Log in

View Full Version : walking atm's, fembots and objectification



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5]

evan_essence
03-13-2005, 06:24 AM
I can't agree with you here. If out-and-out prostitution is happening inside the club, that hurts everyone involved, including the SCJ. If you're seeking a specific sexual act, why not just go to a massage parlor, brothel, or choice street corner? Or find a dancer who's willing to work OTC?Oh, no, Nicolina, you don't comprehend the mission objective. A massage parlor, brothel or street corner are no challenge. Those sources are not the "Holy Grail," aka getting a stripper to put out. (An oddly chosen metaphor since there's only one Holy Grail but trip reports indicate several copies of strippers putting out.) You see, since you manipulate your customers out of their money, your customers' only way to get even is to manipulate you out of your straddle. As they say, turnabout is fair play. ::)

-Ev

SportsWriter2
03-13-2005, 06:25 AM
objectification is a two-way street and it is inherently offensive. however, i argue that behavior is normal inside of a sc. look, we all know what the other party wants when we step inside of a stripclub. the strippers covets the customer's money and the customers covets the stripper. yet, each party seems to expect that the other party pretends otherwise. which is a bit silly and unrealistic, IMO, if you happen to work or patronize an environment that mixes women and men all in a crass display of sex and greed.
You don't need to pretend. You just find someone you like and show some interest in a friendly way. Ask how she's been. Tell her you love her white thigh-high stockings. Last week I had one pull down her stockings and show me where her XBF stabbed her in the thigh. 15 stitches just taken out. :O

Me: "You can leave them on with me."
Dancer (hugging): "I love you."

I'll take a minute later to tell her she should have pressed charges cuz the kid will get drunk again and kick her door in at 1 AM, but right now being a victim turns her on.


"your lovely ass"? is he's buying a lap dance or a harlequin romance novel? i hope that's not an example of what dancers want to hear. if so, it does complicate matters greatly. if a polite question such as, "would you mind bending over and showing me your ass", just won't do. if dancer also needs to hear a little sweet talk on top of the money. what's next? a PL needs flowers and candy to get a stripper to bend over and show her ass?

Me (smiling): "Show me your cute little ass." :)

How much effort is that? I leave out "please" and insert "cute little" because that's what works with her. This is how you find lovable freaks.

I don't know about you, Mr P. Sometimes I think you don't want it. :-\

yoda57us
03-13-2005, 07:52 AM
Youa re paying them too, aren't you Sporty?

SportsWriter2
03-13-2005, 08:46 AM
Youa re paying them too, aren't you Sporty?
Ima payin them, Yoda, but if they think of you as a friend, you pay less. It's one way dancers PROVE that guys can't just buy them with money. :)

How many times have you been with a dancer who said, "I hate him. He offered me [insert dollar amount] for sex."

Nicolina
03-13-2005, 08:57 AM
Oh, no, Nicolina, you don't comprehend the mission objective. A massage parlor, brothel or street corner are no challenge.
-Ev

I do realize that some of the guys are into the whole game. But is it that they enjoy the power struggle (and coming out on top?) Or do they get off on subtle manipulation...? Or the idea that the girl did something she wasn't really "supposed" to do? I'm not really sure. I mean, mr. p is so blatant about the fact that he wants extras...I'm assuming he goes to clubs where he's pretty much guaranteed of obtaining his objective. Is it really a "challenge" in some of the clubs he frequents? I'd like to hear more about it from the guys....I just want to add that I have no problem with prostitution, I'm just a little dismayed that the lines between stripper and prostitute, or SC and whorehouse, have become so blurred in the past few years, even as clubs have become more mainstream....

Nicolina
03-13-2005, 09:08 AM
...if they think of you as a friend, you pay less. It's one way dancers PROVE that guys can't just buy them with money. :)


I hate to say it, Sporty, but this is true..."friend" is tricky, but there were definitely customers for whom I felt more affection than others. And they did tend to get a little more for their money :). For exactly the reason you said.

yoda57us
03-13-2005, 04:32 PM
Ima payin them, Yoda, but if they think of you as a friend, you pay less. It's one way dancers PROVE that guys can't just buy them with money. :)

How many times have you been with a dancer who said, "I hate him. He offered me [insert dollar amount] for sex."

Well, If they LIKE you, you pay less. The whole "friend" thing is a different story and subject to broad interpretation. For me (and yes, this is probably just me) If she's a true friend she won't want to be grinding on your lap, or she'll do it OTC for free....and that's a little more than just a friend.

I've had dancers comment to me about some idiot offering them money for sex. After a while, they realize it comes with the territory and just move on. They reserve the "H" word for other dancers who steal their customers.

mr_punk
03-18-2005, 08:46 PM
I'm like Jenny? You flatterer! This may be hard to believe, but perhaps you have a narrower perception of what is rude than we do; that could be the catalyst for that merry-go-round.i doubt it. according to Jenny, objectification is not only rude, but it's dehumanizing as well. except when she's hustling a customer then dehumanization isn't so bad after all. no, the difference is that you two intertwine rudeness with objectification. which is fine outside of a sc. the problem is it doesn't hold true in a sc. for example, strippers often hustle customers into buying them drinks. so, if a strange dancer walked up and asked a customer to buy her a drink. should a customer be offended because she's trying to hustle him? IMO, the answer is no. however, customers that do buy that drink do become offended once they realize that all she wanted was the drink. OTOH, if she demands that he buys her a drink after he refuses. well, that's a different story, isn't it?

You're agreeing with Lilith but you sound as if you're hedging a bit on her conclusion that "The subtle touch is necessary here. Do it, but you should never be obvious about it." Do you mean that it's silly and unrealistic to be subtle or am I misreading that? Because if you do, we may have found a key point of our disagreement.no, i'm not hedging. you're just looking at it from the wrong angle. lilith's statement indicates that she realizes that people do react badly to being objectified. keep in mind, she isn't talking about being careful not to be impolite. that's a given. she's talking about not being so obvious about your goal. you see, it's that obviousness that causes the negative reaction and not the fact that you're being rude in some way. IMO, it's the person who expects that subtle touch who is being silly and unrealistic by dragging in that OTC expectation of social behavior into a place where it's totally acceptable. in the end, it just complicates the whole transaction. more importantly, that need for subtlety is going to set someone up for a very rude awakening at some point down the line when you don't take it into account. so, it's unrealistic to walk into a sc with the expectation that you won't be objectified.

I don't agree with you that customer complaint about "wanna dance" is an overreaction. It's a poor way to interact because it lacks the subtlety that Lilith was referring to.it's not an overreaction? "wanna dance" is simply a question and nothing more. if a bartender asked you if you would like something to drink. would you be offended by the question? i hope not, but only in a sc would such a similar statement be seen as rude or a poor way to interact. in any case, if you characterize "wanna dance" as poor way to interact. i'm sure realize that people may be offended when being objectified in a sc. i'm sure you also can see how even the most polite, but objectifying statement can prompt a negative response. in reality, there is nothing subtle about a sc. what a stripper desires is obvious. a customer who becomes offended by simple question is fooling himself. if he doesn't realize that the stripper that refrains from saying "wanna dance" is just as interested in his money as well.

I think we have a disagreement about whether or not it's reasonable for the customer to be offended and then complain whenever he doesn't receive that subtlety.i think it's unreasonable to ask someone to be a mind reader. which is why i don't have a problem asking a stripper to bend over and spread her cheeks. however, some customers are reluctant to tell a stripper what he wants. for example, some customers are into the whole personality thing. they like to chitchat with strippers. so, if a customer sees a stripper that catches his eye and that stripper approaches him and says "wanna dance". instead of asking her to sit down. he might just say "no" because he is offended that the stripper seems so mercenary.

