the stripper mentality

34 comments

• Book Guy

  •

  15 years ago

  Battered woman syndrome. The worse it hurts them, the more they protest that "he really loves me." In some senses, it's actually a pretty normal primate response. The submissive individual, sensing that the dominant one (who abuses her) runs a successful troupe, does everything she can to assert fealty to that dominant one. She perceives him to be dominant partly on the basis of his abuse of her -- violence and willingness to take advantage indicates aggression and therefore strength. So, she rewards his bad behavior. Seems like a double bind, right? The worse he is, the more she depends on him being bad to her, right? But there's an out. The natural primate response that escapes this double bind is, that the instant she sees his troupe being unsuccessful, she simply moves on with very little sense of remorse. Her attachments are formed without any sense of duty or permanence. She requires his strength in order to establish her willingness to follow him. Ever wondered why young women -- especially those in the stripper universe -- are so fickle? So easily coaxed on to a new thrill? But also so desperately loyal to their abusive boyfriends? It's actually the same instinct, not contradictory ones. Primates who need someone to follow.
• samsung1

  •

  15 years ago

  just wondering...are strip club owners mostly rich and successful? I personally don't know any. I know a girl (non-dancer) who has an abusive boyfriend and she claims it only happens when they get drunk so it's not that big of a deal. hahaha yeah right..... Although I am not physically abused by strippers, I am emotionally and financially abused sometimes, yet I still come back for more lol.
• jester214

  •

  15 years ago

  Like any other business the owners run the gambit.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  For some women, sex forced or not just isn't a big deal---like a parking ticket. A female employee (non-stripclub at the time) who was raped thought 30 days in jail would be an extremely harsh punishment. She loved sex with men, but didn't like being forced. She didn't like blacks or married men, but other than that pretty much any male had an excellent shot with her. Old? If he can get it up, then no problem. Fat? If he can stick it in no problem. Oh, yeah. She didn't like overly small penises. She had a super sweet wealthy boyfriend. He seemed too good to be true. She agreed, but said he was too tiny and that would drive her crazy---he needed to find a woman that didn't care about that.
• mmdv26

  •

  15 years ago

  Great topic! I think we've all seen this behavior more than once.
• ozymandias

  •

  15 years ago

  It's not a stripper mentality per se, it's pretty typical behavior for low socio-economic class women lacking an education. Give me any clerk at Wal-mart, and I'll show you a woman who explains away her underemployed common-law husband's abuse as "well, he jus' jealous cause he love me". Granted, many strippers are drawn from this level of society (though all aren't, of course), possibly even most of them, but it's "stupid young woman" behavior, not stripper behavior. As far as club owner, most club owners I've known (and I've only known fairly major ones, like Jack Galardi, so maybe they play by different rules) have had some of their strippers as girlfriends, but really didn't go around dipping their dick into the employee pool. Not out of moral restraint, but because (i) it's just not professional, and therefore is bad business and (ii) they're actually pretty busy guys, and it's not worth the drama. O.
• DickJohnson

  •

  15 years ago

  correction...she has sex with a male club owner..this guy is a real bottom-feeder. I refuse to ever spend any more money in his club because hes such a low-life. Also, said dancer contracted an std about the same time he coerced her into having sex with him and she swears he didn't give it to her...yeah right.
• Philip A. Stein

  •

  15 years ago

  "Sounds to me that she enjoys being pimped and controlled." I doubt she enjoys it, she probably has no other perspective other than being pimped and controlled and really can't fathom being anything but pimped and controlled
• monnieg27

