Log in

View Full Version : Do you ever feel guilty?



Pages : 1 [2] 3

Jenny
04-22-2006, 01:29 PM
I think I have responded aplenty to what you call "points". I did delete a series of postings simply because I started to find his ascribing my feelings for me irritating (and as my roommate says - it is not my job to eradicate the internet of stupidity). You can notice, however, a pattern in his posts and in his lines of thought, and these intersect perfectly. If you actually read through these series of posts with some of his previous posts and arguments in mind you would see that I what I said makes perfect sense and is wholly accurate. Or maybe you wouldn't but could actually respond with some intelligence to what I said anyway.

Anyway, didn't we agree to just not cross each other's path again? Like I seem to recall that you found me amusing, but as I do not find you even remotely so, that seems like a fairly onesided relationship, and not the slightest bit fair to me.

dlabtot
04-22-2006, 01:54 PM
I think I have responded aplenty to what you call "points". I did delete a series of postings simply because I started to find his ascribing my feelings for me irritating (and as my roommate says - it is not my job to eradicate the internet of stupidity). You can notice, however, a pattern in his posts and in his lines of thought, and these intersect perfectly. If you actually read through these series of posts with some of his previous posts and arguments in mind you would see that I what I said makes perfect sense and is wholly accurate.

Why don't you quote what you are claiming he said so we can see whether your assertions are as accurate as your next assertion about what I said:


Anyway, didn't we agree to just not cross each other's path again?





we've established that you are not amusing in the slightest. Generally I am kind of a pit bull and insist on having the last word: in this case I shall invite you to, and then hopefully our paths shall never cross again.


Sorry to disappoint you: our paths will definitely cross again, lol.

And btw, I'm not in the least bit interested in 'amusing' you. However, your comments do amuse me. I've always found bombast, pedantry and logorrhea to be funny.
http://www.stripperweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=706713

Looks like yes, you did whine about not wanting me to reply to your posts, however, I did not then nor do I now agree.

I will continue to point out poor reasoning or fallacious arguments, and feel no need to refrain simply because it doesn't 'amuse you' to have someone disagree with you.

And a hearty LOL to you.

Jenny
04-22-2006, 02:00 PM
^^^
So. Onesided relationship. A taker. Typical male behaviour. :)
By the way, I didn't realize that you were serious with that. I would assume that you would have much better things to do than just occasionally poke your head up down here to give me a hard time - apparently with no interest in anything I actually say. But hey. I don't control the universe. Yet. Until I do, I suppose I will have to tolerate you rather mysterious facination with my posts.

By the way. You are not pointing out poor reasoning (since we're all up on reasoning right now). You are asserting poor reasoning. If you want to point out poor reasoning you would have to actually read the posts in the context to which I referred. And actually read the posts. For example: I am aware that X didn't actually say "shame." Hence the expression "what this really means" as opposed to "what it ostensibly says".

yoda57us
04-22-2006, 02:02 PM
^^^
What it really means, Yoda, is that he prefers the idea that dancers have a sense of shame. This fits in, integrally, with the view that what dancers do is wrong, in a moral sense, and anyone who doesn't share his sense of what is moral is, in some way, lying to themselves or doesn't actually know themselves.
Yeah,I figured that out way back on X's first post. I just chose to attack a different part of his logic. Once again I am agreeing with you Jenny.

Without that integral assumption none of it makes sense.
And we all know what happens when you assume....

Since you (I think?) don't share that assumption, you shouldn't expect it to.
I don't (thanks for giving me credit for that) and I don't.

I have better things to do than wander through life holding other folks up to my preferred expectations of right and wrong. I've got my hands full steering my own ship. Most people in all walks of life will disappoint you sooner or later on some level. It's not for me to judge. I spend money on the dancers I like ITC. IF an OTC opportunity presents itself it is then that I start to think about compatibly beyond “I pay you grind”.



Dancing is a job, if you can look at yourself in the mirror every morning and be OK with the person who is looking back who gives a flying fuck what anybody else thinks. As a customer, if you can't walk into a strip club and not spend money you shouldn't spend than you are the one with the problem, not the dancers. The assumption that taking a PL's money some how makes a woman morally bereft just doesn't fly with me. Your landlord doesn’t care if you couldn’t make the rent because the last three guys you danced for last night where drunken PL’s and you just couldn’t accept their money.

dlabtot
04-22-2006, 02:15 PM
You are not pointing out poor reasoning (since we're all up on reasoning right now). You are asserting poor reasoning. If you want to point out poor reasoning you would have to actually read the posts in the context to which I referred. And actually read the posts. For example: I am aware that X didn't actually say "shame." Hence the expression "what this really means" as opposed to "what it ostensibly says".


I guess you can keep pretending that stating your opponents position for them instead of responding to their actual words is not a strawman argument. You can keep pretending that substituting a persons position with another position that you find easier to refute or ridicule is not a logical fallacy and an example of either poor or purposely misleading reasoning. But that pretense is not persuasive when held to the light.


A straw man (or straw dog) argument is a rhetorical technique based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact misleading, since the argument actually presented by the opponent has not been refuted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Jenny
04-22-2006, 02:27 PM
I guess you can keep pretending that stating your opponents position for them instead of responding to their actual words is not a strawman argument. You can keep pretending that substituting a persons position with another position that you find easier to refute or ridicule is not a logical fallacy and an example of either poor or purposely misleading reasoning. But that pretense is not persuasive when held to the light.
Baby - are you just reading the half of my sentence and then guessing at the rest? I've taught people to read. This is a common phenomena in adult illiteracy. The word I used, honey, was context. I would therefore not be substituting a viewpoint, but situating his viewpoint within other things that he has argued for (assiduously) in the past. You see, honey, frequently people think that one belief can influence and inform another. And it seems pretty obvious to me that questions about the perceived or acutal immorality and shame relating to dancing, and whether or not dancers should feel guilt and whether or not customers are victims of dancers are pretty close together and in excellent positions to influence and inform each other. This is not lacking in logic, sense, rhetorical value or any other label you wish to trot out.

And sweetie, I knew what you meant by strawman. Your little wikipedia definition did not establish for you that that was, in fact, what I was doing. Remember Con-Text.

dlabtot
04-22-2006, 02:40 PM
Baby, honey, sweetie... lol, your transparent attempt to belittle me by using such terms in your response is just more of the same type of rhetorical bullshit. If it in some way makes you feel better to once again resort to such grade school tactics, continue.

You conveniently ignored me asking you to provide quotes that would demonstrate that your assertions about what the other poster said were accurate. Obviously you can't provide such quotes (that would really provide context) because you misrepresented and distorted what the other poster said. So showing the real context of the actual argument that you are misrepresenting would knock the legs right out from under Mr. Straw.

