Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    re .0
    
    If you don't get all of the answers here, there should be some books
    around that might help you.
    
    Not all men feel the same way about ANYTHING, so all that can be
    offered is personal experience and anecdotes/generalizations.
    
    Bachelor parties have always struck me as:
    	- a result of enormous peer pressure
    	- a last hurrah to mark a significant transition point
    	- a reluctant good-bye to bachelorhood
    	- all of the above
    	- and more...
    
    Not every bachelor party has strippers. But some do. If you and your
    fiance can't discuss this calmly, you're in for a tough road ahead.
    Yes, there is sometimes a double standard for men's and women's
    behavior. Some men enjoy looking at scantily clad women, but don't want
    other men looking at their wife/fiance the way they know *they* look at
    such women. I always thought it was a pride/possession thing. Or, if
    you want to get deep, its a seperation of wife/mother/whore. We women
    are often capable of playing all of the roles, but men are not always
    comfortable acknowledging this. It is as if no man should see a married
    woman flaunt her sexuality except her husband. Yet many men enjoy
    seeing other women flaunt their sexuality as casual flirtation or
    straight burlesque and beyond... And still it is even harder for some
    men to accept their mothers' sexualities. Despite knowing that that's
    how they arrived on the scene. If your man feels that way, you might
    want to try to adjust... its very deep rooted in society and won't
    change overnight.
    
    Other "theories" in the differences between men and women suggest that
    men are more visually oriented than women, and thus many more men enjoy
    viewing women in terms of their sexuality. Feminists often call this
    objectification. However, many men who are avid Playboy subscribers
    really CAN seperate the women in the pix and on stage from their wife,
    whom they love. They are not you, they do not hold the same weight in
    his life, you are the woman he loves, they are simply women he enjoys
    watching as a pasttime.
    
    I think you're putting your fiance in a tough spot. If he hangs with a
    crowd of men who enjoy the ritual of the bachelor party with ALL the
    trimmings, then its a tough call to go or not go, to tell you or not
    tell you, if he knows you hate them. He chose a lie. Not the best
    choice, but I can understand why. Sometimes, if you'd rather not know,
    its best not to ask. And if you DO ask, be ready to handle the worst.
    And ask yourself if its really worth fighting over.
    
    As for his OWN bachelor party... I think it might be better to ask him
    about it, than to tell him how it should or shouldn't be. And think
    really hard over whether its worth fighting over. If you would prefer
    that he not sleep with anyone that night, tell him if its important.
    But to ask him not to look at the entertainment... if its something he
    and his friends had been looking forward to, I think you're gonna be in
    for quite a discussion.
    
    YOU have an engagement ring on YOUR finger. Does he? If not, he's not
    married, not taken, not obligated, until he says "I do"... unless you
    two have discussed it previously. There are a LOT of men who feel this
    way. Better to discuss it with him than to be wondering. And if this
    makes you uncomfortable, a bit more discussion is in order.
    
    Last rambling comment... male strip shows for women, such as
    Chippendales, are FUN!!! And they are relatively tasteful. The men are
    usually very attractive and the local shows usually have men who have
    learned the audience well enough to know how far to go. I've been
    twice. One was too raunchy - I ascribe that to ME being out of place.
    The other was a blast. Me and mom sat in the back and watched the other
    women go crazy. The men danced as they stripped, smiled, entertained,
    teased, embarrassed the shy women who had been pushed to the front,
    obliged the more daring women by dancing with them in g-strings. Its
    not something to get hot and bothered over, and it probably will not
    affect most women the way a female stripper affects some men. There ARE
    some basic differences between the sexes that aren't going to change
    any time soon.
    
    I know I'm not a man, and my experiences with men aren't vast or all-
    inclusive. But while I can understand your fears, I think you need to
    talk a bit more to your fiance first and foremost. In some marriages,
    the couple dynamics are those of opposite, complementary people. You
    and your fiance may have a lot of opposite views and how you and he
    view the whole category of "visual stimulation" may be something to
    settle between you.
    
    I wish you all the best in your pre-nups and nuptials and all the years
    ever after. 
    
    One last thing: if I were a guy with a lot of male friends and I knew
    there would be a stripper at my bachelor party, I think I'd be honest
    about it. And I'd assure her that I wasn't going to have sex with the
    woman, but that it was just part of the celebration. And I would expect
    her to know me well enough to be comfortable both with this aspect of
    me and how my friends hang out, and with the trust in our relationship.
                 
    Oh: and if possible, ask him to have the bachelor party TWO days before
    the wedding. A hung-over groom is not a fun sight.
    

 Wow- it seems like you are pretty excited about the whole thing. It's
really not such a big deal. Let's see if I can answer your questions.

>    Guys out there, please tell me what the big deal is about having
>    stippers  at your bachelor party

 It's not a big deal. Guys like to see naked women.

>One of the  first questions is: If you knew that your
>    wife-to-be would be quite upset if you had strippers at your bachelor
>    party, would you:

>    a. not have strippers at the party.  b. tell her there won't be any
>    strippers but have them anyway.  c. not have the bachelor party, opt for
>    a jack and jill instead

 Probably a. It's not that big of a deal.

 As far as bachelors who think "anything goes" during the bachelor party,
I'm not one of them unless it is agreed upon beforehand by the man and woman, 
that during the bachelor/bachelorette party "anything goes." My wife
would never have agreed to such a thing, and it's unlikely I would have
done anything about it if she did. But I'm not everybody.

>    How would you feel if your wife-to-be went to a strip joint at her 
>    bachelorette party? 

 So what? Is she going to marry one of the strippers or me? (Of course, I'd
be quite pissed off if she went there and had sex, but looking is ok.)

 You seem to be really irked that your fiance's story and what you subsequently
heard turned out not to jive. Moreover, you seem to be more upset about the
fact that they went to a strip joint than the fact that there were discrepancies
in the story. If it were me, I'd find out if he knew beforehand that they were
going to a strip joint, and if so, why he didn't say so. You do seem to be
sufficiently hot on this subject that he may have thought that not telling
you was better than getting you all excited about it. No doubt he just wanted
to go and have fun and not get hassled. Do you think he should have missed his
friend's bachelor party because his fiance doesn't like strip joints?

>    Another reason is that I have never been to a strip joint and have no 
>    desire to go to one.

 I suspect that a large part of your reaction stems from the fact that you don't
know what such a place is like. You really seem almost paranoid, as if the
moment he walks through the door his penis will take over and he'll be 
defenseless against his impulses. It doesn't work that way. First of all,
there are very strict laws about touching the girls (or the girls touching the
patrons.) Most places like having their liquor license and license to operate
and won't jeopardize such things just because some guy's gonna get married.
They see that stuff all the time. Of more concern is a private party with
a stripper (IMO). Those seem to be about the only times you hear about actual
sex acts occurring, though certainly exceptions abound. FWIW- I've been to 
several bachelor parties, and during none of them did any sex acts occur.

>*****BUT****  if my fiance goes to a strip joint,
>    you can  bet your butt I'm gonna go to one. Why?? So I can feel better
>    perhaps? 

 I personally think you'd feel alot better about things if you went to a
strip joint first. Then you might not worry so much. It's really nothing
to get worked up over.

 You have a whole bunch of questions rolled up into one paragraph. I'll
try just giving answers.

 Men don't _have_ to go to strip joints. Men like to, to see naked female
bodies undulating before them. Men tend to like variety, and many men
will go to watch rather than to actually have an affair. It satisfies their
thirst for variety while maintaining their promise of fidelity. I don't
think that men as a whole go to strip joints because their home life is 
miserable. You seem to be viewing this phenomenon as a reflection on you;
it's not about you. I don't think that you'd tend to feel like "more of
a man" for having gone to a strip joint. After all, you pay a fortune for
drinks and what's the best thing you can get out of it? An unsatisfied
erection. And of course men don't dread going home after going to a strip
joint (well, some might); usually it's just the opposite. Their appetite
is very high and they can't wait to satiate their hunger. :-)

>    I have been told I'm pretty enough to be a model...so think that that
>    would  keep a man home?  NOT!   Why the strip joints????

 That's because it's not about you. No matter how beautiful you are,
your husband will always want to look at other women. If for no other
reason than to compare and say, "Nice, but I've got better!" It's about
men, and biology and hormones and drive. And lest I forget, self-control.
Please realize your man is NOT saying you don't measure up; indeed, he's
saying quite the opposite. He wants to marry you, does he not? Not some
stripper, not some pinup, not one of his coworkers or the woman at the
coffee shop- YOU. Accept that. Realize that he finds value in you beyond
your sexual allure and pleasant countenance.

>    Why is a guy offended if his s.o. suggests something similar to a strip 
>    show..say, dress up in some leather outfit and hit a sleazy
>    nightclub... together?  Right away, its: Theres no way you're going out
>    dressed in that!! 

 Er, not all guys would be offended by such a suggestion. Indeed, many would
be quite excited at the prospect. My guess is that he wants to keep you for
himself; doesn't want to provide ogle-fodder for the other bar patrons.

 The Doctah

    I'll agree with my learned associate, Mr. Levesque, it's really
    not such a big deal - to the man.  Believe me.  My bachelor party was
    attended by a bunch of Marines from the 2nd Division HQ.  I can't tell
    you what happened because it would be immediately deleted as being
    against every rule in the book at Digital.