  •

  15 years ago

  I don't see it as a "stripper" mentality really either..I think it's just a personal weakness that unfortunately so many women have; they just don't know how to say no. They are so afraid of the possible "consequences", that they just give in. *On a personal note* I personally have been a dancer for many years and have so had many (managers, bouncers, dj's) try (to sleep with me) that I have lost count, but I tell you this, never once did it work. *monnie*
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  If a woman chooses to spread her legs to earn money from a john, then what is the big deal about her choosing to spread her legs for the stripclub owner. In both cases she is receiving what she wants. In the case of the john it is money. In the case of the stripclub owner it about getting the opportunity in his club to earn money. Doesn't seem like there is a dime's worth of difference between a woman spreading her legs for a john or for the owner of a stripclub. Big Hint: Some women actually don't view sex much differently than the stereotypical man. Furthermore, it can be very rewarding to play "victim." Oooh Booo Whooo I had to fuck 10 men to pay the rent. The reality may be that damn I got laid real nice by 10 desperate men and they were stupid enough to pay my rent! Hell, if I fuck 50 desperate men that might mean a brand new sports car!!! Different people have different limits and likes. The stripclub owner is probably a man of high integrity and virtue compared to the typical elected official or used car salesman. (I got called a used car salesman and believe me that is a hit below the belt and I felt it was totally undeserved despite the fact that I sold a couple used cars.)
• DickJohnson

  •

  15 years ago

  HHmmm...i dont agree there is not a dimes worth of difference between the two, altho they both are at least partly money-based. The johns power is less limited, whereas a SC owner has far more power, at least in the girls mind. As long as a john is respectful to a girl then there is no abuse concern(hence, the victimless crime claim). However, a boss who tells a girl fuck me now or your fired, or go fuck this guy because he spends a lot of money in the club is definitely being abused. We have a tendency to rationalize sex acts as everything is the same, i.e., such as paying for it vs. dating a girl and paying for it that way, its all the same right? Or getting paid for it vs. being blackmailed into doing it, in effect being paid by not suffering consequences. Human will or decision has nothing to do with it then right? after all, its all the same means to an end.
• shadowcat

  •

  15 years ago

  Jimmy used to be the general manager at the Columbia Platinum Plus. He got fired for "sexually harassing the girls". He is now manager and part owner of Savannah's. His girl friend also worked at PP as a bar tender. She is my favorite ATF bar tender. Sweet, beautiful and charming. Next month she is going to have the dirt bag's baby. It takes all kinds.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  I've seen some very needy strippers and in those cases at least the john has a ton of power. However, you make a very good point that typically the stripclub owner has more power (usually due to government). That often wouldn't be case, if the government allowed a free market. At Angels when clubs were free to open without government BS, management was very accommodating to the dancers. If not, then the dancer goes across the street. Government shuts down the clubs and suddenly those girls know who has the power (hint: those clubs that survive). Anyway, I still don't see a dime's worth of difference between a woman agreeing to fuck pretty all comers for X amount of dollars and then somehow there is a problem fucking the owner of the business. Is the john nicer? Is the john cleaner? Is the john a better business deal? If a girl is smart and greedy, then she'd be eager to get on the good side of a man who can help make her $$$. She has the free will to go to another club or start her own club. Oops, in a free country she could start her own club. Heck, one out of 2 ain't too awful. Wave the flag. Actually in my book the means are all important. And, the means are that a woman should have the freedom to accept $$$ for sex. And, the stripclub owner should have the freedom to make sex a condition of employment. YES, the stripclub owner should also have the freedom to refuse service to blacks and asians and pretty much anyone including President Bush. IOWs, screw all this sexual harassment BS and discrimination BS and let individuals instead of government make the decisions. YES, even if those decisions are wrong or unpopular. That is freedom and not the government demanding this crapola or that crapola. OTOH, if the free market isn't allowed, then yes the government should dictate pretty much everything including anti-discrimination and anti-sexual liberty and equality of income.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  BTW, The Wall Street Journal had many years ago a pro-blackmail or at least decriminalize blackmail (hint: less government is very good) opinion piece. I think that is when they were pro-freedom so that opinion piece probably wouldn't get the ink for at least the last few years.
• Timbuck12

