A question about Magic Mike

It's hard to add anything to this but I'm egotistical enough to try.

* I often respond to my kids' proclamations about a purportedly unfair difference between what I do and what they do by noting that I've been their age and paid the same dues I expect of them. That if fairness matters (which requires more semiotics than they have the patience for), then it would be unfair for them to, e.g., receive an iPhone when I have one only because I worked and paid for it.

In this sense, consider that human societies have historical leaned toward objectifying and often defiling women far more frequently than men. Taking only the US, American women still haven't achieved equality in several ways.

While I don't mean to say that it's okay for women to do it because men have been objectifying women for centuries in the US, it does seem that the response to this movie needs to be considered within a context of scale. Few if any men are likely to have to fight discrimination or lower wages or whatever as a product of the social phenomena into which this movie taps. Many women will, though, as a result of the much-more-strongly entrenched social context of which the strip club is a part.

* My wife wanted to watch _300_ last night mainly to see hot guys. Their forms are certainly impressive. I don't have a problem with it. It's not the attraction that's problematic, but what she or anyone else does with it that needs attention. She didn't demean me for not looking like a Hollywood incarnation of a Spartan soldier. If she had, then the demeaning behavior would've been the problem, not the attraction.

LarryC wrote:

I'd like to voice a contrarian opinion. Disclaimer: not an American.

It seems to me that the direction of all these uncomfortable feelings is to cover up both sexes and to deny sexual attraction both ways. I feel that the ultimate direction of this would eventually be Victorian/formal Japanese. While I have been sexually harassed in the past, I don't feel uncomfortable or have any animosity towards women displaying sexuality by appreciating a sexy male body, in film or otherwise. It doesn't make me uncomfortable. Of course, tit for tat.

A certain amount of animal sexual objectification is unavoidable, in both directions. I'd argue that it's simply normal sexual response in a certain fraction of the population, and to ask them to suppress it would ultimately lead to more unhealthy or objectionable expressions. Let's have the animal sexual energy where we can keep an eye on it, I'd prefer.

There's a point where that sort of thing gets out of control, and it has to be fair to expect it to occur both ways. As a man, I have to be indulgent when the womenfolk go ape over Tatum in the same way that some of the menfolk like to see Spears (or whoever).

I confess that this is fundamentally emotional. I simply can't be bothered to care about this sort of thing since it's a rather far cry from unwanted fondling and caressing - I'd like to cast these latter behaviors as starkly unacceptable and intolerable as possible.

Pretty much this.

fangblackbone wrote:

I think the double standard exists because the majority of men don't feel threatened by this objectification of men and it is not as prolific as when men do it to women.

I think it is a case of what comes after or how far does the thought process continue?

That's pretty much how I see it. I said earlier there's a double standard, and it's not news. I didn't mean to imply I think the double standard is horrific or unfair, though. The problem comes when we look at the degree at which the double standard becomes unfair - it's almost completely arbitrary, because we're talking about people's feelings and emotional capacities. The sexual objectification of men can easily be defended, at low levels, as "dude get over it". But that sort of attitude ('just MAN UP') is somewhat self-defeating, and can become abused.

Unlike what has been expressed in this thread by several posters, though, I don't see it this way because it's women's "turn". That's a pretty lamentable extension of the "two wrongs make a right" sort of thinking. I just see it this way because due to history and current sociological forces, it's less damaging (and possibly completely undamaging) in many cases. There's a double standard because one standard would be ignorant of the reality of things. Not because "payback is fair".

Maybe we can clarify it further like this:

Does the objectification have a history? A future?

In the case of women objectifiying men, it has neither.
In the case of men objectifying women, it has both.

Scratched wrote:

I'm not sure exactly how to phrase this without getting jumped on, but when did it become wrong to gaze at someone you find attractive?

There seems to be this uneasy balance between us being sexual animals looking for a mate (again, for want of a better way to phrase it), and that we're supposed to rise above it and suppress that. It seems like it's getting lost in the details, a 'professional' work environment where apparently everyone turns off a few sections of their brain 9-5, history, and some idea of balance and fairness. What's the officially sanctioned way and permitted locations to express attraction?

I'd say a good rule would be to respect a person's privacy in public. Places like bars or clubs are more appropriate than grocery stores or the sidewalk for telling strangers that you find them attractive.

