Partition Theory

Davids, why on earth shoud anybody go to a strip club and "make it clear that you don't buy dances"? That's what many clubs are all about. That's what most of us go looking for because it's fun. Why shouldn't we be willing to pay money to have fun? Isn't that one of the main purposes of money, to have fun with it? It is for me.

And now that I've called your blufff and outright said you are a bullshitter and poser you will refuse to answer, somehow believing you can pull off "taking the high road" without being exposed. Chist man, you could probably google up a synopsis of Godel's theorems, but then you would see that there was nothing inconsistent with my description and you'd have to explain why it was so hilarious to your big brain.

Jpac: Tipping is fine providing you do it mostly to non-stripper employees; don't go overboard; you can tip strippers on stage since they (for the most part) think they are "exotic dancers". Don't rely on it as a crutch, though: has to be your personality that wins out in the end.

Keys not to be seen as "bullshiter": make it clear you don't buy dances; if you plan to get dates make your intentions and moves earlier on.

I certainly agree that you have to be her type. Why should anything be magical about strippers as opposed to other women?

DavidS, and still you haven't engaged in anything but name droppping Godel. Tell me what Godel's theorem's did say then, if I'm so obviously wrong. Explain why I am wrong. For one of your vast intellect it should be easy. In other words put up or shut up. You want to bring mathematics and philosophy into it fine, but dropping a name is meaningless. You seem to think that the fact you say Godel makes me quake and assume you must know logic. It just means you know who Godel was and can google until you can come up with some sort of substance. In practice your understanding of most topics doesn't seem to me to go very deep since you constantly refuse to go beyond name dropping. I wouild laugh but poseurs like you get under my skin. You will say once again that it's just so obvious I'm wrong it isn't worth your time to lower yourself to engage in an argument, pretend that you have showed me, and go on to post another piece of fashionable pseudo-intellectual crap. And again I'll read it with disgust and feel obligated to call bullshit. You'll post something akin to "Well if you understood this or that", I'll say, explain it if you're such an expert, and the spiral continues.

This thread certainly proves one thing, that there's a huge difference between education and intelligence.

We all "partition" people into categories in our lives. Why shouldn't strippers? Moreover, it is quite common for people to move from one partition to another.

davids I have to disagree on some of your theories. First off Strippers might see you as a "Bullshitter" if all you do is come into the club just to sit and talk with them and never tip or buy dances. Secondly, you can do all the planning you want and smooth talking but if you aren't their type(someone that she naturally finds attractive) your 9 times out of 10 never going to become their lover no matter how smooth your approach is when getting to know her.

AN: " All logical systems start with assumptions. Godel merely showed that math was no exception. "

Hehe... Ok, I see what you say about me overestimating your eduction now. ;-) (Well not really: I didn't think you would know about Godel's theorem, but thought you would be prudent enough not to bluff.)

LMFAO!

DavidS, actually both Godel and Russel would be more accurately placed in mathematics, but a lot of logic follows mathematical methods for proofs, or math follows logical methods, chicken or egg, but I digress.

Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Einstein's theory of special AND general relativity. Guess I rebutted you DavidS. Oh, Euclidian AND non-Euclidian geometry. Ha, take that! Haven't had enough? Ok, postmodernism, logical positivism, DECONSTRUCTION. René Descartes, Francis Bacon, Jaques Deriada, Friedrich Nietzsche. Tremble before my unassailable argument. Logic, I don't need no stinkin' logic. I've got buzzwords!

Do I have to be right, no, but I refuse to let the pablum you spout as if it is some sort of received wisdom stand without scrutiny. Your intellectual shit stinks just like everyone else's.

As for logic, I think you need to start with the basics. Godel's theorems deal with the crisis of foundations when it comes right down to it. Hume dealt with that about 150 years before Godel. All logical systems start with assumptions. Godel merely showed that math was no exception. Godel is astrophysics and you don't even have the planet's names memorized (if you'll permit the metaphore). Given that most of your premises are non-falsifiable, most of your arguments are logically flawed, and most of your conclusions unsupportable, start with the basics, then tell me what Godel meant, or better yet, tell me what Godel's theorem's mean now, and how they apply to our discussion.

Logic? Is that where you study stuff like Godel's completeness and incompleteness theorems? Russell's paradox? Hehe... Got other projects under way these days...