  •

  15 years ago

  I knew (know) a dancer that went through the same thing with a manager...he was basically pimping her out ITC and threatening to fire her if she didn't cooperate. We used to hang out OTC a lot (always unpaid) and I never could understand why she put up with it. She said she hated it but she never really did anything about it. Eventually I just realized that 1) it really isn't as big a deal to them as they make it out to be when they're talking to you, or 2) they just don't know how to stand up for themselves. Either way it's kinda sad......
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  One dancer I knew that complained about being pimped out by management as well as her boyfriends (she attracted assholes err real men---she didn't want pussy men) used to hang out with me usually unpaid. Now, before anyone gets all excited about something a worthless as free sex let me clarify that it wasn't like that at all most of the time. In fact, there was never free sex with her. The hang out unpaid means exactly that. She might want to complain about her pimping boyfriend or her pimping manager. Whatever, I enjoyed talking with her but mainly she was treating me like one of her girlfriends. In the club that was a different ballgame and she earned her money. Anyway, one time she spends the night. No hanky panky if you can believe it. Yes, I know that makes me look worthless. So she wakes up and wants breakfast. Fine and dandy. I bought a bunch of food that she likes to eat at Winn Dixie with her the day before. I had hot cereal and cold cereal, little hot dogs, bacon, eggs, sausages, all manner of fruits, etc. Oh no! She wants me to buy her stinking waffles from the waffle house!!! I tell her you know how much waffles cost?! I could feed an entire block with the money a couple measly waffles cost at the waffle house. Waffles are for wealthy assholes only!!! So, I had assumed my rantings against waffles and wealthy assholes had set her straight. Wrong. She wanted to trade sex for waffles. OK, waffles are nice. :) She was a winner and I felt like a winner and those were the best tasting waffles ever. :) I even think positively about waffles now. You know what? She's probably gonna complain to some other sad sack customer that she was forced to have sex just to get breakfast. lol. :) Dang, she was a fine young hottie.
• DickJohnson

  •

  15 years ago

  HHmm...well i guess if we can't see the difference in a girls decision to willingly engage with a John vs. a girls decision to unwillingly engage with an employer or she be terminated then we truly have different ethics which guide our lives.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  I'd like to see the stripclubs institute a zero tolerance policy for prudes. Stipper and customer. I mean if you wanna be prude that ubiquitous in this country so please for the sake of all that is dear let's have a little safe haven for people who are pro-sex. Right on the freaking employment form the first question should be are you willing to have sex with all the male and female employees one on one and in a gangbang for the privilege of taking your clothes off? Anything but HELL YES should be met with an automatic in red capital lettered REJECTED!!! No prudes allowed would be an appropriate sign plastered everywhere inside the club.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  She willingly does it to keep her job! Just as she willingly does it to earn money from a john! Wage slaves "willingly" do all manner of dangerous nasty jobs. Next you will want the government's sexual harassment filth to be brought into the stripclubs and at that point it is better that the government just shut 'em down. BTW, I think government's sexual harassment filth is applicable to stripclubs and can be used as weapon to shut 'em down. We just need some government scumbag to get a little creative against the stripclubs and even the customers. Wave the flag.
• Dain

  •

  15 years ago

  The second comment above (by Book Guy) is one of the most intelligent on the topic that I have ever read.
• Clubber

  •

  15 years ago

  Battered women! I like to eat mine plain!
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  Prudes aka those inimicable to sexual freedom would do just lovely in an ant colony! "First Rule of the Ant Colony: No Hanky-Panky By Jeffrey Kluger Saturday, Jan. 10, 2009 To the long list of reasons you should be glad you're not an ant, add this: You'd have to forget about having sex. You'd also have to forget about even trying. Sneak off for a little insectile assignation and the other members of the colony would know immediately — and attack you for it." [view link] Sounds like President Bush and his supporters. "The Teen Abstinence-Only Crusade Bush's Domestic Sex Policy By DAVID ROSEN" [view link]
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  "The second comment above (by Book Guy) is one of the most intelligent on the topic that I have ever read." When I read Book Guy's comments it made me think of all the people who are desperate obey. They thrive in a very structured environment and place great value on titles and authority and symbols (a medal, gavel, flag, uniform, whatever). They'll say things like you have to respect the Office. Whether it be President Bush or President Obama they're eager to kneel and play follow the leader. Battered Brain Syndrome? Or, their master could be a religious guru. I find it a little amusing and disgusting how huge numbers of Iraqis severely revere an imam as if he walked on water, but hell Americans have similar worship of authority. Seems more like human mentality than stripper mentality.
• DickJohnson

