Log in

View Full Version : Rants



Pages : 1 [2]

SportsWriter2
10-18-2005, 09:36 AM
I've come to the conclusion that mr_punk and Jenny have a mutual mental masturbation thing going on.
This is a concept begging to be broken off as a new thread. :D

Which reminds me of a rant:

* Guys with pencil dicks who masturbate in clubs. These guys should hide in the closets of their own apartments.

doc-catfish
10-18-2005, 10:23 AM
As for the piss monkeys/bathroom attendants (or whatever else you want to call them), I had one friend argue that they were also there to "protect" guys while they were pissing...in other words, my friend felt that most guys are in a "vulnerable" position when they're standing in front of a urinal and, probably in the more lower end clubs, could very well get mugged or worse in that position.
Not a problem at my home club. No mugger worth his salt wants to risk dysentery just to lift a wallet. It's whats in front of you (and on the floor when the john overflows) that you have to worry about.
:O

mortalman
11-28-2005, 01:14 PM
My favorite club has a guy wandering aroung selling roses and stuffed animals, I don't see the point, it's not like I have to romance the dancer to convince her to go back to the vip with me. I see a dancer walking around with a rose or a stuffed animal and I always figure she would probably rather have the cash.

Don't like the bathroom attendant either.

doc-catfish
11-28-2005, 05:29 PM
My favorite club has a guy wandering aroung selling roses and stuffed animals, I don't see the point, it's not like I have to romance the dancer to convince her to go back to the vip with me.
You might also notice that the roses are often plastic. I wonder how many times that shit gets recycled.

yoda57us
11-29-2005, 06:34 AM
My newest pet peave, based on recent occurances that are becoming far too frequent.

Drunken strippers who stumble into the VIp room when your in there trying to "seal the deal". Instead of appologizing and GETTING THE FUCK OUT OF THERE they have the balls to ask for a glass of champagne.

xdamage
11-29-2005, 11:25 AM
why? because it's a sc. all the social niceties that people normally observe in another context (ie: a date) doesn't necessarily apply within a sc.


That's the way it should be but as you know...



however, if he doesn't buy one. i just don't see how any customer or cock grinder can characterize it as not being nice.


Of course I agree. Here is my take on it:

The best hustlers play on normal human emotions to increase their income. If their real life emotions happen to coincide with the emotions that work well in the club, so much the better since the act is far more believable when behind it is honest human emotions. In this case the emotional play is pretty simple. A guy learns early on that he is far more likely to score (i.e., gain sexual favor) if the woman perceives him as being generous and thoughful; conversely women are far more likely to reject a man they perceive as stingy and thoughtless. This is the way it tends to work in the real world outside the club. A good hustler can bring this normal human behavior into the club because it works in the club as well as outside the club. In this case it really works best if when she looks on the customer, she really perceives him as being stingy or thoughtless (strong emotions) if he declines to buy a drink. For every one smart customer that realizes he is under no obligation (nor is there any point) in buying that drink, there are dozens if not hundreds more who will respond to this and buy her that drink (or feel guilty they didn't). Even if they don't buy the drink, leaving the customer feeling like they are missing out on a chance to score because they aren't spending enough has a benefical effect for the hustler since it may increase the customers spending. There is really no benefit in the hustler perceiving this situation more objectively since at best it will decrease the believability of her hustle because at best it will weaken her emotions which are working to her advantage in the club.

p.s. When I say there is really "no benefit", what I mean is that people tend to do what works first, objectivity is a luxury. It's the way we evolve; what works survives, regardless of objectivity. What works for the hustler is to play on whatever human emotions happen result in increased income. In some cases it works better for them if they are emotionally and psychologically as caught up in the game as the customers. Personally I find it exhausting to have to deal with turning down the drink hustle, but it's predicatable, and I assume most strippers are really thinking and feeling "what a cheap thoughtless bastard" when I decline. There is simply no benefit in it for them to keep in mind that it's a stripclub in this context.

Katrine
11-29-2005, 10:35 PM
Kat Rant: I'm bored of the club, especially as a customer. However, I will never get tired of anything posted by Yoda. ;)

mr_punk
12-03-2005, 03:34 PM
A good hustler can bring this normal human behavior into the club because it works in the club as well as outside the club. In this case it really works best if when she looks on the customer, she really perceives him as being stingy or thoughtless (strong emotions) if he declines to buy a drink.yeah, but if strippers really think that way. it's pretty bizzare because one would think that of all people. they would know better. then again, we are talking about flaky strippers.

