Above is one of the "workouts" offered by Flirty Girl Fitness, a new line of gyms for women that focus on the raunchier forms of exercise. (If you can call it that - in all of Flirty Girl's videos, I have yet to see someone work up a sweat by rotating their ass slowly in circles.)
I have no idea of Flirty Girls is indicative of the pole-dancing-as-workout craze that everyone seems to be talking about, but I thought the video was a good intro to this piece in the Dallas Observer.
I try the first "trick," which is called The Swing and involves kicking your leg out in front of the pole, hooking the metal in the crook of your knee, and then grabbing on with both hands, hoisting yourself off the ground and swinging around in a full circle. My arm muscles strain to sustain what's basically a horizontal pull-up, and I make it about three-quarters of the way around before the pain in my arms peaks. I slide down the pole and into a heap on the dance floor.Peeling myself off the ground, I survey the other students. They're hair stylists, event planners and executive assistants who are tired of the same old gym routine; singles looking for self-confidence or some moves to show a new boyfriend; and wives and mothers who--between chasing toddlers and laundering spit-up-laden clothing--can't recall the last time they felt the least bit sexy.
When I talked about pole-dancing classes in my class at Rutgers yesterday, the majority of women seemed to view them as yet another negative porn-as-mainstream trend. But a few brave gals fessed up to taking the classes - and liking them. What seemed to appeal was an all-female environment where they could act out "sexiness" and "femininity" in a safe space. (I use scare quotes because of the limiting versions of femininity and sexiness that I think pole dancing and such things offer.)
But the sexuality offered in classes like these seems to me - I've never been to one, so correct me if I'm wrong - so put on and so based on the male gaze. After all, many of the women interviewed in this article and others talk about bringing the workout back home for their significant male others. Thoughts?
Thanks to Patrick for the link.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Flirty Girl Fitness, pole dancing workouts and finding "sexiness".
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/10415
Yes.
And not to get too deep into theory, but what does it mean when women's personal sexual expression immitates sexual performance that is specifically constructed for het male consumption? (Wouldn't we rather it be the other way around? Taking as a given that sex work exists, wouldn't we rather that sex work seeks to resemble women's noncommercial sexual expression than the other way around? Or maybe the two ought to be completely different, in that sex work is client service while personal, non-commercial sex ought to be a joint project for all participants' needs equally?)
It is a sexual performance for male consumption, but...isn't that performance based around basic sexuality to begin with? The type of posture and movements that go with pole dancing are sexual to begin with. If I, in the privacy of my room, get into a sexual position, it doesn't take a man to be there watching me to feel sexy.
Pole dancing sounds like any type of dancing, really (and I think it sounds like fun!). It's a way to learn about your body, its movements, its muscles, and what ways to move it to express a certain idea (be it sex, grace, purity, madness, etc.) Like most art, it's interpreted as the person who is consuming it sees it. Of course, this means that if you think of pole dancing as "slutty," that means you're cheating yourself. And with the negative values most people attribute to pole dancing, I can see where it will be hard for a woman not to internalize some sort of "slut" image when they do this. But if you can get beyond it and see it as a type of dance that really helps you express sex, then it shouldn't be a problem.
konkonsn, I want to be entirely clear about something. "slut" is a term you're bringing in, not one I imported, and not something with any place in my worldview. In fact, on my account, the entire concept of "slut" is rooted in a model of sex as commodity; I advocate for a model of sex as performance, in the case of partnered sex a joint project between the participants.
I think we may be operating from fundamentally different premises. Where you say, "based around basic sexuality", I read you as asserting that there is some kind of "basic sexuality" to certain poses and movements that predates the art form being copied, and that perhaps is biological in origin. I disagree; I think that the cultural component of sexuality is too large for stylized representations of sexuality to be acultural and inherent.
as to whether or not they break a sweat, I can certainly say, as a dancer, that that kind of dancing requires a lot of muscle in order to have those slower sustained movements. I'd imagine being sore after an hour of that.
As to the reasons behind taking the class, it doesn't bother me so much. I had problems expressing myself sexually when I first started having sex, and I felt uncomfortable (emotionally) in different positions because I felt like a "slut." I feel like a class like this (as well as any dance class) might help people like I was to become more comfortable in their skin, while doing something sexy. It's not so much for the man's pleasure, as her own. It's a lot easier to have an orgasm when you're not ashamed.
That said, I don't doubt that there are still plenty of people who do take these classes for the wrong reasons, and just want to be perceived as "hot".
It's a lot easier to have an orgasm when you're not ashamed.
It's even easier when you really own your own sexuality and pleasure ;)
...and that's how she's choosing to get herself to that point. Who are you to dictate how someone does that?
I'm sorry if not everyone magically is capable of "owning" their sexuality because it's more emotionally healthy. That's a seriously passive aggressive thing to say to someone who has admitted feeling negative about herself -- something that is encouraged by a patriarchal society.
If something makes a woman feel more confident about herself, I really don't care what it is. I think it's bullshit to say that a woman can't wear high heels or can't dress in miniskirts or can't take pole dancing classes even if they make her feel good about herself ...just because they're things that males enjoy.
(After all, there's nothing hotter than a confident woman. ;D)
I feel like some feminists walk a fine line between arguing that revealing clothing is the tool of the patriarchy and that completely-covering clothing is the tool of the patriarchy.
Yes, we sadly live in a society with only so many options. But given that, why remove a woman's agency by insisting that her choices are not her own to make, are not the best ones for her, or are pre-decided for her?
Wow -- I'm not sure exactly what you saw in my comment that made it seem like an attack to you, but I really did not mean it as such. What I meant by my comment was merely to encourage us -- in a positive, supportive tone -- to realize that there is more beyond "unashamed," that we can even put aside the question of shame entirely and just enjoy our own sexuality, and that that is a wonderful thing. I really didn't mean it as anything more than that at all, and I really hope I didn't accidentally write it such that it comes across otherwise :/
i think combined with the tone of your previous statment it could be taken in such a fashion as to be midly passive agressive. but beyond that, while it is (for you, me, and many women though not all) the end goal to own ones sexuality it's not always something one can do overnight. and it certainly can be as big a jump from feeling unashamed of one's sexuality to full fledged ownership as the jump from shameful to unashamed was. by saying, yeah it's good to not feel shame but ownership is BETTER, you set up the intimation that lack of shame is not a worthy goal or that the journy to that point is less somehow because it hasn't gone "all the way."
While I doubt I'd be one to take a class like this, why exactly is it a problem if someone does want to do something like this to spice up things with their significant other?
I'm a big girl who started doing burlesque/stripping (whatever you want to call it) to get back in touch with my body and re-define my own ideas about sexiness, and men had nothing to do with my wanting to get up in front of people and strip. Of course, this could be because I'm a femme-dyke, but I think there are an infinite number of reasons that women would want to learn to pole dance/strip. Do men come to the shows that I perform at? Yup. Is my stripping about them? Nope. Also, pole/chair/fan-dancing, etc, is just a lot of fun, and it feels great. :-)
I'm not a femme dyke (I'm undefined on both aspects) but I share similar sentiments. I haven't taken burlesque or stripping classes, but I have been interested because, as you say, it's a way to reconnect with my body and sensuality. I come from a culture that's HIGHLY repressive about sexuality, and it's taken me so long to realize that there are aspects about it that I greatly enjoy.
Sure, some parts of it have been coopted to oppress women (body image, sexual control, etc). But that doesn't make the dance INHERENTLY bad. Belly dance is considered an erotic dance, has much the same as pole dance, but in some places it's an important cultural artifact for women.
Basically, shouldn't it really be up to the woman to decide what value these things are for them? Why are we, as feminists, judging how women choose to express their sexuality? Is it necessarily a bad thing if they want to explore it to excite their love life? Is sexuality necessarily evil?
(BTW: Those moves you say don't "break a sweat" - DAMN DIFFICULT. You need to have good muscle control, and even just five seconds can hurt if you haven't developed the strength yet. I've had to do some similar stuff for yoga and circus, and OW.)
I don't think the intention is to judge women, but to question the origin of the entire enterprise.
Sure, women choose to do all sorts of things, but that does not make those choices feminist. Women are free to choose to take these classes, to enjoy them, to feel empowered by them.
The question, however, at least to me, is: as these classes imitate female sexuality as defined by the male gaze (strippers, etc), are they not part of the cultural conditioning women suffer in order to appease patriarchal standards? What about a class that offered a freestyle kind of sexual movement, as defined by women, not men? We're dealing with centuries of so-called "female sexuality" (when, I don't think we've been given the space, culturally, to even know what authentic female sexuality means, beyond whatever it is that makes a woman feel sexually happy and alive).
Basically, these classes are all about teaching women to become the personal stripper/exotic dancers our culture exults for their men, while giving them a good workout. I wouldn't call them feminist (the classes, not the women taking them).
I myself have considered taking one of these precisely because I know my boyfriend would enjoy it, but would I, really? It's all about ornamentation and performance, read: not real.
Where are the classes teaching men to move sexually for women in the name of personal fitness? Sorry, feminism fail, in my rad-fem, book.
i know this is a totally hetero way of looking at things, and right now i'm not sure if or how it would apply to non-hetero women or sexuality, but it seems to me that part of sexuality is learning how to attract and be attractive to the opposite sex. at least on an animal level. leaving asside the issues of strippers and sex work and the objectification therein, does learning to be more sexually appealing to the opposite sex automatically mean repression, objectification, and negativity? if i decide i want to become a more actualized sexual being within the context of my hetero relationship, and i choose to do this by exploring movement he will find sexually stimulating what am i feeding? the patriarchy beast? my sexuality? the relationship i have and the mutual fulfilment of both parties? all of the above?
