discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi DougS,
The main thought that came to mind as I was reading your post was ENJOY THE MOMENT.
Don't worry about looking like the fool. Think of it as asking girls out. Who is getting the trim? The guy worried about being shot down? (Sometimes girls, even women, can be fairly hurtful, btw.) No, it is the jerk that really isn't too worried. He understands it is a numbers game. There aren't any women who are too hot for him because he knows if you don't try you won't even have the opportunity to fail with the too hot women.
I'm fairly shy. Yet some women see me as being overly aggressive and that is the case sometimes because I understand that that aggressiveness is rewarded overall. The main negative is that at heart I'm a shy guy.
Also, looking like the fool facing a chorus of I told you so's shouldn't be a concern either---just try and limit the damage as much as possible. If the risk is worth the reward . . . .
Good luck, what ever course of action you decide on.
discussion comment
17 years ago
The dancer went from 1) being a crook, 2)giving horrible dances (yes, I will buy a second if the girl is hot enough and sometimes that works wonders), and 3) being insulting and aggressive, to giving some "free" dances and giving fantastic GFEs. It was intense and a hell of a lot of fun. And, she made a lot more money although that wasn't what she was interested in. Yeah, I know the constant idiocy that for every dancer it is just about the money. Whatever. And, if it was just about the money where is the problem???
discussion comment
17 years ago
Falling in "love" with a dancer is wonderful. It means she did a fantastic job. I go searching for that and sometimes get lucky with the rare dancer who is willing to provide that service. It is a ton easier to find a woman who will have sex for money, imo.
Perhaps I wasn't really in "love" because I didn't want an unpaid relationship no matter how crazy I was about the dancer----that is a real turn off regardless of what the woman does for a living. But, the feelings were intense, which surprise surprise was excactly the type service I was trying to find.
So, some PL is crying about falling in love and I'm thinking you lucky blanking bastard found a dancer capable of making it that real and you're complaining? Lap it up like the sweet honey it is. Just remember Just Say No to an unpaid relationship even if that is what she wants. Free isn't really free. There is a hell of a lot that goes into a relationship and it is gee why go there? I guess if that is a person's need then that's what they have to search for.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Another form of stealing that occurs is the dancer without asking will change the dance from a table dance to a lap dance and then demand the lap dance price. That will get me more pissed than the overcount. Now you may ask how can you as the customer not know the difference between a table dance and a lap dance? Easy. The table dances for most dancers are the same as lap dances except for the price. Why would a customer choose a lap dance then? Usually because he wants to spend more money. Sometimes because he doesn't know any better. Anyway depending on my mood I'm apt to tell the dancer to go to hell over this issue. Or, I'll pay if she did a fantastic job and then won't deal with her in the future.
Another scam involves the special chair price. Well, I almost always sit in the same exact chair besides there is no special chairs with higher prices. There are private rooms, but that is a whole different issue. The special chair price again is more apt to get me pissed than the simple over count.
Believe it or not the scams are often more about testing to see if you're a man than about stealing a few dollars. Yes, I can play the game full tilt and have been rewarded both financially and with better dances by showing that yes I do have balls. Confrontation will not be a problem. Hardly a risk free strategy even if you're very popular at the club and even if you are strong and capable of defending yourself.
Anyway, I'm really not into the he-man routine although yes I've done it. For me the cop or even the attorneys who advise it is not about right or wrong or what the law says, has the right idea. Retreat, pay off, forget about right or wrong and just avoid the confrontation. That isn't the right course for everyone, but even when I've won a confrontation I usually feel that it would have been much better to avoid all that nonsense right from the start.
EXCEPTION: Dancer is in my face way off the board. She is looking for a fight. I figure what the hell if she is that desperate to see if I have any balls we will take it as far as she wants to go. So I explode on her. The whole damn club is now watching this little drama unfold. Maybe because I'm well known and for the most part very well liked at this club things do not spiral out of control. Another dancer tries to stick up for her buddy? That girl gets put in her place instantly and hard. Where are the bouncer and security? Well, not willing to get involved that's where. Now, if they didn't know me so well then the game would change for the worse very quickly.
