亲密治疗

Mark O'Brien 因6岁患上小儿麻痹，导致脖子以下瘫痪，甚至因呼吸存在困难，需要靠铁肺给他提供足够的氧气而时而需要生活在其中。

与史铁生一样，他没有让残障定义自己，却用其相对短暂的一生，通过写作和参与不同社会活动，致力于唤起美国社会对残障人士生存状态和应给予其同等尊重与权利的重视与支持。

他是诗人，也是记者。

这部电影改编于他的给《太阳报》(The Sun)写的On Seeing a Sex Surrogate。

尽管这部电影主要部分围绕着“疗程”展开，但开篇和结尾给出了，为何Mark决定寻求Cheryl帮助、这个经历于他的意义的答案。

“性”，于他生活在身患小儿麻痹症的身体来说，本是他不可想象，甚至是在他生活的天主教家庭/环境，恐惧提及的事。

即便他对一位照护者心生爱意也勇敢表达了，这个话题或许被想起却未被公开提及。

而当他因接受约稿的机缘，接触到性于残障人士的议题，他开始以记者的身份了解到，原来性生活对许多身患残障的人来说，并不是禁忌，对他们身体健全的伴侣来说，也不是猎奇；而作为一个37岁的处男，亲密行为，是他首先为自己，可以去想象甚至尝试去做的事。

要鼓起勇气走出这一步，他去寻求了牧师的指点，去寻找了医生的帮助，得到了身边朋友和照护者的支持，遇到了帮助人们克服性生活障碍的专业人士Cheryl。

“最多六次疗程”，Cheryl第一次见面就告诉他，这样的边界属于专业性的一部分。

每一次疗程都是一种突破——对身体的体验、对身体的理解、对身体的把控、对身体和自我的接受的突破——而Mark的进步，在Cheryl的悉心指点下，在周围朋友的鼓励下，是超乎他俩第一次拘谨且效果并不太好的疗程所能想象的。

乃至当第四次疗程结束后，两人共同商议决定停止治疗：Mark不再需要这样的治疗去告诉他如何过好性生活了。

就像影片一开始，电视台报道他在UC Berckely成功完成学业，获得文学学士学位一样，在这个关乎身体和自我接纳与成长的课堂，Mark以令人惊叹的成绩毕业了【电影中对Mark与Cheryl关系还进行了一定浪漫化处理】。

或许命运使然，在随后遭遇因停电铁肺暂停的事故几近死亡时，在医院，Mark遇到了喜欢诗歌的志愿者Susan，而他可以毫不掩饰其骄傲和快乐地告诉这一见钟情的人：“我不是处男”。

即便此处有戏剧化的成分——毕竟是电影——还是会让人跟着他和Susan会心一笑。

而正如治疗中遇到困难向牧师倾诉的Mark，听到牧师的回答——你是一个诗人，用你诗人的方法去回应Cheryl的治疗——时，屏幕内外也会一笑一样，Mark与Susan与屏幕前的你我的一笑，既是Mark对自己能给未来的伴侣提供全面的幸福体验的信心，又是他带些孩子气的勇敢与率真的真情流露。

这里，束缚他的身体解放了性话题在社会的一般禁忌。

这里，爱的讨喜与生命的可能融为一体。

Mark这篇纪实性报道发表于1990年，影片上映于2012年。

1999年，49岁的诗人Mark离开了人间，他的诗集、散文和自传 How I Became a Human Being: A Disabled Man's Quest for Independence，和讲述他故事的诗歌、报道、影片一道，成为留给爱他和他爱的人世间的一笔财富。

生活在2024年年尾的你我，看到这部片子，对我们的身体、对我们对残缺对不完整对陌生对过去和未知的恐惧、对我们可以做出改变的选择，是否也能有诗意般的回答与行动呢？

推荐阅读：Chana Bloch, 2013, My sessions with Mark, The Poetry Foundation: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/articles/69959/my-sessions-with-mark

这是一部从朋友U盘拷来的电影，初看题目还以为会有些情色低俗的噱头.看完之后，内心异常感动.残疾人肉体上的残疾的确带来了很大的伤害，但是来自社会对于内心的压力造成的心理阴影是更大的阻碍.男主人公的生存状态展现出来的时候，本身就给人以心得震撼，我们心生怜悯，但是怜悯归于怜悯，就像他第一次追求表白的女孩那样，也许有着心灵上的沟通，但是面对一副丑陋脆弱的皮囊，终究退却了。

也许我们都应该学会什么是尊重，我们因为怜悯，所以忽略了他们的性需求，他们的诉求远远不是怜悯，需要我们把他们当正常人对待。

男主人公与牧师的对话，他努力地去冲破常规想法，给自己的勇气，爆发出的力量，确是常人难以企及的精神高度.就像Motel的老板Confused的那样，一个残疾人和一个女人，他们怎么能进去这么久.....这是因为他们的绽放是那么的有限而非凡.我们应该感动地为他们的勇气鼓掌，女辅导师的灵魂如此干净令人敬畏。

也能照出凡人心中的可耻和懦弱.我们每个人都需要一次心的洗礼.