Well, for me, the drooling and throbbing usually tip me off, so I disagree polite phrasing doesn't show some respect since I already know I'm being objectified. I'll agree that some number of strippers might find the question offensive no matter what, but I'm betting that the number drops dramatically as the subtlety increases because the subtlety is seen as politeness.the same principle that applies to customers applies to strippers as well.

If I didn't know better, I'd swear you were deliberately engaging in selective quoting and moving the target to confuse the discussion.no. i took your comment at face value. i thought your comment was the perfect example of dragging a certain expectation into a sc.

I wouldn't expect you to automatically recognize this, but I was using "lovely" as a humorous embellishment of politeness, so chalk that one up to miscommunication and delete the word.which is why i posted it. i was hoping that you would clarify that statement up for me. thanks for clearing it up.

Btw, you never did answer my inquiry about whether you actually expect to bite a girl's ass or you were exaggerating.sorry, i've must have missed that one. do i go into a sc with the expectation of biting a stripper's ass? well, that would depend on the stripper in question, wouldn't it? specifically, if it's a stripper with whom i have a certain rapport. the answer is yes and i do bite (lightly). generally speaking, do i expect to bite the ass of any random stripper that tickles my fancy? ahhh...if only i could but, the answer is no.

What I'm requesting is for you to use the double opt-in procedure. Only I can solicit an illegal act between us and then you have to get an additional confirmation from me before the interaction proceeds.well, that would put a customer at a disadvantage, wouldn't it? the whole purpose behind my silly test was to show that strippers do entice customers either verbally or non-verbally, fully aware and in a calculated manner. there is a difference between a humdrum, sit-n-grind McLap and a stripper who bends or breaks the rules. perhaps, it's part of their hustle or perhaps it's a slow night or perhaps she does it for certain customers. who knows. in any case, any action on the customer's part after the stripper's initial contact only serves to confirm if it's a hustle or not a hustle. the hesitant customer who waits on a stripper for additional confirmation after the fact only serves to fatten her pockets at his expense. which is probably the whole point of a stripper "accidentally" grabbing a customer's gameboy in the first place.

Always assume not a player, whether it's true or not. Not only is that a way to set new levels of politeness, but also, that way neither of a customer's heads will explode from the tension of seeking a player.oh, don't worry about it. i always assume not a player. i also assume hustle until the stripper gives me a reason to think otherwise. a stripper who "accidentally" lets her nipple fall into my mouth is a good reason.

I fail to see the parody aspect of what you're saying here. If you remove illegal sexual acts and drugs, which are the main secondary effects that have been successful in court arguments, what secondary effects would be left to argue? Would that stop all the opposition you cited? No. But it would give the opposition less ammunition and make a freedom of expression argument more viable. I believe what you're doing is called shitting in your own nest.my point is that horse left the barn and was turned into a pot of glue. it's a little too late because the damage was done years ago. it was never about your freedom of expression. this may may all seem new to anyone who was a stripper during the laissez-faire clinton administration, but to anyone who's old enough to remember nixon's commission on pornography in the 70's or meese commission in the 80's. it's nothing new at all and from my understanding of the issue, the opposition already has all the ammunition it needs. it's only a study away.

mr_punk
03-18-2005, 08:51 PM
I do realize that some of the guys are into the whole game. But is it that they enjoy the power struggle (and coming out on top?) Or do they get off on subtle manipulation...?what manipulation? what power struggle? that's a more apt description of a stripper and her unemployed musician BF rather a stripper and a customer.

Or the idea that the girl did something she wasn't really "supposed" to do? I'm not really sure.LOL.... like when a stripper coquettishly tells a customer after tucking him back in and zipping him up, "gee, i don't know what came over me. i've never done that with a customer before.". yeah right, honey.....LOL. however, you do have a point. some guys eat that BS up with a spoon.

I'm assuming he goes to clubs where he's pretty much guaranteed of obtaining his objective. Is it really a "challenge" in some of the clubs he frequents?a guarantee in a sc is about as dependable as a stripper saying, "i give the best lapdances". there are no guarantees in a sc. secondly, in many stripclubs, a certain percentage of the dancers are players (either ITC or OTC) and this was true even in the "good old days". lastly, in this golden age, the only real challenge is not to spend a lot of money while in the process of separating the cream from the curds.

evan_essence
03-25-2005, 07:04 AM
i doubt it. according to Jenny, objectification is not only rude, but it's dehumanizing as well. except when she's hustling a customer then dehumanization isn't so bad after all. How is she dehumanizing a customer by selling a fantasy that the customer came there to buy? Now if she grabs his dick without permission as she first introduces herself, yeah.


no, the difference is that you two intertwine rudeness with objectification. which is fine outside of a sc. the problem is it doesn't hold true in a sc. for example, strippers often hustle customers into buying them drinks. so, if a strange dancer walked up and asked a customer to buy her a drink. should a customer be offended because she's trying to hustle him? IMO, the answer is no. however, customers that do buy that drink do become offended once they realize that all she wanted was the drink. It's not reasonable for customers to become offended by the standard, perfectly legal business model of creating a fantasy inside the club. However, there's nothing unreasonable about customers and strippers becoming offended by practices outside the business model and law.



no, i'm not hedging. you're just looking at it from the wrong angle. lilith's statement indicates that she realizes that people do react badly to being objectified. keep in mind, she isn't talking about being careful not to be impolite. that's a given. she's talking about not being so obvious about your goal. you see, it's that obviousness that causes the negative reaction and not the fact that you're being rude in some way. IMO, it's the person who expects that subtle touch who is being silly and unrealistic by dragging in that OTC expectation of social behavior into a place where it's totally acceptable. in the end, it just complicates the whole transaction. I see nothing wrong with the customer expecting it as part of the fantasy being sold. I'm beginning to think you believe fantasy, as facilitated by subtlety, is a silly waste of a customer's time and money, compared to your quest of obtaining real sex.


"wanna dance" is simply a question and nothing more. if a bartender asked you if you would like something to drink. would you be offended by the question? i hope not, but only in a sc would such a similar statement be seen as rude or a poor way to interact. A dancer asking "wanna dance" is equivalent to a bartender failing to ask me if I'd like a drink. Neither would be doing their jobs worth a crap.


a customer who becomes offended by simple question is fooling himself. if he doesn't realize that the stripper that refrains from saying "wanna dance" is just as interested in his money as well. I want to shout this response from the rooftop. The whole point is to fool himself. That's what a frickin' fantasy IS. The healthiest fantasy is the one in which he suspends disbelief, or fools himself, yet simultaneously maintains an underlying knowledge that it is a fantasy. Under your rationale, he shouldn't be upset whether the stripper assists him in creating a fantasy or hangs back and coasts to her retirement. This may be difficult to believe for someone like you who's vested exclusively in obtaining FS, but some men actually find value in being flirted with.


in any case, any action on the customer's part after the stripper's initial contact only serves to confirm if it's a hustle or not a hustle. the hesitant customer who waits on a stripper for additional confirmation after the fact only serves to fatten her pockets at his expense. which is probably the whole point of a stripper "accidentally" grabbing a customer's gameboy in the first place.You're assuming "a customer" exercises the due diligence that you're allegedly practicing. They don't, so I was basically suggesting an alternative. Namely, go home.


my point is that horse left the barn and was turned into a pot of glue. it's a little too late because the damage was done years ago. And here I was hoping I could argue in court that you could be rehabilitated.


it was never about your freedom of expression. this may may all seem new to anyone who was a stripper during the laissez-faire clinton administration, but to anyone who's old enough to remember nixon's commission on pornography in the 70's or meese commission in the 80's. it's nothing new at all and from my understanding of the issue, the opposition already has all the ammunition it needs. it's only a study away.Funny, I thought new ammunition was being manufactured daily. The state's interest in restricting strip clubs trumps the freedom of expression only because it can argue that it has an interest to protect the public from the proliferation of illegal sex and drugs. If you would stop that crap, the old ammunition would eventually become a distant memory and a First Amendment argument would have more credibility. IMHO, this legal concept rudely interferes with your personal pursuit of pleasure, so you'll apparently continue to rationalize that you're not a contributor to the strip club's demise.