    I appreciate and respect the feminine perspective on this issue .. but
    .. I ask:  If your husband to be is by all practical standards and
    measures a "model" husband with the single exception of the fact that
    he had this "fling" prior to his marriage - could or should this REALLY
    have any lasting effect on the long term relationship between the two
    of you.

    I may ask - with all respect - why do women go to the male strip
    joints?  Perhaps you can find your answer there.

    As with Ms Foster ... I S-T-R-O-N-G-L-Y suggest that if you can't talk
    to your fiance about this - and *now* - you're probably in for more
    problems than a simple bachelor party.

    Bubba

    
    Why do WE go?
    
    Well, some of us go on a dare, or because we're dragged by our friends.
    Some of us go from less physically coercive peer pressure. Some of us
    go out of curiosity.
    
    Having gone TWICE, I have gone because it is fun, amusing, different.
    Because its a place where I am allowed to ogle and rate and rank men to
    my heart and libido's content. Because, at the drop of a dollar, I can
    get a shimmee from a hunky guy and feel a shiver. I can, if I want,
    pretend that he finds me attractive. Or, I can simply appreciate what a
    dollar can buy. Or, I can find amusement in watching the other women
    act nuts. Its a people watching adventure of the highest sort. For $25,
    I can get my picture taken with a semi-naked hunk. For $50-$100, I can
    find out if it was a sock or not.
    
    I have not made it a habit. Mainly because its most fun in a group, and
    I don't have a lot of friends who would go, and there aren't a lot of
    clubs that have them locally, and I have standards anyway and won't
    just go "anywhere". Similarly, I think I'd be uncomfortable if my man
    went regularly, but I know he's been to several bachelor parties with
    strippers, and it doesn't bother me. I put it in that nebulous category
    of "male bonding" and leave it alone. In fact, I think the best thing
    to do is laugh about it. Because if someone who's there describes it,
    it will probably be worth quite a few.
    
    If my bachelorette party included Michael Dorn or Carl Weathers jumping
    out of a cake in a g-string, doing a scarf dance around me, scented
    with Lagerfeld, I wouldn't complain. Not a bit. In fact, a bit of seat
    mopping might be in order, and I might have my underwear bronzed
    afterwards. However, Pee Wee Herman wouldn't impress me. And from what
    I've heard, some of the strippers who do bachelor parties are NOT to
    die for. 
    
    

>If your husband to be is by all practical standards and
>    measures a "model" husband with the single exception of the fact that
>    he had this "fling" prior to his marriage - could or should this REALLY
>    have any lasting effect on the long term relationship between the two
>    of you.

 As far as I'm concerned, if the woman tells her husband to be that she does
not want him to sleep with anyone during his bachelor party and he does anyway,
then I don't think that bodes well for the long term relationship. After all,
if he is willing to ignore her feelings once, why won't he a second time? A 
third? Etc. 

 BUT- I don't think that having sex and viewing a stripper are in the same
league.

    
    I just got engaged.  And we don't think we'll have a bachelor party or
    a bridal shower.  It seems like so much to-do and expense, when we'd
    really much rather focus on the ceremony and reception.  We're talking
    about each step and coordinating our vision (VERY difficult - it's
    resulted in screaming at least once so far, and I *never* scream, as a
    rule) of what it should look like.
    
    But if he wanted a bachelor party, and was really attached to having a
    stripper, I'd try to help him pick one out, meet them, coordinate with
    them what I was comfortable with them doing, etc.  
    
    Of course, if he wanted more than a stripper (a lay, perhaps), we'd
    definitely have to talk about it.  The words "committed" and
    "monogamous" don't just evaporate for an evening then coalesce again
    the next day as if nothing were wrong.
    
    I understand that some men I've been in relationships with have enjoyed
    pornographic movies, magazines, etc.  Some had been to strip joints,
    but the issue didn't come up while we were together, so I can't say how
    I'd react - but I've thought of visiting one *with* someone just to see
    what it's like - I'll bet it's not anywhere near as fascinating as I
    imagine, and thus far less of a threat than most women may think.
    
    But as Mark said, that wasn't about *me*.  Men seek something in these
    things that a stead relationship can't provide.  My fiancee says he is
    very strongly attracted by several things in a woman, and one of them
    is *difference*.  If he is in relationship with me, and sees an exotic
    italian or red-hair-and-freckled-irish beauty, he will probably find
    that flash of intrigue or fascination that occurs when men get faced
    with beauty (whether it be in the head, heart, or groin).  And what's
    available for me is to understand it's not *about* me, and it doesn't
    *lessen* me when this happens.  In fact, if it's going to happen and I
    can't stop it, what works is for me to understand it as best I can, and
    not complain when it comes up because if it's a knee-jerk reaction,
    there's nothing he can really do to stop it.
    
    I don't know if, truth be told, I'd be completely mellow if I found my
    fiancee had gone to a strip joint or seen a stripper at a party, but I
    do know that the relationship I'm in is firmly grounded in complete
    communication and full expression.  That's where the resolution of any
    issue starts.
    
    Talk and listen, share how you feel, and see how he feels.
    
    -Jody
    

.6>  As far as I'm concerned, if the woman tells her husband to be that
.6>  she does not want him to sleep with anyone during his bachelor party
.6>  and he does anyway, then I don't think that bodes well for the long
.6>  term relationship.

.7>  Talk and listen, share how you feel, and see how he feels.

Bingo!  Different strokes for different folks [and within the context of
the subject matter of this note that is probably not the right thing to
say, but, point made].  COMMUNICATION is the key.  Nothing more and nothing
less.  With it you have something upon which to base your "theory" without
it you have nothing - and - nothing is what you will in all probability
continue to have.

Bubba

    I'm confused.
    
    I thought the Best Man did all of the arrangements for the bachelor
    party, not the groom himself.
    
    I think there have been many grooms who didn't exactly WANT a stripper,
    but got one anyway. In fact, a lot of grooms have been under relatively
    strict orders not to get too drunk, but because their friends had other
    plans for them, it just didn't work out that way...
    
    Then again, a Jack 'n' Jill is probably best planned by the bride and
    groom. Oh horrors, not another thing to plan... Yipes.

    In this case, the best man lives far away and unemployed at the moment,
    so  he most likely will not plan any bachelor party. HOWEVER, there are
    quite a  few men-folk here (my brother included) wondering about the
    bachelor party.  My fiance and I have discussed this. I have told him
    straight out how I  feel about the whole thing. I did suggest a jack
    and jill but I can tell he  would rather not opt for this. Most likely
    cuz he thinks it won't be "as  fun".  A male friend of both of ours
    called me the other day and said to me :  Do you mind if we give Dave a
    little party? And then I said: Well, if there  aren't gonna be any
    strippers there, why not? So this friend then says: Oh  C'mon!! Let the
    guy have some fun will ya! Whereupon we were on the phone  for 1/2 hour
    half arguing about the "morals" of a "little party".  I was  bombarding
    him with the usual" "can't guys have ANY fun by themselves?"  MUST
    there always be a female present for a guy to have fun?  
    
    Anyway, Its obviously hard for a man to imagine anything bad because
    they  are not standing on the opposite side, where I am standing.  One
    of the  notes talked about  "Its not about me".  I would dearly love to
    believe  that. For me, I guess the whole problem is that I feel that he
    doesn't see  me as being exotic or voluptuous (sp?) or beautiful or
    sexy if he goes out  to see women like that.  Its an incredible blow to
    one's self-esteem. 
    
    And about the note that mentioned about driving up a guy's sex drive. 
    I can't speak for other women but personally, I would like a guy to get 
    turned on by ME, not get turned on by something/someone else and then 
    coming to me as a way of relieving himself. C'MON!!! What an insult! 
    Like, I'm gonna be standing there with seamed stockings, garter, black 
    leather outfit, etc.. and have the guy say: Excuse me, Let me go
    somewhere  and get excited first and I"ll be back.   Don't you think it
    would be nice  to get excited by what you have in the first place? am I
    making sense or  what! 

    re:.0
    
    I can see an agreement of "no sex with the strippers" but I can't
    understand why a wife-to-be would object to having them there for
    eye candy.

    
    
     I have always hated the practice. I think bachelor parties and strip
    joints cater to carnal side of the male nature, and we could all use
    a little less of that..
    
    David

    
    Hey luv, you're making plenty of sense, BUT, you're not hearing what
    Mark, Jody and Jerry are saying... or rather you're not accepting it.
    And if you've fallen hard for a man who DOES enjoy LOOKING AT other
    women, clothed or unclothed, you're in for a hard road if you don't
    learn to deal with it.
    
    I think your fiance is making it very clear that he'd like to have the
    "traditional" bachelor party. Which is traditionally raunchy.
    
    I wish I knew how to make you feel more comfortable with this
    situation. And I say this because I think that might be an easier road
    than changing your fiance. 
    
    No, women are not necessary for men to have fun, but scantily-clad
    women ARE a traditional part of the bachelor party to many people.
    While many women don't like this or approve of it, you really need to
    ask yourself why it matters to you what HE does.
    
    I sense that you're allowing this tradition to make you a bit insecure
    about your own packaging. Don't fall for it. You're FINE! And he loves
    you. He wants to marry you. So, you DO have what he wants. And, if
    you've tried dressing in slinky stuff and "it worked", then you have all
    the proof you need.
    