　　让我用文字轻抚你 　　因为我的手犹如空手套般瘫软 　　 　　让我的文字掠过你的秀发 　　抚过你的背部，轻搔你的肚子 　　因为我那犹如砖块般虚晃的双手 　　并不理会我的心智 　　也坚决不肯完成我内心最深处的渴望 　　 　　让我的文字进入你的内心 　　让它们高举火把 　　请欣然接受它们进入你的身心灵 　　我的文字便能轻柔爱抚你心深处 　　 　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　———（电影男主角）马克·欧布莱恩

一个残疾人，生下来就是拖累人 ，先是父母，社会。

倘若人遵循了自然法则，适者生存，优胜略汰，是才能够像动物那样茁壮成长吗?人夹杂着个人情感，需要同情，需要理解，需要安慰，需要鼓励，需要感恩，需要有存在感，需要有成就感。

这些自己显然是给予不了自己的，需要他人，需要周围人，需要家人，需要朋友，需要同事，我们 的要求是不是太多了呢？

并且有一个得不到就会影响整个心情。

“我相信上帝有着邪恶的幽默感，非常邪恶的那种。

”——马克如是说。

最近在豆瓣看到过一位姑娘，因病常年在家画画，那些花栩栩如生惟妙惟肖。

当她描述自己的故事，那种脑仁中的共振，或许小学语文老师会将其形容为“传神”。

朋友说，只有当自己有过同样类似的经历时，对方的故事才能撼动你的心。

人类总是渺小的。

在自以为是的发明和创造中，地球中与人类对立的另外一个世界也在蓬勃发展。

地震、瘟疫、灾难。

宇宙中若是有神明，神明定是在中立的注视，给与了我们福音也正在给予我们灭亡。

个人总是渺小的。

很多很多的时候，你只能选择呆在困住你的地方。

无路可逃，只希望随时间流逝，困境会有改变、境况会有起色。

但奇特的是，我总是相信人力能够赋予个人超凡的能量，比如那些成百上亿的神奇故事中讲的那样，癌症患者的不治自愈或心灵脆弱的人无疾而终。

但有那么一些时候，尽管你将衡量境况的口径缩小到无法再小，你还是无处可逃。

努力、坚持，并用幽默感嘲笑自己的无能。

渐渐的，你会发现一条路，这条路上有你想要的芬芳和清凉，于是开始怀疑“这是真的么？

”努力走，尽全力跨出每一步。

在你正以为事情改变了，你不再是原先那个渺小的自己，一切都在积极有序而愈加明亮的色调中稳步前进——啪——一切都变了，你才发现，其实并不是那么一回事。

这种优越感的戛然而止可以源自一句嘲讽、一种直白的诚实，更甚至是那么一两件不顺心的小事儿。

在戛然而止时，环顾四周，平静而坦然的重新认识自己：愚蠢、自大、骄傲、自满。

可是然后呢？

答案只有一个：继续走。

因为我们本身是那么的伟大。

在huffingtonpost上看到的，觉得有用就转了。

懒得翻译了，只写几点印象深刻的：CCG没有爱上Mark。

（我觉得这一点很重要，电影的设置因为这一点而比现实生活逊色很多，当然我们都能理解为什么要这样编剧本）曾经有过200多名surrogate，现在只有50名。

（经济不景气，需求萎缩啊）CCG因乳腺癌于2006年切除单侧乳房，她今年（2013）已经68岁，仍然战斗在工作第一线。

（这才是为革命事业奋斗终生）下面是原文：One of my favorite movies of the year is The Sessions, based on the true story of sex surrogate Cheryl Cohen Greene and her work with Berkeley-based poet and journalist Mark O'Brien, who was confined to an iron lung after contracting polio at age 6. The story is riveting, and comprises the first chapter of Cheryl's memoir, An Intimate Life: Sex, Love, and My Journey as a Surrogate Partner.For forty years, Cheryl has worked in a career that has helped so many people, yet is greatly misunderstood. Here's what she had to say about her life as a sex surrogate:Lois Alter Mark: I absolutely loved The Sessions, and thought it was such a beautiful and important story that can really open people's minds. How accurate is the movie and what message do you hope viewers will come away with after seeing it?Cheryl Cohen Greene: Overall, I'm pleased with the level of accuracy in the movie. Of course, there are some things that the film couldn't show because of time limitations, but they really gave an accurate depiction of my work with Mark. The part about Mark and I falling in love was an exception. I would say we fell in like and we shared some very intense, loving moments. We stayed friends for years.I hope people will come away understanding how important sexuality is for everyone, including people with disabilities. They have the same needs and desires as those of us who don't live with a physical disability. Additionally, I hope people will have a better sense of who surrogate partners are and the services we provide. We offer people the education and experience that can help them move forward in their lives from a more secure, more knowledgeable place.LAM: Helen Hunt gives a beautiful performance that has deservedly been nominated for an Academy Award. How did it feel to watch her portray you? Did she have any specific questions before she started? What kind of advice did you give her?CCG: It was incredible! Helen observed me very closely. She herself has said that I'm a louder person than she is, but I really felt she got my energy into her portrayal. She asked a lot about how I work with people and the range of clients I have. We discussed my work with Mark and how I encouraged him to give me feedback. Once, I read the script to her in my own voice so she could get my Boston accent. She also invited me to her home and I demonstrated sensual touch, an exercise I do with clients, on her partner -- fully clothed. Much of what you see with Helen and John in the movie comes directly from my work with Mark. I did bring a mirror to our sessions so Mark could see himself, and I did touch him in much the same way Helen did.LAM: Because the movie focuses on just one of your clients, I found it fascinating to read your memoir afterwards. You have lived a very rich life, in a world most people have no idea even exists!CCG: Thank you. I agree! I've been very fortunate.LAM: It seems that the biggest misconception about surrogates is that they're no different than prostitutes. The movie and your book clearly show how off-base that perception is. I love that you say you're more like Julia Child than Xavier Hollander, and you compare seeing a surrogate to going to culinary school. Can you explain that a little?CCG: Well, if you go to a prostitute it's like going to a restaurant. You choose what you want for the menu, you eat and hopefully have a good meal, and then you pay accordingly. If you have a good experience, maybe you'll return or refer friends to them. With a surrogate, it's more like going to culinary school. You learn the recipes, you learn your way around the kitchen, and then you go back to your life equipped with new skills and knowledge. I've yet to find a better metaphor for explaining the difference.LAM: The world was a very different place when you originally