Bottom line the dancer desperate for a fight became a good favorite of mine. VERY good favorite. She likes men who are willing to take a stand. My trying to avoid trouble was just getting her more pissed and more aggressive.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Oh, the attorney for the state kept telling me it would be cheaper just to buy the insurance and besides it was a "benefit." I told her what would be nice is for the court to address the issues that were raised instead of just going DENIED. She, the attorney, says they do that with almost every case! (I knew that from my research.)
I'm also thinking and this is the garbage I'm supposed to support? Those judges make a ton of money and then don't want to do even a little work. You should see how much some of these judges donate to their own campaigns. Really, they don't need a salary---they are more than willing to pay and pay big for their position of power.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Well, what was upsetting was that the state kept repeating that fault was irrelevant. It would make NO difference according to the Bureau of Financial Responsibility even if I was just legally stopped at a red light and someone rear ended me. Fault according to the state was irrelevant.
More upsetting was the courts. I looked thru some 1000 cases---I think it was 900 hundred something. Yes, hard to believe but I did. Almost all the cases were filed by attorneys; 90 per cent or greater? It has been a long time. All but 6 or 7 were denied without opinion. American justice at its finest. Of those 6 or 7 cases that had something besides just DENIED, it was like 1 or at the most 2 that gave real relief. In one case the attorney was pleading with the judge for an opinion because his client had spent so much money. The judge, my judge, btw, did write after DENIED a single case cite, which basically didn't address the issues the attorney had raised.
So this is the vaunted due process??? It is shit. The courts are mainly an extortion rackett for lawyers' fees.
Sorry, if my writing isn't too clear. The subject is very upsetting. And, more than that I just DO NOT believe in the system and I think most people do believe in it. Not too much shared ground there or united we stand bs.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Another reason I wouldn't be upset about a fave asking for the money upfront is that it is something that I wouldn't even think to take personally. I can see a lot of things bringing that situation about. She might be a little paranoid due to drugs. Generally, I like dancers who use drugs at least I liked those who I knew were drug users or even druggies. A good customer might have ripped her off because he was having problems. Another girl might of been ripped off by her good customer making all of the dancers afraid. She might be freaking about making the rent and she knows just having those extra dollars will make her feel a hell of a lot better. I still recall this dancer with her beat up dying car. In the car was an eviction notice and she was desperate to earn money with whatever services were necessary. She tried to budget, but didn't realize shit happens.
There are just so many things that could be bouncing around in the dancer's head. Like her boyfriend threatening to knock her teeth out unless she has a $100 for him next time he walks in the door. Everyone has different likes and dislikes. If you don't like it, then really that is what is important or you could try and see it from her pov.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Oh my, I didn't realize you were one of those lesbians! Too hot. :) LOL, I was thinking you were like one of the guys.
It is amazing just how hot these customers are and I will be thinking the dancers should get off the stage and let's see those customers!!! :) Well, my club is a little rougher than most. And, opinions about me range from he is a super nice guy to let's say a lot less than nice. And in the same vein, some women think I'm not aggressive enough and others think I'm way out of line.
Just want to make conversation? That doesn't sound like me or the club. :) Yeah, sometimes I'll wimp out figuring she doesn't need to be hit on when she is trying to enjoy the dancers.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi AbbieNormal,
No, it is all me. It is the way I write and think. :)
See you bring up something about the pledge not being required since 1943 and my thought is so what? The issue is years of litigation and Supreme Court suddenly discovers Dad has no standing. I believe even if the Constitution and the highest court specially said that you had a right not to pledge allegiance that that would be meaningless. The protections don't work. Precedent is ignored. The Constitution is ignored.
You bring up the garbage about $2 Billion a year for Egypt. And, this situation was for the benefit of ?????????????? I will give you a million guesses. Was one of the guesses Israel?