    BUT: there are still various things that could "conspire" to get your
    fiance/soon-to-be-husband to a strip show. He could be attending
    someone else's bachelor party. He could be attending someone's birthday
    party. He could be fantasizing about something and need to get it out
    of his system without telling you if he thought it would hurt you. He
    could get roped into it by friends or co-workers. Or, he could be
    looking for ideas... Or, as Mark said, variety.
    
    Now: as for morals... be careful with that one, its double-edged.
    If you're willing to wear leather&lace then you're willing to play the sex
    kitten. Obviously that's your private business, but it also means that
    your fiance likes this. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that
    he's marrying you for many other equally good reasons. It would still
    not make sense to assume that he doesn't enjoy looking at women who
    pose as sex kittens. Its not immoral. In fact, just because YOU don't
    like it doesn't make it "wrong"... it just means he needs to be
    discreet about it since it makes you uncomfortable.
    
    In your mind, you need to figure out: what difference does it really
    make if he:
    	a.) has a stripper whom he doesn't touch at his bachelor party
    	b.) sees strip shows once a year due to his activities with 
            friends.
    
    Obviously, its not going to keep him from marrying you. He's already
    been to AT LEAST one. If you think back, you'll probably find that it
    didn't ruin your sex life the last time, either. 
    
    Now, you've also got to realize that its NOT competition. They aren't
    you, they don't compare to you they aren't the woman he's marrying. If
    he wanted to marry a strip-tease artist, he probably could have done
    so. This is not to say that you can't study Josephine Baker, grab some
    bananas and try it yourself. He'd probably enjoy it. And so would you.
    Its FUN! But for him, part of the fun will be being with you. And no
    one in the world can do that but you.
    
    One last thing about how its different: when your fiance goes to a
    strip show for a bachelor party, he is NOT alone, as he is with you.
    His friends don't gather round to watch the two of you. He doesn't poke
    his friends in the ribs when you walk in the room, or wink, or dare
    them to pinch you or stick money in your shirt. A part of what makes
    the bachelor party fun is that its guys at their worst, and enjoying
    an excuse to act that way. Whether its drinking or checking out women
    or any other vice, it has very little to do with you, and EVERYTHING to
    do with HIM.
    
    If you don't want a man who has fun "with the guys", and your fiance
    enjoys the camaraderie of a bachelor party, you've got a major problem
    to work out.  And not just with him, but inside yourself.  You can't
    ask him to give up things he likes because you don't like them, any
    more than he could ask you to give up Harlequin Romances if you like
    reading them. And there are PLENTY of men who would feel quite
    "inadequate" if they felt that they were being constantly compared
    to the stalwart Romeo's of a Harlequin Romance.  If its absolutely
    critical to you that you marry a man who HATES and ABHORS strip shows,
    then I think you need to do a bit more hunting before you settle down.
    If you're going to tell a man who is mildly entertained by them that
    you won't stand for it, then you're already set on a road to disaster,
    because you're basically telling him what he can and can't do, and
    what is and isn't acceptable, INSTEAD of negotiating.  Its a losing
    scenario. He either has to lie to you, or give up something that he
    considers fun and HARMLESS. After all, there's no "Thall shalt not look
    at other women after you get married" commandment. 
    
    Please try to come to terms with this aspect of your fiance. Better
    still, sit down CALMLY with him and ask him to explain what a bachelor
    party is like, and what makes it fun. And do it without bringing up
    "morals" or any arguments for why you object. Then think about it. At
    least for 24 hours. Then, ask another man, like a father or an uncle,
    or some other "red-blooded" male for a second opinion. 
    
    Marriage IS about fidelity and monogamy. Its a great way to avoid AIDS!
    And it includes a LOT of compromising. But there have to be wins on
    both sides for it to work. Some married men need to have space to look
    at women without incurring the wrath of their wives in order for the
    marriage to work. Some men look more than others. But a man who LOOKS
    at other women is not necessarily a husband who doesn't love you.
    

    re .10

>    of the  notes talked about  "Its not about me".  I would dearly love to
>    believe  that. For me, I guess the whole problem is that I feel that he
>    doesn't see  me as being exotic or voluptuous (sp?) or beautiful or
>    sexy if he goes out  to see women like that.  Its an incredible blow to
>    one's self-esteem. 

    Sounds like your self-esteem isn't riding very high anyway if you're
    worried about some sleazy stripper.  A guy can, and will, get turned
    on over many visual stimuli, and they don't necessarily have to have 
    their cloths off.  Heaven help women if they ever stop.  It is not 
    his job to "make you happy" and "build your self-esteem".  If you 
    think it is, you've got a lot of work to do.  If you can't trust him 
    out of your sight, the marriage is already in a _lot_ of trouble and 
    you'd better start looking at where the _real_ problem is.  

    Bottom line is, he is _marrying_ YOU.  That is the biggest complement
    a man can pay a woman.  If he isn't someone you can trust, don't marry
    him.  If he has to keep cow-towing to your every whim for you to trust
    him, he'd better run for cover _now_.

    If you are worried about him near other women, just tell him that
    he'd better keep it where it belongs or you'll cut it off and keep
    it where you can keep an eye on it ;^).

    fred();

    	The strippers have a purpose. They satisfy the desire to be a
    'peeping tom'. They dance for each man individually. I've seen men
    fight over a stripper who wasn't interested in either. I know women who
    stripped naked with kids in school. Great moms with husbands. Women who
    kept themselves in teriffic shape and then went out to make $1500-2000
    a week so the kids could everything that she and hubby never had as
    kids. One woman's husband had never seen her strip act......trust is
    the key.
    
    	To the base noter: Don't worry about it. Others before me have said
    perfectly. This is NOT a reflection on you. YOU are making it a
    reflection on him AND you. With AIDS as rampant as it is, he should be
    smart enough not to have sex with a hooker. Any women who screws her
    clients is not a stripper, shes a hooker. She is a dangerous person.
    You probably don't want to marry a guy who'd jump on a hooker and
    chance endangering himself, more importantly......you. If he's just
    gonna watch....let him....tell him there ain't nothin' out there better
    than what he's going to enjoy for the rest of his life.
    
    	After 18 years of marriage, I love to look atother women. My wife
    points them out, especially my fantasy women (long legged redheads).
    But there isn't one I'd trade for my wife. She's truly the most
    beautiful woman ever created (IMO). The fun for you should be in
    knowing that another woman could never make him as happy as you can.
    
    	Warning......I don't know you, but this is something that has
    created incredible pressure on your relationship. You should get it
    resolved without anger. I sense that your relationship may already be
    on shaky ground and you're trying to prevent the underpins from
    collapsing. If they are to collapse, it's better it happen now than six
    months from now...........I wish you well.
    
    K

    
    	This discussion is very interesting....
    
    	Interesting because there is a phenonema called "sexual addiction"
    a component of which is the objectification of people, as is done
    in a strip joint. Now, while some men (and women) can hold their
    liquor, others are addicted to the stuff. I wonder what kind of
    guy Anon's husband to be really is, given that this is "such" an
    issue. Yeah, there's her concerns about it - but what's on the other 
    side of the coin? I'd say as much to do with it as Anon's own concerns
    -
    
    	Personally, I dont buy the rationalizations and justifications
    that I've read a lot of in this string. Some of the advice I've
    read is akin to "Well, if your fiance's an alcoholic and you're
    really taken by him, you're just going to have to learn to live with 
    it" That's bullshit...
    
    	Believe it or not, there is a form of "high manogamy" that one
    can attain in relationship, if one believes that is of value and
    wants to work toward it. Not that I or anyone else here have *attained*
    that, just saying that it does exist. And it includes being devoted
    to your wife to the point where - not only do you not go to strip
    joints or buy "Penthouse" or "Playboy" - you simply make it a habit
    not to look at other women in general. If your eyes happen to fall
    upon the ass of a pretty woman in the hall, you look away. By conscious
    choice. Not because you're gay, or "less" of a man, but because
    your devotion to your wife as your *sole* partner has extended even
    to your thoughts and mental conduct.
    
    	Now, I admit this is a far cry from the "norm" for men of our
    society, which uses sex and the objectification of women (and men)
    rampantly to sell products. I'm sure that people will "balk" at
    the idea - "dedication to my wife even in my choice of thought".
    I'm not presenting this to put anyone down, just to show that a way 
    does exist in stark contrast to most of what's been written in reply
    here.
    
    	Joe
    
    	

           
    Joe: it takes a special man to do this. Not every man will. It would be
    nice, but I guess most of us are being realistic.
    
    I guess I just sense that if a man IS one of those men who isn't
    going to look at another woman ever again, his wife probably knows it
    going in. And if he is not, then his wife needs to know that as well.
    If you don't want to marry a man who looks at other women, then don't.
    But very often, a woman who expects a man to make a LOT of sweeping
    changes about his fundamental nature starting on the wedding day is in
    for quite a surprise. PEOPLE don't change overnight except from extreme
    trauma. 
    
    An unmarried man who looks at women will continue after marriage unless
    HIS conscience, not hers, dictates otherwise.  Just as marriage doesn't
    *automatically* stop women from reading romance novels, flirting with the
    guys in the office or gossiping to girlfriends if they did so before
    the marriage.
    
