Do Strip Clubs Have Any Saving Graces
When UP Magazine ran a story on strippers online, our ratings skyrocketed. Well obviously: sex sells. But do strip clubs empower or are they only an arena in which women debase their bodies and lascivious men drool? To answer the question we decided to ask two women who, in equal measure, describe themselves as femminists. Awuor Onyango and Olivia Kidula are bother writers whose femminist credentials are hard to challenge. So then why does one of them believe that strip clubs promote the idea that sex is deviant while the other argue that strippers be offered protection and support?
Awuor Onyango - No
Born of the disconnect between ethnic teachings of sexual expression and modern pro-western delusions of sexuality, strip clubs are chiefly a by-product of the commoditisation of human cissexuality (Having a gender identity which matches your sex at birth, Ed.). It is one thing to commoditise yourself of your own free will, another to have a vibrant sexual drive and yet another to be put on display as a sex toy or perhaps even be driven to a life where your only economic and utilitarian value is the amount of flesh you can show. Do strippers benefit from their own commoditisation? Rarely. For they are mostly men exploiting the black bodies in their different “exotic” states and it cannot be said that the stripper benefits from their own Body of work. The exposure of the black body as exotic, more often than not, evokes the image of the Hottentot Venus, her negroid features put on display to explain the inferiority and differences between the negro and the caucasoid.
Not only do strip clubs only cater to mainstream sexualities, they do so in the untoward way in which our culture dictates sexuality ought to be performed. Why must we cater to our sexual needs in the dark as though there was some wrong in performing the natural acts of yearning? Why must it be dingy and in secret as if we were stealing something? Why must sexual workers occupy this dichotomy of Madonna in the day and prostitute in the dark? If you feel a need to qualify the statement that you were at a strip club with some kind of explanation, then you continue to perpetuate the gags we place on our sexual lives as a nation and perhaps a continent. Post-colonial hang-ups that are by-products of the fear of primitive-behaviour, dances that were banned for being too sexual, bare-breasted maidens roaming the streets. Strip clubs promote this view of sexuality as deviant: we don’t need that.
Olivia Kidula - YES
When you are raised as a girl you are subjected to a flurry of instructions on how to hide your sexuality. Sit with our legs crossed! Keep our gazes averted! Cover up our bodies! We are bred to fear and resent the very bodies we reside in; we are made to believe they are not for us and are only meant to satisfy the male gaze. When we grow up, those that buy into the narrative of respectability politics, end up having a holier than thou attitude to the women that do not. They are made to believe that sticking to the “positive” side of patriarchal binaries is more beneficial. Yet this line of thinking does nothing but create further divisions amongst women.
Stripping is a legal profession. Just like any other line of work, stripping is still seen as a means to an end for many women, the ‘stripping her way through college’ narrative is not uncommon for a reason. There is a market for what they do, since people are willing to dole out their hard earned cash just for a glimpse of the female form. Yet there is a negative attitude that follows them around. There is such a deep history of strippers being seen as either poor victims or evil vectors of disease and unfit in mind and body. The majority of strippers don’t engage in prostitution but still are lumped into the colloquial category of whore. Society views them as unworthy of compassion or understanding, as sub-human. But let’s face it: the only reason that strippers are viewed as a sub-class of women is because they have embraced their agency and dictated their sexuality for themselves. There is nothing wrong with taking control of your own sexuality. Women saying ‘yes’ to governing their own bodies means more men being told ‘no’ when they want access to them. It is the entitlement to the access of women’s bodies that causes outrage whenever a woman dictates exactly how she wants to be perceived. The problem therein does not lie with the strippers for giving audiences what they want, but with the voyeurs who imagine themselves better than the women they spend money to ogle.
Much like drugs, society can benefit from people taking the taboo nature out of it and therefore offering strippers and other sex workers better protection and respect.
Lawi Odera says:
So long as i get service for what i paid for..business is always business..grace or no grace..whether they is doing it for their babies,school and what-not..that is none of my business…so long as i am a patron…i just care how well she can work that pole..i am no judge to call them trashy and ratchet(even though i just did) what do i know…I am not a stripper..
