Strip Clubs

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

@ChemGal UK is way ahead of us in the area of disability inclusion all around http://dancingopportunities.com/index.php/tag/disabled-dancers-needed/

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

A video from the UK group "Think Beyond the Label" that pretty much says it all:

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

(sorry it's from the Disability Rights Commission in the UK. I remembered that video - but originally found out about it when a friend/ former colleague pointed me to a link at Think Beyond the Label which I forgot is actually a US group - got them mixed up - they have some witty vids too but the one above is the best I've ever seen)

@Inannawhimsey see above vid - goes great with popcorn.

 

[Pinga]

The joke of this one, is that Kimmio is presuming that being disabled would be a barrier due to attraction.
If someone wished to be a stripper had all the capabilities but couldn't mke it to the pole, then, absolutely accommodation would be an interesting challenge.
If, on the other hand, the person couldn't strip, or be "pleasing" then, what, you send in a proxy stripper?

Inawhimsey, exactly my point. You can't be a neurosurgeon if you dont' have the intellectual ability (or desire or work ethic) to pass all the courses. Now, you can have reasonable accommodation , ie take longer, but you still have to be able to do the job. It is unlikely that someone with Parkinson's could still operate, though they may wish to develop a program which allows them to do it remotely and therefore accommodate any shaking or weakness. They could also move into a position which did not require hands on.

So, the presumption Kimmio is putting forward that someone who meets the requirements would be denied. That isn't my position.


I'm kinda done with this theoretical discussion.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

As you wish, but I will respond to your response, Pinga. It is theoretical only because neither one of us is applying or hiring for the job. It's not theoretical that, at the very least, people with visible disabilities are under-represented in the stripping business - if not completely absent from participating in it. So, I do not believe they are being hired and I cannot assume it's because they can't do the job. This is for a number of reasons.

I realize that looks are not a protected ground in discrimination cases (although that too is beginning to be raised as a future possibility). However, customer preference inherent in the values of the workplace culture does not trump human rights and the principles of inclusion foundational to disability rights. If the perception of a person's "looks" or "sex appeal" is connected to one of the protected grounds it could be legally considered discrimination - it could have the consequence of almost completely, if not completely, excluding strippers with disabilities. Likewise, if customer preference that underpins a significant aspect of the workplace culture violates one of the protected grounds it could be discrimination of this same group. Those attitudes do not trump human rights.

A hospital can not fire a male nurse because patients refuse care because they think a female voice is more soothing or think he must be gay and think because of that they aren't feeling like they are healing as fast -or because they think female nurses change bandages better - or some attitude like that.

Discrimination laws cover other areas of inclusion besides employment. Just like it would be discrimination to argue that __ minorities should not be able to buy a house in the neighbourhood because the houses would depreciate. Those are attitudinal barriers that covertly or blatantly discriminate.

So, back to strippers - we now have things like dating sites for people with disabilities, sites for plus sizes, and "furries" (thanks chansen, good point) - we even have Crippendales as a precedent (why not female strippers with disabilities, again?) - that could be held up as examples of widely differing tastes.

So, is it a matter of them really not being able to do the job that disabled strippers are not hired - or because of attitudinal barriers that lead to real, illegal, discrimination that needs to be challenged?

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

I'm done too. Pinga I think you're back peddling a little on some of the earlier things you said. Never mind, though. Have a look at both sides, people.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

Really? Sounds like a double standard to me. So all men who go to strip clubs are all horned up and doing god knows what in the corner. Women on the other hand who go to watch men strip are behaving like perfect ladies and are only admiring the décor.

I missed this comment.

I don't know about the women here on WC2 but the women I was there with generally found male strippers funny and entertaining - almost comedic - not really a turn on. They start out interesting but it gets to a point where it's more it's like "omg did he just do that with his ___? Hahahhaaa!" not "omg I want him!" or not just sitting and ogling. And I don't know if most women, even straight women, are all that impressed by looking at an assortment of strangers penises. I'm straight and that doesn't turn me on. It can be funny - but it's funnier that somebody behind the scenes who came up with male stripping standars assumes that's sexy.. I think the industry would like to think we are because they are basing it on men's experiences in strip clubs that men go to - I would say you could easily find a large majority of women who prefer more average looking men with a good intellect and emotional IQ to male sex objects who look like CH's roofer. And yes, male stripping is demeaning to them too. I also think they get paid more to be part of a troupe like Chippendales - or for their tours than women do for in-house dancing nightly - but there are fewer men who do it or feel any need to do it. That's the sad statement in this. That they need to.

