Sexual Dysfunction: a Bio-Psycho-Social Approach, Long Beach, CA: Center for Marital and Sexual Studies, 1972
Roberts, B. “The Sexual Surrogate,” Inner-Self Magazine
http://www.innerself.com/Magazine/Sex_Talk/Sexual_Surrogate.htm
Shama, Personal Communication, Los Angeles, November 2002.
Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality Statement of Ethical Guidelines,
Section VI: The Use of Sex Surrogates, 1991
Sutton, L. “Dimensions of Surrogate Therapy,” National Sex Forum, 1983
Szasz, T.S. Sex by Prescription: The Startling Truth About Today’s Sex Therapy, Syracuse University Press, 1990