started this career. How did you get into it and what does it take to be good at this job?CCG: It takes compassion and empathy -- not sympathy, but empathy. It also takes having a very good intuitive sense. Surrogates have a process that we follow, but as the work progressives, it really becomes more individualized and it's important for the surrogate to be able to pick up subtle cues from the client.I got into because it was meant to be! I had a sexually repressive childhood in which I was taught to believe that sex was dirty and wrong, but also that you were supposed to save it for the one you love. When I was pregnant with my first child, I went into therapy because I wanted my children to have a different and better experience from the one I had. In the process of working on myself, I really had to confront all of the shame and guilt I had about my sexuality. I was eventually able to work through it and free myself of it, even though it was intense. That made me believe that this was possible for others, too, and I wanted to help people not just overcome negative feelings about sexuality, but become more accepting and happy as sexual beings.LAM: Although sex is all over the place now and it seems like there's a no-holds-barred attitude, the number of surrogates has actually decreased since you started. Why is that? What have been the biggest changes you've seen in our sexual culture over the past 40 years?CCG: The biggest challenge has always been people's shame and guilt. In the sixties and seventies, people were rejecting that and trying to redefine their attitudes about sex. When AIDS happened, people became understandably scared and surrogates were no exception. A lot of them left the field. Those of us who stayed thought it was frightening too. We made a real effort to understand safer sex and to become condom positive. Most of our clients are low risk because they haven't had a lot of sex, but there was still a certain amount of risk that we faced. We had to have a new dialogue. Before AIDS, we asked if a client wanted to use a condom; now, it's taken as a given that he will, and if he refuses, we won't have intercourse. Surrogates became better sex educators because we had to be much better informed. We were up against something much more serious than syphilis and gonorrhea. There are only about 50 trained surrogates in the U.S. now. That number was up to around 200 in the seventies. We're trying to find young men and women to come into the field and I hope the movie will spark interest in the profession. LAM: What's the most difficult part of being a surrogate?CCG: The most difficult part is probably to not continue to be a surrogate when you're with your partner. We're trained to be highly aware of what the client does and feels. Surrogacy is highly client-centric and the surrogate has to be closely attuned to her client. Sex with a partner is a much more shared experience and you don't want to find yourself becoming a spectator or losing touch with your own body. It took a while for me to learn not to be a surrogate all the time.LAM: What's the scariest part?CCG: I don't really find anything scary about my work. People are often surprised to hear that. There have only been very few instances where I felt scared with a client. One I detail in An Intimate Life. The other was with a man who had a lot of unresolved anger at his ex-wife, whom I apparently looked like. All my clients are screened by the referring therapist and it's appropriate for them to be working with me. In truth, surrogacy is, at least initially, probably way scarier for them than it ever is for me.LAM: You are a breast cancer survivor, and you underwent a mastectomy in 2006. How did that affect your own body image as well as your practice?CCG: It threw me for a loop at first, but I knew instantly that I didn't want to stop working. I had to learn a new dialogue about my body. I found myself trying to come to grips with the loss of a friend. I loved my breast. I loved the sensation I had in my nipple and it happens that the breast I had removed was the more sensitive of the two. I took a philosophical attitude. I had both breasts at one time in my life, and I enjoyed them, but to be alive was more important.LAM: How has being a surrogate affected your personal relationships? CCG: I think I have richer personal relationships because of my work. Who I am and what I do is so different than what others do. I have fabulous friends and a loving husband, and my work has helped me be more empathetic and compassionate with all of them.LAM: You're 68 years old now and are still working. What's been the most rewarding part of your career? What do you see for the future?CCG: I'm going to continue my surrogacy practice for as long as I can. I love the idea of having a public platform and being able to do more education. One thing I would absolutely love to do is to serve as a sex educator for parents. How parents address sexuality has a huge impact on kids, and I'd like to make sure it's a positive one. I'd love to help give parents the knowledge and tools they need to raise happy and healthy kids.

