Does Erotic Dance Degrade Women?

[Fluffy]

Though probably there is wiggle room between erotic and pornographic.

The best part of porn is the erotic part. I lose interest once the clothes are off.

 

[Sunstone]

When you reduce any human being to a tool then yes, it is degrading. It seems so simple to me and I have a hard time understanding why some are OK with it. Obviously, I don't know everything (or else they don't).

Do you feel you are reducing a human being to a tool when you order food from a waitress at a restaurant? What about when you call a police officer to take care of a noisy neighbor? Or, when you hire someone to build a new room on your house? Just curious about what you mean by "reducing someone to a tool".

 

[Matt]

What good comes out of erotic dancing? The people doing it are either immoral or on drugs, and the people watching are no better. This form of dancing is another thing on this world that is further leading to our moral decline. We can do without it.

 

[PureX]

The purpose of erotic dancing is to focus attention on the sexuality of the dancer, and to increase sexual desire in the viewer. Certainly, there will be circumstances where this is not at all exploitive or improper. Unfortunately, there will also be circumstances when it is.

I think erotic dancing in public for money is degrading to everyone involved. It creates and validates the idea that women are primarily objects of sexual pleasure by focusing only on that aspect of a woman's being, and by encouraging the idea that it can and should be obtainable with money.

I see it as a mild form of prostitution. Prostitution isn't bad because it's sexual intercourse, it's bad because it's sexual exploitation. And it's exploitive whether the prostitute thinks so or not. I believe it's unhealthy for a society to confuse sexual intimacy with commerce. Doing so turns human beings into objects of sexual pleasure that can be bought and sold for money. It de-humanizes human beings. It's not an accident that many exotic dancers are also prostitutes, or that prostitution and exotic dancing often occur in the same places with the same intent.

It also encourages exploitation in the other direction, too, by promoting and validating the idea of women using their sexuality to control, manipulate, and exploit men. Usually for money.

It's the exploitation that's wrong, and that's de-humanizing, not the dancer's sexuality, or the dance.

 

[Sunstone]

What good comes out of erotic dancing?

It's life affirming.

The people doing it are either immoral or on drugs, and the people watching are no better.

On what rational or reasonable grounds do you make such sweeping generalizations?

This form of dancing is another thing on this world that is further leading to our moral decline.

It might be argued that a society which cannot affirm sexuality is in moral decline.

 

[PureX]

I know this is a notoriously tough question, and a bit unfair to ask, since it has stumped even Supreme Court justices, but what is the difference between erotic and pornographic?

Let me suggest, once again, that erotic does not involve treating someone solely as a means to an end, while pornographic does indeed involve treating someone solely as a means to an end.

I disagree.

I don't think there is a difference, functionally. I think the difference is social. Society is willing to accept sexual titillation in some forms, but not in others. The difference between what it will accept and what it will not accept is the difference between erotica, and pornography (I realize this is not true of the literal definitions of the words, but I think it's true of how we conceptualize them). The reason the judges have so much trouble with this question is because it's impossible to define exactly what the line between these is, in any given society. In fact, it's an individual, subjective delineation. So all the judges can do is try to find a general mean, and even then it will constantly be changing.

 

[Sunstone]

The purpose of erotic dancing is to focus attention on the sexuality of the dancer, and to increase sexual desire in the viewer. Certainly, there will be circumstances where this is not at all exploitive or improper. Unfortunately, there will also be circumstances when it is.

Are you opposed to focusing attention on the sexuality of the dancer? If so, are you opposed to the way ballet focuses attention on the grace of the dancer?

Would you object to the way some people treat caprenters as if the caprenters were no more than a means to an end? That is, would you be opposed to caprentry because sometimes some people treat caprenters as no more than a means to an end?

I think erotic dancing in public for money is degrading to everyone involved. It creates and validates the idea that women are primarily objects of sexual pleasure by focusing only on that aspect of a woman's being, and by encouraging the idea that it can and should be obtainable with money.

Are you then opposed to ballet when it is done for money because it creates adn validates the idea that women are primarily objects of esthetic pleasure?