    Its wonderful to say: "If you loved her, you'd change." But its simply
    NOT something any spouse should ever assume. And yes, alcoholism is a
    good analogy. If a man is an alcoholic before he gets married, he will
    continue to be one after he marries. Now, if his conscience dictates,
    he may get help and recover. But no amount of nagging, begging,
    scolding or pleading from a woman is going to cure a man who doesn't
    want to be or isn't ready to be cured. Well before the marriage, if you
    KNOW that you don't want to be married to an alcoholic, then don't
    marry one. Trying to change him after the wedding is a long-shot, at
    best.
    
    You can apply the same analogy to a smoker, a social drinker, a
    gambler, a womanizer, or a "man who looks at women" or even a man who
    doesn't put the seat back down. You can lead a horse to water, but you
    can't make it drink. If a man does not want to change, he usually
    won't. And if you "make him", it will cause tension in the marriage,
    because you will have stopped being a spouse and turned more into a
    parent.
    
    This is not to say that you cannot work out a COMPROMISE about
    behaviors which either spouse has which the other finds abhorrent.
    But they must be negotiated to both parties' satisfaction. 
    
    One other thing, Joe. In almost every country and culture that I can
    think of, there are outlets for men who "like variety". In some
    cultures, there is polygamy. In others, there are harems. Others have
    concubines, some have mistresses. There are a LOT of cultures which
    have various forms of erotic dancing. While I would NEVER say that
    EVERY man NEEDS such an outlet, it certainly appears that *many* like
    having it. I think its great for you and your wife if you don't, but if
    you hold yourself up as a standard, an extraordinarily large number of
    American men would fall short of the mark. I personally find it easier
    to accept what I call "innocent lusting" rather than hunt for one of
    those rare men who doesn't look at another woman... especially since I
    know *I* enjoy movies with Carl Weathers, Michael Dorn and Christopher
    Reeves.

    
    
    > looking does not an addiction make
    
     Looking and lusting does Ms Foster. 
    
    David

    re:.16
    
    Is that the addiction du jour?  Sexual addiction?
    
    It's getting to the point where I expect to see people on Oprah who are
    addicted to air.  We've already seen people who are "addicted to food,"
    "addicted to sex," "good women addicted to men who treat them badly,"
    and basically, "addicted to the idea that their addicted to something."

    Bubba, after reading 858.13 and its nomination to the hall of fame. I
    started to think of somethings that are/were traditional amonst the
    stories I have heard of the boonies of Nam. As in going into a brothel,
    or to see the scantly claded women and had their hats, bandana's or
    what ever blessed by the loins of these women to keep their luck from
    not running out. Kinda raunch for luck. 
    
    Like batchlors parties. Your going to go for a marriage to someone that 
    you love. And you want the tradition for many other men before you have 
    gone this route and have successfull marriages. Or at least that is 
    what you are hoping for. 
    
    I have attended a very quiet party of three men who wanted to go see
    the lovely ladies with the small clothing, and the grooms hat was
    blessed. Now I hear its not allowed because of health reasons. 

    
    	Re .17 - "If you hold yourself up as a standard"
    
    	Me? Careful - I never claimed to have personally achieved the
    "high manogamy" I was talking about. I just wanted to mention it,
    to contrast a lot of what was being said. I agree with you that
    a marriage wont cure an alcoholic, BTW...
    
    	Re .19 - "addiction du jour?"
    
    	I subscribe to the definition of addiction as "A pathological
    relationship to a mood altering substance or activity that carries
    with it life-damaging consequences". It's easy to see how so many
    things can fit into this model, under the catagory "substance" or
    "activity". Booze and heroin certainly fall under substance, and
    gambling - or going to the "fuzzy grape" - could fall under activity.
    
    	The life damaging consequences part is key to the model. Even
    "noting" can be done addictively - I believe that those of use who
    have been around the conferences for a while know of at least one
    individual who has suffered "life damaging consequences" - loss of job
    - over their relationship to the notes conferences. (I realize this
    can all be rationalized away with "It didnt hurt him that bad -
    he's been better off since he was terminated. Still, in my book,
    "loss of job" fits very neatly under "life damaging consequences")
    
    	The pathological part simply means ya cant stop doin' it....I
    opened the idea of sexual addiction in the context of this note
    string simply to present it for consideration. I dont know the man
    under question, which I tried to punctuate with the analogy to alcohol:
    some men and women can drink "socially" - others cannot. I have no
    idea what the basenoter's fiance's disposition toward being a sex
    addict is or might be.
    
    	Regarding the base noter's concern, my opinion is that if she
    doesnt want her husband_to_be to be arousing his lust over thoughts
    and images of other women, that is *not* too much to ask. Marriage
    and relationship necessarily contain elements of compromise on the
    part of each partner. If there's a lot of difficulty in compromising
    on something that has been asked for, I tend to believe something
    else or more is going on. Kind of like "why would it be such a big
    deal, unless..." 
    
    	I will concede that this is not *necessarily* an addiction.
    It could simply be a problem of maturity, which he'll eventually
    "grow out of". I've seen it happen with some high school friends
    of mine: They got married, bought homes, had children - and stopped
    abusing that substance simply as a matter of course. These guys
    are not addicts. However, there's always another story of someone
    who didnt stop and lost everything - the wife, the home, the family
    structure - who falls neatly into the above definition of "addict".
    
    	Awareness and understanding is the best prevention of tradgedy.
    Often, I'll present my ideas simply to promote an awareness and
    understanding of alternative ideas to what's being currently said.
    
    	"Take what you like and leave the rest",
    
    	Joe

> I never claimed to have personally achieved the
>    "high manogamy" I was talking about. I just wanted to mention it,
>    to contrast a lot of what was being said.

 Your reply seems to be of the ideological purity varieyt whereas others
seem to be more of the pragmatic type. Very, very few people attain your
ideal of high monogamy. It rather reminds one of the idea of fighting
AIDS transmission in teens by making it as difficult as possible for them
to get condoms and insisting they simply abstain (even though in many
cases their parents didn't even abstain.) Ok- if they all abstain then
AIDS transmission plummets. But they aren't, and the results can be tragic.

    
    	re -.1
    
    	On the other hand, it reminds me that one way to stop the spread
    of AIDS among teenagers is to teach them that there's some value
    to "manogamy" - besides the mere fact that it lessens your chance
    of catching something that could kill you.
    
    	"Very very few people attain" it? - of course! It *is* idealogical
    purity, something that many many people do not have. That fact does
    not make it not of value however. The idealistic purity is simply
    in the level of honesty you wish to have with your partner. Perhaps
    very very few people feel this is of much value - they just dont have
    a problem with having this with their wife on one hand, but this
    other stuff is going on on the other. They see no discrepancy in
    that. What does come up, get rationalized away with "It's a guy thing"
    or "I'm Just having fun". Or maybe even "I cant help myself".
    
    	Perhaps it'd be a good thing for a teenager to learn that there's
    *value* in having a high level of honesty in a relationship. And maybe
    even that the greater the level of honesty, the greater the quality
    of relationship they'll have. I saw this modelled on "Roseann" last
    night, (for God's sakes...) where her daughter was quite honest with 
    both her boyfriend and parents over her sexual choices.
    
    This honesty stuff and the value that goes with it can be extended to
    whatever level one feels it's important. I think basenoters gut
    feelings are right on the mark; that her fiance's planned actions are
    basically dishonest and a breach of his comitting to her as the only
    one at some level. She's sensed the discrepancy in that and is
    raising it as an issue. She's saying "how can we have this one one
    hand, with this other stuff going on on the other?" She feels that's
    important, while her fiance' does not.
    
	I would not allude to it being "her problem" by virtue of the
    fact that many many people are only willing to give, basically, the 
    least amount of comittment and honesty to a relationship that they
    can get away with - certainly not a level approaching an ideal of
    any sort. It's not like "C'mon this is the 90's - nobody has even
    the slightest concept of there being any value in an honest, comitted
    monogamous relationship - beyond the level of the 'least they can 
    possibly get away with'". There's lots of people who'll be willing to 
    do more than the "bare minimum" to make a relationship fine, even
    in this day and age.
    
    	Joe

    RE: .23

   >	I would not allude to it being "her problem" by virtue of the
   > fact that many many people are only willing to give, basically, the 
   > least amount of comittment and honesty to a relationship that they
   > can get away with - certainly not a level approaching an ideal of
   > any sort.

    	Correct me if I'm making any improper assumptions, but don't
    you think you might be jumping to conclusions here?  I mean, are 
    you saying that an interest in "this other stuff going on over
    there" (e.g. strip shows) *automatically* means there is a trust/
    honesty problem in the relationship?

    	Is it possible that one might be able to be *completely*
    honest, open and up front about their interests/actions and NOT
    comply with a "higher level of monogamy" model?

    Just curious...

    /Greg (who happens to agree an emphasis on monogamy, commitment
    	    and responsibility is sorely lacking in our popular culture).

    Just a nit....
    
    	If one person has a problem with another's actions and the other
    person does not........it is the first person's problem...not theirs.
    
    	As Lauren pointed out, you must do one of three things:
    
    1. Ignore it
    2. Talk about it and compromise
    3. Break the relationship off
    
    	Once it's in the open, there is risk involved. Dangerous words come
    out....TRUST, LOVE, YOU, ME, US.
    
