Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 54

Thread: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

  1. #26
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Most of us would probably try to sensibly distinguish the existence of strip clubs to the existence of second hand smoke rather than just do away with all policy decisions.
    ^^^ yes, but in terms of the legal right to enact anti-smoking regulations versus the legal right to enact anti-strip club laws, they both rely on the same principle ... that a majority of people don't want smoking / strip clubs in their face, and justify the ban on the basis of an unproven but generally agreed on assumption that smoking / strip clubs are 'harmful' to others. Thus while it might be possible for a dancer to 'sensibly distinguish the existance of strip clubs vs the existance of second hand smoke', a housewife or retiree or preacher & flock might not have the same 'sense' where strip clubs are concerned !!!

    The point is that if you legally permit and support the concept that the voting majority of dancers + citizens + whoever is entitled to enact anti-smoking laws for 'good social policy' reasons, or are entitled to enact anti-fatty food laws for 'good social policy' reasons, you're also laying the groundwork for legally permitting the citizens + whomever to enact anti-strip club laws for exactly the same 'good social policy' reasons but with the dancers now being in the minority ! Letting the majority decide what's 'good' for everybody in the absence of 100% proof that something is 'bad' can become a very dangerous precedent !

    Whatever feelings on the 'good social policy' issue, for a fact the enforcement of no smoking rules in strip clubs decreases ultimate dancer earnings. Depending on where one is located, somewhere between 20 and 30% of the population are smokers. Enforcement of no smoking rules pretty much guarantees that smokers are not going to stay in a particular place for more than an hour ... and when they leave they take their money with them. Enforcement of no smoking rules also leads to decisions by groups that include smokers + non-smokers (like bachelor parties) to avoid non-smoking venues altogether or to have the entire group leave after an hour. Of those smoking customers who now only plan to stay in the club for an hour, there is now a strong incentive to dispense with the 'time wasting niceties' and get right down to business re negotiating for extras so that they can 'get in, get off, and get out' before the one hour nicotine clock goes off. This dispensing with the 'time wasting niceties' readily rubs off on many non-smoking customers as well, because even though they may not be interested in getting out of the club within an hour they ARE interested in getting maximum 'bang' for their buck taking advantage of the smoking customers' precedent re VIP room negotiations. Similarly, smoking guys also now have a strong incentive to simply bypass the club altogether and call an escort agency to take care of their 'needs' in their home or hotel room where smoking is still permitted.

    Say and think what you want, but every time I have seen a city/state pass a no-smoking law, and a year later I hear tales of woe about reduced dancer earnings, as well as the 'automatic' assumption on the part of the woeful dancers that the two developments are somehow totally unrelated ...

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 01-31-2007 at 02:48 PM.

  2. #27
    AlexxaHex
    Guest

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by beauty21queen View Post
    Ugh just UGH I hate smoke gets me sick and smell like SMOKE sucks but if there was a no smoking law I think that would bring more extras in the club because ALOT of people smoke and want to while at the club
    huh? What does smoking have to do with extras?

  3. #28
    Featured Member NatalieFRPhilly's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,557
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 8 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    I see what it has to do with extras...less customers so girls will be getting way more desperate. I can see it happening at my club slightly already.

  4. #29
    God/dess Jenny's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    9,746
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 50 Times in 31 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    ^^^ yes, but in terms of the legal right to enact anti-smoking regulations versus the legal right to enact anti-strip club laws, they both rely on the same principle ... that a majority of people don't want smoking / strip clubs in their face.
    Well, yes, but a) there is not a lot of contention that there is a fairly plenary government power to strictly regulate strip clubs if not ban them entirely. b) That's why I said that we would likely try to sensibly distinguish the two rather than do away with social policy entirely.

    Thus while it might be possible for a dancer to 'sensibly distinguish the existance of strip clubs vs the existance of second hand smoke', a housewife might not have the same 'sense' where strip clubs are concerned !!!
    No, a housewife may reasonably disagree but I'm not advocating simply saying "well it's different" and leaving it at that; that's where the sensible comes in. Meaning that it is not just a matter of catering to knee jerk reactions, but a measured, intelligent response that articulates differences between stripclubs and second hand smoke; not just a declaration that one is okay and the other isn't on moral grounds (which is, I think, the debate you imagine the housewife and I having. Incidentally - why a housewife? Why not a banker, or doctor?).

