Jump to content

Vegan Strip Club opens in Portland tonight


robert
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ok, Josh, you want to do this then we have to clear out what capitalism and patriarchy is. I will define capitalism and I will leave the definition of patriarchy to you since I've never seen an adequate one.

 

The basis of capitalism is that you own yourself. No one person or organization have a bigger right to you, your mind or your body than yourself. That's it. If you want to get to the basis of the "problem" with capitalism this is where you have to start. Potter, Tarz and others have already explained this, only with different words.

Non capitalist have been tried (and people all over the world are still experimenting) and have failed and are failing throughout the history and the world. We seek this freedom and we should be glad to have it.

I didn't understand in your post if you wanted to get rid of capitalism but if you do I'm interested in how you want to go about it.

 

As you study physics in school I know that you've seen proofs before. The first thing you have to do to prove something is to define it. So I'm asking you to define what the patriarchy is. Then you have to find a method of proving it and then you have to prove it. Radical feminism lacks all three of these steps. This is why I liken it with religion. You won't convince me of otherwise until you make a satisfactory proof. Right now you're just saying I'm wrong which, as you know, will just turn into a sandbox fight.

You need to show us the money, so to speak, otherwise you know what walks.

So first give me what you got and I will disprove it since the patriarchy theory have been criticized from all angels and from most other scientific disciplines.

 

Notice that I'm not trying to convince you though, just as I wouldn't try to convince a christian that God doesn't exists by the method of logic. This is because just like religion the patriarchy theory is built on loose threads and stories that adds up just well enough to satisfy the human imagination and if you want to believe in it it's apparent from history that reason and logic just doesn't cut it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 152
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

And people in a relationship, if you have sex, you're not necessarily treating your partner as a sex object, but you are using their body at the time for what you want - you can still have respect for them, that doesn't go away just because you are using them for sex at the time. I think it becomes bad when the people involved really are treating people as objects - but you can't really determine that one way or the other.

 

I have no problems receiving/giving a striptease from/to a girlfriend who I was in a loving relationship with. The problem with women stripping for money in a capitalist society is that they are reduced to sexual objects and nothing more. There is literally a dollar amount put on their self worth, based solely on superficial characteristics like looks, which puts great pressure and distress on women to meet these standards. By not meeting these standards, their ideas of self worth are damaged, making it increasingly likely for the same patriarchal capitalistic society that is exploiting them to continue doing so. This is only ONE of several well thought out (by others, not myself) arguments against stripping, the exploitation of women, and the capitalist/patriarchial machine. This is one of several scholarly arguments, it's not based on religion as offense has said, but rather based on interviews of women, statistics of rape and domestic violence, and other empirical, measurable horrors that result as a perpetuation of a patriarchal capitalistic society. It is going to be very difficult to link up articles on this, as there are no quick reads. Whole books, courses, and degrees are based on these ideas, so it is easy to casually dismiss them if you are not going to take the time to be quiet and educate yourself before reproducing longstanding, deep rooted oppressive social institutions (such as patriarchy).

 

Well I did already say that I don't have experience and I was talking hypothetically. My point is that in theory, just taking your clothes off for money isn't bad - but in practicality, on a larger scale where it can affect people's opinions of the strippers, and the gender of the those strippers as a whole, it definitely can have negative effects, and I imagine there are a lot of cases where there is also physical abuse in those jobs. I am also not sure one way or the other on this subject - I am not really pro or anti 100% since I don't feel educated enough. Maybe that didn't come across in my post, but I am certainly not 100% pro stripping. But I am saying that in principle, just the exchange of money for a strip - no abuse, and without seeing that person as an object - I don't think that does any harm to anyone. However there are many cases where it is harmful, and in a larger scale I think it does give the message that strippers are objects - or at least, that's how they are viewed by a lot of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The basis of capitalism is that you own yourself.

This is a beautiful concept. However it rarely works in the real world. Talk to someone working 16 hours in an offshore textile shop about this. Or the American wage slave.

 

For capitalism to work, employees need to be paid less than the sum total of goods they produce are worth, in order that employers can turn a profit. In order to justify paying people less than their worth we need to create reasons for why peoples work lacks proper worth. Racism was and is a very powerful way to do this. So is sexism. If you look at the way these ideas and institutions were historically constructed you would see that they exist for this reason.

 

The first thing you have to do to prove something is to define it. So I'm asking you to define what the patriarchy is. Then you have to find a method of proving it and then you have to prove it.

Patriarchy describes a social stratification system where the actions and ideas of men are dominant over those of women.

We only need to look at the world around us to see the work of patriarchy. Who makes the vast majority of the world's political decisions? Who heads the majority of the worlds faiths? Who heads the majority of the world's businesses? Which biological gender earns an average of 30% more in America for the same work as (one of) the other biological genders? Who's ideas are privileged, whose are dismissed? Patriarchy is all around us, the sad thing is that it may not even seem that way since it is so deeply rooted in the economic, political, and social landscape that we call home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but people put a dollar amount on everything. If you make that argument then athletes are just as exploited as strippers...and even worse because in reality the NBA player that gets paid $20mil gets a smaller portion of the profits than a stripper does and in reality he is selling what he does with his body. What are bodybuilders??? The same exact thing. You don't think girls are turned on by them...sure some aren't but many are.

 

When it comes to male strippers I'd think you'd find they are treated much worse than female strippers. Guys can't touch a girl in a strip club(unless the girl puts his hands on her) or they get thrown out. Women at strip clubs with male strippers are a different story though. Guys get touched all over but nobody is fighting for them...well guess what...its not all that different.

 

When it comes to women making less money than men thats gonna change for the most part. As of now the majority of salary paid Americans are men that are college educated. The workforce of college educated men is much larger than that of women. Luckily...starting a few years ago...there were more women enrolled in college than men. Once those women are graduated and get 20yrs of work in I think you'll find they'll be on equal ground(at least I hope so).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, so many things to respond to. As a person who has stripped for 6 years I have an embarassingly negative view on strip clubs. I recently quit after FINALLY realizing how my soul was being yanked from my body every night I worked.

 

True, each girl chooses to be there. This doesn't make it right. I was being a hypocrite by participating in an industry that destroys and distorts men's view of women and visa versa.

 

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING GOOD COMES FROM ATTENDING A STRIP CLUB OR WORKING AT ONE

 

The hundreds of girls I have worked with are the most insecure, bitter, man-hating and frightened group of people I have ever encountered. Of course this is not apparent while being entertained at a table or stage by a dancer who is putting on a performance. And believe me, they always are.

 

STRIP CLUBS ARE BASED ON LIES

 

Strippers PRETEND to like you, PRETEND to like their job, PRETEND that they are ok with what they do...I did so each and every night I worked. And again for this I am ashamed.

 

True, many exotic dancers are putting themselves through college...SO WHAT??? The fact that many dancers are smart/nice, ect. is of no consequence.

 

Moreover, the people suffering from the existence of strip clubs is not just the dancers and patrons...it is all the others in society who are being compared to those dancers. I often am told "wow, if only I could meet a girl like you girls." By pretending to be girls who just love walking around and dancing for gross guys, we are creating a false pretence for real-life women.

 

Please feel free to ask me any questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For capitalism to work, employees need to be paid less than the sum total of goods they produce are worth, in order that employers can turn a profit.

This is why, according to Marx, we will have a worker revolution. Workers will have less and less due to the margin of which you speak will be less and less and the profit for the bolscheviks more and more. Workers will thus have to sell their labour for less and this goes on until they starve and make a revolution.

So, is poverty to the brink of starvation the norm among Americans? Is it the norm among any free people adapting this horrifying concept? Are we near a revolution due to low wages? Are our lives economically tougher than that of our great great grandfathers? No.

Industrial capitalism is unsustainable but not because of this correlation. In a world of infinite resources the industrial revolution could go on forever, making us richer and richer, financially. Industrial capitalism will disappear into history because the world have finite resources, not anything else. However, this is not mentioned by Marx or any other who have said what I quoted you to say. That theory has been disproven by history and it still being around is apparently in the way of focusing on the real problem that our planet and human kind is facing.

 

Patriarchy describes a social stratification system where the actions and ideas of men are dominant over those of women.

Or more specifically that: Men as a group is oppressing women as a group. Sound familiar? Have we seen this before in history? Can you change the words 'men' and 'women' for something else in this sentence and get a devastating result that have already happened? Can you see why I oppose this fundamental thinking to the strongest of my ability?

We only need to look at the world around us to see the work of patriarchy. Who makes the vast majority of the world's political decisions? Who heads the majority of the worlds faiths? Who heads the majority of the world's businesses? Which biological gender earns an average of 30% more in America for the same work as (one of) the other biological genders? Who's ideas are privileged, whose are dismissed? Patriarchy is all around us, the sad thing is that it may not even seem that way since it is so deeply rooted in the economic, political, and social landscape that we call home.

This is the tactic of all leaders throughout history that has grouped together people and united them against a common enemy. It's, according to me, the root of all evil.

I'm not saying that there are women who have less power than men, I'm not saying that there are women that has lower wages than men. What I am saying is that it's dangerous to generalize so far as to say that as a man you will always have more power or earn more money than any given woman, just because you're a man. All other feats you might possess are secondary. If you have a dick, you have power, if not, you don't. Simple.

So, Josh, how do you want to build the justice system based on your assumptions? If a man beats a woman you surely see this as a consequence of the patriarchial structures and thus men as a group has to be punished, right? Maybe all men would have to constantly take ritalin or whatever drug that lowers aggression? What if a woman beats a woman? Should those cases be tried in a case to case manner? Should all men be castrated because some men rape women?

In Sweden the delusions of the patriarchy is bigger than in the US, we also have fewer outspoken people that protects the long tradition of working, unifying and accepting feminism that most people subscribe to. These justice system questions have been asked in the form of 'female violence on other females in lesbian relationships' and why that occurs in a patriarchial society. No answer have been provided.

 

I tell you why this theory appeals. It appeals because it's simple. It will give you easy 'solutions' to complex problems. Humans love easy solutions.

The problem is that the solutions are (in the case there are any) by the ones who believe in this doesn't solve the problem. It sounds like it does just like it have sounded like it does throughout history. I can't think of any problems right now that have been solved by generalizing and grouping people against a common enemy. I can think of a lot of problems being solved by unification though. In fact, most problems created by group thinking is solved by unification.

Racism was and is a very powerful way to do this. So is sexism. If you look at the way these ideas and institutions were historically constructed you would see that they exist for this reason.

Ok, so let's not create new groups based loosely on inadequate correlations that have been disproven, like 'men' being a homogenous group or homosexuals being a homogenous group or jews being a homogenous group with traits that destroys the premises for other 'groups'. Instead we can focus on the acts committed by individuals and thus slowly trying to solve the problems on a case by case basis. That's been proven to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patriarchy describes a social stratification system where the actions and ideas of men are dominant over those of women.

Or more specifically that: Men as a group is oppressing women as a group. Sound familiar? Have we seen this before in history? Can you change the words 'men' and 'women' for something else in this sentence and get a devastating result that have already happened? Can you see why I oppose this fundamental thinking to the strongest of my ability?

Of course we have seen groups oppressing other groups throughout history and there are numeourous examples of this, but Im not sure what you are getting at. So please explain ?

 

This is the tactic of all leaders throughout history that has grouped together people and united them against a common enemy. It's, according to me, the root of all evil.

It is a very common anti-feminist tactic to accuse feminism of being against men. I guess in a way one could say that feminism is against men because they want to reduce the power of that group, in the same way one could say that the anti-aparteid movement was against whites because its goal was to reduce the power held by whites agains blacks.

The point of feminism is not to unite people against men, it is to unite people against the opressive structure that is patriarchy. You seem like an intelligent person, so if you havent understood this simple point one cannot help but wonder how much you know about feminism at all.

 

I'm not saying that there are women who have less power than men, I'm not saying that there are women that has lower wages than men. What I am saying is that it's dangerous to generalize so far as to say that as a man you will always have more power or earn more money than any given woman, just because you're a man. All other feats you might possess are secondary. If you have a dick, you have power, if not, you don't. Simple.

Now you are making a bullshit analysis and trying to project it onto feminists. Of course not all men have more power than all women. The point is not that your sex is the only feat deciding your power in society, the point is that it is a factor and a rather strong one.

 

So, Josh, how do you want to build the justice system based on your assumptions? If a man beats a woman you surely see this as a consequence of the patriarchial structures and thus men as a group has to be punished, right? Maybe all men would have to constantly take ritalin or whatever drug that lowers aggression? What if a woman beats a woman? Should those cases be tried in a case to case manner? Should all men be castrated because some men rape women?

Sorry, what are you getting at here?

 

In Sweden the delusions of the patriarchy is bigger than in the US,

Unfortunately there are lots of people here living under the delusion that the patriarchy does not exist, but one could hope that that would change at some point.

 

I tell you why this theory appeals. It appeals because it's simple. It will give you easy 'solutions' to complex problems. Humans love easy solutions.

Since when does feminism give give an easy solution? I admit not being an expert on feminism, but I have read a little and I certainly havent seen any easy solutions being offered.

 

Ok, so let's not create new groups based loosely on inadequate correlations that have been disproven, like 'men' being a homogenous group or homosexuals being a homogenous group or jews being a homogenous group with traits that destroys the premises for other 'groups'. Instead we can focus on the acts committed by individuals and thus slowly trying to solve the problems on a case by case basis. That's been proven to work.

Once again you are making the incorrect assumption that a cornerstone of feminism is that men are a homogenous group. That is not the case. Looking at acts commited by individuas without putting them into any context seems completely useless for solving structural problems. Has that really been proven to work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, you and many others have come to the conclusion that I don't know or understand feminism or other far left separatist movements. I know more than most and when other people get enlightened the shun from the movement just as I do. As you know this was apparent in the last Swedish election where the feminist party, who had large support as long as people believed they stood for constructive feminism, ended up with 0,68% From wiki.

I have read a lot about these issues and even so the most common critique is that I need to study even more or that I'm not intelligent enough to understand. How complicated is it? Please enlighten us! I've been asking for proof, conclusive evidence, anything that could convince the ignorant 98% of the population that doesn't believe in this is BS. Nothing comes out. Nothing. And when the discussion starts again, may it be with with economists, cognitive psychologists, sociologists, law makers, anthropologists, etc. all they never get any convincing answers, just that they're clearly too dumb to see the unproven connections between, more often than not, poorly conducted studies.

There obviously is some kind of communication error on your part. Either that or people understand just fine and shun from it, just as I have.

And just as I don't want you to confuse the real statistically significant positive goals of a plant diet with the patriarchy theory, I don't want you to confuse real, working feminism with the apparently overwhelmingly confusing patriarchy theory. Or rather, I would like you to not mix the proven positive things of the plant diet with your other goals of a more religious character so that people don't get confused on the real, positive issues of a plant diet. You what kind of reputation vegans have already in Sweden, it's hard enough as it is.

 

Of course we have seen groups oppressing other groups throughout history and there are numeourous examples of this, but Im not sure what you are getting at. So please explain ?

The nazis blamed the jews, the christians blamed the jews and the muslims, the swedes blamed the norwegians and the danes, the hutus blamed the tutsis, the greek blamed the persians. I could go on. I know that you don't see the connection between what you believe in and what I see, since you believe that the structure is real. I hope you realize that if you're wrong you have not been fighting for an existing group but you have instead created a fictional group and a fictional group of perpetrators that is to blame for the ills of first group. So as long as it is clear that no conclusive evidence of the patriarchy exists, I will fold you into the same group as the ones above.

 

The point of feminism is not to unite people against men, it is to unite people against the opressive structure that is patriarchy. You seem like an intelligent person, so if you havent understood this simple point one cannot help but wonder how much you know about feminism at all.

I keep repeating myself. Define the structure. Tell us what your method will be of proving it and then prove it. I know you can't, you know you can't and thus you have created a fictional group with the only common traits being a uterus that are oppressed by a group who's only common traits is that the have dicks. It's ridiculous.

 

Sorry, what are you getting at here?

You don't want to use the state and the juridical system for the purpose of getting rid of the structures you believe in? That's really uncommon for far leftism. In case you want to use it, why not attack the structures instead of the crime? That way, since the structure is the fundamental problem, you would solve that regardless of what crime was committed. It's what's is usually done when someone finds structures like this in society. Like I said, it doesn't solve the problem but it's a convenient way of looking at it.

 

Unfortunately there are lots of people here living under the delusion that the patriarchy does not exist, but one could hope that that would change at some point.

I'd say about 99% and I hope it stays that way and don't turn in to one of the bigger religions.

 

Since when does feminism give give an easy solution? I admit not being an expert on feminism, but I have read a little and I certainly havent seen any easy solutions being offered.

I think it's fairly clear that punishing a group of people regardless of their crimes would be easier than to handle every crime and individual separately.

 

Once again you are making the incorrect assumption that a cornerstone of feminism is that men are a homogenous group. That is not the case. Looking at acts commited by individuas without putting them into any context seems completely useless for solving structural problems. Has that really been proven to work?

Swedes in general do believe, and rightfully so, that social democracy and social liberalism have created the more open and accepting society that we live in today. Radical feminism, by among other things trying to steal the word feminism (just like DaveNoisy is trying to steal the word 'vegan) and positiveness connected to it, have stood on the sidelines for this entire time. After every pointless war, and they are usually pointless, comes reconstruction ad unification. You really don't understand that it is the unification and not the war that is working?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think feminisms ideas on sex in society is so crazy and all over the place. I've met people on both sides...saying its great that women are now allowed to do what they want. They can now be sexual and not controlled by men and do what they please. And that its great that women can now do what they chose with their bodies...then I hear the other side that basically doesn't want any sexualization of women whatsoever. I've even met a few feminists that are extremely pro life...mostly because they feel its something women were given and they basically should have kids because thats what a womens body is designed for(of course they don't mean this in the sense of being a house wife), but then the woman needs to be an equal breadwinner in the home....these aren't my explanations...just relaying what I've heard through conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I find it more than a little bit odd too Potter.

 

On the one hand women are rightly empowered to make their own decisions. Yet on the other hand they are only allowed to make decisions to an extent permissible and to live their lives in a manner that meets the approval and acceptance of feminist zealots.

 

You can't have it both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now a detour from this serious discussion:

 

Fox News did a piece on the place:

http://www.kptv.com/video/15269884/index.html

 

 

From my perspective I don't like the sounds of this guy.

 

"We put the meat on the poll and not on the plate"

 

oh Lord

 

Seriously. I heard that, and I was going to comment on the objectification of women and its parallels to how humans treat animals as objects, but I think it's pretty self evident.

 

It seems most people in this pseudo discussion have already made up their mind either way, which is a shame for the people who don't believe that patriachy exists, that we routinely treat women as objects, and that sexism is as strong and prevalent as ever, even in our "social democracies" .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's kind of rude to call it a 'pseudo discussion' just because it didn't turn out the way you wanted it to.

Is there a problem? Yes. Is it a structural problem? Maybe. That's what I'm asking you. If this is a structural problem then it should be solved in a structural manner which indicates that you have to define the structures. You claim that these structures exist and I ask you to define them and present a solution. It should be seemingly easy but it seems overwhelmingly hard.

Right now I'm holding a monologue with some people complaining that I'm complaining while an other tells me what these structures (that you base your theory on) are not.

Male violence against women is a problem. Is it a problem that can be derived by some structure still present in society created and executed by men?

To me violence is the problem nomatter whom it might hit. The day the words 'male', female', 'black', 'white', 'jew' appears in our law books we are screwed, according to me. The feminist party in Sweden (who believes in the patriarchy and acts accordingly) wanted a 'man tax', that is a tax that only affects you because you're a man. It's a punishment for being born with a dick. That's how the word man ends up in the law text. Thank God they just got 0,68%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I admit patriarchy exists but this isn't a case of it. Lets say we look at a case where a woman knows a man desires control of a woman in their relationship...he lets her know that before hand and she's completely aware...that is not patriarchy.

 

***Anyhow the fact that Fox News would cover the story only proves that strip clubs are OK...after all its Fox News...the definition of morality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, so many things to respond to. As a person who has stripped for 6 years I have an embarassingly negative view on strip clubs. I recently quit after FINALLY realizing how my soul was being yanked from my body every night I worked.

 

True, each girl chooses to be there. This doesn't make it right. I was being a hypocrite by participating in an industry that destroys and distorts men's view of women and visa versa.

 

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING GOOD COMES FROM ATTENDING A STRIP CLUB OR WORKING AT ONE

 

The hundreds of girls I have worked with are the most insecure, bitter, man-hating and frightened group of people I have ever encountered. Of course this is not apparent while being entertained at a table or stage by a dancer who is putting on a performance. And believe me, they always are.

 

STRIP CLUBS ARE BASED ON LIES

 

Strippers PRETEND to like you, PRETEND to like their job, PRETEND that they are ok with what they do...I did so each and every night I worked. And again for this I am ashamed.

 

True, many exotic dancers are putting themselves through college...SO WHAT??? The fact that many dancers are smart/nice, ect. is of no consequence.

 

Moreover, the people suffering from the existence of strip clubs is not just the dancers and patrons...it is all the others in society who are being compared to those dancers. I often am told "wow, if only I could meet a girl like you girls." By pretending to be girls who just love walking around and dancing for gross guys, we are creating a false pretence for real-life women.

 

Please feel free to ask me any questions.

 

Thank you so goddamn much. I no longer feel the need to say anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's an interesting concept. For people that go to strip clubs it'll open up veganism to them. I guess there will be controversy with any new idea. Some people will hate it, others love it, and some just accept it for what it is.

 

I think that parts a crock for him. He just wants to make money in a way that doesn't kill any animals. I doubt he honestly thinks people will go vegan by going there...at best people will be eating vegan food at a strip club instead of eating a steak at a normal strip club...thats what most people eat when they go to a strip club that has food other than chips or peanuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read all the posts in this topic as it is obvious I don't have views as strong as the ones that are being posted here.

 

Here is a question for you, There is a Male Strip club in Portland (Called Silverado), where Men strip and received money from both Men and Women, I wonder if thoughts on Silverado are any different?

Are The strippers being exploited etc like their female counterparts or are the public who go there and hand over money the ones who are being exploited?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...