    	If the guy is gonna climb on another woman in this day and age
    prior to getting married..........he probably ain't worth the space in
    this file.
    
    	If he just watches and has a raunchy, fun time with his friends as
    he departs bachelorhood for the confinment of matrimony......ignore it,
    and stop creating so much stress for yourself. I hope the guy never
    buys a Gallery magazine......
    
    	I'd like to know if the author of the basenote feels the same way
    about magazines, x-rated movies, etc. as she does about strippers and
    places that they work. Maybe it's more than 'just' strippers.
    
    K
    	

    Re: .25
    
    >     If one person has a problem with another's actions and the other
    > person does not........it is the first person's problem...not theirs.
    
    Sorry, but this doesn't wash.  Let me put this crassly enough to get
    the point across: If your wife doesn't think much of the fact that you
    sleep around, your marriage is gonna get pretty rocky unless the TWO of
    you either work it out or get a divorce.  The preferable course, says
    I, is to get it straight before getting hitched so you won't have to
    spend everybody's tax dollars in a divorce court getting unhitched
    later.
    
    -dick

    RE:.25  I usually just read this file, but had to add my own opinion to
    THIS LINE...I TOTALLY agree with what .25 is saying...from JUST what I 
    read here, the basenoters fiance is (I'm drawing a conclusion based
    ONLY on the information available about him here) just your every-day,
    ordinary, average guy who PROBABLY loves his wife-to-be VERY MUCH and 
    wouldn't DREAM of intentionally trying to hurt her...there's obviously
    a MAJOR communications problem here.  Otherwise, why would it bother
    the basenoter so much?  If you love someone enough to marry them, I
    would HOPE that you know him well enough to know whether he can be
    trusted or not.  If you DON'T know each other that well YET, then you
    shouldn't be getting married!!!  From what I can tell, this man is not
    planning to sleep with another woman, and I could hardly blame him for
    not wanting to miss out on his bachelor party!!!  I think this is more
    HER problem than his...I mean, really, lighten up a little, will you? 
    You DON'T want your future husband to miss out on this (!) once-in-a
    lifetime opportunity do you?  Hey...there's only ONE senior prom...how
    would you feel now if you had MISSED IT?  How would you feel if (for
    some strange reason) your SO at the time had WANTED you to miss the
    prom?  (unlikely, I know, but...)  Even if you had a HORRIBLE time at
    the senior prom, at least now you can say that you were THERE, and you
    won't have to wonder for the rest of your life what it would have been
    like...DON'T DO THAT TO YOUR HUSBAND.  Tell him in no uncertain terms
    that you will not tolerate him sleeping with another woman, but that
    you WILL allow him his bachelor party...you don't have to like it, just
    do it.  If you two can't come to some kind of compromise on this issue,
    don't get married until you learn how to communicate better...

    Where is man without tradition? As shaky as a fiddler on the roof!
     
    from: Fiddler on the Roof
    
    

Why do people refer to "the confinement of matrimony"?  Why do people
believe that it is necessary to have a last wild fling before being sold
into the eternal bondage of marriage?  Is the wedding ring really considered
a ball-and-chain?  It's this attitude which I find offensive.

In my view, marriage is a partnership, with mutual commitment and trust.
It's an environment in which two people can flourish and enrich their lives
together.  It should not be viewed as a prison sentence.

If the groom-to-be is of the frame of mind that he had better get his jollies
while he still can (and this implies that he's single and care-free right up
till he says "I do", which in itself is disturbing), I feel sorry for him and 
his bride.  If he's just going along with it because "everyone does it", but 
it's not something he really wants, he should stand up for his own values.

I disagree with those who say that it is the bride-to-be who has the problem.
If this is coming up as an issue now, it is a problem for both of them.

If he is in a committed relationship, married or not, he should not feel
free to cavort with other women.  "Look but don't touch" is ok, as long as
the "looking" is not done in such a way to hurt his partner; and it's her
feelings about the matter which count.

				Steve

    
    	Re .24 -
    
    	Yes, I had considered that possibility. If the other stuff is
    completely acceptable to both partners and they talk about it
    openly (i.e. no secrets) I dont necessarily see an intimacy problem 
    existing.
    
    	I personally feel that's a fringe situation, possibly as much
    so as two people who fit the high monagamy model to a "T". They
    might even be the same thing, cause in both situations, both partners
    are completely honest with each other within the framework of their
    agreed upon moral beliefs they feel are "okay". "Whatever works
    for you (two)" and all...
    
    	Joe
    
    	

    	If marriage is not confinement what the hell is it? It's
    confinement to one other person. It's confinement in the decision
    making process....she/he is confining factor. After marriage, does one
    go to one's best friend ask if it's ok to buy a car then go home and
    tell the wife that 'John' said it was ok and within 'our' budget. Does
    one partner just decide that he or she is going to Bermuda for 4 days
    without asking the s.o.? It's a shared confinement. But that's why we
    marry.....we want the security of that confinement, we want to love the
    one we share the confinement with..
    
    	It's a healthy confinement when it works.......a nightmare when it
    doesn't.
    
    K

    I DO NOT AGREE with that term, confinement. Marriage is not a
    confinement!!  It is not a prison!  I agree that a man has the right to
    choose whether or  not he wants strippers at his party or not, it
    doesn't make him any less of  a man.  If we (and believe me, we will)
    talk this thing through, I'm sure  we  will eventually come to an
    understanding.  Do men think that all fun  and glory end when a
    marriage begins...and is that why they feel compelled  to have that
    "last hurrah"...whatever the hell that implies.  So it would  not
    bother you in the least if your brideto-be had her last hurrah?  Did 
    you watch Cheers the other night? I don't watch it very often but my
    fiance  watched it and he said that one of the characters (forget the
    name)was  woeing in his sorrows because he was going to get married and
    feeling sorry  cuz he won't be with other women for the rest of his
    life. So then, his  fiance (forget her name also...sorry, I don't watch
    the show), happened to  overhear him say this and decides that he has
    24 hours to do whatever he  pleases. He was overjoyed! But when she
    said: the same goes with me. I have  24 hours to do anything I want. He
    started getting a bit nervous! To make a  long story short, he ended up
    watching her apartment all night long! And  she ended up watching HIM
    watch her apartment!  ha! What a riot! 
    
    Anyway, on to something else I must say....
    
    I DO NOT BELIEVE that a man can go into a strip joint and not get
    excited. unless he's stoned drunk, you bet there will be something
    stirring.  To a  woman, its probably just the THOUGHT that someone else
    could get her s.o.  excited is unnerving, hence the hesistation when
    the word "bachelor party" comes around a conversation.  
    
    A reply to a previous noter...my fiance and i have watched x-rated
    movies  together..(ok, I could only stand a few minutes before I would
    start  cracking up!). Anyway, its just I'm not into that type of
    stuff..strip  shows, x-rated magazines or movies.  Maybe I'm just
    uncomfortable with the  whole thing, I don't know. I'll tell ya this
    though...when my fiance and I  are (ahem) together, we have FUN!! And
    believe me, when we get married, its  gonna get even better! I feel
    sorry for people who think marriage is a  confinement...a prison. 
    
    PS: My wedding is 4 months away. I will post another note here at a
    later  time to let everyone know how it worked out. (the party, not the
    sex!) 
    

.32> So it would  not bother you in the least if your brideto-be had
.32> her last hurrah?

Believe it or not ... Not in the least.


Bubba

>Why do people refer to "the confinement of matrimony"?

 Because you confine many aspects of yourself to the bounds your marriage.
No longer can you run off with the boys at a moment's notice. No longer is your
money your own. Decisions are now somebody else's business, too.

>In my view, marriage is a partnership, with mutual commitment and trust.
>It's an environment in which two people can flourish and enrich their lives
>together.  It should not be viewed as a prison sentence.

 Is this always true? It all sounds very idyllic and sweet. One might think
you are still on your honeymoon. (If so, great!)

 It almost sounds like we are having two discussions here: one based on
idealism and philosophy and based on pragmatism and day to day living.
Anyone else notice this dichotomy? I was under the impression the basenote
author was looking for pragmatic advice to help her in her situation as opposed
to what amounts to nice words, intents and feelings but little in the way
of practical advice.

>Why do people
>believe that it is necessary to have a last wild fling before being sold
>into the eternal bondage of marriage?

 This statement is loaded with emotion and connotation, little of which
has a basis in what has previously been said. First of all, "fling" is
a word that carries with it the connotation of sexual relations. Few if
any of the previous notes have been supportive of an "anything goes"
attitude, so where are you getting this from? "Bondage" certainly colors
the impression you're trying to give regarding marriage...

>"Look but don't touch" is ok, as long as
>the "looking" is not done in such a way to hurt his partner; and it's her
>feelings about the matter which count.

 And if she is unreasonably sensitive (like say she insists he work in an
all male office, etc) what then? Is it still her call? You are so firmly
grounded in the binary that it's really difficult to discuss this with you.
A man who doesn't shun other women is "cavorting" with them. Do you really
find this all so black and white?

