Do you believe the GOP will ban Strip Clubs ?

If they banned strip clubs then Hunter Biden would never be able to have sex again (with exception to his sister in law) without access to strippers.

If they banned strip clubs Donald Trump’s buddy Stormy Daniels wouldn’t have anywhere to work.

It’s lose - lose no matter what side you’re on.

Trump has moved the GOP further from evangelicals than before. In fact studies of 2016 have shown an inverse correlation between level of church attendance and Trump support.

We've had this discussion before in the correlation between better/worse club cities and politics. Liberal Boston sucks but liberal Providence an hour a day is great. Liberal Chicago sucks but liberal Detroit is great. Red Texas and Florida are generally good but it's not uniform across cities (which trend to be blue even in red states). Blue Atlanta in purplish red Georgia is good but on the wane...a local said it's because a lot of clubs were in unincorporated areas but now coming under crusading city councils.

I think it's local, and depends on if the city has bigger fish to fry, or if city council needs a scapegoat.

*an hour away. Autocorrect fucking sucks on my phone.

Oh, and if strip owners know who to bribe and how much.

This is governed by the states not the Feds.

And it doesn't matter who is in charge. Chicago is run by democratic mayors and the clubs suck.

It's a funny mix. Some mostly-Red states are extremely anti-vice-trade -- Mississippi -- while others have excellent strip-club opportunities -- Texas. I can't really put my finger on why one place is good and another is bad 100% of the time. Some mostly-Blue states the same -- California vs Massachusetts.

Partly it mirrors the Bible Belt, where Evangelicals hold significant political control. In true Bible Belt areas, strip clubs (and prostitution) are very low-quality to the point of dead. Part of it is simply size -- the Evangelicals predominate in more sparsely populated places like Mississippi or Kansas, whereas better strip-club culture tends to coagulate around major urban areas like Houston or Miami. Usually. Not always, though, f.e. Kokomo Indiana (never been there, feel free to correct me). Good example for Chicago, too.

I tried to get to the bottom of some of this a few weeks back, with a thread I started on the subject of what might account for good or bad strip-club culture in a region or city. We didn't really get to any good conclusions, but a few arguments were persuasive to me. Specific jurisdictional (city- or township-level) history was demonstrated to be a significant factor, IIRC.

It’s not Trump it’s the Supreme Court. Evangelicals and Catholics have never been less relevant in America but the Court is controlled by those types and all there are about is controlling people to there values. Some right wingers claim they don’t want to legislate through the court but principles are not in vogue right now. I don’t think they will, because there are other major things on the agenda. But if they can get a chance to they might.

Trump can still have sex with Ivanaka

dem/gop they all want weed and pussy. The strip clubs will stay, maybe except in ultra-con religious states like Louisiana and Idaho.

👽 It Seems Out In The Far That Strip Clubs Would Really Be Banned But Anything Is Possible With Changing Govt & Society.
There Are Too Many Beliefs, Economy, & Rights Conflicting Issues That If This Happened, Nightmare's Will Come & Never Go Away 🌙 🤓

thank you to everyone who responded. Personally I don't think there is enough motivation for it to happen. My home state Louisiana recently passed a law putting 10 commandments in public schools (Republican Governor).

It's already had more than a little pushback.
As another poster stated, I don't think the GOP has enough fuel to force anything but smaller scale changes. Putting religious rules in public schools and flat out go after multiple businesses that are legally owned and operated are very different animals.

Most attempts by Evangelicals are what I consider "soft moral victories". They don't actually make any changes that have real impact.

Strip clubs are dying regardless of who is in power. Democrats are closing strip clubs down right now with their inflation and anti-capitalist policies. No disposable income=strip clubs close down. Liberals also push the gay/trans/feminist agenda and mock straight men.

I don't think even the Republican Supreme Count justices would claim it was unconstitutional to permit strip clubs (or brothels) to operate. As far as prohibiting a ban on strip clubs, I don't think you can assume that Democrat justices would support it, and Republican justices would oppose it. But, I think a law requiring air dancing only would probably be upheld as constitutional.

