Log in

View Full Version : Line between stripping and pros?



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5

vmurphy252
09-24-2009, 06:46 AM
Wackjobs notwithstanding (and there are plenty of those), I'd argue that whatever you did was enough for him to get off and you were paid for it, hence prostitution occurred. It might not have been intentional on your part, but if you took the money...... Premature ejaculation doesn't change things. It just means you didn't have to work as hard or at all for your money.

I'd even argue that if someone is providing sexual thrills (that don't necessarily end in orgasm) for money, that person is treading pretty close to prostitution anyhow. People can try to draw the line distinguishing between the two where they see fit.
<Puts on body armor>

princessjas
09-24-2009, 07:42 AM
Wackjobs notwithstanding (and there are plenty of those), I'd argue that whatever you did was enough for him to get off and you were paid for it, hence prostitution occurred. It might not have been intentional on your part, but if you took the money...... Premature ejaculation doesn't change things. It just means you didn't have to work as hard or at all for your money.

I'd even argue that if someone is providing sexual thrills (that don't necessarily end in orgasm) for money, that person is treading pretty close to prostitution anyhow. People can try to draw the line distinguishing between the two where they see fit.

Yanno, I have had quiet a few men come during dances over the years and not once did I feel like a prostitute. If I dance around sexily in front of the guy, trail my hair over his face, run my nails down his neck, then sit on his lap, not even grinding or straddling him and he comes...WTF have I done to cause it?? Very little...inspired a fantasy basically, it was all in his own mind. More akin to a wet dream than an act of prostitution imo. I mean if a guy jacks off to the memory of a hot girl who danced sexy for him at a nightclub, you wouldn't say she had SEX with him...It's a similar leap you are making.

If a dancer is straddling the guy grinding away and he comes, then I see your point a bit (still a grey area to me though), but guys that come from heavy contact tend to me more normal in their responses, so you can tell they are getting close and back off.

princessjas
09-24-2009, 07:46 AM
<Puts on body armor>

Don't worry, I'm resisting the urge to pull out the flamethrower! ;D

vmurphy252
09-24-2009, 07:54 AM
Wackjobs notwithstanding (and there are plenty of those), I'd argue that whatever you did was enough for him to get off and you were paid for it, hence prostitution occurred. It might not have been intentional on your part, but if you took the money...... Premature ejaculation doesn't change things. It just means you didn't have to work as hard or at all for your money.

I'd even argue that if someone is providing sexual thrills (that don't necessarily end in orgasm) for money, that person is treading pretty close to prostitution anyhow. People can try to draw the line distinguishing between the two where they see fit.
^For the record, no issue with the general opinion. Just thought the indicated sentence was... well, anyway.

xdamage
09-24-2009, 08:17 AM
/threadjack

In my state, like all states, law makers and us every day people debate what is adultery/cheating with as much disagreement as this prostitution debate.

The rough law in my state is:

There must be intercourse but not completion. Laying around naked having oral sex and having orgasms is not adultery, but on the flip side, intercourse without completion is (yep even if you later masturbate to the thought of it, how much later? 1 minute? 1 hour? 1 day? who cares?)

Which is why I gave up on these discussions, and the laws set by others, and decided I set my own boundaries for what I tolerate between my S.O. and myself, and I don't care what others do with their sex lives or for what because it has no effect on me at all.

If I was a dancer competing for dollars then indeed it would matter, but since I'm not, there a great peace in not having an opinion about what others are doing with their bodies. Their bodies belong to them and who they get off with, for what really has less impact on me then the following which has already happened today:

1.) The jerk who blew wet grass on my car with a leaf blower which will stain and so I need to wash the car ASAP.

2.) The jerk who tossed a lit cig out of their car in front of me and may have started a fire for someone else.

3.) The tard whose driveway is covered in gravel all over the road now so everyone who drives by his house gets dings in their car

And all of that occurred just coming to work ;)

Two people having sex for money? Nada = no impact on me at all.

chris91
09-24-2009, 09:10 AM
Wackjobs notwithstanding (and there are plenty of those), I'd argue that whatever you did was enough for him to get off and you were paid for it, hence prostitution occurred. It might not have been intentional on your part, but if you took the money...... Premature ejaculation doesn't change things. It just means you didn't have to work as hard or at all for your money.

I'd even argue that if someone is providing sexual thrills (that don't necessarily end in orgasm) for money, that person is treading pretty close to prostitution anyhow. People can try to draw the line distinguishing between the two where they see fit.


So if a guy with some kind of drill fetish goes to get a cavity filled and comes in his pants, then the dentist is a prostitute unless he gives the dude his money back? That doesn't make any sense.

The dentist didn't take money for getting him off. He took money for filling a cavity. Just like the dancer who took money for doing a lapdance and not for getting a dude off.

Everyman
09-24-2009, 09:38 AM
So if a guy with some kind of drill fetish goes to get a cavity filled and comes in his pants, then the dentist is a prostitute unless he gives the dude his money back? That doesn't make any sense.