Lawino says:
To some extent I find Olivia’s take on strippers not only disturbing but quite frankly reckless. In her brief response, the author forgets to unpack cultural contexts or even moral nuances. Instead she chooses to engage in neo-liberal hypocrisies cloaked as new wave feminism. This type of politics articulates itself in the commodification of women’s bodies – certainly those of black females at the expense of wider emancipatory politics.
In Kenya we are in the habit of seeing naked women. How often do we here of a woman being stripped naked for mere existence? Thus the naked female form is synonymous with violence within the public arena, the subsequent rape and trauma that comes with this nakedness has never been subject to meaningful critique or even a shred of justice. Is the scenario different when one is in a strip club? Do women who strip have greater agency than those who are stripped? What Olivia is hinting at is that exploitation is permissible if there is some kind of consent or as she more crudely puts it if it gives the people [men] what they want. In an age where millions of women are still held in bondage and in a country where violence (both physical and sexual) against women is so engrained in us that Kerugo Macharia terms it “banal misogyny”. Thus, I don’t feel as though the author has subjected he stripping to rigorous analytical work nor has it been linked to wider legitimate struggles which I feel this article should really be about. For instance, what do the strippers have to say about the sociological framework you use to prop up your argument? Do they see themselves as empowered or revolutionary? And finally, who owns these strip clubs? Who ultimately profits from this exchange, the interplay between the viewer and the body on display, the master and the slave? Do girls in Runda dream of one day being strippers etc, etc….
Within this postmodern moment, a kind of lazy, superficial permissiveness becomes synonymous with liberal ideals and humanistic values. I feel that Olivia’s piece is evidence of this and for me it is truly worrisome. In her outstanding essay “Silence is a Woman”, Wambui Mwangi illustrates how the spectre of the naked female form within instances of subversion can be revolutionary. While one form of stripping can be emancipatory, the other kind simply entrenches the status quo. And that’s the thing about strippers, they’re always silent and in silence there is tragedy.
Olivia says:
“Is the scenario different when one is in a strip club? Do women who strip have greater agency than those who are stripped? What Olivia is hinting at is that exploitation is permissible if there is some kind of consent.”
Uh yes this is EXACTLY what I am saying. If a woman has agency then she is in control of how she is perceived. Those who are stripped in public arenas did not choose therefore that is a violation of their rights. If she open herself up to the male gaze by HER OWN VOLITION she has empowered herself. It therefore doesn’t become exploitation. Exploitation is treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work. They cannot be exploited if they are making their choices for themselves. Exploitation would come in with the owners that is true and unfortunately because of space constraints I couldn’t go into depth, but the angle I took is that of the strippers themselves and how they are viewed by society.
I actually DID talk to strippers before I wrote the article. They are not ashamed of their bodies. They are aware of all the things that come with stripping, the negative attitudes, the misogyny, the solitude and loneliness; all these things do take a toll. However to fight back against these stereotypes and the stigma they face IS empowering and revolutionary. Strippers aren’t silent, they are BEING SILENCED by people who think that a narrative of their existence is “lazy, superficial permissiveness.”
Wanjiku says:
In truth, strippers may FEEL that they are revolutionary and empowering themselves, but, if they had a choice is that the road they would have paved for themselves? I am of the opinion that even this very feeling is skewed, in a manner of speaking. Was this something Olivia interrogated during her research? The motives behind the “decision”? No matter how I personally dissect it, it is a deficiency that led them there. Some people look at it as a trade, but a woman’s body is more than a car, or a piece of land, a country. A woman’s body is a temple that deserves adornment; with respect and honour for the treasures that abound within, treasures that can’t and shouldn’t be up for hire. I would imagine that therein is the principle of feminism. What IS revolutionary is having a woman expose her unadulterated beauty beyond the tangible; experiencing sheer force behind a woman’s worth. No, a woman’s worth is not made manifest in the (very generic) sway of breasts, or the jiggle of her behind, it is the very much needed avalanche-her voice, her mind, her contribution to the genuine growth of mankind. Further, strip clubs play into unreal expectations of women that are not even feasible. The woman debases herself, her thoughts, her opinions, her contributions, her individuality, and blots them, and person herself, out of the picture. Instead, she demotes her true standing to appeal to a deviant appetite for fulfillment. The women aren’t being silenced, they have silenced themselves, they have pushed themselves into an abyss in which they are no longer viewed as women with souls, spirits, minds-with names, aspirations and ambitions. They are an unrealistic and fabricated personification of women. No, Olivia, you probably wouldn’t advise your unborn daughter to become a stripper, because you will know her worth beyond it.