Whatever. Perhaps you think the benefit of the $2 Billion a year for Egypt was for U.S. college students. Who knows. Israel is no benefit to the United States it is the exact opposite--it is a financial as well as a security drain.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Correction: ******These weren't the exact words of the cop of course, but he was telling me even though I wasn't at fault I would get SCREWED. 100% correcto mundo!******
discussion comment
17 years ago
The stealing can cover a number of areas. The one that seems very common is the overcount of dances. Some of the clubs are set up that way. So you try and reach an agreement with the dancer BEFORE she starts dancing that she will tell when the song ends. Believe it or not the dancers have very different standards, depending on their honesty, of when a song ends. The good ones are very upfront especially if you have an agreement BEFORE she starts dancing. What happens is the dancer will claim she forgot to tell the song had ended and thus you owe her for one or two more songs than you heard. It is setup like this on purpose with the DJ. My solution is to pay and cut her off for future dances no matter how much I liked her.
A truck crashed into my car when I was at a full stop. Fortunately, not only did the trucker confess, but a nice person stopped and told the cop everything. So the cop tells me he doesn't want to write a ticket because it will cause the insurance rates to skyrocket and the Bureau of Financial Responsibility will gets its 2 cents in demanding that at fault or not you will be required to buy more expensive insurance which is a "benefit" to you. It is a "benefit" that is why fault is irrelevant. ******These weren't the exact words of the cop of course, but he was telling me even though I was at fault I would get SCREWED. 100% correcto mundo!******
It was a Georgia case, I believe where the U.S. Supreme said NO, if you want to force somebody to get the insurance which they otherwise wouldn't be required to purchase, then the state had to consider whether the driver in the accident was at fault or not. The state had yapped that it was a "benefit" and thus fault was irrelevant.
So fast forward about 20 years after that Supreme Court holding. Do I get a hearing as to fault? Do I get written findings of fact? Yeah, at the administrative level stating fault is irrelevant because insurance is of course a "benefit." So, we have years of litigation. Can't get the state trial court to provide written findings of fact or much of anything. In fact, 1 day after the petition was filed it was denied without opinion and I received it in the mail (regular first class) not even 24 hours after it was filed--more like 12 hours if that. An appeal took place and an opinion was written and part of the opinion said that I didn't have a right to findings of fact and conclusions of law--in the footnote, I think. So the case goes on and on and even gets into the federal court. Still no finding of fact of conclusions of law (but a note that due process doesn't require findings of facts and conclusions of law). Anyway, the federal judge says the written findings of fact wouldn't apply to a trial judge. Yes, but the Supreme Court said a trial judge would be held to even higher standards. So more litigation and I believe the appeal court reversed in that federal district shouldn't have decided anything. Oh gee, a court not supposed to make a decision. Whatever.
Anyway, it was a very interest case.
Perhaps I could have explained it better, but I just have so little faith in the honesty of the system that it is why bother. It is a FRAUD to me. BTW, my relative who was a practicing attorney at the time was very interested in case, but he lived in New York so I just sent him the garbage as it went back and forth. He's a relative, but he thought I had a damn solid case.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi AbbieNormal,
Gee I wonder why Egypt is getting $2 Billion a year? Could it have anything to do with Israel?
The point of the pledge of allegiance case was the grounds the Supreme Court used to avoid deciding the issue. Dad has no standing where his child is concerned--No surprise there, sounds like typical America. Furthermore as I stated if the government wants you to say pledge of allegiance to peanut butter and jelly sandwiches you do it. AND, no it doesn't make a bit of difference if there is some stupid or smart Supreme Court precedence stating that you can or can't do X, Y, or Z. Whether the statutory law or case law is for or against you makes very little difference. It is whatever the judge wants.
I had some Supreme Court law where an administrative judge was held to the requirement of written findings of fact and conclusions of law under the due process clause. As an aside the court stated a trial judge would be held to even higher standards of due process. You believe that? Is that the law that will be enforced? Or is there some reason a trial judge shouldn't be held to that standard of due process?