Trump doesn't care about strip clubs. If he's elected President, his priority will be to get a Medvedev elected in 2028, or somehow stay in power past January 2029. If he thinks people who are against strip clubs will loyally support him in that priority, he'll close the strip clubs.

Biden doesn't care about strip clubs either. But, for him, his best play is to leave it a non-Federal issue.

What lockjaw said: "No disposable income=strip clubs close down." The industry has been dying a slow death (outside a few select area) since at least 2008. Disposable income never recovered.

I can't argue that strip clubs have been in a death spiral the past decade. That said, my recollection of 2008 through 2010 was the strip clubs were outstanding. It was a great time if you had money. More new girls coming in to the club than I had ever seen previously.

What has lead to the decline of strip clubs? I realize this question could be its own thread.

Was it Onlyfans. I'm 33 years old. Some people thought porn would kill strip clubs in the 90s with the rise of internet access. We know now that Internet will never replace real human contact. The only reason I go to Strip clubs is for the possibility of OTC and ITC. That's not happening on Onlyfans (regulations on those sites further prevent it).

Escorting still hasn't gone anywhere. I don't see how you can stop two consenting adults from having sex. There will always be another website and VPNs make any attempt to stop this useless.

I would agree the biggest killer of strip clubs is the bad economy. Some clubs are just empty nowadays, while others get a lot of customers, but they are not spending customers. Taxes and inflation are killing guy's disposable income.

Linking with escorts was more difficult before the internet. You had to troll casino bars or ride the blade to find street meat. By 2010 or 2011, everyone had smart phones making it easy to link with 304's. Sugar baby-sugar daddy dating websites took off around that same time. Escorting has had a huge boost with the advent of the internet and smart phones. Also value in strip clubs is no longer great: pay $30-40 for a three minute song with nothing sexual or pay $300-400 for an escort or sugar baby for an hour of wick dipping.

@sinclair, I've literally seen this personally. Price increases for clubs in Huntsville nuked the PL base. The numbers are only decent on weekends.

Escorting in my neck of woods ranges 120 to 150 for 15 minutes. The hour frame is the same as yours.

I haven't tried sugar babying because I can't find someone willing to do it within my pay range. But taxes around here haven't helped anyone.

I Agree With GGOFV
There Is No Substitute For In Person Strip Clubs Except For Our Own SC People & Pole Dancing On ▶️ YouTube. I Do Watch That Quite A Bit.
I Wonder If Sugar Baby In Person Girls Are As Fun As The SC.
*******Happy 4th Of July

happy fourth of July

Look locally to anal-retentive ordinances and state statute policies on regulating businesses and of course SCs.

This isn't the Roaring '20s with a lot of disposable income, and coupled with the +20% compounded 4-years of inflation and wages not keeping up makes it is worse.

Einstein, pretty good math guy, once said "Compounding Interest is the 8th Wonder of the World (this applies to YOY Inflation.)

Look how many restaurant chains have shuttered (I recall a post here a month or so ago) that have been around for 40+ years, the prices at McDonalds & Shake Shack are high, not the high end places like Del Friso's that are doing good. Not many people have $100 to spend on 3 LDs or these expensive VIP deals for 15/30 minutes across the country. NYC, sure, I expect it to be expensive but strip clubs in Michell and Lesterville, SD are expensive.

This is more of a disposable shrinking income thing. And I don't think Trump has any effect on SCs at all. And sure, the Republicans are courting religious people in the country just as Democrats are courting their chosen voting sectors.

There is not even a Federal law prohibiting prostitution, where would they find political capital to outlaw strip clubs?

No. Stop trying to stir up shit you idiot

It's a state and local issue, not a federal one. It's also an issue of political extremism on both sides of the aisle. In places where the religious right or feminazis on the left have a lot of influence, strip clubs tend to suffer.

