BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Head Shop >

Eating Sushi Off Of Naked Female Models

  
  

Page: 12(3)

 
 
some guy
13:36 / 12.09.02
First, Laurence, I remember you doing this in the porn thread - advancing the "filth/erotica" thesis over and over again, as if it was the only thing worth saying about the whole question. Once again, it is arguably not.

I agree it is arguable. I also think that nobody has done a particularly good job in their argument here. At its most basic, Haus, any position on this issue will inevitably boil down to "because I think so." Period. There is no independent method to determine degredation. All we can really do is toss out opinion. It does come down to the usual filth/erotica choice, because at the end of the day its value is in the eyes of the beholder and participants.

there are people in this discussion who have previously on Barbelith discussed their own sex lives in a fashion that would make a sushi spread a very pale little peccavi indeed. Given that anyone who has had even a teeny bit of sex has probably done something with food, we might assume that the idea in terms of its raw sexual strangeness is probably not all that disconcerting, and thus that there may just be something in the parallel discussions about gender roles, class structures and so forth.

When it comes to sex, nothing surprises me anymore. I've seen people into B&D blanche at the thought of anal sex. I've known committed swingers who consider S&M abberant behavior. I know someone who is into spanking but finds oral sex disgusting. The argument that because some 'Lithers have admitted to certain behaviors but dislike others does nothing to advance the discussion.

To talk about gender roles and class structure without having detailed knowledge of what's happening is so silly that I'm surprised you're seriously trying to prop it up. The simple fact is that none of us knows anything more than what we've read in an article or seen on a website. We haven't spoken to the models, we haven't spoken to the hosts, we haven't spoken to the diners. We haven't been to one of these events. We don't know the context of the things we've read. We don't know what people are thinking. We don't know if the diners view the models as objects. We don't know if the models find the work more fulfilling than slinging burgers.

And so there's a lot of projection going on. Of course these women are helpless victims, of course the company owner is a capitalist pig, of course the clientele are rich bastards hoping to keep the lower classes - which they don't see as human - down. Nevermind that there's nothing to back any of this up except our own personal thoughts and biases.

Second, hypocrisy is a very serious allegation, and if you are going to use it I would ask you to learn how to spell it.

I may as well request that if you are going to communicate, you learn manners. Naturally you yourself have never once dashed out an errant spelling, and are therefore fortunate enough to be able cast stones. How unfortunate that everything I say is instantly undermined by a fumble of the keyboard. I can only hope that some 'Lithers are clever enough to figure out what I meant to type.
 
 
Papess
14:40 / 12.09.02
Haus wrote:
...you and Jack Sprat have made essentially the same move, which is to suggest that such an encounter is of a precisely equal value with a similar encounter between two others in a private matter, unconnected with the material exchange between patron and servant. If your belief is that the two situations are precisely equivalent, then that is a position worth exposition, but which is done a disservice by simple proposition

Not exactly Haus. My point is NOT that exchange between a patron and servant is equivelant to an intimate and private matter between consenting lovers. It is a different matter for me.

If I get paid, to do a job I love to do, how can that be degrading for me? It does not mean it is equal to the experience I have with my lover. I allow my lover to have certain priviledges no client could ever pay me for.
For example: I may clean the dirty toilets naked for my lover, while nobody could pay me for such a thing...or, I would gladly kiss my lover on the lips, tongue and all, but a client would never get an intimate kiss from me. I can only speak from my own experience in the Sex Trade Industry, to site examples of how, what may seem like such a private matter, can be sold as a service to complete strangers. (BTW, sometimes, the annonymity is an incredible turn on!) The exchange differs from the intimate encounter.

For me, in the exchange, I am concerned about the business (my financial gain, the satisfaction of my customers, the quality and safety which I perform with...etc) and my enjoyment is secondary but definately a bonus. During an intimate encounter, the point is the pleasure., the granting and recieving of such pleasure (safety being a matter of concern in the giving of pleasure also). There is no price on this, for it is priceless. No, money cannot buy you love, but it sure can buy a good time! I would like to mention also, that getting paid for intimate matters is not exclusive to Erotic work. I find my doctor has to get quite intimate with me in order to do her job and there is also the example of a psychiatrist or psychologist being intimate with my mind and emotions.

So, yes, in a way I do agree with Jack Sprat except, I really enjoy sushi!! YUMMM

The Fool wrote:
...but as time goes on it becomes less and less sensual for all involved. More sexual, more commodifying. The model seeing it as a job and feeling like dirty dishes at the end of a meal while the jaded diners demand a new table because 'we've already eaten off this one and we don't like her boobs'.

