Burlesque is it grotesque?

Maybe because the stripping element is objectionable thus interesting for discussion?

rebranding burlesque is like polishing a turd.never works.still shite

have never been to burlesque but it isnt empowering to women who are selling a product sex.and no amount of fancy discourse or blah blah about the woman choses this makes it anything other than sleazy.an industry driven by men.lets face it if the clammy bastards didnt but it no one would sell it

Any men there MJ?

Big fat ones? With huge beer-bellies? Being empowered?

All of those who went to Burlesque shows, were men doing it too, in equal numbers?

oh yes that's the same argument that says the prostituted woman is the one in charge, because she's making money out of the john.

Oh. Kay.

(I don't buy that one either btw)

I've seen it, been to the one hen night do for a friend so where do you get off thinking you 'get it' more than me?

I'm saying that this joke is bollocks. Stripping isn't particularly funny and who do you think the joke is really on? The patrons with their clothes on or the one with nipple tassles and glitter covering her decency? This is just about objectifying women and people trying to justify it by talking crap about it being all a big in joke, are totally deluding themselves.

Sorry, meant to say "I read..." and then "and I agree with whoever it was 100%!"

It never fails to astonish me that women want to go and watch this shit...

Just the one class was it msrisotto?

One thing I should clarify - the humour is not at the expense of the dancer, it's the dancer taking the mickey out of the audience. So your hilarious irony about 'laughing at the naked wriggling woman' is misplaced.

i would never claim to be an expert about burlesque but Ive seen it & Ive seen the other thing so I think I have an inkling of what the difference might be.

Can't stand it.

I read someone somewhere (possibly on MN?) saying that burlesque was basically stripping for middle-class women who thought they were too 'naice' for stripping.

I see no humour in it, tbh, woo hoo, so she nearly took her top off but then gave us a knowing glance and didn't? (and I was at a burlesque show as part of someone's hen night (wtf?!) so I know what I'm on about - unfunny, turgid, just all round embarrassing and horrible).

It's just basically the Nuts/ Zoo argument all over again isn't it? That ran something like: "we're all post-feminist now, stripping is ironic and humourous, we can all larf at it becauase we're all equal now, so STFU and get yer tits out girls."

And now we're not laughing at Nuts and Zoo anymore. They don't even pretend to be joking now, because they don't need to.

'Burlesque' is just plain old fashioned titillation. Nowt wrong with that but don;'t try and make it all like so todally post-modern ok?

What a pile of shit.

It is just a fancy type of stripping but it is still stripping.

Exactly gothic - it's just stripping by another name.

you are discussing a type of american burlesque, The bigger discussion should be why is society trying to rebrand what is obviously stripping by another name.

I find it just as vile as any other type of stripping. However, lots of people see it as more alternative/mainstream (contradiction I know) so therefore it seems to be more socially acceptable, even by women. I'm not sure why, exactly. Still very sleazy.

Wrong assumption David. I've taken part in a burlesque class (does that make me more or less qualified than you to discuss this form of stripping?), I know what i'm talking about, unlike you with your egotestical attitude. Thanks anyway.

Oh yes, even better to laugh at the naked wriggling woman. Silly me, I almost didn't get that one

Try to see a show so you will know what you're talking about next time