Anyway, you believe in this corrupt system that is fine and dandy. I wouldn't trust them with anything over a $1--no even a $1 is too much to trust them with.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi AbbieNormal,
Glad you don't see stealing as a problem. Because of my reaction to stealing (which could be wrong) I lose otherwise excellent dancers over it. Part of the problem is that I associate it with a prelude to greater confrontation in the future; there may be no correlation with that particular dancer. My interest usually is very strongly in favor of trying to avoid confrontation if the cost of doing so isn't too high.
LOOK BACK: Some of the best advice I ever got was from a cop who told me that it didn't make any difference if I was legally right and morally right. That just didn't make any difference at all. The smart decision, and I had NO IDEA how good the cop's advice was till many many years later, was to walk away or payoff or do whatever it took to avoid the system. At the time I thought it was so strange for a cop to have that attitude, but I figured he knew more about because of his occupation and experience so I did what he said. I still think very kindly of the cop who is probably dead by now because of his sound advice.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi Bones,
There are very good reasons for managers trying to get the dancers to collect the money upfront. Most dancers hate it because they understand they make more and can cheat more (assuming they're crooks) if the customer pays after the dances.
"White Boy" a bouncer over at Angels was murdered over a customer's refusal to pay a dancer $20 that was owed. The dancer didn't get the money upfront like she was supposed to, but alas almost none of the dancers ever did because it hurts their earnings too much. So she complains to Steven (I think that is his first name.) and the fight appears to be finished with Steven (the bouncer) defeating the customer and it seemed like end of story. Well, the customer gets a gun out of his pickup truck and two lives are lost over $20. Steven, a young man and a good guy was survived by a pregnant wife and young child as well as his parents. The other young man, I heard was also highly thought of, was captured immediately by police. The complaining dancer was just an emotional wreck and gave up dancing. She was also out of this world beautiful.
So these confrontations continue from time to time because economically it just makes sense for the customer to pay after the dances. Dancer makes more money and club can charge her more.
MAYBE THIS WHY IT DOESN'T BOTHER ME A TINY BIT THAT A DANCER WHO KNOWS ME MIGHT FEEL FORCED TO OBEY A MANAGER'S RANTING ABOUT COLLECTING THE MONEY UPFRONT. BTW, the club makes less----not directly, but from dancers not willing to pay the outrageous fees to dance when their income has been slashed by the money upfront rule. Over at Angels those poor dancers get clobbered left right and center--if there was a free market I strongly believe the dancer's would be calling the shots or at the very least would be treated with due respect to their wallet and person by the club.
OK, rant off a little bit. :)
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi FONDL,
Well you don't shrink the government by throwing money and resources to protect Israel let alone risk plunging the world into war over a strip of land that should truly have NO value to Americans. Protecting the Jewish people is one thing getting into a real estate squabble is quite another. Plenty of room here in the U.S. for those Jews who value peace and their lives over some strip of "holy land." They think God gave it to them? Fine, then its God's problem. America should actually start thinking about its citizens first for a change and not get involved in idiotic religious disputes. The Republicans look like just a bunch of hoodlums and closet sex cases.
Anyway compassionate conservative as I understood it meant more government in every aspect of people's lives. So it shouldn't have come as a surprise. If more government is the desire of both parties, then that is fine. I would like to see gay marriage approved of by both state and federal governments. Perhaps even affirmative action for gays and lesbians. I would also like to see the government pay for abortions as well as medical care for everyone. Taxes? Way too low and enforcement not aggressive enough. Alcohol banned and other drugs legalized, but regulated and heavily taxed. Inflation? Not enough because the government needs to create more money to give to the poor. Mandatory million dollar no-fault insurance for gun owners per gun. Almost forgot again. Nothing more important than giving government millions to family farms.
But, if none of those good things happen that will be fine. So any Democrat or Republican is wonderful. Remember WE STAND UNITED!!!
