To be annoyed my DH had a naked private dance

[maybunny]

OK my DH wasnt naked, but the stripper in the stripclub in Los Angeles was :-(
He went to LA on business (PR - so mostly socialising rather than what I consider 'work'!) last month, and he has only just told me that a colleague paid for him to have a private dance after they all went to a strip club. I was most annoyed because he had kept it a secret from me for a few weeks, and that he had put 'saving dace' in front of colleagues before my feelings.
He said he thought I would be a bit annoyed about it which was why he hadnt told me about it at the time (esp as I was having huge sleep problems with DD - ie surviving on 2 hours a night!)
I am so upset about this and apart from apologising (which he has done now he knows how I feel) I dont know wht he can do to make me feel better. I am realy struggling to forgive him.
:-(

[mauricetinkler]

I'm surprised you can walk SWC with that fucking great chip on your shoulder.

[VelvetSnow]

smallwhitecat - sorry to interrupt here but something has been bothering me throughout your posts on this thread....

May i just say that you appear to be quite intelligent and you clearly know your own mind, but it's your use of the constant insults that bothers me - do you really need to conduct your posts in such a way?

Just asking - not looking for a fight.

[HerBeX]

I give up. I've asked it about 3 times now. I am not Jeremy Paxman.

It beggars belief that anyone would argue that corporate entertainment in lapdancing clubs, have the same damaging sexist effect as women getting in free to nightclubs.

Women getting into nightclubs for free does not have the effect of excluding or humiliating their already disadvantaged male colleagues and provide them with a bonding opportunity where members of the opposite sex are commodified and objectified.

The glass ceiling will never be smashed, while this sort of entertainment is considered OK for corporate events. No one would think it was OK to go to black and white minstrel shows for corporate entertainment, the offensiveness that would imply for black colleagues would be self-evident. It would be a racist policy to even allow it. To pretend that sexist corporate entertainment policies are on the same level as not letting a man into a nightclub for free, is just absurd.

[larrygrylls]

Herbex,

You are impossible to debate with. I do not know whether you are dumb or disingenuous, but given that you write well, I suspect it is the latter.

Is J.P your role model? Your questioning style is awfully similar. It is quite amusing that you choose him as I find him to be a terrible bully.

"it beggars belief...".

I never claimed it did. A typical "straw man" argument. Pretend someone has said something that they have not and demolish that argument rather than what someone actually said. We have seen "false dichotomies" and "straw men" in spades from you throughout this thread.

"sexual corporate entertainment policies"

HAHA :)

I have never ever seen an HR manual suggesting that, as a corporate policy, clients should be taken out for a spot of lapdancing. If you have some examples, I would love to see them. Lapdancing is the "dark" side of corporate entertainment, officially frowned upon but tolerated if the client insists. It is employee driven and I rather suspect never billed as what it is. As I also said, it is normally for middle ranking sales people and their clients. I doubt lapdancing has halted more than a handful of women's careers in the entire country. Again, I am amenable to be proved wrong but facts rather than arguments that are logically fallacious, please.

"letting a man into a nightclub for free"

Where did the "for free" bit come from? I said they were not let in at all.

[HerBeX]

LOL I'm impossible to debate with, I'm not the one who tells other posters what they believe and pretends pretty straightforward questions are too difficult to answer unless you qualify them with their social, economic, metaphysical, up-yer-arseness context.

So what did you mean then? What are you saying about men not being allowed into nightclubs vs corporate entertaining in laptops? Why are you comparing the two, as if a comparison is appropriate and valid?

As you know perfectly well (or perhaps you don't) something doesn't have to be written down or spelled out officially to be a policy. Industrial Tribunals have established that custom and practice constitute a policy, whether its referred to in any corporate paperwork or not.

[HerBeX]

that should obviously say lapdance clubs, not laptops

[mauricetinkler]

swc - why are you so bitter and angry? Honest question.

[larrygrylls]

Herbex,

I was providing historical context as to why lapdancing clubs came into being, that is not saying that they are the same things. The second world war was a consequence of the Versailles treaty, that does not make them morally equivalent.

To be honest, in my experience, any man who is stupid enough to use lapdancing as a form of corporate entertainment lays himself open to a charge of sexual discrimination and victimisation in employment law (as you mentioned). It is an opportunity for any woman to sue the arse off their company and win an unlimited settlement.

