Article about strip clubs in the Guardian

Yes I noticed the 'distancing' too. Arguing vociferously for the rights of men to pay for women to wiggle around half naked - then oh, no I don't go to them/ I went once/ I went years ago, wouldn't go now.

GetallTheThings: So you would both be embarrassed - wonder why if LPDs are just another place of work or entertainment? Glad to hear you would be supportive of your daughter, but I hope you would be supportive enough to encourage her to do something more worthwhile with her life.

NameChangeGuy: you don't frequent them? Good. But hypothetically you are sort of defending them. So why not answer the question hypothetically?

Suddenly we have two male posters distancing themselves Perhaps because a picture of a (hypotethical) 18 year old daughter is popping into your heads?

Larry - what would your reaction be?

Running,

Cannot imagine I will ever go again given that it is 12 years since I have been. Feel a bit old for that kind of thing, too, would feel a bit like Benny Hill (although not quite that bad!).

However, were I to be with a group of people who all wanted to go, I would not be a killjoy and would at least go along for a while because, as you know, I don't have the principled objection that you do.

Ah, sorry, no that part wasn't clear Larry.

No, I don't agree that men going to normal clubs to mix with pretty women is the same as going to a LDC where a woman is part of the paid-for entertainment.

Would you go to a LDC now Larry?

Sorry grimble, I did misread. As I said, I don't frequent them though. At my age, a good night out is a decent pint, good friends and the ability to hear a conversation

Running,

I mean that since men can now go to any pub post 11PM, there is no need for lap dancing clubs for that purpose. How was my last post not clear?

Most men will pay to mix with pretty women, most not directly but why do you think that bouncers of smart bars/clubs vet the entry and always allow in pretty women? Why do you think there are bars where drinks are half price for women at certain times? Do you think these businesses just do that for a tiny minority of men? It would be a pretty crazy business decision.

Ok. gimble

First, I obviously can't claim to speak for educated lap dancers but from what I've read on MN when they post about these issues they cite flexible hours and relatively good pay as being high up the list.

I would guess that for a single mother or indeed a student those are going to be attractive propositions if comparable non sex based alternatives are not available.

As for seeing ones daughter in a LDC.... I really don't know because I don't visit them. I'd imagine extreme embarrassment on both sides.

I would hope however that my dd when she's older will feel she can tell me anything without me judging her ( hopeful ) . If she told me she worked in an LDC without coercion or desperation I'd accept her choice and offer any support if she asked for it. Otherwise she'd be an adult and it wouldn't be my place to tell her what to do.

I don't really have an opinion one way or the other about LDC, I'm forming one based on threads like this. I don't visit them and have no plans to. I've been to one in my life in America when my cousin and his wife took me to a pole dance club.

I really only started piping up over the issues around criticism of parties involved in objectification.

namechangeguy: Sorry, I think you misread my question. You are answering a question I didn't ask. It was not about general attitudes to LPDs by male posters.

It was very specific: namely Finally, may I ask the male supporters of LPDs here what they would do if they were in an LPD, asked for a dance and found that it was their own daughter who turned up in front of them?

Sabrina,

When I started in the City, it was horrifically sexist. I could not agree more. There were some truly shocking guys around and, yes, porn and page 3 were prevalent on desks. Lap dancing certainly did not exist in the UK then.

However, it is just not like that any more (with the exception of a few neanderthal organisations). So, I am not sure that LDCs can be claimed to have a detrimental effect on the workplace. Certainly not enough to outweigh strong laws and HR departments and just many more women represented in all areas of work.

Oh, and are you studiously studiously ignoring sabrina's question re. sexual objectification of women and women in the workplace?

Sorry Larry, can you explain what you mean by "Of course, the change of licensing has subsequently negated the above need for LDCs." ?

And I think you should amend your post to some men will pay to mix with pretty women. There is no need to pay to mix with pretty women - pretty women are all over the place - freely going on nights out in places where women are not being paid to get their kit off. Some of them will get their kit off with men of their choosing of their own free will

Why do you think it's ok for men to pay for half naked women in clubs?