 

[Pinga]

umm, nope, no change in my attitude or expectation. It may be that you are understanding the points that I made poorly before...but, no, no change.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

That you made your points poorly, or that you could've made them better?

If i apply to a gym, I am going to be hired based on my physical ability, as are firefighters and paramedics.
Rocket scientists are hired based on brains.
Models and strippers are hired based on looks and ability to appeal in their medium.

There seems to be a bias here.....and it is a bias against people with looks who get jobs due to them, or awareness of sexual attraction.

You made these comments (emphasis mine). Would you like to reword them? My point was that there exists a strong bias against looks that are connected to protected human rights grounds like age, sex, race, and disability. 40% of all human rights complaints are disability related. There are huge attitudinal barriers and lack of awareness about the human rights that impede the protected groups in everyday life. And connected to my point is that there are no female strippers working in clubs who have visible disabilities - the clubs are in serious breach as they are now if people actually took them to task - oh, maybe if you searched the world you'd find a handful - but they are by far under-represented.

 

[ChemGal]

That you made your points poorly, or that you could've made them better?


You made these comments (emphasis mine). Would you like to reword them? My point was that there exists a strong bias against looks that are connected to protected human rights grounds like age, sex, race, and disability. 40% of all human rights complaints are disability related. There are huge attitudinal barriers and lack of awareness about the human rights that impede the protected groups in everyday life. And connected to my point is that there are no female strippers working in clubs who have visible disabilities - the clubs are in serious breach as they are now if people actually took them to task - oh, maybe if you searched the world you'd find a handful - but they are by far under-represented.

So now there's a qualifier of visible disabilities?

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

...to add...people who get jobs due to their looks (and abilities) are far more advantaged in society - they are not hard to find. I don't feel they need advocating for because it's not a disadvantage. People who don't get jobs because of their looks - unconventional looks for whatever reason - are not hard to find, either.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

So now there's a qualifier of visible disabilities?

Well, yes, it needs to be considered seperately because invisible disabilities would not change a hirer's perception of looks in the hiring process or a customer's perception of their looks. It would only be an issue if they were fired because of it or needed an accommodation for it.

 

[ChemGal]

Well, yes, because invisible disabilities would not change a hirer's perception of looks in the hiring process or a customer's perception of their looks.

Why not use that before?

 

[ChemGal]

I'm pretty sure some people currently working as strippers have disabilities.

@ChemGal I'm not so sure about that. There may be one or two on earth. It certainly isn't the norm to consider them in hiring practices at strip clubs...but it is the law.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

It needs to be considered separately because the biases are different. in employment services people with physical and mental health disabilities are often served in different programs.

 

[ChemGal]

It needs to be considered separately because the biases are different. in employment services people with physical and mental health disabilities are often served in different programs.

So what, the disabilities don't count? Don't deserve accommodation when appropriate? Or do strippers not have invisible disabilities?

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

Never said they didn't count and don't deserve necessary accommodation, but invisible and visible disabilities are looked at a little differently in the interest of leveling the playing field. For example - if you can't see it and it doesn't get in the way of your work, or bias other's perception of it, it isn't a disability.

 

[ChemGal]

Never said they didn't count and don't deserve necessary accommodation, but invisible and visible disabilities are looked at a little differently in the interest of leveling the playing field. For example - if you can't see it and it doesn't get in the way of your work, or bias other's perception of it, it isn't a disability.

What? If someone has an invisible disability, but they have a job where there disability doesn't hinder it, then it isn't a disability? You've lost me with that.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

What? If someone has an invisible disability, but they have a job where there disability doesn't hinder it, then it isn't a disability? You've lost me with that.

Not in the employment context. It is not an impediment to their job - it doesn't put them at any disadvantage next to others if they don't need or don't lack any sort of accommodation - and if they are not disabled to do what they need to do compared to the norm. Do you know what leveling the playing field means?

 

[ChemGal]

It is not an impediment to their job - it doesn't put them at any disadvantage next to others if they don't need or don't lack any sort of accommodation - and if they are not disabled to do what they need to do compared to the norm. Do you know what leveling the playing field means?

When a career choice is chosen around a disability - it's still a disability. When it affects other aspects of someone's life and not work, it's still a disability. I question if you understand what a disability is.