Jenny
04-22-2006, 02:45 PM
Baby - and thank you, it does (although again, if you actually read a whole post, you would see that it is a very general vernacular that I use frequently. It's not all about you, hon) - I'm not even the slightest bit interested in providing you with proof. I don't care about your opinion on this matter that much, and I don't feel the need to convince you. The person in question already knows what he said, and the poster to whom I directed my response also knows what I'm talking about. If you are really, really interested - look it up yourself. If you are not really interested - why are we having this conversation?

dlabtot
04-22-2006, 02:47 PM
Baby - and thank you, it does (although again, if you actually read a whole post, you would see that it is a very general vernacular that I use frequently. It's not all about you, hon) - I'm not even the slightest bit interested in providing you with proof. I don't care about your opinion on this matter that much, and I don't feel the need to convince you. The person in question already knows what he said, and the poster to whom I directed my response also knows what I'm talking about. If you are really, really interested - look it up yourself. If you are not really interested - why are we having this conversation?

The fact is you introduced an idea -- that dancing is or should be shameful -- that was not present in any way in his posts. It was neither said nor implied.

Jenny
04-22-2006, 03:09 PM
Well, as for what can be inferred, that is hard to say without referring to the greater context of the posts, isn't it? And, as I said, x knows of the posts of which I speak (even if he disagrees with my characterization) and so does the person to whom I was speaking. Or posting. How does this add up to me having to prove anything to you? As I said - if x's previous characterization of dancing and morality are of interest to you, look them up. I am under no duty - rhetorical or otherwise - to do that for you. If you are not interested, fair enough, but what's your problem? I said from the beginning that I was referring to a greater context. Everyone involved knows the context of which I speak. The fact is (since we are all up on facts now) that you are not really interested in the topic or in what I'm saying. You are just kind of getting off on giving a hard time, arencha?

dlabtot
04-22-2006, 03:32 PM
I don't think a dancer should feel guilty for taking the money of a customer who can't afford it, and that's the topic of the thread. As far as that goes I disagree with xdamage.

But that doesn't change the fact that you misrepresented his posts and continue to do so.

Jenny
04-22-2006, 04:02 PM
No, honey. Once again - contextualizing is not misrepresenting. It means, again, that things one says in one instance, can, in appropriate circumstances, inform things one says in other instances.

My point was simply that vendors are seldom in a better position to tell consumers what they can afford than the consumer is to the tell the vendor, and that putting that particular moral responsibility on the vendor is somewhat inappropriate (what the consumer looks like, notwithstanding). Thus, unless you have a business designed, intended or known to promote dependancy (which drugs, cigarettes, alcohol and gambling do, and prostitution, stripping, clothing and housecleaning do not) and failing very specific circumstances (which I have encountered very seldom) there is no reason to feel guilt, and really no ability to know whether guilt should be felt. So what you are saying, hon, is that, indeed, you have no argument with my position and you object strongly to the fact that I am allowing past posts of x's regarding moral, stripping, prostitution and what he calls emotional immaturity to contextualize what he is saying now about stripping, manipulation, customers as victims and emotional immaturity? That just seems unreasonable. But you said earlier that this amused you, so... I hope you had fun, baby. (and I didn't even get to charge you. Dammit).

dlabtot
04-22-2006, 04:55 PM
No, honey. Once again - contextualizing is not misrepresenting. It means, again, that things one says in one instance, can, in appropriate circumstances, inform things one says in other instances.

Saying that black is white is not going to turn black into white, neither is pretending that putting words in someone's mouth and saying that what they 'really meant' is some bogus argument that you can easily ridicule going to turn misrepresenting into contextualizing.


Just what did he say that in some way made you think he meant what you said he meant, rather than what he actually said? As in please provide the context that supports your assertion, lol. You can keep saying all you want that I haven't read the posts, you can lob your lame insults about 'adult illiteracy', etc., but you can't point to anything he said that supports your view of what he meant because he said no such thing.

Jenny
04-22-2006, 05:11 PM
Well, sweetheart, if you go back to my original post and sound out all the words what I referred to was his previous assertions that dancing was immoral, and that moreover all dancers, deep inside share this view of immorality and those of us that don't find it immoral are emotionally immature and lying to ourselves. That is - that dancers who are honest with themselves should be ashamed (he acknowledged his own hypocrisy in patronizing dancers when he feels it is immoral, and insists that the rest of us are hypocrites because he is). I think this attitude reflects, strongly, in the idea that dancers should feel guilt over taking their customer's money, and that those who don't are.... emotionally immature and hypocritical. All this information, hon, was already readily available in THIS thread. You just had to read it. I mean, I haven't told you anything new at all - you just keep virtually pointing and saying "nuh-huh, nuh-huh" and then covering your ears and humming through my response.

So seriously - you clearly just get off giving me a hard time. I've been giving you a freebie up until now, but really, as I said - you are not nearly as interesting or as amusing to me, so if you want to keep this up, you're either going to have to pull your weight (that is, be either a) intelligent or b) amusing), or I'm going to have to start charging you.

dlabtot
04-22-2006, 05:12 PM
Well, sweetheart, if you go back to my original post and sound out all the words what I referred to was his previous assertions that dancing was immoral, and that moreover all dancers, deep inside share this view of immorality and those of us that don't find it immoral are emotionally immature and lying to ourselves. That is - that dancers who are honest with themselves should be ashamed (he acknowledged his own hypocrisy in patronizing dancers when he feels it is immoral, and insists that the rest of us are hypocrites because he is). I think this attitude reflects, strongly, in the idea that dancers should feel guilt over taking their customer's money, and that those who don't are.... emotionally immature and hypocritical.

What you are saying is simply untrue. He didn't say the things you are claiming he said. Which you obviously know or you would just end this discussion by providing the quotes. If he said those things, quote him saying them. He didn't, so you can't.

Jenny
04-22-2006, 05:15 PM
What you are saying is simply untrue. He didn't say the things you are claiming he said. Which you obviously know or you would just end this discussion by providing the quotes. If he said those things, quote him saying them. He didn't, so you can't.

Ahem:

Baby - and thank you, it does (although again, if you actually read a whole post, you would see that it is a very general vernacular that I use frequently. It's not all about you, hon) - I'm not even the slightest bit interested in providing you with proof. I don't care about your opinion on this matter that much, and I don't feel the need to convince you. The person in question already knows what he said, and the poster to whom I directed my response also knows what I'm talking about. If you are really, really interested - look it up yourself. If you are not really interested - why are we having this conversation?

dlabtot
04-22-2006, 05:19 PM
So now you are reduced to quoting yourself asserting that you are right?