This unfortunately, can be the downside to such work. If I start to feel like this I will take a small respite to renew myself. This happens in all types of professions though, wouldn't you say?

Oh, if one party doesn't like your boobs, you can bet there will be others who do. I have a saying, "There is always another customer!"

Lyra says:
If she gets her own reward for the act independent of the monetary exchange because of the significance she places on doing it, surely it can no longer be degrading?


Exactly! For one of those models to be able keep her body in the necessary condition for this work and then perform the service of lying still can hold some value for her. Whether it is the financial value alone is good enough for me but, if she derives pleasure from this work even better. Myself, I would take it as a magickal discipline - holding body and mind still, trying not to get too aroused as the patrons removed the food from my body all ways to acheive magickal focus. However, that is for another forum!

Persephone posted:
...But if I am going to operate from the stance that the girl on the table is complicated with complicated motives, then for consistency shouldn't I operate from the same stance that these consumers are complicated with complicated motives? Or maybe I just have a general derision for consumption...?

Absolutely! I for one, cannot depreciate one of the most valued parts of any business...the client! Some of the things I have been asked to do and did has filled my clients with joy and wonder, and respect for me. They have been so appreciative that, besides my normal fee, they have sent expensive gifts to thank me. They are not so simple and often it is not even about the penetration and sexual pleasure. Often, it is about beauty and companionship, adventure and mystique, conversation (Thus, I have had to learn a little about everything, enough to feign my way through it anyway!). I cannot claim to know exactly what goes on in their minds but it certainly runs a gamut.

]

Just one more point on the subject of class. This really is not a class issue for me. I have seen clientelle from all classes, although, the clients with more money have the ability to use my services with frequency. Sometimes, I have had to turn away clients who I knew were getting in over their heads...just for my own conscience. The clients sometimes, will fall in love (In anticipated defence...this happens in the case of Psychotherapy quite often.), and I have to cut them off. Especially, if they are unable to afford such luxury. Business is business after all! But I digress, the assumption that the models or sex trade workers are of a lower class is not a fair assumption either. As an extreme example, I have met Indian Princesses who chose to do such work for the shear rebellion and adventure.

Yes, complicated people with complicated agendas indeed!

~MT
 
 
The Apple-Picker
15:31 / 12.09.02
The simple fact is that none of us knows anything more than what we've read in an article or seen on a website. We haven't spoken to the models, we haven't spoken to the hosts, we haven't spoken to the diners. We haven't been to one of these events. We don't know the context of the things we've read. We don't know what people are thinking.

I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding you or if you're miscommunicating, but it sounds like you're saying that because we haven't experienced these sushi events that we cannot draw conclusions about them. That seems like that could also mean if you haven't raped or been raped, you can't draw conclusions about the social implications of rape--same for a mugging or driving a car or buying a Big Mac from McDonalds.
 
 
some guy
16:19 / 12.09.02
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding you or if you're miscommunicating, but it sounds like you're saying that because we haven't experienced these sushi events that we cannot draw conclusions about them. That seems like that could also mean if you haven't raped or been raped, you can't draw conclusions about the social implications of rape--same for a mugging or driving a car or buying a Big Mac from McDonalds.

I see what you're getting at, but I think this is apples and oranges. If I may be so bold.

Rape by definition is a specific context. This thread is about information read without context. We know the circumstances of rape, especially in regards to the participants. We do not know that here.

In a way this links back to the School Disco thread; to read an article that tells of a place where women are forced to dress like little girls so they can be ogled by men brings all sorts of thoughts to mind. But without understanding the context of School Disco, these thoughts are prejudiced, uninformed and probably in no way pertain to the actual real-world happening. (My description of School Disco above is accurate, strictly speaking, but does little to describe the reality of School Disco.) Does that make sense? I suggest the same thing is happening here, and it's not helped by the fact that nobody can ever seem to agree on anything when it comes to sex, eroticism or just plain nudity.

What we can do is play an uninformed game of What If. If the models feel degraded, then X. If the diners view the models as objects, then X. If there is a power differential between parties, then X.

But that's a whole string of ifs that we just don't have specifics for. Armchair theory is all well and good, but if it's done without more information that we have, what relevence does it have to the real world?
 
 
Papess
16:38 / 12.09.02
Apple-picker, maybe those without these experiences can only comment so far. Alot of what an outsiders perspective is, is assumption. This certainly does not mean it is not of value! Objective speculation can only offer more insight. It is not however, able to communicate the whole story alone or give an informed opinion based on first-hand experience.

I can respect the opinions of those who are not in the industry but, I cherish the opinions of my articulate colleagues who are able to convey their perceptions with reference to specifics...as per any debate or discussion.