    The point is that if you legally permit the voting majority of dancers + citizens + whoever to enact anti-smoking laws for 'good social policy' reasons, you're also laying the groundwork for legally permitting the citizens + whomever to enact anti-strip club laws for exactly the same 'good social policy' reasons with the dancers now being in the minority !
    Well... again, it is pretty incontestable that there is plenary government authority to strenuously regulate strip clubs (and all clubs, for that matter). So the groundwork is already there, and has been for many decades. It's not something we need to worry about suddenly cropping up. And I got your point. That was what I was responding to - that we don't all base our political and health decisions on what best serves the existence of strip clubs. So I get your point, I just think that it is an incredibly short sighted approach to social policy.

    I get what you are getting at with the "tyranny of the majority" (although I see a bit of an irony considering so many of your other stances); however demanding 100% of "harm" is a) impractical and b) not always relevant. Science doesn't generally work in 100% certainties. You could never scientifically prove to 100% that a crack house is going to lower neighbourhood property values - however it is still pretty damn likely. Further the tyranny of the majority is generally constrained in the pursuit of basic human rights - not substance regulation or business zoning.
    I have taught that the sky in all its zones is mortal and its substance was formed by a process of birth

  5. #30
    beauty21queen
    Guest

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by NatalieFRPhilly View Post
    I see what it has to do with extras...less customers so girls will be getting way more desperate. I can see it happening at my club slightly already.
    Thank you for getting my point

  6. #31
    AlexxaHex
    Guest

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by beauty21queen View Post
    Thank you for getting my point
    Perhaps more people would get your point if you used proper punctuation and sentence formation to more properly get your point across. Just a suggestion.

  7. #32
    God/dess Paris's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,345
    Thanks
    168
    Thanked 801 Times in 419 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    Letting the majority decide what's 'good' for everybody in the absence of 100% proof that something is 'bad' can become a very dangerous precedent !

    ~
    So you're saying that there is not 100% proof that smoking and second hand smoke is bad? What more evidence do you need?

    I also think that it is okay if the majority of people in a community feel that sexually oriented businesses should not be part of their communtiy. That is what a democracy is all about. If an indivdual has issue with strip clubs and the like, they can easily move to a community that has laws against such businesses. Ditto with folks that enjoy their strip clubs. We, in Oregon, have voted repeatedly in favor of strip clubs and strippers. The people of Utah do not agree with our laws. That's okay. I no more want to force my viewpoints on others than I want people to force their viewpoints on me.

    There is solid scientific evidence that shows that smoking is harmful to people. Just like lead based paint and asbestos and DDT. I see public smoking to be in the same catergory as those perviously available consumer products. Not the same as stripping and strip clubs.


    Promote yourself and earn more money! This is a business that is owned by strippers for strippers. Let's make that money!


  8. #33
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Well, yes, but a) there is not a lot of contention that there is a fairly plenary government power to strictly regulate strip clubs if not ban them entirely.
    maybe so ... in your particular city ... at this particular moment !


    not just a declaration that one is okay and the other isn't on moral grounds
    if you look at some of the justifications already used for anti-strip club ordinances, you see 'supposed' proof of harm to the surrounding community via 'secondary effects' ... lowered property values, higher crime rates, etc. Thus it is not a moral question, but a legal question of strip clubs supposedly 'harming' the citizens who live around them in exactly the same way that smokers' second-hand smoke supposedly 'harms' the people around them.


    Incidentally - why a housewife? Why not a banker, or doctor?
    the number of housewives who may be worried about their husband spending time and money at a local strip club vastly outnumbers the number of female bankers or female doctors with similar worries, I would think !

    So you're saying that there is not 100% proof that smoking and second hand smoke is bad? What more evidence do you need?
    Direct negative effects of smoking are well proven. However, in regard to the supposedly harmful effects of second-hand smoke which form the legal basis for anti-smoking laws ... well, since you asked ... the Washington Post published an article on this very subject yesterday --->

    (snip)"Adding confusion, people with lung cancer or cardiovascular disease are prone to amplify their recall of secondhand smoke exposure. Others will fib about being nonsmokers and will contaminate the results. More than two dozen causes of lung cancer are reported in the professional literature, and over 200 for cardiovascular diseases; their likely intrusions have never been credibly measured and controlled in secondhand smoke studies. Thus, the claimed risks are doubly deceptive because of interferences that could not be calculated and corrected.