And don't be a skeeve about it either.
IMAGE(http://jessfink.com/kwe/wp-content/webcomic/kwe/154_CatCalls.jpg)

Am I the only one here who is ok with both men and women embracing their sexuality as long as its done consentually and not on the company clock? Maybe the real problem is not that there's a double standard between men and women when it comes to strippers or provocative movies. Maybe the real problem is that there are all sorts of stupid sexual taboos in America, which includes strong condemnation of consentual activities like stripping.

I, for one, am deeply uncomfortable with the prospect of being regarded purely as an object for someone else's sexual gratification.

Some of Magic Mike's answers are obvious: ripped abs, shaved legs, big penises, though only so much of the latter. Just one of the movie's strippers, the accurately-named Big Dick Richie (Joe Manganiello), sheds his G-string as a regular part of his act. When he does, his boss Dallas (Matthew McConaughey) describes the crowd as "devastated by your c*ck," as if the screaming gals stuffing dollar bills into the crew's costumes suddenly would become demure maidens when the trou-dropping was completed.

As devastated as the women might be, the movie constantly undermines the idea that penises and missionary-position sex are the be-all and end-all for modern women. Dallas may lecture the men in his employ on the importance of their penises ("You are the liberation. You have the c*ck, they don't.”),
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor...

Wait, is this the movie we're talking about?

jdzappa wrote:

Am I the only one here who is ok with both men and women embracing their sexuality as long as its done consentually and not on the company clock? Maybe the real problem is not that there's a double standard between men and women when it comes to strippers or provocative movies. Maybe the real problem is that there are all sorts of stupid sexual taboos in America, which includes strong condemnation of consentual activities like stripping.

You are not the only one.

jdzappa wrote:

Am I the only one here who is ok with both men and women embracing their sexuality as long as its done consentually and not on the company clock? Maybe the real problem is not that there's a double standard between men and women when it comes to strippers or provocative movies. Maybe the real problem is that there are all sorts of stupid sexual taboos in America, which includes strong condemnation of consentual activities like stripping.

Considering I just said the double standard itself is not the problem, and several others have said things in the same vein: no, you're not the only wistfully enlightened cyclops in the land of the gouged ocular orifices. Sorry!

Does the above win an award for triple entendres? I really hope so.

Bloo Driver wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

Am I the only one here who is ok with both men and women embracing their sexuality as long as its done consentually and not on the company clock? Maybe the real problem is not that there's a double standard between men and women when it comes to strippers or provocative movies. Maybe the real problem is that there are all sorts of stupid sexual taboos in America, which includes strong condemnation of consentual activities like stripping.

Considering I just said the double standard itself is not the problem, and several others have said things in the same vein: no, you're not the only wistfully enlightened cyclops in the land of the gouged ocular orifices. Sorry!

Does the above win an award for triple entendres? I really hope so.

With the above, while I said that I find strip clubs sleazy, at least the ones around here, I don't have any issues with people wanting to go to them.

So, one thing that hasn't been touched on yet that I think is a key differentiator in many of the discussions here is the difference between men's perception and reaction to female strippers, and women's perception and reaction to male strippers.

Maybe I'm buying into folk wisdom here a little too much, but women stripping for men is about arousal, and men stripping for women is about titillation. That is to say, the goal of a female stripper is raw sexual arousal, and the goal for a male stripper is entertainment.

To put it less eloquantly, I'd bet money that more men rub one out after seeing a woman strip than women do after seeing a man strip.

Doesn't that reveal the false equivalency at play here?

Jonman brings up a good point.

Another thing I'd like to point out is jdzappa's comment about "consentual." At least from an anecdotal perspective from my ex working as a bartender at one and my exposure to the girls in question, there are some seriously broken dynamics in the whole mechanism with female stripping. For every dancer who feels empowered by it (and I did meet one) there are many seriously messed up people who are doing this because they feel they have to. The attitude is far more supplication than display, particularly when you're dealing with the girls who don't get top billing. And they have a carnie's disdain or even active hatred for their audience.

I don't know enough about the male side of it to say if it's the same or not. They seem to have kept the power in the equation in a way the women don't but those are portrayals and not from my knowing anyone personally.

momgamer wrote:

At least from an anecdotal perspective from my ex working as a bartender at one and my exposure to the girls in question, there are some seriously broken dynamics in the whole mechanism with female stripping. For every dancer who feels empowered by it (and I did meet one) there are many seriously messed up people who are doing this because they feel they have to. The attitude is far more supplication than display, particularly when you're dealing with the girls who don't get top billing. And they have a carnie's disdain or even active hatred for their audience.

