Comments by chitownlawyer (page 24)

Bonita Flats is in Olathe, Kansas.

I guess for the first year they have a big income tax refund to help them through the transition...oh, never mind.

Well, now Mouse, remember, the wealth of an older man and the beauty/other physical attributes of a younger woman are both relative commodities. Yes, as a 50 plus man you do have to have more-than-average wealth to attract a desirable woman under 30. HOWEVER, how wealthy you have to be depends on how attractive she is. If you are Michael Douglas, you get Catherine Zeta-Jones. If you are Donald Trump, you get Melania Knauss. However, even if your wealth is less than spectacular--but still considerable, or at least above average--then you may well be able to get an attractive woman within the context in which you live your life. If you want the latest Czech model off of the cover of Sports Illustrated, I doubt that a net worth of less than 20-25 million, plus a pretty high profile lifestyle is going to do it. But if you are looking for a fairly good looking woman in a second- or third-tier metropolitan area, or small town USA, I bet that you could do it with a net worth in the 2-5 million range, assuming that you have a good annual income and aren't overly encumbered by other obligations (alimony/child support being the most obvious). The bait you need depends on the fish you want to catch. However, as my grandfather used to say, just make sure the real sucker isn't sitting on the bank. (sucker=a midwestern term for carp, a game fish of middling quality),.

It makes no difference to me if she's married. I'm not looking for a relationship. For those who are concerned about subsidizing the dancer's husband, I would suggest that, assuming there is any level of contact at your club at all, that which you are taking from hubby far exceeds that which you are giving him.....

I never feel like calling a stripper greedy. When they work, they work as hard as anyone I know. I have this perverse admiration for door-to-door salemen who can get 99 doors slammed in their face for the sake of making one sale, and dancers are in very much the same situation. If anything, my criticism of dancers is that they are too timid or disinterested in selling themselves, and sometimes just hang out in the club. But I can understand that they would sometimes get discouraged, especially if the crowd is small and composed of people who seem to have a hard time getting their hands to reach their wallets. And, if a girl does get a hot hand early in her shift, I can see how she would be tempted to take it easy, or just hang out in the locker room and run down the clock.

Jpac, the perfect time will never come. You need to promise yourself that the next time you see her under any reasonable circumstances, (like, she's not bleeding to death, or under the gun at that moment from management) you will approach her and ask her to go out with you under some very safe circumstances. The fact she has bi-racial kids shows that she is open to more than "talking" to black guys. Anyone who has a problem with bi-racial dating/whatever in 2005 needs to enter at least the 20th century. This is the year that Seal and Heidi Klum got married, remember? You have to have the discipline to make yourself go for it. You are vastly overthinking the situation (as illustrated by the fact that you are posting here....if you have posted here, I can't imagine the number and extent of other circumstances/venues/forums in which you have agonized/emoted about this).

Umm, not to sound like davids, but, I think that, like any good profit-maximizer, they really don't give a shit.

Like I said....

I don't know about dancers, but that sure brought back memories of some women that I knew (and some that I chased) as a young lawyer in a major metropolitan area (far from my current home). These women would make you feel on the top of the world when you were with them, but shitty all other times. I get some spiteful happiness over the three or four of them who forget when to turn the player bit off, and are now in middle age and involuntarily alone. I guess that's why men can play the game longer and better than women...men are trading on money, which has a much longer shelf life than looks, the main commodity available to women.

I'll tell you how I tip, although I'm sure it will subject me to huge amount of flaming and other criticism. As the other regulars on this board know, I tend to frequent one specific club. Under those circumstances, it is important to to have a reputation for being cheap. Also, the dancers at the club I go to give extraordinary dances (which is why I am such a devotee). My club has $10 full contact couch dances. At this point, I rarely get these, since I know who I want to take straight to VIP. However, unless the couch dance is terrible, I will tip another $10. My club has legendary $50 VIPs, of which the house gets $10. Unless the dance is terrible, I will tip the dancer another $20 on top of her share. If the dance is good to great, the tip rises accordingly. Rarely do I give the "minimum" $20 tip. If a girl sits and talks for me for 10-15 minutes or more, and I am encouraging her to do so, or at least not actively trying to get rid of her, and for some reason do not get a dance from her, I will tip her $20 for her time. RL...davids...let the flaming begin!!!

correction---it's important NOT to have a reputation for being cheap.

It gets worse...increasingly I am tipping $5 at the rail. $1 doesn't seem to be enough for the services provided, and it is awkward to screw around with multiple singles..besides, once you are up to $2 or $3, what the hell difference does another $2 or $3 make? I should stress...I only go about once a month...the experience is still more in the realm of a trip to Six Flags than a regular place to stop off after work. If I went more often, I'm sure I would tip more...but I doubt that I would go that often. It would be like having ice cream every night. But that is a different thread.

