Stripped bare
I read an intriguing article a little while back regarding the sexualisation of women by women. It was all rather reminiscent of Ariel Levy’s ‘Female Chauvinistic Pigs’ (a damn good read by the way) and it utterly confused me.
The argument was that lesbians should not indulge in strip clubs as they only encouraged the patriarchal objectification of women, therefore demeaning our gender. As lesbians and bisexuals, we have a moral responsibility not to sustain the abuse of our fellow women by ogling their goodies, but rather, we should be campaigning against the laws that allow any Tom, Dick and Henrietta to open up a strip club (currently they’re not seen as part of the sex industry and so legally are on a par with any regular bar, club or restaurant, allowing for some pretty lack licensing laws). After all, all strippers hate their job; I mean what sort of women enjoys having fake dollar bills stuffed down the side of her G –string?
Now, whilst I seriously doubt such claims as ‘all strippers hate their job’, I had to admit there was some semblance of truth in the article – and it very much relates to what Ariel Levy identifies as the rise of Raunch Culture amongst women. Although Female Chauvinistic Pigs focuses more in depth on heterosexual women who, in the name of progressive feminism, exploit themselves and their fellow females by reclaiming their sexuality in accordance with the prevalent sexist male ideology (the irony is not lost there), Levy does touch upon some patterns of behaviour that are associated with certain types of lesbians. The ‘boi’ for example whose main criteria is an androgynous look that borders on masculine (the terminology is not a coincidence) coupled with a love ‘em and leave ‘em attitude. Her examination of the ‘boi’ lifestyle highlights the recurring theme of her book; in our expression of sexuality are we simply adopting ‘male’ patterns of behaviour?

Ariel Levy
To suggest that a lack of interest in commitment, coupled with an express delight for bed-hopping is explicitly male behaviour could be considered offensive to women (and men) in itself. Yet I am doubtful that Levy intended this. Rather, her focus is more on the way in which these ‘bois’ pursue the objects of their desire. There is a noticeable lack of respect which inevitably results from the detached and non-committal way in which women are desired and then discarded. Levy reports overhearing one ‘boi’ that she encounters exclaiming to her friend: “… just some fucking femme. I met her at a party three weeks ago and I fucked her and that was cool. But now she’s like, emailing me and I’m just like, chill out, bitch!”
Harsh words indeed. But such an attitude quite obviously does not reflect the entire lesbian population (Levy should know, she’s one herself). Nor does it do justice to the ‘boi’ population; Levy goes on further to discuss the fluidity of the terminology and its multifaceted interpretations, after all, labels are for clothes not people. So what’s the problem?
True we may not all be heartless bastards, but perhaps there is some argument for the relaxed and accepting way in which many of us view promiscuity affecting our relationships with each other as feminists. And if this is the case then perhaps a liberal attitude to sex is negatively encouraged by strip clubs. I mean how many times have you pulled a girl in a club without even knowing her name and never finding out because at the time she was nothing more than a giant pair of luscious lips? And every time you look on with appreciation as a sultry beauty strips down to nothing but the lacy garter holding up her fake cash, are you simply buying into the dominant male paradigm of how sexuality should be expressed?

Demi Moore fights for her respect in 1996 film Striptease.
It’s a tricky question and an irksome one at that. After all, lesbians and bisexuals do desire women, so to enjoy watching a woman take her clothes off is not so unreasonable. But what is it we see whilst we watch those women? Do we value them for the sentient beings that they actually are? Do we even recognise them as such? Or are we simply looking at an array of body parts moving in a conundrum of ways that thrill and excite us?
Like Aretha belts out, it all comes down to R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Do we respect the women we lust after but don’t actually get to have? Do we even respect the ones that we do get to have? When sex can be nothing more than a casual encounter does respect fly out the window along with commitment?
There used to be a time when lesbianism was seen as the most adequate way to promote the feminist cause, yet now it appears that with the cultural acceptance of strip clubs in the lesbian community, the opposite may ring just as true. After all the sex industry is all about the allusion of sex. Those women taking off their clothes aren’t asking you to consider them for a Nobel Peace Prize now are they? Still perhaps I’m giving lesbians far less credit than they deserve. Although it’s never particularly sexy to think about the woman’s life whilst she’s stripping (what she had for breakfast, does she have children, did she vote in the last general election for instance) I would like to think that when most lesbians watch another women strip they see more than just a body.


I think the balance is tricky here. I know lesbians who would never go to a strip club because they think the sex industry perpetuates misogynist attitudes. Yet when it comes to their own love lives they’re pretty hypocritical.
Judith Butler (wordy gender theorist) writes about how society often breaks lesbianism down into a ‘heterosexual matrix’…i.e. binaries of ‘butch’ and ‘femme’ behaviour. It’s dangerous to simplify gender like this. So, if a woman goes to strip clubs this doesn’t necessarily mean she’s imitating the patriarchal objectification of women. Instead she’s deconstructing normal gender roles and reinventing them.
I personally don’t think watching a stripper automatically makes you a misogynist but forgetting that the tits and ass in your face are attached to a whole woman probably does. And choosing a venue where you’re confident the strippers aren’t being expoited probably helps. Ultimately, as you say, it all comes down to respect.
Female Chauvinist Pigs is definitely worth a read folks.
Promiscuity and a liberal attitude to sex isn’t anti-feminist – in fact saying sex should be only in relationships is more unfeminist. It’s possible to have a ton of casual sex without hurting anybody. As long as everyone knows what’s going on, then fucking someone and never talking to them again is not disrespectful. Saying “I fucked her and that was cool. But now she’s like, emailing me and I’m just like, chill out, bitch!” is disrespecful, because you obviously didn’t take the time to make it clear what was happening, and now you’re just going around bitching to your friends about it instead of contacting the other person to say “Hey, I enjoyed the other day but I’m afraid it was just a one-off thing for me”. The kind of person who says the former needs to read a copy of Ethical Slut http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ethical-Slut-Roadmap-Relationship-Pioneers/dp/1587613379/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259874604&sr=8-1 pronto.
Paying to watch strippers is completely different because it’s a financial, therefore power, relationship – if you have the money to pay someone or not pay them then you have power over them, and you’re using your financial power to have access to their body. Which makes it sound way wronger, doesn’t it? That’s one way of looking at it. I’m not sure what my position on the feminist or non-feministness or watching, or being, a stripper is yet. I’m still thinking about it… but I don’t go in for it myself because it does nothing for me. I don’t understand the joy of staring at a woman I don’t and won’t know getting nekkid.
Didn’t know Ariel Levy’s gay, cheers for that knowledge Ms. Pudding!
yes, interesting, that’s always a controversial split in the lesbian mentality: the lust-promiscuity / respect dilemma – as you all say, you can definitely feel both at the same time, though sometimes the balance tips too much to one side
as well as the old hetero pattern, I think gay boys provide another model again which sometimes gets overlooked as an influence on the lesbian scene. what with the scene and situation being set up in similar ways for all us..
I guess that influence could be characterised as “ethical sluttery” (love that idea by the way. i’ll check that book out.)
Ohhh, such a tricky one this! I’ve worried for a long time that I’m not really a lesbian, just the product of a society that treats women as sex objects – and that I somehow ended up imitating the objectifiers, rather than the objectified. But then, as Tarte Tatin says, it’s always possible to reinvent and reappropriate gender roles – and after all, me checking out someone’s tits is very different from a hairy-arsed (male) builder doing it. But still. I hate it (HATE it!) when people check out mine, or otherwise drag my sexuality into normal conversation, so I’ve started making a very conscious effort to avoid doing that to other people.
Of course, what goes on in the bedroom, with everyone’s consent, is an entirely different matter! As someone of my acquaintance (and she’s butch, for what it’s worth) guiltily admitted recently, “being objectified is really HOT.” And somehow, all my principles seem to fly out the window when I notice someone I really fancy looking down my top. Oh dear…
yes… ooh this is complicated.
i have to say… i quite like objects. i often think about objects from the point of view of art where artist intentionally makes objects that are quite beautiful or intriguing. and that often we objectify things that we love or admire..
i think that objectifying gaze can be really hot because of the attention in it..
um.. an example.. i remember in first form art class when when we had to draw the person opposite us, and the girl opposite me was just looking at me in that way you do when you’re drawing someone, very intense and dispassionate and just considering them purely as lines and shapes. i got a little frisson off it… it is quite hot when someone literally just considers you as a physical being. [she didn't mean it like that, but anyway]
i suppose ’cause we all live very mental lives, what is going in our head is almost always more important than what our body feels and because sex is about bodies.. i guess that objectifying look suddenly reminds you that you have one.
[obviously though - awful things happen when people are denied their basic humanity, cut-off from empathy and treated as non-human stuff to be used or damaged - objectifying at its worst]
so i guess what i’m saying is that it’s not necessarily a bad thing to consider someone as physical object, but as long as it’s just part of considering them as a human being as well.. . [and as long as it's an art object..]
oh my god. that went for a while. um. hope it made *some* sense.