The dentist didn't take money for getting him off. He took money for filling a cavity. Just like the dancer who took money for doing a lapdance and not for getting a dude off.

Oh come on now...there is a continuum flowing from flirtation to sex that most humans follow. Something like:

glances-looks-discussion-laughing-showing-touching-kissing-foreplay-sex

I know that example isn't perfect, but a lapdance falls somewhere on that continuum. Around "touching" or "foreplay". A drill bit in the tooth is not on that continuum. So you can't compare it to a lapdance, in sexual arousal.

princessjas
09-24-2009, 10:20 AM
Oh come on now...there is a continuum flowing from flirtation to sex that most humans follow. Something like:

glances-looks-discussion-laughing-showing-touching-kissing-foreplay-sex

I know that example isn't perfect, but a lapdance falls somewhere on that continuum. Around "touching" or "foreplay". A drill bit in the tooth is not on that continuum. So you can't compare it to a lapdance, in sexual arousal.

See, this is what you guys don't understand...To us, it is not on that continuum. We are providing a show. ACTING, not participating in foreplay. There is no intent to provide sex or sexual release of any kind and most men might enjoy the arousal, but aren't there to get off. Is the playboy playmate a prostitute if you jack off to her pics? We are more up close and personal, but lapdances are supposed to be a sensual act, NOT a sexual one. What about a regular massage, say some pervy guy comes while having his shoulders (and only shoulders) rubbed is the masseuse a prostitute? Massage would fit somewhere on your continuum, no?

chris91
09-24-2009, 10:21 AM
Oh come on now...there is a continuum flowing from flirtation to sex that most humans follow. Something like:

glances-looks-discussion-laughing-showing-touching-kissing-foreplay-sex

I know that example isn't perfect, but a lapdance falls somewhere on that continuum. Around "touching" or "foreplay". A drill bit in the tooth is not on that continuum. So you can't compare it to a lapdance, in sexual arousal.

I don't see how that's relevant to my point.

I'm saying that it's ridiculous to say that if a guy pays you to clean his house, and then steals your windex, then you have somehow been paid for the windex and are now a windex salesperson.

Maids know that someone might steal windex from their supplies, but it doesn't make them a windex salesperson. Dancers know that some dudes might get off from a lapdance, but it doesn't make us prostitutes.

vmurphy252
09-24-2009, 10:32 AM
See, this is what you guys don't understand...To us, it is not on that continuum. We are providing a show. ACTING, not participating in foreplay. There is no intent to provide sex or sexual release of any kind and most men might enjoy the arousal, but aren't there to get off. Is the playboy playmate a prostitute if you jack off to her pics? We are more up close and personal, but lapdances are supposed to be a sensual act, NOT a sexual one. What about a regular massage, say some pervy guy comes while having his shoulders (and only shoulders) rubbed is the masseuse a prostitute? Massage would fit somewhere on your continuum, no?
Tsk, tsk. Generalities...

princessjas
09-24-2009, 10:37 AM
Tsk, tsk. Generalities...

Hmm, I meant the guys that argue points like that..not all guys. Should have clarified that one a bit. I know not all guys have that view, many do understand our point of view, or at least try to.

vmurphy252
09-24-2009, 11:03 AM
Don't you hate smartasses?

jack0177057
09-24-2009, 12:58 PM
^^Well, my experience is about 3 years old at this point too (so maybe my experience is no longer relevant). I've been considering coming out of retirement, but what I'm hearing about extremely elevated contact levels has me waffling. What's been said all over the board makes it sound like contact levels and xtras have increased 500% in the last 3 years, which is somewhat mind-boggling.

I don't know where you live, but here in Houston (and most big cities?):
Upscale clubs - high contact and many extras girl (at least 25% that I know of, but could be a lot higher); and
Regular clubs - propositioned for a BJ or HJ within 1 hr of arrival.

Once in a while enforcement heats up and the clubs become very "clean", but thats just temporary.

KiwiStrawberry Splenda
09-24-2009, 01:10 PM
Wackjobs notwithstanding (and there are plenty of those), I'd argue that whatever you did was enough for him to get off and you were paid for it, hence prostitution occurred. It might not have been intentional on your part, but if you took the money...... Premature ejaculation doesn't change things. It just means you didn't have to work as hard or at all for your money.

I'd even argue that if someone is providing sexual thrills (that don't necessarily end in orgasm) for money, that person is treading pretty close to prostitution anyhow. People can try to draw the line distinguishing between the two where they see fit.

You're ridiculous. However, I do not care about getting branded as a prostitute by non-spending PL fuckoes, so refer to what I do as whatever you want, doesn't change anything.

As far as not having to work for my money because the guy has a problem with premature ejaculation...that isn't my fucking problem. When I do the same thing for 1,000 guys, and they don't come, and one does, that doesn't change me or what I'm doing, it changes the customer. I can't read minds, and strippers don't tend to ask strange new clients what their spunk tolerance is.