    In addition, results are not consistently reproducible. The majority of studies do not report a statistically significant change in risk from secondhand smoke exposure, some studies show an increase in risk, and ¿ astoundingly ¿ some show a reduction of risk.

    Some prominent anti-smokers have been quietly forthcoming on what "the science" does and does not show. Asked to quantify secondhand smoke risks at a 2006 hearing at the UK House of Lords, Oxford epidemiologist Sir Richard Peto ¿ a leader of the secondhand smoke crusade ¿ replied, "I am sorry not to be more helpful; you want numbers and I could give you numbers..., but what does one make of them? ...These hazards cannot be directly measured."

    It has been fashionable to ignore the weakness of "the science" on secondhand smoke, perhaps in the belief that claiming "the science is settled" will lead to policies and public attitudes that will reduce the prevalence of smoking. But such a Faustian bargain is an ominous precedent in public health and political ethics. Consider how minimally such policies as smoking bans in bars and restaurants really reduce the prevalence of smoking, and yet how odious and socially unfair such prohibitions are."(snip)


    If the same sort of anecdotal 'fact' gathering, margins for error, deliberate disregard of other possible causes etc. that were used in the American second-hand smoke studies (which are NOT substantiated by other, larger, better controlled foreign studies) were applied to strip club 'negative secondary effects', every strip club in every city would be at risk of being closed down. If the same procedures were followed as were used in the American second-hand smoke studies, all that would have to happen is to ask questions of neighbors regarding their 'recollections' of incidents involving neighborhood crimes, drug dealing, etc. which had some supposed connection to the neighborhood strip club. Similarly, a historical record of declining property values could disregard other possible causes such as a local factory closing, while blaming the property value decline solely on the presence of a neighborhood strip club.


    One of the better summaries of the actual progression of anti-smoking legislation was given by Dr. Michael Crighton (the noted author who is also rich enough to not care about being awarded future grant money)

    (snip)"n 1993, the EPA announced that second-hand smoke was "responsible for approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths each year in nonsmoking adults," and that it " impairs the respiratory health of hundreds of thousands of people." In a 1994 pamphlet the EPA said that the eleven studies it based its decision on were not by themselves conclusive, and that they collectively assigned second-hand smoke a risk factor of 1.19. (For reference, a risk factor below 3.0 is too small for action by the EPA. or for publication in the New England Journal of Medicine, for example.) Furthermore, since there was no statistical association at the 95% confidence limits, the EPA lowered the limit to 90%. They then classified second hand smoke as a Group A Carcinogen.

    This was openly fraudulent science, but it formed the basis for bans on smoking in restaurants, offices, and airports. California banned public smoking in 1995. Soon, no claim was too extreme. By 1998, the Christian Science Monitor was saying that "Second-hand smoke is the nation's third-leading preventable cause of death." The American Cancer Society announced that 53,000 people died each year of second-hand smoke. The evidence for this claim is nonexistent.

    In 1998, a Federal judge held that the EPA had acted improperly, had "committed to a conclusion before research had begun", and had "disregarded information and made findings on selective information." The reaction of Carol Browner, head of the EPA was: "We stand by our science….there's wide agreement. The American people certainly recognize that exposure to second hand smoke brings…a whole host of health problems." Again, note how the claim of consensus trumps science. In this case, it isn't even a consensus of scientists that Browner evokes! It's the consensus of the American people.

    Meanwhile, ever-larger studies failed to confirm any association. A large, seven-country WHO study in 1998 found no association. Nor have well-controlled subsequent studies, to my knowledge. Yet we now read, for example, that second hand smoke is a cause of breast cancer. At this point you can say pretty much anything you want about second-hand smoke.