You misrepresented him, I called you on it, and now you're unwilling to admit it. Or really discuss the details of what was actually said. You just keep on making the same unfounded assertion over and over.

LOL

Jenny
04-22-2006, 05:25 PM
Faster than endlessly repeating myself dude - the quote is meant to explicate what I said before. That if you are interested you can look it up yourself. I am in no way bound by the laws of logic and rhetoric to do it for you. Like I said - x, I have no doubt, knows what I am referring to even if he disagrees with the characterization. So does the poster to whom I was speaking. If you disagree with my characterization, I would suggest you resurrect the thread in question and start discussing it there. Again - you are not "showing" or "proving" anything. You are simply asserting and then demanding that I prove you wrong. Onesided. Taker. Typical male. :)

dlabtot
04-22-2006, 05:28 PM
No, I am not asking you to prove me wrong. I am asking you to point to one single thing - or many things - that support your positive assertion that you know better what his point was and can better express what he 'really meant' than he can.

You say this is easy to find - so why can't you find it?

And the fact that you 'have no doubt' what is in someone else's mind speaks for itself.

Jenny
04-22-2006, 05:33 PM
Because sweetheart - as I said, not my job to help you analyze my post, and you have given me no incentive to want to help you out (also noting - I feel no obligation, incentive or interest in proving to you what I am already pretty damn sure of). Find it yourself if you are interested. Stop offloading your research onto me. If you are interested in something, don't expect other people to do your damn legwork, lazy-pants. If you are not interested - why are you bugging me? Do you have a crush or something? Is this the e-version of pulling my hair? Because really - just because I'm addicted to conflict doesn't mean I find this charming.

And "no doubt" is an expression - as I have "no doubt" you know.

FBR
04-22-2006, 05:43 PM
You guys are having fun with the reparte, right? If so, we'll keep the sandbox open. But if not, Im about to lock the thread as I'm getting tired of checking it.

FBR

Jenny
04-22-2006, 05:47 PM
Well, if you are expecting me to be all "reasonable" and "polite" and stuff, I suppose I can TRY to exercise some self-control.

dlabtot
04-22-2006, 05:47 PM
Because sweetheart - as I said, not my job to help you analyze my post, and you have given me no incentive to want to help you out (also noting - I feel no obligation, incentive or interest in proving to you what I am already pretty damn sure of). Find it yourself if you are interested.

It's not there to be found, as you well know.

Your position is the same as someone who asserts that the moon is made of green cheese, and then when asked to provide evidence, says: go find it yourself.

yoda57us
04-22-2006, 05:48 PM
So now you are reduced to quoting yourself asserting that you are right?

You misrepresented him, I called you on it, and now you're unwilling to admit it. Or really discuss the details of what was actually said. You just keep on making the same unfounded assertion over and over.

LOL

The last time I checked, during the course of discussion or debate (or whatever this is we are doing here) a person is allowed to formulate their own interpretations and opinions on what somebody else posts. Jenny did not misrepresent anything that Xdamage said, she responded to it; there is a huge difference. She's entitled, as we all are to her own interpretations of X's posts. She, as we all do, has the right to formulate her opinions of X's posts based on those interpretations. She hasn't misquoted anything anywhere. That’s how a board like this works. The fact that you may not agree with her assessment of X's posts doesn't make her wrong.

dlabtot
04-23-2006, 01:56 AM
^^Well of course I never said she was not entitled to her opinion, I simply disagreed with it and asked her to support her positive assertion with some shred of evidence. And certainly you are equally entitled to take her side, as it were -- for whatever that's worth.

And of course - LOL - she's not wrong because I disagree with her! That's hilarious. No, she's wrong because she said something that isn't true. She said that the thrust of the argument was about shame, and then went further to imply that he meant that all dancers should feel ashamed about what they do -- totally in contradiction to his posts which stressed the importance of not using black and white thinking, and sought to draw distinctions, whether valid or not --- not at all similar to her characterizations....

Jenny
04-23-2006, 06:52 AM
Oh, honey. That is just full out precious. Speaking of mischaracterization - I suspect you know (although in this case I do have doubts) that is not what I said - reread the thread and sound out the big words. And, like I said before - you are not in the slightest bit interesting or fun (which, in addition to my conflict addiction, is why I come here). So really - unless you are going to start paying to do this, I'm actually done.

mr_punk
04-23-2006, 07:47 AM
Outside of the club, here in this forum, I find her sense of compassion to be admirable, and frankly somewhat unusual as compared with most strippers I've talked with outside of the clubs.well, i'm not going to pin any medals on her chest anytime soon. at the end of the day, a compassionate stripper will take the money offered to her just like an uncompassionate stripper, but i'm not going to personally hold that against her OTC, ITC or here on this forum. it's part of her job.

What it really means, Yoda, is that he prefers the idea that dancers have a sense of shame. This fits in, integrally, with the view that what dancers do is wrong, in a moral sense, and anyone who doesn't share his sense of what is moral is, in some way, lying to themselves or doesn't actually know themselves. Without that integral assumption none of it makes sense. Since you (I think?) don't share that assumption, you shouldn't expect it to.a sense of shame? i don't think so. he's been pretty straightforward to me. case in point:

And I'm far more impressed with one that can take her money, and yet still maintain some awareness of how what benefits her can at times come at the expense of others over one who lives with her head buried in the sand and is oblivous to others.what i think he's looking for is a level (perhaps, too high of a level, IMO) of awareness. for example, when that besotted fool of a PL took you shopping for doggie coats. you benefited from his monumental stupidity. now, while that kind of crash-n-burn story cracks me up. i won't hold it against you (however, i will use it as an opportunity to make fun) because you're a stripper. OTOH, xdamage will hold it against you. if you don't acknowledge that you are aware that you did benefit from his retardedness. it's called accountability. then again, since you're a woman. i wouldn't expect you to understand.....

Secretary: How do you write women so well?
Melvin: I think of a man, and then I take away reason and accountability. - from the movie, "As Good as It Gets".

dlabtot
04-23-2006, 08:18 AM
That's hilarious. No, she's wrong because she said something that isn't true. She said that the thrust of the argument was about shame, and then went further to imply that he meant that all dancers should feel ashamed about what they do -- totally in contradiction to his posts which stressed the importance of not using black and white thinking, and sought to draw distinctions, whether valid or not --- not at all similar to her characterizations....


