Strippers do NOT get aroused by fondling their boobs?
shadowcat
Atlanta suburb
In my experience 90% do not. It's just like an arm or leg or butt.They let you touch it. It is part of the job. I have only met 2 in the last 8 years that did not allow it and only met 2 that truly enjoyed it.
Now if you can gets your hands on the kitty, that is totally different.
Now if you can gets your hands on the kitty, that is totally different.
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
51 comments
I believe, and could be wrong, that when a stripper responds in the narrow physical sense her feelings of arousal (meaning simply it feels good to her) are also usually in harmony. In my experience *most* (90%?) don't care about breast fondling---physically there is no response and the stripper doesn't respond in a convincing manner to indicate feelings of arousal.
BTW, if a woman is raped and admits that she enjoyed the rape, then does that somehow mean she can't seek punishment of the rapist? I'm not talking legally. Just curious as to different opinions.
The man and the victim agree that she repeatedly said NO. Man admits that he ignored her because he believed that she liked him and wanted sex. Woman wants justice because although she enjoyed the sex immensely, she felt violated and disrespected and thought the man needs to learn that NO means NO when she says it!
So, jurors are sitting around debating? or perhaps it is like hey, this is an easy case: the man admits it and he should get 20 years to life in a government prison.
Oh gee, I'm so glad you've taken up residence in every rape victims brain. Or, more likely you are a victim of the "one size fits all mentality." Rape victims need to know that it is ok if they enjoyed the rape---that, that doesn't make them sluts or dirty. Feminists and government who champion the "one size fits all mentality" need to be slapped down repeatedly. :)
The only "forcible rape" any woman might enjoy would be if it was part of rough sex play that was consensual between her & her partner.
Any other rape is an act of violence, not sex, and is not going to be enjoyable. That is a FACT that has nothing to do with feminism or government coverups.
As far as boobie fondling goes...if a woman is not already starting to be sexually aroused, any boobie touching is probably going to be just tolerated, at best. Excessive boobie fondling while not sexually aroused can get downright annoying. It's not surprising to think that most dancers start to shut down their sexual arousal during working hours due to the constant demand on them to act sexy for countless number of customers.
It is an OPINION and a stupid opinion at that. A female relative was raped. She repeatedly said NO. The man decided to ignore her and proceed. She was confused as to whether to contact the police because she ENJOYED the rape.
How did I get involved in this? The man was upset that she basically told him to drop dead as to future dating. On his behalf I inquired as to what the problem was because he believed that she liked him. The whole sordid story was explained by her to me. He confirmed what she said, but claimed that she couldn't have been raped because she was responsive. She was raped. She did enjoy the sexual stimulation. That was the end of their "relationship."
Bottom line, I don't tolerate BS like every woman who is raped doesn't enjoy it. Women have a whole range of feelings on all manner subjects. Sorry, but that is the FACT. Not some idiotic government propaganda or some idiotic feminist propaganda.
You could be RAPED tonight by some disgusting male and love every moment of it----I doubt that would be the case. In fact, I'd assume you'd feel the exact opposite. Heck, I could be RAPED and love every minute of it----I doubt that would be the case.
Rape is an act of sex---government BS and feminist BS don't impress even a little bit. It may be an act of sexual violence. Please note the word *may*. Government and feminists often can't comprehend that word.
I think your input is needed here!
BTW, for those nitwits who believe that women never enjoy forcible rape----grow up already! :) I'd assume that vast majority don't, but the act of rape doesn't preclude the victim from enjoying the act. Forget about the vile government's one size fits all mentality and feminist propaganda.
Also, the nitwits who believe a woman can't enjoy forcible rape may lead the victim to feeling guilty or dirty or whoreish because the victim did enjoy the sexual stimulation. So there is nothing wrong with explaining to the victim that it is ok, if there were good feelings even though you didn't want to be raped---the victims can and do respond differently to the act. The one size fits all mentality needs to taken out with the trash.