Ok, one last request. Please point out to me when I was "clearly wrong". I am perfectly willing to concede if you will just kindly point out where I have been factually rebutted. I've gone to great length to lay out my arguments and to summarize yours, allowing you to challenge either. Instead of any kind of argument, you dismiss my arguments as "obviously wrong", refusing to extend the simple courtesy of explaining my erroneous assumptions or logical flaws. I consider this to be not only somewhat rude, but arrogant. If you want to dismiss my statements without any attempt to address the substance that does imply that you consider yourself somehow above me in your station, and that to engage me in discussion or argument is somehow beneath you. All I ask is that the "obvious" deficiencies in my arguments be made public, so that we can all decide who is making a good faith argument. This does not include a lighthearted comment I made about Philip of Macedon's haircuts being possibly painful experiences as opposed to lap dances that turned into a debate about the metalurgy of his razor (which incidentally I am most likely right about, read some history rather than just relying on Google). I will gladly address any substantive comment you wish to raise. If you want to keep it off the board, my e-mail is available, just click on my name.

DavidS, Your seeing potential in me is a dubious distinction. Your analysis of my education is a joke. I remember when I had it all figured out too. While some may have enjoyed our sparing, I have found it nothing but frustrating. You need to learn logic. It is a very well developed discipline for those with the patience to study and apply it. Your theories are entertaining, your logic is sloppy, and your arguments tend toward ad hominem attacks that ignore the substance of any criticism, refering to any and all criticism as a straw man. I tend to respond out of some sense of duty to point out the flagrant rhetorical stolen bases that form the basis of what you consider an argument. It is perhaps a character flaw, but it is not born of a need to "always be right", it is more a disgust with sloppy reasonoing, bad science, and flawed logic. On the positive side you seem to understand how to work google and have apparently completed several Tony Robins style seminars. Hope that works for you my friend. Keep trying that theory that the best way to approach a strip club is to spend no money and try to get dates, let me know how that works out.

Oh, and DavidS, I think Freudianism is also a bit over-rated. I see your new strategy is to not defend your position but to offer glib witticisms as a substitute for rebuttal or argument. Good luck with that.

AN: Sorry to disappoint anyone who enjoyed it, but I don't plan on debating too much in the future.

I am more interested in studying and trying to develop strategies and tactics for making friends or girlfriends in strip clubs without spending money.

If someone has some valuable insights into this topic or points out flaws in my approach I may very well respond at length. However, if it is just going to be a case of me pointing out how I said "x not y" or they explain themselves why their criticism doesn't quite apply then it's not even worth my time to reply when I could be studying instead. (I will just trust other readers to be able to see the problems with the criticizes when they are suffeciently obvious.)

Anyway, I had fun debating with you in the past, you are clearly fairly well educated.

However, I would work on your desire to always be right: by yielding once in a while when you are clearly wrong you will build your credibility not harm it. Also avoid strawman: it can be an effective tactic (especially against the unaware)l, but isn't it more challenging to defeat the real position?

Also don't focus so much on the minutae how some line may not hold 100% of the time and therefore the post doesn't make sense over all. That makes you look like a nerd. Just try to get the gist of it, and attack the gist instead.

In general I think you read some things too literally when it suits you (and may clearly be a joke) and not literally enough when that suits you:

Again by trying to always prove that your are the smartest you may be hampering your ability to learn.

But anyway, so to seem so negative toward you: I see alot of potential in you. Good luck, my friend.

AN: Yeah and some girls have regular friends turn into lovers.

FONDL: "They don't scheme or plan, they react." Too funny!

I agree with AN, I don't think that most strippers give any thought to us outside of the club. They don't scheme or plan, they react. Just like most other girls their age. I'm convinced that a lot of what we call stripper shit is nothing more than typical behavior of immature 20 year-old girls everywhere.

Well DavidS, once again we disagree. You make some very nice tidy catagories, and, as I now understand it claim that strippers do this subconsciously. Then after laying out the catagories you seem to indicate that not only are strippers aware of these catagories, but would lie to you if you asked, indicating not only awareness, but an operating knowledge of their limitations and implications when dealing with a customer. Now you could say that they do all this subconsciously and that your partition theory is merely descriptive of behavior. If so what makes your theory any more valid a description than any other theory? I could theorize that strippers treat you differently subconsciously based on the ammount of invisible magic pixie dust on your money. I think you are looking for a nice neat catagorization that doesn't exist. I'll be very frank this time. I've had sex with a certain stripper twice. I was her regular. I'd known her for a year and tipped well all the time. I never indicated any interest in OTC other than a drink after her shift. We ended up having sex on two different occasions. There was no fee involved OTC. She had a SO. I think they had an open relationship (i.e. were swingers), and it turned both of them on to have some guy take her from the strip club to have sex. I also think I was picked to be the lucky guy because she trusted me and knew I wasn't going to be looking for an OTC relationship. Where does that fit your theory? Now clearly you can say your theory is general or statistical in nature and that there will always be exceptions. Fine, if your theory helps you sort through things and enhances your experience, then clearly you should use it. Once again, as many of us continually say, you seem to indicate that it is the only valid, sane, reasonable, or logical way to operate. Given that, we should go into a strip club looking for dates and planning not to spend money. If you have fun like that, fine, but I still think that is a recipe for having a bad experience.

There can be no doubt that strippers, being women, think and talk about and concern themselves more with interpersonal relations (uh,sorry about that term) than men do. However, pigeonholing (syn. for partitioning, right?) I believe is much more of a male trait.

Nope, I'm not asserting that strippers choose to practice "partition theory" anymore than I would assert that people decide to have an id, ego, and superego. It isjust the way it is for most.

I'll just add that the theory assumes strippers do a lot of thinking about customers. We may like to flatter ourselves, but overall I'd guess that OTC we don't often cross their minds. I'd also say that in my experience there are quite a few strippers without anything recognizable as a "thought process". Crediting them as a group with a fully formed philosophy or logic is a bit of a stretch in my opinion, and does not match what I've seen. In my experience strippers are mostly like the population at large, albeit with certain traits over and under-represented. There will be honest forthright and smart ones as well as scammers, prima donnas, teases, sluts, druggies (somewhat over-represented), and girls next door. I look for the good ones, avoid the rest, and don't worry about their internal life too much as long as they treat me well and I'm happy.

I have two other problems with the original post. First, the language implies that everyone's objective is or should be to get into one of the first 2 categories. I disagree, I want to be a customer, I want to buy dances and pay a girl to spend time wwith me, that's why I go to clubs. If I were looking for either sex or friendship, I'd go somewhere else where the odds were better and/or the cost lower.

Second, davids also implies that everyone's objective is or should be to get the most for the least amount of money. Again I disagree. When I hire someone for any job, I decide what I want, choose someone who I think is good at doing it, and pay them what I consider to be a fair price. I'm never looking for the cheapest bid because I'm a firm believer that in the long run you get what you pay for. And I usually take a long term view in case I may want to hire them again someday, so I want to pay them what I consider to be a fair price. I treat strippers the same way.

I think the original post is an interesting start to a discussion but is overly simplistic and assumes that everyone has the same objectives.

Davids, from what I've seen of your posts here, you have a stong impulse to erect partitions yourself. I don't believe strippers think that way any more than the rest of us. If anything, they are less so inclined, tending to act more impulsively. There is a natural and necessary human need to categorize people we meet. The better we get to know them, the more the categories blur. It's the same for strippers only more so, since they are always meeting a lot of new people (duh!)

I think this theory has some validity but I don't think there are enough categories here. For example if you're talking about guys who are somewhat close to the dancer in age it makes more sense than when there's a huge age difference. I've seen a lot of relationships between dancers and older gentlement that don't fit any of these descriptions. In fact such relationships are very common in strip clubs and many of us have them. I also don't think these categories are quite so distinct, I think there's more of a continuum from one extreme to the other, with a fair amount of movement along the continuum. I also think that every stranger starts out as a customer in the eyes of the dancer, but that some may move very quickly into another category while others may never move at all. I also think that the customer category should be further subdivided into those who the dancer enjoys and trusts to some extent, those she's fairly indifferent about, and those she doesn't much care for. We've all heard dancers talk about certain customers who they really enjoy seeing and those who they can't stand, but they're all still customers. Again this is more of a continuum than distinct separate categories. In other words it's not much different from the way people feel about each other outside the club.

Davids: I pretty much agree with your post. The only thing I would add is that, though it's rare, sometimes you can change partitions. I've gone from customer to friend with a number of dancers but in all cases it either meant not spending on them anymore or becoming friends after they quit dancing. The money/friend/customer equation is very one sided. Most guys who spend money on a girl and think they are friends are usually just customers. As my retired ATF used to say. "Friendly" and "Friends" are two different things.

Yes, I have seen guys walk into the club, spend ZERO and immediately go into category one. After all, strippers have the same needs and desires as any other woman, and are only human.

chit: No some are friends: I've seen it with my own eyes. I'm also pretty sure I've seen guys walk right in and get into category 1 (lovers) without buying dances.

Another interesting fact is that, often, if you get into a category <= 2 from the start she will not try to solicit dances from you.

I think that is a good way to tell if you are in categories 1 or 2: is she trying to solicit dances from you?

DavidS: I haven't done a lot of thinking on this, but it appears that you might be onto something. However, is it also possible that, to the stripper mind, all men in a strip club other than employees, managers, owners, etc., are automatically classified in category number three?