Oh, honey. That is just full out precious. Speaking of mischaracterization - I suspect you know (although in this case I do have doubts) that is not what I said

Oh no? All I had to do was scroll a bit to find this (this is called providing context and supporting my assertion, btw):


that dancers who are honest with themselves should be ashamed (he acknowledged his own hypocrisy in patronizing dancers when he feels it is immoral, and insists that the rest of us are hypocrites because he is).

and the original comment I objected to:

What it really means, Yoda, is that he prefers the idea that dancers have a sense of shame. This fits in, integrally, with the view that what dancers do is wrong, in a moral sense, and anyone who doesn't share his sense of what is moral is, in some way, lying to themselves or doesn't actually know themselves. Without that integral assumption none of it makes sense. Since you (I think?) don't share that assumption, you shouldn't expect it to.

So yes you did claim that he thinks all dancers should be ashamed of what that do.

See how easy it is to find evidence to support an assertion when that assertion is not a falsehood? LOL

Jenny
04-23-2006, 08:19 AM
Yes, but that is a whole other thread, punky. That goes back to your assumption that it is stupid or retarded to buy me a doggie coat if I am not going to have sex in exchange (or maybe even if I do). I obviously don't think that my time or company or sexual contact sans actual sex is valueless (hence the whole stripping thing). I think it is well worth a doggie coat or two. (or I think that on my good days. My bad days not so much). So does this guy. It's only retarded because you don't think it's worth it. But that just goes back to what people value and what people like. I mean, that wasn't a crash and burn story, because it wasn't a story in which the guy was being strung along and told he was going to get something he wasn't. I never told him I was going to meet him at Denny's and didn't show up and then gave him an excuse. I never asked him for money to pay my tuition or for cancer treatments or to buy Advil for my sick mother and then instead spent it on... I don't know. Something people spend money on. Nail polish. Facials. Whatever you think girls do. He paid for what he wanted, in full awareness of what he was getting in return. I don't think that is retarded. I mean, I'm clearly aware that I benefitted (although, incidentally, he's pretty sure that he did too), but I don't know that there is cause for guilt.

And, oh my god - I hated that movie. It just made worms of rage crawl up and down my spine.

mr_punk
04-23-2006, 03:23 PM
Yes, but that is a whole other thread, punky. That goes back to your assumption that it is stupid or retarded to buy me a doggie coat if I am not going to have sex in exchange (or maybe even if I do).you're missing the point, red. it's not about your worth. if you know some guy is doing retarded things for you to get some ass. however, you know full well he isn't getting any ass. yet, you still decide to take advantage of his retardedness....fine. you're a stripper. it's what you're supposed to do. accountability is simply owning up to your actions...period. i don't think xdamage is asking strippers to feel shame, remorse, guilt, regret, etc.

He paid for what he wanted, in full awareness of what he was getting in return. I don't think that is retarded. I mean, I'm clearly aware that I benefitted (although, incidentally, he's pretty sure that he did too), but I don't know that there is cause for guilt.well, i'm not asking you to feel guilty, but do you see what i mean? that's all you have to say. BTW, he is retarded. yeah, i know you're going to say, "he's a very nice man". fine, have it your way. so, he's a very nice, but very retarded man.

And, oh my god - I hated that movie. It just made worms of rage crawl up and down my spine.despite it some of it's flaws, it was a good movie. i could really relate to Nicholson's character.

xdamage
04-24-2006, 11:01 AM
I'm not responding to the topic X, I'm responding to your postings that you prefer a dancer with a concience. As I said earlier, how could you possibly know?

No, I never said that! Or at least not as you interpreted it.

I know a few dancers still as people outside of the club, never even seen them in a club. I prefer those who have some sense of concience yes. Outside the club I'm not buying their time. We are just friends that talk. In that context I can know.

As for the original poster, this is a forum, and in the context of this forum I find her sense of concern about other human beings admirable. In the context of this forum, I can know because she told us what she was feeling.

Inside the club I couldn't care less about their sense of conscience.

xdamage
04-24-2006, 11:18 AM
you're missing the point, red. it's not about your worth. if you know some guy is doing retarded things for you to get some ass. however, you know full well he isn't getting any ass. yet, you still decide to take advantage of his retardedness....fine. you're a stripper. it's what you're supposed to do. accountability is simply owning up to your actions...period. i don't think xdamage is asking strippers to feel shame, remorse, guilt, regret, etc.
well, i'm not asking you to feel guilty, but do you see what i mean? that's all

I have several friends that ended up working in military development jobs. Bottom line is they all do it because the want the $$s and I don't know any that would keep on doing it if it wasn't for the pay check. Hey, no big deal, we all work for a paycheck.

However their awareness of the effects of their work on others varies from pretty damn flakey to fairly conscience. Now they all do the same work. The only difference between the former and the later is the former lives in a fantasy world unable to face that there are negatives (as well as positives) to their work, while the later are aware of it.

Now I prefer the company of the later as I find the former to be frustrating to be around, not just in their job, but in general they are mental flakes. The flakes live in a world where the live in a state of obliviousness to how their behavior intertwines with others, completely unable to face that there are many who end up suffering (as well as benefitting) for the dollars they earn.

A mature person can do their job, not with a sense of shame, or intense guilt, but can still be aware of how it impacts on others (even when the impact is negative). In this case my advice to the the original poster would be, take the money, since you can't judge who can and cannot afford it, but don't lose your awareness of other human beings and that some of your customers aren't entirely capable of making good decisions. And if you really feel strongly that you're dealing with someone that is not able to make a good decision (e.g., a very drunk customer) do what you know is right - don't take advantage of them. Or take the money, and be aware you are taking advantage of another human being.

Jenny is probably right about one thing though, whether or not she has said it. I generally do assume strippers are emotional flakes who just want as much money as they can get with as little sense of responsibility as possible. The ones I know outside the club have remained flakes even after they quit stripping and don't seem to have the slightest clue as to why others view them as flakes. They just think everyone else is jealous of them. But behind their backs, we (women and men) just see them as being emotional flakes. Of course the guys rarely tell them so; most guys suck up because they are hot looking and the guys want to score, which just feeds into the flakey personality.

xdamage
04-24-2006, 11:36 AM
^^^
What it really means, Yoda, is that he prefers the idea that dancers have a sense of shame.

No. But what is true is that most dancers I have talked with outside the club are emotional flakes, unable to deal with accountability. Accountability is associated with feelings guilt, shame, remorse when people violate their own sense of what is right and wrong, but they are not the same things. Unfortunately most flakey types can't separate these things so they avoid all of it by trying to come up with a system of beliefs that paints themselves as a "good" person and avoids all accountability (and if you have no sense of accountability, you never need to feel guilt, shame, or remorse either - convienent).

Phil-W
04-24-2006, 01:06 PM
Jenny is probably right about one thing though, whether or not she has said it. I generally do assume strippers are emotional flakes who just want as much money as they can get with as little sense of responsibility as possible. The ones I know outside the club have remained flakes even after they quit stripping and don't seem to have the slightest clue as to why others view them as flakes.

