Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I am proud that i have never seen a female stripper, I know you might think its an odd thing to be proud of, but it means that its something that i can keep for myself, I can tell my colleagues when they suggest going to a club that Im not going to spoil that record now
....they suggest it to me perhaps cos they think that I am up for stuff, and am into male bonding activities. I hope the younger ones will reconsider.....the older ones (managers) I feel distinctly disappointed in and superior to.
I think that this is all really really sad and sordid, to men to a degree as well as women.....its like the woman says......why does a guy get appluaded by his mates for paying for a woman to take her clothes off.
Why do men not feel sullied by the introduction of money into the idea of sex or sensuality?
This whole area makes me feel very dissappointed in people
I find it completely depressing when I've been asked to these kind of things and then been baffled at the reaction to my answer of no. I think that the guys who do these kinds of places have no idea of how much of big a whole in their souls and hearts they must have to not only consider going to these places but also think it's a good time?
it's like going to a restaurant and only looking at the menu. Why not, for £20 more, pop down the knocking shop and get your dipstick wet
a pound in a pint jar type place. He didn't have any change, so the stripper tried to steal the watch off his wrist.
I brought him that watch. It was made of pink plastic and cost £3 in Tiger, Hammersmith.
(disclaimer: I'm not trying to pretend that this is a simple issue or that all strippers feel similarly about their work, this is just one depressing story, much like the article).
yet somehow i still know the guardian are over sensationalizing this
the way they always do with issues like this, in an irritating middle class tone
i've never been to a strip club and the extent of my strip club knowledge comes from the sopranos
...you see it, right?
i refuse to believe that all strippers are depressed about their job, which is the general tone of that article.
whatever your position on the issue, it's quite a lot more irritatingly middle-class to declare that the lives of (mostly) working-class women obviously can't be THAT bad based on a self-proclaimed total lack of knowledge. just sayin'
but strip bars exist in lots of different cultures, at varying degrees of respectability. i admit that i don't know a whole lot about stripping and that culture, but i do know better than to assume most women must secretly hate themselves for doing it.
who's 'assuming' anything? the article is about a book by a woman who has actual first-hand experience of the job and presumably lots of interaction with other strippers. that doesn't make it an absolute authority on the subject but it's a massive fuckload better-informed than your opinion
that's pretty much the extent of it.
i don't know why you keep reminding me that it's an interview, my issue is with the guardian falling into guardian-style editorial cliches. shit like "popularised by rihanna" and general tone is the problem.
i offered my full disclosure because this was more about how the guardian always misrepresents issues like this, even when it's an issue i don't fully understand their patronising sneer shines through.
when you literally keep saying you don't know anything about it? i mean i actually think there are plenty of bits to take issue with in the article but to say the whole thing is just 'over sensationalizing' is patronisingly dismissive of an issue which is routinely dismissed by people saying ridiculous things like 'the women are exploiting the men'
i didn't use the words over sensationalizing. it's a problem for some, perhaps the majority.
my problem is the tone the guardian have taken, that's my opinion. you can keep pretending that i need to have extensive knowledge of the stripping industry (like you do, i'm guessing?) if you want to, but i never made any comments about the seriousness of the problem at hand; just the guardian specifically.
and nah i don't have extensive knowledge of this, i just think it's a bit lazy to dismiss stuff like this by doing a CG-esque 'lol the guardian'. but y'know, i'm generally fine with papers taking stances on things rather than aspiring to absolute neutrality, so hey
re the over sensationalizing.
by a stripper talking about how she finds her job totally empowering and fun and insinuated that most other strippers feel the same way? i assume you'd be equally as irritated by such 'over sensationalizing', and that you'd definitely point out how it was a patronisingly middle-class angle (since only wealthy women are really in a position for stripping to be a meaningful choice, and they're not very representative of the demographics of the profession). right?
it's hard to really pass judgment on an article that doesn't exist.
if not, let's imagine you did...
if you want to flip it you can easily say that the women are exploiting the men. they dance, the men mindlessly hand over cash to continue to just look. i can see how somebody might see it that way.