Actually, in light of the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in _Lawrence v. Texas_, the presumption seems to be that consenting private conduct between consenting adults is immune from government regulation, based on the right to privacy that the Supreme Court invented in the 1960s, first to strike down laws against interracial marriage (Loving v. Oklahoma), then to strike down laws against providing birth control information to married couples (Griswold v. Connecticut), then finally to find a right to abortion in Roe v. Wade. The Supreme Court "found" this right to privacy by cobbling together different parts of the Constitution, such as the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent and (I am not making this up) the Third Amendment right not to have soldiers quartered in your home during peacetime (Roe v. Wade is the only US Supreme Court that draws on the Third Amendment). The COurt has found that, though the COnstitution does not explicitly talk about a right to privacy, the "sense of the document" provides the basis for such a right. However, the right to privacy is one of the "Second tier" rights, that can be infringed upon if there is a sufficiently compelling public interest(Usually termed "health, safety and morals)". If someone was to argue that prostitution should be legalized because it involves private sexual conduct between consenting adults, I would guess that the anti-prostitution laws would pass muster on the basis that the State has a compelling interest in protecting public health, and that commercial sex involves health issues, including those that can affect the public at large, such that the state has a right to regulate it, including outlawing it. These are the arguments used to uphold mandatory vaccination laws against those people and groups who argue that such laws infringe on their right of privacy. There could also be the argument that commercial sex tends to be caught up in organized crime, and that by outlawing prostitution, the legislature sought to achieve the permissible goal of promoting law enforcement. (In evaluating whether a law is permissible, the Court will not look at whether the law is the best way of achieving a particular end, or whether the law actually worked to achieve that end, but only whether the Legislature could reasonably have thought that the law could promote the desired goal) When _Lawrence_ was announced, my first thought was that every LDS man in Utah who is doing time for polygamy should have his lawyer file a habeus corpus petition for his release. However, most polygamists are in jail for welfare fraud or child sexual assault, not polygamy.

At the risk of going off topic, I have always found the Deja Vu chains to be like the MacDonald's of the sc business..they offer a standardized, bland, predictable product. And the hustle is worse than any other club I've been in.

No, the fact the copper lied is not a defense. After all, when you think about it, all undercover work is a "lie," albeit not one that is verbalized. Unless the cop comes into the club wearing his uniform, he is encouraging people to think that he is simply another customer of the club, an impression he furthers by ordering a beverage, sitting among the customers, and watching the dancers. No one has a legal interest in undercover LE telling the truth, unless a false statement is being used for entrapment.

Aren't the Las Vegas clubs 24/7?

_Lawrence v. Texas_ holds that the state cannot prosecute for homosexual acts performed by consenting adults in private. There was a serious question as to whether the whole case was a set-up...the raid in which the police found the defendants engaged in anal sex was made in response to a call for disturbing the peace...but the caller was never identified, and no specific breach of the peace was ever identified. However, when the local police investigated, they entered the defendants' apartment (after getting no response to their knocking). It was suggested that defendants who really wanted to resist the charges would have filed motions to quash their arrests on the basis of illegal search and seizure, and these motions may well have been granted. The attorneys who argued the case for the Texas attorney general before the Supreme Court claimed that the whole situation was a set-up on the part of gay rights advocates to force an issue to the Supreme Court, and that the Court should have dismissed the case on the basis that it did not involve a real "case and controversy", which is required under Article III of the COnstitution.

With the exception of pilgrimages to Indy, the specific identify of SC's I patronize is based entirely on the random factor of where my business takes me (Is this really random? Are people who live in communities with good strip clubs more litigious than other people? Inquiring minds want to know). However, I am aware of extras occurring in more clubs than not. The second time that I went to a club, the dancer put my hand in her g-string. Last night a dancer in a club in Indy (not favorite club) told me that earnings in her club were down about 1/3 during the current year...and this is in a good club with a lot of attractive dancers. Under these circumstances, all conditions are right for extras to flourish.

"I HAVE to see myself as an entertainer. if i felt otherwise, i don't think i could do the job, because to be completely honest (regardless of whether it is or isn't true), thinking of myself as a sexual object to grind on the laps of men 3 times my age so they can go home and masturbate" Oh, Foxxy, if it's done right, masturbation has very little to do with it...Sorry.

I am glad, though for some "conventional wisdom" among a lot of civilian women that there is no touching in sc's. I have often overheard women say that they don't understand why sc's appeal to men, since there are RULES against the dancers even touching the men. So the men enjoy going to the clubs even though they can't touch the dancers, and vice-versa--because that would be WRONG. Preach it, Sister. Such talk--and the belief that it indicates--gives us all great cover for the hobby. Oh, yes, we crazy, irrational men. What WILL we think of next?

FONDL: My figure is my estimate of what it would take to support a young woman with whom one is having a full-blown, sexual, exclusive (at least on her part) relationship, and in which one is securing a claim on her time pretty much at will by supporting her is such a way that she does not need demanding employment. I am assuming that you will have to pay for her rent/mortgage payment, keep her in a fairly nice car, pay a thousand or so a month in clothing and hair expenses, etc. I am figuring that women in their twenties are fairly acquistive. In other words, the figure that I gave is what I think it would cost to keep a mistress. If you are just interested in a non-sexual, "best pals hanging out" type of relationship, more sort of a Henry Higgins/Eliza Doolittle thing (as opposed to a small town USA version of Donald Trump/Marla Maples(scratch that, Melania Knauss)), then I'm sure that is obtainable for far less--maybe not more than picking up the tab at dinner.

