I’d ask him if he’d practised safe sex, if the girl was special to him, and if the answers to both these questions were “yes”, then I’d offer him a beer to celebrate.
Your puritan head may explode now.
…
A 16 year old having sex! With a girl! The sheer noive of him!
I would be disappointed with him for capitulating to societal convention and not consummating with his boyfriend as he’d discussed with his therapist, his lesbian minister, and me.
Most of us have ethics. Some of us have and see a value in morals.
You don’t have a stick up your ass. No, the whole tree has been shoved up there.
Oh. No ovation, but I would hold up my lighter full flame as I yelled “FREEBIRD!”
I don’t think that, on a moral level, I would oppose my son or daughter going to a strip club. However, I’ve always been really big on teaching children that actions have consequences.
For instance, if you do something illegal, expect to face the consequence of having to deal with the police and possibly having to face other consequences such as (but not limited to) retribution at school or at home, a loss of future opportunities, and/or a loss of social interaction or esteem. If they are willing to accept those consequences–in other words, if they are doing an MLK to prove that the laws are unjust–then I’m cool with that, and, unless their stance is “it’s not RIGHT that I’m not allowed to kill people!” I will support them.
If, however, they do something they know is illegal, get caught, and then bitch and moan about how it isn’t their fault, how everyone else does it, how it isn’t fair that they’re being punished, I will tell them to quit whining. They knew the consequences of their actions. They did it anyway. Sucks to be them. In this case, I’d tell them that while it isn’t wrong for him to look at a naked body, it is wrong to break the law and then not expect anything to happen. If he thinks the law is wrong, he should work to change it, not expect to be treated differently.
For instance: I don’t think it’s wrong or dangerous of me to park in the fire lane for five minutes while I grab something from the school cafeteria. I’m not blocking traffic, and, if something were to happen, I would move my car. However, I know that if I park in the fire lane, I can more or less expect to get a $50+ ticket. Yeah, the police might not come by, or he might let me off, but, if I did get the ticket, I’m sure as fuck not going to be able or willing to pay it. Might as well not park in the fire lane, even though I think it’s stupid.
That has to be the first intelligent thing I have read from Brutus.
The therapy is making me the smarts, ala Flowers for Algernon…
Like others here, I think that the kids (and parents) are big whiners for acting as if it’s beyond unreasonable that they have to face the consequences of their actions. They need to suck it up–they went to the strip club, knew it was against the rules, but they wanted to go anyway. Too late now to change their minds and decide that they aren’t willing to face the consequences.
And, if my hypothetical 16-year-old son was caught having sex with a girl, after I stopped shrieking (OK, I hope I’d not do that ;)), I’d ask him if he’s prepared to be a father at age 16. Since no birth control is foolproof, etc. etc., there’s always that small possibility that even if they do have safe sex, she could get pregnant. And she may even decide to keep the kid. So, I’d ask him–is he prepared to have to get a full time job, in order to pay for child support? Because I’d make it clear to him–he’s not going to get me or anyone else to help him out financially if he finds himself in such a situation.
Once again, I think it’s one of those “be prepared to face the consequences” kind of deals.
I, too, am rather intrigued by Brutus’s enlightened stand.
Well played. 
I completely agree with Angel of the Lord on this stand: Gandhi and King both took responsibility for their actions, and in doing so forced people to see what kind of actions good people were `held responsible for.’
Should it have been a crime to harvest your own salt? No, but it was, and Gandhi took his lumps in a British prison for doing it.
Should it have been illegal to stage peaceful protest against Jim Crow Laws? No, but it was, and King felt the brunt of legal (and extralegal) proceedings against him.
I’m not comparing the magnitudes of the students’ actions, or the intent, but I am comparing the kinds of `crimes’ they committed: Nudity? We raise hell when healthy teens show an interest in nudity? Truly, we are the heirs of Cotton Mather, and we are chaining ourselves to the outdated, hate-filled notions classically expressed in Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God and contemporarily expressed in the latest Chick Tract. It is a disgrace and an indecency when we cannot look on our own bodies even with the same frankness as Europeans.