This comment reminds me of the first time I went to a strip club. The first dance I had was with a giant blonde amazonian woman who took off her top, shook her giant fake titties in my face, and purred as she wriggled in my lap. I had to put my hand over my mouth to stop from laughing out loud.
But the next dance was with a normal looking woman, older than the girls there, who pulled me into a dark corner. It was fully clothed, slow and sensual movements, slow rubbing, and breathing in my ear. I was so turned on my eyes rolled back into my head and I melted into a puddle. And I'm a heterosexual woman.
I've been to many strip clubs since (thank you Portland, OR) and have had many dances, and I can tell you that dancing and stripping is not just for men. It does not have to be overtly sexual, but sensual and erotic too.
thank you for mentioning belly dancing, as i feel like i forgot to make a statement about that. Belly dancing requires amazing muscle control and can completely be a cardio activity, which is great for someone who isnt built for running (like me, I don't run cause of my 38F chest)...anyhoo..thanks for replying. :-)
Well, it could be based on the "male" gaze. But what if your partner is female, and that's who you bring it home to?
Look, I understand that's not how it often works, but the point of contention here - the feminist concern - is, to my mind, that women in these classes are trying to look sexy for somebody else, rather than feeling sexy themselves. Workout classes like this are other-centric rather than self-improving, and that, to me, is more of a red flag for body image and health than the "male gaze."
but what does it mean "to be sexy for yourself"? i'm always flummoxed by this statement. sex, by its very nature, is something shared with someone else. most, if not all, of us want to be sexually appealing to SOMEONE, be it a man, a woman, both, any permutation thereof. to do something to sexually gratify a partner strikes me as very positive, as long as the gift is freely given and reciprocated in some fashion.
weird side note: i got invited to one of these classes for the first time a few years ago by the HR lady at the company i worked at. good lord, my head almost blew up.
After all, many of the women interviewed in this article and others talk about bringing the workout back home for their significant male others. Thoughts?
So what? What's wrong with wanting to play in a way that your *male significant other* finds sexy? (Syntax, Jess -- it's the "other" which is significant, not the "male"; "male" is meant to describe the gender of the single object "significant other". Just because they split infinitives in Star Trek doesn't mean you can do it. :p)
A lot of feminists walk a fine line between advocating for sexy being whatever feels sexy to them on the on hand, and denigrating or shaming sex workers on the other. Why is it somehow degrading to take a pole-dancing class? Why is it somehow degrading to take your clothes off for money? Beyond that, why is it degrading or un-feminist to take your clothes off in a sexy way for your significant other? It's not like these women are being forced to take the pole-dancing class because they're being emotionally abused by their male significant others -- and if they are that's another thing all together.
Movement=burning of calories. Period. It doesn't matter whether you're using the elliptical at the gym in old gauchos and a "got hope?" t-shirt (as I will be doing after work), or if you're dancing around a brass pole in a sports bra and spandex shorts. People should do exercise that they enjoy, and promoting pole-dancing classes (which not only burn calories, but build muscle as the author of the Dallas Observer article can attest after taking a class), as being "feminine" is not subjugating anyone to one specific kind of femininity. Rather, promoting pole-dancing classes presents an addition to the plurality of activities women who want to do "feminine" things have available to them. Don't wanna hug the pole? Don't.
The reason we should get upset over the working conditions of strippers and other sex workers is not because they're being subjugated by the male gaze. I would hope that most sex workers do that work because they choose to, and those women need to be cut some slack -- just as much slack as I get as a receptionist (a heavily female profession) -- because they're working and many of them enjoy their work, or place no value judgment on it at all because it's just a job.
No, the reason we should be upset about the conditions under which sex workers operate (no pun intended) that we should be upset about is the rate of sexual assault, sex workers' inability to stand up to their employers because they don't have an option to unionize, and other dangers/health hazards that are encountered by sex workers.
Women who take pole dancing classes don't encounter these things (any more than they would by just going to the gym), and we should NEVER engage in slut shaming because women who take these classes enjoy them. So what if they're aimed at women? Let people do what they like (so long as they aren't harming themselves or others) and go do what you like. There's no reason feminists should get up in arms about this trend.
Very, very well said. My sentiments exactly.
word!
Hahaha - I got all upset and spent a long time rereading my comment to find out where I split infinitives - and now I realize you were talking to one of the other Jessicas on this page. :)
word!
I love you. Yes. Thank you.
Just because they split infinitives in Star Trek doesn't mean you can do it.
Huh? That isn't an infinitive...
Women who take pole dancing classes don't encounter these things (any more than they would by just going to the gym), and we should NEVER engage in slut shaming because women who take these classes enjoy them. So what if they're aimed at women? Let people do what they like (so long as they aren't harming themselves or others) and go do what you like.
First of all, I don't think anybody was doing any "slut shaming" as you claim. Jessica's post mentioned nothing of the sort, and I'm not exactly sure how you made that leap.
Second, as for "so long as they aren't harming themselves or others": That, I think, is what Jessica and many other commenters here are wondering: whether the popularity of the classes and its attendant symptoms or causes are harming anybody. Judging by the heady discussions in here, I think it's far from clear to a lot of people whether they are.
You say we should be concerned about the conditions in which sex workers operate, and yet you ignore the fact that the very reason they operate in such poor conditions is because patriarchy pushers have no reason to change those conditions. Precisely because sex workers (and here I'm assuming we're talking about the -1% who "choose" this path, not the 99%+ who are sex-trafficked against their will) are an integral part of women's oppression and male dominance; they are not the focus of sex work. The "johns" or demand part of the supply-and-demand chain are. Thus the male gaze, not the female.
We can discuss all day that women have the right to choose this, the right to choose that, you can't call them anti-feminist, but it's not the WOMEN who are anti-feminist (unless they choose to be so) but the CHOICES that are. (Not the act of choosing, mind you--the freedom to do so IS feminist). I wear make-up and high heels, but I do so fully aware of what these cultural practices mean and why I am wearing them--to wear make-up and high heels is not a feminist act, unless doing so somehow subverts the status-quo.
Therefore, stipper-cizing is not feminist.
Let's get to the root of the problem, people. Cutting leaves off the tree of patriarchy ignores the roots.
The act of choosing is feminist, but it does not follow that every choice a woman makes is going to feminist.
The act of choosing is feminist, but it does not follow that every choice a woman makes is going to be feminist.
99% of sex workers are trafficked against their will?
hmmm.. can we get a citation for this incorrect exaggeration?
Wow, AYF, that sounds so much like "love the sinner, hate the sin" that it makes me want to vomit.
And where the hell are you getting your numbers? 99%+?! Did you do your own study?
It's fine with me if "stripper-[sic]cizing" isn't in your definition of feminism, but if let she who is without "un"-feminist pleasures cast the first stone. I think that people, especially women, should do things they enjoy whether men enjoy them doing it as well or not. I almost want to go grab the pole just to spite you and your snippy little tone -- but I just had my eyes dilated, so my depth perception isn't too great right now.
i'm with rachel here. which brings to mind a larger question for me....what would our society look like w/o any sort of real or perceived hierarchy? b/c it seems to me that the makeup, high heels, stripaerobics, what have you, are all tools to help women gain some sort of higher status in the existing patriarchal system that we've got, and that the decision whether or not to aim for that higher status strikes some people as a good idea. after all, it's the system we've got, why not try to make the most of it for yourself? usually i find myself on this side of the argument. and others think any sort of participation in this sort of thing is tacit approval of the unfair system, to be avoided (or at least felt badly about).
my mind literally can't imagine a world w/o some sort of social stratification, be it on the basis of sex or gender, beauty, economic class, level of education, intellect/intelligence, religion, what have you.
Posting made up stats is lying.
Lying to make a point says more about your point than your lie ever could have.
Stop it.
You're telling women what is and is not feminist.
Is making up stats feminist?
First of all, I did not intend to be "snippy." It is possible to have a debate, not agree and still be civil.
But...
Wow. Patriarchy is a WORLD system, y'all. We do not live in a vacuum. Misogyny in America, just as misogyny in Africa or any other continent, effects all woman. To base all your feminist views only on, what seems to me (read: my perception), the American (read: white, middle class & up) feminist tradition/thread is to ignore the majority of women's experiences in the world. (I am not insinuating that intersectional and women of color feminist viewpoints do not exist here, only that they have been slower to have their voices heard because of the oppression visited upon them by our culture.)
Yes. I am a proudly radical feminist. That means getting to the root of the issue, which is the system of oppression that is patriarchy (making sure I see the forest and not just the trees). It is ridiculous, in my mind, even without statistics, to assume that are more women (and children)who CHOOSE sex work, globally, than there are women (and children) who are sex-trafficked.
However, in all fairness and in tribute to true dialogue and debate, I'll be back with sources.
In the meantime, I highly recommend the following blog, for those you who think I'm crazy:
http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2008/08/01/rape-trafficking-interlude-with-peridot-ash/
but you have to acknowledge the issues that make prostitution a viable weapon for the partiarchy. and that is the fact that, in this country and many others, it is not legal. if you look at those places that are the arguments about the dehumanization, degredation, traumatization and subgegation are significantly deminished if not eradicated entirely. when the practice is a legal job option, violence agains sex workers can be procecuted. when the practice is legal, protection from sexually transmited diseases is available and mandated for the health of the worker and the john. when it is legal it really does become another service based transaction.
