Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Stripping / Strippers

Rate this topic


TheColdTruth
 Share

Recommended Posts

I agree, but if a woman of self-esteem chooses to share her body in a sexual way

ok but those 2 things dont go together, have you ever been a stripper?

I'm not talking about a whore, but a stripper; there is a difference.

sure men just F you with their eyes instead of the real thing-there is not much difference.

you obviously find strippers attractive in some way - that is fine just dont try to give them as much dignity as a woman/man who tries to make a life without resorting to doing that. I admire people who try not to have to do that. Dont you?

Edited by pam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

ok but those 2 things dont go together, have you ever been a stripper?

Yea, it's my night job. Shoot I'm running late. Seriously, they don't usually go together, but they could, and I'm sure do in some cases.

sure men just F you with their eyes instead of the real thing-there is not much difference.

Actually, the difference is so large that it is immaterial. Men fantasize about women all the time whether they are strippers or not.

you obviously find strippers attractive in some way - that is fine just dont try to give them as much dignity as a woman/man who tries to make a life without resorting to doing that. I admire people who try not to have to do that. Dont you?

Some, maybe. I don't see that it has to be a loss of dignity. Sure in many cases it probably is, but not to a woman who has high self-esteem, is proud of her looks, want's to make a lot of money quick, and isn't ashamed of expressing her sexuality in a sort of fantasy way. Would I rather see someone use there mind, sure, but I am not going to fault them for needing to make money in a way that harms no one including themselves. It's a different story if the girl is lacking in self-esteem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, but if a woman of self-esteem chooses to share her body in a sexual way only as a means of desire not the actual acts, but live fantasy to make money, what's wrong with that?

Before we go there, then, are you saying you agree with my point and retract your statement that in order to take a self-esteem hit from selling one's sexuality that it would necessarily have to be sourced in shame of one's sexuality? I.e. that shame of one's sexuality is the only possible source for not wanting to do that?

I just want to be clear on this point. I'll get to your next question as soon as I know we're past that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before we go there, then, are you saying you agree with my point and retract your statement that in order to take a self-esteem hit from selling one's sexuality that it would necessarily have to be sourced in shame of one's sexuality? I.e. that shame of one's sexuality is the only possible source for not wanting to do that?

I just want to be clear on this point. I'll get to your next question as soon as I know we're past that.

I don't think I ever claimed that, at least intentionally. There is plenty of reasons why they may not want to do it, but that doesn't negate the fact that a rational woman could want to do it without shame for *any* reason but actually have positive reasons why she does want to do it, i.e., make a lot of money fast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I ever claimed that, at least intentionally. There is plenty of reasons why they may not want to do it, but that doesn't negate the fact that a rational woman could want to do it without shame for *any* reason but actually have positive reasons why she does want to do it, i.e., make a lot of money fast.

Now I'm confused - what you're agreeing to is that a woman may not want to do it and it doesn't necessarily have to have anything to do with being ashamed of her body or her sexuality. That she could hold both in very high esteem and also not want to do it.

Are we on the same page there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I'm confused - what you're agreeing to is that a woman may not want to do it and it doesn't necessarily have to have anything to do with being ashamed of her body or her sexuality. That she could hold both in very high esteem and also not want to do it.

Are we on the same page there?

Oh absolutely. I think that would be the default position for most women of high self-esteem ,or even women in general. But, I'm just saying that it doesn't *always* have to be the case. I just don't see why it has to be true that if she does choose to do it (strip), that it "somehow" naturally follows that she has some psychological problems, as most seem to be claiming. I'm not going to speculate at her reasoning except that maybe she just wants to make a lot of money fast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say "make money" it brings to mind the scene from Atlas Shrugged in which Francisco tells Jim that "words have an exact meaning."

Yea, except Jim has no problem "making money" by looting it. How is a stripper a looter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh absolutely. I think that would be the default position for most women of high self-esteem ,or even women in general. But, I'm just saying that it doesn't *always* have to be the case. I just don't see why it has to be true that if she does choose to do it (strip), that it "somehow" naturally follows that she has some psychological problems, as most seem to be claiming. I'm not going to speculate at her reasoning except that maybe she just wants to make a lot of money fast.

Okay.

So, then what I'll say is: Without going into what we don't know - what her exact reasoning may be - we have to focus on what we do know. What we do know is that she is valuing her body and her sexuality lowly enough that she is willing to sell it on the cheap (cheap compared to romance) to strangers (most of whom are perverts and sleazoids). To value these things so lowly is to mean that one doesn't hold them in high esteem - i.e. indicating by definition low self-esteem, at least for this purpose.

If you want to bring absolutely bizarre or extraordinary contexts in, that's another matter, but as far as I am concerned, just about everything I say should automatically be considered to have that caveat on the end of it. (including that sentence)

Edited by Inspector
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To value these things so lowly is to mean that one doesn't hold them in high esteem - i.e. indicating by definition low self-esteem, at least for this purpose.

Usually yes, in all cases--I don't think so. There is a lot of context that one must know before they make this judgment, and none of it has to be "bizarre".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually yes, in all cases--I don't think so. There is a lot of context that one must know before they make this judgment, and none of it has to be "bizarre".

Which part of what I said? The part about not holding one's body and sexuality as being as valuable as one who will not sell them on the cheap (again compared to one who gives them only for romance) or the part about that indicating low self-esteem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which part of what I said? The part about not holding one's body and sexuality as being as valuable as one who will not sell them on the cheap (again compared to one who gives them only for romance) or the part about that indicating low self-esteem?

The first specifically, but the second also as an alleged natural result of the first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first specifically, but the second also as an alleged natural result of the first.

So - to be clear - you are making the claim that a woman who will sell her body and sexuality for money to strangers (again, in the context of "stripper" almost certainly to sleazy men) is not valuing her body and sexuality less than a woman who refuses to do so and will only give those values in a romantic context?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strippers do not sell their bodies... they retain the ownership of their bodies throughout the stripping act. What they sell are actions they perform with their bodies. That the exchange involves some sexual nature does NOT mean they necessarily value their bodies any more or any less than women who would not strip. However they value their body (or their life) cannot necessarily be accurately discerned by a person speculating from the outside in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

A stripper is a producer in that he/she is providing a service for money. His/her entertainment services are a value to those who seek that type of entertainment and it provides the stripper with income he/she can use to purchase other products and services.

Are you asking if being a stripper is moral? I think it can be, although I don't think most strippers live moral lives. Many of them have low self-esteem which leads to a multitude of other problems, including drugs, alcohol and prostitution. I think a psychologically healthy person would have a hard time taking on such a career. Same thing with prostitution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think strippers are performers (that's productive), and very different from prostitutes.

Prostitutes pervert the sexual act, and that is always immoral. (it is also immoral for the client to desire sex with a prostitute) But that is not restricted to sex that's caused by money changing hands: using sex for anything except for what it is constitutes an act of depravity.

With someone stripping on stage however, I don't see it as sex (which is at the least an interaction between two people), but rather a one way performance, with the woman doing her thing, and the clients watching. (their reaction, whether they are excited, just entertained or indifferent, does not concern the performer or affect the performance)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can a person watch another naked person without wanting to get into his/her pants? Yes.

It is no more immoral to go to a strip club than it is to go to an art museum with sculptures and paintings of naked people. In both cases you may admire the human body for what it is. What if a man and a woman who were married went to a strip club together? They might have an enjoyable time drinking and watching the dancers. (depending on the quality of the club)

There is absolutely nothing immoral about being a stripper, nor does being a stripper implicitly carry with it a tendency for psychological problems. Similarly, I believe it is immoral to be a pornstar and have sex with many people I'm not in love with, however, it would not be immoral to be in a relationship and model for porn as a couple. SHOWING sexual behavior for other people to enjoy is not immoral, nor does it de-value the relationship. In some cases it causes even more sexual fulfillment in a couple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a psychologically healthy person would have a hard time taking on such a career. Same thing with prostitution.

For the record, I do not equate stripping with prostitution, less the detrimental psychological effect.

Can a person watch another naked person without wanting to get into his/her pants? Yes.

Sure, but that is not why people go to strip clubs, at least not in my experience. They are there for a sexual experience. We're not talking about a topless Vegas show here, or are we?

It is no more immoral to go to a strip club than it is to go to an art museum with sculptures and paintings of naked people. In both cases you may admire the human body for what it is. What if a man and a woman who were married went to a strip club together? They might have an enjoyable time drinking and watching the dancers. (depending on the quality of the club)

I have never met anyone that went to a strip club to admire the human body in an artistic manner. :P I have been to nice strip clubs (well, as nice as they seem to get) as one half of a married couple and it was VERY sexual in nature, not artistic. It was nothing like drawing the human form in my art class or viewing nude paintings or sculptures in museum, unless we were looking at erotic art.

I have no problems, personally, with erotica. I do have a problem with insecure people who are willing to do anything for a buck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can create hypotheticals about dancers with self esteem and integrity who value their sexuality, and customers who arent watching them for arousal, but for artistic appreciation of her body, but this is just a rationalisation, an after the fact explanation to why one did something.

It's like explaining that dogfighting fans are watching dogs kill each other to appreciate the beaty and instinctual behavior of canines, while getting a bigger appreciation of evolutionary processes that have eventually led to human beings. The reason people watch dogfighting, is because they seek thrills from mindless killing and suffering, and that is how dogfighting should be viewed.

And to EC: the fact that she makes money has nothing to do with whether stripping is moral, and i remember other threads as well where you offer the fact that a person getting money from consentual services is relevant to whether the act is moral or not. Just like me running a dogfighting ring or writing astrology books may "make" me money, it has nothing to do with morality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can such a thing be sexually appealing to any Objectivist is beyond me.

Sexuality divorced from a woman's mind is not a rational value.

What exactly do you think Howard Roark was doing when he raped Dominique?

What do you think Dagny and Francisco/Rearden/Galt were doing sexually, in all their explicit and implicit encounters, throughout the span of their lives?

As Ayn Rand describes the sexual activities occurring, it’s not a far stretch to imagine Dagny would have done anything those men asked of her, including stripping. The super heroes of Ayn Rand's novels obviously felt very strong sexual desire for the super heroines such as Dagny; but the men were not having sex with the women's mind.

They were having an integrated response of mind and body, with the body winning out, such that the sexual act became, the literal, real, actualized, objectified expression of valuing. The sex act was an end in itself; such that the physical pleasure, at some point in the sex act, is the end.

This is not to say the mind does not play a dominant role in the selection of one's partner; but sexuality is not only philosophical, it is psychological and physical.

I suggest reading the sections in OPAR on sexuality as having a Metaphysical component; and rereading the sex scenes in Ayn Rand’s novels, and Ayn Rand’s commentary in the “Art of Fiction,” especially where she describes how she wrote the scene where Galt shows Dagny the power house for the first time.

Edited by phibetakappa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly do you think Howard Roark was doing when he raped Dominique?

What do you think Dagny and Francisco/Rearden/Galt were doing sexually, in all their explicit and implicit encounters, throughout the span of their lives?

As Ayn Rand describes the sexual activities occurring, it’s not a far stretch to imagine Dagny would have done anything those men asked of her, including stripping. The super heroes of Ayn Rand's novels obviously felt very strong sexual desire for the super heroines such as Dagny

You make it sound like people have been arguing against sex itself here. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...