What should I have done, not taken his money? Then would it not be prostitution, it would just be me put into a very uncomfortable position, without compensation? He was embarrassed and shoved it into my hands as he ran off. Work can't be easy sometimes, strippers aren't allowed any breaks?

jack0177057
09-24-2009, 01:31 PM
See, this is what you guys don't understand...To us, it is not on that continuum. We are providing a show. ACTING, not participating in foreplay. There is no intent to provide sex or sexual release of any kind and most men might enjoy the arousal, but aren't there to get off. Is the playboy playmate a prostitute if you jack off to her pics? We are more up close and personal, but lapdances are supposed to be a sensual act, NOT a sexual one. What about a regular massage, say some pervy guy comes while having his shoulders (and only shoulders) rubbed is the masseuse a prostitute? Massage would fit somewhere on your continuum, no?

I agree with princessjas, but I do see the point that Everyman is making.

Dancers are acting, but they are also providing very intense sexual stimulation that could easily result in orgasm. On more than one occasion, a dancer's beautiful butt grinding and rubbing hard on my erect penis (her head back on my shoulder to give me a perfect view of her awesome breasts - which I am sometimes invited to touch - and her right hand rubbing my neck) - has brought me very close to the point of orgasm.

I know that the dancer wants to tease only, and not to cause the guy to orgasm -- she wants to arouse him intensely (so the money keeps flowing), but she then step away to let him cool off when he gets too hot. She has little to gain from his orgasm (unless he's paid her a premium for this privilege up front), because at that point he stops spending money on her.

So, the no-extras dancer does not intend for the guy to orgasm, because he will stop spending money at that point. But, she also knows (or should know) that grinding and rubbing on a guys genitals -- any normal guy with no strange fetishes -- can lead to orgasm. The slightest miscalculation on her part - like grinding him a little too long - and he will orgasm.

bem401
09-24-2009, 02:05 PM
You're ridiculous. However, I do not care about getting branded as a prostitute by non-spending PL fuckoes, so refer to what I do as whatever you want, doesn't change anything.

As far as not having to work for my money because the guy has a problem with premature ejaculation...that isn't my fucking problem. When I do the same thing for 1,000 guys, and they don't come, and one does, that doesn't change me or what I'm doing, it changes the customer. I can't read minds, and strippers don't tend to ask strange new clients what their spunk tolerance is.

What should I have done, not taken his money? Then would it not be prostitution, it would just be me put into a very uncomfortable position, without compensation? He was embarrassed and shoved it into my hands as he ran off. Work can't be easy sometimes, strippers aren't allowed any breaks?

First off, I'm not calling anyone names and my spending habits have nothing to do with this issue. But the facts speak for themselves.

1. You personally engaged in an act intended to sexually stimulate the guy.
2. He had an orgasm as a result.
3. You were paid for the encounter.

This is an occupational hazard of the business. I doubt there is a dancer out there who hasn't had this happen once, if not several times. I never said it was anyone's intent to have things play out this way, but it happened because you were in close proximity to the guy and I am guessing acting seductively.

I never suggested you should have refunded the guy's money, merely noted you were paid. The "not having to work for the money" might have been an unfortunate choice of words but my point was to say that the "premature" aspect doesn't change the basic facts. It was a premature ejaculation, not a spontaneous one. It had something to do with your being there.

Around here, I've never heard anyone say one out of a thousand is the completion rate, more like one out of two or higher. Maybe we're talking about two different types of dances.

And for the record, you girls seldom get the breaks you deserve.

KiwiStrawberry Splenda
09-24-2009, 03:15 PM
Realistically, I'd say, 1 out of 100, depending on the city. Also, sometimes custies might actually nut their pants and not tell us.

In 10 years of dancing, I only had 2 regulars that I knew would be orgasming from standard lapdances, and I continued to see them. That's because they were respectful gentlemen, and would always warn me well in advance before they did it, so I could back off. They were good, consistent money, I enjoyed their company, and I never even so much as touched their penis through their pants. But there was grinding. If that's prostitution, so be it. I've done proper prostitution as well, so the stigma doesn't affect me, as I'm already a guilty party.

I would agree that the line is blurred, and that girls posting on a message board are going to be very defensive versus the reality that goes on in the clubs. That's just a knee-jerk reaction to a negative social stigma. We, as sex workers, want to be respected and considered good people. And we know that when someone is referring to a lady as a whore or prostitute, its usually meant as an insult. If the stigma was de-mystified, wouldn't be a big deal.

Everyman
09-24-2009, 05:21 PM
See, this is what you guys don't understand...To us, it is not on that continuum. We are providing a show.

Lots of things have been said, but this is easily the most ridiculous. Whether you're "acting" or not, if a lap dance wasn't on that continuum, you would never get paid for it. You should be glad it's on that continuum; it gives you a job.

You also drew a non-existent distinction between "sexual" andf "sensual." Things can be both at the same time, and lap dances certainly are.

princessjas
09-24-2009, 05:33 PM
Once again Everyman, go ahead and ignore every other point made that doesn't support your opinion. I notice you didn't address Chris's statement below or mine. I'm not trying to say it's not a grey area if you really, really get literal with some shit, but basically the bottom line is...If you think we are all prostitutes regardless of contact levels, get the fuck off this board. You clearly have zero respect for any of us. You don't belong here.