i'm sure there are strippers who hate it and hate the verbal abuse (note: you don't really have any evidence that verbal abuse happens at all strip bars) but it's patronising to imply they all do.
yeah, me too. probably somebody whose entire knowledge of strip clubs comes from the sopranos, though.
so i'm pretty sure i'm not basing anything on that.
i'm basing it on general experience that not all people feel victimized by the same things. just because you linger around an internet message board sniffing out the next feminism bait to sink your teeth into, doesn't mean all women are on your side of "the line".
where are they all hiding?!?! also yeah i've never seen the sopranos, so apologies for any uninformed assumptions i may have made
Along the lines of: "I FUCKING HATE STRIP CLUBS! You go in, you sit down, and some hot woman comes up and shoves her arse in your face. And all you want to do is smack it, but YOU CAN'T! Because if you do, a seven foot tall man made mostly of meat will pick you up, throw you out, and kick seven shades of shit out of you.
I'd rather go home and have a beer and a wank."
the first time I pulled my knickers down my soul fell out
''In some instances, no Bengalis at all.''
as the greatest sentence i've seen written in a newspaper.
but i carried on doing it because, y'know, the money was good and working a more normal job with longer hours seemed like a worse proposition.
that is, assuming that she had the time/experience/job-hunting skills/interview skills/self-esteem/etc to find another job.
those are some of the most pathetic excuses ever. Theres are millions of people who work menial jobs and dont resort to stripping. You can get jobs where you dont even bother with an interview, i worked plenty of them. Forigve me but i cant really feel any sympathy for someone who chooses to strip and then later finds out the harsh realities of it, but still carries on.
when she was given the option of taking her knickers off or not.
do you actually think there's an abundance of work out there for people who often have addiction problems and no experience or qualifications? yeah these women are probably just lazy. get a job in a factory or something love.
what if your friend was in this predicament would you say "i understand your pain but y'know theres no other options for you"?
a) seeming emotional disconnection and
b) pig-headed assurances about the fluidity of labour markets (especially in provincial towns)
gives a particularly sound base from which to argue your point from. I understand the rational root from which your points are coming from, but you're not going to understand the problem if you can't emotionally sympathise with, and understand the economic problems which, engulf some people.
Not everyone is as strong as you - if indeed you actually are...
but I've spoken in person to women who do work in the sex trade and want out. It's not as easy as just showing up at the jobcentre. And having worked with groups who try to stop sex trafficking, I know how difficult it is.
But in recent years I have observed two children doing so and if that's what your soul looks like, I don't want one. Of course I was very encouraging and assured them they would get the hang of it eventually and did not pass comment on the smell of their souls at all.
...but anyone (man or woman) who feeds these horrible industries are down there on the bottom rungs of all humanity. The very fact these places actually exist saddens me beyond belief. Anyone who chooses to use them is an irreddeemable cunt...
even on a stag do?
Both on stag do's. Neither time have I bought anything other than a bottle of beer.
And both times I have forsaken my morals because it is easier to do rather than having to endlessly justify yourself to a group of people who don't give a shit about it. I'm a weak man for doing so to an extent (essentially to prevent myself getting grief from other people) but I don't think it invalidates my position.
And, just to reaffirm, I have never bought a dance nor contributed to one for someone else.
of course it invalidates your position, what with you feeding the industry you're so morally opposed to
...but I see where you're coming from. And I'm not justifying my behaviour. My attendance alone is clearly 'part of the problem'. I admitted my decision for going was borne out of weakness, and one which I am happy to be called up on.
I don't think it totally discredits what I was saying though - I'm not saying it's one rule for me and another for others; I'm not saying my actions are justifiable; and if you choose to rank me, based upon what I have said, alongside the 'bottom rungs of all humanity' (to use my own words) then fair enough.
Because that's also "feeding a horrible industry".
It's a pretty high-horse attitude to take.
...but I don't think it's one that you'd find many disagreeing with. And yes, I smoke. If you think that is a contradiction that invalidates what I'm saying then fair enough.
Basically it all boils down to: What sort of a prick are you if you have to go somewhere and PAY A GIRL TO TAKE THEIR CLOTHES OFF IN FRONT OF YOU? Think about it. Especially if you are married/in a relationship. I can understand to an extent if you're bitterly lonely but if you're with someone? You are truly appalling...