I see it as a mild form of prostitution. Prostitution isn't bad because it's sexual intercourse, it's bad because it's sexual exploitation. And it's exploitive whether the prostitute thinks so or not. I believe it's unhealthy for a society to confuse sexual intimacy with commerce. Doing so turns human beings into objects of sexual pleasure that can be bought and sold for money. It de-humanizes human beings. It's not an accident that many exotic dancers are also prostitutes, or that prostitution and exotic dancing often occur in the same places with the same intent.

There was a time when actresses where considered nothing much more than high quality call girls. Would you have banned women from acting because of that, or would you have worked to separate the notion that actresses are high quality call girls from the profession of acting?

 

[Sunstone]

I disagree.

I don't think there is a difference, functionally. I think the difference is social. Society is willing to accept sexual titillation in some forms, but not in others. The difference between what it will accept and what it will not accept is the difference between erotica, and pornography (I realize this is not true of the literal definitions of the words, but I think it's true of how we conceptualize them). The reason the judges have so much trouble with this question is because it's impossible to define exactly what the line between these is, in any given society. In fact, it's an individual, subjective delineation. So all the judges can do is try to find a general mean, and even then it will constantly be changing.

If there is no difference between erotica and porn besides what society whimsically says is one or the other, then why shouldn't society decide everything is equally good?

 

[PureX]

Are you opposed to focusing attention on the sexuality of the dancer? If so, are you opposed to the way ballet focuses attention on the grace of the dancer?

No, I'm opposed to the economic exploitation of a dancer's sexual expression, and of the sexual desire the dancer wishes to inspire in the viewer.

Would you object to the way some people treat carpenters as if the carpenters were no more than a means to an end? That is, would you be opposed to carpentry because sometimes some people treat carpenters as no more than a means to an end?

I'm not opposed to dancing or carpentry. I'm opposed to exploitation, and de-humanization, whether it's being done to dancers or carpenters.

We can and do exploit a person's carpentry skills just as we can and do exploit a women's sexuality. The fact that exotic dancers, prostitutes, and carpenters often do not consider themselves as being exploited doesn't mean that they aren't being exploited. The real difference is that the act of carpentering does not promote the idea that carpentering is all the carpenter is for or about. Exotic dancing (done under certain conditions) does inherently promote the idea that sex is all the dancer is for.

There was a time when actresses where considered nothing much more than high quality call girls. Would you have banned women from acting because of that, or would you have worked to separate the notion that actresses are high quality call girls from the profession of acting?

Acting and dancing are both art forms. I'm not objecting to art, or to acting or dancing, I'm objecting to the exploitation of human beings. If some expressions of some art forms inherently promote and validate such exploitation, then I object to participating in the expression of those specific art forms.

 

[Djamila]

Erotic dance, by its very nature, doesn't necessarily demean women - it depends on the circumstances. I don't consider pole dancing to be any more or less sexual than belly dancing.

If I set up a pole in downtown Sarajevo and started having at it, everyone would think: what a horrible woman. If I wore even LESS clothes and belly danced, everyone would think: THERE'S a fine Muslim woman.

So I think it depends more on society's impression of things.

 

[PureX]

If there is no difference between erotica and porn besides what society whimsically says is one or the other, then why shouldn't society decide everything is equally good?

Because they don't believe it's all equal. People feel how people feel about it. It's not necessarily logical.

People will accept sexual exploitation in some forms, but will not accept it in other forms. I suspect that if the exploitation is subtle, and can easily be ignored, then people will accept it, generally, whereas when it's obvious and impossible to ignore, then they'll object to it. This is why "the public" will accept selling cars by draping them with scantily clad models, but will not accept selling cars by draping them with naked models. It's not really a logical delineation, as sexual exploitation is sexual exploitation regardless, but in reality there is always the matter of indifference and degrees ... and prejudice.

 

[PureX]

Erotic dance, by its very nature, doesn't necessarily demean women - it depends on the circumstances. I don't consider pole dancing to be any more or less sexual than belly dancing.

If I set up a pole in downtown Sarajevo and started having at it, everyone would think: what a horrible woman. If I wore even LESS clothes and belly danced, everyone would think: THERE'S a fine Muslim woman.

So I think it depends more on society's impression of things.

Do you see this is hypocritical?

I'm puzzled by the fact that so many Muslim female singers sing only about sexual themes. And then sell their music by presenting themselves in an overtly sexual way. Isn't this antithetical to Muslim moral precepts?

 

[Sunstone]

The real difference is that the act of carpentering does not promote the idea that carpentering is all the carpenter is for or about. Exotic dancing (done under certain conditions) does inherently promote the idea that sex is all the dancer is for.

Why or how does erotic dancing (done under certain conditions) inherently promote the idea that sex is all the dancer is for? Is such a perception (the perception that sex is all the dancer is for) something inherent in the dance, or something that the audience either assumes or does not assume?

I would say that the perception the dancer is only for sex is a perception of the audience, rather than something inherent in the dance. There does not seem to me to be anything in the dance that inherently causes the audience to have that perception. I know, for instance, that some people can view erotic dance without assuming that the dancer is only for sex. But if there was something inherent in the dance that caused people to view the dancer as only for sex, that should be impossible for those people to do.

 

[Djamila]

Do you see this is hypocritical?

I'm puzzled by the fact that so many Muslim female singers sing only about sexual themes. And then sell their music by presenting themselves in an overtly sexual way. Isn't this antithetical to Muslim moral precepts?

Hypocritical... not really. I think Muslim opposition to the sexual culture of the West is more to do with the circumstances surrounding it. You visit one of the rural Bosnian border cities where Romanian hookers are assembled into "belly dancing clubs" and see the opposition to belly dancing in these communities. lol I think it's unusual, interesting, but not hypocritical.

Well, it's not really sexual themes they sing of. It's more about love, about the man, and so on. But who knows.

I don't find it strange in Bosnia because this reflects the wider society, but I find it strange to see, for example, Arab female singers wearing not much of anything.

Take this clip, for example:

Haifa Wehbe (Lebanese Artist) - Ma Andi Habib

I'd like to see her try that in south Beirut. If the show of skin and sex wouldn't get her beaten up, the American symbolism would.

 

[PureX]

Why or how does erotic dancing (done under certain conditions) inherently promote the idea that sex is all the dancer is for? Is such a perception (the perception that sex is all the dancer is for) something inherent in the dance, or something that the audience either assumes or does not assume?

"Exotic dancing" as I understand it, is dancing specifically designed to enhance and focus the viewer's attention on the sexuality of the dancer. And the purpose of performing such a dance is to inspire sexual desire in the viewer. Such a dance, then, would inherently promote the idea that the dancer is a sexual phenomenon, by purposely suppressing all the other aspects of them as human beings. If such a dance is being performed for strangers, for money, then the it's also presenting and validating the idea that the dancer's sexuality can be obtained with money. And in fact, throughout history, exotic dancers were often also prostitutes, or worked in conjunction with prostitutes, and the purpose of the dancing was to advertise and promote the purchase of sexual intercourse.

I would say that the perception the dancer is only for sex is a perception of the audience, rather than something inherent in the dance.

The audience is being invited to make such an assumption by the whole design of the "exotic" dance. And adding to that the fact that the sexuality of the dancer can be purchased for a price (through the dance), invites the idea that the dancer's sexual body can also be purchased for a price.

There does not seem to me to be anything in the dance that inherently causes the audience to have that perception.

Huh??? Have you seen an exotic dance? What ELSE is the dance about?

I know, for instance, that some people can view erotic dance without assuming that the dancer is only for sex.

But the dancer is still presenting their sexuality (and only their sexuality) to the audience for a price. And they are also presenting the idea that doing so is acceptable to them.

But if there was something inherent in the dance that caused people to view the dancer as only for sex, that should be impossible for those people to do.

No it wouldn't be. We're all different. Some of us will easily be able to separate and differentiate content, context, and implication, while some of us will not. In truth, I think many of us will not find that easy, and so will not bother doing so.

I think if you were to visit an "exotic" night club, you would quickly change your mind on this. Believe me, the audience is not sitting there separating the content of the dance from humanity of the dancer, nor are the dancers encouraging them to do so. Instead, they're stuffing money into places on the dancer's bodies that would under normal conditions be considered a sexual assault, in direct response to the dancer's overtly sexual invitation to do so. It's ALL about sex for cash.

 

[PureX]

Hypocritical... not really. I think Muslim opposition to the sexual culture of the West is more to do with the circumstances surrounding it. You visit one of the rural Bosnian border cities where Romanian hookers are assembled into "belly dancing clubs" and see the opposition to belly dancing in these communities. lol I think it's unusual, interesting, but not hypocritical.

Well, it's not really sexual themes they sing of. It's more about love, about the man, and so on. But who knows.

I don't find it strange in Bosnia because this reflects the wider society, but I find it strange to see, for example, Arab female singers wearing not much of anything.

Take this clip, for example:

Haifa Wehbe (Lebanese Artist) - Ma Andi Habib

I'd like to see her try that in south Beirut. If the show of skin and sex wouldn't get her beaten up, the American symbolism would.

Well, of all the videos of female singers that you've posted, I don't recall any of them singing the praises of art, for example. It's always about the mating. And even if they were to sing about art, it looks to me like they'd still very likely be dressed in scanty outfits and moving in a sexually suggestive manner.

There seems (to me, as an American) to be a very rigid view of women in your eastern European countries (and in Arab countries, too), based primarily on sexuality. Do you have any female artists who don't dress provocatively, dance provocatively, and sing about mating in your part of the world? *smile*

One of the things I am very proud of as an American, is American art. Whatever else we Americans may be, we are certainly a freely expressive and very creative people. I can think of lots of female musical performers who sing about all kinds if things besides mating, and who do so wearing outfits that are definitely not overtly sexual, or who feel they must dance sexually, either. I'm saddened and somewhat ashamed by American performers like Madonna and Britney Spears who because they have so little actual talent, must stoop to controversial and sexual themes to get attention. They are not the norm, here, even though they're promoted so heavily. And I'm proud of the many American female artists who have had the courage over the years to face off with the male-dominant culture-brokers and fight for their right to be NON-sexual, and intelligent, and human.

 

[Sunstone]

Huh??? Have you seen an exotic dance? What ELSE is the dance about?

An erotic dance is always about a person's sexuality. It is about a person's sexuality even when the person doing the dance does not know, or is unaware, that she is dancing her sexuality.

There are also good dancers, mediocre dancers and poor dancers. A good dancer dances her sexuality much more unselfconsciously than a poor dancer. A poor dancer often dances what she believes is expected of her to dance. You can tell the diference very easily if you've seen enough dancers.

It is no different than with any other art. Some artists are better than others. For that matter, some clubs attract better dancers than do other clubs.

In principle, there is no difference between treating a caprenter as a person, despite that one is also using him to achieve some end, and treating a dancer as a person, despite that one is also using her to achieve some end.

"Exotic dancing" as I understand it, is dancing specifically designed to enhance and focus the viewer's attention on the sexuality of the dancer. And the purpose of performing such a dance is to inspire sexual desire in the viewer.

That might be one way of understanding erotic dance, and if that's the way you wish to understand it, then who is to say you are wrong? But it's not quite how I understand it, nor how I approach it.

To me, erotic dance does not reduce the dancer to merely her sexuality, but reveals her personality through her sexuality, and her sexuality through her personality. You can see this most clearly if you compare different dancers. Each has a different, personal, way of expressing her sexuality. Although poor dancers are much less adept at doing that, and good dancers are much better at it.

Whether the average member of a dance audience percieves these things or not is irrelevant. These things are there to be percieved if one has the eyes to see them.

 

[michel]

An erotic dance is always about a person's sexuality. It is about a person's sexuality even when the person doing the dance does not know, or is unaware, that she is dancing her sexuality.

There are also good dancers, mediocre dancers and poor dancers. A good dancer dances her sexuality much more unselfconsciously than a poor dancer. A poor dancer often dances what she believes is expected of her to dance. You can tell the diference very easily if you've seen enough dancers.

It is no different than with any other art. Some artists are better than others. For that matter, some clubs attract better dancers than do other clubs.

In principle, there is no difference between treating a caprenter as a person, despite that one is also using him to achieve some end, and treating a dancer as a person, despite that one is also using her to achieve some end.



That might be one way of understanding erotic dance, and if that's the way you wish to understand it, then who is to say you are wrong? But it's not quite how I understand it, nor how I approach it.

To me, erotic dance does not reduce the dancer to merely her sexuality, but reveals her personality through her sexuality, and her sexuality through her personality. You can see this most clearly if you compare different dancers. Each has a different, personal, way of expressing her sexuality. Although poor dancers are much less adept at doing that, and good dancers are much better at it.

Whether the average member of a dance audience percieves these things or not is irrelevant. These things are there to be percieved if one has the eyes to see them.

I would like to be controversial here; I do not believe that erotic dancing is "an art". I have always seen dancing emanating from pagan traditions; to me the erotic dancing is what it says it is - erotic, to 'lure' a mate.

There are tribes (in Africa that I know of, and most likely elsewhere), where the young women of the village
have a certain number of days to 'sell themselves' to the young male warriors. In that time, each has to persuade a guy that she, and no one else is what he wants, How is she going to achieve that ? - Go figure!

Most dancing does have it's roots in Pagan rituals, and in(that I am aware of) Voddo rituals; there, it is mixed with highly potent concotions, and the end of the 'Partay' is very much an orgy. Is it right/wrong? Who cares.........but those are the roots of dancing.

Don't forget that Bach's waltzles were described as 'disgusting' because the men had to get close to the women............

 

[mingmty]

I would like to be controversial here; I do not believe that erotic dancing is "an art". I have always seen dancing emanating from pagan traditions; to me the erotic dancing is what it says it is - erotic, to 'lure' a mate.

There are tribes (in Africa that I know of, and most likely elsewhere), where the young women of the village
have a certain number of days to 'sell themselves' to the young male warriors. In that time, each has to persuade a guy that she, and no one else is what he wants, How is she going to achieve that ? - Go figure!

Most dancing does have it's roots in Pagan rituals, and in(that I am aware of) Voddo rituals; there, it is mixed with highly potent concotions, and the end of the 'Partay' is very much an orgy. Is it right/wrong? Who cares.........but those are the roots of dancing.

Don't forget that Bach's waltzles were described as 'disgusting' because the men had to get close to the women............

What's wrong with luring men by dancing? What's wrong with a woman who acepts her sexuality?

Dancing to "lure a mate" has nothing to do with paganism (and you say so as a "bad thing"), is nature my friend and nothing more, Christians are the ones who like to deny it's own nature, next you are going to say that a peacock spreading its beautiful tail is pagan because is luring his mate.

There is no living creature that doesn't lure the opposite sex with a erotic ritual, is part of our nature.

 

[Djamila]

Well, of all the videos of female singers that you've posted, I don't recall any of them singing the praises of art, for example. It's always about the mating. And even if they were to sing about art, it looks to me like they'd still very likely be dressed in scanty outfits and moving in a sexually suggestive manner.

There seems (to me, as an American) to be a very rigid view of women in your eastern European countries (and in Arab countries, too), based primarily on sexuality. Do you have any female artists who don't dress provocatively, dance provocatively, and sing about mating in your part of the world? *smile*

One of the things I am very proud of as an American, is American art. Whatever else we Americans may be, we are certainly a freely expressive and very creative people. I can think of lots of female musical performers who sing about all kinds if things besides mating, and who do so wearing outfits that are definitely not overtly sexual, or who feel they must dance sexually, either. I'm saddened and somewhat ashamed by American performers like Madonna and Britney Spears who because they have so little actual talent, must stoop to controversial and sexual themes to get attention. They are not the norm, here, even though they're promoted so heavily. And I'm proud of the many American female artists who have had the courage over the years to face off with the male-dominant culture-brokers and fight for their right to be NON-sexual, and intelligent, and human.

Oh, I see what I did. Picking apart a little aspect of what you said and missing what you really meant.

Well, when it comes to music - yes, we have a few female artists who do not dress sexually and don't sing about mating. I have to admit, though, these artists are almost always ugly beyond any plastic surgeon's repair.

When you become a singer in Bosnia, there are four things you get done - and I am willing to bet my life than 90% of female singers in Bosnia, and in most of the Balkans, have done these things:

1. Get your lips injected.
2. Get your breasts enlarged.
3. Get your nose refined.
4. Get your teeth made flawless.

So as far as singing is concerned, you're absolutely right - more right than you probably realize, I bet.

But in terms of the overall culture, I think art is very important. Dancers, writers, painters, all of these sorts of things - they're all much more mainstream in Bosnia, and most of Europe, than they I find them to be in North America. Our money doesn't have politicians on it, it has artists on it.