There is really no benefit in the hustler perceiving this situation more objectively since at best it will decrease the believability of her hustle because at best it will weaken her emotions which are working to her advantage in the club.probably not. you can't tell a PL that she's being a PL.

xdamage
12-06-2005, 10:46 AM
yeah, but if strippers really think that way. it's pretty bizzare because one would think that of all people. they would know better. then again, we are talking about flaky strippers.


The strip club is an unusual situation because the sales people (the employees or consultants or free lance artists if they prefer to think of themselves that way) are also the product.

Even so, can you imagine walking into Neiman Marcus and while you're trying on a suit or shoes, instead of them offering you a drink, they have someone walking around carrying overpriced drinks asking you "Would you like to buy your sales person a Perrier for $10?"

Or while you are in a restaurant picking out a bottle of wine if they tried to sell you extra beverages for the employees?

Even better still is if they then look down on you like you're some kind of scum for drinking or eating in front of them while they work!

I am being somewhat sarcastic of course, but only somewhat.

Personally I think strip clubs sell primarly drinks, pole dances, and lap or table dances. And in any normal business it is just expected that employees are suppose to spend time with customers in order to sell the product.

But many guys also willing to pay for "company"; the time with the employee is for them the product. Some trip clubs leverage this to sell more drinks. It seems some strippers can get as emotionally wrapped up in this scheme to make money as the customers.

But like I said, objectivity is a luxury. It really has little to do with how people think or believe. People tend to try to get the best deal they can for themselves, and shape their thinking in whatever ways are needed so that they can sleep well at night and feel like they are doing right and the best they can given the situation.

In this case it's mostly harmless, and can be ignored, although it's too bad that the more strippers aren't aware that when we skip the drink hustle, it's not because we are cheap bastards, but because we aren't complete PLs like the strippers are being when they become emotionally wrapped up in this scheme to make more money.

Jenny
12-06-2005, 10:58 AM
Again, x, you're a little confused about everyone's role in the industry. The strip club's job is to sell drinks (it is ours only if there is a drink commission, which is sketchy, legally). It is ours to sell dances. These things are actually separate - as in clubs generally have limited interest in your dances (some, of course, are more exploitative than others) and we have limited interest in how much beer you drink. And nobody sells "pole dances" (by which I assume you mean stage shows?) at all. It is a barely relevant by-product now. I suppose you could say that we (the dancers) sell them to the club (usually in exchange for reduced fees). I know that's why I do it (outside of it being practically the only exercise I get in a week. My thighs really require the stage work at this point). And again - we are not employees. The employees that exist in the context of your drink are waitresses (which would be the natural parallel of waitresses in restaurants, don't you think?). We are not trying to sell anything but dances - and the time employees spend with you to "sell" their employees wares is usually limited to "May I take your order?" and "What size is that?" Your analogies don't work for this particular example, simply because the roles you are trying to make parallel, aren't. We ARE selling ourselves - whatever element of that that the customers are willing to buy. Most usually that involves feeling us up, but not always. So you can't viably compare our product/service with that of a product that is a separate product. Not to mention that there are still social mores at work.

xdamage
12-06-2005, 11:28 AM
I think you missed the important point in all that. The roles I get. The important point though is that some strippers view customers as being not nice, or being thoughtless or cheap for declining to buy them drink. They take no personally.

That's explainable, but objectively it's strange. It's like the person at the movie theater taking it personally when you decline to buy the popcorn deal and just buy the soda. Like you are personally rejecting them because, no you don't want to buy a drink for the employees.* See below.

As for the pole dancing, I am sure it is does not account for the majority of your income, but I am not thinking just in terms of what benefits the dancer. In context it is the strip clubs, not the dancers, who are putting up the big bucks in this business. It is they who pay for the property, insurance, rights to sell liquor, rights to replay pop music, other employees, carpet cleaning, etc. They are the ones that carry the greater risk.