In both cases they're aroused (aroused meaning "to stir to action or strong response; excite")---doesn't mean they're enjoying it, but their aroused. Sorta like some fat slob sucking on my dick while she has me pinned. My dick ain't getting up due to the "friction." (If simple friction was the deal, then walking would have my dick up.) And, if I could get the fat slob off of me----then bingo she is gone and away from my dick at warp speed. Similarly, a man could be raped by a man or a woman after getting hard-----doesn't mean he is happy about the man or woman raping him.
I can suck on a woman's titties and if they get hard----yes, she is aroused. Doesn't mean she is enjoying my titty sucking, but it is her arousal that gets me. I don't need the stripper to enjoy it----but the arousal in the form of hardened titties and racing heart are a supreme turn on.
Let's go back to our female rape victim. She is gushing wet, titties super hard, heart going a million miles a minute, and she is moaning from all the stimulation----yep, yes, affirmative she is aroused; this doesn't mean she is happy about being raped.
I have had a couple strippers tell me they like to be spanked and have their hair pulled though.
Well, most of them. Women are also more varied and less predictable than men. Many strippers become desensitized by their work - so much so that their sex life suffers. The umpteenth dude in the day to grab her tits might not arouse her.
Also, contrary to what I keep seeing in posts here, a wet pussy doesn't necessarily mean a woman is aroused. It's not the same as your dick. Wetness an involuntary physical response to friction. Women can get wet from horseback riding, but that doesn't mean the horse arouses them. Rape victims get wet, but...
OK, class dismissed.
One dancer would feel nothing if you're buying dances---it was like she had a shutoff switch. Don't pay her and WOW! A significant improvement---breasts harden and heart races.
She was smoking hot except she looked like a graffiti board. It looked like people had used her as a practice board to learn tattooing. I mentioned a good tattoo (very well done---a true artist where it is like I'd like to see some of his other work) she had and she says oh, I paid for that one. I say it is excellent. She says after all the bad tattoos she needed at least one good tattoo and so she went to a pro, but it was expensive. He told he worked extra hard so that in the future she wouldn't get marked up with garbage. She says that tattoo still makes her very happy every time she looks at it because it is so well done.
Most don't. If they do, then sometimes it is off limits. A very few enjoy. This one girl with no boobs (my boobs were bigger than hers and they're not big) enjoyed it to the point it was no charge----I'd run out of money after only 4 dances and apologized because I loved what she was doing. She says you aren't happy? I said I'm thrilled, but a budget is a budget; I'd like to do this all day. She says that sounds very good. That was a very fun visit. Most customers probably would have no interest in her because she had no boobs.
I have in the past enjoyed many of your posts. But your attitudes towards certain issues are intolerable to me.
I don't like using the ignore button too often, but in this case you've crossed a major line to me. Enjoy your conspiracy theories, as I will not be privy to your rantings anymore.
Also interesting that he can not type his thoughts in a single post, or keep from running on and on and on and on.
Hi Clubber,
Maybe it is because I have a lot of thoughts while you have seem to have very few? And, the few that you have seem like you're just following the conservative herd. Some would think you're a nut case for questioning President Obama's birth certificate. You still believe in that conspiracy or have you grown up?
BTW, yes, I could still be considered one of those crazy birthers. :) Yes, I also think President Obama is top quality and more. America lucked out big time.
I will grant you I am more of a liberal conservative on some issues. IE: I support strip clubs!
If the courts hold that there essentially are no 2nd Amendment rights, then well those rights don't exist---no gray area. And, if the court says yes there are 2nd Amendment rights, but they can be infringed---no gray area.
If the courts hold abortion isn't murder---no gray area. If the courts hold abortion is murder---no gray area.
If the courts hold that you don't have a right to fire a bullet into the ground to stop a rogue police officer from beating your son to death---then no gray area.
If the courts hold that yes you can fire up to 2 shots into the ground to stop a rogue police officer from beating your son to death---then no gray area.