What about a regular massage, say some pervy guy comes while having his shoulders (and only shoulders) rubbed is the masseuse a prostitute? Massage would fit somewhere on your continuum, no?


I don't see how that's relevant to my point.

I'm saying that it's ridiculous to say that if a guy pays you to clean his house, and then steals your windex, then you have somehow been paid for the windex and are now a windex salesperson.

Maids know that someone might steal windex from their supplies, but it doesn't make them a windex salesperson. Dancers know that some dudes might get off from a lapdance, but it doesn't make us prostitutes.

Elvia
09-24-2009, 08:10 PM
I kinda figured this thread might have been a bad idea.

Earl_the_Pearl
09-24-2009, 11:00 PM
If you think we are all prostitutes regardless of contact levels, get the fuck off this board. You clearly have zero respect for any of us. You don't belong here.
Why do you assume we have no respect for providers? It is obvious that you have no respect for what you consider a provider.

chris91
09-25-2009, 12:00 AM
Why do you assume we have no respect for providers? It is obvious that you have no respect for what you consider a provider.

Providers? Does "providers" mean "strippers who fuck customers for money"? If so, then no, I do not have any respect for providers.

princessjas
09-25-2009, 04:08 AM
^^Exactly, actual prostitutes who admit they are providers, are clean, use protection and keep it out of the clubs, I respect. Dancers who whore themselves out for peanuts. Zilch.

vmurphy252
09-25-2009, 05:54 AM
Peanuts? Is it a friggin' petting zoo?

Everyman
09-25-2009, 08:08 AM
Once again Everyman, go ahead and ignore every other point made that doesn't support your opinion. I notice you didn't address Chris's statement below or mine. I'm not trying to say it's not a grey area if you really, really get literal with some shit, but basically the bottom line is...If you think we are all prostitutes regardless of contact levels, get the fuck off this board. You clearly have zero respect for any of us. You don't belong here.

You're making several leaps that I never said.

1) That I think you're all prostitutes...I never said that.

2) That even if I think that, it means there is something wrong with being a pros...I never said that either, in fact if you look up I think I pretty much said the opposite.

One thing I do believe is that one type of sex worker really has no room to be looking down on another type. A sex worker is a sex worker.

princessjas
09-25-2009, 08:20 AM
You're making several leaps that I never said.

1) That I think you're all prostitutes...I never said that.

2) That even if I think that, it means there is something wrong with being a pros...I never said that either, in fact if you look up I think I pretty much said the opposite.

One thing I do believe is that one type of sex worker really has no room to be looking down on another type. A sex worker is a sex worker.

You did say that if a guy had ever came during a dance then we were prostitutes, did you not? Now, I give very low contact dances, with basically no grinding, but yeah, I've had it happen. I've also had a couple of guys cum in their pants when I leaned over and drew my nails down their neck...no other contact.

Saying a sex worker is a sex worker is ridiculous. For one thing, I don't consider myself a sex worker. I dance on stage, mostly at bikini or topless clubs and provide very low contact dances...for many years I was a stage only dancer and refused to even give lapdances. It is laughable to compare that to someone who allows full penetration or gives HJ or BJ's. It's like saying that a girl who goes to a nightclub and dances with several guys is a slut because dancing is the same as fucking or comparing heavy duty flirting to full out sex...yes they are both sexually charged, but completely different things, and while opinions vary most would have an issue with one and not the other. What I do (and many other clean dancers) provides zero risk of STD infection or pregnancy and is entertainment that many SO's would not have an issue with their husbands enjoying from time to time.

Oh, and I never said you thought there was something wrong with being a pro. I said you did not respect us for insisting we were basically all prostitues, not because I assumed you didn't respect prostitutes, but because it obviously bothers many dancers to call us prostitutes, yet you continue to do so. That shows clearly that you have no respect for dancers, or at least the ladies on this board, and if you do not respect us you have no business on this site, which is meant to provide support for dancers, imo.

chris91
09-25-2009, 09:23 AM
Lots of things have been said, but this is easily the most ridiculous. Whether you're "acting" or not, if a lap dance wasn't on that continuum, you would never get paid for it. You should be glad it's on that continuum; it gives you a job.

You also drew a non-existent distinction between "sexual" andf "sensual." Things can be both at the same time, and lap dances certainly are.

First of all, I don't think lapdances are on that continuum. Lapdances usually aren't something girls do outside of the club during a natural progression to sex. In fact, If you looked at all the lapdances ever done, I would guess that very large percentage of them did not lead to sex, because thats not what they are meant to do.

Now, lets say for arguments sake, that they are on that continuum. What difference does it make? Here it is, as written by you:

glances-looks-discussion-laughing-showing-touching-kissing-foreplay-sex

What about laughing? If a bartender laughs at one of her customers jokes, he tips her and tells her that he will jerk off to her later, she is a prostitute? No.

Touching. If a nurse is wiping the ass of an incontinent patient, and the patient gets off from it, she is a prostitute? No.