Not being a rape victim/rapist doesn't mean I cannot have an opinion about it. It does mean though my opinion is limited by this very fact and I am merely speculating. Which, is still very cool just not a good basis for any judgement calls.

~MT
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
17:16 / 12.09.02
I think it is perhaps more useful to consider the implications of this, to critique it, than to argue whether or not some of us may be judgemental about it. This thread was never meant to be about whether the girls themselves were wrong for doing this, and I think that it would be pretty obvious from the cited article that the girls who are doing this modelling themselves don't feel particularly abused.

However, there is a question of societal conditioning that shapes the way people make decisions for themselves. There are issues of class, gender, and art - note that in the article linked from the first post, the caterer was forcing distinctions from lower-class frat houses and strip bars. I understand that they need that disctinction to appeal to the class of people they are selling their services to, but also think about how the girls figure into this as well. It's probably quite unlikely that these girls may also strip at a strip club, or appear in porn - this is a classier gig for them, and puts them higher in a percieved hierarchy. There are snobbish class distinctions from the top to the bottom of this - putting to rest the argument of whether or not this is in fact degrading, perhaps we should instead start to think about how different classes commodify XXX LIVE NUDE GIRLS XXX.

Examining the way this catering service talks about it, and how the writer of the Time Out article write about this, there seems to be a lot of 'liberal guilt' in them. They seem to be straining to show how their approach to having naked girls is not prurient, that it's tasteful, that the girls aren't being abused, emphasizing that it's a sensual and not a sexual experience. To me, there seems to be a desperate need for these men and their clients to find a way to compromise a shallow sense of political correctness with a desire to still indulge in ogling naked girls. In other words: excuses, excuses.

So, do they really just have the same motives as the owner of a strip club, but recontextualized and rationalized through artistic pretensions, shaky pro-sex feminism, and snobbish class distinctions? If that is the case, are they really improving anything, or are they just deluding themselves?
 
 
Papess
18:24 / 12.09.02
Flux wrote:
So, do they really just have the same motives as the owner of a strip club, but recontextualized and rationalized through artistic pretensions, shaky pro-sex feminism, and snobbish class distinctions? If that is the case, are they really improving anything, or are they just deluding themselves?

OMG, my head hurts Flux!

This onion has a few layers. At the base layer, I believe there is just a raw instinct to eat, fuck and sleep. Us humans though, with our big brains, need a little more stimulation to arouse us and create fantasy games to boost our sexual prowess.

The proprietors of these businesses are just cashing in on our base urges. I can barely see the difference between their exploits and the exploits of, let's say... McDonald's/Hotels/dairy farmers/the makers of feminine products....

These are all things we can barely do without in our society and which exploit some base needs or desires that we have.

The reason for keeping a certain mood about these affairs is the whole appeal for the client. If a "frat boy" wanted to see a naked girl he would probably feel more coomfortable in a strip club anyway! If he was so inclined as to prefer the "sushi girl", then he would act accordingly. This is the mood of the affair. I do not see the debate here.

In either case, the underlying intent is to raise the sexual chi at the event. Latent, amatuerish magicians, all of them!!

The other point of this being presented with "liberal guilt" and a "shallow sense of political correctness (with a desire to still indulge in ogling naked girls. In other words: excuses, excuses.)" this is very funny to me.

**This is assuming one feels ogling naked girls is politically incorrect. Still, a good/bad issue.

From my experience, when a someone can push the proverbial envelope in their sexual experiences (and even sensual ones), the outcome is their tastes change. Often, this leads them to the fringe of acceptability. My own experiences are - I have a fantasy, it becomes reality and then a new fantasy pops up that is a little deeper, more risque than the last. Some wisdom from my Grandma "...once you start kissing, you can't go back to just holding hands!"

It has been my experience also, that very rich men/women do have, more often than not, the ability to buy anything they like. They can indulge themselves in their fantasies. Albeit, most do with some trepidation due to upbringing and societal standards put on them, especially if the hold office or are executives in an established firm or business. (Oh is that a dated argument! Fucken Clinton!) Well anyway, more often than not the idea is to escape from the daily roles they have and that is often saturated with that impalatable taste of "artistic pretensions,(and) shaky pro-sex feminism". They are just trying to keep some sense of themselves together in their escape...afraid of losing themselves to the seduction of such fringe behavior.

And what is this bit about improving anything? Is that a requirement for having a business? This isn't curing cancer, this is capitalism, plain and simple.


Just my opinions based on 15 years of service in the Sex Trade/Erotica Industry.

~MT
 
 
The Apple-Picker
19:05 / 12.09.02
If a "frat boy" wanted to see a naked girl he would probably feel more coomfortable in a strip club anyway! If he was so inclined as to prefer the "sushi girl", then he would act accordingly.