Rachel, who is slut shaming? Who said it was degrading? I asked a pretty open ended question about why women would feel like a class like this is the best expression of their sexuality. There's no judgment there, just a question. After all, feminists have conversations all the time about sex work, sexuality as a performance, etc in a critical way - I don't think exploring something like this means that you're not being supportive...
I also think the larger issue of sex work is just that - a larger issue. I'm talking about specific, commercialized classes.
On the workout benefits - I don't doubt that pole dancing is hard work! These vids just made me laugh because they're very much NOT a workout, that's all.
Sorry if rambling, just landed in CA after world's worst plane ride/hotel madness. I have a lot more thoughts on this, just wanted to make sure that I weighed in before I passed out.
Maybe I read the OP wrong -- possible that I've been reading Ren too exclusively... -- but my main point is that too often these questions of "is this really okay?" even if they're honest questions, are based in this idea that sexy is bad.
I hear you. But I'm not really asking if this is "okay." Of course it is! Again, no judgment. I'm just interested in exploring why we find what we do sexy, sexual, etc. That's all.
That's a good question then... and I'm pretty sure the answer is a casual shrug and "I dunno". Why do foot fetishists get turned on by feet? *shrug* Dunno. Why do some people get into bondage? *shrug* Dunno. I think analyzing why something is sexy can take the sexy out of it... A lot of people like to watch gyrating bodies and a lot of people think that dancing simulates sex (in which case, what sex act does ballet simulate? Is that just how they "do it" in Russia?), but whose to say why people think it's sexy. The whole "sexy" adjective is kind of ephemeral anyway.
(And there's no denying that there are certain persons in this thread, who shall go unmentioned, placing judgment on women who do "stripper-[sic]cizing".)
i disagree. analyzing what people find sexy and why can be a great tool for self-exploration, and let's not forget the personal is political. it's a shame your own analysis stops at "i dunno."
also, the poster who disagreed with you above was not condemning the women who choose to exercise this way, she was condemning the patriarchal culture which pushes women towards such choices, then alternately rewards and shames/hurts women for making them.
lastly, for someone hung up on grammar, jessica never split an infinitive in the OP (infinitives are verbs, not adjectives), and it's "who's" not "whose".
Jessica,
If you attempt the moves - even just the ones on the promo-
and actually perform them well-
you'll learn that it is a work out.
Until you've tried it as an exercise, you have no idea. Please stop your assumptions.
A lot of it is like Pilates, except, it's a lot more fun.
Yay! I sent in this video!
As for the video itself, I just found it to be somewhat degrading that it is put on television as an info-mercial and I'm pretty sure I saw it during the day. Are they trying to appeal to the "dowdy housewife"? Psshht. Who knows..
I would be all for this if it wasn't so much for the end product of satisfying a male somehow. If this video showed empowered women of all shapes, sizes, and ethnicities, then maybe I would consider it in a more positive light. But it seems to me as a blatant show for males because of the type of female they are presenting in the videos and commercials.
But, like Jessica, I have not taken one of these classes. Nor do I plan on it. Running works fine for me when motivated to work out. Swiveling my butt in circles doesn't seem too appealing.
There's nothing wrong with taking classes that will make your significant other happy. Nor anything wrong with potentially revving up your love life. It's true that things like sexy dancing is for the male onlooker, in situations where you are trying to attract a man or please your man, then that's ok to pander to the male gaze. What's not ok is when you base your self worth on being able to attract the men, nor is it ok if everything about a woman's sexuality is to please the guy. And of course it's even healthier when men are encouraged to do things to please their ladies as well.
I think it all depends on the studio/gym your are going to and who your instructor is.
I did a pole dancing class and the teacher was awesome, the classmates were supportive and it was really fun. It was safe, silly, very cool and unique environment. In addition, my upper back and arms have never looked better.
If you make this all about the other side of the equation (i.e. the potential "guy" in this scenario), then it is sort of gross. On the other hand, if you make it about ME having FUN expressing myself sexually and gaining the self confidence to move sexually in front of others...I think it's sort of a feminist expreience. My class was hardly full of future girls gone wild stars.
How many Feministing readers have seen a pole dancer? I have not. I did see a photography exhibit at the local museum of 6 different pole dancers in various poses on their poles, and holy hell, those poses took some strength. These women were supporting themselves horizontally six feet in the air by clutching a pole with their thighs. I mean, dayum. I don't know if what I saw was representative of pole dancing, and I don't know if it was representative of what you learn in a class, but my respect for the sport of pole dancing went up several, several notches. It looks like something I would really enjoy seeing if the woman were clothed, or at least not unclothed to meet the male gaze. I think you have to be mostly unclothed or you won't have enough friction to stay up the pole. And hell yes, it looked like something I would want to learn.
I did, live. The stunts they do - oh my goodness! They make it look so easy, but it actually takes a LOT of skill and strength to flip yourself around a pole the way they do.
I did a bit of Chinese Pole for circus class - it's a bit like poledancing except the pole's bigger and taller. Just CLIMBING the pole was so difficult, never mind hanging on there and doing stunts! (There were some girls in my class that were total monkeys though...clambered up like it was nothing :P)
PS
It's not something I would do for my SO or to express my sexuality. My sexuality expresses itself just fine with my clothes on and my back straight. The idea that I, or women, need to wear something in particular and move in a certain way to express themselves sexually is limiting. In this culture, pole dancing, chair dancing and skimpy clothes are the only ways promoted to women for expressing their sexuality, making them not just a few options among many, but the only options. That is the damaging portion. Whether you dance for a male audience or not, sexualized dances are based on satisfying the Male Gaze. Queers dancing for other queers doesn't change that.
I agree with most everything you've said in both comments, but, I'm curious about one aspect.
You say that these dances are made for the male gaze, and that even if a male isn't involved, it's still for the male gaze. Are you saying that a provocative, suggestive dance performed by one woman for another is somehow meant for men? Or that it's not possible for a female observer to be aroused by such displays? I'm not really following your conclusion on that part.
The Male Gaze (capitalized) does not refer to males, gazing. It refers to the het male aesthetic that permeates definitions of femininity and feminine sexual expression. Women are capable of the Male Gaze, queers are capable of the Male Gaze. You can take pole dancing out of the Patriarchy, but you can't take the Patriarchy out of pole dancing. Not even if yer queer.
I did, live. The stunts they do - oh my goodness! They make it look so easy, but it actually takes a LOT of skill and strength to flip yourself around a pole the way they do.
I did a bit of Chinese Pole for circus class - it's a bit like poledancing except the pole's bigger and taller. Just CLIMBING the pole was so difficult, never mind hanging on there and doing stunts! (There were some girls in my class that were total monkeys though...clambered up like it was nothing :P)
What's wrong with this? I think it looks like fun. Definitely a good workout too, if you got good enough to do it for more than five minutes. And what's wrong with the women wanting to show their husbands/boyfriends? It might be the only time they ever feel sexy/confident in front of them. Isn't it a good thing, if it helps a woman feel better about herself?
You pathetic manhaters! I'd like to see some of YOU ditch pigs slip into a leotard,and dance around! It would look like feding time at the zoo! Sex was created for women to please men!!
Sorry about the troll folks; cleaning up now!
I worked as a stripper for some time, and let me tell you, arial pole dancing is difficult: it requires a huge amount of physical strength, flexibility and coordination. When I came home after dancing for the first time (and the day after that and the day after that) my thigh muscles were so tired I couldn't walk up stairs without assistance, and I hadn't done a single pole trick besides fall over when I tried to swing in a circle. Ariel pole tricks (not just twirling around in a circle languidly, but the kind that get both of your feet off the ground, often above your head) are hard, and until you've mastered them, performing them doesn't leave a lot of room for performing for the gaze.
(Also, in defense of what sounds like a utterly ridiculous class, doing dancing of any kind -- especially if your lifestyle is more sedentary -- is exercise, and in general, a little exercise, even if it is wriggling your ass in a circle, is better than none.)
From personal experience, when you're learning how to climb up a pole using mostly your thighs, there is very little room to be "sexy" for others -- you're worrying about not falling 10 feet to the ground. Or at least I was. Same goes when you're learning to do a controlled slide down a pole hanging up-side-down by your feet, or any sort of arial trick. People have all sorts of reasons for joining dance classes of any kind (bellydancing is another kind of dance that I think walks this line between dancing for yourself, and dancing for the gaze. Ballet as well, actually, but that's a whole other story.), and I think the act of dance in and of itself is not inherently anything but movement. But how often are you going to find dance of any kind without a context?
Personally, I'd say that the act of poledancing itself is not sexist or problematic; it is the intention for taking the class that matters and eventually limits the definition of female sexiness. If you are taking a class to feel good about your body as it is, to learn that it is OK to be sexy in this way, etc., classes that teach poledancing aren't automatically about performing for the male gaze. If you're taking a class so your boyfriend will think you're sexy like a stripper... well, that's different, and to me, problematic.
Without an emphasis on the physical challenges of pole dancing, I think that classes like these are pandering to our cultural mythos of what a stripper is and does by allowing a woman to essentially simulate the skillset of a stripper without the taint of being a stripper. Media limits depictions of strippers to vixens, girls gone bad, people (women) who are little more if not whores, and consumers seem to buy into this whole-heartedly. Most people don't know (or don't know they know) strippers, or sex workers of any kind. Men are pounded with the message that strippers are some sort of prize game; if you score with a stripper, you've done the unattainable. Women are pounded with the message that strippers are what they can never be: beautiful, sexy, perfect, and that given any chance, their male partner will cheat on them with a stripper, which is often by simply engaging a stripper for a dance.