While I'll not disagree with you that there are some seriously broken dynamics in female stripping, and that there's more negative aspects than positive, it's worth pointing out that the experience runs across a wide spectrum. I have a couple of friends who are well-known in local burlesque circles (and maybe I'm commiting a fallacy by conflating burlesque with stripping?), and for them, it's an artform, a performance far more than anything else. If anything, the atmosphere at a burlesque show feels far more like what I imagine a male-stripper-revue to be like - the emphasis is very much on hollering, laughing and having a grand old time.

Even good 'ole stripping can vary - my girlfriend stripped for a short while while she was in college, and her tales of the two clubs she worked in are like chalk and cheese. One sleazy, grimy and depressing to the max, the other an enjoyable, respectful place to work.

I think, in this specific incidence, we can all agree that Channing Tatum has it better than any stripper out there.

(Burlesque has a culture of empowerment and audience behavior that stripping generally lacks. Wish they were the same, but they're not.)

clover wrote:

(Burlesque has a culture of empowerment and audience behavior that stripping generally lacks. Wish they were the same, but they're not.)

Totes. Isn't burlesque a more apt comparison to male stripping then?

Jonman wrote:
clover wrote:

(Burlesque has a culture of empowerment and audience behavior that stripping generally lacks. Wish they were the same, but they're not.)

Totes. Isn't burlesque a more apt comparison to male stripping then?

I'd say so... and the more genteel strip clubs are more burlesque-like in the level of mutual dancer/audience respect. I dont think "normal" stripping really has a male equivalent.

Not to say that a group of divorce-party women at a male strip club won't be completely obnoxious, but the power dynamic is not the same.

Well you have the "Girls Gone Wild" thing that is all about titilation. (no the pun is not intended I am just using the same verbage as the above posts) But I'd argue that is way more approachable than stripping for women and in many cases far more exploitation and thus more damaging.

And I don't think that female stripping is always about arousal. I think you have a scale from 1-100 where the 1 side are the bikini bars, the 75 side is lap dancing and the 100 side is private room sex.

I don't think male stripping is as diverse. I disagree that it is about titilation as there is tons of porn out there with bachelorette parties where the women engage in sex with the strippers out in the open in the club. You don't see that with women strippers. It is all behind closed doors and doesn't seem nearly as common male strippers.

Not to say that a group of divorce-party women at a male strip club won't be completely obnoxious, but the power dynamic is not the same.

See I think the power dynamic is the same. The distinction is in the follow through. Men are more likely to pursue. Women audiences so far have been shown to respect a boundary and male strippers have been more apt to invoke it and enforce it.

fangblackbone wrote:
Not to say that a group of divorce-party women at a male strip club won't be completely obnoxious, but the power dynamic is not the same.

See I think the power dynamic is the same. The distinction is in the follow through. Men are more likely to pursue. Women audiences so far have been shown to respect a boundary and male strippers have been more apt to invoke it and enforce it.

The power dynamic is different in a few ways, the most obvious being that conventionally attractive strippers are generally smaller, and conventional male strippers are rather muscle-bound, and so rude or belligerent customers represent radically different threat levels.

fangblackbone wrote:

Well you have the "Girls Gone Wild" thing that is all about titilation. (no the pun is not intended I am just using the same verbage as the above posts) But I'd argue that is way more approachable than stripping for women and in many cases far more exploitation and thus more damaging.

That's a rather poor example because Joe Francis and several of his employees served jail time for drugging underage girls who were then assaulted on-camera for the videos.

That's a rather poor example because Joe Francis and several of his employees served jail time for drugging underage girls who were then assaulted on-camera for the videos.

I did not know that but I think that sort of furthers my point. It isn't whether the intent is to arouse or titilate, it is the means by which the titilation or arousal is acquired and the environment created to support it.

The power dynamic is different in a few ways, the most obvious being that conventionally attractive strippers are generally smaller, and conventional male strippers are rather muscle-bound, and so rude or belligerent customers represent radically different threat levels.

I agree it is just that I am trying to be more nuanced that the call to action is the same but there are natural psychological and physical barriers that favor males. It would be interesting if we lived in a society where petite males were the most sexually attractive to women and whether that would change the dynamic of male stripping. (both from the stripper's perspective and the women audience's perspective)

Saying the call to action is the same is a lot different from arguing the whole power dynamic is the same.

You are absolutely right. My bad.