The strip clubs are in business for themselves; you dancers are part of products they peddle. The pole dancing continues in club after club because it works. It is part of the product that strip clubs sell, because it brings guys into the club, gets them to buy drinks, and maybe buy lap dances. It works no different then say putting some items up for sale to get people into the store. It may not be the key product, or the biggest money maker, but it's part of what the customer is paying for (or put another way, if a guy just wanted a drink he could have one for a hell of a lot less then the drink he pays for while he is watching a pole dancer). While you may not benefit much from the pole dancing money personally, the clubs do.

As for being an employee vs the product, I get that, but don't over glamourize the signficance of that. The reality is that strippers don't produce any product or produce any intellectual property that can be resold. If you did the clubs would require more of your contract with them. The only reason they clubs don't require more of you (e.g., require the rights to resell the fruits of your labor) is there is nothing for them to resell. But I can almost guarantee you don't have free reign while in the club. For example you can't go in while you're working and shoot videos of your performance and just resell it because you were dancing on it. Not while it's on their property. If you did that you would be taking advantage of their property to promote your interests, and I can almost guarantee no club would be okay with you benefiting from their property, not if they don't get a cut of the profits.

*All that said, where things are a bit different for you is you are the sales person and the product, so there are differences, but nevertheless from the customers point of view they have several dozen women all trying every scheme they can along with the club to try and get their dollars. No customer can afford to buy dances from all the dancers, or drinks for all of them that ask, so it's important to remain objective.

No doesn't necessarily mean anything emotionally to the customer, yet many dancers take no (whether it be drink or dance) personally which is really not a lot different then the PLs who becomes emotionally wrapped up in the transactions and think their interaction with the dancer is special. When a customer says no, I don't want to buy a drink (or a dance) it often has little or nothing to do with the dancer personally; there is nothing special about her that causes him to say yes or no. It's often just whim, like choosing to see one movie over another, or choosing to try a new beer, there is no emotions attached or rejection of his previous beer choice.

But to be entirely fair, I (like most people) tend to take rejection personally. It's human nature and understandable that we react that way emotionally. But objectively, it's a strip club, rejection often means nothing, just like the faked emotions of the dancer often mean nothing.

Still, I think people feel rejected because it's what tends to work. It tends to have the effect of affecting other peoples behaviors, causing them to feel sorry for us, or guilty about how we treated them. It doesn't work on everyone, but it works often enough that people do it. So when it comes to the drink hustle, I think it tends to work out such that it is actually in the dancers best financial interest to feel rejected or look down on customers who decline to buy them that drink. These emotions are far more likely to result in the customer responding emotionally and buying a drink (or a dance) then being neutral and objective.

Jenny
12-06-2005, 12:21 PM
I think you missed the important point in all that. The roles I get. The important point though is that some strippers view customers as being not nice, or being thoughtless or cheap for declining to buy them drink. They take no personally.
Ooh, I think you're talking about me. What I said exactly, was that if the customer wants the dancer to sit with him he should buy her a drink. Not that he should buy everyone a drink or always succumb to pressure. (Although, while I'm one the subject. You guys should always, ALWAYS succumb to pressure).


As for the pole dancing, I am sure it is does not account for the majority of your income, but I am not thinking just in terms of what benefits the dancer. In context it is the strip clubs, not the dancers, who are putting up the big bucks in this business. It is they who pay for the property, insurance, rights to sell liquor, rights to replay pop music, other employees, carpet cleaning, etc. They are the ones that carry the greater risk.
I wasn't either. I thought we were talking about what is "sold" in strip clubs. You don't pay for the show, either to the bar or us (at least not directly). And again - I feel the need to separate OUR business from THEIR business. These things are connected, but they are not one and the same.


The strip clubs are in business for themselves; you dancers are part of products they peddle.
Again - we are our own products. Independant contractors.


The pole dancing continues in club after club because it works. It is part of the product that strip clubs sell, because it brings guys into the club, gets them to buy drinks, and maybe buy lap dances.
See I think the opposite. I'm pretty sure that guys come for the lapdances and one on one time. They barely notice the stage anymore.


It works no different then say putting some items up for sale to get people into the store. It may not be the key product, or the biggest money maker, but it's part of what the customer is paying for (or put another way, if a guy just wanted a drink he could have one for a hell of a lot less then the drink he pays for while he is watching a pole dancer). While you may not benefit much from the pole dancing money personally, the clubs do.
Not the point. It's still not a sold commodity. You guys aren't buying it, either from the club or from us. The only "consumer" in this case would be club.