But the irony is that strippers themselves are often treated as damaged goods, especially with regards to dating and relationships. Or at least, all the dancers I knew were: dancers with a boyfriend either had partners who treated their occupation like a merit badge (Dude! I'm dating a stripper!!!), or kept their occupation a secret, from their boyfriend, or from their friends, like it was something to be ashamed of. People tend to have very rigid ideas of who strippers are and what they are like: sex addicts, pornstars, drug addicts, single mothers, heroin users, "gold-diggers", plastic surgery addicts, stupid bimbos are just some of the tropes that get slung around. Personally, I'm not ashamed at all about having worked as a stripper, but I tend to not tell people that I worked as a dancer until they know me well, if I do tell them at all, because often people's conceptions of what a stripper is like is so strong, difficult to dispel, and for me, very false.
Classes without an emphasis on the physical challenges of pole dancing or the liberation of feeling sexy with your body the way it is then fall into the trap of idealizing and preaching the limited kind of sexy that is associated with stripping, and by extension, the kind of idealized body that a stripper is supposed to have. And I think this is why they're so wildly popular. They offer women a chance to act as a stripper without having to be a stripper. They play on the insecurity offered by the media that men will cheat with a stripper at any opportunity; if you can offer what a stripper offers without being a stripper, maybe he will have less reason to cheat?
So.... classes like these? Totally mixed bag. I think the issues at play are so complicated, and it would take a book to fully get into why sex-workers are treated the way they are by our society, and who gets to define 'sexy'.
great post. i wish the voices of sex workers (and former sex workers) would be heard more often in these dialogues.
i agree with you that the classes are a "mixed bag" because pretty much all issues of sexuality are more complicated than black and white. i like watching pole tricks, much like i enjoy watching gymnastics, simply because they look awesome and require a lot of skill, not because of anything inherently sexy about them. i would not mind trying to learn them myself if i were not convinced i would fall to my death or end up million dollar baby style.
Rush,
That was so very well put!
Thank you for writing eloquently and honestly about an industry (retired) we have in common.
I've taken pole dancing classes for about 6 months and right now I have a removable pole in my living room because I don't have any room for it anywhere else in my house!
I love doing it for myself because it's just a really fun way to work out without getting bored, and it really does build up some great upper body strength. Swinging around like a monkey is just more appealing to me than crunches or pushups I guess.
I even had a boyfriend at the time when I got it, and it really became more of a joke than anything sexy, since we'd make up dances and moves together and never took off any clothes while dancing. Maybe that's just been my experience of it, since I just do it for fun and myself rather than to attract a mate.
I guess that it depends on what the person's reasons for taking the class are, but I honestly don't see anything horrible about wanting to be sexy for your partner if you feel empowered by your sexiness and more comfortable.
I've taken pole dancing classes for about 6 months and right now I have a removable pole in my living room because I don't have any room for it anywhere else in my house!
I love doing it for myself because it's just a really fun way to work out without getting bored, and it really does build up some great upper body strength. Swinging around like a monkey is just more appealing to me than crunches or pushups I guess.
I even had a boyfriend at the time when I got it, and it really became more of a joke than anything sexy, since we'd make up dances and moves together and never took off any clothes while dancing. Maybe that's just been my experience of it, since I just do it for fun and myself rather than to attract a mate.
I guess that it depends on what the person's reasons for taking the class are, but I honestly don't see anything horrible about wanting to be sexy for your partner if you feel empowered by your sexiness and more comfortable.
Wait, the whole point of sexuality, period, is appealing to your partner. It's not neccessarily a sign of "femininity" but it is a sign of "sexuality" because that's what sexuality is all about. I mean, you have to appeal to yourself too, of course, so you can feel confident-- lack of confidence is never sexy. But it's still mostly about attracting a partner and being sexy for them, whatever that means to you.
I'd take a class like this, especially since it's in an environment where I am not being objectified; I can control for myself who sees me dance outside the class.
Wait, the whole point of sexuality, period, is appealing to your partner.
I think A LOT of people, myself included, would heartily disagree with this statement. I'm not going to go further into it, because it's just such a no-brainer to me.
Clean up aisle 6, plzkthx
i don't think we get it yet. post it a few more times.
I think it would be an interesting and fun workout, but I hate the way it's packaged. I like to move, sexy isn't required.
And the name "Flirty Girl Fitness" isn't working for me... girl? pink and purple? I'm not 13... ;)
I like the idea of this because it seems more like "play" than work. The dea of pole-dancing seems like fun.
And my boyfriend would probably find it sexy. That's wonderful. I like the person I'm having sex with to find my body attractive. I like to be told I am sexy. My sexuality and confidence is partially based in another person, because, right now, part of my life is based with that person. If I was single, I wouldn't care what any man--or woman--thought.
I've been waiting for this post.
The commercials for this have been playing like crazy around here for the past couple of weeks. My eyes practically bugged out of my head the first time I saw it.
They do seem to focus on the pleasure and excitement you can bring home to your man.
What bothers me further is that it seems like one big gender role enforcer. The pink EVERYTHING, the butterfly logo, the title itself "Flirty GIRL Fitness", the fact that you would learn it for your boyfriend or male significant other, the idea that it will teach you how to express your sexuality (because, you know, women don't know how to do that unless we're taught).
Would you also criticise Argentine Tango because it developed out of brothels?
Social partner dancing is so embued with heteronormativity that it about makes me puke. Swear to dog, it's worse than dating. That's a whole 'nother set of issues, though.
Can't males dance this one together, or three people in a group? Wasn't that part of it's street development?
Possibly, but I've never seen it. Not that I am the world's fore most leading authority on the practice of Argentine tango.
And you know, men could pole dance, too, but they don't, now do they?
Wow, it's like those "girls" got trapped in a cotton candy machine.
my bridesmaid booked my bachelorette party for a class like this. we were all told to bring a man's shirt and high heels and i had a real problem with that. i brought a sarong instead, but i was told i couldn't dance with a sarong because the dance specifically called for a man's shirt, and undressing yourself.
i appreciate feeling sexy and showing that with my body, but not when i am required to do it in a man's shirt. brings up all sorts of power differentials (little girl/big man) that don't come into play in my sex life.
I was going to take a pole dancing class just because it seemed like a different workout and one that was fun. I love dancing and it seemed like a good workout.
I agree that the way they package it sometimes is that its only to take home for your significant other, but if I ended up doing something for my boyfriend, so what? It would make me feel a little more adventurous, but that wouldn't be the only reason I took the class.
The chair dancing in the video, however, is a little ridiculous... and with a name like "flirty girl fitness" it seems like they're catering to pre-teens which i hope to god they aren't.
While the video just looks like strippers trying to make money off of a video of them stretching, pole dancing is hard work!
I wish pole-dancing wasn't exclusively/almost exclusively associated with stripping or male pleasure, because it is really hard work! I can imagine you'd get an excellent workout pole dancing, and it can be really graceful, like gymnastics. You have to support your body with just your arms or legs, spin, twirl, climb, etc. I've looked it up online and there are people who do it professionally w/o it having a sexual nature.
All that said, if a woman WANTS to be a stripper and capitalize on her body, as a feminist, I can't say what she can or can't do, and I do not think stripping and feminism are completely incompatible. I'm still not impressed with the "flirty girl" video. I'd rather see a girl playing softball, running, or doing classical dancing than lapdances.
I don't find any problems with wanting to be sexy for your man, my boyfriend would love this and I would gladly do it for him. The only issue I have is the limitations it puts on what's sexy and sexuality.
I think stuff like this limits sexuality, and it being for women to please men limits male sexuality. If my boyfriend's friends knew that he moved like that for me, a few would probably call him a bitch, or at least think it was weird.
It just seems like this stuff is expected from women, but unthinkable for men. If a woman doesn't have a thong, she's a prude, but if a man does have a thong, he's whipped. Does anyone else see this attitude from people?
I lived with a former pole dancer for a few months and she had a pole installed in her room - she hated the sleazy aspect of dancing for men, but as for the actual dancing, she absolutely loved it and viewed it as a great way of exercising. I have to say I agree, she taught me a few moves and fuck me is it tricky! She saw it more as a type of gymnastics than anything else. I would love to take a class cos I find it difficult to stick to an exercise routine and this looks a helluva lot more fun than jogging.
I also think there's nothing *inherently* wrong with learning sexiness for a male partner, perhaps this is because I am bisexual and feel that anything I'd do for a girl I'd do for a boy as well (lapdances and the like), although this "Flirty Girl" thing does seem like it would be embraced by people who don't think too far outside the dominant gender paradigm, as it were...
Okay, so apparently today is irrelevant comment day, but one of the moves they do in that video is a significantly less fabulous version of something from Fosse's choreography for "Mein Herr" from Cabaret!
... Also, every time I hear someone making some kind of vaguely demeaning comment about strippers, I can't help but think of Mazeppa in Gypsy. "Something WRONG with STRIPPIN?!?!!" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFRSawe33sA)
In other news, I don't know how I feel about pole dancing classes, but the way this is marketed is somewhere between appallingly sexist and appallingly bad, isn't it?
I just reject the notion that everything we as women say or do should be "SEXY." I feel like I'm constantly being told to dress sexy, walk sexy, cut my hair sexy, eat sexy, yadda yadda yadda. Now I'm supposed to work out sexy.
This is just another form of the mainstream propagated image of "sexy"- created by the patriarchy, of course. There's nothing here that's particularly exciting or interesting or benefiting women-- EXCEPT when its a consequence of benefiting a man (i.e. feeling sexy!)
When I work out I do it because its good for my body. I am ridiculously sweaty and tired and panting and have a look on my face like. I am not prancing around with a sexy face with my hair done up in pink pants and lots of makeup.