    As with nuclear winter, bad science is used to promote what most people would consider good policy. I certainly think it is. I don't want people smoking around me. So who will speak out against banning second-hand smoke? Nobody, and if you do, you'll be branded a shill of RJ Reynolds. A big tobacco flunky. But the truth is that we now have a social policy supported by the grossest of superstitions. And we've given the EPA a bad lesson in how to behave in the future. We've told them that cheating is the way to succeed. "(snip) from


    Also, keep in mind that the American studies which 'supposedly' proved that silicone implants were harmful (which disagreed with Foreign studies showing no real correlation) were enough to get Silicone implants banned in the USA for 10+ years. Eventually, the truth won out and silicone implants are again legal in the USA. However, the 'social policy' involved with second-hand smoke, and arguably with strip clubs, wasn't a factor with Silicone implants (once the civil damage lawsuits against Dow Corning were concluded anyhow).

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 01-31-2007 at 03:40 PM.

  9. #34
    God/dess Paris's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,345
    Thanks
    168
    Thanked 801 Times in 419 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Sorry, but I don't think a science fiction novelist (Jurasic Park) is a credible source for science fact. That is like basing foreign policy on what Barbra Streisand thinks we should do.

    The article from the Washington Post is simply the bickering that precedes the legal action that harms an industry or industries. It is the counter point of the argument. This does not mean it is correct, simply it is a way for big tobacco and the people who make money selling tabacco products are trying to save their livelyhood.

    At best, I found the argument weak. If there is a possibility that second hand smoke is harmful, in the mortal sense, then isn't it the responsibilty of the law makers to protect the public? Just like seatbelt and helmet laws, this law is to protect those who don't have a choice but to be exposed to second hand smoke publicly. Employees of bars, nightclubs, casinos and restaurants. The patrons do have a choice, but how do you tell a career bartender that if he/she wants to ply his/her trade that exposure to potentially toxic chemicals is required to earn a living?

    It is one thing to live in the same home as a smoker. The non smoker is only getting a very small amount of the smoke from their house mate. Think about it in the context of of bar and restaurant employees. They are surrounded by dozens of people smoking, constantly. Haven't you ever been at work on a particually smoky night and your eyes were burning from the volume of smoke in the air? That air is also going into the lungs. I have read about air filtration tests that equate the tabacco smoke in bars as equivilent to smoking a cigarette for each hour spent in that bar. In an 8 hour shift, that is a lot of smoke. I've even experienced withdrawal symptoms from tabacco smoke after working several days in a row, without smoking one cigarette myself.

    I'm sure most bar employees have had the experience of waking up the next day with a smokers cough, even though they did not smoke a single cigarette. I have a friend that has COPD and she has never smoked in her life. She worked in a very smoky strip club for several years, and her doctors believe that is what brought on her illness. She has never been exposed to any other carcinogens.

    Going to the occasional bar or party I'm sure has little or no impact on a person's health. It is those of us that have to breath all that second hand smoke for 40 hours a week that are really being harmed by it. I'd like to see a study of career bartenders and other career employees of smoke filled atmospheres. Where is that study?

    Come on! This is just common sense of anyone who has worked in a smoke filled bar.


    Promote yourself and earn more money! This is a business that is owned by strippers for strippers. Let's make that money!


  10. #35
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    not to hijack the thread, but where DDT is concerned ...



    ... which argues that the banning of DDT has CAUSED over a million human deaths each year ! That's apparently OK though, since extremely few of those additional human deaths occurred in the USA.


    Sorry, but I don't think a science fiction novelist (Jurasic Park) is a credible source for science fact. That is like basing foreign policy on what Barbra Streisand thinks we should do.
    PLEASE don't get me started regarding the relative influence on US foreign policy wielded by Hollywood Celebrities. We'll all find that out for ourselves when GWB is replaced with a Democratic president in 2009 ! At any rate, Dr. Crighton is much more than just an author ...

    "He attended Harvard College in Cambridge, Massachusetts as an undergraduate, graduating summa cum laude in 1964. Crichton was also initiated into the honors organization Phi Beta Kappa. He went on to become the Henry Russell Shaw Travelling Fellow, 1964-65 and Visiting Lecturer in Anthropology at Cambridge University, England, 1965. He graduated at Harvard Medical School, gaining an M.D. in 1969 and did post-doctoral fellowship study at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, California, in 1969–1970" for starters.

    As to the credentials of the Washington Post article's author ...