It's ridiculous. I changed my analogy earlier to make it easier for you to understand, and you ignored it, presumably because it proves you wrong.

Princessjas brought up a very valid point about massage therapists. Dudes get boners all the time from clean massage. It's not crazy to think that some of them actually get off. You ignored her point also, I'm guessing because you know how stupid it would be to say that the massage therapist is a prostitute.

Bottom line, your logic is bad.

Everyman
09-25-2009, 09:43 AM
You did say that if a guy had ever came during a dance then we were prostitutes, did you not?

No that wasn't me...I'm not gonna take the time on my blackberry to go up and find out who it was, but maybe that's why you're unjustifiably pissed at me, you think I said something that someone else did.

xdamage
09-25-2009, 09:44 AM
What about laughing? If a bartender laughs at one of her customers jokes, he tips her and tells her that he will jerk off to her later, she is a prostitute? No.

Actually my mind works differently then some people and it is in my first post in this thread.

If you start with the assumption that prostitution is an actual tangible black or white universal truth, then you'll approach this one way.

The other way to look at life and matters like this is that there is a continuum of many matters, and people set their lines arbitrarily, that on one end of the extreme it is clearly not, on the far end clearly so, and in the middle a murky mess that many disagree on. It is a false assumption that we need to agree about the murky middle. We people don't. It is a good thing that people don't agree because it is the very fact that they don't agree that allowed them to move beyond earlier extremes in history.

See in fact there are societies were a woman flirting with a man and dressing proactively in that society may have the rest of society labeling her as a whore. For them their lines are drawn differently and stripping clearly goes too far. You are a beneficiary of being able to strip today because people before you didn't agree about the lines, and pushed for a more liberal view. But believe it that many people still see stripping as whoredom.

It's when you accept that there is no absolute truth, that we generally mean 'whore" in a negative way, and generally people do look down on what others are doing for money that it all starts to make sense.

That is why I said for most of us we're better off just not having an opinion about what others do as long as it doesn't effect us.

So the following makes sense to me - "I don't want to be grabbing strange guys dicks for money as that exceeds my personal limits, but I'm willing to dance erotically and engage in light body to body touching. For business reasons I'd like that to be the line which every other person in my club sticks too legally and actually so that I can compete fairly."

What doesn't make sense to me is to debate exactly where the line is crossed into whore-dom. Its just requires a lot of judgmental thinking and people will not agree. It is also ironic because it requires the very judgmental thinking which has some people in society believing stripping is sin, evil, wicked, whoredom, etc. It requires cake wanting and eating it too, demanding others have to judge where the limits are, but not so judgmental that they disagree with our own personal boundaries.

I think this topic for a thread was just an all around sucky idea, and almost assuredly cannot turn out well.

chris91
09-25-2009, 10:04 AM
Actually my mind works differently then some people and it is in my first post in this thread.

If you start with the assumption that prostitution is an actual tangible black or white universal truth, then you'll approach this one way.

The other way to look at life and matters like this is that there is a continuum of many matters, and people set their lines arbitrarily, that on one end of the extreme it is clearly not, on the far end clearly so, and in the middle a murky mess that many disagree on. It is a false assumption that we need to agree about the murky middle. We people don't. It is a good thing that people don't agree because it is the very fact that they don't agree that allowed them to move beyond earlier extremes in history.

See in fact there are societies were a woman flirting with a man and dressing proactively in that society may have the rest of society labeling her as a whore. For them their lines are drawn differently and stripping clearly goes too far. You are a beneficiary of being able to strip today because people before you didn't agree about the lines, and pushed for a more liberal view. But believe it that many people still see stripping as whoredom.

It's when you accept that there is no absolute truth, that we generally mean 'whore" in a negative way, and generally people do look down on what others are doing for money that it all starts to make sense.

That is why I said for most of us we're better off just not having an opinion about what others do as long as it doesn't effect us.

So the following makes sense to me - "I don't want to be grabbing strange guys dicks for money as that exceeds my personal limits, but I'm willing to dance erotically and engage in light body to body touching. For business reasons I'd like that to be the line which every other person in my club sticks too legally and actually so that I can compete fairly."

What doesn't make sense to me is to debate exactly where the line is crossed into whore-dom. Its just requires a lot of judgmental thinking and people will not agree. It is also ironic because it requires the very judgmental thinking which has some people in society believing stripping is sin, evil, wicked, whoredom, etc. It requires cake wanting and eating it too, demanding others have to judge where the limits are, but not so judgmental that they disagree with our own personal boundaries.

I think this topic for a thread was just an all around sucky idea, and almost assuredly cannot turn out well.

Well, I have to go with what most people in my society consider prostitution. That's having sex with someone in exchange for money. People who think strippers are whores, think that way because they believe that strippers have sex for money. They are wrong.

I'm sorry, but I'm just not evolved enough to not cast judgment on anyone ever. I don't know how I would make any decisions if I didn't judge on choice as worse than another. That said, I have nothing but respect for legitimate prostitutes. It's the ones who do it in my club that I don't like, and with good reason.