I mean, hey, whatever floats your boat. If you really DO enjoy this type of thing, there is NOTHING wrong with that. Hell I walk around with makeup and heels in other aspects of my life, I'm not on any high horse. But I just HATE when people try and call things like this feminist. They just aren't.
Just because these programs exist doesn't somehow mean that all women have to "work out sexy". It's evident that some do though; how does the fact that they do this hurt you, really?
How does the fact that they do this hurt you, really?
To paraphrase Gail Dines, "Your decision to do porn affects my ability to walk to my car safely." When any person participates in an activity which furthers the aims of the Patriarchy, that person is a tacit accomplice of the Patriarchy. When I wear dresses and lipstick, which I do, regularly, I send the message to everyone who sees me that I agree that women should be decorative in a particular way defined by the Male Gaze. I have a choice. I don't have to be decorative. Not all women have this choice, and every time I put on drag, I make it that much more difficult for women who don't have the choice to reject it.
I'm not criticizing any individual for any choice they make, wearing lipstick, taking a pole dancing class, whatever. What I'm saying is that our choices exist in a larger context, our choices do affect others, and we should ask ourselves hard questions about why we make our choices and why they make us feel good. Why does pole dancing in high heels make women feel sexy? Why doesn't lolling around on the futon in a pair of old sweat pants worn inside out have the same appeal? And what does it say about female sexiness when we pick the pole instead of the futon as a way to feel sexier? It says that we buy into the model of female sexiness put forth by pole dancing, and we make it that much harder for women who prefer sweat pants to feel sexy.
wow, word.
I'm glad you bring up this point about how every aspect of our lives has to be SEXY (and capitalization is intended). It seems that when you watch ads for fitness clubs or equipment, the women are in the skimpiest outfits possible, making sexy faces at the camera, not sweating while doing strenuous activity. Of course I know that the outfits emphasize the 'fitness' and muscles of the subjects, highlighting the results the product wants to sell. But even in my gym or out for a run, the emphasis seems to be on looking 'SEXY' not powerful/empowered/strong/sweaty/fit. You don't see Paula Radcliff finishing the NYMarathon wearing a spangled top from BEBE saying pussy. She is wearing light, but sport appropriate clothing. I mean--go girl, show some cleavage, but get a good running bra too. The one place where I'm not thinking about my face/hair/ass/stomach is when I'm working out, because everything is channeled towards the workout, not the externals. I think that some of the women writing in about the pole dance workout/experience expressed that thought--the work was so hard that they had no time to be sexy. Maybe this can be the chance for some woman to get out of her head and just be powerful and strong. Which is so much more SEXY than posing, pouting and pretending.
Just putting in my side of things: I'm a man who loves pole-dancing. Really loves it. Can't get enough of it. I'm on my University's pole-dancing team. I'm no good at the looking sexy in-between, but it's a chance to be almost naked upside down on a simple jungle gym, and I'm good at the gymnastics.
So... make sure all commentary wouldn't infringe on my right to hang upside-down by one leg for fun.
I don't recall where I found the link (it may even have been Feministing during the summer) but I found this clip of a NY Times story about the growing popularity of pole dancing in China, for fitness and other reasons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhXud8hx6YU
It appears to have more in common with Chinese circus performance than what one sees in a US strip club, MTV or the OP. There are a number of clips available on YouTube on Chinese pole dancing, acrobats on poles, and pole dancing in general.
There are varying degrees of athleticism or "sexiness" involved, which may be the issue for some who see it as catering to male gaze. The "chair dancing" above? Hmm. But take note of the NY Times clip which cuts to the Chinese TV demonstration of the strength and skill required to perform those moves (i.e., the studio panel can't do them, to the amusement of the audience - Japanese variety or talk shows also like demonstrations of this sort). I believe it can be as empowering as one chooses it to be.
I would love to take this class. I would love to be able to dance up on stage at the Industrial clubs I go to. Plus, the only exercise I like is dancing, and my husband sucks at dancing. So this would work extremely well for me.
The movements remind me of yoga in the clip you posted. It's about stretching, flexibility, and small muscle control, which does not generally break a sweat, but does you infinite amount of good in other ways.
I'm glad the tone of this post is a lot less confrontational than the last few posts on this subject.
I don't think everything we do has to be sexy. There is a time and place for it...as there is for fitness programs!
I go to an all-women's school, no men consuming this, and one of my friends had the Carmen Electra "Stripperobics" tapes and would get people together for group sessions. They were apparently low on stripping but incredibly hard, leading to a lot of hilarity, fun, and falling over.
Just my perspective. Sometimes it's just a way of bonding with other women and not encased in pink sugar or men drooling.
I'm having trouble understanding some of the views presented at Feministing by the editors and readers. Isn't it contradictory to demand that people respect women who dance and/or strip for a living while also demonizing this form of exercise? Isn't it contradictory to embrace our sexuality and see it as fun for us and our significant others while claiming that dancing exotically for our lovers is sexist? If pole dancing as exercise or as a way to spice up one's sex life is fun and safe, then what's the big deal?
It's not that there's something wrong with enjoying pole dancing as exercise.
It's the way it's being marketed, the compulsory and narrowly defined "sexiness" that's shoved in women's faces from the time they're barely women at all. Look at this. It looks like the "girl" aisle in a toy store; it does not appear to be something meant for adult women. It even infantalizes women by using the word "girl!" That girlishness, in women, is perceived as sexy is something worth critiquing.
It's not just about this ONE particular workout; it's about the culture in which things like this spring up and thrive.
I find it disturbing that so many readers are opposed to examining and criticising stuff like this. What a shallow "feminism" - "I choose my choice!"
The young women in Jessica's class didn't say that this was the only way they could feel sexy. It's just one way. And they're not using it for the approval of men, but perhaps as a way to enhance their sex lives with someone they love. I don't see anything male-gazey about that. I think it's something that women are reclaiming for themselves and their most intimate relationships.
But I do agree with you about the use of the word girl. "Sexy" and "girl" shouldn't appear next to each other. That's just creepy.
If you haven't, check out Rush's comment above, the really long one with 22 recommendations. It addresses many of these questions you're asking.
Do women think that this is attractive? Just because you dress like a slut does not mean that you look attractive in any way shape or form it just means that you have a lot of self confidence.
I think that this article proves that women have a misconsumption of what is sexy and femine. This is simply since the women here are trying to be sexy to please men, not for themselves.
I'll admit that I didn't read all the comments.
I have been following pole dancing for a little while and am conflicted with my feminist leanings and the strength and agility needed for real pole dancing. I think flirty girl fitness is going about it the wrong way. Check out ktcoates is going about it the way that many other women on youtube are. They aren't trying to be all that sexy, they are doing it for themselves, for upper body strength and grace. Check outher video that she submitted to the nike dance competiton as well as her website where she puts a picture of a gymnast next to her on her pole and asks the viewer to spot the difference. There are people trying to desexualize pole dancing, which I think is great. I gravitate towards any kind of fitness that is fun. So that means lifting weights is out and hula hooping is in.
And yet I kind of like that showmanship that goes with it. It reminds me of the same showmanship I showed in gymnastics, baton, poms, dance, and skating as a child, of course it wasn't sexualized, but it is still an element of showmanship.
I love that a 47 year old man can take pole dancing and make it his own. It is kind of amazing to see men pole dance since it is so associated with women.
Some of the things those people do seem near impossible and gravity defying. Oh and it is easier to get your skin to stick to the pole than fabric, so booty shorts and a sports bra are actually the easiest clothing to wear when performing these moves.
But the sexuality offered in classes like these seems to me - I've never been to one, so correct me if I'm wrong - so put on and so based on the male gaze.
And what’s wrong with that?
After all, many of the women interviewed in this article and others talk about bringing the workout back home for their significant male others. Thoughts?
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
A lot of feminists walk a fine line between advocating for sexy being whatever feels sexy to them on the on hand, and denigrating or shaming sex workers on the other. Why is it somehow degrading to take a pole-dancing class? Why is it somehow degrading to take your clothes off for money? Beyond that, why is it degrading or un-feminist to take your clothes off in a sexy way for your significant other? It's not like these women are being forced to take the pole-dancing class because they're being emotionally abused by their male significant others -- and if they are that's another thing all together.
Since when are strippers “sex workers”? Since when are women who copy the moves of strippers or dress like them (heels, stockings) to please their partners “sex workers”? Not that there’s anything inherently wrong with sex workers, but some people are making absurd leaps in logic here. Your other points are good, though.
was doing any "slut shaming" as you claim. Jessica's post mentioned nothing of the sort, and I'm not exactly sure how you made that leap.
Second, as for "so long as they aren't harming themselves or others": That, I think, is what Jessica and many other commenters here are wondering: whether the popularity of the classes and or causes are harming anybody. Judging by the heady discussions in here, I think it's far from clear to a lot of people whether they are.
It might help if people didn’t use words and phrases like “its attendant symptoms” as though they’re talking about a disease.
You just contradicted yourself. If pole dancing is hard work then surely the practice needed to do it would also be hard.
I don't know if what I saw was representative of pole dancing, and I don't know if it was representative of what you learn in a class, but my respect for the sport of pole dancing went up several, several notches. It looks like something I would really enjoy seeing if the woman were clothed, or at least not unclothed to meet the male gaze. I think you have to be mostly unclothed or you won't have enough friction to stay up the pole. And hell yes, it looked like something I would want to learn.