    "Gio Batta Gori, an epidemiologist and toxicologist, is a fellow of the Health Policy Center in Bethesda. He is a former deputy director of the National Cancer Institute's Division of Cancer Cause and Prevention"

    ... and as I pointed out earlier, there is a contention that the opinions of certain American researchers is directly or indirectly influenced by 'grant grubbing', which is why I tend to pay particular attention to other qualified opinions which originate outside the sphere of US gov't grant funded institutions.


    Come on! This is just common sense of anyone who has worked in a smoke filled bar.
    I no more want to force my viewpoints on others than I want people to force their viewpoints on me.
    I spent two decades in smoke filled bars and clubs. But I CHOSE to work there, or CHOSE to go there as a customer. At no point over most of the past two decades was I told that I MUST work in a smoke filled environment, and was free to take a (lower paying) job with less smoky working conditions any time I wanted to. At the same time, until the past few years proliferation of non-smoking laws at least, nobody was FORCING me to accept a smaller paycheck in exchange for a smoke-free work environment 'for my own good', as determined by the opinion of a majority of registered voters.

    I'm also glad that, being retired, I won't have to contend with the increased risk of being forced out of a job as an exotic dancer 'for my own good', as determined by the opinion of a majority of local residents.

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 01-31-2007 at 04:19 PM.

  11. #36
    beauty21queen
    Guest

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by beauty21queen View Post
    Thank you for getting my point
    Well im bussing right now but anyways anyone can know what I meant its commen sense

  12. #37
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    ^^^ I can't argue with the common sense aspect. But I can argue about a minority's freedom of choice being thrown out the window in favor of majority opinion which is based on 'common sense'. Just keep in mind that the same principle you are supporting in regard to no-smoking laws can just as easily be applied to anti-strip club laws ... as many local residents might see a great deal of 'common sense' in the elimination of local strip clubs. After all, there is a body of 'consensus' opinion already out there that strip clubs are degrading to dancers, that strip clubs promote prostitution and STD's, that strip clubs facilitate drug use / dealing, that strip clubs put profits in the pockets of pimps and organized crime etc.

  13. #38
    God/dess Paris's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,345
    Thanks
    168
    Thanked 801 Times in 419 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    ^^^ I can't argue with the common sense aspect. But I can argue about freedom of choice being thrown out the window in favor of majority opinion. Just keep in mind that the same principle you are supporting in regard to no-smoking laws can just as easily be applied to anti-strip club laws ... as many local residents might see a great deal of 'common sense' in the elimination of local strip clubs. After all, there is a body of 'consensus' opinion already out there that strip clubs are degrading to dancers, that strip clubs promote prostitution and STD's, that strip clubs facilitate drug use / dealing, that strip clubs put profits in the pockets of pimps and organized crime etc.
    We all have the choice. We exercise that choice at the ballot box.

    *Paris runs off to pimp school...


    Promote yourself and earn more money! This is a business that is owned by strippers for strippers. Let's make that money!


  14. #39
    God/dess Jenny's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    9,746
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 50 Times in 31 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    maybe so ... in your particular city ... at this particular moment !
    I'm sorry Melonie, but if there is a city in which they do NOT have plenary discretion to regulate strip club (or, as I said, regular clubs) I'm pretty sure that they would be the (notable) exception. As for it being momentary - not so much. It pretty much always has been. There are some very specific grounds that attract legal protection, but outside of those specific areas the city may regulate any way it likes.
    if you look at some of the justifications already used for anti-strip club ordinances, you see 'supposed' proof of harm to the surrounding community via 'secondary effects' ... lowered property values, higher crime rates, etc. Thus it is not a moral question, but a legal question of strip clubs supposedly 'harming' the citizens who live around them in exactly the same way that smokers' second-hand smoke supposedly 'harms' the people around them.
    Well, yes, except with much less specificity and much less proof and there is already PLENTY of regulation preventing that. Strip clubs can't operate in residential neighbourhoods, for example. Like I said - sensible distinguishing. Plus - if strip clubs in fact lower property values, and increase crime, OF COURSE people want to regulate them. And they are, in fact, regulated. Like I said - this is not something we need to worry about suddenly popping up. It is a situation that has always existed.

    the number of housewives who may be worried about their husband spending time and money at a local strip club vastly outnumbers the number of female bankers or female doctors with similar worries, I would think !
    Again, the assumption that people take a position that "I like or dislike stripclubs and I'll form my worldview accordingly" is short sighted. You are simply creating a stereotypical "enemy" who is "against you" for wholly irrational reasons. Believe it or not, housewives don't form their political opinions because they don't like you. In terms of being jealous or possessive of their husbands - I don't see any reason to assume that a housewife is more so than a doctor. It just suits your characterization to assume that the "enemy" you've created is irrational and possibly uneducated - stereotype.
    I have taught that the sky in all its zones is mortal and its substance was formed by a process of birth

  15. #40
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    I'm sorry Melonie, but if there is a city in which they do NOT have plenary discretion to regulate strip club (or, as I said, regular clubs) I'm pretty sure that they would be the (notable) exception.