By way of examples: MA clubs suck ass and you can blame the feminazis for that. MO clubs suck too and you can blame the religious right for that. VA clubs suck the worst and you can probably blame a weird confluence of religious types in the rural parts of VA and feminazis in the DC suburbs of N. VA for that - never let it be said that extremists on either side of the aisle can't agree upon something, lol.

Short answer: No. Quit being a partisan idiot.

I agree with Rick and gamma.

Dammit we need the like/dislike buttons back.

New York and San Francisco are among the worst strip club destinations in the US.

Texas and Florida are among the best.

Each side has its own basis for theoretically being anti-strip clubs / sex work.

Democrats are against objectification of women.

Republicans associate themselves more with religion than Democrats.

Yet, strip clubs exist in both Democrat and Republican ruled jurisdictions. People like sex/seduction....on both sides.

well.....that fosta bill after all was passed through under trump's watch. backpage was an awesome option. see a girl you like and within an hour or two good stuff is happening. once bp was gone the number of options in nyc plummeted to utter shit.

once again the only positive thing that i can only thing that has happened under the watch of diaper wearing drug cocktailing hair sniffing dickbag joe was the latin female talent let in. so far the last few months have been fun in engaging with them. i'll enjoy for as long as until that eventually will end.

Ironically, TUSCL discussions would be a big help to a politician wanting to crusade against strip clubs. Because of the level of contempt between strippers and customers that's routinely expressed here. It supports the idea that strip clubs only help people indulge self-destructive urges.

There cannot be a federal law on prostitution, for the same reason there is no national standard, by law, for what constitutes drunk driving. These are state's rights issues under the 10th amendment. If I go on a strip club visit out of state, it's to a red state for fun, or a red area. Providence is the liberal outlier, but it is an Italian city, so it's fun, unlike here in Irish Massachusetts, where it is lame.

In the few cases I've seen restricting strip club activity, it's been bipartisan supported with a heavier contingent of republicans. I don't agree with it, just like I don't agree with certain states banning certain porn web sites. Whether I go to those sites or not, I do not like government interference in free speech, whatever that speech may be. Those politicians who ban speech or adult entertainment or who seek to prolong surveillance of citizens under the guise of "protecting the children" or "protecting the people" may have good intentions, or may not, but it is a slippery slope that is prone to disastrous consequences.

The biggest threat to strip clubs atm is their lack of value. Where I live just north of Seattle the clubs all want $20+ for cover, $40+ for a regular dance, $300+ for extras if they're fat, and $500+ if they're actually decent looking

Within 5 miles from my house there's probably 50 Asian massage parlors, 80% of which an hour with FS for $200. Better yet there's even one where all the ladies are under 30, thin, and offer full GFE including BBBJCIM for the same rate.

Why would a pay $350 or more for 15 minutes with an overweight 40 year old when I can have an hour with a 24 year old spinner who will let me do a lot more?

I pretty much just go to clubs for the eye candy before stopping by my favorite AMP these days. Better service from a better looking women for half the price or less

It's worth noting that Project 2025, which is a Republican game plan for the first 180 days of an incoming Republican administration, calls for the criminalization of pornography. I can only imagine what their take on adult establishments would be. Whether or not their plan is doable, or not, is debatable, but a lot of freedoms you may now take for granted are potentially on the chopping block.

^Project 2025 was written by the Heritage Foundation and Kevin Roberts. The Heritage Foundation is a think tank, not the Republican Party. Pornography will not be banned, especially not by a president that likes porn stars.

Trump will most certainly not ban porn. It would take a Republican candidate who is a puppet of the Party to have them agree to push that agenda. And, if there is a puppet that somehow makes it only the ticket (assuming they make it past primaries), the Democrats would likely succeed, as Republicans, particularly, don't like to be told what to do (reference mask debate as an example).

Trump wants to be popular. Remember how hard he tried to claim he had a bigger crowd of people at his inauguration than Obama did. 60+% of men watch porn, so I can't see Trump banning it. But, only about 15% of men frequent strip clubs. Not as big of a risk to one's popularity to be against stripping.

