A news story in the Ann Arbor news on Sunday (Gannet news byline) spelled out why it IS LEGAL to be totally nude and serve alcohol in a Michigan club. This all stemmed from a lawsuit brought by the owners of Bogarts et al.. This went down in 2011 but most clubs have not picked up on it. There is a review of the Flight Club for the past weekend that seems to indicate a drift in this direction. The article included a quote from the owner of Omars ( as if!) stating he didn't see a need for it and that he doubted dancers would go for it. He actually said that the dancers would want to maintain an aura of mystery-what's next an air of modesty? I would encourage all Metro detroit mongers to ask about this in their favorite clubs . At least give the girls a choice. It would add an element of suspense I guess. Will she or won't she?
Interesting Omars was mentioned. I heard from my (retired) ATF who heard from her old manager who knows the Omars manager and he indicated they were going to start nude dancing. That was about 6 months ago.
Interesting. Note that the opinion states that full nudity and sex acts are "expressive conduct" protected by the First Amendment."
So, what can we expect to see in the clubs under the "sex acts" protection clause? I assume that this applies to sex acts performed on stage by the entertainers (e.g., masturbation), rather than sex acts performed with the customers in the VIP.
Thank you Super Dude for posting the link. Sexual acts are allowed under First Amendment but paying for sex is still illegal. You just have to get the girl to give it up for free.
I actually have never understood the reasoning in banning sex for sale or porn for that matter. What is the difference between that and an actor being paid to be someone else in a movie, or to clean your house. Or a better comparison clean your teeth or any medical procedure. All give the recipient pleasure in one form or another. Movies give you visual pleasure, a clean house is pleasing, a dentist (afterward) give you a pleasing smile, and a doctor makes you feel better. You can make all the excuses you want for it "being different for a doctor etc." but you are paying for a service the some one physically performs to make you feel better. They are willing to do the service in return for payment. Sex is the only service that is forbidden to pay for the service. I find that hypocritical. A professional is actually safer than an amateur. Look at the spread of AIDS in the 70's and 80's. Most of the spread occurred in the "bathhouses" frequented by homosexual or bi-sexual males that went there to have multiple partners each night.
Having seen and enjoyed the infamous shaving cream shows at the Hong Kong club in Tijuana (two or more naked women on a shaving cream covered stage with a supplied of dildos and audience participation), I would be interested in a U.S. club that featured sex acts, even if the sex acts are a part of the stage performance. I guess I have a little streak of voyeurism, but I suspect that I'm not alone among the other strip club patrons on this list serve.
10 comments
Latest
Hamilton's Bogart v. Michigan, 501 F.3rd 644 (CA6, 2007)
http://impact.mlive.com/lansing-news/pri…
So, what can we expect to see in the clubs under the "sex acts" protection clause? I assume that this applies to sex acts performed on stage by the entertainers (e.g., masturbation), rather than sex acts performed with the customers in the VIP.