    
    
    re .0
    
    Don't make the assumption that you are speaking for the majority of
    women here as you may be quite surprised at what you find out.
    When my brother was married last year, all of the women folk went
    to the Palace for the Men in Motion night.  We had a blast.  Gotta
    admit though that at first I really didnt want to go.  Afterall, my
    mom, her mom, my aunts and little sister were going to be there
    right along side me.  Yet after a while, we all found ourselves
    having quite alot of fun.  It was strange, but funny too.  And
    my little sister was bound and determined to get me to dance with
    one of they dancers which I happily did.  Though the difference is
    that there was absolutely no frontal nudity.  So in fact, it was
    not really that much different than hitting the beach.  Though
    it did leave very little to the imagination.  
    
    I think the major difference is that this is an organized event
    that is very well controlled.  The guys would not do anything that
    they did not want to do.  Very little touching was allowed though
    some women were obscene after a few too many drinks.  
    
    I can however understand your feelings too.  I don't think I would
    have a problem with my fiancee to have a stripper to be at his
    bachelor party, but I would not trust him if he decided to sleep
    with her.   There is fun, and there is crossing the line.  
    
    Michele

.0> Speaking for the majority of women, I would feel offended if my s.o.
    went  to a strip joint,

I don't believe that you speak for a majority of women.  I really have
no idea what such a majority might feel, and I find appeals to majorities
and norms as self-defeating anyway; I'm trying to live my own life, and
no one else's, and that means I have to figure out what's right for me
and for my relationship with my sweetie on my own.  What some arbitrary
majority feels really doesn't matter to me; it fails to convince me.
Now, if YOU, on your OWN, speaking for YOURSELF, tell your fiance that
you feel this way, then its a matter of one person communicating their
feelings to another, at what I believe an appropriate level.  No need to
drag in any made-up "majority of women" to explain your feelings; that
sort of rhetoric hinders communication, in my experience, rather than
improving it.

[as I read the notes up to this point, I see Michelle made the same point
as I've been writing, in .35; it wasn't there when I started.]

.32> I DO NOT BELIEVE that a man can go into a strip joint and not get
    excited. unless he's stoned drunk, you bet there will be something
    stirring.  To a  woman, its probably just the THOUGHT that someone else
    could get her s.o.  excited is unnerving,

Nobody denied that a guy in a strip joint would get stimulated, excited;
that's the purpose of such places.  If you don't want your fiance getting
excited at the sight of other women, though, you'd better plan to lock
him up at home; all day, every day.  This culture is chock-full of such
stimulation; companies use it to sell cars, magazines, detergent; women
use it to enhance their lives in areas of self-esteem, job status, male
attractiveness, and dozens of other areas.  Expecting your fiance not to
receive such stimulation does not demonstrate an adequate uinderstanding
on your part of the cultural saturation of such stimulii.  Men live in
this world full of these stimulations; you accept it every time you go
through the grocery checkout.  The strip joint is part and parcel of the
whole cultural package, just a little further out on the scale.  Think
about it from a male perspective; eye candy is everywhere.  What's the
big difference about going into a strip joint?  It's like enjoying an
overly-sweet Grand Marnier truffle once in awhile, instead of a See's 
chocolate; to carry on the (eye-)candy analogy.  I'm not saying I think
this is the way it should be (as a feminist, I dislike the objectification
of anybody); I am saying that this is the world we live in.  Putting a big
emotional stake on the kinds of visual stimulation your fiance receives is
not what looks like a rational strategy for domestic bliss, to me.

DougO

    Re: .27
    
    
>    Sorry, but this doesn't wash.  Let me put this crassly enough to get
>    the point across: If your wife doesn't think much of the fact that you
>    sleep around, your marriage is gonna get pretty rocky unless the TWO of
>    you either work it out or get a divorce.

    Please help me understand this, if the wife DOES NOT have a problem
    with him sleeping around and of course he DOES NOT have a problem with
    it, does it not mean that both agree that there is NO PROBLEM at all
    with his actions, which means there is no reason to work out a
    NON-PROBLEM?

    Re: .25
    
    >     If one person has a problem with another's actions and the other
    > person does not........it is the first person's problem...not theirs.

    Totally agree.  My wife and I have always try to answer two questions
    before attempting to solve the problem:

	1. What is the problem?
	2. and who has the problem?

    Once "WE" both answer both questions, we have always found a solution
    to the problem.

    COMMUNICATION is the key in a relationship.


    Re: Strippers -

    A friend of mine said, "it all comes down to the responsibility of the
    person".  Well, it's true. If you don't believe the other person (e.g.
    spouse) is responsible, then "trust" will be a little shaky.  If there
    is no trust then you got major problems.

    When I met my wife, we both agree that none of us will go to a strip
    joint. Main reason we both agree was that it was not respectful to one
    another.

    Well, when we got engage, guess who helped organize my bachelor party?
    yep, my wife, all the guys took me to a strip joint.  Few weeks ago,
    all our female friends got together and went to a strip joint. I was
    glad my wife went, not once did I question it or even bother me.

    We both talked about "how come it does not bother us like it did when
    we were dating?"  The answer was that when we were dating, we were
    little insecure within ourselves because trust was never the problem.
    Of course, the communication is a whole lot better then when we started
    dating.

    Now, few husbands of the females that went had minor problems with
    their wifes going, yet these guys went to my bachelor party and did not
    think it was problem.  It turned out that the the few husbands are
    insecure.

    Re: Men -

    IMHO I believe this to be true, the female that a men is marrying needs
    to be the following:

	- A wife
	- A friend
	- A mistress
    
    (of course, it should be the same for the men)

    If the wife (or husband) is not one of them, chances are he (or she)
    will look out somewhere else for it.
    

    Carlos

     
    And now another man's perspective. 
    
    I've been married for 12 years. My bachelor party was very "traditional". 
    I didn't plan the party, but I made a decision on how to behave that night.
    My behavior that night had nothing to do with how I felt about my wife or 
    impending marriage.
    
    I enjoyed myself to the fullest that night. My wife never asked about
    it, so I never told her. I also never asked her what she did other than
    her *3* bridal showers. I know that my marriage wouldn't have been any 
    different if I didn't have the party, so what harm did it do?
    
    In conclusion, prior to marriage, my wife got lots of nice gifts, and I 
    got to make 2 new female friends. That is what we both wanted. We've been
    together 12 years. I feel bad for women who get all upset over these
    things because (usually) they're not a big deal. Just because your fiance 
    looks at or touches a naked women doesn't mean he doesn't love you. 
    
    Of course the AIDS factor is a big concern today.
    
    Guy
    

    reply .32

>    I DO NOT AGREE with that term, confinement. Marriage is not a
>    confinement!!  It is not a prison!  I agree that a man has the right to

    It can get that way real fast if one "partner" starts playing head
    games like "if you so much as look at another woman, you are  going
    to destroy my self-esteem".  Marriage is a partnership.  Not a "now
    I have control over you".  Unfortunately too many people think it is.
    That is why so many relationships where the couple were living together
    and getting along fine will break up after they finally decide to get
    married. 

>    started getting a bit nervous! To make a  long story short, he ended up
>    watching her apartment all night long! And  she ended up watching HIM
>    watch her apartment!  ha! What a riot! 

    No.  They ended up calling off the wedding. 

>    I DO NOT BELIEVE that a man can go into a strip joint and not get
>    excited. unless he's stoned drunk, you bet there will be something
    > stirring.  To a  woman, its probably just the THOUGHT that someone
    > else could get her s.o.  excited is unnerving, hence the hesitation 
    > when the word "bachelor party" comes around a conversation.  

    Only to a very insecure woman.  The thing to worry about is if he
    DON'T get excited.  That means he probably won't get all that
    excited over _you_ either.

>    uncomfortable with the  whole thing, I don't know. I'll tell ya this
>    though...when my fiance and I  are (ahem) together, we have FUN!! And
>    believe me, when we get married, its  gonna get even better! I feel
>    sorry for people who think marriage is a  confinement...a prison. 
 
    Don't be too surprised if it isn't.  I suppose everybody's heard
    the old story of the beans in a jar.  Also, many people find that 
    it isn't quite as exciting because after marriage it isn't quite as 
    "naughty".  It is also IMHO at least partially the "naughtiness" 
    that makes the strippers exciting.

    fred();

    Um, excuse me Fred but you say after marriage sex is  not as exciting?
    I feel  sorry for you! Are you one of those people that have to set up
    a "time" to  have sex and have basically regarded it as a "chore"
    rather than something  exciting?  Are you trying to tell me that after
    I get married sex is not  going to be exciting? I think you are
    definatley wrong in that department. as I've said before, its what
    *YOU* bring to it. If you want to believe  that sex isn't as exciting
    after marriage then obviously it won't be.  Hey, I can put on a strip
    show for my husband! I can be spontaneous!  I can take a can of whipped
    cream and (insert sex stuff here) and I can  also (insert sex stuff
    here), hey I've got a million ideas! and I'm not  gonna run out of them
    either! 
    
    

    
    I've heard other men say what Fred was saying. For some people, not
    necessarily you, a small and possibly subconscious part of the thrill
    of pre-marital sex is that its not completely socially acceptable. And
    after marriage, it is. 
                          