Sorry, but I've had the exact opposite experience. I'm on pretty friendly terms with a number of dancers that I bump into from time to time when they're working. Several are OTC friends that I socialise with from time to time.

I empathetically would not describe them as flakey. They are basically normal, well adjusted women who've found they can earn a fairly good living in an unconventional job. To be fair, they're slightly different in that they've got an exhibitionistic streak - which is why they do what they do - but that exhibitionistic streak is confined to work, where they can earn by showing off their assets.

Got one dancer coming round my place in a couple of evenings' time. She's studying for a degree in marine biology - works very hard at it - and wants a bit of help with her maths. Her dancing is putting her thro university. Is that the behaviour of a flakey dancer?

I know another that I'm helping set up her own on-line business. Again, she's putting her earnings from dancing into the business, (and already has quite a bit more invested in property). Again, is that flakey behaviour?

Sure, I could think of one or two flakey dancers, but they're very much in the minority. Most have got their heads screwed on straight and are making a pretty good living out of guys who are willing to pay to see the finer points of their anatomy.

Phil.

Jenny
04-24-2006, 03:28 PM
I don't know about this - I think to me, flaky might mean something different than to you guys. I would use the word flaky to describe someone who is quirky. Possibly someone who is irresponsible. But people can be responsible about some things and irresponsible about others.

Just a thing - I've seen more dancers behave conscientiously towards customers (when such conscientiousness has been called for) than customers towards dancers. What does that make the customers (i.e. you?) Oh but you are aware of it - so it's all okay.

There is no point in feeling accountable for that which I am not accountable for. Unless I agree with you that I am victimizing my customers, it would be silly for me to feel accountable for doing so. Hence - first assumption - the customers are victims of the sleazy, flaky, emotionally immature dancer-whores. Customers do not make the decision to spend their money on lapdances - they are tricked into it or manipulated somehow. Note the original poster is not talking about feeling guilty over manipulating a customer, but because she feels like they don't look like they can afford it. Unless I agree with that, I have no accountability. And conveniently by your definition, if I don't agree with that I'm flaky and immature, and refuse accountability for ANYTHING.

Accountability for ANYTHING has not come up. Guilt for ANYTHING has not come up. We are talking about accountability - or rather guilt - for one particular thing. This grotesque characterization that I refuse to take responsibility because I don't feel sorry for my customers for buying dances is just full out - well, actually I think grotesque covers it.

dlabtot
04-24-2006, 03:38 PM
Hence - first assumption - the customers are victims of the sleazy, flaky, emotionally immature dancer-whores. Customers do not make the decision to spend their money on lapdances - they are tricked into it or manipulated somehow.

Why did you originate this idea, which is wholly yours, and not in any way said or implied by anyone on this thread?

Jenny
04-24-2006, 03:41 PM
you're missing the point, red. it's not about your worth. if you know some guy is doing retarded things for you to get some ass.
I didn't miss the point. You just focused on what was meant to a completely meaningless, funny aside. I never thought it was about my worth. It's about what he was trading his money for. It wasn't to get at my ass, because it was explicitly never on offer. He would have liked it if I agreed to have sex with him, I'm sure, but FAILING THAT he was still happy to spend what he did, on what he spent it on - i.e. the lapdances, company and sheer gratitude. I realize that you are about to guffaw on the worthlessness of stripper gratitude. Go ahead. Now. Okay, now stop. The fact is, though, that OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT YOU like it. And because you would not value the kind of service he values doesn't mean that he's getting screwed. Just because he doesn't value the service he got AS MUCH as he would value the ass to which you referred doesn't mean he holds the service he got as completely without value. Like, All things being equal I might rather have the large coffee than the medium, but that doesn't mean that the medium is worthless.


however, you know full well he isn't getting any ass. yet, you still decide to take advantage of his retardedness....fine. you're a stripper. it's what you're supposed to do. accountability is simply owning up to your actions...period. i don't think xdamage is asking strippers to feel shame, remorse, guilt, regret, etc.
Look at the thread title. Do you ever feel guilty? And his response - only if you want to be emotionally mature. And again - you only characterize it as taking advantage because he is buying something you wouldn't buy. It was still something he wanted, and something he was entirely satisfied with. I know this, because he still emails occasionally. If I had slept with him, you would think the doggie coat was an excellent trade. And, somewhat paradoxically, you probably wouldn't characterize him as taking advantage of me. So it is sheerly about you and what you value, and your complete inability to believe that other people also value other things.


well, i'm not asking you to feel guilty, but do you see what i mean? that's all you have to say. BTW, he is retarded. yeah, i know you're going to say, "he's a very nice man". fine, have it your way. so, he's a very nice, but very retarded man.
I just really didn't think he was retarded. I think it's that I am exceptionally charming and fun to be with.

xdamage
04-24-2006, 04:28 PM
Well back on topic (for me). The original poster has a sense that some of her customers shouldn't be there. Bottom line is I find her sense of compassion for another human being admirable, and suggest she not lose it. A little guilt (or sense of accountability as you prefer) and compassion strikes me as quite healthy, and certainly the kind of person I'd spend my time with (outside the club) as compared with someone who lives in a state of being completely oblivious to others.

Like all of us, she needs money, and so we work. It's difficult to judge what is motivating others, but it doesnt mean we have to be completely oblivious to the fact that some people don't make good judgements (yes, including customer type people). It's possible to make money, and still maintain some sense of compassion for humans that are making bad choices and spending money they shouldn't on stripping, cigs, alcohol, gambling, drugs, etc. etc.

It's easier to live in a state of obliviousness then it to live in one where we do what we have to do to survive, yet still maintain some sense of how our survival impacts on others (for better and for worse).

xdamage
04-25-2006, 07:30 PM
Sorry, but I've had the exact opposite experience.

Phil.


I'm sure there are exceptions Phil, and I can't say I've kept objective statistics. Just a subjective impression that a lot of girls that end up in the business get stuck in it and end up with some fairly twisted views about the world and others. It's not completely unexpected or unexplainable, and not even entirely their "fault" in the sense that stripping has it's own kind of tolls and demands on a person.

But really the key point I'm making is simple. We have a stripper who has some sense that not all of her customers are making good decisions. Whats wrong with that? Nothing. Except for the extremist view (which is you should never ever feel guilt no matter what, like it's the worst possible feeling you ever possibly have), I don't see any problem with her having some sense of her customer's ability to make decisions, or even some concerns over taking money from them. I just see that as someone having some sense of compassion for other human beings. Seems like a good trait to me and I'd encourage her not to lose it. Take the money, do what she has to do to survive, but don't lose her sense of compassion towards those she feels are not capable of making good decisions. I'd certainly find that trait in her attractive in any person, independent of her being a stripper.