They broke the rule, but the rule does not have to break them.
Nice strawman, people.
Whether or not this behavior is morally acceptable is a completely different issue.
The players signed codes of conduct and violated them. That’s basically it. The way that one deals with rules one doesn’t agree with is NOT to break them and THEN complain. If they had a problem with the code of conduct, they shouldn’t have signed it in the first place. They agreed to follow rules and then decided not to.
There is no “moral” argument, here.
You’re comparing teenagers at a strip club to GHANDI??
I think someone needs some perspective…
If there is no moral argument, then the OP should have focused on the whining kids and parents, who knowingly broke a rule, and got busted. Tough cookies: I guess most people here will agree to that part of the OP.
But, the OP chose to go the extra step, and decided to apply his own morality (one can only assume) to the teenagers at hand, accusing them of a “lack of any sort of moral values”. As if wanting to look at naked women somehow constitutes immorality, whether the subject is 17 or 77.
That’s the problem with the OP, NightRabbit. Not the complaint about the kids and parents not owing up to their responsibilities. That part’s perfectly valid.
I’ll state, I’m not against strip clubs. As long as the dancers aren’t doing anything illegal, and the patrons are considered “of age” to be admitted to the club. The attitude displayed by some of the patrons of strip clubs is distrubing in that they seem to veiw women as objects instead of people. NOT every patron, just a few. This is not confined to strip clubs, so I will not point the “giant accusatory finger of ultimate evil” at them.
I’ll admit I have a problem with any age group that excessively abuses alcohol. Having a drink with friends, even drinking to the point of “getting a buzz” or becoming tipsy is not a big thing, if it’s not common. (As long as it does not interfere with your life, it’s not a problem.) There is nothing to indicate they got puking drunk however. If they did indeed obtain alcohol (through inferred deception) that’s a problem, because they are not legally allowed to drink in such establishments. (Some states have a loophole, if my memory serves me, that allows teens to consume alcohol in their parent’s house.)
What I spoke out against was the fact that these teens, who just happen to also be athletes, felt they could break the rules, and not have to face the consequences when they were caught.
I think it’s wrong of the parents to throw a fit, and say that it’s “unfair” when their child is punished for wrong doing. Unfortunately, from what I have personally seen, this attitude is displayed most visibly by the parents of athletes.
I think it might actually help them to be good citizens in the end, if they realize they are no better than anyone else, and must follow the laws, or face the consequences. If they feel the laws are unfair, they should go about getting them changed. Preferably not by breaking them.
They are representatives of their school, and community, and as such are expected to be good citizens. This includes following the laws. They signed agreements, stating they understood and would obey the rules. They broke their word.
I don’t think getting outraged at the idea of parents encouraging their children to break their word, and the law by trying to get them out of the punishment is “puritanical”. Like it or not, they knew the rules, and willfully broke them. Whether you or I think those laws are too old fashioned or not, doesn’t change the fact that they are still in place. Nor does it change the fact that the kids gave their “word of honor” to obey them. I think it will encourage them to be good citizens in the future, if they don’t wriggle out of the punishment stated in the contract they signed.
Hrmm, alter the sentence “The attitude displayed by some of the patrons of strip clubs is distrubing in that they seem to veiw women as objects instead of people.”
To read:
“The attitude displayed by some of the patrons of strip clubs is disturbing in that they seem to veiw the DANCERS as objects instead of people.”
I’ve seen women who are just as guilty of harboring this attitude. My apologies to any males I may have offended with that statement.
Of course they see the dancers as objects, if by objects you mean “objects of sexual lust”. What, did you think guys frequent strip clubs because they like to discuss feminism with the topless lady dangling from the pole?
It’s a market: there’s an infinite demand, and a limited supply.