-Ev

mr_punk
03-27-2005, 11:34 AM
How is she dehumanizing a customer by selling a fantasy that the customer came there to buy? Now if she grabs his dick without permission as she first introduces herself, yeah.actually, the dehumanization part is reducing the customer to a walking ATM or wallet or reducing a stripper to a collection of tits and ass. now, as far as a stripper grabbing a customer's willy. well, it's no different than a stripper kissing a customer, overpromising and under delivering, leading a customer to think that she likes him, sticking her nipple in his mouth, etc. it all goes under the heading of what you ladies call hustling.

It's not reasonable for customers to become offended by the standard, perfectly legal business model of creating a fantasy inside the club. However, there's nothing unreasonable about customers and strippers becoming offended by practices outside the business model and law.a fantasy? that's the second time you used that word. what does a fantasy have to do with the price of tea in china. now, i have to wonder if you are deliberately moving the target to confuse the discussion. however, i'll humor you.

I see nothing wrong with the customer expecting it as part of the fantasy being sold. I'm beginning to think you believe fantasy, as facilitated by subtlety, is a silly waste of a customer's time and money, compared to your quest of obtaining real sex.actually, it really doesn't matter what the customer wants. it could be a BJ or a "fantasy". in the end, it's silly and unrealistic to drag in that expectation of subtlety from some random stripper into a sc. like i said, there is nothing subtle about a stripper. a stripper is as transparent as a pane of glass and as you ladies have pointed out countless of times. a stripper's goal is to hustle the customer for money. it's what strippers do. a realistic customer knows this as well.

A dancer asking "wanna dance" is equivalent to a bartender failing to ask me if I'd like a drink. Neither would be doing their jobs worth a crap.well, i think you're proving my point about unrealistic expectations in a sc. "wanna dance" is just a question to gauge interest and nothing more. however, you seem to disapprove of the question not only because it lacks subtlety, but also as a method to hustle customers. however, if the question is just as effective on a customer as sitting down and talking to him. you may argue and disapprove with the methods involved. however, you can't argue with the results if it ends in a sale. after all, isn't that how you ladies measure success?

as far as a stripper not doing her job. well, during a nuclear summit with the U.S. . soviet leader Gorbachev became annoyed by the U.S. demand of weapons inspection before signing a nuclear treaty. "You don't trust us?" Gorbachev asked President Reagan. "Trust yes, but verify." was reagan response. my point is that strippers work for themselves and usually in their own best interests. so, it would be foolish for any customer to simply trust the words of some strange stripper when she tells him that he is going to have a good time.

I want to shout this response from the rooftop. The whole point is to fool himself. That's what a frickin' fantasy IS. The healthiest fantasy is the one in which he suspends disbelief, or fools himself, yet simultaneously maintains an underlying knowledge that it is a fantasy. Under your rationale, he shouldn't be upset whether the stripper assists him in creating a fantasy or hangs back and coasts to her retirement. This may be difficult to believe for someone like you who's vested exclusively in obtaining FS, but some men actually find value in being flirted with.there you go again with the "fantasy" thing. you know, a customer indulging in a fantasy isn't equivalent to being delusional or having an unrealistic expectation in a sc. for example, if a stripper pretends to like a customer in order to hustle him. does that indicate a level of genuine interest on the stripper's part? of course not. however, i don't have to tell you that some customers do believe it indicates a level of genuine interest. furthermore, those same customers do become offended when they find out that nothing could be further from the truth. that kind of "the biatch just wanted my money" response is an unrealistic expectation. it has nothing to do with fantasy at all. ultimately, it doesn't matter how much a customer fantasizes about a stripper. at the end of the day, the realistic customer always knows why the stripper is sitting next to him and stroking his ego. he's also knows that when he finished indulging in his fantasy. he pays her, she leaves and the transaction is completed. OTOH, the unrealistic customers always and without fail loses sight of that fact.

You're assuming "a customer" exercises the due diligence that you're allegedly practicing. They don't, so I was basically suggesting an alternative. Namely, go home.be careful what you ask for. you might not like what you get. those guys are part of the vast majority of sc customers. the part that drag unrealistic expectations into a sc. ironically, those expectations can and are being used by dancers to their advantage and if those customers all disappeared one day. it would just make your job much more difficult. although, if they did disappear. it would be nice from my POV. it would be the mother of all perfect storms.

Funny, I thought new ammunition was being manufactured daily.
you're kidding, right? when a municipality argues secondary effects. they have the burden of proving the relationship between SOB and secondary effects. more importantly, it takes time and money to produce such studies and they ain't cheap these days. however, whether you're a small local goverment on a tight budget or a big city mayor who would rather spend the money on expensive gifts for your mistresses. there is a solution all those problems.

the supreme court ruled that local goverments are not required "to conduct new studies or produce evidence independent of that already generated by other cities, so long as whatever evidence the city relies upon is reasonably believed to be relevant to the problem that the city addresses."(Justice Renquist). IOW, a city doesn't have to bother wasting it's time and resources reinventing the wheel by creating a new study that's relevant to the community in question. the courts can and do rely on studies which may have been conducted in other cities and/or may have been conducted decades ago and there are countless of such studies that were created long before you even came into the business. some law firms even offer an economically affordable "SOB packet" which contains a number of studies that have been around for years from several different cities and counties that can meet any local goverment needs.

it gets even better. whether or not the community in question is actually suffering from secondary effects is irrelevant. a municipality only needs to show is that those effects MIGHT occur, by the use of studies or court opinion, but without actually having to prove that it's actually occuring. thus, a municipality can draft laws in order to combat secondary effects even though there is absolutely no proof they are actually occurring. now, if you can follow that twisted logic. you're ready for law school.

The state's interest in restricting strip clubs trumps the freedom of expression only because it can argue that it has an interest to protect the public from the proliferation of illegal sex and drugs.actually, no. at least, according to the supreme court. like i said, it's not about your freedom of expression. the supreme court made it very clear that local goverments can't create laws with the intent of banning your freedom of expression. however, if a municipality's intent is not to ban nude dancing, but to regulate it in order to combat secondary effects like crime, declining property values, etc. well, they're not really affecting your freedom of expression at all. needless to say, if those regulatory laws just so happen to be so economically burdensome that it can literally kill a business or make it very difficult to survive. although, it may seem to be in effect a ban on nude dancing. you can rest assured that your freedom of expression is still protected under the constitution. at least, according to the supreme court.

in short, nude dancing can be in effect banned. if the city council's intent is not to ban nude dancing, but to combat secondary effects like declining property values, crime, etc by in effect banning nude dancing. now, if you can follow that twisted logic. you're ready to sit on the supreme court.