I guess buying from cheap shops like TopShop and Primark similarly do the same.
I don't think this invalidates your position on Strip clubs. Maybe if you can find someone who's a complete straight edge and never has tea or coffee and buys their clothes only from the most trustworthy of shops, but STILL regularly goes down strip clubs...maybe that person can turn round and call you a low-down stinking hypocrite.
Just pointing out that it's a little inconsistent to have a vitriolic attitude (let's face it - he's using some pretty aggressive language) in one case and be unconcerned in the other.
...that's correct. It's a personal stance, which I THINK I made clear. If I didn't, I apologise. Maybe I am getting all PocketMouse about it. I don't care. We all have things that we get angry about; this makes me angry. Therefore, I'll have a moan about it... (something about variety of opinions/rich tapestry of life etc.)
I'm not sure what harm my personal stance on this matter does, apart from potentially upset people who frequent strip clubs and speak positively about the experience.
Explaining it is another matter.
And I'm not yet sure of the rationale behind your vitriol.
Going on what you've said so far, there are a couple of possibilities. But I'm not certain exactly where the beef lies.
(...is it essential for you to know where the beef lies? Because I CAN detail it if you want, I'd just rather not because I don't think the time expended on doing so is worth it).
I think you're wrong.
>"Especially if you are married/in a relationship."
What about when both parties in the marriage/relationship are there?
>"I can understand to an extent if you're bitterly lonely but if you're with someone? You are truly appalling..."
Why? With the first part of that you're accepting some sort of rationale. But with the second, you're removing it on the basis of a fairly arbitrary and unconnected reasoning. Seems like a logic fail to me.
2nd point - that's an interesting demographic to think about. However, I don't think that the strip club industry is built upon providing pleasure for married couples both in the vicinity... could be wrong mind.
3rd point - I take umbrage with the fact that if you're in a relationship, you'd go somewhere else to pay someone else to get naked for you. I can understand that if you're not, then you might, because you don't have a sexual partnership with someone. I don't think this is arbitrary/unconnected reasoning - it's quite straightforward is it not. It's not a logic fail, there's clearly logic there, but maybe it's just not a position you agree with... and that's fair enough.
3rd point - what if you don't have a sexual relationship with your partner? can you understand it then? can you now begin to see that perhaps there's a flaw in your apparently straightforward approach to human interaction?
your position is not logical because you're basing an across the board opinion about something on a subsection of that particular thing, to the exclusion of things that don't fit your 'theory'.
And although I'm still not certain exactly where your beef lies, it seems to be with the fundamental notion of making a payment in exchange for the viewing of human flesh. But, as I say, I'm not certain if that's your feeling on the matter until you move beyond opinions about the actions of others.
...from my experience (and I could be wrong here), most people I know frequent strip clubs because they aren't sufficiently sexually gratified in their relationships, and therefore go behind their partners' backs in order to achieve this. I think this is, by and large, pretty indecent behaviour but that's probably where we differ. As a result, if the experience is being shared between partners then, for me, it makes it a lot less objectionable. So, cool, you've at least made me concede some ground from the way my initial proposition was worded...
3rd - is this a common position people find themselves in? I don't know... But yes I'm in as much agreement as anyone that my position might be flawed. I AM viewing this matter in perhaps a very narrow way, and maybe I don't realise the socially beneficial things that strip clubs etc. can bring...
Can I ask you a question (you don't have to answer...) do you frequent strip clubs (of any kind) in order to gain sexual gratification (of any kind)? You don't have to answer, and nor will I use that answer as a means of judgement...
But true or not, I don't think we do differ all that much in that sense. Deception's not cool.
I'm not sure how to take the 'socially beneficial' bit. I'll presume it to be a quip and move on... to your last question... which is worded very specifically.
Yeah, I have been to places with women stripping or naked. On a handful of occasions (we're talking comfortably in single figures here). Let's go through 'em and treat this as a worked example!...