As for being an employee vs the product, I get that, but don't over glamourize the signficance of that. The reality is that strippers don't produce any product or produce any intellectual property that can be resold. If you did the clubs would require more of your contract with them. The only reason they clubs don't require more of you (e.g., require the rights to resell the fruits of your labor) is there is nothing for them to resell. But I can almost guarantee you don't have free reign while in the club. For example you can't go in while you're working and shoot videos of your performance and just resell it because you were dancing on it. Not while it's on their property. If you did that you would be taking advantage of their property to promote your interests, and I can almost guarantee no club would be okay with you benefiting from their property, not if they don't get a cut of the profits.
That's an entirely separate contractual issue, that has nothing whatsoever to do with independant status. I couldn't just come in and film, without permission, in my school either. Or in a bar in which I was a patron. What you are saying is true, it's just irrelevant to the point at hand. Glamour is not the point. But to understand the structure of this busines you have to understand that we work parallel to the clubs, not underneath them. We pay them so that we have a place to work. They don't employ us. Yet every point you make is premised by the fact that clubs employ us, or that we work for the clubs and that their business includes ours. This is not a minor detail. This is central to how we all act in the business.



*All that said, where things are a bit different for you is you are the sales person and the product, so there are differences, but nevertheless from the customers point of view they have several dozen women all trying every scheme they can along with the club to try and get their dollars. No customer can afford to buy dances from all the dancers, or drinks for all of them that ask, so it's important to remain objective.
Sure - my point was just that when comparing strip clubs to restaurants, the natural person to compare the waitresses to are the waitresses - we are providing a unique product/service in that comparison. And the fact remains that we are not selling real estate, and you aren't buying hamburgers. It is an inherently intimate interaction (even for hardasses). Undermining the personality element by comparing our company and bodies to a plate of food is kind of cheap, in my opinion. Note - it is not restaurant analogies as a whole that I disregard - just the contention that waitresses and dancers are selling the same and/or similar services.


Still, I think people feel rejected because it's what tends to work. It tends to have the effect of affecting other peoples behaviors, causing them to feel sorry for us, or guilty about how we treated them. It doesn't work on everyone, but it works often enough that people do it. So when it comes to the drink hustle, I think it tends to work out such that it is actually in the dancers best financial interest to feel rejected or look down on customers who decline to buy them that drink. These emotions are far more likely to result in the customer responding emotionally and buying a drink (or a dance) then being neutral and objective. You think people FEEL things because of the effect it has on other people, or that they simulate feelings?

mr_punk
12-07-2005, 08:44 AM
In this case it's mostly harmless, and can be ignored, although it's too bad that the more strippers aren't aware that when we skip the drink hustle, it's not because we are cheap bastards, but because we aren't complete PLs like the strippers are being when they become emotionally wrapped up in this scheme to make more money.well, unless the club has a drink hustle. the strippers aren't making any money off drink sales. however, a lot of these ladies do need a couple of shots of liquid courage to before they can start grinding on strange cocks. so, why not hustle the customer to get her buzz on? in any case, i see this issue is no different than stage dancing. a stripper takes off her clothes on stage and they think a customer should tip them. a stripper talks to a customer and they think he should buy her a drink. frankly, it gives me the impression that a $1 tip or a drink is just as important (if not more) as a customer buying multiple laps. which is funny because they say it's all the money. then again, alcohol does impair one's judgement.

See I think the opposite. I'm pretty sure that guys come for the lapdances and one on one time. They barely notice the stage anymore.well, that's true for me. the stage is akin to a display case in the meat and poultry section in the supermarket. you just point to the slab of beef you want and the waitress..er..butcher wraps it up for you.

xdamage
12-07-2005, 09:06 AM
You think people FEEL things because of the effect it has on other people, or that they simulate feelings?

Absolutely.

We simply haven't learned to think of ourselves in this way because as I said, objectivity is a luxury afforded to us who have a lot of free time in a modern world, but it is not necessary for survival or adaptation.