I’m not offended at all by your statements, but I find the remark “The attitude displayed by some of the patrons of strip clubs is disturbing in that they seem to veiw the DANCERS as objects instead of people” incredibly naive.
Of course they see the strippers as lust objects. That’s the whole fucking idea behind the “strip club” concept.
I agree 100%, NightRabbit. As I was going to say (but you beat me to it), after Alereon said:
They knew the rules and they broke them. If you don’t like the rules do you:
- Break them and then whine (I mean complain) about them or
- Complain/petition for change and then, if changed, do what was once prevented?
Which should we be teaching children today?
I understand, that by dancing in tiny skin tight costumes the dancers are “inviting lust”, but it’s really not that different from what you see on some beaches, or in your own bedroom when you lover is whipping you into a frenzy. It does not mean that it’s ok to veiw the PERSON in the costume solely as a sexual object.
Yes, that’s likely the only contact the dancer will have with the patron, however I’ve seen patrons who take this attitude outside the club with them, and apply it to other females who aren’t “putting their sexuality up for view” as overtly. These particlular indivduals have a problem veiwing people they find sexually attractive as thinking, feeling beings.
I’ve got a friend that worked as a stripper, I went to the club to see her more than once. (She began stripping, incidentally because she felt she could have more control of how her sexuality came into play then at her previous job. Ironically, she was right. She did not have to take getting pinched on the ass at the club, the bouncers were swift to toss offenders out.)
The patrons I spoke of expected extreme “liberties” from the dancers because they gave them money. They actually wanted the strippers to bend the rules, and do things to them while the bouncers were busy elsewhere. She made the mistake of going out on a date with a patron that was like this. He expected he’d get sex because he bought her a hamburger and shake, also because she stripped. She didn’t go out with him a second time. He was a “sore loser” and got banned from the club because he harassed her afterwards.
This is what I meant. I don’t think it’s niave to remember that the person you want to screw until they can only moan and sweat has feelings too. Just because they are displaying themselves, and giving you good dreams for later, does not mean they don’t have hopes and fears, and deserve no consideration.
As long as they remember that the whole club is a “tangible dream” setting, and don’t expect that they will be able to carry out their fantasies with the dancers, it’s all good. It’s when they begin to think of everyone as “fuckable” or “unfuckable”, and fail to recognize the non-sexual side of the person, that the problems arise.
I refer you to Tori Amos’ song titled “Leather”. I think the song captures the stripper’s veiwpoint nicely.
Sorry for the above hijack. While not entirely on track with the OP, it still addressed previous posts.
You keep adding new things, Zabali. Of course it’s not OK to treat women like nothing but lust objects in general. But when you visit a strip club and pay good money to see a girl strip, then hell yes, it’s an appropriate approach.
To take that attitude and apply it to every female in the world is wrong, to try and get the strippers to bend the stated rules is wrong, and to think a stripper turns into a cheap hooker for a Big Mac and a shake is wrong as well. But as long as you’re in a strip club behaving yourself and stuffing a girl’s panties with money, then yes, you have the “right” to see her as a pure lust object, in that particular setting.
And I don’t need Tori Amos to explain that to me, beautiful as her voice is.
It seems that we do agree after all, we just choose to express our veiwpoints differently.
Now for something to ponder.
Don’t you think the reason there is an age limit for admittance to strip clubs, is not only the fact that alcohol is often served there, but that younger people might not understand the above stated points, and that problems could arise from this?
Shouldn’t there be an age limit set, because the people are not likely to emotionally and mentally be able make these connections, and behave in a responsible manner? I’m not saying this is a truth for everyone, it is a general statement.
This is where I, personally come from when I say that people under age 18, should not be allowed in strip clubs . If alcohol is served, then the age limit should be 21 in those states that have that law.
They are a place for people mature enough to handle the concept of “look, drool, tip, but don’t try to force your attentions.” There are some people over 18, that don’t understand this concept, and they often find themselves banned from clubs due to their own behavior.