  •

  15 years ago

  Jablake. You seem to value sexual freedom, as do I. I don't understand how sexual liberty is accomplished via threats and intimidation. Your rationale is a little strange, are you really serious in your POV? or are you just being facetious?
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  I'm serious especially where the free market is in force. For example, at Angels for the dancers to work a single shift sometimes they'd have to pay $150. That is a nice piece of change to work a single shift especially when the club has 4 shifts! This BS wouldn't last a second if you had a free market. So the clubs exploit the dancers for every last dime including hefty fines. (Some dancers exchange sexual services to get reduced shift fees and reduced fines. A definite benefit for almost all the girls who are proud of being super sluts.) So if a club owner is free to charge $150 to a dancer to allow her to dance, then working at the club definitely has value if dancers are paying it. If the owner wants a blow job instead of the $150 or if he wants a blow job plus a $150 that just is just a free market in action. I see no difference between an owner demanding $150 from a dancer to allow her to work or demanding that she mow his lawn or tutor his son or provide him full service. She is free to say NO! The beauty is that he is free to demand that which fills his needs and she is free to counter offer, refuse, or accept. This is basic contractual freedom. The vile government has contempt for the freedom to contract; it knows best and it may in some cases---I detest a one size fits all. Normally, I prefer freedom. However, if the government is going be a nanny then I prefer a powerful nanny that will do things like require equality of income for all citizens and residents. :) Hey, *supposed* conservatives love the filth of government when it does their bidding and if that is the case a lot more government is desirable to "level the playing field" and redistribute the wealth. Another point is that with one of my girlfriends, I was very aggressive. A typical bystander would think it was an outrage. Meanwhile she wanted me to be even more aggressive! When it comes to sexual politics the government needs to get its stinking nose cut off with a rusty razor. The fact is my girlfriend was not only free to leave, but was more than capable of having me beaten to a bloody pulp by more than a few men who would love to be on good terms of any type with her. She demanded a "real man" and in her mind that equalled extreme aggression. As she loved to say if a man is going to act like a woman, then she'd prefer a woman because women are normally much more attractive. In the example you gave the freaking woman runs back to the supposed abuse. Maybe she actually likes it? Maybe she likes to play the victim for straight shooters (such as yourself?). She left before and if she so desires I assume she will leave again. Meanwhile she has the satisfaction of being so desirable that a man will lower himself to threats to get some of her premium pussy. My guess is that inflates her ego thru the roof! IOWs, it appears both are getting what they want.
• Book Guy

  •

  15 years ago

  I agree with most of you. But the "hang out unpaid but no sex" thing with someone who gives out sex-for-free or sex-for-money is simply another term, in my personal universe, for "woman using man for attention without giving man what he really wants." If it's GENUINELY the case that you don't want to fuck her, then I must assume it's because either (A) you're all fucked out with other hot women or (B) she's simply not hot enough.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  Hi Book Guy, It is nothing but a power play by her, imo. She is a hooker. Her job is to sell sex to customers who have the money. However, again and again in my experience a hooker will refuse to sell if she really likes you a lot. That is just a hard rule that many of them have (not all, but it seems like it). With this hooker, I don't believe the deal was that she liked me because ITC everything was fine. She wanted to dominate by getting me to agree to something that I avoid like a dreaded disease. See, if I'm not paying a woman, then I feel responsible for protecting and providing for her. I can't stand the phony gender equality. So, send me any hot babe or hottest babe who wishes to have sex with me for free and the answer is an easy HELL NO! I need to pay her at least $5 for full service and $2 for a blow job. If she ain't interested in money, then I've got zero use for her. It really is that simple.
• DickJohnson

  •

  15 years ago

  Still not on board here with you Jablake, but you do seem passionate about your beliefs. You bite off quite a bit with your rants about the gov't, sexual politics, etc...some of which i might be in agreement with you about. Aside from that, I don't think its unreasonable for a young girl to walk into a SC, get a job, do her job according to what she thinks is within her boundaries, and not have to suffer threats and intimidation. In your universe, are you saying thats justified in some way, to be threatened and intimidated?
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  I can only laugh when you speak of her being threatened and intimidated. Look she is an adult. I expect an adult to be able to freely enter into contracts. She could refuse his "threat"---sounded more like an offer of you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours---that he wouldn't allow her to work. Intimidated? Sounds what many wage slaves face and the solution in a free market is look for another job or start your own business. Now, if you wish to argue that it isn't a free market, then I'd be a lot more sympathetic. But, even then she went back to alleged threats and intimidation so it sounds like no problem at all. In fact, I see busy buddies who wish to restrict the right to contract thru force of government as the real serious problem. I'm passionate about my beliefs because I detest when the government creates a prison state and almost as sickening is its one size fits all mentality. Here locally johns under true coercion from the government had to admit that they didn't want sex or love or warmth from a prostitute, but only wished to abuse her. It was sexual violence. It was one government stupidity after another and the government has the hammer to force you to admit to any idiotic "truth" they spew at the moment. So, john after john admitted whatever was demanded by the government---the truth being tossed into the garbage thanks to a blood thirsty corrupt government. This is a free country? LOL!
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  he wouldn't allow her to work *at his club.*
• magicrat