While I don't want to claim any original thought (I'll give credit to several other modern psychologists), basically it comes down to people have ways of thinking, feeling, and sensing that are adaptations to their environment. Our brains aren't particularly good at self awareness. For example, almost all creatures on the planet that have eyes see only a very narrow band of electromagnetic waves. There is nothing particularly special about this band except that it happens to be the one that is most prevelant on earth due to our atmosphere, distance from the sun, etc., up until fairly recently in history people were fairly oblivious to the fact that they see only a small fraction of what they might possibly see. And in most primitive cultures people wouldn't even ask the questions that would lead them to realize they aren't seeing but a small fraction of what is seeable. What is not in their brains evolution is a strong sense to question their own senses. One might even think someone is a bit wacky to suggest that maybe their vision is biased, or greatly limited to what little bit is needed to survive.

This basic self blindness extends how we think and feel, and many people never even question or think of their feelings as in terms of how those feelings and thoughts have evolved to affect others.

Feelings and much of how we think, like our senses, are adaptations to our environment and our physiology. Feelings of anger, guilt, rejection, etc. they serve adaptive purposes. And most people don't live in solitary; we evolve in the presence of others. We've developed thoughts and feelings that are adapative. And what is adaptive is what works, what has an influence to change outcomes. When you consider feelings that are caused by or intertwined by social interactions with others, its a good bet that those feelings are adapative ways of modifying other's behavior.

Take a simple example, a crying baby. The baby has all kinds of feelings we can all relate to when it cries. But the feelings are not just there for no particular reason. Crying and the emotions that are intertwined with it serve an adaptive purpose; it gets the attention of the parents to come help them. Of course that's not to say the baby doesn't have internal stimuli, pain, discomort, etc., but emotions serve multiple purposes, some internal, some external.

Rejection is a complex emotion, but a part of it is, IMHO, definitely an adaptation to influence others. Put in more concrete terms, if a guy goes into a club and declines to buy a dance, if the dancer has emotions of rejection, many guys (not all) will respond with emotions of their own, feeling some sense of remorse or pity and change their minds. If you look at a rejected persons face and body stance, you see they sort of go into a stance that displays that they are vulnerable, at the mercy of another, which can have the affect of causing the other to take pity (not the best term really, but you get the idea) on the rejected one.

If you saw two animals doing this you might chalk those kinds of interplays up between them to instinct. When two humans do it it is more complex because rationale thoughts can override emotions, but that people's emotions are (in part) adapative to influence how others behave seems very clear to me.

Of course I'm not saying emotions strictly serve one purpose. Most like most body parts serve multiple purposes (thats key to a good efficient design, which evolution favors). Rejection is complex because while on the one hand a rejected persons emotions serve to influence others, they also serve the purpose of causing some pain for the rejected one, leaving them less likely to make the same mistake again. Basically you can think of it as the best compromise; covering both bases.

Of course to the rejected one the feelings are intense, and real. The rejected one may be blissfully unaware that their behavior is, in part, an adapative mechanism to try and change another's behavior (just like a baby can be completely unaware that their crying behavior is greatly about influencing the behavior of others). Rationale awarness of the benefits of our emotions is not necessary for them to be effective. Infact emotions can be overwhelming, beyond rationale explination for why they run so deep. But as I said, that's they way we are. It's what works that surives, not necessarily what is objective or what is painless. Just like pain in our bodies is not pleasant, but it is very effective at preventing us from hurting ourselves, it's what works and so pain (emotional and physical) has survived and thrived in our evolution.

As for simulating feelings, some people are fairly adept at simulating emotions to influence others (e.g., psychopaths, con artists, some hustlers, etc.); however it is not necessary for a person to consciously simulate feelings to become effective at manipulating others. Some of the best manipulators are deeply intertwined emotionally in their feelings and manipulate others out of habit, learned behavior, etc., and do so well and probably mostly unconsciously. Those with BPD for example excel at manipulating others with their emotions without themselves having any real clear awareness of what they are doing.

Katrine
12-07-2005, 05:45 PM
A customer's acceptance to buy dancer a drink is merely a sign that he is interested in her company, at least for a drink. We have to "butter up" those fantasy buyers somehow, and that's through low-context signals, such as requesting a drink. Its quite simple. The waitress is in business for herself 100%. You are succumbing to different types of pressures from two parties with their own sovereign interests.

Just buy her the fucking drink already!!