If you would stop that crap, the old ammunition would eventually become a distant memory and a First Amendment argument would have more credibility. IMHO, this legal concept rudely interferes with your personal pursuit of pleasure, so you'll apparently continue to rationalize that you're not a contributor to the strip club's demise.
i suppose i should be a team player and deny my own personal gratification when i go to sc, but the dark side of the force is too strong to resist...LOL. sorry, i guess i should be more serious about this, but i'm just being pragmatic about the whole issue. the USSC really did a major number on your industry. so, you can forget about seeking help on a federal level. however, all that means is that the battle is being kicked back down to the state level. fortunately, there is a lot more give at the state level. so, there's no need to think that sc are going to disappear anytime soon. it's just means that you have a lot of protracted legal battles ahead of you in order to stay in business or perhaps not.... greasing the palms of the powers that be can work just as well.

evan_essence
03-28-2005, 09:55 AM
actually, the dehumanization part is reducing the customer to a walking ATM or wallet or reducing a stripper to a collection of tits and ass.Amazingly, there's a paradigm in which dehumanization doesn't take place. It's called the business transaction, in which the customer plays the role of consumer of fantasies and the stripper plays the role of fantasy provider. Sorta like going to Sears and being waited on by a "sales associate" while seeking to buy some tools.

now, as far as a stripper grabbing a customer's willy. well, it's no different than a stripper kissing a customer, overpromising and under delivering, leading a customer to think that she likes him, sticking her nipple in his mouth, etc. it all goes under the heading of what you ladies call hustling.Hey, I never thought kissing you, sticking my nipples in your mouth or fondling your willy were good ideas. I promise I'd never do those things to you if you were my customer because I respect you too much. It's not my intention to deliberately overpromise/under deliver either. When I say you'll have a good time, I really think you will enjoy my lewd behavior, but I suppose that's subjective. And leading you to believe I like you? Well, guilty as charged on that one. You are, after all, rather irresistable so it's not difficult for me to respond accordingly. Debating you definitely makes my nipples hard, but again, I promise to keep them out of your mouth.

a fantasy? that's the second time you used that word. what does a fantasy have to do with the price of tea in china. now, i have to wonder if you are deliberately moving the target to confuse the discussion. however, i'll humor you. Sorry, my bad. I must have forgotten for a moment that I'm dancing with a male. In such cases, I automatically yield to the male's lead, out of pure pragmatism and respect for tradition. I got confused because I'm used to taking the lead when I dance with my girlfriend.
actually, it really doesn't matter what the customer wants. it could be a BJ or a "fantasy". in the end, it's silly and unrealistic to drag in that expectation of subtlety from some random stripper into a sc. Yeah, subtlety and BJs don't really go together, do they? Thinking back on it, I don't believe I've ever pulled off a subtle BJ for any of my male lovers. Maybe a girl more skilled than I am could offer a subtle approach, but I always want to go into devour mode. OTOH, subtle nuances and sexually erotic fantasy seem more of a match.

like i said, there is nothing subtle about a stripper. a stripper is as transparent as a pane of glass and as you ladies have pointed out countless of times. a stripper's goal is to hustle the customer for money. it's what strippers do. a realistic customer knows this as well.Sounds like you're agreeing that the customer isn't dehumanized in the process. (It's the first time I've been considered as a "piece of glass," BTW.)

"wanna dance" is just a question to gauge interest and nothing more. ... if the question is just as effective on a customer as sitting down and talking to him. you may argue and disapprove with the methods involved. however, you can't argue with the results if it ends in a sale. after all, isn't that how you ladies measure success?Phew, I can hear the condescension dripping off your delivery of "you ladies." It's funny but I thought I WAS arguing with the method of interacting with the customer since that preliminary interaction is part of creating the ideal customer experience. Less so for those whose goal is to cum on the spot, of course.

as far as a stripper not doing her job. ... my point is that strippers work for themselves and usually in their own best interests. so, it would be foolish for any customer to simply trust the words of some strange stripper when she tells him that he is going to have a good time.Wow, I'm just now realizing that it's never in a stripper's best interest to give the customer a good time. I can always make more money by deliberately deceiving and shortchanging the customer. Successful business people automatically put their best interests over and above the customer's interests, rather than making a transaction a win-win situation.

there you go again with the "fantasy" thing. you know, a customer indulging in a fantasy isn't equivalent to being delusional or having an unrealistic expectation in a sc. ... at the end of the day, the realistic customer always knows why the stripper is sitting next to him and stroking his ego. he's also knows that when he finished indulging in his fantasy. he pays her, she leaves and the transaction is completed. OTOH, the unrealistic customers always and without fail loses sight of that fact. Since we agree on this, I'm suddenly unsure of where our disagreement lies. Do you know? Perhaps I've gotten so used to dancing with you, I just desire to continue to dance.

be careful what you ask for. you might not like what you get. those guys are part of the vast majority of sc customers. the part that drag unrealistic expectations into a sc. ironically, those expectations can and are being used by dancers to their advantage and if those customers all disappeared one day. it would just make your job much more difficult.So my choices to wish for are what? Between delusional customers who think my tease makes me actual girlfriend material or delusional customers who plot to have full sex with me as revenge for my ability to tease? Is there no hope for a body of customers who come in fully aware that this is role playing that stops short of full sex and enjoy that sort of party?

You see, this gets to the heart of what I find so misguided about your modus operandi. Here's how I perceive how you perceive stripping. You're pushing this world view that my hustling is deception, not acting out a fantasy, and that the solution to that is the customer can only be satisfied by exacting revenge by turning the tables on me and tricking me into sucking and/or fucking him. Isn't that pretty much it in a nutsack.. er nutshell?

the supreme court ruled that local goverments are not required "to conduct new studies or produce evidence independent of that already generated by other cities, so long as whatever evidence the city relies upon is reasonably believed to be relevant to the problem that the city addresses."(Justice Renquist). Let's tackle the "is reasonably believed to be relevant" part. That leaves room for debate, doesn't it? If I can show that the clubs which are the object of new regulation have instituted procedures that eliminate or significantly miminimize secondary activity, and that's vastly different than the locale where the original study took place, then I can argue it's not reasonable to believe the study being cited is relevant. If the clubs would self-regulate to a degree that's less restrictive than potential legal restraints and produce a history that the self-regulation accomplishes what tighter legal restrictions are intended to do, they might have some ammunition to show that the law need be only as restrictive as the steps taken in self-regulation.

it gets even better. whether or not the community in question is actually suffering from secondary effects is irrelevant. a municipality only needs to show is that those effects MIGHT occur, by the use of studies or court opinion, but without actually having to prove that it's actually occuring.The first step in successfully building a case that secondary effects are highly unlikely to occur because this situation is different than the others is taking steps to actually eliminate their occurence. After all, even if the municipality doesn't need to prove that's occurring already, if it is, you've lost. The next step would be to create and provide studies and history to show that secondary effects don't occur in areas where the law regulates clubs with a lesser level of restrictions than those proposed.

in short, nude dancing can be in effect banned. if the city council's intent is not to ban nude dancing, but to combat secondary effects like declining property values, crime, etc by in effect banning nude dancing. now, if you can follow that twisted logic. you're ready to sit on the supreme court. Ya know, I believe that's what I was saying in many fewer words, but suffice it to say I understand that and agree with your more detailed description. Technically, I think we're both concluding that sexually expressive dancing per se can't be banned outright, but it can be so restricted (i.e., 10 foot rule, no direct tipping, no private rooms) under the guise of combatting secondary effects that it becomes unprofitable, which accomplishes the same end result.

i suppose i should be a team player and deny my own personal gratification when i go to sc, but the dark side of the force is too strong to resist...LOL. sorry, i guess i should be more serious about this, but i'm just being pragmatic about the whole issue. OMG, I can't believe I prompted you to throw me a bone of even that tiny size. Normally I don't like small ones, but I'm thrilled this time anyway.

the USSC really did a major number on your industry. so, you can forget about seeking help on a federal level. however, all that means is that the battle is being kicked back down to the state level. fortunately, there is a lot more give at the state level. so, there's no need to think that sc are going to disappear anytime soon. it's just means that you have a lot of protracted legal battles ahead of you in order to stay in business or perhaps not.... greasing the palms of the powers that be can work just as well.True, but there is a decidely conservative and sexually repressive political mood across the country right now, so greasing palms has less impact when the palms feel that no amount of money can make the cause politically palatable at election time. For that very reason, I continue to maintain that flying under the radar, facilitated by fewer violations of current law, holds value in the battle.