    I think it also may change when you're seeing someone all the time, and
    in some ways this is good - I hope sex will be a special pleasure
    throughout my life, and not something I get bored with after a while
    because I can get it any night of the week by just rolling over and
    saying "hey dude, is now a good time?" This is not to say that I would
    say "sex on Wednesdays at 9pm". I like 'spontaneous combustion' myself.
    But I also know that with a new love, sometimes its just something
    you've gotta do the minute you see him... and that fades pleasantly
    with time and familiarity. 
    
    By the way, I hope you're not taking all of this "insecurity" stuff too
    personally. I hate saying that about anyone. But it does seem like you
    and your fiance feel differently about this issue, and I hope you can
    work it through with him.
    
    later...

    
    small reality check for single people without children ...
    
    	I hate to break the news to you but when children come along,
    spontanaity gets diminished -- most weeks its not  "sex on Wednesdays
    at 9pm" - but our new born daughter has some effect -- when she's
    crying it can ruin some spontanaity --- your mileage may very ...
    
    Back to the bachelor party and strippers ... IMO - men and women view
    sex very differently. Going to a strip joint to look but not touch is
    fine and harmless.  A little excitement, a little fantasy - but for
    most of us married men it gets boring after an hour or so ...
    
    Once in a while it truly is harmless ... If he's down there every
    friday for lunch - that's another story.  I also don't approve of
    sleeping with a stripper at a house party - just my ethics/morals. 
    And with aids - anyone who does is playing russian roulette ...
    
    a happily married man ... whose been to a handful of strip joints
    
    	jim
    

    After ploughing through this topic I'm convinced that not only is the
    base noter fearfully insecure but fundamentally ignorant of male
    sexuality.  
    
    The stag party marks transition.  Married life is fundamentally
    different to single life.  This applies to his mates as well as the
    groom.  His commitment to his bride must necessarily override his
    previous bonds to his friends.  Particularly for first marriages he is
    also marking the end of his carefree days of youth  His friends, too,
    are saying goodbye, for their group is being altered and some would say
    diminished.
    
    It is therefore no surprise that the form of the farewell is that of
    excess, and the very name, stag party, with its connotations of
    strength and rutting, is symbolic.  The stripper appeals, obviously, to
    male sexuality, but is also symbolic of pleasures which the groom is
    forsaking.  Indeed, the excess occurs precisely because it is the last
    time.  Thus, it is not merely a 'little party', but is instead a very
    important one.
    
    The tone of the base note screams out the desire for control.  She
    clearly wants him to behave according to her mores.  In short, she
    wants her man to behave not as a man.  If this is indicative of the
    relationship as a whole then disaster looms large on the horizon.

    I don't think the issue should be trust, or what's reasonable behavior
    for the "average" man, or whether the woman is overreacting, or any of
    the other criteria that most people are applying in this string.
    
    The issue should be how these two people deal with behavior in the
    other that each finds offensive and unreasonable, even as they consider
    their own point of view as harmless and reasonable. Ideally, she would
    sacrifice her feeling that drunken parties with strippers are puerile
    and indicative of lack of respect for her; ideally, he would sacrifice
    his feeling that she's being paranoid and priggish (we're guessing at
    what he thinks here).
    
    The point is that when the person you love feels very strongly about
    something, you should be willing to accomodate yourself. This is not
    easy, particularly when you are sure the other one is off base. But it
    is a skill that is essential to a stable and loving relationship.
    
    Kit  

    re .40

    ditto what ::Foster said in .41.
    
>    Um, excuse me Fred but you say after marriage sex is  not as exciting?
>    I feel  sorry for you! Are you one of those people that have to set up
>    a "time" to  have sex and have basically regarded it as a "chore"
>    rather than something  exciting?  

    Can't really respond to that without embarrassing my wife ;^).  No,
    sex is not a chore, but just say it _will_ take a bit of _work_ on
    both your parts to keep the fires burning.  

    >Are you trying to tell me that after
>    I get married sex is not  going to be exciting? I think you are
>    definitely wrong in that department.

    Then you have a lot to learn.  If you eat T-Bone steak every night
    for dinner even that will get old after a hundred times or so.  The 
    _new_ _will_ wear off of sex after a year or two or ten.  That's when
    _love_ will be important.

    fred();

    	I'm bowing out of this discussion after this reply. I believe
    enough replies have been made to the base noter that she should have
    enough points of view to make a judgement. After reading and re-reading
    some replies and replies from the basenoter, I've come to the
    conclusion it's a matter of "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind's
    made up."
    
    	There have been superb replies and points of view from other women
    in here. One male reply (I believe it was .43) made a point of control
    which I thought was excellent. If the base noter can't control it, she
    doesn't want it in her life or her fiance's. One of Lauren's replies
    was immediately inducted into the Hall of Fame. 
    
    	I think enough has been offered. I don't think the basenoter is
    happy with the response. If it had supported her views, I'm sure she
    might even have shared it with the future Mr.
    
    	I also think that if she is anywhere near as goodlooking and sexual
    as she claims, she wouldn't be worring about some unknown female
    flagging her body at her fiance. Women who are that confident about
    their sexuality would find another female challenging. That kind of
    competition brings out the fire. If you are insecure, it's something
    you really have to get a grip on and try to overcome. It can be a
    limiting factor in your future happiness. 
    
    	I wish the basenoter much luck, love and happiness. I hope she
    finds the answers she seem to seek so desperately.
    
    Ken

    
    I don't mean to critise you, but it does seem your a bit insecure.  If
    you don't trust this guy, why are you marrying him?   Your not even
    married yet and your already dictating what he can and cannot do.
    
    Do you expect him to stop speaking to all woman after he gets
    married for fear he may become interested? Then you will probley will 
    have to forbid him from going to the beach without you too.  There are an 
    awful lot of woman with beautiful bodies wearing skimpy bathing suits. 
    Somone may catch his eye, and you won't be the most beautiful anymore.
      
    If he works out at a health club, you best get yourself a membership.  
    You don't want to leave him unattended with all those woman in 
    provocative leotards, sweating and breathing hard.  He may just start
    pumping with somone else, afterall out of sight out of mind.    
    
    And if he does go someplace you don't approve, you make sure you take
    off and go someplace he doesn't want you to go.   Cause "on upping" is
    makes for real happy marriages! NOT!  Actually,  it's the fastest way
    to get a divorce.  Someone ends of crossing the imaginary line and
    hurts the other beyond repair, and their ain't no turning back after
    you cross that line.  It's anything goes...
    
    Chris (a woman)
    
    
    
    

    The kind of control the base noter is pushing is exactly how the words
    "My wife doesn't understand me" came about. If she truly wants her man
    at home and with her she better get rid of the "my way or no way"
    attitude. Men are, thinking, feeling, people in their own right, NOT
    OBJECTS to be molded to someone elses thinking. Accept him as he is,
    don't try and change him, it won't work. He will make your fears come
    true and seek another woman if you continue with an obssesion for
    control.
    
    
    				My 2 cents worth
    				
    				Wayne 

    Men like to look. Period. As one noter pointed out strip joints are
    very strict about the "no-touch" rule. And as another noter pointed out
    quite a few are women just trying to make some money for the bills.
    Often young single mothers. Not all of them are "sleazy" and you have
    to admit $1500-$2000 per week is a hell of a lot better than $200 per
    wk at McDonalds or worse.  Most men like seeing women nude/scantily
    dressed/string bikinis/etc. Know why? God made us that way. You are
    worrying yourself needlessly. After all this guy loves you. That's
    the bottom line. And the novelty wears off fast. Why are you so
    threatened by him seeing a stripper? It isn't like this is going to be
    permanently implanted in his brain for instant recall. Don't force the
    issue or it could put a permanent dent in your futre relationship.
    

    
    
    > and you have to admit $1500
    
      I wonder how much it costs all of us when we encourage men to view
    women as objects, and women treat their bodies as marketable product?
    
    
    David

    re:.31
    
    Agreed ... totally.
    
    A traditional marriage is confinement for both people, but it's not
    necessarily a bad thing.

    Woody Bowd said it best last night on Cheers ...
    
    "Doctor Krane told me that I should be willing to concede every point,
     every argument, every matter, no matter how insignificant ... that is,
     if I ever expect to see you naked again."

    >I wonder how much it costs....(ref 858.51)
    It costs $3.00 cover charge and $3.75 per beer at Pudgy's and about the
    same at Lamplighter II. Only been to each of those one time. The
    strippers also make a lot of money from those in the audience who want
    to put $$bills in their garters. Others have told me it costs more at
    the Fuzzy Grape, i.e. $5.00 cover charge and $12-$20 for a Polaroid
    shot (if you want one) standing with the "headline stripper". I know
    one person who paid $20.00 for a picture of himself with his arms
    around a very naked Marilyn Chambers. And, guess what? He looks VERY,
    VERY happy!    Don't forget a lot of these women are strippers because
    they WANT to be and it's usually for the money. 
    
    Reminds me of the time Linda Lovelace of the "Deep Throat" fame, was
    a guest speaker at Boston University. She spoke for about 45 minutes
    on how she was "exploited" (LOVE that word) into making the movie. And
    got paid $2,000.00 to tell us all about it. She unfortunately couldn't
    stay around very long as she had to head for the University of New
    Hampshire and speak again of her "exploitation" for another $2,000.00.
    Some exploitation this! Actually I think her main gripe was she did the
    film for $1,500.00. I doubt she would have been griping if she'd got
    10% of the profit. 
    