Olivia says:
“No matter how I personally dissect it, it is a deficiency that led them there. Some people look at it as a trade, but a woman’s body is more than a car, or a piece of land, a country. A woman’s body is a temple that deserves adornment; with respect and honour for the treasures that abound within, treasures that can’t and shouldn’t be up for hire.”
This is exactly what I was referring to when I said that there is a negative attitude that follows these women. “There is such a deep history of strippers being seen as either poor victims or evil vectors of disease and unfit in mind and body.” They are not deficient, Wanjiku. There are several reasons that they have for stripping, some are there because they cannot get into other lines of work or this one is simply easier or whatever. Feminism isn’t about shielding yourself its about the ability to make your own choices and dictate YOUR OWN life, rather than to fit into the little boxes that patriarchy forcefully places us in. For you to say that it shouldn’t be put up for hire means that you want to dictate how other people should perceive the female form, that it should only be seen how you deem it fit, which again goes back to the patriarchal binaries I referred to. Why dismiss the sway of breasts or the jiggle of the behind? Is this not something women can do? I agree that women are more than body parts, however it is possible to shake your ass on a pole AND contribute to the genuine growth of mankind. Those two events are not mutually exclusive, and to assume that strippers have no life or ambitions beyond the pole is misogynistic. Who is THEY? Who doesn’t see them as women with souls? You?
They are not an unrealistic and fabricated personification of women, THEY ARE WOMEN. Businesswomen in fact. If I get a daughter who decides to become a stripper, I would of course be hesitant, but I wouldn’t see her as a nameless soulless spiritless person because of that choice. She’s still a person, a brave one at that, because to decide to undergo all the othering, the stigma and the holier than thou speeches is, again, revolutionary.
admin says:
I’m just going to throw this one out there: if the debate was over Burlesque dancers (who also sway their breasts and jiggle their behinds)… would it be any different?
Adam Kiboi says:
Well i just recently had a discussion on sexual positivity and having spoken to the women at #KnightNurse (an advocacy group for strippers) and i think that Wanjiku and Lawino need to read this book
http://www.oozebap.org/dones/biblio/Sex_Worker.pdf
the link leads to the PDF file for the book When I Dare To Be Powerful
Here’s an excerpt
But then comes along the other woman - the bad
woman; the one who refuses your ‘help’, who just
can’t be helped, and although all her clients are the
upstanding men in your community, you are sure she
is the devil incarnate.
“She doesn’t want to leave sex work?” you ask, shocked,
horrified even.
“But, we gave her a sewing kit. Why did she not
become a seamstress?”
Is this woman a victim, exploited by predatory
patriarchy, or is she a bastion of feminist sexuality, an
embodiment in herself of the body politic? Amidst the
grandiose debate and the fanfare of controversy, the
voices, opinions, narratives, perspectives of women
who engage in sex work, in fact the only voices that
really matter, have been lost.
“When I Dare to Be Powerful” presents the multiple
dimensions of women’s lives. Women who happen to
have worked or still work in the sex industry. Women
in their complexity, full of personality, experiences,
dashed dreams and high hopes. Mothers, sisters,
lovers, wives, women with vulnerabilities and women
with strength. The book presents the interwoven 4
tapestry of narratives that tell merely a thread of
women’s life stories, rejecting the “single story”, telling
neither the negative stereotype, nor the politically
correct narratives, reinforcing and debunking myths.
These stories were told not to make an argument but
to share a herstory.