As an aside Phil, I will admit, I don't fully trust men's judgements when it comes to strippers. I'm feeling a big "crusty" at the moment, for other reasons, but I see too many guys idealize strippers, idealizations they would never make if the girls were unattractive. Not saying you are doing that, but it happens, a lot. It's sort of based on the "if I suck up a lot, I may get some" male strategy. ;)

Surrender
04-26-2006, 04:02 PM
::) Well i feel the same at times but also they know when they come in that they are going to have to spend something ;) but i go easy sometimes so i think you should too. }:D

xdamage
04-27-2006, 07:21 PM
::) Well i feel the same at times but also they know when they come in that they are going to have to spend something ;) but i go easy sometimes so i think you should too. }:D

A soft side for the customers surrender? WTH? What's the world going to come to? Isn't that breaking the stripper code of ethics? LOL. I'm kidding (or am I???) :O

mr_punk
04-30-2006, 07:42 AM
A mature person can do their job, not with a sense of shame, or intense guilt, but can still be aware of how it impacts on others (even when the impact is negative).true. well, unless it's jenny.

The ones I know outside the club have remained flakes even after they quit stripping and don't seem to have the slightest clue as to why others view them as flakes. They just think everyone else is jealous of them. But behind their backs, we (women and men) just see them as being emotional flakes. Of course the guys rarely tell them so; most guys suck up because they are hot looking and the guys want to score, which just feeds into the flakey personality.sure, an emperor without clothes. if a stripper is hot and has a vestigial gag reflex. there are plenty of guys who will overlook a stripper's flakiness.

As an aside Phil, I will admit, I don't fully trust men's judgements when it comes to strippers. I'm feeling a big "crusty" at the moment, for other reasons, but I see too many guys idealize strippers, idealizations they would never make if the girls were unattractive. Not saying you are doing that, but it happens, a lot. It's sort of based on the "if I suck up a lot, I may get some" male strategy.oh, i love it when customers, bless their retarded hearts, engage in pedestal building when it comes to stripppers. they usually end committing some of the most dumbest acts known to mankind. you can't put a price on that kind of entertainment value.

mr_punk
04-30-2006, 08:14 AM
There is no point in feeling accountable for that which I am not accountable for.why, of course not, silly. you already have 3 strikes against you. (1) you're a woman. (2) you're a stripper, but worst of all (3) you're studying to be a lawyer. which makes you half-bloodsucking leech/half-weasel. so, it's not exactly a surprise that you feel not accountable for any of your of actions at all.

There is no point in feeling accountable for that which I am not accountable for. Unless I agree with you that I am victimizing my customers, it would be silly for me to feel accountable for doing so. Hence - first assumption - the customers are victims of the sleazy, flaky, emotionally immature dancer-whores.LOL..first, it was shame. now, it's victimization. so, what's next? it's dehumanization, right?

I didn't miss the point. You just focused on what was meant to a completely meaningless, funny aside.no, i focused on your misconstruction of xdamage's point. see the above for another perfect example.

It's about what he was trading his money for. It wasn't to get at my ass, because it was explicitly never on offer.oh, don't play lawyer games with me or i'll send back to your coffin without any blood, missy. i didn't say there was an explicit offer. in any case, whether explicit or implict. i'm sure you got the message loud and clear that this retard was looking to buy something more complex than a simple dance.

He would have liked it if I agreed to have sex with him, I'm sure, but FAILING THAT he was still happy to spend what he did, on what he spent it on - i.e. the lapdances, company and sheer gratitude. I realize that you are about to guffaw on the worthlessness of stripper gratitude.actually, i'm laughing about something else. anyway, despite the fact there was no explict offer. it sounds like you were aware he was looking to buy something (ie: a girlfriend) more complex than a simple dance.

Look at the thread title. Do you ever feel guilty? And his response - only if you want to be emotionally mature.well, i did say perhaps he's asking a bit too much from strippers.

And again - you only characterize it as taking advantage because he is buying something you wouldn't buy.LOL..see? first, you say you know it isn't about worth. now, you start talking about worth again. anyway, i characterize it that way not because it isn't worth it, but because of his retardedness. sorry, but customers looking to turn a ho into a housewife is pretty retarded. i'm kind of amazed you don't see it. when, strangely enough, you see it so clearly in this thread (http://http://www.stripperweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=65764&page=2). the guy in this thread is not all that different from your cuddle bitch. the only difference is that one guy realizes he's been acting like a retard and the other one has not.

If I had slept with him, you would think the doggie coat was an excellent trade. And, somewhat paradoxically, you probably wouldn't characterize him as taking advantage of me.what does his retardedness have to do with me? i didn't create this guy's romantic interest in you. i mean, it's pretty obvious that he was looking for a GF and FAILING THAT, now it seems like he wants to be your cuddle bitch. why do you think that retard still emails you? he's hanging around waiting for a ship that will never sail into port.

I just really didn't think he was retarded. I think it's that I am exceptionally charming and fun to be with.of course, you won't say he's retarded. after all the retarded things he did for you. i suppose, it would seem a bit ungrateful to say otherwise. however, i don't see how your charm or humor makes him less of a retarded, cuddle bitch.

one last thing. given the way you always defend this guy. it almost seems as if you're feeling...what?....sympathy for the guy? if that's true. why, that's something even xdamage could admire. now, that would be really funny.

Phil-W
04-30-2006, 08:50 AM
As an aside Phil, I will admit, I don't fully trust men's judgements when it comes to strippers. I'm feeling a big "crusty" at the moment, for other reasons, but I see too many guys idealize strippers, idealizations they would never make if the girls were unattractive. Not saying you are doing that, but it happens, a lot. It's sort of based on the "if I suck up a lot, I may get some" male strategy. ;)

It depends on the environment where you see dancers. If you see them outside of work, and more specifically give them lifts to/from work, then you can have few illusions about what dancers think in general of their customers.

A dancer getting ready for work seems to go through a bit of a metamorphis. On goes the make-up, (which is generally very different from the make-up they use in civilian life). On goes the costume, (and even if it's bra and knickers, it can be stuff they wouldn't normally wear). Finally, on slips the persona. Hey presto, Suzie the stripper, not Sarah the person.

You can only really make a judgement if you know Sarah the person. Susie the stripper is there to make a living, and to do that she's got to part custy's from their money. The degree to which she's willing to be manipulative varies from dancer to dancer, as does the degree of guilt she might feel from getting some guy to spend more than he can afford.

This thread started out about do dancers feel guilty, and we've been treating them as a generalised case. To state the obvious, you'll get ther full spectrum of responses; from dancers who show a bit of compassion for their customers through to those who'll get a guy to remortgage his house so they can extract more money from them.

