Should I be cross if DH went to lap dancing club?

[ActingNormal]

...and spent £60 on private dances (we aren't poor and he doesn't spend money on much that is frivolous).

Other people seem to think I should be cross but I can't see it. Am I being a mug? Is it a sign of disrespect?

He got a bit of female attention outside the marriage. He was consenting. They were consenting. I knew he was going there. There doesn't seem like there is a risk of him forming a relationship with the women but if a woman behaved that way with him in a regular nightclub that seems more of a threat to me.

He came home horny as hell and seemed like he had a good break from the stress of his job.

Sorry, againstpornography.org/socialsciencestudies.html here.

I thought that was about cockle shell picking.

That was to SGB, btw.

AN-'1. There was more rape in the old days (when there was less accessibility to sexual services/porn) when women were not treated as equally in society eg men thinking marriage gave them a right to sex with their wives whenever they wanted. And that women reported it less because they were less likely to get sympathy from the law.'

didnt the law change very recently(1991?)wrt this?i recall reading that on a thread a while back.anyhow,i think there are alot of men who still believe marriage gives them a right to sex with their wives,or even co-habiting,as that chilling thread VVVQV started sometime last year(i think)seemed to suggest.and i dont think many rape victims nowadays get sympathy from the law,probably only those who have clearly been brutally raped by a stranger.

i cant find it and have no idea when it was other than over a year ago(i have lost chunks of time between july 2006+march 2008 and have very little memory)

Policywonk: Oh FFS not Zillman and Bryant again. Zillman's 'sexual callousness' study basically demonstrated that users of pornography tended to demonstrate less traditional attitudes ie thinking that it is OK to be gay, that sex outside marriage is not a sin and it's OK not to want children. He labelled this 'sexual callousness'. Zillman is/was a social conservative in favour of traditional values. All those studies cited by anti-porn campaigners have been shown to be seriously flawed (conflating different experiments together, absence of a control group, experiments done on pyschology students who were aware of the structure of the experiment and keen to please the experimenter, etc, etc) and none have been shown to be possible to replicate independently.
THe 'demonstrating aggression' studies pretty much consisted of showing the test subject a wank mag then giving them the option of pushing/not pushing a button which would (allegedly: buttons were usually dummies) deliver an electric shock to someone. Ie these were variations on Stanley Milgram's experiments about how people responde to authority/take orders etc.

Rape in marriage became a crime in Scotland in 1982, and in England in 1991.

sgb - if you are who I think you are then we've had the Zillman and Bryant discussion before, no? I agree with you that the socially conservative assumptions are bullshit, but the second study (82-84) is less to do with that and more to do with aggression.

Can you really say that all the studies cited in that link have been comprehensively discredited?

well quite, smallwhitecat.

'If PT rejoins thread I would like to know why lap dancers decide not to continue 'dancing'when they are obviously pregnant - surely this should be seen as discrimination and a direct contradiction of maternity law?'

linden, lots of women continue dancing while pregnant, especially in the states.

personnally i don't find 'my' pregnant body attractive and can't imagine anyone else doing so so wouldn't have done it, but some women feel differantly and still earn good money. (apparently according to something i read the other day men are actually subconciously attracted to pregnant women so maybe these women are onto something by continueing to dance)

it's the same as asking why do most models not work whilst pregnant, yes some do but most don't and there is a limited market for their work anyway.

'I am guessing that fat lap dancers don't do well either.'

beanie, you'd be surprised... some of the biggest earners were women that had larger bodies, were older, were very short. basically not the tall, thin, young things you'd expect.

'But some arguements on here where suggesting that lapdancing is a bit of fun and has nothing to do with sex and yet the men still choose the woman for a private dance. On what do they make their choice'

in the clubs i worked in it was the dancers who circulated and encouraged men to buy dances. some of the girls were very persuasive and could easily manage to get evey man in the room in for a dance.... the men had very little say in the matter..... it's the poor guys and their wallets being exploited, not the dancers.

just out of curiosity... do all of you buy fairtrade? fairtrade everything?

because if you don't i think you need to seriously question why you think it's ok that child labour was used for your teabags and clothes and why it's ok that the workers who picked your cotton and bananas work in horrific conditions and earn too little to live on, but all lap dancers and their clientele should take the blame for the unspeakable acts that occur in some areas of that industry.

for what it's worth, whoever presumed that because i'm a lapdancer i must wear head to toe playboy gear and dress my daughter similarily is about as wrong as it's possible to be. i've never bought anything by the playboy brand as i think marketing plastic blondes with double digit iq's as the ideal woman is ridiculous.

just beacuse i was part of the sex industry doesn't mean i support every part of it.

it's like saying someone who works in a restaurant must be a macdonalds fan

i was actually a bit bigger than the girls i worked with when i started dancing. i lost weight because of all the dancing i was doing.

one of the men i danced for took to bringing me sandwhiches to work because he was worried my mum had stopped feeding me

he was sharply sent back out to kfc by all the other girls.