其实不大爱在电影里见到「著名诗人」。

以冠此头衔（自封尤其）的人为主角的片子，不是苦大愁深就是大逆光小清新还剩下一种叫做「腐兰兰出品」。

总之，感觉是成天说寻常人不会讲的话发着寻常不会作的疯恋着寻常人不能够的爱生活在与寻常人平行的「逼」字型世界里。

而这恰恰是本片最成功的地方——说一个诗人的故事，一个因小儿麻痹症高位瘫痪的诗人的故事，情节里有大段的床戏，台词里有几首诗，对白里不少「爱乃旅途」的箴言。

明明具备了一切申请「逼世界」签证的条件，它却安安稳稳地呆在寻常人中间。

Mark为是否要辞退看护纠结、向Amanda告白悲剧性的失败。

他同Cheryl初次会面时两人小心翼翼地试探似近实远地圆舞。

Cheryl告诉Mark自己的丈夫「料理家事、弹吉它、喜欢思考」之后陷入尴尬、与丈夫争吵冷战和解之后偷溜出去到垃圾箱里翻Mark寄来的诗。

Brendan牧师被Mark咨询「是否应该接受性疗」时先是抗拒然后鼓励，其后倾听关注Mark的疗程，Vera告诉Mark自己的初体验、在Motel和店主轻轻巧巧的搭讪。