The only way you can come to any conclusions is on a case by case basis.

Phil.

mr_punk
04-30-2006, 10:06 AM
It depends on the environment where you see dancers. If you see them outside of work, and more specifically give them lifts to/from work, then you can have few illusions about what dancers think in general of their customers.i think he's referring to ITC. however, seeing a stripper OTC doesn't necessarily mean the customer knows the stripper either. for instance, a customer meeting a stripper at denny's or going shopping using his credit card, can have just as many illusions about strippers as a customer ITC. believe it or not, strippers are well aware of how much premium customers place upon authenticity and will act accordingly.

Phil-W
04-30-2006, 11:12 AM
i think he's referring to ITC. however, seeing a stripper OTC doesn't necessarily mean the customer knows the stripper either. for instance, a customer meeting a stripper at denny's or going shopping using his credit card, can have just as many illusions about strippers as a customer ITC. believe it or not, strippers are well aware of how much premium customers place upon authenticity and will act accordingly.

IMHO, you would have to be exceedingly dumb not to realise that a dancer meeting you OTC and using your credit card might just have different motivations from the ones you hope.

However, I've heard more than enough ancedotal evidence from dancers to suggest there is a appreciable supply of exceedingly dumb customers about.

Phil.

Jenny
04-30-2006, 01:57 PM
why, of course not, silly. you already have 3 strikes against you. (1) you're a woman. (2) you're a stripper, but worst of all (3) you're studying to be a lawyer. which makes you half-bloodsucking leech/half-weasel. so, it's not exactly a surprise that you feel not accountable for any of your of actions at all.
Okay. I object to this on behalf of lawyers, leeches and weasels. And myself, I guess. Besides that - I never said that I never felt accountable for any of my actions. I said that I don't feel guilty for taking money from customers who come in wanting to purchase a service that I sell. How does that translate into general lack of accountability? I will say however, that generally, when I feel that something is bad or victimizing someone - I DON'T DO IT. That is not to say that I never have an ethical slip. But I cannot say that I run my life or conscience in such a way that I can justify doing "bad things" to people under the auspices of self-honesty. That is - if I felt bad for taking a customers money I probably wouldn't take it.


LOL..first, it was shame. now, it's victimization. so, what's next? it's dehumanization, right?
What? Okay - explain to me like I'm six - how does this work if it doesn't engage with victimizing the customer? I mean, what do I have to feel guilty FOR if the customer is making informed, mature choices? Isn't the whole point of comparing lapdances to cigarette manufacturers to illustrate how we are victimizing our consumer base?


no, i focused on your misconstruction of xdamage's point. see the above for another perfect example.
Well - the thing with shame was informed from things he has posted in the past. But the vicimization is pretty inherent.


oh, don't play lawyer games with me or i'll send back to your coffin without any blood, missy.
Oh, I dare you to try.


i didn't say there was an explicit offer. in any case, whether explicit or implict. i'm sure you got the message loud and clear that this retard was looking to buy something more complex than a simple dance.
Again, I'm not sure what you mean by that. He was fully aware that the prospect of sleeping with me was... well, not impossible. I make some really questionable decisions when I'm drunk. But low. He was also perfectly aware that I wasn't about to be his girlfriend. If nothing else there was a distance problem. Did he want more than a "simple dance"? Well obviously. But isn't that what the moniker "GirlFriend Experience" is for?


LOL..see? first, you say you know it isn't about worth. now, you start talking about worth again.
Technically, I said (or at least I meant) it wasn't about MY worth. In terms of value - it seems that the relative value of fucking the girl you are spending money on as opposed to simply touching her in sexual ways is very much at issue in the punkmeister universe. The punkverse.


anyway, i characterize it that way not because it isn't worth it, but because of his retardedness. sorry, but customers looking to turn a ho into a housewife is pretty retarded.
Okay - first of all: I can cook. And knit. And sew on buttons correctly.


i 'm kind of amazed you don't see it. when, strangely enough, you see it so clearly in this thread (http://http://www.stripperweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=65764&page=2). the guy in this thread is not all that different from your cuddle bitch. the only difference is that one guy realizes he's been acting like a retard and the other one has not.
Okay. Second - that guy has NOT realized that he was acting like a retard. Third: I think the expression "cuddle bitch" says it all. If that is the experience you WANT, how is achieving that retarded? You'll note that MY customers are not on here bitching that I took them for a ride. And Jenny is my stage name, so I'd know.


what does his retardedness have to do with me? i didn't create this guy's romantic interest in you. i mean, it's pretty obvious that he was looking for a GF and FAILING THAT, now it seems like he wants to be your cuddle bitch.
Precisely - exactly. The coffee shop is out of Earl Grey tea, so I buy peppermint. My first choice? No. Would I pay more for Earl Grey - depends on the differential. Would the guy in line behind me buy the peppermint instead, or would he say "Fuck this; I'm going to Timothy's down the street where they have the fucking tea I want"? Entirely up to him. Does that mean that the Peppermint is inherently worthless? No.


why do you think that retard still emails you? he's hanging around waiting for a ship that will never sail into port.
Okay. Now I know you are going to find this hard to believe. But there are people out there that actually like me. I know, I know. It's hard for everyone to understand. But really, I don't find it hard to believe that someone is emailing me just because they are under the misapprehension that I'm cool.


of course, you won't say he's retarded. after all the retarded things he did for you. i suppose, it would seem a bit ungrateful to say otherwise. however, i don't see how your charm or humor makes him less of a retarded, cuddle bitch.
See, "cuddle bitch" can stay. But the ONLY reason you think he is retarded is because he wants to be a cuddle bitch. Because he likes a different experience than you, you think he is retarded. Seriously - imagine it the other way around: that the customers I have allowed to do way to much to me to me in private rooms were being told that they were retarded because they didn't get the cuddle experience. "Like no, man. You completely wasted your money. You should have absolutely just held her for an hour. It's unbelievable." The reason that sounds stupid is because you would far rather do the bad, bad touching than the cuddling. Not all guys are like that. Seriously. They're not. I've worked on drink commissions. In Guam there were guys who spent hundreds on dollars buying me drinks when they could have bought, well, half as many dances. Why? I'll give you a hint. I would rather do the dances. It's faster.


one last thing. given the way you always defend this guy. it almost seems as if you're feeling...what?....sympathy for the guy? if that's true. why, that's something even xdamage could admire. now, that would be really funny.
Oh, you shut the fuck up. Right now.