"
because if you don't i think you need to seriously question why you think it's ok that child labour was used for your teabags and clothes and why it's ok that the workers who picked your cotton and bananas work in horrific conditions and earn too little to live on, but all lap dancers and their clientele should take the blame for the unspeakable acts that occur in some areas of that industry."

PT. Do you know about Darfur? because if so, you should really stop worrying about UK domestic abuse, because Darfur is really much worse and therefore nothing else is worth worrying about.

PW: Yes, it is me. And that first Bryant thing cited, about the telephone survey, is ridiculous: why is it so shocking that teenage boys say, if asked, that they might like to have sex? (Because there is no suggestion that they are watching wall-to-wall bestiality/asphyxiation porn, is there? Just'Hardcore' which usually means oral, genital and some anal sex). And the Malamuth study about likelihood to rape is botched as fuck as well: he asked his test subjects if they might use force to get sex if it were GUARANTEED they would never be caught and punished. Also, if 35% of men showed some likelihood to rape, that means that 65% of men (ie a substantial majority) are not likely to rape. And all studies on human behaviour which depend on the test subjects speaking for themselves are flawed from the beginning: the researchers cannot be sure that a) the subjects are telling the whole truth (some will lie out of mischief, others will lie to fit in with either the rest of the test subject group or, if interviewed alone they will often say what they think the interviewer wants to hear. Some will give the answers that they think make them sound the most 'normal' whatever they really think.)

Solid "Also, if 35% of men showed some likelihood to rape, that means that 65% of men (ie a substantial majority) are not likely to rape"

Well Hoo-fucking-raah.

For crying out fucking loud, you are truly not living in the world that the rest of us are living in.

I honestly find it quite shocking that 35 per cent of men would be willing to rape even if they could not be caught. I like to think that this isn't men's natural inclination.

Out of interest, do you think it's possible to construct a study on porn's effects on behaviour that would address your concerns? Or do you think it's just impossible to measure?

PT-'for what it's worth, whoever presumed that because i'm a lapdancer i must wear head to toe playboy gear and dress my daughter similarily is about as wrong as it's possible to be. i've never bought anything by the playboy brand as i think marketing plastic blondes with double digit iq's as the ideal woman is ridiculous.'

it was i who mentioned playboy gear,but it wasnt in response to anything you said,it was during a discussion with beanieb about whether i am against porn or not and i was explaining that i am uncomfortable with the 'normalisation' of porn and included the marketing of playboy products to pre-teens in this.

"For crying out fucking loud, you are truly not living in the world that the rest of us are living in"

All I can say is thank fuck I am not to be absolutely frank.

The world you live in seems so black and white.

so it's ok to give money to exploititive companies in other countries because bad shit goes on in the world but lap dancers are to blame for encouraging every aspect of sexual exploitation and sex traffciking on the planet

which is it, are you to blame if you give money to a company that commits evil acts or not? and if not, why are sex workers and their clients who have no part in the evils of their industry held responsible for everything from hookers on crack to child prostitutes in brazil?

this is the point at which i have solid proof there's no point argueing with you, you're so determined to be right you're contradicting yourself at every turn. so quick to dismiss everyone's arguements and points of view as flawed yet refuse to admit there could be cracks in your own logic.

my poor neglected dp hasn't seen me for nights now so i'm off to watch a movie with him and figure out a way to hide this damn thread!

by the way, i'm curious..... i've never been in a abusive relationship... the second any man said or did something to me i didn't like i left. end of story. yet 2 of you who talk about women's rights, equality and sexual opression have admited to one or more abusive relationship.

if you truely live like you preach, why did you become in involved with men like that? and more to the point, why did you stay for long enough for it to become an abusive relationship as opposed to a one off incident?

"The world you live in seems so black and white".

well, yup - that old black and white world where the fact that 35% of men would rape if they wouldn't be caught seems like a shocking statistic.

But beyond that: Really? I'm surprised and disappointed that you take that from my posts. I think I've been pretty circumspect. I don't think I've made any wild assertions. Are you confusing me with someone else?

Sorry - can you link me to the source of the 35% stat - is it the one policywonk posted. I don't think I am confusing you with someone else.

Ah - it's this "in several studies an average of about 35% of male students indicated some likelihood of raping a woman" I think some likelihood is a very vague terem. We'd need to know how or what questions were asked, and of course showing some likelihood doesn't mean they actually would.

I thought this might have been an old Tamba thread

plus, policywonk, if you are going to post research you need to find something which is a bit me objective than an 'against pornography website'