Half of the times have been stag-based, and probably matches quite closely to your own experiences: pretty scuzzy and far from 'sexy', but I didn't feel like I was forsaking my morals. But (as a partnered guy) I probably would've done if I'd have gotten up to what my married/partnered mates got up to (and probably didn't tell their partners, compared to my personal preference of being a bit more more restrained and upfront by recounting the truth of 'yeah - went there and had a few beers and didn't go back on the second night like some of 'em did.'). One one occasion we walked out half way through a pint and went straight to the indie disco a bit earlier cos the beer was so awful. On another I went as a single guy with some mates and paid for a lapdance - it was ok, but the fact that I've not paid for another in the many years since is probably the only comment really worth making about that. I've been to a couple of burlesque club nights with MsWza (nb: blokes were on stage, doing routines, too. I'm straight, afaik, but, in one way or another, this was probably a big contribution to the whole shebang being a much more enjoyable night out that A N Other stag-based affair). On another occasion I've been to a supposedly alt/suicide girls/burlesque (hi Theo!) type place with MsWza - it didn't live up to the billing, was a bit lame for a number of reasons, and I think we only stayed for one drink. ~The End~
Sexual gratification? Gratification is quite an evocative word. I wasn't excitedly creaming myself at the sight of baps, that's for sure. And I can barely remember actually being aroused. But in certain cases, there's been mild titillation. Draw your own conclusions, but I think the answer falls broadly into the 'no' category.
The reason why I asked was because I have never come across someone who frequents strip clubs who can talk all that comfortably about their reasons for doing so. Y'know it's always like a 'dirty little secret' type thing. In spite of the fact these places are legal and loads of people go to 'em of a weekend so, in theory, where's the shame? The reason I asked you is because you were the one most vocally challenging what I was saying... not that I was going "oh yeah, I bet you're in 'em every week you dirty cunt" or anything! I was just intrigued for reasons of my own experimentation...
I do find it odd that in discussions of this nature you don't get people chipping up going "I go all the time - it's really, really good!" and talk about it comfortably. When, in theory, given their prevalence, legality and visibility, where's the problem?
amongst the indie bedwetting demographic of DiS.
-does that include the strippers themselves?
that literally ANYONE who "feeds" the industry (as the performers themselves technically do) is deserving of the same level of disapprobation.
...I do take significantly less umbrage with strippers themselves than people who go to strip clubs and pay them to dance naked for them. But I suppose ultimately, given my wording, maybe I shouldn't... (and your questions does expose a fatal flaw in my expression of vitriol, so fair play).
Otherwise, I'm unsure what it is that you're condemning.
I have no idea what GeOff means by "these places" until it's specified.
OK. Let's work with that. I have one simple answer: outrage of the GeOff's can only ever be one of a personal moral position of preference. But as fundamental philosophical position, it's fatally flawed. The devil is in the detail.
Spot on. I didn't expect this to be held up as a fundamental philosophical position.
I'm trying to establish what is at the source of your judgement.
(To clarify: the 'it's not' was directed at the latter 'fpp' bit, rather than former.)
You're morally judging and scathingly, sweepingly criticising others.
As I've asked TheWza upthread - do you frequent stip clubs, just out of interest? (You don't have to answer...)
Only ever been on stag dos and then I've generally found the atmosphere a little uncomfortable, being pawed, spanked, having girls sit down on my lap, etc, just trying to get me to pay for a private dance.
fundamental philosophical position
can be dismissed as silly moralistic personal opinion
I don't know what "the issue" is.
I've clarified a number of times it is a personal opinion. I am more than happy to go over my issue with it, but I'd rather not owing to being at work and having better things to do with my time than argue with someone who isn't a) going to change my opinion and b) doesn't agree with it whatsoever. Not everything needs to be explained to the nth degree... (unless you can make a case for it in this instance).
I believe the distinction was: Burlesque is middle class and therefore empowering and non-exploitative whereas strip clubs are working class and therefore women are being horribly exploited.
...he normally presents significantly more reasoned arguments.
From what I recall, Theo made a strikingly similar misrepresentation of my opinions in this type of discussion once before.
It's pretty unhelpful.
