RiotGibbon
|
Re: Spearmint Rhino
Dec 10, 2002, 13:23
|
so that's that sorted then ...
phew
Spearmint Rhino looms large in our house, unfortunately, having had to explain to a 10 year old girl that the place we sometimes drive past isn't a restaurant (though there's been plenty of amusement from that since, poor girl).
We've got an enormous billboard advertising it by the house, and once we even saw the Rhino stretch limo on the motorway
How anyone can say that paying someone to take their clothes off isn't exploitative is quite beyond me. It might be lucrative, depending on circumstances, but someone rubbing their tits, arse and fanny (depending on the establishment) in a strangers face for 20 quid upwards does seem a little degrading. The girls might do OK financially on a good night, but there's lots of other people doing even better than them, without the frottage ...
but yes, you're right, there's no fixed link between prostitution and stripping. My old girlfriend went off to do strippagrams a few years back, and she was like most of the other women doing it, had a day job but making a few quid, cash in undies, on the side ...
she's quite a character though, and it is quite possible she didn't give me *all* the details ...
RG
|
CraigR
|
Re: Spearmint Rhino
Dec 10, 2002, 13:29
|
Expliot = To make use of selfishly or unethically.
Depends on your definition of ethics I guess.
As it's a voluntary decision of 99% of these girls to work here, how can they be being exploited? If somebody want to take off their clothes for £££, so be it. If people want to watch, why not?
I'm not trying to 'sort things' merely offer an opinion, one which I hold.
|
MonkeyBoy
|
Re: Spearmint Rhino
Dec 10, 2002, 13:35
|
"Are you suggesting that lap/table/pole dancers were once prostitutes?"
This wasn't what I was sugesting at all, merely that one or two may have been. I know for a fact many weren't ever. I was suggesting that if such places were shut down then they may have to find even less disireable employment. If the girls who work at such places aren't pressurised into anything else by the managers, punters etc (and this can happen) then there is far worse they could be doing.
Depending on the conditions the girls can make a lot of money. They would be exploited in a 9 - 5 and maybe have to deal with sexual harasment in the workplace. The point I was making is that unionisation could prevent some of the more unsavoury aspects that they might be exposed to.
Honeypot has no lap/table dancing and you pay the women in their a fiver to see a quick flash of their breasts, more if you want to see them for longer. This is not some Soho lap dancing joint and is more on the fringes of something less desireable. They are not dancing around, if someone payed for it would they be presurised into giving someone a hand job. I dunno. Honeypots is shittier than a lap dancing joint.
I don't agree with banning such places, as I don't agree with banning page 3 or consenting adult pornography. Though page 3 is terrible it is a problem of uneducated and sexist people and I do not agree with censureship in any form. It is a problem of attitudes and not legality.
|
CraigR
|
Re: Spearmint Rhino
Dec 10, 2002, 13:41
|
Well clarified!
And I agree with you. But it's more likely they would find a job elsewhere other than as ho's on the street. It's a bit ignorant to suggest that someone who gets there kit off is likely to sell their bodies!
|
MonkeyBoy
|
Re: Spearmint Rhino
Dec 10, 2002, 13:56
|
"It's a bit ignorant to suggest that someone who gets there kit off is likely to sell their bodies!"
Yet again this is not what I suggested. In a place like Honeypot the lines can blur (hand them your money - see a flash and no dancing). Some women may be in a more vulnerable position and be presurised etc. Some could be drawn into it if places like that are shut down, especialy if they have already been exposed to it.
Some girls who work in massage parlours are drawn into prostitution. This is a fact as I once knew someone who was a massuer (not sure about spellin') and got drawn into being a Ho while working there. Another thing Unionisation might have helped prevent.
The women being organised in such places would mean for a lot more solidarity between them and be able to stand up to really bad mangers or creepy punters.
|
grrr
|
Re: Spearmint Rhino
Dec 10, 2002, 14:01
|
my partner's MA research touched on the subject of the power relationship in strip clubs (who is in control - the person on the stage, the audience, the owner of the club...) and she has been asked to speak in various situations (including court) on behalf of people on all sides (performers, club owners, councils etc) and has always refused, because it simply isn't possible to say.
She is in no doubt that the fact that it is possible to run such an establishment for profit is supremely depressing, but when it comes to whether a particular club should be allowed to operate under those cultural circumstances, it's the old censorship thing.
My personal opinion (for what it's worth) is that sexist attitudes are more effectively endorsed by that frightening 'cheeky girls' song getting to number 2 in the charts than by a few hundred sad men thinking it's fun to go to a strip club.
|
CraigR
|
Re: Spearmint Rhino
Dec 10, 2002, 14:04
|
|
I agree with unionisationof sex workers. Sorry for misinterpreting your point.
|
RiotGibbon
|
Re: Spearmint Rhino
Dec 10, 2002, 14:05
|
unfortunatly, both are happening simultaneously.
You can't stop it, don't know if you should, but the "prohibitionist" and "look the other way" approaches both leave the women who do work in these places extremely vulnerable. Not a good situation
RG
|
CraigR
|
Re: Spearmint Rhino
Dec 10, 2002, 14:13
|
|
No more vulnerable than men/women in many jobs?
|
RiotGibbon
|
Re: Spearmint Rhino
Dec 10, 2002, 14:16
|
|
yes, a lot more.
|