Edit to add: For custy such as yourself X, once custy has said he won't buy me a drink but wants me to stay, I assume he is more of a raincoater type and ready for action. I immediately go in for the kill, which is fine, my time is money in that environment. I mean, at least let us order a redbull or somethin, c'mon??? :P

yoda57us
12-07-2005, 07:59 PM
It just seems like this issue is not that complicated. Wanna buy her a drink, fine. Don't wanna? Fine too but don't be surprised if she walks away unless you ask for a dance almost immedietly. It's just a fucking drink....it's the base line of courtesy in almost any social environment...yes, strip clubs are a social environment too.

Naturaly Kat, you are free to park you awesomeness next to me at any bar, any time and order whatever you like...hell, you can even interupt me in the Champagne room. ;)

A guy can dream.....;D

xdamage
12-08-2005, 02:41 PM
Its quite simple. The waitress is in business for herself 100%. You are succumbing to different types of pressures from two parties with their own sovereign interests.


Astute points.

Just out of curiosity, would you rather have the drink, or the money? Door #1, or door #2? (tip - You can buy your own drinks with money!)

Actually I don't really mind paying for good service. Hell I'll gladly pay for good service, nor do I have a problem with offering a dancer a drink if she is entertaining and of course the reality is it's just fricking drink and cheap as compared with so much else I'll spend in a night. It's really the high pressure drink hustle that some clubs have adopted that I find tiresome. Buying drinks in those clubs doesn't get you better service, the dancer rarely truly is going to appreciate it, it's just an annoyance for the customer.

doc-catfish
12-08-2005, 02:55 PM
Astute points.

[quote]Just out of curiosity, would you rather have the drink, or the money? Door #1, or door #2? (tip - You can buy your own drinks with money!)
Generally speaking in most clubs, the dancer would rather be selling dances. There's simply a higher profit margin in them. OTOH, if the "drinks" have a hefty comission involved, or if the dancer is forced by the club to sell 'x' drinks during her shift or pay for them herself, that changes things slightly.


It's really the high pressure drink hustle that some clubs have adopted that I find tiresome. Buying drinks in those clubs doesn't get you better service, the dancer rarely truly is going to appreciate it, it's just an annoyance for the customer.
Precisely why I'm glad that some states/locales have specifically outlawed this practice (not here though unfortunately). I really don't mind buying a gal a drink when it costs the same as if I had bought it for myself. It's when the damn things cost $20+ that get me in a snit.
:-\

Richard_Head
12-08-2005, 08:01 PM
Precisely why I'm glad that some states/locales have specifically outlawed this practice (not here though unfortunately).That's one of the great things about the clubs in AZ, the girls can't drink on the floor. On second thought, the girls can't drink on the floor, hmmm, I actually kind of like a tipsy dancer on occassion if you catch my drift.

mr_punk
12-09-2005, 06:36 PM
For custy such as yourself X, once custy has said he won't buy me a drink but wants me to stay, I assume he is more of a raincoater type and ready for action. I immediately go in for the kill, which is fine, my time is money in that environment. I mean, at least let us order a redbull or somethin, c'mon???roger that!..lubed finger locked, loaded and ready for action, ma'am!}:D thankfully, you can still rely on slavic strippers to have their priorities in order.

Just out of curiosity, would you rather have the drink, or the money? Door #1, or door #2? (tip - You can buy your own drinks with money!)well, one would hope that they would choose the latter. however, i can't tell from some of the responses. i mean, it's bad enough when the johns talk about not feeling loved, but when the whores start doing it. now, that's just beyond flaky.

wakko0129
12-09-2005, 07:38 PM
OK, interesting side note to the whole "waitress asking you to buy dancer a drink" discussion. What you are actually experiencing is an old sales technique known as the "double-team." I used to work in retail sales, and a friend I worked with and I used this technique constantly. It didn't take much. I'd be walking by as he was doing a presentation, and chime in with a really cool feature, or I'd be ringing a sale, and he'd toss me the "perfect" add-on.

You guys are going back and forth over something that is not only common, but probably happens to you more than you have ever realized, and has probably cost you alot more than $7 or $8 for a drink.



Now, back to the rants.

Guys who sit at the stage and don't tip.

Guys who sit at the stage and repeatedly get up and start dancing.

Guys who, for some unknown reason, want to have a conversation with me. I don't know you, get out of my face.