I was wrong. Your argument was that strip clubs were bad and Burlesque was good because that's how it is.
It's not really an argument that can be 'won' as such.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion on the 'truth* of how it reads'?
Makes them more special when I do have one.
of which i'm sure you'll agree there are many surrounding the industry - gender inequality, sexual exploitation, assault/harassment, addiction, take yer pick. now i wouldn't go as far as to say that anyone who has ever visited a strip club is an irredeemable cunt, but given those issues i think there are some quite important ethical and political dimensions in the act of going to a strip club that you can't reduce to a "personal moral position of preference" (which, let's be honest, sounds like you're basically just saying "prude")
And GeOff has now largely clarified the matter.
And downthread, I've already acknowledged that you've made some totally valid points re: the ethical/political dimensions.
You can project the word prude onto my words if you want. But that'd most definitely be your choice of words, not mine (because that'd detract from the point being made, as clarified upthread).
were first aroused by your use of the words "fundamental philosophical position".
I also used the words "personal moral position of preference".
I didn't really ascribe GeOff's comments as being either. I was just suggesting the relative validity of those comments, should they fall under one categorisation or the other.
how do you define the validity of a 'fundamental philosophical position' more accurately than a moral stance? don't totally understand the distinction you're trying to draw tbh
Not least because neither you or I know for sure. (Keep me updated though, if you wish to pass comment, cos it gives me things to add to the reading list. Srsly.)
I'll try and answer your other point.
To c&p from upthread, I was wondering whether GeOff's opinions boiled down to the level of 'the fundamental notion of making a payment in exchange for the viewing of human flesh'.
I see that as something along the lines of a 'fundamental philosophical position'. It's almost a binary yes/no thing.
But I don't think that he thread was operating on that level until GeOffs post hinted towards it. And if he was taking it down to that level, then, well, that's a whole 'nother thread(/course of study).
And based on posting in this thread so far, it would seem that that's not quite the level GeOff was talking about. And he acknowledges some of the contradictions inherent in the necessary theory underlying his strong initial statement.
The 'personal moral position of preference' bit is intended to refer to the acknowledged spectrum of ethical and political issues that arise once you move away from a baseline opinion. It's what I think the thread was about in the earlier parts, where you, wishpig, DarwinDude et al were making solid points.
i've never been fully against the places, and if women want to earn their money that way, i don't really have a problem with it, but i'd never like to go to such an establishment, and from the sounds of it neither do many of the women working there, so when i read lines like "And she says the increase in university tuition fees will "undoubtedly" mean more women turn to lap-dancing" it makes me pretty sad about the current state of our country.
No worries, I know where I can find some!
They all made sensible points, then, sensibly, left before GeOff started trolling.
Ill thought through - yes. Trolling - nah.
(Yeah, fair point, it's become clear that you're up for a proper chat about it rather than just throwing in some incendiary stuff and legging it.)
it don't make her a ho, no
These gentlemen's clubs. Full of sad, pissed LADS and overpriced beer. I went in one once, £20 on the door and a gaggle of complete slappers caked in makeup came over to us and started making idle chit-chat. The aim obviously to get us to pay for a private show. The sad thing is, people fall for it and line up at a cash point to take more money out to get the briefest glimpse of snatch.
The girls get paid silly amounts of money for doing fuck all which they probably think is great, until they realise they are over the hill at 30, have no qualifications, no experience in anything worthwhile and have spent 10 years gyrating in front of strangers for money which has now come to an abrupt stop.
"...she found herself struggling to make a profit after her £80 house fee."
If it is a quiet night they don't get paid, which is the flipside I suppose.
There are other fees such as makeup (you have to use their makeup and hiar people, so that the white girls look consistently orange enough). Some clubs also makwe them buy their attire from them. That said, if you're a good dancer and know how to work it (the crowd, and your body) then you can easily clean up in some of the pricier clubs. Sadly, the bottom end of these clubs does not deliver quite the same margin and generally speaking there's a higher pressure on the women to use prostitution to supplement their income.
THOUGHT I SHOULD CLARIFY THIS
the thewza posted some replies and i couldn't continue so i wrote this.
Soul out the vagina.