Everyman
09-25-2009, 10:05 AM
How about "physical contact with the intent or purpose of creating sexual titillation or arousal in exchange for money"? Anyone have a problem with that definition? It would take care of all these objections or counterarguments raised in this thread:

- masseuses
- dentists
- laughing bartenders
- air dancing strippers
- needing to have the intent to create orgasm (not the same as titillation or arousal)

princessjas
09-25-2009, 10:08 AM
No that wasn't me...I'm not gonna take the time on my blackberry to go up and find out who it was, but maybe that's why you're unjustifiably pissed at me, you think I said something that someone else did.

Actually, I believe it might have been Bem that said it and when we countered, you jumped in and started arguing with us. I should have said you AGREED that we were all prostitutes, maybe? Anyway, I'm not pissed at you, not even slightly miffed actually. At this point it's more comical than anything when this sort of discussion starts.

I do think that any man that does not respect the dancers on this site has no business being here...and insinuating we are all prostitutes when many of us have made it clear we find this insulting is very disrespectful in my book. If that was not your intention, then maybe you could say that and then explain why you were arguing when we countered bem's blanket statement? There could have been another reason I guess..maybe you just like to argue? But it certainly wasn't a leap for us to assume you supported Bem's point of view.

Everyman
09-25-2009, 10:26 AM
Actually, I don't agree with Bem. I've already stated twice, quite clearly, my own personal definition (see above you). I have also stated quite clearly I don't think prostitution is morally wrong (absent other things like lying or violence) and I don't think it should be legally wrong.

You seem to think "prostitute" is some big insult...remember, to many people, "she looks like a fucking stripper" is an insult too.

Everyman
09-25-2009, 10:34 AM
many of us have made it clear we find this (being thought of like prostitutes) insulting

I guess if there's still a point to this thread, it's to show how silly and hypocritical this type of thinking is.

princessjas
09-25-2009, 11:28 AM
I guess if there's still a point to this thread, it's to show how silly and hypocritical this type of thinking is.

Nice way to go "Uh, oh, the girls have a point....Wait!! Look over there!!" Yep calling me a hypocrite certainly takes the thread in a new direction, and takes attention off the points made. It'd be nice if you stayed on topic and did a counterpoint exchange instead of stooping to this level. I clearly explained WHY I thought you agreed with Bem, and I still don't see how I'm wrong...by your own definition that you posted, we are all prostitutes...and so sorry if you think I'm a hypocrite for not wanting to be called a whore, but you don't get to decide where my personal boundaries are.

And yes, I obviously have a BIG issue with your definition. I DO NOT have sex for money or any SEXUAL CONTACT for money. You are being ridiculous and offensive....and guess what?? You don't get to tell me I'm wrong for being offended! :O

jack0177057
09-25-2009, 11:59 AM
This thread is piting one class of sex workers (dancers) against another (dancers who provide extras and prostitutes).

I remember reading somewhere (I think it was - Bare: The Naked Truth About Stripping by Elisabeth Eaves) that dancers call prostitutes "whores" because they have sex with their customers, but prostitutes, in turn, called dancers bigger "whores" because a prostitute has sex with about 7-10 guys a week, but in that time, dancers will have grinded and rubbed on 70-100 guys.

This feud is ridiculous. Sex workers as a group would be a lot stronger without being pitted one against the other. The same rule applies to all of them - a woman should have the right to decide whether to profit from her sexuality.

The only good argument I've heard against extras-dancers in the club is that non-extras dancers suffer because of the customer expectations and the potential violence. Other than that, I don't see why one group of sex-workers should be critical and disparaging of another.

Elvia
09-25-2009, 12:33 PM
I think it's ridiculous that some of guys have come to the conclusion that if we don't appreciate being labeled "prostitutes," then it must mean we have some sort of problem with actual prostitutes. Has it occurred to you that we might just like to have our job acknowledged fo what it is? That while many of us (though not all, another important point) identify as sex workers, we would also like it be acknowledged that there are differences between what a dancer, a phone sex operator, and an escort do? I don't want to be called a prostitute because I feel there are some significant differences between being a dancer and an escort or street walker, and when you have an attitude of "oh whatever, you all just sell sex, it's all pretty much the same" it shows how little you care to understand that point of view.

Elvia
09-25-2009, 12:36 PM
How about "physical contact with the intent or purpose of creating sexual titillation or arousal in exchange for money"? Anyone have a problem with that definition? It would take care of all these objections or counterarguments raised in this thread:

- masseuses
- dentists
- laughing bartenders
- air dancing strippers
- needing to have the intent to create orgasm (not the same as titillation or arousal)


if you've been paying attention to this thread at all, you should have noticed that most of us do not equate lapdancing with prostitution, so obviously the answer is no, that definition is not generally going to be considered acceptable. really, it seems like a lot of you are trying to push the dancers into just accept being considered prostitutes. And then you wonder why we find the direction this thread has gone in insulting? really?