-Ev

mr_punk
04-03-2005, 04:50 PM
Amazingly, there's a paradigm in which dehumanization doesn't take place. It's called the business transaction, in which the customer plays the role of consumer of fantasies and the stripper plays the role of fantasy provider. Sorta like going to Sears and being waited on by a "sales associate" while seeking to buy some tools.
well...yeah..that's been my point from the very beginning:
objectification in a sc is good (or it isn't necessarily such a bad thing). sometimes, i think the indignation over the act is about as sincere as the NFL's outrage over the ABC's cross promotion skit before MNF.
all the hand wringing over the idea of whether or not a stripper is being viewed as living blow-up doll (or as jenny would say,"a little, fuckable animal) is superfluous and only complicates the transaction.


Hey, I never thought kissing you, sticking my nipples in your mouth or fondling your willy were good ideas.i never meant to imply that you thought they were good ideas. i'm just pointing out that strippers hustle customers in a lot of different ways. some of their methods are subtle and some are not so subtle and i'm sure you would disapprove of many of them. however, from this customer's POV. it comes with the territory. it's what strippers do.


I promise I'd never do those things to you if you were my customer because I respect you too much. It's not my intention to deliberately overpromise/under deliver either. When I say you'll have a good time, I really think you will enjoy my lewd behavior, but I suppose that's subjective. And leading you to believe I like you? Well, guilty as charged on that one.i'm sure you mean everything you say. however, generally speaking, talk is cheap and plentiful in a sc. frankly, i really don't pay much attention when strippers tell me about their good intentions. a stripper's actions is a much more important and reliable indicator than mere words.


Sorry, my bad. I must have forgotten for a moment that I'm dancing with a male. In such cases, I automatically yield to the male's lead, out of pure pragmatism and respect for tradition.LOL...if i was the type of customer who actually paid attention to SS. i just might believe you.



Sounds like you're agreeing that the customer isn't dehumanized in the process. (It's the first time I've been considered as a "piece of glass," BTW.)
what ever gave you the idea that i thought the customer was being dehumanized in the first place? like i said from the very beginning:

i don't mind clubs where dancers hustle the customers hard. i don't mind the "wanna dance" routine. i don't mind a dancer who's main objective is to dig very deep into my tiproll.jenny's is the one who thinks that objectification equals dehumanization. OTOH, a stripper who wants a customer's money is perfectly natural behavior in a sc.



Phew, I can hear the condescension dripping off your delivery of "you ladies." It's funny but I thought I WAS arguing with the method of interacting with the customer since that preliminary interaction is part of creating the ideal customer experience. Less so for those whose goal is to cum on the spot, of course."creating ideal customer experience?". now, that's funny. look, i'm sure you're interested accomplishing such a feat. however, i would like to point out that creating the "ideal customer experience" has never been a priority for your industry as a whole. i'm sure you've met your share of strippers who think that just showing up is 99% of the job.



Wow, I'm just now realizing that it's never in a stripper's best interest to give the customer a good time. I can always make more money by deliberately deceiving and shortchanging the customer. Successful business people automatically put their best interests over and above the customer's interests, rather than making a transaction a win-win situation.putting your sarcasm aside for the moment....you're correct and the sc industry isn't alone. like i said in another thread before it was deleted. it's pretty indicative of the sex industry as a whole. it's one of the few industries that can consistently turn out poor or mediocre offerings or customer service and still make money and it happens because the buyers allow it to happen. having said that, i have no problem with anyone going to a sc. however, rather than strictly rely on the words and empty promises of a sc or a stripper. it's totally up to the customer to be a more careful, choosy and discerning consumer. otherwise, he has no one to blame, but himself if he is dissatisfied with his experience.



So my choices to wish for are what? Between delusional customers who think my tease makes me actual girlfriend material or delusional customers who plot to have full sex with me as revenge for my ability to tease?oh no, those customers would be long gone. those are the customers that actually believe SS and eat it up with a spoon. believe it or not, they make your job easier. it's easier to extract cash from a guy who's thinking with the little head.


You see, this gets to the heart of what I find so misguided about your modus operandi. Here's how I perceive how you perceive stripping. You're pushing this world view that my hustling is deception, not acting out a fantasy, and that the solution to that is the customer can only be satisfied by exacting revenge by turning the tables on me and tricking me into sucking and/or fucking him. Isn't that pretty much it in a nutsack.. er nutshell?are you serious? now, why would i want to "exact revenge" on a stripper? although, if she murdered my kung-fu master. you might have a point. i would have no choice, but to kill her with my flying guillotine to restore my master's honor. otherwise, there's no need for you and jenny to continue wear the tin foil hats. there is no conspiracy against strippers. BTW, acting is a form of deception. so, unless you really like and go out with all your customers. you are deceiving them. in any case, i don't have a problem with the act. it's what strippers do. like i said, i really don't pay much attention when strippers tell me what they can do. it's not very important in the scheme of things.



Since we agree on this, I'm suddenly unsure of where our disagreement lies. Do you know?maybe. you seem to be under the impression that i believe that objectification is bad in a sc. i never did.



Let's tackle the "is reasonably believed to be relevant" part. That leaves room for debate, doesn't it?yes, but i'm not the chief justice of the supreme court. although, i did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night.



If I can show that the clubs which are the object of new regulation have instituted procedures that eliminate or significantly miminimize secondary activity, and that's vastly different than the locale where the original study took place, then I can argue it's not reasonable to believe the study being cited is relevant.yes, on both counts. a local government's findings can be challenged in court and you can't compare a sc located in the cornfields of iowa in a medium-sized suburb right off the highway to a peep show in NY Times Square in the 1970's. the comparison between locales has to be germane.



If the clubs would self-regulate to a degree that's less restrictive than potential legal restraints and produce a history that the self-regulation accomplishes what tighter legal restrictions are intended to do, they might have some ammunition to show that the law need be only as restrictive as the steps taken inself-regulation. that's one big "if". most businesses abhor excessive goverment regulation and sc are no different.


After all, even if the municipality doesn't need to prove that's occurring already, if it is, you've lost. The next step would be to create and provide studies and history to show that secondary effects don't occur in areas where the law regulates clubs with a lesser level of restrictions than those proposed.sure, it's a battle of the expert witnesses and studies that show either the evidence (or lack thereof) regarding secondary effects. however, if a sc has deep pockets. any half-assed lawyer can drag out a case like this for years and the sc can still make money while going through the process.


OMG, I can't believe I prompted you to throw me a bone of even that tiny size. Normally I don't like small ones, but I'm thrilled this time anyway.gee..thanks. i'm just thrilled you didn't also manage to work in a double entendre about my lack of stamina in the sack as well. now, that would have really been emasculating.


True, but there is a decidely conservative and sexually repressive political mood across the country right now, so greasing palms has less impact when the palms feel that no amount of money can make the cause politically palatable at election time. For that very reason, I continue to maintain that flying under the radar, facilitated by fewer violations of current law, holds value in the battle.but exactly how much value is the question? it really doesn't matter how low the industry flies, how clean it may be or how much the industry self-regulates. if a local goverment is simply offended by idea of adult entertainment and has the ability to do something about it. the problem with the secondary effects doctrine is that it is prone to abuse by local goverments. the doctrine originally arose from series of adult ordinance zoning cases. however, the Supreme Court's extention of secondary effects rationale has provided backdoor for local goverments and officials to hide their disgust for adult businesses behind a facade of concern in the public interest. i find it to be more of a cynical political exercise rather than a legal issue. at the very root of that problem is that people will simply find the adult industry to be deviant and repulsive behavior. IMO, it will take a change in societal mores before that mindset changes.