  •

  15 years ago

  One of the reasons I like to stand at the bar. I feel I can always just walk away to tip the girl on stage, go to the bathroom, something/anything as an excuse.
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  "all the while she contends how well she is treated there and how good it is there." Sounds like she has it pretty damn good so unless there is some inside information to the story I would say she recognizes 1) She is very well treated and 2) How good the situation is. The stripclub owner sounds like a prince for her. He delivers dick and cash. What more could a young hooker desire? OK, that ain't the desire of every young hooker but she sounds like a happy camper. The light of day probably really hit her when she realized how horrible most wage slaves have it. Perhaps I know and knew the wrong hookers, but most looked at men as being completely brain dead for giving both dick and money. Like one young hooker said to me (I was young at the time and knew how to treat a woman; no equal rights nonsense.) why in the world are you paying me? She explained further that if I'm treating her right, then why should I pay? She didn't understand, but I pay to avoid a real relationship where I'd pretty much be responsible for not only protecting and providing for her, but also I'd need to defend my honor----an extremely risky proposition in country with so little freedom. Anyway, she gave me an ultimatum as is normal: It's free or hit the curb. I can't imagine a thinking man not hitting the curb. There are other hoes to be found and cherished, who wont start up with garbage demands like they're part of some feminist militia or government lovers.
• DickJohnson

  •

  15 years ago

  You have some fairly interesting views, Jablake. Seriously tho, I know nothing about how you make your living, but I was wondering something. If you are, or were, or maybe someday will be in a postion of authority over young women, would you feel comfortable making sexual demands from such women in exchange for leniency? Lets say, you owned a SC, do you think its OK to demand sex from the girls that work for you, or else there will be consequences?
• jablake

  •

  15 years ago

  Depends on the position of authority and on the young woman and the stage of my life. As an old man, I'm just interested in pay for play without further complications. As a young man, the culture that I was raised in demanded that the women show resistance to show she was valuable. My girlfriend loved to say NO and she expected the man to be very rough with her. If she was going to work in a SC, then she'd disappointed if the owner wasn't pressuring or demanding sex from her. The more aggressive he became up to a point---the happier she'd be---it proved her high value. I've met other women like her and actually, I'd rather not play the role even when or if they melt in my hands. You know what? When she actually meant NO it was very easy to read and proceeding after that point wasn't enjoyable in the least. Contrary to popular opinion there should be a humongous difference between a NO where you are expected to be a he-man and a NO that says scram! In short, the answer is yes it is OK especially if I'm running a SC where the women are supposed to be super sluts. However, just because I think it is OK doesn't mean that I'd pursue it. Yes, it can be a fun game (for both parties), but I'd rather not get involved like that. Too much drama when there are women that can do a good job for a reasonable price. Having said that there are plenty of men and women that enjoy that game and they should be free to negotiate and play away. My old boss hired a secretary with the understanding that not only would she fuck him for the job, but she'd service him weekly. No fuckie no job! Was the woman crying her eyes out? Hardly. She was super slut and proud of it. Her complaint with the boss is he didn't get hard enough and got tired too easy. She preferred fucking him over her other wage slave duties. What about other women who refused his offer of fucking to work? Should I cry a river for 'em? If it isn't a free market, then yes perhaps I should cry a river or demand more government dictates. However, in that office at least the other employees (mainly men) preferred women who were slutty. In a non-work environment non-slutty would have been OK. But, you work your ass off all day long in close proximity and the last thing you want to deal with is some feminist prude or religious prude. Don't like sex, then get a different employer that loves prudes and that BS!