I think all this alarm over the bogeyman of the dreaded Male Gaze is ridiculous. Yes, naked women attract the attention of straight males and lesbians. But here’s a little secret: A woman doesn’t have to be naked or wearing stockings and heels, or gyrating her hips, or shaking her ass to cause someone to want to look at her and think about what it might be like to have sex with her. The straight male mind is what causes him to gaze at women. Whether it’s a woman spinning around a metal pole in a dance class or strip club, playing volleyball on the beach, swimming, bowling, skeet shooting or whatever; if a guy or lesbian sees her and finds her sexy –SCHWING!
Back in the early 1990s, I was a dancer, and I've got to say that the experience was one of the most celibate and athletic times in my life.
When I arrived at that first bar, I was 19 and relatively skill-less, attempting to earn some money for school and a means of working on my own terms for cash. Making $80-$250 a night for 4-6 hours of work seemed so much better than working 9 hours straight in some fast-food joint for peanuts, and, having grown up around a lot of nontraditional gals, the idea of dancing had always intrigued me.
Anyway, when I first started, I gyrated around the stage a bit, was profoundly uncomfortable, in complete and utter pain after every evening, and for the most part felt really, really dorky. However, after working the stage and the pole for two years, I was in top physical condition (the dancing works your core muscle groups in some amazing ways), was eating really well due to the constant cash influx, and I believe I made a few truly lonely people feel less so as well.
I danced to entertain, to test my own physical limits on the stage, to offer a kind ear to guys (and some women), and to make a living. Was it a good experience? That's debatable, I suppose, depending on which side you're on. I learned a lot about life, human desperation, and men in our society. I also learned about my own sexuality, and how to enjoy it for me, to see myself as attractive, interesting, and in control of myself. There were nights when I'd spend an hour or two just talking to the same customer because he'd had a shit day or an interesting story; I didn't make as much cash, but I felt like I at least made a minor difference in someone's life.
Occasionally it was a truly bleak experience, but I also enjoyed the camaraderie of the women I worked with, and I never forgot that I had the option to walk away. Working nekkidish in a material world gave me a more clear idea of just how many kinds of sexy women there are out there, and that in turn made me feel a lot better about my own sexuality. Old, young, fat, skinny...every woman I encountered in that world had her own brand of sexuality and comfort with her own body...but then again I guess you have to if you work night after night, topless in front of a room filled with strangers.
It's a conundrum, for sure, how to handle human sexuality in our current world. There is so much destruction, confusion, violence, and oversimplification, and yet here we all are, each expressing ourselves on purpose or unwittingly, day-in-day-out, for the gazes of other human beings, and more importantly, for our own selves.
It's been 14 years since I've graced that stage, and though I'm glad I haven't had to return to that line of work, I also find that whenever I do mention it, I almost always meet women who want to give it a try. Some are closet exhibitionists, and some just want to test their own limits. The pole classes may be a silly and/or offensive to certain people (I think they're a tad silly, personally, but also have a to-each-their-own view of this activity), but at this moment in time, where there is so much confusion in life, I honestly don't have a good answer about how to claim positive sexuality 100% for someone else, especially as what is a positive, enjoyable experience for some people can make others want to barf or call their congressperson.
Do any of you?
Back in the early 1990s, I was a dancer, and I've got to say that the experience was one of the most celibate and athletic times in my life.
When I arrived at that first bar, I was 19 and relatively skill-less, attempting to earn some money for school and a means of working on my own terms for cash. Making $80-$250 a night for 4-6 hours of work 3-4 nights a week seemed so much better than working 9 hours straight for 6 in some fast-food joint for peanuts, and, having grown up around a lot of nontraditional gals, the idea of dancing had always intrigued me.
Anyway, when I first started, I gyrated around the stage a bit, was profoundly uncomfortable, in complete and utter pain after every evening, and for the most part felt really, really dorky. However, after working the stage and the pole for two years, I was in top physical condition (the dancing works your core muscle groups in some amazing ways), was eating really well due to the constant cash influx, and I believe I made a few truly lonely people feel less so as well.
I danced to entertain, to test my own physical limits on the stage, to offer a kind ear to guys (and some women), and to make a living. Was it a good experience? That's debatable, I suppose, depending on which side you're on. I learned a lot about life, human desperation, and men in our society. I also learned about my own sexuality, and how to enjoy it for me, to see myself as attractive, interesting, and in control of myself. There were nights when I'd spend an hour or two just talking to the same customer because he'd had a shit day or an interesting story; I didn't make as much cash, but I felt like I at least made a minor difference in someone's life.
Occasionally it was a truly bleak experience, but I also enjoyed the camaraderie of the women I worked with, and I never forgot that I had the option to walk away. Working nekkidish in a material world gave me a more clear idea of just how many kinds of sexy women there are out there, and that in turn made me feel a lot better about my own sexuality. Old, young, fat, skinny...every woman I encountered in that world had her own brand of sexuality and comfort with her own body...but then again I guess you have to if you work night after night, topless in front of a room filled with strangers.
It's a conundrum, for sure, how to handle human sexuality in our current world. There is so much destruction, confusion, violence, and oversimplification, and yet here we all are, each expressing ourselves on purpose or unwittingly, day-in-day-out, for the gazes of other human beings, and more importantly, for our own selves.
It's been 14 years since I've graced that stage, and though I'm glad I haven't had to return to that line of work, I also find that whenever I do mention it, I almost always meet women who want to give it a try. Some are closet exhibitionists, and some just want to test their own limits. The pole classes may be a silly and/or offensive to certain people (I think they're a tad silly, personally, but also have a to-each-their-own view of this activity), but at this moment in time, where there is so much confusion in life, I honestly don't have a good answer about how to claim positive sexuality 100% for someone else, especially as what is a positive, enjoyable experience for some people can make others want to barf or call their congressperson.
Do any of you?
It's a great form of exercise, whether you feel the "need" to be more sexual or in touch with your sensuality, whether you are into men or women-
whatever-
regardless of how it is marketed-
it's a great form of exercise-
and it FEELS GOOD! to be in that shape. Personally, I miss it.
Another great form of exercise is Tissu (aerial ballet on long strips of cloth- think Cirque Du Soleil) but, Pole is a hell of a lot safer (apparatus) than Tissu'. Pole dancing gave me a six pack. When I stopped, it went away.
As for the "dress like a slut" comments-
WOW- gotta love it when people describe women or their choice of attire with that word.
As for who is a sex worker
in my humble retired stripper opinion:
Prostitutes/ Call girls/ Street Walkers/ Women in Bordello's
Actresses
&
Strippers
I love a site that defends a Mormon who defines herself as feminist and then disses women who choose to express their sexuality in a way the poster doesn't feel comfortable with- male gaze,
paradigm or not
I call Bull shit-
and send you to urbanfertilitydancer.com
Is tribal belly dancing kosher with feminists?
How bout Burlesque?
Jazz?
Bob Fossy's Choreography?
Do you still get to be an atheist even if you enjoy Alvin Ailey's dance? DO we take atheist cards away like we take feminist cards?
This is the U.S. -we mix and match, pick and CHOOSE. We are techni color and surround sound with various levels of contrast at all times. We are Greek descended who serve creole food and Mexican descended making American Pizza for our friends. We are knowledgeable feminists who survive by any means necessary and butch lesbians who like to twirl around a pole.
We are Jazz. Get used to it.
We are free to say, "Wow, that is just not for me."
Just as we are free to pick and choose what we appreciate.
and the line"I've never been to one"
smacks of Christian's who burn books they haven't read and get Blockbuster to ban films (Last Temptation of Christ) they haven't seen.
I realize that telling you I worked out with a pole may lower your respect for me. That is fine.
Respect for others stems from self respect.
I wish you all well.
Hey, I agree that the sexualization of fitness is targeting women and conjuring stripper imagery. The part I have trouble grasping is the necessary male gaze, and not general sexual gaze. Why do these moves have to necessarily attract male sexual attraction. If a woman takes these classes and impresses their lesbian lover, how has she participated in male gaze? Secondly, I think that creating your own sexual expression, for whatever viewer ( who is of your free choice of course) is liberating in a sense. It takes being a sexualized object out of the control of the viewer and allowing the dancer to produce her own sexual environment and arousal. Of course on can argue that this would be a form of conditioning, but at what point are women's sexual desire for gaze ( much like anyone's desire for sexual gaze) not oppressive?
P.S. that video looks like fun.
P.P.S.
It's ok for feminists to masterbate too.
Try the moves and you'll see what I mean.
Hmmm,
At one point in time, this phenomenon would be part of being a female Eunuch.
Greer was right to point out that most women have no idea what a female driven portrait of what feminine sexiness is because we've never been in a world where it existed. We are all aping the male gaze's definition of female sexiness even femininity. This makes puts us all in the category of female impersonators.
The problem I see with this pole dancing exercise is that the last reason for it all is pleasing some male other. Flirty Girl Fitness is refreshingly honest about that and has no illusions otherwise.
I've done pole dancing classes, and it was fun, and hard work. I don't see why it's unfeminist for me to enjoy my body being sexual when dancing. I understand all the stuff about Male Gaze perfectly well, thanks, but if I'm having a good time and enjoying myself, and even better my SO also enjoys it - I think that adds to the goodness in the world. As someone said, if one went on a class like this and was forced to, that would be horrible. But I really dislike arguments based on false consciousness. Have some respect for the other person- false consciousness is just disempowering
I've done pole dancing classes, and it was fun, and hard work. I don't see why it's unfeminist for me to enjoy my body being sexual when dancing. I understand all the stuff about Male Gaze perfectly well, thanks, but if I'm having a good time and enjoying myself, and even better my SO also enjoys it - I think that adds to the goodness in the world. As someone said, if one went on a class like this and was forced to, that would be horrible. But I really dislike arguments based on false consciousness. Have some respect for the other person- false consciousness is just disempowering
I want to address two concepts as separate.