It's not so much about "strip clubs" as it is about people not wanting the government telling them what to do. I suppose it's more of a Libertarian view than Republican view, but I would think even Democrats would prefer to make their own choices.

Some people like HOAs because they prevent certain activities/conditions that they don't like, yet those same people then get upset when HOA prevents them from doing what THEY want to do.

Reminds me of a quote related to the Holocaust....I'll paraphrase....came for the Socialists, and I didn't speak up, as I wasn't one...came for the Jews...didn't speak up, I wasn't one...then they came for me, and there was nobody to stand up for me.

I hope people are smart enough to recognize that the government banning one thing becomes a road to banning other things...things that one may enjoy. How did Prohibition work out ultimately?

And, it could be the same argument regarding why prostitution should be lawful....when something is illegal, it pushes activities underground, increasing risks for all involved.

With all the problems to be solved, it seems that banning strip clubs should be near the bottom of the priority list.

Then again, there was a debate about daylight savings time during the pandemic crisis (among other times). So, our government has demonstrated a tendency to focus on easy issues vs meaningful ones.

@ilbbaicnl, you are correct. Although that statistic is misleading. 1. Are the men located in a location where strip clubs are within a 30 minute drive radius. 2. Even if it was, societal pressure forces men to not go to it, especially in small towns (I should know).

3. If men are married or in committed relationships, they are usually inclined to not go whether they want to or not. Basically strip clubs are bullied by peer pressure.

@gg if someone doesn't go to strip clubs, they have little reason to care if they get closed or not. Regardless of whether they secretly would like to go to strip clubs.

This is worse than the view. Pornography is Constitutionally protected so without a constitutional amendment or a new court case, it cannot be banned. Secondly, all the media Hysteria over Dobbs, was left-wing media hysteria, not knowledgeable and true commentary and as such everyone failed to figure out that Dobbs protects strip clubs from the Federal Government. Why? the 10th amendment. Same as abortion. There is not, never was and cannot be a federal right or Federal ban on abortion without a constitutional amendment. It is a state issue, not Federal. Same with pornography and why every strip club locale is different. State issue under the Constitution.

Freedom of speech, a fundamental right, is constitutionally protected. Pornography has been, generally, held to fall under that protection so long as there are no good reasons to curtail it. I could see an extremist Evangelical move to curtail pornography despite its generally well-protected status, by creating test cases that make sure they are curtailing non-political speech for the compelling state interest of ... oh, I don't know what they'd make up, protecting the children, or preventing trafficking, or something. It's a long shot but I wouldn't put it past them. They have a deep need to shove their bullshit as deep into everyone else's asses as possible so that it can't be examined in the clear light of day.

8 States currently require digital verification of age to watch internet porn. Maybe some members can verify if my google was correct? Looks like red states on the leading edge but blue states including California not far behind.

Montana
Utah
Texas
Mississippi
Louisiana
Virginia
North Carolina
Missouri

https://19thnews.org/2024/01/states-age-….

DeSantis has signed a restrictive law, pending completion of several lawsuits could cause the large sites like porn hub and x videos to stop being used in the state of Florida. I believe this law is scheduled to take effect in 2025.

Banning porn in 2024 would be harder than banning alcohol back in the day. So many back channels, servers outside of America, new sites springing up that they'll never catch them all. It's a dumbass virtue signal.

We start of discussing the banning of strip clubs and when we find out it's a state issue we bring up digital porn and blame evangelicals, proving once and for all that progressives are the single largest group of incurable douchebags on the planet.

But, according to Originalism, you have to look at what people in the 1780s would have understood as freedom of speech. They were less uptight than in Victorian times, but I'm not sure they would have thought of erotic literature or imagery as protected speech.

Funny point, ilbbaicnl, we'd have to consider what "internet" meant in 1789 as well.

Not sure what skibum609's logical procedure is, in this case, for how he got rationally from the first part of his sentence ("we start of[f]") to the latter part ("progressives are ... douchebags"). Evidently he thinks this evidence somehow is "proving once and for all" that conclusion; the absence of reasoning thereby demonstrating the fact that logical connection is entirely unnecessary for him.