To get back to context, I am not a fan of lapdancing, have not been for 10+ years and would have no problem with all of these clubs being shut down. People have made some very good points as to why that should happen. My point, though, is that while they are there and being used in the mainstream as corporate entertainment, it should not be assumed that if a man frequents them, they are somehow being unfaithful to their wives and it be talked of as a "deal breaker".

Qualification: The above is my opinion only and anyone has a right to make whatever they want a dealbreaker. I am not trying to dictate what others should think. However, given that the OP was asking for opinions, I have a right to put mine forward.

[FreudianSlipper]

in other words a women can no put a limit on what she feels is acceptable in her relationship and what is not

i would find it unacceptable for a partner of mine to feel it is ok to buy a women, touching or no touching it is that mentality, buying a woman's time that it is acceptable for a women to be a commodity

thank fuck women have choices in what is acceptable now in their relationship and no longer have to put up and shut up

[Orbinator]

Larry I have to disagree that only a minority of businesses do this for corporate entertainment. I've had partners in Design, Web programming, and Film all working for large global companies and each and every one has been taken to and has taken clients and colleagues to strip clubs in this country and abroad. It is especially popular in USA and Spain and in some countries almost expected. I don't know which area you work in obviously, but I would suspect that perhaps it is not in a large corporate environment? I don't mean to teach a man how to suck their own eggs, but I think you are also mistaken that "only and handful of women" would have missed out because of strip clubs. Given that they are usually global multinational companies entertaining in this way, a woman either has to bite her tongue and go along, or is simply excluded. This happened regularly to my ex's female colleagues who would accompany them on trips to Vegas etc, but were never invited and some lengths were taken to hide the fact it was going from them. Therefore, if some (strangely homoerotic bonding/show of masculinity) resulting in a perverse respect were achieved it would definitely have the result of at least partially alienating the female colleagues who would also get less time to bond with the client.

[perfectstorm]

"It beggars belief that anyone would argue that corporate entertainment in lapdancing clubs, have the same damaging sexist effect as women getting in free to nightclubs.

Women getting into nightclubs for free does not have the effect of excluding or humiliating their already disadvantaged male colleagues and provide them with a bonding opportunity where members of the opposite sex are commodified and objectified.

The glass ceiling will never be smashed, while this sort of entertainment is considered OK for corporate events. No one would think it was OK to go to black and white minstrel shows for corporate entertainment, the offensiveness that would imply for black colleagues would be self-evident. It would be a racist policy to even allow it. To pretend that sexist corporate entertainment policies are on the same level as not letting a man into a nightclub for free, is just absurd."

Brilliant post.

[perfectstorm]

"My point, though, is that while they are there and being used in the mainstream as corporate entertainment, it should not be assumed that if a man frequents them, they are somehow being unfaithful to their wives and it be talked of as a "deal breaker"."

You are a man, in a world run by men, telling women that they have no right to expect their husbands not to go along with sexual exploitation of other women, because everyone does it? Funnily enough, that argument got people precisely nowhere in Nuremberg. They aren't SOMEHOW being unfaithful to their wives. They are behaving in a way that most people would regard as a dealbreaker if payment were not involved. Kindly explain to me how it is that the purchase of the sexual favours of another human being, in a foully misgynist aquiescence to the historical abuse of women, in some way mitigates the disloyalty towards the person with whom you are meant to be in a committed, exclusive relationship?

Slavery was wrong. Apartheid was wrong. Racism is wrong. Do you disagree? Then kindly explain to me why there is not a world boycott of Saudi over their treatment of women. Kindly explain to me how you can, in all seriousness, tell women they have no right to object to a practice that is to their very clear professional disadvantage, to the sexual exploitation of other women, to the very purchase of another woman's body... from a man who is supposed to have committed himself to them in a bond of sexual exclusivity, and emotional and intellectual partnership, on a permanent basis?

My husband doesn't need to be told this would be a sodding dealbreaker. He has guts, a conscience and balls. He knows it's wrong, other women's husbands know it's wrong, and the seeking to belittle and posture when cogent, intelligent arguments are made for which you have no intellectually respectable answer is just transparent. You really had the gall to call someone else in this thread disingenous? Good grief. Look, if you want to justify your abuse of women while denying partaking, knock yourself out. I'll just quietly laugh at you behind my hands. Bu stop lecturing women, from a position of assumed male superiority (and yes, that's precisely what you have done) on how their objecting to the growth of a practice that is so obviously abusive and demeaning and damaging to women is unfair... to men.