For clarification, grimble, I don't go to them. I am not ignoring your question. I suspect many men see it as a bit of a laugh, and if challenged, might say that it's no different to hen parties watching the Chippendales. I can see why it isn't, though.

At the same time, I don't think it's part of the male psyche to go around deliberately demeaning women by turning up at these places when pissed. There is no widespread 'hatred', which is a word I see to easily bandied round on here. If anything, it will be more of a thoughtless act, rather than a vindictive one.

Running,

The first time I ever went to a LDC was entirely by accident. It was Stringfellows which, up to that point, had been a regular club. It had been converted to the "Cabaret of Angels". There was no way I had a pent up desire to go lap dancing. I had never heard of it and it seemed quite bizarre.

It then seeped into the City culture at that time. It was at least partially founded on the basis that most late night clubs/bars were not accessible to groups of men on their own. And, most City nights out started with a meal at a very good restaurant and then it was a question of where to go with a bunch of guys (and, at that time, it was predominantly guys).

Of course, the change of licensing laws has subsequently negated the above need for LDCs. I really am not sure that there was this latent demand for them, unless you mean that men will happily pay up to mix with very pretty women. Which is hardly rocket science when you consider that most regular clubs have certain times when entry is free for women or drinks are served at reduced prices to them. I guess that above does show a difference between the sexes but it seems one equally embraced by men and women. Maybe it is basic biology and maybe it is a consequence of the evolution of society; what you would term "patriarchal". I don't think this, or any other thread, has actually, in a meaningful scientific way, got us any closer to resolving that one in either direction, despite people's strong visceral beliefs.

And I'd like to see the men answer grimbletarts question too.

Thanks running and tunip for the support

Larry, with regard to your latest post on objectification in LDC's and how it affects women in the workplace. I would like to say that in my first job, I was told by the men that I should be getting my tits out for the lads, and why was I wasting my time in that job? A copy of page 3 was being waved in my face at the time.

Sexual objectification of women, be it LDC's or page 3 does have an effect on women in the workplace.

I have tried to be honest and fair in my previous post about what I feel so I am now looking forward to an honest response from male posters to the question in my final paragraph.

Thanks for the post, grimbletart. Apologies for picking over the details of your post - I am basically in agreement with you. I do not 'condemn' the dancers - I don't see how that is the slightest bit helpful. It doesn't stop me questioning why they would choose to do it - and sadly the answers aren't always straightforward, and do often involve things like low self esteem, needing validation from male attention and the like.

However, as I keep on saying I don't lay the blame on the women dancers for LDC's - I will not criticise them for being responsible for the existence of lap dancing clubs, because I don't think they are - that is to be laid squarely at the door of the men that go to them. And the club owners of course - who are profiting from men wanting to have naked girls draped around them for cash.

Larry - I think that's the first time I've ever seen you admit that LDC's objectify women! So well done for that.... I couldn't disagree with the rest of your post more though.

Very clear grimble, thanks. It answers the question that so many others have danced around or ignored.

grimbletart That is a great post.

Equality means taking personal responsibility for your actions if you have the intellectual and emotional capacity to do so

I agree with that 100%.

Not that I go to LDCs, but I shall ponder your question whilst I go grab a coffee........

Running,

I don't think anyone can deny that LDC sexually objectify women. However, my point is that in a society where a man can see women as bosses, academics, mothers, the fact that some are lap dancers is in no sense going to change men's opinion of womankind, which is surely the problem with "objectification".

And, as I have also posted, and not received an adequate reply to, all men and women objectify the other sex when it comes to any form of sexual relations, to eyeing up an attractive person in the street to having sex with one's spouse. That is part of our animal selves (laugh if you will) which will never, thankfully, disappear. It is rather essential for the survival of the species.

In that sense, as we get more equality, instead of things like lapdancing clubs disappearing, we are getting women buying more at more sexual services such as escorts, Gambian holidays etc. If you google male strippers for hen parties, you will find plenty available and plenty on the menu which is far from the good wholesome laugh people like to pretend it is when it comes to women using the sex industry.

The whole subject is, IMO, far subtler than people want to paint it. There is nothing wrong with sexual "objectification" as long as it is not used to define an entire sex or even one's entire relationship with one person. Lapdancers are definitely selling themselves as a form of sexual object but that does not stop some men from marrying lapdancers that they have met in LDCs (I know of one who did in Tokyo, which is more of an expat scene). So, he clearly perceived her as a sexual object and a potential life partner. The bifurcation of sex object/real person that certain feminists would like to believe just does not exist in most people's minds. Most people are capable of seeing any other individual as multi faceted, but one facet is their physical body.

OK - as posters are discussing my posts (no problem with that) let me clarify if it is unclear.

My attitude to strippers who are forced into through any type of abuse or lack of self esteem is one of compassion. It is extremely sad to see any woman believe her body is her only or even best 'asset' - and an asset with a short shelf life too. What then for these women?

My attitude to non-abused, supposedly highly intelligent strippers is one of bafflement. It makes no logical or economic sense to throw away the chance of a life-long, potentially high earning career for a (necessarily) short term job, where the earnings are low (at worst) and medium (at best) and leave you a decade or so behind your peers when you have to start again as gravity takes over and the dances dry up.

As to their rationale, who knows? I have no idea because, as I said, it makes no logical or economic sense beyond the very short-term. I could only make one or two suggestions of possible motives in my previous post.

I am a feminist and have been one since I was a little girl in the late 1940s and early 1950s, way before the women's lib of the late 60s/early 70s. My belief is that there is undoubtedly a patriarchy within which many women make compromises - consciously or sub-consciously - in order to get along day to day.

However, as a feminist, the past half century or so has shown me that the way to defeat the patriarchy is to put two fingers up to it, not to pander to it.

I will not defend women just because they are women. Equality means taking personal responsibility for your actions if you have the intellectual and emotional capacity to do so.

So I would ask these apparently intelligent and educated women - what is your logic, what is your rationale? And, depending on the answers I may very well be highly critical of them.

None of which stops me from thoroughly disliking LPDs and the attitudes of men who patronise them and laying by far the most blame on them. Being bored, feeling randy or wanting a night out with the lads is no excuse for for supporting an industry that contains within it the abuse of women.

Finally, may I ask the male supporters of LPDs here what they would do if they were in an LPD, asked for a dance and found that it was their own daughter who turned up in front of them?

*running"

What she says is this

"I would never condemn those women from backgrounds that have made them vulnerable and who have low self-esteem that consequently causes them to think that their body is their only asset,

Well I agree with her, you've truncated her sentence to 'I wouldn't condemn the women..." . Different meaning as she put a qualifier in that you've removed, also by your changing 'those' to 'the' changes the meaning.

She goes on...

but unlike some posters here I don't hesitate to wonder why non-abused, intelligent, well educated women do it when they could use their education and intelligence in more positive ways and in careers, which while not instantly paying a lot of money, have better long term prospects.

I think it's clear that whilst she may well not be explicitly condemning those educated women who have other choices, she certainly questions it ( which I do too, that's the point ! ) and doesn't simply defend them based purely on their gender which is what you appear to be doing.

But you can put radical feminism into a nutshell, simply because it is so simple and uncomplicated in it's analysis of everything.

Is there a demand for LDC's? Absolutely, otherwise they would not make money. Will there be women working in them who don't want to? I suspect so (I think it is almost certain, but I have no evidence either way). But do they also cater for women who want to work there? Again, I am pretty certain, but have no evidence.

Do they contribute to the sexual objectification of women? They must do, since they are all about displaying the body and sexual simulation. But what I don't know is what you can do about it if some women want to be employed there, or want to run them, i.e. there is no direct exploitation of a person. If it is a transaction between two consenting adults, then I don't know what you can do about them in practical terms. Make them illegal? Monitor them more closely? A phrase like 'remove the demand' doesn't make any sense to me.

I'm not sure I do Namechangeguy - I agree with certain aspects of it, but it seems an over simplification to me. It's like 'radfem in a nutshell'.

I don't actually identify as a radical feminist - just a feminist. I don't see all women as disempowered, or as victims - far from it.

However, I do think that lap dancing bars sexually objectify women, and I believe that LDC's only exist because we live in a sexist society that tolerates men buying sexual services from women.

Running, does that mean that you disagree with my post?