Let's reason this out together, RL, to see who gets the better deal, me or loser boyfriend....for him to get my money, his girlfriend has to touch me in ways that would normally be considered quite intimate. I basically get access to all the parts of her body that he does, with the exception of one, to which I wouldn't want access, because presumably he does have access to it. I get this access for a price that I, by definition, consider reasonable, since I am paying it under no particular compulsion (lap dances and related activities being non-necessary items). Further, I get to spend time with his girlfriend when she is at her most attractive, "upbeat" and convivial. He gets her when she is tired from work, pissed off about living with the loser, and down on men due to having spent the prior evening being pawed by a middle aged lawyer old enough to be her father. Goodness, RL, this one seems easy to me.

"The only thing I would suggest is not paying strippers for conversation. Your personality should be enough to make them want to talk to you for free. If you pay them for their time I believe it insults them: suggesting they have an ulterior motive in talking to you. It also makes them disrespect you: thinking you can buy their friendship, or that you think your personality cannot win them over on its own merits. Try this instead: Make friends with other employees in the club like the waitresses, bartenders, doormen, oh and especially the DJ if you can. Try to establish yourself with them as a good and friendly customer who has a good personality and treats people. Tip these other employees well but not extravagantly. Buy the waitresses some drinks if your club allows this. Word will get around. You will then find strippers talking to you for free, even if you are not buying dances from them. Sometimes even ones you never buy dances from. Does that sound hard to believe? It probably does but it really works. " ************* I don't mind paying for time spent in conversation, because I don't see it as buying their attention or affection. I see it as compensating them for the time they have lost from, potentially, dancing for other customers. I charge the same hourly rate to customers for all my work. When I am driving to a courthouse in a distant part of the state, I may be the most expensive driver around, because the client is paying me full rate. But the client is not paying me for what I am doing...the client is paying me for what I cannot be doing...appearing in court, or working on cases in my office...because I am driving to a distant place to represent them. In the same way, when I pay a dancer after she sits with me for a while, I am not paying her for her conversation, but I am recognizing that she could have been making money dancing while she was talking to me instead. I have never known a dancer to be offended by being given money.. I have rarely known anyone, in any condition of life, to be offended by being offered money. If, as I found out, dancers are not embarrassed by having money thrown at their person, in quick succession of singles, but one at a time, while they are dancing, with the expectation that they will gather every single on their hands and knees at the conclusion of the set (the so-called "money shower", a practice that strikes me as a degrading and humiliating practice), I doubt that anything relating to money could offend them. Due to having gone to the same club about once a month for the past 2 1/2 or 3 years, I have become what I would call a "cordial acquaintance" with some of the staff at the club, with some of the results that you suggest. Given that I really can't, from a practical point of view, increase the frequency of my visits, I think that this is where it will continue to be. I enjoy the company of dancers. However, I do note that few of them appear to spend their leisure time in the company of middle-aged lawyers (at least not voluntarily). Therefore, I recognize that their willingness to spend time with me has, at the very least, a substantial financial component, and recognizing that means paying them something even for time spent in conversation. I don't, by the way, pay girls that I find unattractive (either physically or emotionally), as long as I have been giving them fair notice that I want them to leave me alone. My high tipping actually comes from ignorance. Keep in mind that no one introduced me to the sc scene...I went by myself while on business. I guess I was so blown away by the contact in the Houston clubs that I first went to ( a large case in the mid 90s took me to Houston about twice a month for 18 months) that I thought the pricing structure in clubs had to be like that in restaurants, where a tip for the staff was expected. By the time that I found out otherwise, I was firmly esconced in my current payment mode...which my ATF says is far too much money to pay (to other dancers).

davids: I think you are plumbing the depths of my psyche here. As you have correctly opined, I am happily married, but go to sc's for a little variety. Perhaps paying for the entire, even the conversation, helps me insulate the experience from being anything personal. However, you have piqued my curiosity. The next time I go to a club, I will not pay for time spent merely in conversation. I'm not sure that it should be Favorite Club, since I've already established a pattern there. HOwever, the next time I am out of town and find a club that can serve as a suitable control, I'll do as you suggest, and report back on the results. I just hope this isn't like the last scene in "Tora! Tora! Tora!": "I fear that we have wakened a sleeping giant."

By the way, the dancers with whom I have discussed the issue are straightforward about the fact that couch dances and VIPs are where they make their money, and that stage dancing is just an advertisement for the high-revenue producing activities. In fact, the many of the best dancers, such as my ATF don't even go on stage, since they don't need any new business...they spend the evening doing VIPs with their regulars, plus any new guys lucky enough to get in between the regulars.