Unbelievable.

[Malificence]

Very succinctly put perfectstorm.

[larrygrylls]

Perfect Storm and The Eponymous Malificence,

You have put yourself beyond the pail comparing the crime of watching a semi-naked (and occasionally naked) woman dance for 3 minutes with the extermination of 6 million Jews. Sure, it is an analogy to do with peer pressure, but some analogies just should not be made in civilised company.

PerfectStorm,

The whole raison d'etre of lapdancing (in the UK at least) is that there is no touching. I cannot imagine an unpaid relationship where a woman would gyrate in front of you for the duration of a short song and then disappear. That is why it is more acceptable that the unpaid alternative. There are rules.

[larrygrylls]

Orbinator,

I used to be in finance and I have seen a female employee receive a largeish payout (£40k) because a stupid male colleague took her clients out to a lapdancing joint and excluded her.

It is really not deemed acceptable in this country, even in the the highly moral (!) world of banking.

[Orbinator]

It still happens very regularly though, acceptable or not. And for the record I was always told that the client would be given at least one naked private dance and the norm for this would be, at a minimum, the woman literally rubbing her privates in the man's face/on his nose. I think hinting that men just go for a beer with the girls dancing in the background is quite naive. Cheap drinks are not the main attraction of these places.

Plus I imagine most female colleagues either don't know or don't want to make a fuss about this in the work place for fear of being branded uptight and shunned. As I said my partners always had to keep it secret from females in the office, presumably because of such Court cases as you mention.

[FreudianSlipper]

larry did you used to work in the city? that was one payout and how many women feel that this is part of client entertainment and they have to prove they are happy to be one of the guys. sadly it is it is part of a thursday night out for many and that was senior management too

[perfectstorm]

larrygrylls, gosh, thanks for setting me straight! A gentile man telling me precisely how I may discuss attitudes to women and Jews - how screamingly appropriate. My only point - do tell me where I mentioned the Holocaust? Because while the systematic oppression and abuse of my husband's people is actually quite useful as an analogy, it wasn't one I have made. So your self-righteous huffing and puffing is perhaps (yet more) evidence of your rich and rewarding fantasy life than it is a rebuttal of any argument of mine. I do think it interesting, however, that you are appalled by any notion that female oppression is comparable to Jewish. Do you know how many missing women there are in the world, due to gendered abortion? Are you aware of the prevalence of child forced marriage, and female genital mutilation, and domestic violence? Somehow, I don't think you are.

For your information: women in Saudi cannot drive cars. Their fathers and brothers are allowed to kill them if they feel their conduct brings the family shame. Their sons can refuse to allow them to leave the house, as small children. And if a woman is raped, she needs multiple male witnesses to attest to it or she can be executed for fornication. Yes, that is a level of oppression which can be equated to apartheid, which was my comparator.

Non-touching: a friend was assaulted by a senior executive at a major lapdancing chain. He wanked over her and groped her tits. What these chains say and what actually happens are not one and the same, and if you seriously believe the corporate PR then that's your issue, not mine - how can you trust that a male-run organisation that profits from the bodies of young women is a benign and paternalistic place? Please. And quite frankly, if you think the purchase of another human being's sexuality is appropriate corporate entertainment in any form, then you are not someone whose opinion is of the least interest.

The documentary I mentioned earlier in the thread is being reshown. It's sobering viewing.

[perfectstorm]

Oh - and I'd have trouble putting myself "beyond the pail". It's "beyond the Pale" and it refers to the Russian Pale of Settlement, which determined where Jewish people could and could not settle in Orthodox Russia.

As I said, amusing to be lectured on Jewish history and rights by you.

[BelfastBloke]

The English Pale was the area of Ireland controlled by the British. Beyond the Pale were Irish rebels.

perfectstorm's definition of the phrase focussing on Russia is also valid, because 'the Pale' has its roots in a Latin phrase for settlement, so the concept is exactly the same, although its English usage tends to draw more on the closer-to-home example.