Everyman
09-25-2009, 12:43 PM
I think it's ridiculous that some of guys have come to the conclusion that if we don't appreciate being labeled "prostitutes," then it must mean we have some sort of problem with actual prostitutes. Has it occurred to you that we might just like to have our job acknowledged fo what it is? That while many (though not all, another important point) identify as sex workers, we would also like it be acknowledged that there are differences between what a dancer, a phone sex operator, and an escort do? I don't want to be called a prostitute because I feel there are some significant differences between being a dancer and an escort or street walker, and when you have an attitude of "oh whatever, you all just sell sex, it's all pretty much the same" it shows how little you care to understand that point of view.

Compare it to a guy being called "gay". Nowadays, most guys' reaction would like Seinfeld, "I'm not -- not that there's anything wrong with that." But it still comes out all defensive, like there IS something wrong with that. That's pretty much the position many of you have staked out with prostitution.

If anyone ever might think I'm gay, I don't even bother to correct them. Because it absolutely utterly does not matter to me. If I liked guys I would be fine with anyone thinking I was gay or straight. It's just not important.


Likewise, if you were truly perfectly ok with prostitution, I would think you just wouldn't care whether me or anyone else thought you were one (whether you thought so yourself or not).

princessjas
09-25-2009, 01:02 PM
Jack and Everyman...you are entitled to your opinions, but you DO NOT get to tell me how I should feel towards prostitutes, being called a prostitute or whore or ANY other issue. Argue WHY you feel that what we do is equivalent all you like, but DO NOT tell me I'm ridiculous for not wanting to be labled a prostitute or a whore.

If you buy some asprin for a friend, and he pays you back would you want to be called a drug dealer?? Probably not. What if you actually picked up his vicoden prescription instead...you give them to him and he reimburses you and gives you a $5 for your effort...are you a drug dealer then?? Or is it a grey area??

Elvia
09-25-2009, 01:03 PM
And if everywhere you went, people continued to insist that you were gay, even when you explained to them that you were straight, you wouldn't find that insulting? It doesn't bother you when someone insists they understand you and your life better than you? Because I know plenty of men who have attributes that make people often assume they are gay (I tend to date them, actually) and the do find it offensive, not when people make an assumption, but when they continue to insist that they must be gay, because they dress to nicely, or are too sensitive, or too domestic, or have feminine mannerisms, etc. It probably makes a difference that this isn't just a hypothetical or rare occurence for sex workers. It happens all the time- people don't care about the complexities, acknowledging that would get in the way of their attempts to reduce us. But the truth is, as should be apparent at this point, that an attitude of "you're all just the same anyway" IS pretty offensive. Especially coming from people who are NOT sex workers.

KiwiStrawberry Splenda
09-25-2009, 01:54 PM
How about "physical contact with the intent or purpose of creating sexual titillation or arousal in exchange for money"? Anyone have a problem with that definition? It would take care of all these objections or counterarguments raised in this thread:

- masseuses
- dentists
- laughing bartenders
- air dancing strippers
- needing to have the intent to create orgasm (not the same as titillation or arousal)

Yes, I do not agree with that definition. Prositution is sex for money: be it oral, vaginal, or anal. I think that rubbing a guys pants at the SC or letting him suck on your boobs is an extra, but isn't prostitution. That's just my opinion, and since the laws are diverse all over this country, it doesn't really matter what I think, or what you think in fact.

jack0177057
09-25-2009, 02:01 PM
I think it's ridiculous that some of guys have come to the conclusion that if we don't appreciate being labeled "prostitutes," then it must mean we have some sort of problem with actual prostitutes. Has it occurred to you that we might just like to have our job acknowledged fo what it is?

I agree, but a few comments reveal more than just a clarification of differences. They reveal indignation at being put in that category and hostility towards prostitutes.

Its like if someone calls me an accountant, I could: (A) clarify that lawyers advise clients on matters of business law and accountants advise clients on financial indicators, prepare and examine financial statements, tax returns, etc... or (B) I could get very indignant and respond that I am not one of those number-crunching nerds that help people lie on their tax returns and get away with tax fraud (i.e., showing hostility and contempt towards accountants).


Jack and Everyman...you are entitled to your opinions, but you DO NOT get to tell me how I should feel towards prostitutes, being called a prostitute or whore or ANY other issue. Argue WHY you feel that what we do is equivalent all you like, but DO NOT tell me I'm ridiculous for not wanting to be labled a prostitute or a whore.

Oh, oh,... I'd never call YOU "ridiculous" princessjas. I was just speaking generally. All sex-workers share many similarities, most importantly of which is social prejudice and stigma directed at them. So when different groups within the industry start doing this amongst themselves, it just seems counterproductive. Sex-positive feminism (which I've learned about on this forum) embraces ALL sex-workers and empowers women's choice to profit from their sexuality, however they feel comfortable.

jack0177057
09-25-2009, 02:06 PM
And if everywhere you went, people continued to insist that you were gay, even when you explained to them that you were straight, you wouldn't find that insulting? It doesn't bother you when someone insists they understand you and your life better than you? Because I know plenty of men who have attributes that make people often assume they are gay (I tend to date them, actually) and the do find it offensive, not when people make an assumption, but when they continue to insist that they must be gay, because they dress to nicely, or are too sensitive, or too domestic, or have feminine mannerisms, etc. It probably makes a difference that this isn't just a hypothetical or rare occurence for sex workers. It happens all the time- people don't care about the complexities, acknowledging that would get in the way of their attempts to reduce us. But the truth is, as should be apparent at this point, that an attitude of "you're all just the same anyway" IS pretty offensive. Especially coming from people who are NOT sex workers.