Jenny
04-03-2005, 08:04 PM
Okay - I am interjecting here again. When one "objectifies" someone it means that one treats her as less than human - as an "object", as it were. A social/business interaction does not necessarily equal denying someone's humanity, as is mr._punk's contention. The fact that I don't know the person who serves me coffee in the morning very well (I actually do, but I need an example) does not mean that I see her as only a coffee machine - it mean's that she is a person endowed with the necessary anonymity that is part of living in a large, urban environment. I still extend her the respect that I extend to all human beings (except the fat ones. Fuck them.) I personally do not deny my customer's humanity because they pay me for a service, any more than the young lady who serves me coffee denies mine when she rings up my red-eye. This does not mean that we have to constantly validate each other's humanity through specific action - it is more a constant assumption and behaviour. This is, unfortunately, sometimes lacking in a strip club. I used the example of a very rude customer, not to illustrate that is bad to be rude (it is), but to provide an example of a person who understands us completely as commodity, devoid of any .... (yes, I am about to say it) humanity. Denying that humanity while saying "please" is really not that much better. Again - this does not equal dancers and customers liking each other, knowing each other, prying into each other's conscious/subconscious minds, etc. It equals a business transactions between two people instead of one person and one thing. Nic - you're a Gaitskill fan. She expresses this relationship beautifully in her short stories - mostly involving prostitutes, but it stands.

evan_essence
04-04-2005, 05:04 AM
well...yeah..that's been my point from the very beginning:
all the hand wringing over the idea of whether or not a stripper is being viewed as living blow-up doll (or as jenny would say,"a little, fuckable animal) is superfluous and only complicates the transaction.Nah, it doesn't really complicate things, at least not if you treat your blow-up dolls as human.


what ever gave you the idea that i thought the customer was being dehumanized in the first place?Um.. well, those were your words, which appeared quoted right above my response. To wit:

"actually, the dehumanization part is reducing the customer to a walking ATM or wallet or reducing a stripper to a collection of tits and ass."


putting your sarcasm aside for the moment....Well, next to my growing desire for you to sink your molars into my rump, that's at the very core of my existence, but if you must.


however, rather than strictly rely on the words and empty promises of a sc or a stripper. it's totally up to the customer to be a more careful, choosy and discerning consumer. otherwise, he has no one to blame, but himself if he is dissatisfied with his experience.That would be fine if you weren't using this description as a platform to urge customers to seek services outside of club rules.


those are the customers that actually believe SS and eat it up with a spoon. believe it or not, they make your job easier. it's easier to extract cash from a guy who's thinking with the little head. Actually, it's easier to extract cash, at least in the short run, from a guy who's thinking with his heart. A guy who's thinking with his little head usually wants more than is legal for free or cheap.


are you serious? now, why would i want to "exact revenge" on a stripper? ... there is no conspiracy against strippers. i'm sure you mean everything you say. however, generally speaking, talk is cheap and plentiful in a sc. frankly, i really don't pay much attention when customers tell me about their good intentions. a customer's actions are a much more important and reliable indicator than mere words. (Gawd, I've been at this so long I'm starting to echo you.)


BTW, acting is a form of deception. so, unless you really like and go out with all your customers. you are deceiving them. in any case, i don't have a problem with the act. it's what strippers do. like i said, i really don't pay much attention when strippers tell me what they can do. it's not very important in the scheme of things.First, all acting is not deception; it is a willing suspension of disbelief, or fantasy, when it's presented in a context in which it's known to be acting. Second, that's a key component of the product. If you don't think it's very important, you're in the wrong place of business looking for the wrong merchandise. Which it's quite obvious to me that you are.

-Ev

SportsWriter2
04-04-2005, 05:22 AM
I still extend her the respect that I extend to all human beings (except the fat ones. Fuck them.)
If you extend respect to the fat ones, they're all over you because they have no other friends. Here's how I handle it:

fat one: "Have a good day."
me: "U2"
fat one: "Thank-you."

Ordinarily I'd say "You, too" in response. Saying "U2" lets me deny them respect without being obvious. If they were really tuned in, they'd notice the missing comma, but all they think about is the next donut. :P

evan_essence
04-04-2005, 05:22 AM
I used the example of a very rude customer, not to illustrate that is bad to be rude (it is), but to provide an example of a person who understands us completely as commodity, devoid of any .... (yes, I am about to say it) humanity. We keep going round and round on this very point. I get the impression that, falling short of a customer sticking his fingers in your snatch without your permission which he would agree is unacceptable, Mr. P does not consider rudeness as an example of, nor equivalent to, dehumanizing objectification. I think I hear him saying that if you insist customers not be rude, that just complicates the transaction because it's what customers do, just as strippers hustle. But you know, now I'm putting words in his mouth. Next I'll be donning whips and leather to spoon feed him in a high chair.

-Ev

mr_punk
04-04-2005, 10:43 PM
A social/business interaction does not necessarily equal denying someone's humanity, as is mr._punk's contention. i agree. how many times do i have to repeat myself. i just don't agree that objectification of a stripper is the same as the dehumanization of a stripper.


I personally do not deny my customer's humanity because they pay me for a service, any more than the young lady who serves me coffee denies mine when she rings up my red-eye. This does not mean that we have to constantly validate each other's humanity through specific action - it is more a constant assumption and behaviour.i agree. however, it seems that when the discussion is moved to a sc. people (ie: jenny) seem to become overly concerned that a stripper is being viewed as a piece of meat or a customer is being viewed as an ATM. in reality, strippers do want money from their customers. customers do want whatever they want from strippers. futhermore, they do view each other as sex or money objects for their own selfish purposes and as long as no one is unpleasant about it. i see nothing wrong with the act itself inside of a sc and it's hardly dehumanizing.


I used the example of a very rude customer, not to illustrate that is bad to be rude (it is), but to provide an example of a person who understands us completely as commodity, devoid of any .... (yes, I am about to say it) humanity.oh, would someone please break out the crying towels. isn't that a bit overwrought? a person in a similar situation outside of a sc would be seen as your everyday generic asshole. no different that the person who cuts you off in traffic. only inside of a sc would he seen as denying a stripper of her humanity. why? simply because he is being rude to strippers. the next time i get cut off in traffic. instead of giving the other person the finger like i usually do. i'm going to scream loudly out the window, "you're denying me of my humanity!". that'll show him not to deny people of their humanity in traffic.


Denying that humanity while saying "please" is really not that much better. Again - this does not equal dancers and customers liking each other, knowing each other, prying into each other's conscious/subconscious minds, etc. It equals a business transactions between two people instead of one person and one thing.how about, "pretty please with sugar on top. would you bend over and show me your ass?". seriously, why isn't saying "please" good enough? when you are being served by this hypothetical waitress. you probably exchange a greeting and/or perhaps exchange a bit of small talk. she takes your order, refills your coffee, etc. you pay your bill and you leave, right? why is it any different in a sc. a stripper approaches me, makes a bit of small talk and asks if i would like to buy a dance. i say yes. i ask her to bend over and show me her ass or perhaps to stick her tits out. she does what i ask of her. i pay her and leave. transaction complete. you need not make nothing more of it and yet you do. you seem to enjoy complicating the simplest of transactions with this idea of dehumanization. look, just because you hate being told what to do or perhaps you dislike being viewed as a sex object. it does not mean that if another stripper doesn't have a problem with being told what to do or being viewed as a sex object that person is being dehumanized.

mr_punk
04-04-2005, 11:01 PM
Nah, it doesn't really complicate things, at least not if you treat your blow-up dolls as human.well, i never said treating anyone as less than human is a good idea.

Um.. well, those were your words, which appeared quoted right above my response. To wit:um..well...did you go back and look at the statement you were responding to?


