Article about strip clubs in the Guardian

[SaskiaRembrandtVampireHunter]

Never read such a load of twaddle in my life:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/19/strip-clubs-new-normal

"Is it good or bad that for young men, going to a strip club is the new normal? I'd venture that it's a good thing. It's a place where they can step outside the anxiety-fraught dating scene and talk to a woman who, as long as he keeps tipping, will give him the time of day. It's a world where women parade around nude or nearly so in which doing so doesn't get anybody arrested or elicit gasps. It's a private room wherein a lap dance is on the table and a man expressing his sexuality isn't going to be met with a sexual harassment lawsuit."

Oh yes, because thanks to the feminazis it's now illegal to talk to women

Yes, GetAll - when you completely fail to make an argument, there's always straw man arguments and putting words into other peoples' mouths.

GetAll, I say the women are not equally culpable as the men who go to those clubs - and I say I will not condemn them for it. You want to disagree that's fine. You want to pick apart posts and try and make out I have said something I haven't, then you just make yourself look ignorant.

I'm glad you now see that Sabrina, it was getting a bit tiresome.

GetAll - you're not here to actually discuss this are you - you're playing 'goad the feminists'.

It shows right through this thread.

running you've been saying through out the thread the dancers hold no responsibly in all this, that you don't lay any blame on dancers, and you've explained why. Numerous times.

I say this because it's all in this thread and I'm looking at your posts which explain your views on this as I type.

Now you're saying they're not 'equally culpable' .

Those are two different stances no ? Either they bare some responsibility or they don't.

I'm not trying to make out you've said something you haven't , I'm reading your past posts and commenting on what you've actually said.

GetAll - you can be as obtuse as you like.

I've explained quite clearly - I don't condemn the dancers. I put the responsibility of lap dancing clubs onto the owners who exploit women and the men who go to them.

WHy on earth is it so important to you that we hold the women equally culpable?? I'm wondering if it's a twisted 'what about the menz' type argument.

The thing is, GetAll, there is a difference from having a personal responsibility for something - ie taking a job within a LDC - yes a woman bears the responsibility for that. But I don't think that a woman individually accepting work in a LDC is to blame for lap dancing culture. The blame and condemnation should go to the club owners/men who go to them. That's why I don't condemn the women.

You quite clearly failed to understand that from running's post.

Yes, Sabina, exactly.

Especially, as the acceptance of a job in a lap dancing club, of a woman's own free will (which I don't dispute) is done within the context of a sexist society. A society that sexually objectifies women in the media, porn, page 3, LDCs etc, and then blames them for their own objectification. Not on.

What's even more interesting is that Daddancer came back on with a jokey type post about him stripping on and dancing, but didn't respond to my post:

Daddancer, if you admit that LDCs harm women, how do you justify going to them?

The blame and condemnation should go to the club owners/men who go to them.

and what about the women who go to them? to see blokes or women. Or are you going to deny they exist?

You're not acknowledging the real harm to real women in the clubs, GetAll. The intelligent women contributing to this industry (as you argue) then state that negatives from working there include 'losing all their faith in men' and 'abusive customers.' If a man goes into those clubs, he's condoning this.

Isn't that like saying if someone goes into a pub they are condoning alcohol fueled violence?

I've explained quite clearly - I don't condemn the dancers. I put the responsibility of lap dancing clubs onto the owners who exploit women and the men who go to them

I know FFS, that is what I've been saying all morning. That you don't hold the dancers responsible. You don't need to explain it again. But if Sabrina asks where I got the idea you feel that I think it's fair enough that I tell her where I gained that opinion without subsequent accusation of goading.

Daddancer: "I haven't denied anyone's bad experiences of LDC's either, i even posted a link with some negatives from a lap dancer. Trouble is a lot of people objecting here haven't even set foot in a lap dancing club, and they just keep making assumptions, instead of making a judgement for themselves."

Daddancer - if you know that lapdancing clubs cause bad experiences for the women working there, how do you justify going to them?

I notice that Daddancer picks and chooses the questions and posts he will respnd to. He hasn't answered any of my points. His arguments are illogical and never get to the heart of the issue. He will do anything to go off on a tangent rather than address the issues seriously. The latest example of this is "If you haven't been to a lapdanicng club then you are only making assumptions and can't really know what it's like and so can't argue against them" and "lots of women enjoy going to lapdancing clubs too." There are plenty of reasons why these arguments don't hold water at all but, supposing they did, the obvious answers are: 1) if you can only argue on actual experience then daddancer, as a man, cannot argue about whether or not women have felt objectified because he is not a woman and 2) how come you are to be believed when you say that lots of women go to these clubs but we are not to be believed when we say that many men do not agree with and therefore don't to lapdancing clubs?

I don't think there's much point trying to persuade someone who will not engage with the arguments on an intelligent level. However, I think that one value of this thread has been the excellent replies and reasonings by many on here about women's experiences within a sexist society, of which lapdancing clubs are a very obvious example. Daddancer's many assertions, illogical arguments, personal anecdotes and his whole general tone which is oftem arrogant, dismissive or patronising have only served to strengthen the arguments against him.

"Simple question: Is "objectification" per se bad or is it just bad when it overwhelms other value judgments of a person?

Personally, I think that everyone objectifies sexual partners (or generally anyone of the opposite sex whom they fancy but don't really know). And most youthful relationships are based, at least, on an element of "fancying" which is objectification by another name. I believe that decent human beings are able to value members of the other sex as both fully functioning human beings and sexual objects. And I believe that this binary of sex object/real person is a completely artificial trope which some people assume to be true. "

I posted the above way upthread and no one has chosen to reply. Everyone picks and chooses what they answer.

