Should “Ladies Only” Always Include Men? Hell No!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/vivica-fox-apologizes-to-lgbt-community-over-offensive-remark/ar-BBy7wnb?li=BBnb7Kz

 

bby7u5o-img

This whole non-issue is crap. Chippendale Dancers’ shows were always targeted as “ladies’ night out” entertainment. So what the hell is wrong if Vivica A. Fox wants to have a reality TV show which revives the ’80s for women who either missed out or want to relive it (and both groups don’t want the hassle of driving down to a club or casino and paying to see the show live)?

And so what if Fox says the dancers dance for ladies only and “hell no” to dancing for gays? It’s her goddamn TV show and she can control who gets let in to see it live but she has zero control over who can watch it on TV. And if the ratings remain low because not enough women are watching it and the show’s canceled, then the market has spoken.

And of course the potential irony here is that some of the male strippers employed by the show might be gay themselves, just like there are lesbian strippers who perform for men. Nobody in the audience cares anyway because it’s the visuals, titillation, and fantasies components of the entertainment that matter anyway.

And besides that, there’s a greater issue involved here. What the hell is wrong with women getting together in a venue without men or vice versa? I may be a political liberal but I guess in some ways I’m a social libertarian. It’s both genetic and cultural that in some situations men only want to party with men and women only want to party with women. This behavior is established during childhood and you can observe it everyday. Children will naturally choose which play and activities are co-ed and which are segregated by gender and they will freely switch back and forth at any given time. But the important point here is that it is by their own choice.

 

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Should “Ladies Only” Always Include Men? Hell No!

  1. Well I’ll tell you what’s wrong with ladies only…we worked decades on getting into and invading “men’s only clubs”…..so now you to separate ?? Then let the men do it too. Equal mean, the same , not better but the same…….sooooooo, if you want that privilege them you MUST allow men the same………be careful what you wish for!!!!!

    • farlefty says:

      When I worked for a county welfare agency back in the ’90s my workstation was in an area surrounded by women. I heard all about periods and all sorts of vagina-related talk. I heard sexist comments as well. Now, I could’ve filed a sexual harassment claim and I would’ve won it because I didn’t like hearing that stuff. But I never said a word because I wasn’t offended by it. Now, what if some male co-workers and I were talking about our penises and making sexist remarks about women? The sexual harassment claims would’ve been flying and we men would’ve had censures entered into our personnel files.

      Here’s my point: the genders just naturally like to be segregated in certain situations so they can relax, let their hair down, and talk with impunity without having to be made to feel uncomfortable by the ears of other genders, whether we’re talking straights, breeders, or LGBT. I think it’s both socially and genetically natural that members of a group at times want to hang out only with members of their group. I continue to think it’s stupid and asinine that all gender groups are legally required to mix together. Now, I’m not talking about men-only clubs and organizations where business and political deals are arranged that women were shut out of, and I’m applying this same exception to women’s clubs and organizations as well (think Emily’s List).

      If a promoter wants a women-only audience for Chippendale Dancers–some dancers of which might be gay, bi, or whatever, what the hell is wrong with that? They don’t have to compete with gay men for the attention of the dancers on stage and they can just relax and be women. Gay men can also have their own show without women hanging around and trying to cut in on their enjoyment and action. This is the basic philosophy behind stag parties, and bachelor and bachelorette parties.

      Let’s take your example further. Why not have women on college and pro men’s sports teams but then men should also be on women’s college and pro sports teams as well. And when that happens what will be the point of any gender-separate sports leagues at all, disregarding the average size, strength and abilities between men and women athletes? Why not combine all scouting and call it “Scouts”, no more Boy or Girl or Brownies or whatever. And let’s make all restrooms from school age to adults unisexual for both genders. Why segregate at all?

      Because the logical and factual answer is that there are fundamental differences between the sexes; the way they think and act. And in some situations males want to be exclusively with other males and in some situations women want to be with other women. My wife and her female friends love to go out on an occasional “Girls’ Night Out”. They want one night free of men, just to enjoy each other’s female company. What the hell is wrong with that? The sexes have never been equal in all things. Trying to codify forced “cohabitation” (in the loosest sense of the word) is ludicrous. I’m all for joining my wife at a Pampered Chef party but why would I would to go with her to a Mary Kaye Cosmetics party–just to prove a legal point? I can turn it around and say that if there was a cigar mulitlevel marketing organization my wife would be very content to let me go alone (keep in mind I don’t smoke at all) and let the men be alone together since she’d have no interest in attending something like that.

      See? You should’ve stayed out of those men only clubs. Now you’ll have us in your restrooms after I file the lawsuit we men are sure to win. Be careful what YOU wish for.

Comments are closed.