I'm like Jenny? You flatterer! This may be hard to believe, but perhaps you have a narrower perception of what is rude than we do; that could be the catalyst for that merry-go-round.

according to Jenny, objectification is not only rude, but it's dehumanizing as well.according to jenny, but not to me. you see, that's the difference between jenny and myself. she thinks that the objectification of a stripper is the same as the dehumanization of a stripper. OTOH, i disagree. they are two different concepts. strippers are sex objects in a stripclub. strippers strive to be sex objects to customers in a sc. so, it's no surprise that customers do see them as sex objects. so, if objectification is equal to dehumanization. it implies that strippers are dehumanizing themselves as well and some people do believe that's exactly they are doing by being strippers. although, i disagree with that notion as well.

Well, next to my growing desire for you to sink your molars into my rump, that's at the very core of my existence, but if you must.well, i do like a good rump roast. however, it's important to tenderize the roast by slapping, biting, poking, prodding and licking in order taste and savor to full flavor and natural juices of the roast. bon appetit!

That would be fine if you weren't using this description as a platform to urge customers to seek services outside of club rules.yeah, that free will thing is a bitch isn't it? the most important thing a customer should know before stepping foot in a sc is to ask himself, "what do i want?". i can't answer the question for him. no customer is under any obligation to listen to me. he's not under my command to do as i do. i am not a role model. so, whatever he decides to do. the final decision doesn't rest in my hands.

Actually, it's easier to extract cash, at least in the short run, from a guy who's thinking with his heart. A guy who's thinking with his little head usually wants more than is legal for free or cheap.big head..little head. what's the difference. in the case of the former, his emotions gets the better of him. in the case of the latter, his lust gets the better of him. a good stripper will try to string along both types of customers for as long as possible without giving up the pussy and some strippers will go a lot further than you in order to accomplish that goal.

i'm sure you mean everything you say. however, generally speaking, talk is cheap and plentiful in a sc. frankly, i really don't pay much attention when customers tell me about their good intentions. a customer's actions are a much more important and reliable indicator than mere words.well, i never claimed that my intentions are good nor are they bad. it is what it is. i yam what i yam. i don't claim or pretend to be a nice guy. when i walk into a sc. i know what a stripper wants. i know what i want. all that remains is for me is to find the stripper that can do the job that's required of her. if she can do the job. well, we'll get along just fine. if she can't..well, it was nice meeting you. see ya later.

First, all acting is not deception.if acting isn't deception. why do strippers feel the need to create a persona? why not be yourselves when you go to work? the creation of those personas helps you to deceive the customer.

it is a willing suspension of disbelief, or fantasy, when it's presented in a context in which it's known to be acting.the willing suspension of disbelief is required from the audience member not the actor. the actor is in on the joke (ie: the deception).

Second, that's a key component of the product. i agree. like i said, i don't have a problem with the act. a stripper can pretend to be whomever she wishes in order to get the cash. i just don't pay much attention to her act myself.

Mr. P does not consider rudeness as an example of, nor equivalent to, dehumanizing objectification.it's rude to fart at the dinner table. however, i would hardly call the act dehumanizing or objectifying to my guests.

I think I hear him saying that if you insist customers not be rude, that just complicates the transaction because it's what customers do, just as strippers hustle.er...no.

Katrine
04-04-2005, 11:54 PM
Die. Thread. Die. Already.

I keep clicking on it hoping for some fresh insight but its the same circular foreplay over and over again. I think you all essentially agree with each other.... :(

yoda57us
04-05-2005, 05:09 AM
Kat, Essentialy, I agree.

evan_essence
04-05-2005, 06:10 AM
um..well...did you go back and look at the statement you were responding to?Well, I see the progression after further investigation, but the original context was farther back than that, and it was somewhat difficult to discern at that point. So nevah mind.


if acting isn't deception. why do strippers feel the need to create a persona? why not be yourselves when you go to work? the creation of those personas helps you to deceive the customer.Oh frickin' please. Now you're painting all customers with a victim mentality. Sheesus, pass a law that says we have to hand out a disclaimer at the door. And when a customer enters the movies, better let them know that Bruce Willis is an aging old bald man who can't really do half what he portrays on the screen. He's actually deceiving movie goers!

Yes, my customers are my victims because I insist they pay to see me undressing, writhing and pretending I'm getting orgasmic by their presence. I, and the club, insist that getting nakkid and creating this fantasy has monetary value. How deceptive of me to pretend to be what the customers want me to be in order to create what they came for. How deceptive of me for failing to see that all men are idiots who don't understand that a strip club's women are not hanging out for dates. God, if you've got access to the Internet, HBO's G-String Divas, a public library or even conversation with a buddy, my "deception" is about as transparent as professional wrestling.

Mr. P's advice on professional wrestling attendance: Since they're trying to deceive you, know what you want - HJ, BJ or FS - from the wrestler when you go in. If one wrestler won't give it, find one who will or else you haven't been a wise wrestling consumer.


the willing suspension of disbelief is required from the audience member not the actor. the actor is in on the joke (ie: the deception). Audience members recognize actors as actors acting when they appear on stage. They recognize strippers as strippers when they appear in a strip club asking for money to strip. The context of each is clear. Both are environments established to serve customers through the suspension of disbelief. You won't see actors using real bullets inside a theater and you won't find e-Harmony.com at a strip club. You find actors pretending to use real bullets and strippers pretending to be charmed. What would you have an actor do before he starts a performance? Poll the audience to make sure everyone understands he's acting? That would be absurd because the context is already clear.


like i said, i don't have a problem with the act. a stripper can pretend to be whomever she wishes in order to get the cash. i just don't pay much attention to her act myself.Your problem is you're not in it for the suspension of disbelief. For whatever sourpuss reason (ad hominem acknowledged), you cannot have any fun from suspending disbelief. You refuse to accept that the business model of a strip club is sexual fantasy, not actual sex. That's precisely why I wish you'd stay home. And, yes, I'm being careful about what I wish for.


I keep clicking on it hoping for some fresh insight but its the same circular foreplay over and over again.I'm sorry if I'm the only one cumming from circular repetition, but your point is acknowledged, and for you, I'm a sucker for obedience. With this final climax, I'm out.

-Ev

NVJosh
04-05-2005, 03:34 PM
I'm waiting for Jenny and mr_punk to announce their engagement.

Nicolina
04-05-2005, 03:55 PM
^LMAO Josh!!!

:rotfl:

Jenny
04-05-2005, 04:20 PM
actually, mr._punk is just my alter-ego. I thought you guys all knew and were just too polite to say anything.

mr_punk
04-06-2005, 06:26 PM
Oh frickin' please. Now you're painting all customers with a victim mentality.victims? hardly, unless strippers are forcing customers to go to sc at gunpoint.

Sheesus, pass a law that says we have to hand out a disclaimer at the door. And when a customer enters the movies, better let them know that Bruce Willis is an aging old bald man who can't really do half what he portrays on the screen. He's actually deceiving movie goers!all i'm pointing out is that acting is a form of deception. i could no more blame him for not really being an action hero than i would blame a stripper for pretending to like a customer.

I, and the club, insist that getting nakkid and creating this fantasy has monetary value. How deceptive of me to pretend to be what the customers want me to be in order to create what they came for. How deceptive of me for failing to see that all men are idiots who don't understand that a strip club's women are not hanging out for dates.
why are you getting so defensive? i'm not arguing it's value nor am i insinuating that the practice is negative in some way. it's what strippers do as strippers in order to do business and nothing more. however, it doesn't happen in a vacuum. the customer can't willingly suspend his disbelief alone. it takes two parties in order to create and maintain the deception.

using your example, when someone goes to see a movie starring his favorite actor. at first, he willingly suspends his disbelief. it's sort of like extending a line of credit. however, that suspension is subject to change. if a movie is entertaining. the audience member will overlook something like an implausible event. OTOH, if the movie is bad. the audience member tends to notice the imperfections of the movie. it's a little more complex, but suffice it to say that is what separates the robert de niros from the william shatners. an good actor can deceive the audience into believing he is jake lamotta rather than some overacting ham that should be canned and pressed in a tin container.