    Plus - if strip clubs in fact lower property values, and increase crime, OF COURSE people want to regulate them. And they are, in fact, regulated. Like I said - this is not something we need to worry about suddenly popping up.

    Actually, this is incorrect. Most of the successful appeals of local anti-strip club ordinances have been successful because they have forced the city fathers to prove SPECIFIC adverse affects on the SPECIFIC community due to the SPECIFIC presence of strip clubs ... where the judge ruled that anecdotal testimony by neighborhood residents, the use of statistics gathered for other cities, the use of poorly correlated evidence (i.e. two new strip clubs opened in 2005 - property values declined in 2005 - therefore the decline in property values had to be attributable to the new strip clubs despite the fact that a major area employer had massive layoffs in 2005) constituted insufficient proof of harm. A federal judge ruled in exactly the same manner about the validity / applicability of evidence in the EPA's second-hand smoke studies, but unlike the local strip club ordinance the second-hand smoking law judge's decision was not final.


    We all have the choice. We exercise that choice at the ballot box
    Which, for a minority, means that the vote of the majority overrides the minority's freedom of choice ? Hmmm let's see, the majority of voters didn't want to legalize gay marriage ... the majority of voters didn't want to provide social welfare benefits to illegal aliens ...


    At any rate, it appears that everyone has their mind made up on this issue so I'll drop it. All I will say as a parting comment is that it would be curious to correlate the enacting of no-smoking laws which are actually enforced in strip clubs with the dancer earnings potential and contact levels in those same strip clubs a year after the no-smoking laws came into effect.

  16. #41
    Featured Member GenWar's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    North Central New York State
    Posts
    1,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    We'll always have Vegas. And/or Charlotte.

    Hopefully. *knocks on wood*

    In any event, the one recourse the unpopular minority has is its money. Frequent establishments that allow smoking and let them know that you appreciate it...as I almost certainly will with Emily's club. That's all you can do. That and cling to those situations in which you are a member of the popular majority...have to salve your wounds with a little oppression of your own....always works for me

    -gen
    "See, believe it or not (and I don't care whether you do), it's never been about the sex. I get sex at home, anytime, and we like it, and it's good for both of us. No, my stripclub experience has been about acceptance, and affirmation, and desirability...There have been some women who have a personality that just clicks with mine, and in the faux-sex atmosphere of the club, it's a mix that is completely seductive." - Jay Zeno

  17. #42
    Veteran Member Aine's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    615
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    My city has a public smoking ban also, has for just over a year. However, if the establishments income comes from a certain percentage of alcohol sales, you can smoke in it. Hince most bars and clubs you can still smoke in. I guess it's just different per city ordinance.

  18. #43
    Veteran Member Bubble's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    327
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 18 Times in 16 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by NaomiSweetPea View Post
    If you're in the UK (I am) the new laws will not apply to 'Gentlemen's Clubs' or 'Private Member's Clubs' ...like many strip clubs are, mine is.
    SORRY, this is NOT true. The ban in the UK will also cover Private members clubs.
    I also don't see why gentlemen's clubs are any different to a bar/nightclub!!??

  19. #44
    Member
    Joined
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    35
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    smoking is naaasty

  20. #45
    God/dess Miss Jessica's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Funktown, East Oakland, Califas.
    Posts
    2,142
    Thanks
    162
    Thanked 27 Times in 19 Posts
    My Mood
    Amazed

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    I'm a social smoker on occasion, but cannot imagine working in a smoke filled environment. If smoking was allowed in SF clubs, I very much doubt I would be dancing! It's just not right to make people work like that, whether you're a smoker or not. Keep that crap outside, or in a smokers room. I really want to go back to one of my old clubs (Hungry I) but it's the only club in SF where the girls smoke in the dressing room. It's DISGUSTING and RUDE. I'm sorry I have to rant because I remember going home a all of my outfits even my regular clothes would be smoke filled, I smelled like a friggn' ashtray! Ugh.
    "We all must suffer from one of two pains: the pain of discipline or the pain of regret. The difference is discipline weighs ounces while regret weighs tons. In order to achieve what others don't, you have to do what others won't."