Lawyers say don't cooperate with the police---then no gray area.
Pretty pathetic way of thinking, imo.
What the courts or anyone else says does not change my opinion unless someone can present a thoughtful, logical, and well thought out argument to alter my opinion.
"If the courts hold that there essentially are no 2nd Amendment rights, then well those rights don't exist---no gray area. And, if the court says yes there are 2nd Amendment rights, but they can be infringed---no gray area." The court is WRONG. The 2nd amendment is quite clear in plain English. For those that can not grasp the writing, read the Federalist Papers!
"If the courts hold abortion isn't murder---no gray area. If the courts hold abortion is murder---no gray area." It IS murder! Show me ANYWHERE in the United States Constitution that even mentions the word or anything pertaining to it! Also, if you try the "clause" argument, once again, read the Federalist Papers!
"If the courts hold that you don't have a right to fire a bullet into the ground to stop a rogue police officer from beating your son to death---then no gray area." Hardly enough information to even consider right or wrong.
"If the courts hold that yes you can fire up to 2 shots into the ground to stop a rogue police officer from beating your son to death---then no gray area." See directly above.
"Lawyers say don't cooperate with the police---then no gray area." I would not have a reason to not cooperate with a police officer.
Now, the above said, any decision of right and wrong would have to be made on a case to case basis and not on generalizations.
I read and you jump to the law as some type of moral support. Makes absolutely no sense. You could get convicted on gun charges by a court and sentenced to 50 years. So because a court found that you violated the law, did the "crime," accountability means you serving 50 years? Or, even 30 days?
To say he broke the law! As if that was bad is beyond absurd because the system is corrupt. He must be held accountable! Really? Since when did this corrupt courts gain such stature?
Actually that is an excellent point. :(
I have personally met chandler twice. He is not sociable. Prefers to sit by himself. The girls do not like him. I think that Dugster has him pegged.
Last night the dancer may not have been aroused, but her nipples were certainly standing at attention.
Innocent people have done years behind bars for believing there was no reason to not cooperate with a police officer. The officer could be a great guy interested in the truth and an innocent person's truthful statement could put them behind bars for many years. The case as I recall it went something like this. An eyewitness called 911 to report an argument which quickly turned to murder. The eyewitness caller is hysterical at this point, but the police arrived promptly to find the dead body. An innocent man quickly approached the police and told everything that happened because he was *right there* next to both victim and murder---a good samaritan. Here's the problem. The eyewitness said there were only 2 men arguing and there was no else around. Gets worse for the good samaritan. The description of eyewitness caller not only identified the clothing (which happened to match what the good samaritan matched), but that there were only 2 people and no one else. Oops, eyewitness was mistaken---the good samaritan was there also. The police matching 1) the clothing of the suspect with the good samaritan and 2) the eyewitness statement there were only 2 people quickly puts 2 and 2 together. Good samaritan gets arrested---he was wearing the wrong clothing and according to the eyewitness caller there definitely only 2 men---victim and murder---no one else. Enough for a conviction!
Anyway you could be right Clubber and the lawyers could be wrong. I'd go with the experts and believe it or not that includes police officers. In fact, and it would be interesting if there was a survey of police officers, but I'd bet good money most of these officers would admit to telling their loved ones to take the Fifth and do not cooperate with the police even if they are completely innocent. Of course, I could be wrong and only a minority of officers would advise innocent people to take the Fifth----it would be an interesting survey. The officers that I've spoken with sometimes have a lower opinion of the justice system then I do. And, I'll never forget the officer telling me that he thought 15% of the people in prison were innocent----and he thought that was a good percentage! I had thought it was 5% innocent and that was unacceptable.
