Objectifying is not dehumanizing; your presumption that it is represents your main objection.I think it is foolish for guys to act like the only way to find a woman attractive is to dehumanize her.
Objectifying is not dehumanizing; your presumption that it is represents your main objection.I think it is foolish for guys to act like the only way to find a woman attractive is to dehumanize her.
Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.
William F. Buckley, Jr.
Does anyone read the comic strip "Luanne"? Luanne's brother landed a hottie girlfriend, Toni Daytona. When the subject of how her looks made him feel insecure about holding onto her, she made a face and asked him how he felt then.
It's all in our heads! My idea of attractive is 180 degrees different than many other women's. I dislike pretty boys. No metrosexuals, blech. That's just me.
It would surprise you how many attractive people are actually very down to earth. I worked with a dancer whose boyfriend was an employee of Brad Pitt's- she said Brad was one of the nicest people she ever met.





I understand how simply considering one aspect of a woman--her physical appearance--is not necessarily dehumanizing, but treating her as though that is the only aspect that matters is (and I also understand that this is what strippers let themselves in for upon entering a profession that places a premium on appearance). The evidence that club customers objectify/dehumanize dancers is proved nightly by the myriad ways they talk to/treat us as if we aren't really people (kind of like the way my bitchy stepmother behaves towards waiters). I think this is also borne out by the fact that lots of (though not all) customers feel uncomfortable buying dances from strippers they've decided are real people.
I don't really give a crap about the rating scale since I haven't ever been subjected to it in a cruel way. Also, I have a healthy appreciation for the fact that female attractiveness is a fleeting thing and I damn sure better not be too sensitive about my looks because one day they will be gone, gone, gone. And then I'd better be damn funny, charming, or rich to compensate (just like a man!)





Not so much. But getting way OT again, anyone ever read Why I Hate Saturn? Where one of the characters talks about how pretty people don't have to be smart, since they can get by on their looks, and smart people don't have to be pretty, since they have their brains, so anyone who is pretty and smart must be insane since they didn't figure out they didn't have to be both? hee hee. That's the problem ladies, all of us fucking college graduate strippers are crazy. Jenny, Kat, B, ND, I dare you to provide me with evidence of your sanity!Originally Posted by madmaxine
Ok, back to the topic,
I honestly can't think of ever using a ratings scale ever. For looks or anything else on a person. I have a sequentially numbered list of people somewhere, but that is a whole other thing. And as far as using it in a strip club review I don't see where it's that harmful. OK, I lied, I have used that scale, shit, you can use it when you do a dancer club review here on SW and I'm sure I've said that I worked in a club full of 8s or a club full of 4s. I guess guys could say, "The dancers in this establishment appeared to be in the top 20th percentile of looks overall with a few in the top 5th." Would that be less offensive?




![]()
I am not a number! I am a free man!
. . . Ianyone who gets the reference.
Also, I wanna hear Jenny's story! Story, Jenny?



funny I cam across this thread I was listening to howard stern talkin to donald trump, they were rating women with numbers like carman, pamela, just to name a couple and honestly I was appalled....who the hell do they think they are?
People have always tried to quantify quality. In any profession be it Doctor or Athlete or Dancer there needs to be a number to decide how much the persons services are worth.
In the case of a dancer beauty is part of that equation. It does not take a brain trust to know that the strippers at the Dollhouse in Tampa make a lot of money because they are beautiful and they don’t have to give hand jobs or heavy grindage to get the money and the strippers at Ybor Strip are less beautiful but like Alice’s restaurant you can get anything you want. I imagine they both go home with about the same amount of cash at the end of the night. Mons, on the other hand is in the midrange and they only have to masturbate guys with their buttocks to make their bank (although I must admit it is a little gross to see them wiping off their behinds with handy wipes on the dressing room cam). So does it make anyone feel any better not to say the Dollhouse is 10’s, Mons is 8’s and Ybor is 5’s? Which is the busiest club? Mons of course because most guys take the mid road and all in all Mons is the most butt for the buck. I however think this whole system is absurd and especially perverted. I think they guys who rate women by numbers are as nutty as the women who resent it. For gosh sakes if you don’t like to be rated you got to be a hermit because anything you do, anything, is going to have a rating system. And it is certainly not news to anyone that women don’t like to be rated or objectified in any way so for a guy to actually admit that he does that is just plain nuts. To me there will always be one woman who is a ten. No matter how old or fat or mean she gets and all the other women in the world will not be 10’s. So here’s to you Mrs Kalabash wherever you are and that is my rating system.