I think this idea that we can only understand how someone feels about something if we have experienced exactly the same is also not right. How would a man ever converse with a woman on that basis? I think most people have known lots of people of the opposite sex throughout their lives and, from conversations with them, will have some idea of how they feel and what are pertinent issues to them.

And, I do think this idea that a man cannot understand how a woman feels and should not be able to post a perspective only seems to apply one way. Most women on this thread seem to think they have a perfect understanding of the rationale for men's behaviour. How are you able to do that not having experienced the life of a man?

I agree with your post Rosabud.

Larry, did you address your post to a particular poster?

Running,

The previous post is obviously at least in part a response to Rosabud's. The earlier question, though, was general. I am genuinely interested in people's views.

Larry, I think that people can be objectified in relationships, but I don't think that 'fancying' someone or being physically attracted to them is objectification. I don't think it's sexual objectification in the same way as LDCs, porn, the media sexually objectifies women, anyway.

I think there is a huge difference between people meeting, where they are (hopefully) equals, and one finding the other attractive. It is all part of human sexual relationships. So, maybe I understand what Nussbaum argued - that this sort of 'objectification,' if indeed it is 'objectification,' is not necessarily negative.

I am also in absolute agreement with Nussbaum that the sexual objectification in porn is negative.

Similarly, I think the objectification in LDCs is negative - it is structural commoditisation of women in a way that a consensual relationship between 2 people just isn't. In a LDC, objectification is happening on a structural, mass level. The woman is the product - she's not just walking down the street and having someone find her attractive - she has a cash value. Women are essentially being sold by the club owners (who essentially makes a lot of profit from her - through the fees and commission) and being bought by the punters.

Not comparable to a relationship between 2 people at all.

And I bet you don't really want to know Larry. You just want to pick my post apart.

Great post running.

Running,

Nope, I am genuinely interested and I need to think about your reply...bit busy with toddlers right now.

Larrygrylls - your point about understanding how someone feels without having experienced precisely the same thing is an interesting one. While I agree it is possible to empathise to a degree, I am afraid you will never convince me that a man, particularly a white, middle class man, can truly have any idea of what it is to be a woman.

Have you read the thread about women being victims of sexual attack/abuse in every day life mentioned upthread? Because it is APPALLING - not least because every woman I know could tell a story that would feature on that thread, myself included. No man will ever know what it is to grow up and exist in a society where you are considered, either overtly or subliminally, by the majority of the opposite sex to be in some way lesser because of your gender.

No man will ever understand how it feels to walk into a newsagent and be confronted by a wall of magazines with covers of women in various states of undress as though it is normal and right. Or to sit next to people on trains and buses looking at topless women on page 3 as though it is normal and right. or indeed to walk past titty clubs knowing what is going on inside, with men walking in and out as though paying someone to bump and grind is normal and right.

Go ahead, come on here and spout pedantic arguments about stats, and what have you. You might even be able to guess at a woman's motivation or rationale for certain behaviours. But don't tell me you can empathise with what it is to be a woman - because you can't.

Daddancer - if you know that lapdancing clubs cause bad experiences for the women working there, how do you justify going to them?

I justify going because i and my friends are not the ones being abusive, breaking the clubs rules etc. Not that i have ever witnessed any bad behavior in any of the 5 or 6 clubs i have been to. They have always seemed well run and the dancers have always been honest with things like the house fees, opinions of the management etc.
However i appreciate there may be clubs that aren't so well run (assuming what other people have said is true) and i would make the judgement not to visit if i did encounter one. And if they get closed down for breaking the rules then so be it.

I would also add that all kinds of work can cause bad experiences. for example do you not go to a supermarket on the principal that some staff may get abuse from the customers? As it's exactly the same logic as you are using here.

Dd, the logic is that even customers who are being polite etc are damaging because it is damaging to be objectified to the extent that someone is paying to access your sexuality. Hence it is not the same logic as "don't go to the supermarket" because working in a supermarket is not intrinsically damaging in this way.

HTH.

rosabud thanks for the psychoanalysis. I appologise if I haven't replied back to every question that has come my way, but i am not online all day and have a busy family/work life and simply don't have the time. I have been on this thread for over 2 weeks now and i am pretty sure i have expressed my views on all the arguments that have been put forward. I do think numerous things that i have said have been conveniently ignored too.
Going back to the 'you don't understand as you are not a woman' point you have made, well i could say the same thing to you. All of my arguments regarding objectification have been from a mans prospective. Eg. You have said something like lap dancing clubs cause men to objectify women and i have come back with something like no men are more complex than that.

Again you have failed to follow a logical argument.

Going back to the 'you don't understand as you are not a woman' point you have made, well i could say the same thing to you.

Yes that is what you said to me! And I was turning it back on you to prove that is an illogical argument so thankyou for appreciating that fact!

You have said something like lap dancing clubs cause men to objectify women and i have come back with something like no men are more complex than that.

No, for the purposes of the thread above I was saying NOT that lapdancing clubs cause men to objectify women (although, as it happens, I do believe that to be true) BUT that lapdancing clubs cause women to feel that they are being objectifed by men. I was making this point to reinforce how illogical your "you can only comment if you have direct experience" point was. It's also wrong to argue that you can only comment if you have direct experience because, in fact, as many on here have posted, lots of men DO understand how lapdancing clubs can make women feel objectified.

I think you will probably now fail to follow the logic of this argument and come back with something like, "well the women who feel objectified don't have to go to them, do they?"