PS --- I was Republican who wouldn't have ever thought of voting for Democrats. I believed in less government even for progams that I thought were basically good and less taxes and a stable dollar. After Bush, I don't care what the Democrats do they'll never look appealing to me. :)
So bring on Hillary or whoever.
Democratic victory is fine and so is a Republican victory. Endless wars that is fine or peace nut city is fine also.
discussion comment
17 years ago
It wouldn't bother me at all. Some people are extremely obedient to authority figures like a manager. The old just following orders. (Some people think that is never a defense and others thinks it always a defense and still others depend on an authority figure to tell them if it's a defense.)
She probably didn't see it as a big deal. I think that might have happened to me once or twice with dancers who knew I would pay. In each instance it was the old obeying the manager story because some girl got ripped off by a customer. Future visits and it just faded away or there was a new manager.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Interesting that stealing doesn't rate a mention for you. Except for losing the services of the dancer where she otherwise does an excellent job it wouldn't merit mention for me either. Unfortunately, even if she just stole small it takes the fun out the dance for me.
discussion comment
17 years ago
In one case it was a combination of spending lots of time talking with her or actually more listening to her. And, the real thing that she said impressed her the most was that I didn't show any interest in other dancers except for just being nice even when she wasn't working. What was important to her seemed absurd to me, but she thought that was the greatest. Even stranger as I pointed out to her, I did have a girlfriend that she knew about. Turns out she thought the reason for my "cheating" was completely reasonable. She couldn't understand a woman not putting out for her boyfriend as often as he needed it.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi Book Guy,
Do you remember the Pledge of Allegiance case? The father sued on behalf of his daughter and the case spent years in the courts. The state had its team of lawyers and the lawyer-judges batted the issue around. The father appearing pro-se did have a law degree and may have even been licensed to practice law. So you have all these lawyers who you would think might know a little something about law, but know it never occured to them that the father didn't have standing to sue on behalf of his daughter. The great legal minds of the Supreme Court, more likely their law clerks, had to cook up that excuse to avoid deciding the case. Not that the case had any real importance. The government wants you to pledge allegiance to peanut butter and jelly sandwiches then you pledge allegiance to peanut butter and jelly sandwishes. It's real simple.
Most of government is just about force and fraud. Who was that said if men were angels we wouldn't need government as if the the government was better than ordinary men. It might be if you created real separation of powers and checks by ordinary citizens . . . imo it is just a bunch of ca ca. :)
discussion comment
17 years ago
The Constitution doesn't even mention lawyer or attorney. It's been turned into a gravy train by and for lawyers.
I didn't know there was right to bear arms secured by the Constitution. And, perhaps I need to take a closer look at it, but free speech rights weren't protected either as I recall. I know their isn't a right to a jury of ones peers. And, there isn't a right to a jury trial in civil cases either. Double jeopardy? Gone. No standing army? Well with endless war promoted by the government that ain't really applicable. It is a fairly "flexible" document that I believe was ignored or selectively enforced right from the get go.
And, as good as it was in many respects in planted the seeds for a very bloody war. And, I'm not even talking about the slave issue; the division of power between the States and the Federal Government.
discussion comment
17 years ago
As far as you're "being a WHOLE lot worse than a dancer that is struggling to keep her kids fed and sheltered," I don't necessarily see that either.
Imagine a dancer who views sex like a typical young male i.e. will screw pretty much anything. That makes her bad? In your belief system it may and actually that belief system may be fine and dandy.
On my father's side of the family women were held to a much higher set of standards and were considered the foundation of the family. The man's job was to protect and provide. Nowadays the women is supposed to be Ms. Rambo playing war games in the Middle East and other parts of the empire. My views are a tad more old fashioned, but kudos to the young men view women with total equality. No reason for a man to work to support his family if the woman can hustle her body and make more money. Beats risking for her life and limbs for some silly stupid government project any day of the week, imo.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi DougS,
I wouldn't worry too much about getting taken and see that as part of the process. That is true in other relationships as well. My concern would be limiting the damage to what you would consider an acceptable level.