Lots of folks talk about "the gaze" or "the male gaze", a concept with its origins IIRC in film theory. I've always been a skeptic that it can be exported wholesale from art to the rest of the world. The question of whether women accomodate their sexuality to male expectations is a very abstract one, and not one I'm interested in grappling with on this thread.
The concern I was trying to raise above was much more specific: that pole dancing that takes as its model what strippers to is mimicking not what women or men find sexy in some general way, but rather a stylized performance that arises when men pay, and women perform. (Renegade Evolution, one of the more eloquent and prolific sex worker bloggers out there, has written about how stylized porn is and how it's not a representation of most folks' sexuality -- though in many ways it is of hers -- it's a fascinating post but I can't seem to find it, so if any Ren mavens remember it, please post a link).
To my way of thinking, the latter critique is far more specific: not whether women's sexuality is being defined by male partners or male ideas of sexuality, but rather whether it's being defined by commerce.
All this talk of "constructed," "inauthentic" sexuality seems to presume that there is in fact some authentic, original, natural, non-commodified, pre-male gaze, DIY sexuality. I don't think there is.
and I think that's the whole problem with the male gaze. It says a lot about our society that we can't imagine natural sexualities(I'm making it plural because obviously there isn't one right answer). but to have it be unthinkable? that right there is proof to me that the male gaze is alive and well.
For awhile these workouts were available through my cable "On Demand" system. So I started one up out of curiosity.
I was not impressed.
I must say that I have no problem with pole-dancing workouts. I wish someone would offer them in my area. I own the entire Carmen Electra series of striptease workouts, and admit that it's fun and a good workout. I have also done bellydancing.
But this workout was fluff to me. It didn't seem to be beneficial as exercise. Maybe it was just that the demos were easy. I also felt like I had "girlness" shoved down my throat with all the pink and butterflies.
yeah I saw this commercial when I was babystting and the ittle girl thought it looked "cool". I was shocked and insulted. My aunt bellydances as a form of exercise but it's different right? She doesn't do it for her husband. She does it because it's fun and bellydancing actually works your muscles.
I'd say it depends. I mean, I have heard in some cultures traditionally, bellydance was what women did with each other at parties. The main men there were related. I can't prove this, since I wasn't there, but I do believe the teacher who said it. In the US for profit? a different issue. having taken bellydance from teachers who very much teach it as an appreciation of your own body, it can be very much not performing sexually for men, or at least, no more so than a woman enjoying her body is always going to draw men. however, I've also taken classes that were very flirty "sell it" sexual styles.
yeah I saw this commercial when I was babystting and the ittle girl thought it looked "cool". I was shocked and insulted. My aunt bellydances as a form of exercise but it's different right? She doesn't do it for her husband. She does it because it's fun and bellydancing actually works your muscles.
I just want to say that expressing concern about prostitution or stripping isn't about "slut shaming" for me, but about the expectations these activities generate. The more they are legalized and accepted into society, the more usually-male exploiters make them a standard for everyone. In certain cases, this can translate into making it difficult or impossible for women to refuse to engage in these activities. For example, if you legalize prostitution, it's no longer sexual harassment to expect a hostess to sleep with clients; it becomes a legally-acceptable condition of employment. Though activities such as pole-dancing classes are portrayed as voluntary and fun, making them look this way paves the way for them to become not just voluntary mainstream, but eventually expected, in some cases in workplaces, like Hooters uniforms became a mainstream thing.
wow... slippery slope arguments are full of logical falisy. it's on the same line as saying if we let the gays marrie we have to let the pedofiles marry littel kids, and we have to let people marry their cat. rediculous and completely illogical.
Uh, no. Countries that legalise sex work have very stringent rules for what is OK and what's not, and women working in the sex industry have a lot of power and say in what they can or cannot do. If your job is to be a dancer, you are in no way expected to sleep with the clients - because it's not your job.
I was just at a club (women-owned) and we were told very specific things about what's allowed and what's not allowed. They really do take care of the girls here. Some places are dodgy, yes, but that's more a case of bad business rather than the inherent nature of sex work.
Look at New Zealand's Occupational Health and Safety Guide for the Sex Industry:
http://www.osh.dol.govt.nz/order/catalogue/235.shtml
To me, the slut-shaming that's happening here is very similar to "she deserved the abuse because of her work/dress/etc".
I think there definitely _is_ a male gaze that applies into the real world. Remember, the art world is created by people living in the real world. It often reflects the real world.
Check out John Berger's _Ways of Seeing_
I think women have the 'male gaze', too - only they project it onto themselves and other women.
The male gaze (outside of film critique) is another way of saying that in our culture, women judge ourselves and other women by our physical appearance. Which leads to a world where women are primarily the ones concerned with the buying of makeup, fashion, and flirty-girl-fitness lessons. Every man I've ever asked about the veracity of the existence of the male gaze (feminists, non-feminists, philosophy teachers, etc,) has replied with a sort of "well, duh" attitude. It seemed to be second nature to them that their primary interaction with women was to size them up for 'fuckability'. The secondary, was of course, to listen to them and interact as human beings. I hate hate HATE the fact that in order for me to be 'Feminine', I have to care about my appearance, and try to appear petite, delicate, flowery... I AM feminine - hairy legs, armpits and shaved head. Because what makes me a woman is NOT how much time I spend putting into my appearance.
Not all men do this, however.
So when I see flirty-girl fitness, I just see more of the same - womens sexuality defined as a product for men(and women) to visually consume.
Also check out Ariel Levy's _Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture_
I know I've read previous posts by Jessica saying that she hated this book, which is why I thought it was funny when she posts Flirty Girl Fitness.
Not all men find this sort of thing sexual. I know men who specifically find this sort of thing revolting.
Flirty Girl Fitness serves to reinforce the idea that if you're not thin, slim, and wanting to be sexy, you're a failure. This 'excercise' system does nothing to to promote cardiovascular health - which would be really pro-woman, considering that we are more likely to die from heart disease than anything else (whitehouse.gov) . It promotes the idea of "fitness" as in "fitness for a mate".
If you're not already slim, there is no way that you'll gain any health benefit from this class. And if you're overweight, watching this video might make you feel shittier.
I just want to say that expressing concern about prostitution or stripping isn't about "slut shaming" for me, but about the expectations these activities generate. The more they are legalized and accepted into society, the more usually-male exploiters make them a standard for everyone. In certain cases, this can translate into making it difficult or impossible for women to refuse to engage in these activities. For example, if you legalize prostitution, it's no longer sexual harassment to expect a hostess to sleep with clients; it becomes a legally-acceptable condition of employment. Though activities such as pole-dancing classes are portrayed as voluntary and fun, making them look this way paves the way for them to become not just voluntary mainstream, but eventually expected, in some cases in workplaces, like Hooters uniforms became a mainstream thing. The issue first surfaced in Canada with lap dancing. Once it was legalized, ALL strippers had to do it, or lose their jobs.
Of *course* this is about catering to the male gaze. If a person who wishes to attract men acts out her sexuality by "doing" things to "feel sexy", she is performing in a way as to display herself as a sexual object.
It's not that there's inherently anything wrong with that. But it's a position that our culture pushes on women, hard.
Men expressing their sexuality are *usually* sitting back and looking at women. Or they are talking amongst themselves about women. Or they are listening to a woman put on a sexual performance. Men don't, typically, express their sexuality by doing something to feel sexy; men express their sexuality by doing something to consume someone else's expression of sexuality. (Unless they are gay. Among gay men, it's pretty well understood that everyone is both the gazer and the gazee, so gay men both cheerfully objectify each other *and* seek to be the most attractive sex objects they can be, themselves.)
If you contort your body into a sexual position to "feel sexy", it actually doesn't matter if there's a man looking at you or not; you are trying to feel like a sexually desirable object. If you were the subject, you'd be objectifying someone else. Being "sexy" is being sexually desirable, and "desirable" means that someone desires you, making you the object of desire. (There is confusion on this point. When people talk about "objectifying" others or being a "sex object", sometimes they mean object in the sense of thing, and sometimes they mean object in the grammatical sense of what is being acted upon as opposed to what is acting. I *always* use "sex object" to mean "the object of someone's sexual desire", not "a non-person thing that someone desires." Humans can be the object of the sentence, but humans cannot be and should not be objects in the sense of "things".)
So the very act of wanting to feel sexy is the act of wanting to be a desirable object. And if you're an object of desire, someone else is the subject of desire, meaning that they desire you. So someone else, presumably male unless you're a lesbian, is looking at you to make you "sexy" (if a woman is completely alone on an alien planet, can she be sexy? If a tree falls in a forest, does it make a sound? Sexy only exists when there is an observer.) Or, you're imagining the someone else who could be looking at you.
Now, inherently there's nothing particularly wrong with wanting to be the object of someone's desire. The problem I have with heterosexual relations and subject desire object is that in our culture men are pressured to be subjects and women are pressured to be objects. This is *so* strong in het culture that if a man wants to be sexy, he's often immediately thought of as probably gay! Because a man could never be the object of a *woman's* gaze, so if a man is seeking to be a desirable object he *has* to be looking for a male subject to desire him. Women can't be subjects and straight men can't be objects. (It's a problem with lesbians, too, in that -- at least what I saw in my brief experiences in lesbian subcultures -- there's a *very* strong presumption that no one should be an object, and therefore no one gets to be a subject. It's wrong to want your girlfriend to be physically attractive because that's surrendering to the patriarchy! Or something.) And the imbalance is inherently unfair.