「残障者在特殊理疗师的帮助下完成人生的第一次」这种高能剧情和大尺度画面就被这些日常对话生活即景所冲淡。

其实朋友之间是这么交淡的——不咸不谈地说一点自己的私生活，情人之间是这样相处的——不急不羞地聊一点彼此的性体验。

但是其他影片中这样的场景总会有一个「目的性」，朝着一个矛盾冲突而去，让观众下意识将这些场景当成「头盘」期待之后展开的「主菜」。

本片也有「目的性」，却预告表白「我没有任何戏剧设定」。

Amanda不会回头，Cheryl不会离婚，Vera更不会和Mark神展开。

所以这些就是「主菜」，不为叙事服务，而是为了体现人与人之间的互动关系和亲疏距离，请用心品尝。

剧本君控制住了调料的味道，在不过份刺探私生活不使用内心独白的条件下，既让所有角色保有自己的色彩同时也保留了寻常人的面貌。

于是它不再是一个关于残障文学青年如何找到真爱的小清新故事，而是很多观众在感情中会遇到的困扰与努力与彷徨与希望这样柴米油盐的味道。

主人公的肢体不便不过是将「障碍」具像，那些诗——至少是那样的诗意——在每个人的心里都流淌飞扬过，或被珍藏或被遗弃。

这是我个人比较喜欢的一种电影姿态：细而不碎——每个场景都很细致，不使什么诡计冲突只用生活本身串粘到一起。

简单的美，让人没有压力。

后来觉得Helen Hunt不适合这个角色也是这个原因：她的气质中有一种类似Jodie Foster的压迫感。

我觉得电影一般般，喋喋不休的残疾诗人，可爱的神父，敬业的性治疗师。

在经过性治疗师的六次治疗下，两个人的情感变味了，使得对本身职业的一种渎职，对待残疾人需要的是关爱和怜悯，感情用事会加深伤害。

特殊的行业有一定的危险性，需要很好心理素质的专业人完成，如电影里的性治疗师，虽然专业，但心理素质不够，太圣人。

由一开始的情于不色，到后面掺杂了个人情感，就变得色了，女人如果一首诗就能被打动的话我也无话可说。

一直保持专业与理智的角度，我会看作是部好电影

一直没看的电影，今晚找电影看的时候，想起它。

是根据马克奥布莱恩的真实故事改编而成的。

马克是从小小儿麻痹症的患者，全身有知觉，却不能动弹。

他很敏感，是一位诗人和记者。

他寻求爱，但是被拒绝。

很特别的机缘，让他有机会寻求性的治疗。

他遇到了治疗师夏若尔，并最终遇到了和他相伴的女友。

49岁的时候，他离开人世。

葬礼上，三位对他来说都很重要的女性，都来参加了。

他的女友念了他最喜欢的写给夏若尔的诗。

影片有大量裸体的镜头，并直言不讳的谈论性爱，却没有丝毫跟情色有关的感觉，只是感到美好。

那是多么美好，人们从头脑里出来，非常非常轻柔的在一起，共处，分享，探索。

就像是晨露轻轻的滚落你的手臂。

影片里你也看不到沉重，它像一首轻松的小诗，像是初夏的阳光般随着清风流淌。

而且，还很幽默。

可爱的神父，坐在教堂里，听一位教徒不断跟他说关于性的体验。

神父说，真不晓得为什么人们总把性爱和天主扯在一起，真是太不相干了！

人们甚至在高潮的时候大喊：“噢，买糕！

” 但是神父真的很有爱，他并没有刻板的推开马克，而是陪伴马克一起度过他的探索之旅，就像一对好基友。

有一次，马克感到受伤，求助于神父。

神父赶到他身边，准备好给他来个庄重的演讲，看了状态不错的马克，神父改变了主意，他说我的演讲很短，就是关于爱，然后他说：“爱是一趟旅程。

这就是我的演讲，我说过，它很短。

” 影片里面谈到了马克关于性的观念，罪恶感羞耻感，恐惧感等等，正如我们每个人一样……好吧，正如我一样。

他试图成功，优秀，做得很好，然后他看书，学习，然后陷入困惑。

而夏若尔是位专业的性爱治疗师，非常专业，不但是心理，也是生理的。

在他们的探索中，亲密终究在两个陌生人之中产生。

真的非常美好。

你看着那个亲密，他们的相处，像是轻柔的捧起一朵花，小心的呼吸它的芬芳。

看电影的时候，我的内心有很多碰触。

关于性，有了完全不同的感观，生平第一次，感觉它是美好的。

不一定是性交，不一定是高潮，不一定是射精，不一定是生殖，你们只是静静地相处，没有一丝间隙，完全的在一起，甚至没有定义这是什么，也没有试图把它发展成关系，试图去抓住什么。

就像是在伊甸园一样，只有美好。

任何言语都是多余。

很有意思，不是吗？

大多数身体健康的人，都用头脑去与人相处。

而马克全身不能动，却在用身体来感受对方。

马克写给夏若尔的那首诗，名字叫做《献给随便那个谁的情诗》。

让我用文字轻抚你因为我的手犹如空手套般瘫软让我的文字掠过你的秀发抚过你的背部轻搔你的肚子因为我那犹如砖块般虚晃的双手并不理会我的心志也坚决不肯完成我内心最深处的渴望让我的文字进入你的心让它们高举火把请欣然接受它们进入你的身心灵我的文字便能轻柔爱抚你心深处2015/4/7

《亲密治疗》改编自真人真事，看完电影后有一种莫名的震撼与感动，不得不感叹发达国家对于残障人士的福利，从各种针对性的职业到社会机构都非常的进步和人性化。

电影讲述了一名因小儿麻痹后遗症导致瘫痪的诗人记者的故事，已过而立之年的马克在事业方面早已成功，但因为身体残障却从未有过性生活，通过牧师的开导和指引，他决定雇佣专业性辅导师完成自己的愿望，进而重拾追求幸福的勇气，收获那本身就属于自己的情与爱。