I get chewed out by most people when I normally shrug at small theft. I shrug because it is small--the it's the principle nonsense would have impressed me decades ago. Not even a twitch of agreement now. Some people have the knack for finding good in others (not me, generally) and I think their reward is inner peace and happiness.
I was talking with a dancer that it seems like I've known forever and she really gets hyper in a negative way about prostitution i.e. FS. She did it way back when she was young and pregnant and didn't like it at all. She wouldn't consider a HJ as being prostitution because to her it just isn't very intimate like she considers sexual intercourse to be. Likewise she just doesn't consider grinding with clothing on as being intimate.
discussion comment
17 years ago
I was watching Rumsfeld on TV some years back and he was complaining that we spend more money than the terrorists. OK, he wants to spend less money than the terrorists? That's a good start. :)
No, he couldn't be that sensible. Naw, somehow he needs to force the terrorists to spend more of their money. Maybe help them set up their own IRS? :) Naw, that would probable be a little too cruel and unusual. OTOH, they aren't protected by the Consitution are they? Silly, is anyone? The legal profession.
discussion comment
17 years ago
.
One policy of President Bush's that is ingenious is fighting the terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them over here. It is a win/win for the terrorists and Americans. Think for a moment.
Why would a terrorist need to make the long and risky journey to America when President Bush has so thoughtfully given them a plentiful number of Americans in convenient locations? No need for Omar or Rasheed or Muhammed to travel to far off lands. They can can conduct their godly duties in the holy lands and hang with friends and family. Even better if successful they get more than a few dozen virgins as a reward and are freed from being jealous of our FREEDOMS. (Remember how right before the holy warriors boarded the planes they hung out at a strip club so they could get a small taste of the freedom that was awaiting them? Oh, that story was a fraud. Oh, well. :) )
OK, sounds good so far but what do our soldiers win out of this? Besides increased monetary rewards and adventure? Simple they get to fight for our freedoms that didn't need to be surrendered to our war on terror. Remember the reason the terrorists hate us according to President Bush is because they're jealous of our freedoms. A damn good reason of making strip clubs illegal as Governor Bush promised the people of Florida. The Bushes sure know how to fight terrorists!
Selfish people would rather watch tits and ass than appease the terrorists! Sorry, that's fight the terrorists! Talk about a lethal blow to the whole terrorist movement. They're all in a hissey fit over our freedoms? Just elminate the freedoms! President Bush does know how to win the war on terror through a dual pronged strategy of giving the terrorists more convenient targets and eliminating freedoms. It is so simple the war has basically already been won and it is just time to distribute the medals in a few short months. :)
discussion comment
17 years ago
"But it's not just the ultrarich who are abandoning Republicans. CNN's exit poll last fall showed that voters in the East making between $150,000 and $200,000 favored Democratic candidates by a 63-37 majority. Since 2004, the percentage of professionals identifying themselves as Republicans fell from 44 percent to 37 percent, according to a September Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. The same survey found 59 percent of Republican voters agreed with the statement that free trade has been a negative for the country."
http://www.newsweek.com/id/43346/page/2
Is it true? Does it make any difference? Don't the voters understand the Democrats want to SURRENDER to the terrorists? Even if they did surrender it seems like the policy would be declare victory and run ala President Reagan in Lebanon. Everyone once in a blue moon I'll read a story bemoaning President Reagan's decision to "cut and run." How the terrorists could have been defeated in Lebanon if only President Reagan hadn't taken the convenient and cowardly way out. Fortunately, the heroic government has an opportunity to correct that mistake by defeating the terrorists in Iraq. Golly gee whittaker. It is like if you NUKED Columbia the drug lords would be defeated. Oh, you might have to NUKE Mexico as well, but that ain't any great loss and it solves the problem of illegal immigration! Killin two dem dogs with a couple pop pops definitely a bargain for freedom loving people all over the world. Next we can all sit around a faux camp fire and drink Coca Cola while swaying to the music and holding hands. :)