Jonman wrote:
momgamer wrote:

At least from an anecdotal perspective from my ex working as a bartender at one and my exposure to the girls in question, there are some seriously broken dynamics in the whole mechanism with female stripping. For every dancer who feels empowered by it (and I did meet one) there are many seriously messed up people who are doing this because they feel they have to. The attitude is far more supplication than display, particularly when you're dealing with the girls who don't get top billing. And they have a carnie's disdain or even active hatred for their audience.

While I'll not disagree with you that there are some seriously broken dynamics in female stripping, and that there's more negative aspects than positive, it's worth pointing out that the experience runs across a wide spectrum. I have a couple of friends who are well-known in local burlesque circles (and maybe I'm commiting a fallacy by conflating burlesque with stripping?), and for them, it's an artform, a performance far more than anything else. If anything, the atmosphere at a burlesque show feels far more like what I imagine a male-stripper-revue to be like - the emphasis is very much on hollering, laughing and having a grand old time.

Even good 'ole stripping can vary - my girlfriend stripped for a short while while she was in college, and her tales of the two clubs she worked in are like chalk and cheese. One sleazy, grimy and depressing to the max, the other an enjoyable, respectful place to work.

These are all excellent points and I agree that burlesque should not be compared with stripping. Ive also been convinced that the power dynamics between male and female strippers is also skewed. However, I'm not so sure I buy into the argument that the girls who strip have no other options. It seems to me the main draw is the money, which puts stripping on par with the other degrading and even dangerous jobs that pay well because so few people want to do them.

jdzappa wrote:
Jonman wrote:
momgamer wrote:

At least from an anecdotal perspective from my ex working as a bartender at one and my exposure to the girls in question, there are some seriously broken dynamics in the whole mechanism with female stripping. For every dancer who feels empowered by it (and I did meet one) there are many seriously messed up people who are doing this because they feel they have to. The attitude is far more supplication than display, particularly when you're dealing with the girls who don't get top billing. And they have a carnie's disdain or even active hatred for their audience.

While I'll not disagree with you that there are some seriously broken dynamics in female stripping, and that there's more negative aspects than positive, it's worth pointing out that the experience runs across a wide spectrum. I have a couple of friends who are well-known in local burlesque circles (and maybe I'm commiting a fallacy by conflating burlesque with stripping?), and for them, it's an artform, a performance far more than anything else. If anything, the atmosphere at a burlesque show feels far more like what I imagine a male-stripper-revue to be like - the emphasis is very much on hollering, laughing and having a grand old time.

Even good 'ole stripping can vary - my girlfriend stripped for a short while while she was in college, and her tales of the two clubs she worked in are like chalk and cheese. One sleazy, grimy and depressing to the max, the other an enjoyable, respectful place to work.

These are all excellent points and I agree that burlesque should not be compared with stripping. Ive also been convinced that the power dynamics between male and female strippers is also skewed. However, I'm not so sure I buy into the argument that the girls who strip have no other options. It seems to me the main draw is the money, which puts stripping on par with the other degrading and even dangerous jobs that pay well because so few people want to do them.

I'm not trying to call you out here jdzappa, but what jobs are those? Many of these girls are at least walking wounded if not outright mentally ill. Add in lack of education and the strong possibility of a child in the mix and you've got a nightmare in the making. In the two years I was around there, I only met one who was anything like truly functional, and she was a traveling headliner who called down ridiculous fees because of her twice-Dolly-Parton sized chest who stripped summers to pay for med school and a serious breast reduction. They're in it "for the money" but without help a lot of them really don't have a lot of other choice, and don't actually end up making the money they think they're going to either.

And how much money do you think these girls make? You seem to have this notion they're all walking around with wads of cash, but outside of a few headline acts that just doesn't happen. Often they aren't paid a wage at all - it's all tips. And they pay the house for right to work the shift. The money isn't that much better than the average waitress, especially once they've paid their cut to the house and the support staff. I often saw girls end up in debt to the house by the end of the night. The girls who just served drinks did as well or better than the dancers. One of the links I was looking at characterized $44,000 a year as high pay. Not exactly high rolling.

Just to make sure it wasn't just the way it was in the two places he worked, I hit Google and looked up some other materials:
Stripclubs According To Strippers (part 1 | part 2 | part 3 )
Dissociation and abuse among multiple-personality patients, prostitutes, and exotic dancers

I wasn't able to find any equivalent information on male stripping before this whole thing got too depressing to contemplate. All I have is hearsay and that would be that male and female stripping really don't compare; the comparison to burlesque above seems right to me but that might be because I don't know jack about either situation.

It's hard for me to believe the power dynamic would be the same inside male and female strip clubs, given that the power dynamic is hardly the same outside it.

From the first study Momgamer posted:

One hundred percent of the eighteen women in the survey report being physically abused in the stripclub. The physical abuse ranged from three to fifteen times with a mean of 7.7 occurrences over the course of their involvement in stripping. One hundred percent of the eighteen women in this study report sexual abuse in the stripclub. The sexual abuse ranged from two to nine occurrences with a mean of 4.4 occurrences over the course of their involvement in stripping.

One hundred percent of the women report verbal harassment in the stripclub. The verbal abuse ranged from one to seven occurrences with a mean of 4.8 occurrences over the course of their involvement in stripping. One hundred percent of the women report being propositioned for prostitution. Seventy eight percent of the women were stalked by someone associated with the stripclub with a range of one to seven incidents. Sixty one percent of the women report that someone associated with the stripclub has attempted to sexually assault her with a range of one to eleven attempts. Not only do women suffer the abuse they experience, all of women in the survey witnessed these things happen to other strippers in the clubs.

The overwhelming trend for violence against women in stripclubs was committed by customers of the establishments. Stripclub owners, managers, assistant managers, and the staff of bartenders, music programmers or disc jockeys, bouncers, security guards, floorwalkers, doormen, and valet were significantly less involved in violence against the women. According to the women in this study, almost all of the perpetrators suffered no consequence whatsoever for their actions.

Not seen the movie but just wanted to comment about male and female strip clubs, all in my experience of course so when I generalize it's not like I mean it as gospel.

Ok so obviously strip clubs in Mexico are probably different from the american ones but every single one I've been to (umm, let's say a few) is full of damaged people, and those that aren't damaged when they go in will invariably leave all sorts of f*cked up unless they leave quickly.

It does happen that a girl makes some money in a summer and leaves, but usually they are all "Oh I just need some quick money for such and such" and you go 2 years later and they're still there hustling, pretending "it's my last year, I'm leaving soon", or you find them in another strip club, or just all out prostitution. Also horrible things go on behind the scenes.

Also I've met a couple of male strippers at the gym and if their stories are to be believed, these motherf*ckers have a LOT of sex with married and engaged women. Like, a LOT. Also women obviously don't abuse men physically but there's some horrible psychological sh*t that they talk, like they know how to hurt men with words and through other people. If I was younger my faith in humanity and women would be completely destroyed. But I take it like you know, they're people and everyone makes mistakes, specially in night clubs.

In my personal experience, women are really horny too, they're probably a lot worse behaved in a male strip club than a guy in a female strip club. I dunno why. Not all of them but the ones that stand out would get their ass kicked if they were a guy doing that to a girl.

I think the whole "glamour" thing that surrounds strippers is a bad thing because it's a horrible horrible job, that only leads to bad things, but hey. There's certainly a few people who are making a lot of money stripping, not using drugs, not being abused, not prostituting themselves, etc etc, but it's minuscule compared to what goes on. It's like how many people in the world are Mark Zuckerberg and how everyone else just has a website.

Anyway just thinking out loud and bored at work.

edit: when I say "abused" there's like a million different ways, like a 19 year old woman being "girlfriend" of a pimp who exploits her emotionally and stuff, or a dude getting hooked on drugs by a woman on purpose, lots of sad stories going on.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and address what I see as the central false equivalency in this thread.

Starting from the most basic premise: Sexism against men, if we are speaking in the same terms used when talking about sexism against women, does not exist. It is imaginary. A fantasy.

There is a kind of old equation defining what I'm talking about here: Sexism (and other isms) = Prejudice + Power. That is to say, sexism is not an individual act but an underlying system of oppression by which men gain and defend their power in society. An individual man certainly can feel objectified by a movie, but that objectification does not then go on to define and limit the way that society values him.

Going to the other example raised, when men at a workplace make plans to go visit a strip club, they're working inside of and reinforcing a system that holds up the workplace as a place for straight men and is hostile and alienating to everyone else. Despite everything, it's a system that still exists and still pays out very real and measurable dividends to men, still penalizes women. When women make plans to go see Magic Mike that is simply not what is happening. There is no double standard, what you see are two very different things.

I find all the talk of "women turning the tables" a little disturbing, because what it looks more like to me is men who feel like they have been wronged somehow, like something has been taken from them, jumping at the opportunity to grab what they see as a weapon from their opponent and get some hits in for their team. It's an idea that I think ignores the larger context in which we live.