I can confirm porn is more restricted when browsing from Louisiana. The front pages of Pornhub and Spankbang redirect automatically to an age-verification requirement of sorts. Funny thing, the previews are still available on the search engines. So if you search for videos on Bing or Google, you'll see dirty stills and even, if you mouse-hover, moving images with sound; but then if you actually click the link, you'll get to a block-out page that demands age verification. Pornhub is up front about it, stating that your location's laws require you to verify; what you see is a blurred front page of Pornhub with an overlay rectangle requiring login credentials. Spankbang is more intrusive; it silently redirects the browser to their paid video-chat-style pages, which are at .xxx rather than .com; you may not even know why you've been redirected unless you suss it out yourself by carefully examining the rewritten URL. I note with some smugness that this state has not had the gall to attempt to control Google or Bing on the issue, the dirty images remain in the search results without age verification.

Of course, this state has its own age-verification service. Personally I'd never turn over private info just so I could tell a government authority I was interested in viewing porn. "Hi there mister policeman, I want you to write me down as a creepy miscreant so the next time you need a scapegoat for some random up-state child-molestation case you can't solve, I'll be first in line to help you frame me. Just look up my credentials!" Nope. And adding to the irony, Louisiana's three main government databases for consumer private info (porn viewing; motor vehicle registration; land title service) were all hacked, each on a different occasion, within six months of the start of this anti-porn system. Further, internet users nearby, f.e. in the panhandle of Florida, report as well that their proximity to blocked locations sometimes get them blocked even though they aren't in a legally blocked jurisdiction.

It's easy to use a very simple VPN, which simply makes your computer pretend that you're somewhere else.

I don't think any of this internet porn-blockage is going to survive constitutional challenges. There's good precedent that it's the Federal government which is in charge of inter-state commerce, including precedent addressing specifically shipment of adult magazines and books, on both Commerce Clause grounds and First Amendment freedom of speech grounds. It seems pretty much a no-brainer. Some suits are already pending. And with this current court, who knows, maybe Clarence has an axe to grind because his big ol' black cock didn't get him the sponsorship deal from Brazzers which he and Ginny auditioned for.

I'm very loathe to post anything political online, but ...

I think this thread has a lot of misinformation, or at least incomplete perspectives. First off, the part of the point of Project 2025 is to migrate power from the states and congress and into the executive branch. Whether or not Trump would be on board with P2025 or whether or not it will be successful is up for debate. However, a big point of it is to bypass the protections that SkiBum and others have pointed out. It is certainly something to be concerned about.

Sinclair's statement about Heritage <> Trump is sorta kinda accurate. More likely, he'll support it if he thinks it will either piss off his political enemies or buy him adulation. He'll block it if he thinks it will do the opposite. I think that reasoning about Trump's principals driving policy is a fools game.

Of note, Speaker Johnson would certainly be in support of a Federal ban of strip clubs. At this point, it seems likely that the Senate will flip Republican and the House will flip Democrat, but really who knows how that will shake out.

@blah, I see where your concerned and I am as well. The only issue with Speaker Johnson is that he may not be there for very long. The only reason Johnson is still speaker is BECAUSE OF DEMOCRATS voting to keep him after the MAGA coalition wanted him out.

I'm not getting into the politics very deeply. What I will say is that I think what saves porn and clubs in the immediate future is the apathy of both political parties.

Trump cares about himself first and foremost, this isn't even issue 4346 on his list of things to handle. As you stated it'll only happen if he thinks it will get him an edge. As of current voting issues that's is extremely doubtful. Johnson needs to focus on keeping his own seat, he is a compromised GOP, despite what right wing media wants you to believe.

I live in a city in North Alabama with a strong evangelical culture and their are 5 active strip clubs here. The worst thing the police accomplished: enforcing pasties. if that's the best they can do, then it says alot about what Evangelicals (modern) actually care about.

There cannot be a federal ban on strip clubs. Just sayin'.

^ the government could do something efficient one day, but they won’t

^Exactly.