Ah ah ah. You're making assumptions, and Laurence says no-no to that. And I don't think it has anything to do about these frat boys behaving in accordance with whatever would be proper for one of these events. The sushi chef refused to cater for those frat boys based on his assumption that all they wanted was nude girl and were not interested in his food--when frat boys could actually get a stripper for one of their parties at a smaller cost than Ms. Sushi Platter, if all they wanted was nude girl.

So, if it's okay to make assumptions like the one you just made, and the one that the sushi chef made, please tell me why some of the other assumptions are so wrong--the ones about objectification, degradation, blah blah blah. Am I wrong to assume that the sushi chef really isn't as interested in a well-behaved audience as he is in the status he expects a well-behaved (read: upperclass) audience would bring him?
 
 
some guy
19:21 / 12.09.02
perhaps we should instead start to think about how different classes commodify XXX LIVE NUDE GIRLS XXX

With respect, you are trying to describe this gray issue in black and white. I suppose we can completely backtrack and try to determine whether or not the commodification of live nude girls is a good, bad or indifferent thing, what constitutes commoditization and so forth. But let's step back for a moment and take a breath.

A few years ago, the Pet Shop Boys toured the world to promote their Bilingual album. Part of the show featured nude male dancers in gogo cages. We could launch into how different classes commodify live nude men ... but it would be silly, because even though the nude male dancers were prominent, the show wasn't about them.

This isn't about the nude women. Yes, there are nude women at these parties, lying beneath finger food. Yes, it likely creates an erotic charge. But this is a service for parties. Parties that would happen without the models. Even though the nude models are prominent, the party isn't about them. This is an in-person relative of the James Bond opening titles. People enjoy them, but that's not why we're watching the movie.

Your commentary about liberal guilt is interesting - I suspect that in your eyes the partiers are damned no matter what they do. Surely liberal guilt is evidence that these are not the rampaging objectifiers some posters have been making them out to be?

So, do they really just have the same motives as the owner of a strip club, but recontextualized and rationalized through artistic pretensions, shaky pro-sex feminism, and snobbish class distinctions?

The catering service owner or the party attendees? I imagine everyone involved would be making a lot more money in a traditional strip club, which suggests that no, they don't have the same motives, unless they are just really poor businessmen.

I'd also refer you upthread to the bit about making assumptions and remind you that you have no basis to assume that anyone involved A) has artistic pretensions, B) is a shaky pro-sex feminist or C) holds snobbish class distinctions. These are all signs of your personal bias creeping into play. And before we get any further into this delightful class warfare thing, perhaps we ought to mark out the classes, determine the economic and social boundaries of each, and then explain why the caterer and partiers are upper class while the models aren't, taking care to offer evidence from individual W2s.
 
 
some guy
19:23 / 12.09.02
Am I wrong to assume that the sushi chef really isn't as interested in a well-behaved audience as he is in the status he expects a well-behaved (read: upperclass) audience would bring him?

Bearing in mind that frat boys are generally part of the upper class? Yes.
 
 
Papess
21:29 / 12.09.02
Apple-Picker, I am not exactly making assumptions. I am making generalizations though.

I am basing my findings on years of servicing men and yes, frat boys. So you see, I am not exactly assuming...I actually know these things. I think i have a unique perspective and insight here yet, that was alas a generalization. Equally a misdemeanour in debate. I did try to balance this idea with If he was so inclined as to prefer the "sushi girl". Obviously, my point was not well made.

*sigh*

Did anything else I have to say make any sense?

~MT
 
 
The Apple-Picker
22:19 / 12.09.02
Bearing in mind that frat boys are generally part of the upper class? Yes.

Mm, I don't know, Laurence, if we bore that in mind it would certainly go against my personal experience (which I understand would not perfectly describe the frat boy populace): I've known quite a few, and almost all of them were strictly middle-class, some lower-middle class, some upper-middle class--and I also knew quite a few who would probably be considered among the lower classes, not that they were the majority. In America, at least, the greek system is much different than how it began.

I certainly don't mean to defend them either--most of the ones I knew were not cool dudes. I just had some questions, was all.
 
 
some guy
23:28 / 12.09.02
In that case, let's bypass the question of frat boys and address:

Am I wrong to assume that the sushi chef really isn't as interested in a well-behaved audience as he is in the status he expects a well-behaved (read: upperclass) audience would bring him?

Virtually all sex venues demand a well-behaved audience, for very obvious reasons. This audience does not bring with it a class distinction. - low-end strip clubs are not rowdier or less respectful than high-end strip clubs.
 
  

Page: 12(3)

 
  
Add Your Reply