  21. #46
    Veteran Member I_luv_dancers!'s Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Somewhere Else
    Posts
    451
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    I seriously don't know how you non-smoking dancers can work in a smoky club. I absolutely despise cig smoke and will go to great lengths to avoid it. I would spend much more time going out to bars and SC's if it were not for smoking. I go to SC's when not crowded and I never get LD's or go to the VIP with a girl who I have seen smoking. I simply cannot enjoy myself in a smoky environment and watching someone smoke grosses me out.

    When I encounter a non-smoking dancer, it's like I've found a treasure. Wonderful.

    I still have intrusive images from my paramedic days - of trying to resuscitate a cardiac arrest victim while his last pack of cigarettes slides out of his shirt pocket, pushed by the chest compressions we were performing. Nasty. My father's life was significantly shortened by smoking - and he quit 20 years before he died, the last 8 of which he was connected to oxygen 24/7.

    Here's to clean, fresh air and healthy pink lungs

    Ahhhhh
    Quote Originally Posted by Katrine View Post
    ....And I_Luv_Dancers.....can I say that your post brought a tear to my mildly buzzed eye? Right on...you are so awesome, thank you for the post. I really needed to hear it, esp. after what's happening with someone close to me. Big hugs and tugs to you!

    Quote Originally Posted by asianlady View Post
    ........I have had pretty good sex with hot guys and surprisingly great sex from over weight old farts who made me very vocal which I am not usually

  22. #47
    God/dess jaizaine's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2006
    Location
    melbourne australia
    Posts
    10,144
    Thanks
    328
    Thanked 219 Times in 133 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by I_luv_dancers! View Post
    I seriously don't know how you non-smoking dancers can work in a smoky club.

    Here's to clean, fresh air and healthy pink lungs

    Ahhhhh
    It is very hard to work in my club with all the cig smoke. Makes me sick and I have sinusitis and it makes it 100 times worse. But it will be banned in July WOOHOO.

    Here's to healthy pink lungs too!!

    Also, on a side note what is DDT?

  23. #48
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Also, on a side note what is DDT?


    DDT was a 'miracle' pesticide which was banned by the EPA in the 1970's based on the same sort of 'shaky' evidence as collected in the second-hand smoking studies. Since the production facilities for DDT were based in the USA and western europe, the banning of DDT in the USA and western europe essentially cut off high volume low priced worldwide supply. Other insecticides were developed after the DDT ban which are now used in the US and western europe, but they are much more expensive than DDT as well as being less effective.

    Lack of supply essentially cut off the freedom of choice for third world countries to continue the use affordable DDT to control their insect populations thus malaria cases in humans. As a result an arguable 60 million additional human deaths have occurred in these third world countries due to malaria etc. as a result of the DDT ban and the lack of an affordable alternative.



    (snip)"Why was DDT banned, 30 years after its World War II introduction and spectacular success in saving lives? The reason was stated bluntly by Alexander King, founder of the Malthusian Club of Rome, who wrote in a biographical essay in 1990, “My chief quarrel with DDT in hindsight is that it has greatly added to the population problem.” King was particularly concerned that DDT had dramatically cut the death rates in the developing sector, and thus increased population growth."(snip)


    We'll always have Vegas. And/or Charlotte.

    Hopefully. *knocks on wood*

    In any event, the one recourse the unpopular minority has is its money. Frequent establishments that allow smoking and let them know that you appreciate it.
    Probably true re Vegas and 'tobacco state' clubs. However, numerically at least, the smokers who have serious money to spend in clubs are located in other cities. They are not going to travel out of their home city very often. What they are going to do is either attempt to find a club in their home city that has an exemption to the no-smoking laws, or call a private dancer / escort service and move the 'action' to their home or a hotel room where smoking is still allowed, or simply stop going to clubs.