BTW, if there are any lawyers or police officers on this board who believe an innocent person shouldn't take the Fifth, then please provide your insight; it were be good to get a different perspective. ***I personally think that sometimes not taking the Fifth is the best course for the guilty person or the innocent person----since I'm not a lawyer or a police officer please ignore that thought!*** :)
BTW, the Blake case a criminal defense attorney who really really really should know better talked to the police instead of following the the standard legal advice of remaining silent. Without his big mouth talking the criminal defense attorney most likely wouldn't have been arrested. End result? I believe it was a 7 year probation for the criminal defense attorney plus he wasn't allowed to practice law during that time frame----who knows maybe that later got modified for good behaviour.
The legal fees for the criminal defense attorney? It is my understanding they astonomical. Oh was the attorney guilty? I believe he was innocent on the *initial* charge(s). The real problem occurred later and on those charges, yes, I believe he was guilty. If he didn't talk, the real problems would never have gotten started. He was, imo, an innocent man who later due to his own bad character and worse actions became a guilty man. Very interesting even as reported by the Miami New Times.
Shadowcat, it's odd that you make up this shit about me now, apparently in support of the board's resident troll, no less. Back when we met, you posted how you you enjoyed meeting me. I didn't go to PP to meet you, didn't know you would be there. But when I thought I recognized you, I said hi, and we had a friendly chat. Sorry I didn't choose to hang with you, etc. I like spending time one-on-one with strippers, and not necessarily the same ones as you. You don't know what they think about me.
You're an interesting guy and write like a pro. However, you have an unreasonable expection that threads will stay on topic. And, no we aren't buddies. :)
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/1998-06-18/…
A stripper, who I believe was innocent, also got herself arrested by failing to remain silent; she just needed to follow the advice given by not only lawyers, but police officers to save herself a bunch of needless grief. The problem in her case is caused by court decisions. The officers under judge made reasoning are free to take what a person says out of context and free to ignore exculpatory evidence. The typical cattle class person would in no way be capable of understanding this. They got typical cattle mentality and that is that.
***However, even a cattle class person should be able to understand when a police officer opines that even the innocent person should remain silent aka take the Fifth. I mean normally the police officer is the good guy, imo, and when he says an innocent person should remain silent even typical cattle class people should be able to smell the coffee and wake up a little. Now, if you know police officers who don't share that view then well since they're normally the good guys listen to them! :)
Btw, he used to post under the name of Kyle1111. He is responsible for founder imposing the 4 week rule. There has got to be other sites where he can run his mouth off.
He enjoyed meeting you? Really? Yes, I think shadowcat did post that he enjoyed meeting you. I also remember shadowcat post a bunch of shit about you that sounded very true based on your board persona.
There is a lesson here for you, chandler, and for shadowcat as well. The lesson is that even if a person seems like a good person don't trust 'em. People who have met shadowcat in person rave about him---I don't recal a single----oops, yes there was that poster who claimed to be a dancer and she posted all manner of shit including his real identity information. Maybe you didn't rave, either.
Shadowcat, did you just make up phony shit about chandler because you got your panties in a bunch. Not very nice, if that is the case.
Shadowcat if you did make up phony shit about chandler, then you need to remember just as you are seen as sweet guy by many it means jack shit. Gridget could also be a sweet lady and boom she makes up phony shit about you and you're hearbroken and wimpering. Anyone, the odds imo are in your favor that she wont screw you. Now you? You may be basically a good guy---but, if made up phony shit about chandler, then it basically means your a fake and no one should trust you.
You a fake shadowcat? I dealt with many in my life and some appeared to morally upstanding citizens beyond reproach. In fact, it was only a week ago that I got take by a very good fake who has an excellent reputation----surprised he'd risk it for $250, but it probably wasn't about the money. Besides, I would call him out because like most victims of fraud I'd be ashamed to admit it. He probably knows that in spades.
I've often thought Kyle1111 and jablake the same. Nice to know I'm not the only one.
And, you say you are into conspiracies Clubber? According to shadowcat I was a few other posters as well.
No, chandler, that is highly unlikely that girls can even stand to be within 100 yards of you. Shadowcat may be a 100% fake, but he nailed your hiney on that point. ;)
Please take the foregoing as bad humor on my part chandler.