How dare strippers think of me as a $400 guy or another regular as a $60 guy. Whats with this money rating system? I am a complete person damn it! <sarcasm?>
"Peter, did you take Stewie to a strip-club? He smells like sweat and fear." - Lois and Stewie (Family Guy) ... "Through early morning fog I see, Visions of the things to be, The pains that are withheld for me, I realize and I can see..."
CO - I do not know WHERE you learned your sociology. But you're wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Objectifying IS dehumanizing - by definition. Any critical studies from Marx to Butler confirms this. This is just what "objectify" means - it may not mean what you mean, but in that case you are just using the wrong word or the wrong concept. I mean WHY would the word "objectify" refer to anything except "make into object"? Well - I suppose the word "evervate" is pretty counterintuitive, but "Objectify" isn't.Originally Posted by Casual Observer
I promise that I didn't add this page, and I realize that wiki is not the realiable-est resource, but this one is right:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectify
Objectification refers to the way in which one person treats another person as an object and not as a human being. This is commonly used to refer to the way the mass media, in particular advertising, is perceived by some as portraying women as sex objects (although this treatment now increasingly also extends to men).
Self-objectification is a person's objectification of themselves, often in response to other people's attitudes to that person.
I have taught that the sky in all its zones is mortal and its substance was formed by a process of birth




Ouch!Originally Posted by WiseGuy_TX
Whenever I have seen customers this way, the results always have been bad. If I do not appreciate customers as complete people, I lose.
Yeah, I want to hear Jenny's story too.
You never know what life will bring you- the man I'll call "the love of my life" was actually UGLY. I'd look at him sometimes & be like, Why the hell am I so in love with this guy? We had a connection, even though it didn't matter in the end. Ugly people can be lying losers too, not just manipulative pretty people LOL...
Edit- to answer kellyallstar's question, Donald Trump & Howard Stern are sucessful ugly losers who have enough money to pay trophy wives to stand by them since their first wives who might have felt real love for them once....figured them out & got divorces post-haste. LOL
Originally Posted by Jenny
the majority of men don't have a problem (or don't see the problem) with objectification because they're not subjected to it for the most part. a woman is the sum of her body parts and her looks are her most valued asset for most of them.
![]()
why do some people still have to fight to get the same opportunities that are given to others?
reclusiveness...is a good thing.
the greatest revenge in the world...is success.





Scores customers !funny I cam across this thread I was listening to howard stern talkin to donald trump, they were rating women with numbers like carman, pamela, just to name a couple and honestly I was appalled....who the hell do they think they are?




Is that why it's called "Scores?" Do they run around with cards, adding and subtracting points like Olympic judges?Originally Posted by Melonie





Men can certainly be objectified as well. In continental contemporary philosophy, many people made a lot of hay out of the fact that people who work at jobs that treat them like machines are essentially objectified, and that this leads to an unfulfilling life. It's all written in a Marxist strain, but ever read Death of a Salesman? To me, if people see you entirely as a mechanical purpose, then in their eyes you are not a person. I think this can have to do with many other things than a woman's sexuality, like enslaved children in sweat shops.Originally Posted by MsTopaz
Well I don't mind it and hate it all at the same time.
Hell I rate others like that, but I hate to be rated like that.
So we have come up with nick names for girls at work.
Mine is Mary Poppins. Anyone wanna guess why, lol?
We have me, J-Lo, Juicy Lucy, and a few others, but it's easier and more fun that way.