    Thus, in response to your observation about this minority's money, the de-facto result is likely to be a 20% reduction in the total amount of customer money spent in clubs which are affected by no-smoking laws (based on the statistic that somewhere around 20-30% of the US population are smokers), and a very significant increase in the amount of money spent with escort services ! Unfortunately, no such financial statistics exist re strip clubs and escort services. However, financial statistics that DO exist for sit-down restaurants versus take-out food places in cities that enacted no-smoking laws a few years ago show exactly the same trend ... that restaurant earnings are down by 20-30% while take-out earnings are way up. Unfortunately, unlike the food business, the 'job requirements' that go along with the take-out aspect of private dancing / escorting usually involve 'delivering' quite a bit more mileage in comparison to sit-down lap dance customers in clubs.

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 02-02-2007 at 03:46 AM.

  24. #49
    Featured Member GenWar's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    North Central New York State
    Posts
    1,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    Thus, in response to your observation about this minority's money, the de-facto result is likely to be a 20% reduction in the total amount of customer money spent in clubs which are affected by no-smoking laws (based on the statistic that somewhere around 20-30% of the US population are smokers), and a very significant increase in the amount of money spent with escort services !
    I feel ya. I do have to disagree with the idea that Escort services are a substitute for the services of a strip club. But the last thing I want to do is open up the whole "I don't go for sex." Can of Worms. Especially on the Pink side. But your numerical analysis does make sense. We can only do so much. Part and parcel of the whole "minority" status.

    -gen
    "See, believe it or not (and I don't care whether you do), it's never been about the sex. I get sex at home, anytime, and we like it, and it's good for both of us. No, my stripclub experience has been about acceptance, and affirmation, and desirability...There have been some women who have a personality that just clicks with mine, and in the faux-sex atmosphere of the club, it's a mix that is completely seductive." - Jay Zeno

  25. #50
    God/dess Paris's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,345
    Thanks
    168
    Thanked 801 Times in 419 Posts

    Default Re: bring on anti-smoking in clubs in july rant

    This will be my lasty post in this thread, but I wanted to just say, what is wrong with the majority deciding what is right for the minority? The majority of Americans believed that women should not be treated like property and should have the right to vote. Hence the Suffarage movement and the majority voted to give women the right to vote, and women all over the world have been making strides to become equeal in power and wealth with men ever since. We aren't there yet, but we are getting close.

    The majority of Americans believed that salvery was wrong, and we fought a war to end slavery. In the 1960s segregation was ended by the majority that believed it was wrong. In all of those cases there were minoirities that did not want the change, for a variety of reasons- personal beliefs, economic impact, going against tradition and likely the oppostition had "scientific evidence" to show that the majority was wrong to force their rules on this unhappy minority.

    I do not see how ending tobacco smoke in public places is going to somehow cause dancers and strip clubs to go broke. Men will always want to go see beautiful naked women. And just like guys don't like being covered in glitter or purfume when leaving a strip club, the same goes with tabacco smoke. Also, if 20-30% of all Americans are smokers, then wouldn't it stand to reason that 70-80% of all potential strip club customers would enjoy their time in the club more often if not confronted with the blue tabacco haze upon entrance?

    And, lastly, if 20-30% of Americans are current smokers, how many of that number are trying or wishing that they could quit? Acording to the FDA that number is 70% of adult smokers wish to quit. It might be a bit easier to quit if one could spend time doing one's favorite leisure activities or profession with out being confronted with tabacco smoke, hence causing a temptation to begin smoking again.

    I probably would not have ever started smoking again after becoming a dancer if smoking were not permitted inside the clubs. I had been smoke free for 6 years when I started dancing, and picked it back up again at work. I'm probably not alone.


    Promote yourself and earn more money! This is a business that is owned by strippers for strippers. Let's make that money!


Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. the anti-wingman/critique/rant
    By pink_bunny in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-17-2011, 10:21 PM
  2. Anti-gay rant by school official in Arkansas
    By tempest666 in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-30-2010, 01:28 PM
  3. Why do customers bring their jealous girlfriends to the club? (rant)
    By luvbuniz in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-27-2009, 06:45 PM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-24-2008, 09:36 AM
  5. Can I bring titles with me to other clubs?
    By shedevil4260 in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-24-2003, 08:40 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •