discussion comment
15 years ago
Street clothes and no makeup is ideal, but she needs to close the deal by going totally nude. Fancy clothes and high heels are a total turnoff to me; seems like the equivalent to the monkey suit men in many occupations are required to don. Maybe if I wasn't such a runt, my dislike of the monkey suit wouldn't be. At least on my bod it ain't practical at all unless I found a world class tailor.
I still remember the genital warts growing out of the anus on this one 20 something hottie. I lost all interest. Now if she'd been wearing clothes in a no stripping situation, then I'd have learned about the nasty growth too late. Unlike most customers that I know, I'm more of a PG to R type of guy. Hardcore is usually more than I want unless I've known the dancer awhile. Seems like almost every male that I know is the exact opposite. Sex even before you've known the woman 5 minutes if she is willing.
discussion comment
15 years ago
Hi casualguy,
I think the economics of releasing petty criminals just ain't there. The key is that sure the government has a bunch of nobodies incarcerated for petty offenses and it costs a few dollars warehousing 'em. The beauty of the system isn't creating jobs for prison officials. The beauty is how much money can be extorted from other nobodies thru fear. There are all types of fines, fees, and costs that harmless folks need to pay or they face not only years behind bars, but rape, denial of medical services, etc. Eliminate that fear and woe these harmless nobodies may not pay all the garbage----thus, it is a net revenue loser for the government as well as jobs loser. Besides government knows to make supposedly "painful" cuts in services to get the cattle all scared and willing to open the their pocket books wide. When the government was releasing Willie Horton, how many nobodies were rotting away? Willie is priceless because it gets the cattle class thinking oh my god more prisons need to be built and more police and more taxes. In one case that I was involved with an extremely violent felon (according to his rap sheet) was released again and again and again. It was truly a thing of beauty if you saw how many nobodies rot away and yet this extremely violent repeat offender kept getting released. He wasn't even a U.S. citizen and I don't think he was here legally---if that is important. Anyway, the violent felon does a lot of good in getting the cattle class to clamor for more police and more prisons and more laws (lawyers need the money!). It is a game.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"He's just a dirtbag."
Some people want to be abused and that includes men. The desire to be abused can be very powerful.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"That article is classic...'sell the sizzle, not the steak'...LOL!!"
I've never been a fan of selling the sizzle, but it can work. I remember a buddy who loved Fords. It made no sense and what was surprising is that he agreed the Fords were garbage, but that was unimportant. He wasn't a "value" shopper when it came to cars. He might also feel right at home in a no touch club with the right amount of glitz and sizzle.
Jablake's wisdom: Keep the sizzle for the tourists or those with money to blow. I'd rather be eating raw bloody steak with the thug's occasional bullets whizzing by. A very fun thug club was Club Honeys (deceased)----I didn't visit too often because it was ringed by law enforcement. It was a true sight to behold. A relatively small club and an army of police. The strippers were often fresh out of a government cage and ready for some male attention.
Get rid of the thugs? Wash your mouth out with a healthy dose of soap and water!
discussion comment
15 years ago
It is always a shock to me how quickly some people can die. One moment they're laughing and having a good time and looking good and bingo the reaper takes 'em in a blink of an eye. This one gentleman looked fantastic. A real lady's man who had women, including his remarried ex-wife, fighting for his services. He ate all the healthy foods. Exercised at gym in a responsible manner. Regularly went for his checkups. No smoking or drugs other than an occasional beer or glass of wine.
He left behind loving children and friends. The worst part besides just up and dying in the middle of the work day was that he was only a year away from collecting his Social Security check. He dreamed of that check along with a modest investment portfolio. His plans were meticulous and complete for traveling the world (on a budget) and meeting young ladies at every locale. My eyes would always widened in envy when he'd relate his plans. He was a man who knew how to enjoy life.
Rarely do I have women chasing me. This man was proof that if you're a stud in bed (and in shape) the ladies will be knocking on your door as well as bothering you at work.
discussion comment
15 years ago
I don't need any drugs from her, but I would LOVE to get some of my allergy medicine :) (bought some over the internet and the shit, fakes, came from somewhere in Eastern Europe or so it seemed; Canadian pharmacy).
Not into FS----unless I know her and like her and am pretty damn sure she is disease free and she better be smoking hot. IOWs, I get very little FS.
discussion comment
15 years ago
Sounds sexy for a fantasy, but I think it is a too X-rated for me. All the religion of my youth might have made me a little more conservative than other clubbers or perhaps I was just destined to be a little bit of a prude. :)
discussion comment
15 years ago
My "buddy" Gambling dancer has a whole family history of very violent male thugs. Her daddy has spent much more time in the governments' cages than "free." In a different time and place with white skin more than likely he'd just be considered one of the good old boys and not a violent felon. Funny how that works. Anyway, Gambling dancer is shocked that I'm not afraid of any of her violent male relatives. Well, except for their long criminal histories and skin color, they could be my relatives. My relatives were very willing to spill blood and the normal reaction of police was to basically shrug or say don't be doing that in the future! LOL. The police were very good people. :) In fact, I'd say my relatives (mother's side only) were much more dangerous than Gambling dancer's male relatives and yet for the most part they weren't seen as thugs. Didn't make no never mind that they were carrying guns and willing to use 'em right quick neither. Time, place, and culture made all the difference in labelling and perception. True, you could get some anti-gun nuts/liberals who'd see 'em as thugs, however, by and large that was a tiny minority view.
discussion comment
15 years ago
Hi SuperDude,
Don't monopolize their girl friends! :) That is more than a little humor. The thug boyfriends can get upset if you seem to actually want more than just sex and their woman is responding. So if a customer is actually concerned about that, then best to cool it.
Two points: First, the link you posted seemed to be about a club that was basically taking the fun out of strip clubbing. Sure there are degrees. I actually prefer an R rated club to a triple XXX. I'm not looking for hardcore. However, some might see titty grabbing as hardcore. I've been in clubs where there is no titty grabbing. Doesn't have any appeal to me, but maybe no titty grabbing floats most customers' boats. Second, it is probably far more risky to drive to the stripclub than there is risk of getting shot by a thug. I go to the so called shooting galleries. My "buddy" white boy (a nice young guy) was gunned down in the front of Angels. Cocos has been shut down a few times due to shootings that have left multiple people dead. RolLexx, gee even dancers give the look are you crazy?!, when I tell 'em that I visit the RolLexx. Sounds real scary, right? What is scary by comparison is the blood spilt along the travel route to get to these clubs or even the travel route to get to the local mall. It is something like 50,000 dead Americans every year due to traffic accidents and over a 100,000 dead Americans every year due to medical incompetence.
So yes thugs do increase the risk of death, but like motor vehicles perhaps they are worth the trade off. The dancers who are less inclined toward extras or thug boyfriends may be less fun depending on your idea of fun. For example, I don't consider $20 lap dances fun because it is outside of my budget and generally you get a higher class dancer. You may laugh and says $20 for a lap is very reasonable and best to keep that price and higher standards. Fine and maybe you'll feel the same when standards are raised and the price goes to a mere $50 per lap dance. For some customers a $100 a lap is fine because they only need a single lap dance to be happy or because a $100 is pocket change to them.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"putting up with thugs and jablake is part of the cost of doing business"
Really? What about just building more prisons? Or, at the very least allow police officers to ticket a range of behaviours. The Stripclub Code could be modeled after The Motor Vehicle Code. No grabbing titties, no blow jobs, no drugs, stay at least 3 feet away from the dancers, etc. Just as speeding tickets and the like generate revenue for government, moral tickets and the like could generate revenue for government. Democracy and freedom in action.
As far as adorable jablake, there is always the ignore assuming you don't think prisons and tickets can get the job done.
The stripclubs need more thugs and fewer upscale gentlemen, imo.
discussion comment
15 years ago
I got to see pics of her when she looked very young in her cheerleader outfit. The other young cheerleaders looked familiar as well. ;)
Hell, over at Angels it might have been more than half the squad dancing at one time or another. ;)
discussion comment
15 years ago
She is a hot stripper you've known for years. She needs free room and board in your home for a week. She doesn't want to provide any service, but if demanded will submit and will complain that, that isn't nice. She was pouting over the waffle deal. :(
Other strippers that I know said the woman should have been required to perform for the room and board, but NOT for the waffles. They thought performance for waffles was 1) cold and 2) demeaning. I didn't want to require bennies for the room and board because I viewed that as a real need and wanted to help her out short term without taking advantage.
discussion comment
15 years ago
If I was a woman, then I think the loser boyfriend would wins hands down. Easy to see putting out for a nice guy or even caring about him as a friend; a good friend. A love interest? Putrid.
Solution? I'm sure there are women out there who like that. There is an old saying about how many tons of dirt do you need to shovel before you find a nugget . . . just remember to dig in an area where it is more likely rather than less likely to find a nugget. Dig along Miami Beach and you may find a doubloon if you're lucky, but a nugget?
discussion comment
15 years ago
I prefer the dives. A depressing article, imo. This society has too many laws and the stripclub is a small enclave or at least use to be from that. A woman is giving head? Call out the National Guard or at least the local SWAT. Don't laugh. Angels has been raided by SWAT. Just fun for those with the firepower and authority. What about the drugs some nitwit may yelp? Gee, maybe recriminalizing alcohol will reduce the drugs . . . Of course, then there is the propaganda about Al Queda in the clubs. I'd say ban beards problem solved, but supposedly the "terrorists" were clean shaven.
My 2 cents is I'd prefer just to see 'em shuttered than regimented.
discussion comment
15 years ago
Sounds like a normal woman. :)
To answer your question: Yes, in a manner of speaking. There was a dancer named Felicity over at the old Diamonds. She gave true GFE and was able to turn on all my love chemicals---what a high. It ought to be a crime. Wait, it is a crime. Anyway, no GFE when she was on good terms with her boyfriend. Most customers didn't care or she was so good that they'd accept the lesser service (I'd be surprised if most could feel the slight difference between her being on and off)---she was in demand.
discussion comment
15 years ago
I don't care for the dancing at all. I liked the modeling with slow clothing removal. Oh, and the music can go too.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"or refusing to let his car be searched at a border patrol checkpoint (well inside our border)."
I believe, and may be wrong, that the Supreme Court has ruled (probably 5-4 decision(s)) that there aren't any Fourth Amendment rights within 150 miles of a border or airport. Anyway, as Bork pointed out constitutional rights take away as much freedom as they grant. :) Yep, these legal brainics are so impressive---at least compared to a typical American.
discussion comment
15 years ago
It might keep a clubber from getting arrested. I remember a raid at Angels many many years ago where a tough police officer asked me why didn't I run? I was surprised by the question. I had thought fleeing would cause trouble and might even result in arrest. The officer made it very clear that I was to leave at once---which was fine given that club had pretty much been completely emptied by the police raid.
The point is don't be thinking you are all that and a bag of chips unless you are prepared to be arrested. Too many people have bought into the propaganda that you have all these rights. You have the right to be arrested and even that might be difficult if the officer wants to be contrary.
discussion comment
15 years ago
Here is a link to a table outlining which violations of Chapter 320 which are arrestable: http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Statutes/results.asp. Of interest you can be arrested for violation of this statute:
320.02(4) The owner of any motor vehicle registered in the state shall notify the department in writing of any change of address within 20 days of such change. The notification shall include the registration license plate number, the vehicle identification number (VIN) or title certificate number, year of vehicle make, and the owner's full name.
Better keep the government notified promptly of when you have any change of address. I wonder how FDLE compiled these arrestable offenses----it may be non-inclusive in that FDLE assumed if conviction results in mere fines then it was concluded the police officer doesn't have the power to put a person behind bars. Anyway, FDLE could be wrong or the attorneys that I spoke with could be wrong or both could be wrong!
discussion comment
15 years ago
BTW, the jailing for failure to wear a seatbelt where the maximum penalty for conviction was $50 was another 5-4 decision.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Now, *I* --assuming the officer doesn't know my political beliefs-- being old and white and polite should have pretty near zero fear of being arrested for a minor traffic offense."
Of course, I would have thought that a police officer would have no interest in searching me. Yep, he also ordered that I show him what was in my pockets. Of course, there was nothing---but normal junk i.e. wallet, store receipts, etc. But, many people approve of this because the next person might have a weapon or drugs or whatever. Unreasonable search? I think President Clinton was right when he stated the people want more police intrusions because they make us all safer. Safety or anti-crime or anti-terrorism is sure winner compared to constitutional rights. Search your home? President Clinton thought that was excellent thinking and framers were "radicals" who didn't trust government, but we are beyond that type thinking.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"I think cops can arrest you if you just look at them wrong."
Exactly. Children should have this drilled into their brains instead of the fluffy nonsense about our alleged freedoms. The youngster next door didn't believe that he could be arrested for the most minor traffic violations. I told him to ask attorneys the question and report back because he is in for a rude awakening.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Court OKs Arrest for No Seat Belt
By ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Clarifying the extent of police power in roadside stops, the Supreme Court held that officers can arrest and handcuff people even for minor offenses punishable by a fine. The justices ruled against a driver who was arrested and handcuffed for failing to wear a seat belt.
Such arrests do not violate the constitutional protection against unreasonable search, the court declared Monday. In the 5-4 ruling, which could affect anyone who drives a car, the justices said such an arrest does not violate the Constitution's Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable seizures.
Police generally can arrest anyone they see breaking the law, the court said as it barred a Texas woman from suing the officer who handcuffed her and took her to jail." http://www.ifisher.com/arrest.asp
Hi Clubber,
Unfortunately, I think the police officer gave you poor advice. Now, *I* --assuming the officer doesn't know my political beliefs-- being old and white and polite should have pretty near zero fear of being arrested for a minor traffic offense. Anyway, I'm hardly an expert on criminal law. Now, civil litigation that I do have some experience with---not a lawyer, not saying that at all.
***Anyway, I've been asking attorneys about the threat of being arrested for *civil* traffic infractions and so far every attorney has advised that yes a police officer could arrest and jail a person for the most minor traffic violation.*** I believe the United States Supreme Court also gives the thumbs up to arresting people for any alleged violation of law. IMO, if regular joes and regular janes actually read and understood court decisions then there would be a lot less yapping about all our supposed rights.
Again to make it clear: The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, imo, is a total joke. BTW, if the attorneys that I asked are wrong about the government having the right to arrest a person for the most minor violation of traffic laws----then that is excellent news! :)
discussion comment
15 years ago
A warning to those who do use illegal drugs. Let's say you are stopped by the police and you say NO to a search and there isn't probable cause for a search. First, the officer could just arrest you (as attorneys have explained it to me) and get his search in a round about manner. Second, the officer could just go ahead and do the search over your objection. He finds something that he thinks is illegal drugs (doesn't matter---much, in that now you'll have an arrest record) and bingo you are talking real pain for years and years and years.
"Arrest-Proof Yourself: An Ex-Cop Reveals How Easy It Is for Anyone to Get Arrested, How Even a Single Arrest Could Ruin Your Life, and What to Do If the Police Get in Your Face (Paperback)
by Dale C. Carson (Author), Wes Denham (Author)," http://www.amazon.com/Arrest-Proof-Yourself-Ex-Cop-Reveals-Arrested/dp/1556526377/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242327504&sr=8-1 . I found the book interesting and it might even open the eyes of a few liberals and a few conservatives. Noteworthy: the ex-cop thinks the arrest regardless if you're found innocent can ruin your life.
Please don't be betting on the court system to obey its own rules or protect your rights. What an attorney says the judge should do or what the law says can be very different from the reality. It makes zero difference, imo, how clear the law is---much of seems like it just window dressing i.e. put up for show.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Secondly, if you tell an officer that "no, I don't agree to a search,"--which you always should, imo--it is absolutely illegal for them to do so. The exception is when there is probable cause (cop sees a weapon, empty alcohol containers, or drug paraphenalia in the car, or smells alcohol/marijuana eminating from the vehicle or driver, etc.). Glad you didn't get busted, but unless that cop saw any of those, he was WAY out of line. That said, it doesn't surprise me."
Hi laxplayer,
I felt really stupid saying no to the search for a couple of reasons. First, I don't use illegal drugs and doubt anyone would be stashing 'em in the vehicle (you never know 100% for sure, however). Second, it has come to my attention that a police officer (according to attorneys who recommend just saying NO to a search) has a right to arrest me for even the most minor traffic violation e.g. going 1 mile over the speed limit. So, the police officer arrests me on any charge that he wishes and then the police do a search of the vehicle at the tow yard. Doesn't seem, imo, to be good advice under the rules as I understand 'em. The Fourth Amendment, imo, just seems like a total joke.
I don't think the officer was "bad." I could have easily been mistreated and ended up in jail with an arrest record---and innocent or guilty that can screw you good for years if you're a young person; good to be old for once. :) As it was it just seemed like a misguided cop trying too hard to catch druggies or there was an agenda. Fortunately, for me that is one vice that I can easily say no thank you to.