God, if you've got access to the Internet, HBO's G-String Divas, a public library or even conversation with a buddy, my "deception" is about as transparent as professional wrestling.

They recognize strippers as strippers when they appear in a strip club asking for money to strip. The context of each is clear. Both are environments established to serve customers through the suspension of disbelief.no doubt and yet despite that transparency. despite the fact that you say customers recognize you as a stripper simply asking for money or just doing her job. i'm sure customers still ask you out on a frequent basis because they think you are showing them genuine interest. although, that's beyond the mere willing suspension of disbelief. which is usually momentary. it's more like an willing and absolute suspension of disbelief. either way, consider it a compliment to your craft. you must be one damn fine actor.

Your problem is you're not in it for the suspension of disbelief.now, why is that a problem? i'm sorry, i didn't know it was mandatory for customers to absorb SS. okay, the next time i go to the club. i'm going to ask a stripper to hold my hands, look me in the eyes lovingly and tell me that i am pretty and she better g-ddamn well make me believe it by saying it with feeling.

For whatever sourpuss reason (ad hominem acknowledged), you cannot have any fun from suspending disbelief.sure, i can. however, i don't feel the need or see the reason to do so in a sc. in some ways, i'm a pretty easy sell. if i like a stripper's look. she doesn't need to waste her time or mine by stroking my ego. i much rather have a stripper strip down to her bare ass and bend over stick out her ass.

You refuse to accept that the business model of a strip club is sexual fantasy, not actual sex.LOL....sexual fantasy started to die a slow death when the first stripper jumped off the stage and into a customer's lap and started polishing his willy with her ass until he splooged. look, if i was strictly interested in fantasy. i would go to air dance clubs. anyway, it's like i told jenny. no stripper has to give me a BJ. however, i am a mileage hound and at a minimum. i like my laps nastier than the usual sit-n-grind.

That's precisely why I wish you'd stay home. And, yes, I'm being careful about what I wish for.does it really have to be that way? you want me to stay home and miss out on this golden age of mileage? ummmm..no. i suppose, that's the drawback of being a mileage hound for so many years. any substitute seems so bland and vapid in comparison because once you stick your finger, metaphorically speaking, in the darkside. there's no going back.

Die. Thread. Die. Already. I keep clicking on it hoping for some fresh insight but its the same circular foreplay over and over again.well, why don't you go back over to the "Which Stripperweb Member would you most like to get with" thread. i'm sure you'll find plenty of insight to satisfy your every need....

Katrine
04-07-2005, 12:52 PM
well, why don't you go back over to the "Which Stripperweb Member would you most like to get with" thread. i'm sure you'll find plenty of insight to satisfy your every need....

Awwww, is someone jealous that they havn't been picked yet? :P ;)

evan_essence
04-09-2005, 10:55 AM
In my experience, when a customer starts to see me as a real person, (i.e. he's been totally sucked in by whatever cute BS I've thrown his way;) ) that's when things start to get a little messy. I don't like trying to deal with customers' feelings (or if not actual feelings at least their desire to fuck me) or messing around with people's psyches ... When a customer becomes too involved, then I have to give them the boot and that means I lose $$$.Yes! Thank you for expressing that so succinctly. That's price-cisely how I feel. In other words, I don't want a close friend, confidant or lover, but a customer of my services. And please, don't order anything that's not on the establishment's menu.

-Ev

Moneywise
04-09-2005, 11:58 AM
Diversification of the menu is the key to the success of a small business. ;)

People love choice. The more the better. Some people revel in the time taken studying the menu before making that ultimate choice for the night.

mr_punk
04-10-2005, 09:02 AM
But I also have to say that objectification in general isn't that bad or offensive. At least not to me. If I understood his posts correctly, I think that Mr. P's got it right. There's nothing wrong with the simplicity of the business transaction: Customer wants A and B, has X amount of money. Dancer wants X amount of money and is willing to do/show A nd B. Pretty simple.my, you sound like a stripper who knows how to indulge a customer without all the hand-wringing over whether or not you're being treated as a life-sized action figure. jenny could learn a thing or two from you.


In my experience, when a customer starts to see me as a real person, (i.e. he's been totally sucked in by whatever cute BS I've thrown his way ) that's when things start to get a little messy.sure, customers often confuse SS for genuine or romantic interest all the time. OTOH, i tune SS out. once, i was really ill and i didn't go to the sc for awhile. while getting an LD upon my return. this stripper told me that she was concerned about my whereabouts while i was gone. i didn't reply to her comment because it meant absolutely nothing. so, i just put her nipple back into my mouth.


Anyways, what I'm trying to say is that it sucks ass when things get too personal. Which is what usually happens when dancers and customers try too hard to see one another as the unique and individual little snowflakes we all are. When a customer becomes too involved, then I have to give them the boot and that means I lose $$$.yeah,a sc is a business. people tend to overlook or diminish that fact and overemphasize the more social aspects of a sc. frankly, i don't have the time nor inclination to schmooze with every stripper that i meet. especially, if she isn't worth the effort.

KC Joe
04-10-2005, 08:52 PM
i didn't reply to her comment because it meant absolutely nothing. so, i just put her nipple back into my mouth.

You never fail to make me laugh.

evan_essence
04-10-2005, 09:53 PM
Diversification of the menu is the key to the success of a small business. ;)

People love choice. The more the better. Some people revel in the time taken studying the menu before making that ultimate choice for the night.Oh, you are so 1990s. It's so cute. But no, they do not like being overwhelmed by choices. I could hunt for a more analytical marketing paper, but this newspaper columnist frames the issue in more human terms.

http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/timesleader/news/columnists/casey_jones/8634773.htm

-Ev

Moneywise
04-11-2005, 05:03 AM
I didn't have this many choices back in the 90s. Then again, I wasn't grocery shopping in the places I now frequent. Therefore, the choices I enjoy (both real and figuratively) are products of the manner in which I shop. I also occasionally enjoy a diverse menu on those out of town excursions as well.

Choice is definitely a must. I do have my menu favorite but wouldn't hit my favorite restaurant as often as I do it it were the only thing to chose from. :P

The writer of that article sounds 90s. Wake up man. It's the new millenium. Choices abound because people like to window shop.

evan_essence
04-11-2005, 06:23 AM
The writer of that article sounds 90s. Wake up man. It's the new millenium. Choices abound because people like to window shop.*Sigh* Okay, you forced me to hunt for the psychological study that this premise is based upon.


Too Many Choices --- Nine Kinds of Kleenex Tissue, Eggo Waffles in 16 Flavors: Blame Brand Managers http://www.columbia.edu/~ss957/TooManyChoices.htm

When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing?
http://www.columbia.edu/~ss957/whenchoiceabstract.htm

Why they believe everything is SS. ::);D

-Ev

SportsWriter2
04-11-2005, 07:40 AM
*Sigh* Okay, you forced me to hunt for the psychological study that this premise is based upon.

Ev, those are good articles that make sense. I really don't need choices like Big Mama with Orange Hair, Goth Girl with Four Face Piercings, Cokehead Who Blows Everybody...

One the other hand, nothing but Cute Spinners with Curly Blonde Hair would bore me after a few months... or years. :)

Katrine
04-11-2005, 08:09 AM
All of this psychological theory can be easily summed up by the prevalance of the big implants bleach blonde Barbie types at every club. They aren't every man's cup of tea, but they keep the uncreative from having to make an actual choice in dancer............

mr_punk
04-11-2005, 05:22 PM
yes, the porn star/barbie doll look is still popular but ,IMO, it's not as bad as it used to be. i remember a time in early 90's when it looked as if every stripper was required to have a big bleached blond hairdo and overinflate their boobs with helium. it was a cavalcade of bad boob jobs with scar tissue, clevages as wide as the panama canal and big rock hard implants for days on end.