Good point... But, if I yelled in desperation, "I'm not a goddam cocksucking faggot!" -gay people would be rightfully offended.

princessjas
09-25-2009, 02:15 PM
I agree, but a few comments reveal more than just a clarification of differences. They reveal indignation at being put in that category and hostility towards prostitutes.

Its like if someone calls me an accountant, I could: (A) clarify that lawyers advise clients on matters of business law and accountants advise clients on financial indicators, prepare and examine financial statements, tax returns, etc... or (B) I could get very indignant and respond that I am not one of those number-crunching nerds that help people lie on their tax returns and get away with tax fraud (i.e., showing hostility and contempt towards accountants).



Oh, oh,... I'd never call YOU "ridiculous" princessjas. I was just speaking generally. All sex-workers share many similarities, most importantly of which is social prejudice and stigma directed at them. So when different groups within the industry start doing this amongst themselves, it just seems counterproductive. Sex-positive feminism (which I've learned about on this forum) embraces ALL sex-workers and empowers women's choice to profit from their sexuality, however they feel comfortable.

Really we are only getting so frustrated because someone (a man no less) is trying to define what we are and what we do and when we corrected them, we were told that we are the ones mistaken and we actually are prostitutes. Talk about a slap in the face...especially if you are a sex-positive feminist.

I'd like to see how any man would react if a woman told him...Nope, sorry, but you are mistaken, what you do is exactly the same as (insert something slightly related but vastly different). I don't have an issue with prostitutes, but it crosses a line that is beyond my personal boundaries, so being told...but basically that is what you do, is offensive...and I really don't care if anyone considers that hypocritical. Quit trying to tell me you know what I do for a living better than I do and I won't have to object...end of problem. ;)

Elvia
09-25-2009, 02:38 PM
Good point... But, if I yelled in desperation, "I'm not a goddam cocksucking faggot!" -gay people would be rightfully offended.

Have you seen anything in this thread that you would consider the equivalent of such a statement? Because I just went over it again and I can't find anything. Most of the women on this site have shown time and time again that they have no problem with prostitutes (the exception being dancers who prostitute within the club, for reasons we all understand). It's more similar to this:

Guy A) You've gay. Why don't you just admit it?
Guy B) But I'm not gay.
A) Oh, so you have a problem with gay people?
B) No, I'm just not gay
A) If you didn't have a problem with gay people, you wouldn't have a problem with me labeling you as gay
B) I'm telling you I'm not gay.
A) why do you hate gay people?

See how frustrating that would be?

chris91
09-25-2009, 02:41 PM
How about "physical contact with the intent or purpose of creating sexual titillation or arousal in exchange for money"? Anyone have a problem with that definition? It would take care of all these objections or counterarguments raised in this thread:

- masseuses
- dentists
- laughing bartenders
- air dancing strippers
- needing to have the intent to create orgasm (not the same as titillation or arousal)

This definition of prostitution is ridiculous. When someone says "That guy loves to hire prostitutes." do you think "Oh he loves to pay women to dance around and sit in his lap." Of course not. You think, "Oh he pays women to have sex with him."

I know you're not stupid, so I have to assume that you're just using this definition so that you can call us whores and give some basis to your "strippers shouldn't look down on hookers" idea. Well, you can't just change the definition of something to suit your argument. In America, prostitution is sex for money.

chris91
09-25-2009, 02:43 PM
Compare it to a guy being called "gay". Nowadays, most guys' reaction would like Seinfeld, "I'm not -- not that there's anything wrong with that." But it still comes out all defensive, like there IS something wrong with that. That's pretty much the position many of you have staked out with prostitution.


We get defensive because if we allow people to go around calling us prostitutes, then we have to deal with customer who expect us to get them off. People expect that of prostitutes because that is what prostitutes do. We do not do that.

chris91
09-25-2009, 02:47 PM
And if everywhere you went, people continued to insist that you were gay,

This is a great point. Sure, you have nothing against gay guys, but you would still correct people when they call you gay. Otherwise, you end up with dudes trying to make out with you. What's even worse is when you do say, "I'm not gay." and the dude says, "Sure you are. You're just too stupid to know it."

Elvia
09-25-2009, 02:53 PM
Too many people already assume that a dancer does everything a prostitute does anyway. I can't tell you how many times I've heard "most strippers are prostitutes anyway!" And yes, in a context that definitely means "they'll have sex with you for money." It's insulting because it's not true, and because so many people feel entitled to make assumptions about what we do without even bothering to talk to us and learn that's not true by a long shot. Defining us as prostitutes is just going to validate that ignorant assumption further.