Well, I don't know. It could be half vanity. Like it would be a serious blow for me to accept that my company is really worthless, and only a retard would want me around for anything but sex. (There is a whole story about teeth here that I won't bore you with). The other half is likely that I seriously think you are wrong.

xdamage
04-30-2006, 04:21 PM
The only two I still talk with OTC (and I was never a customer, just happened to meet them, and later found out they were ex-strippers) are still pretty flakey - it's just not stereotypical hollywood extreme drama, but both have never ending drama and relationship problems (and I can only guess some part of them enjoys it or they wouldn't keep doing it). Sure, they work at non-stripper jobs and went to college. Big deal. You wouldn't think anything of it at all if it was just an average looking woman - so they have jobs, are going to school, so what? Doesn't mean they can't be flakes in other aspects of their life. Frankly I don't even know if they are very good at their jobs or just getting by because they are very attractive. They certainly haven't been promoted, and they don't come across as particularly brilliant or inspired by what they do.

Anyway, of course my limited experiences hardly constitute proof of anything. But like I said, when it comes to guy's (being one, and having some sense of what makes us tick) I am suspicious of how objective other guys are when it comes to strippers.

mr_punk
04-30-2006, 05:04 PM
Okay. I object to this on behalf of lawyers, leeches and weasels. And myself, I guess.well, lawyers, leeches and weasels all come in the same package. it's sort of a 3-in-1 deal. however, your objection is noted.

I said that I don't feel guilty for taking money from customers who come in wanting to purchase a service that I sell. How does that translate into general lack of accountability?no one, including xdamage, has asked anyone to feel guilty. if you're aware that retarded customer is doing retarded things for you, because he thinks (an idea of his own creation) it will get him somewhere. well, his retardness isn't your responsibility. OTOH, as a stripper, you can either refuse or benefit from his retardedness. however, whatever course of action you decide to take. you are responsible for that decision. xdamage seems to admire strippers who are aware they're benefiting from a customer's retardedness more than strippers who are not. frankly, i could care less, but he thinks otherwise.

II will say however, that generally, when I feel that something is bad or victimizing someone - I DON'T DO IT. That is not to say that I never have an ethical slip. But I cannot say that I run my life or conscience in such a way that I can justify doing "bad things" to people under the auspices of self-honesty. That is - if I felt bad for taking a customers money I probably wouldn't take it.what victimization? we're not talking about the civilian world. selling false intimacy in order to extract cash from men in the civilian world makes you a gold digger (or one of my ex-wives..sigh). OTOH, in the sc, you're just a stripper. the phrase, "caveat emptor" is much more applicable than victimization in this context.

I mean, what do I have to feel guilty FOR if the customer is making informed, mature choices? Isn't the whole point of comparing lapdances to cigarette manufacturers to illustrate how we are victimizing our consumer base?an informed, mature sc customer? LOL....now, that's funny! hold on, i think i need to go change my underwear.

Well - the thing with shame was informed from things he has posted in the past. But the vicimization is pretty inherent.well, he's not doing it now. look, xdamage doesn't mind if a stripper decides to take the money. his pet peeve seems to be whether or not she's aware of her decision and it's impact.

Again, I'm not sure what you mean by that. He was fully aware that the prospect of sleeping with me was... well, not impossible. I make some really questionable decisions when I'm drunk. But low. He was also perfectly aware that I wasn't about to be his girlfriend. If nothing else there was a distance problem. Did he want more than a "simple dance"? Well obviously. But isn't that what the moniker "GirlFriend Experience" is for?GFE is still a false sense of intimacy and moving from GFE to an actual relationship is a very tough proposition. i'm not saying it's impossible, but i wouldn't go to a sc looking to beat the odds. however, many retarded customers do.

Technically, I said (or at least I meant) it wasn't about MY worth. In terms of value - it seems that the relative value of fucking the girl you are spending money on as opposed to simply touching her in sexual ways is very much at issue in the punkmeister universe. The punkverse.i value results..production. i don't care exactly what a guy wants. so, if he wants a stripper to stand on her head and sing "O'Canada". well, find a stripper who can deliver the goods. otherwise, why pay a stripper that can't stand on her head and sing "O'Canada"? yet, many customers will pay a stripper that can't stand on her head and sing "O'Canada". which is why i find them so entertaining.

Okay. Second - that guy has NOT realized that he was acting like a retard. Third: I think the expression "cuddle bitch" says it all. If that is the experience you WANT, how is achieving that retarded? You'll note that MY customers are not on here bitching that I took them for a ride. And Jenny is my stage name, so I'd know.well, whether he has realized it or not. you do see my point. he was looking to turn this stripper into his GF. so, he did all these retarded things for her hoping it would get him a GF. it got him nothing. so, now he's mad about it...."caveat emptor".

Precisely - exactly. The coffee shop is out of Earl Grey tea, so I buy peppermint. My first choice? No. Would I pay more for Earl Grey - depends on the differential. Would the guy in line behind me buy the peppermint instead, or would he say "Fuck this; I'm going to Timothy's down the street where they have the fucking tea I want"? Entirely up to him. Does that mean that the Peppermint is inherently worthless? No.hmmm...you don't know exactly what "cuddle bitch" means, do you? basically, it's sort of like a gay male friend of a woman. it's a guy who wants a relationship with a woman. except, the woman doesn't want to have a relationship with the guy. however, in every other respect she treats him like a BF (ie: hence the "cuddle" in cuddle bitch). of course, the reason why guys become cuddle bitches is because, they all hope that one day their efforts (mostly at futilely trying to wear her down) will pay off. it usually never does, but they can still hope, right?

Okay. Now I know you are going to find this hard to believe. But there are people out there that actually like me. I know, I know. It's hard for everyone to understand. But really, I don't find it hard to believe that someone is emailing me just because they are under the misapprehension that I'm cool.actually, quite the opposite. i sure he likes you very much. in fact, so much, i'm sure he would still like you to be his GF. look, it really doesn't matter how many times you tell him it ain't happening. he's going to have to reach this conclusion all on his own.

See, "cuddle bitch" can stay. But the ONLY reason you think he is retarded is because he wants to be a cuddle bitch. Because he likes a different experience than you, you think he is retarded.well, since you don't seem to know what cuddle bitch means. i'll let this one pass because that's not what i'm getting at.

evan_essence
04-30-2006, 06:31 PM
actually, quite the opposite. i sure he likes you very much. in fact, so much, i'm sure he would still like you to be his GF. look, it really doesn't matter how many times you tell him it ain't happening. he's going to have to reach this conclusion all on his own.Okay, I really wanted to stay out of this one, but this comment sets me off. Why on Earth do you believe that you know this guy? How do you know he hasn't already reached that conclusion? It's so elitist for you to believe that the only way a guy is not a retard for buying a stripper's time is for him to have the same goals as you do. There are plenty of guys in this forum who pay a stripper for some temporary attention. Are they retards too?

-Ev