Men crave the experience of being objects because they never get it. It's why so many of them genuinely don't understand why it bothers women to be hit on constantly, to have people whistling at them on the street or complimenting their sexual attributes. They are *starving* for the experience of being a desirable object, but it is denied to them by a culture that tells them "if you are a desirable object only men will desire you", or "only women seek to be objects, so if you want to be an object, that makes you effeminate, and an un-man." Women, on the other hand, are forced to be objects all the time, even when we don't want to, and the cultural pressure on men to make them refuse to be objects for us means that the most desirable objects for us to gaze on... aren't actually doing it for us. Gay men aren't really hotter than straight men, but gay men try to be attractive objects and straight men don't.
It would be fair if we did things the way gay men do, where everyone is both a subject and an object. It would be fair, but possibly unpleasant, if we did things the way lesbians do, where no one is a subject or an object. But the way we do things defines men as subjects and women as objects, and that's not fair at *all*. So I don't tell women that no, you can't exercise by dancing around a pole, but I *do* feel that there's something very unpleasant about the fact that only women are encouraged to exercise in a way that makes them feel sexy. I mean, gay guys know how to work out in a way that makes them feel sexy; why can't straight men do that?
(And yes this is full of wild generalizations, and yes, I know you're a straight man who loves to dress up in attractive clothes for his wife, and yes, I know you're a woman and your boyfriend is totally hot and knows it. I am talking about general trends, averages, not every single individual on the planet.)
You just blew my mind a little with your post.
Kudos.
Brilliant, thank you for laying it out like this. I was really struggling to rationalize and explain my disgust with videos like this and my need to not condemn or limit women's behavior.
I second Dominique.
This isn't about slut shaming. I would think that anyone who calls herself/hisself a feminist would be past that already.
I have absolutely no beef with women who want to be sexual. With women who want to have sex, with men or women. Even with women who don't want to have sex.
What I have a problem with is when feminine sexuality is defined as ONLY visually performative.
Unlike some posters, I have been a stripper. I have given lap dances, fully naked.
It was not sexual for me or for any of the other dancers I worked with. It was a way of making money. Sure, it was fun to spin around a pole - but at the end of the day our thongs were dry.
No one found it arousing, except the men.
It can be exhilarating to be the center of attention, to be admired for your body. But after a while, I began to be disturbed by the job.
It was a world fueled by money and greed and insecurity and violence and depression and addiction.
Now, we live in America and I fully support everyone's choice to be consumed by whatever drug they want, whether it's money, fame or fashion.
That's not up for debate. No one wants to take away your right to choose.
"What I have a problem with is when feminine sexuality is defined as ONLY visually performative."
...
"Sure, it was fun to spin around a pole - but at the end of the day our thongs were dry.
No one found it arousing, except the men."
Two of the best statements I've read on this subject. Clear, conscise, and ringing with simple truth.
"What I have a problem with is when feminine sexuality is defined as ONLY visually performative."
...
"Sure, it was fun to spin around a pole - but at the end of the day our thongs were dry."
Two of the best statements I've read on this subject. Clear, conscise, and ringing with simple truth.
I realized that I accidentally left on the bit about men being aroused...I think the statement is clearer and more powerful without it:
"Sure, it was fun to spin around a pole - but at the end of the day our thongs were dry."
This could be a slogan for teaching men and women alike about how to become aroused and enjoy their own sexUAL (instead of sexy) feelings as agents and subjects--not objects ALONE--of sexuality.
Oh, and Alara Rogers.
You said that better than I could have.
Try a hula or Tahitian dance class sometime if you think moving your ass slowly in circles isn't a workout. It's harder than moving fast.
Anything that gets people to exercise is good. If you enjoy pole dancing classes, they can be a great workout. I haven't taken them.
I also agree with other posters that if it makes women more confident with their bodies and sexuality that is a good thing.
and this is the problem I think they were suggesting, and why feminists think the male gaze is problematic. We can't picture a woman's sexuality not defined by the gaze. and I think that's sad and wrong. No, there may not be "one natural true sexuality" but to say this one version of sexuality is okay because you can't picture another says VOLUMES about our culture and its problems.
I also agree with other posters that if it makes women more confident with their bodies and sexuality that is a good thing.
But come on -- this is an old trick in the marketing book. A usually male company succeeds in selling products to women largely by telling them that it will make them more confident -- the subtext being that without it, they will, and should, not be confident with their bodies.
Just look at the success of Victoria's Secret. Bras that add a cup size or two might boost the confidence of a teenager who's self-conscious about a flat chest. Does that mean that kind of product is beneficial for women? Does that mean it was born of some good-hearted generosity toward women? Hell no. But that's the marketing angle: Make it indispensable.
Feminism isn't just about selling women objects and sexual tools to make them feel good about themselves. Madison Avenue has been doing that for decades. One of the questions here is, though, why do these classes succeed, and on whose ideas of sexuality are they predicated? Why and how do they make women feel better about their bodies?
I don't purport to know the answers to those questions, but I think it's antithetical to radical feminism to just say "but it makes them happy" and leave it at that.
This causes me a great deal of distress.
It seems that now, more than ever, women (not girls as they like to say) are constantly being bombarded with images of sex-perfection. The perfect woman, the male ideal of the perfect woman is unattainable. And we shouldn't want to get there.
I live in Los Angeles. Pole "dancing" classes are popping up like tumors. Every woman in my office has taken a class and they rave about how great it makes them feel. Why did you not feel good before? You have accomplished so much, you are intelligent, you're active, you're alive and vibrant. Why this to feel good about yourself? It's really strange how deepl,y ingrained the need to be sexually appealing to men is.
I put dance in quotation marks because I was a dancer and don't consider this dancing. Pole-tricking, pole-work, pole-movement yes, dancing no. It is a good workout, but climbing anything is. Go mountain climbing, see something beautiful, hiking get outside, that too is not boring. I always recommend ballet, age doesn't matter. Why pole "dance?"
It really does represent something specific. There is no way to get around that. To pretend it doesn't is dishonest.
The strippers I know who teach it are doing what they do best, hustling. It's what they do. They've hustled on one side and now they're hustling on the other. They always sell it as confidence-building and getting in touch with your sexuality, but they know they won't get you in any other way. The only way to really get in touch with your sexuality is to work through you. Swinging around on a pole in big shoes is not going to do it; not and make a lasting impression.
I have also been involved with the adult industry.
I am no longer, but I was. I've met and befriended strippers and adult actresses. They're trying to get by and I feel like this is just saying that their struggle is futile. It's saying that this is a joke and no one really cares about the real problems that the industry causes to the worker, the families it affects, the relationships. It really is all connected.
Would women go to these classes if they were marketed solely as a workout? I really don't think so.
I am not a great writer so this probably came out all wrong.
But really, this just seems like a hustle, and women are buying into it without asking, why.
Why not jungle gym for adults? That would be fun.
i don't think the women you know didn't feel good about themselves before but rather have a new found feel good thing. if they didn't think they could climb a mountain and then did you'd hear much the same rhetoric about how good and confident they feel. as for your go climb a mountain assertation... not everyone can. there are people who don't live close to hiking trails, or who's hiking trails are simply not safe, or cannot afford the proper shoes.
No, these women did not feel good. I know these women, I watch these women. They are women who want to be loved. This makes them feel that they can compete.
Everyone has access to something. The streets are crowded with cars, but people still bike.
I think getting outdoors and being physical is a good way to combat boredom in workout routine.
You don't have to be locked in a room swinging around and climbing a pole to get exercise.
What I was saying is, just about everyone can get outside.
I know women who felt amazing doing stripping work. The plural of anecdote is not data.
Personally... I have lots of issues with this.
My best friends (women) and I frequently do the Carmen Electra Aerobic Striptease tapes... (I know, I know). But the thing is... we don't do it in front of men, and don't plan to. We do it because it's more fun than the repetitive treadmill/bike/elliptical routine... it has music, dancing, and I guess some of it is sexy. Most of it, though, is so ridiculously cheesy that we enjoy just laughing at it. "Remember, putting your finger in your mouth might not burn calories, but it looks hot!"
I do it, while at the same time understanding that I shouldn't take it seriously. If women do these things thinking that they HAVE to in order for men to find them sexy, that's one thing.
I really do see it as a workout (at least, for myself). Then again... I guess the premise of these gyms (and stripper classes, and the like) don't follow the same principles...
Feministing
meet
Footloose
I have to agree with the author of this post. I believe that while striptease classes may feel empowering and feel 'safe and sexy, away from the male gaze' they are based on just that - the male gaze. This is just another example of sexy leaving out the definition of female pleasure and basing it instead on what males demand. Classes like these limit our own creativity about what is sexy for us, and what is sexy for the person we are with. Imitating women who get paid to act sexy for men - this does not seem empowering to me.
Someone else had mentioned that feminists walk a fine line between "wearing revealing clothing is a sign of the patirarchy and wearing covering clothing is a sign of the patriarchy" and I have to agree.
It seems that we are damned if we DO think it's okay for women to wear revealing clothing and be highly sexualized (because then feminists argue it's only for a male's pleasure and not really conducive for a women's personal development) and yet damned if DON'T think it's okay if women wear revealing clothing.
I personally think it's okay for a woman to wear whatever she wants or dance however she wants, and to hear a feminist say that it's wrong because it plays up to men's ideas of sexualized behavior seems just as damning as those who would have us cover up to AVOID men's ideas of sexualized behavior.
It bothers me, saddens me, and angers me that some feminists would cast women who want to take a pole dancing class in a negative manner, for whatever reason.
Aren't we supposed to be in this thing together????