Placing a numeric desirability rating on strippers may be dehumanizing, but it is one mechanical way for some to make an optimum preference. Many customers make this decision on some collection of traits (like big boobs and blond hair) which they collectively judge numerically. I believe many dancers subjectively set themselves up to play into this method (buying boobs, dying hair etc) to raise their rating. Example, how do I take so many thousand dollars and raise my net income.
In business most of us are rated (eg, sells $400,000 against a loaded salary cost of $70,000; can I find a saller who will raise that ratio). I dont like it, but from a numeric rating system (dollars) it makes sense.
I had a friend who would look at a hunting magazine with a, say, big elk and would say to me, "I'd like to shoot that." No rating; to me, it's not only objectifying (trophy) but exploitative (meaningless death).
I know many customers do use this numerical 1-10 rating system to choose a dancer, but it is not how I make any dance decision. I much prefer to get dances with a dancer I already know (shapely, older, likeable, exciting, funny, etc). But when I have to make a new selection, I use a go/no-go method. Then anyone I'm attracted to, and is available, is fine with me. I'm sorry that I do have to choose; one could say that itself is unfair. But this is not in itself any more objectifying than the whole stripping industry is, which admittedly it emphatically is.
I loved going to strip clubs; I actually made some friends there. Now things are different for the clubs and for me. As a result I am not as happy.
Customers are not entitled to grope, disrespect, or rob strippers. This is their job, not their hobby, and they all need income. Clubs are not just some erotic show for guys to view while drinking.
NOTE: anything I post here, outside of a direct quote, is my opinion only, which I am entitled to. Take it for what you estimate it is worth.
A friend and I have a rating system we use for girls that's a little different...we rate them by what's the most we'd pay to have sex with them. Is that bad? Not that I care.
It's all just fun and games.
Leave it to Jenny to quote not only Marxist pseudo-theories and blather, but Wikipedia, the anti-encyclopedia. And I presume you mean enervate rather than evervate? Either way, I'm still not seeing the connection.
The meaning of objectify:
ob·jec·ti·fy Audio pronunciation of "objectify" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (b-jkt-f)
tr.v. ob·jec·ti·fied, ob·jec·ti·fy·ing, ob·jec·ti·fies
1. To present or regard as an object:
2. To make objective, external, or concrete:
As I said, there is nothing inherently dehumanizing about the objectification of people. If you want to attach a social or political agenda to the word, you can make it whatever you want. Semantics is like that, and so is postmodernism and its useless deconstructionist viewpoint.
Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.
William F. Buckley, Jr.
Stripper ratings scale for custy:
10 Clean and attractive. Spends thousands every week. Never tries to touch where not allowed, never asks you out, never tries to take you home. Endlessly charming and a joy to work with. He's always there when you want him, but isn't at the club too much as to get annoying. Wires you the cash if he's out for a business trip.(hahaha!)
9 Solid custy, but it sometimes feels like work.
8 A good all-around custy, but may get a little handsy.
7 Good custy, but only spends hundreds a month.
6 Decent to deal with, but starting to want more for his money.
5 Needy, but tolerable. Wants to date you, fuck you, and save you, but is willing to just accept dances and stripper shit.
4 Offers you money for sex each time you dance for him. The amount is negligible and keeps decreasing every time he doesn't get what he wants.
3 Tolerable for perhaps 1-2 dances, then its just too much of a pain in the ass to get him to put his dick back in his pants.
2 Smells kinda funny AND wants to touchey-feely the pussoise. To be avoided at all costs unless its REALLY bad night and you need to get a dance in to cover your DJ tip.
1 Mr_Punk or Derrick.
"Have you ever been to American wedding? Where is the vodka, where's marinated herring?" - GB
"And do the cats give a shit? No, they do not. Why? Because they're cats."-from The Onion
Originally Posted by Mia M




^^^^
Nice breakdown, Katrine.I'd say "5" is the median rating for my customers. I've only had 2 10s.
Proud to be a 10 custyOriginally Posted by Katrine
![]()




LOL katrine! IU





It's a little more pragmatic than that. Girls who are 10's get hired at Scores East, are allowed to work any shift they please, and get invited to the VIP room with Howard Stern or Donald Trump. Girls who are 9's get hired at Scores East, but don't get chosen to spend VIP time with Howard Stern or Donald Trump. Girls who are 8's might get hired at Scores East but restricted to working specific days/shifts ... or get sent to Scores West. Girls who are 7's will not get hired at Scores.Is that why it's called "Scores?" Do they run around with cards, adding and subtracting points like Olympic judges?

It's gross, the rating thing, but if you work in this industry, you put up with a lot of gross shit.
Bookmarks