    
    
    > DON'T FORGET that alot of the strippers want to be
    
     
      Yeah I'm certain every little girls dream was to grow up to be
    a stripper..
    
    Barbie:: Oh I cannot wait to grow up so I can take my clothes off in
    front of a buncha drooling happy fools. Gosh maybe they will even pay
    me to take pictures..
    
     Women who exploit themselves are just as pathetic as the institutions
    that do it for them. Women and men should not cater to the carnal sides
    of human nature even if the adults are consenting..
    
    
    David

    If the activist feminists ever find out about "Topless Dancer Barbie"
    they'll really flip their wigs ... remember what they did when they
    found out that one plastic doll thought math was hard?

    .55

    >Women and men should not cater to the carnal sides
    >of human nature even if the adults are consenting..

    but this is a free society, every one is free to do what they want
    as long as it does not harm others. 

    a woman who wants to strip and become wealthy doing it is free to do it , 
    when men stop going to the strip clubs to pay to see them, women will stop 
    doing it because they'll find there is no money in it, and they do it
    for the money. it is a matter of supply and demand.

    \nasser

    
    
    
    Nasser,
    
    There is a difference between " I have the right" and, " It is right."
    
    
    David
    
    
    
    
     

    
    
    re .55
    
    On women exploiting themselves.  Why is is wrong for any person
    to use thier bodies to gain money (with the exception of prostitution)?
    Athletes do it all the time, and they are paid hundreds of thousands
    of dollars and sometimes millions!!!!  They are being paid for using
    their bodies.  To me there really is no difference.  As long as the
    environment is healthy and controlled, the only problems are the
    ones that arrise when folks can't handle themselves.
    The only folks who allow themselves to be exploited are those
    that have no choice and are "forced" into doing something they
    do not want to do.  
    
    As for the base noter, you sound as though this is a first major
    relationship for you.  Is that correct?  Is this the first time
    you have been in love?  Have you defined making love vs having
    sex?  Or has your sex life with your fiancee matured enough to
    the point where you can easily distinguish between expressing
    your love for each other through love making vs just screwing
    around (to be blunt) to satisfy a physical urge?  
    
    There are a few fundamental differences between the way women
    and men look at sex and sexual stimulation.  Men tend to be very
    "eye" oriented and like to look.  Whereas women tend to be very
    "emotion" oriented and tend to look at thier man from this base.
    This is why there is such a major market for lingerie.  
    
    I don't agree with many of the folks in here who are throwing
    the insecurity issue at you.  I don't know you and that would
    be silly of me to make that assumption.  However, from your
    words, you do seem to not understand this fundamental difference
    stated above.  If you truly did understand it, you would easily
    see that it truly is not a matter of your fiancees love for
    you, but nature at work.  One word of caution though, if you do
    not come to terms with the above fact, then you will have a 
    very rough road ahead of you.   If you do understand the above,
    take advantage of it and revel in it with your fiancee.  
    
    Michele

    .58

    >There is a difference between " I have the right" and, " It is right."

    first, the absolute right is determined by the law. not by you.

    so, if the law says that you have the right to do it, then it is "right" , 
    else you would not have the right to do it because a society will not give 
    someone the right to do something that is not "right", that is why one 
    do not have the right to kill someone else because that is not "right".

    you cant have your cake and eat too , you know!

    \nasser
    ps. i wish i was a pretty women instead, i would probably have went out
    and stripped teased and made a million bucks in just one year, and
    eat your hearts out ;-)

    
    
    > why is it wrong for any person to use their bodies to gain money
    > athletes do it all the time
    
     In doing the things that athletes do, they do not cater to the carnal,
    or base part of our being. Even if they did two wrons do not make a
    right. Women must not on the one hand ask to be treated with respect
    and equality, and on the other hand get paid paid to be objects..
    
    David

    
    
    
    > the absolute right is determined by the law.
    
     In the deep south the law said blacks were to ridde at the back of the
    bus and eat in seperate parts of a diner. Was this right? Of course it
    wasn't, and how do we know this? Because in each of us is written
    atleast a basic moral law with which we measure and appraise the
    rightness of anyything and everything that goes ona round us. I think
    Immanuel Kant wrote something about this..
    
    David

    re .61,
    
    I don't know what you watch sports for, but one of the reasons I watch
    is to look at those nicely rounded whatchas and the way certain men
    fill out their jerseys and other parts of their uniforms.  
    
    They are also using their bodies for entertainment, and in the case of
    hockey and football, setting themselves at risk for serious injuries,
    something an exotic dancer doesn't sign up for.  (mud, hot oil, and
    jello wrestling excepted)
    
    Meg                       

    .-1

    ok, the law says you have the right to drive ahead when the traffic
    light is green, i say this is not right. Just because the law
    gives me the right to do it , it does not make it right, "In the deep 
    south the law said blacks were to ridde at the back of the bus and eat in 
    seperate parts of a diner. Was this right?" of course not, so driving
    through a green traffic light is not right even though the law says I
    have the right to do it.

    \nasser

    
    
    Meg,
    
    > I don't know what you watch sports for
    > nicely rounded butts
    
       The sports arena is not directly designed for sexually stimulating
    the audience. I have no doubt that it can be for someone, I also have
    no doubt that watching a lumberjack chop down a tree might very well
    float someones boat too.. It does not serve either sexes best interest
    to view the opposite sex as an object, or a nicely rounded whatchas..
    
    David
     

    
    
    Nasser,
    
    > when the traffic light is green
    
    
     I surrender.
    
    David

    
    Wise move on your part, David.

Re: .65

My personal view is that many sports, for example boxing and wrestling, appeal
to the same or similar instincts as do strippers.  I don't believe there's any
moral distinction between them (other than that at least strippers don't
physically injure others in the course of their performance.)

But to get back to the original question, I'd like to point out that one
should perhaps make a distinction between a bachelor party at a "strip joint"
(where "look but don't touch" is generally the rule) and the traditional
private stag party, where a stripper/prostitute is hired, often with the
explicit intention of sexual interaction with the guest of honor.  It's this
latter which I would find most objectionable.

			Steve

    
    
    Steve,
    
     One nit and then I will stop beating this horse.  The athletes do not
    intend to appeal to the instincts but rather to compete. Any sexual
    thrill is totally that of the viewers.. Apples and oranges..
    
    David

    RE: .69
    
    David, if you don't mind my asking....
    
    I don't think I follow you.
    
    You say the athletes "do not intend to appeal to the instincts 
    but rather to compete."   I agree that athletes intend to compete.
    They may also intend to earn some money, have some fun, and become
    famous.  However, I have never been part of a professional sports
    team but it would not surprise me to learn that some intend to arouse
    the passions of viewers as well.
    
    It seems clear that such arousal of passion (at least sexual passion)
    is not the *primary* intent of those who participate in sporting
    events, but such intent may remain nevertheless.
    
    Also,
    
    >thrill is totally that of the viewers..
    
    ....does this imply that if the stripper isn't thrilled (but is
    just doing her/his job - with the *intent* of earning $$$s), that it 
    is then, OK?
    
    /Greg

    if dudes were not supposed to be aroused when they see a pretty
    women strip then why did God put these aerosols in our soles? why
    we were born with them then?

    this means it is natural thing and not something to hid from
    and you cant come tell us it is against the instincts and all
    that stuff.
    
    \nasser

    
    
    
    > does this imply
    
     No. Greg all I am saying is that we should not treat women as objects.
    If we discovered that a school teacher was teaching the males in their
    classroom that a womans value is based  on how big her breasts are and
    how tight her buttocks are would we not say " This is wrong"??
    Strippers re-enforce(sp) this mentality in men.. It is wrong, it is
    counterproductive..
    
    
    David
    

    
    Wow David, that's a deep personal name. You really believe that things
    are all binary? (I can't say "black and white" 'cause I *know* that one
    is incorrect! :-) )

    
    
    Nasser,
    
     You reminded me of a joke I heard once, you may have heard it.
    
       Question: Why would most women choose looks over brains?
      
       Answer:: Because most men can see better than they can think..
    
    David

    
    
    Foster,
    
     > that's a deep personal name.
    
     Thanks, I was kinda hoping you would notice :-)
    
    > you really think that things are all binary
    
        I've never met things, so I do not know if they are binary or
    not:-).I do believe that everything is understandable if you keep 
    searching.
    
    David

    oh PUH-LEEZ..give me a break.... if all guys are SUPPOSED to get
    excited of anything from sleazy magazines to a waitress in a short
    skirt, an encounter at the beach...etc.. we'd have an awful lot of
    guys walking around with their you-know-whats up for about 18 hours a
    day!! I agree with David. 
    

    Thanks, David.  
    
    I agree (emphatically!) that we should not completely objectify
    women (or men) and I also agree that strippers *can* re-inforce this
    mentality.  I think it is a matter of degree though.   I can think
    of times when I didn't mind being "objectified" - but that is because
    I have been valued for other things.   I agree it is very harmful for
    someone with low/no self-esteem.
    
    I don't think all strip shows should stop.  Instead, I think we need
    to get over our hang-ups about sex and learn to treat all people
    with dignity and respect.
    
    /Greg

    .76

    oh yes, most normal healthy guys do get excited when they see a 
    pretty women strip teasing, i dont know about you, but i do, so
    here you go. 

    women are free to strip if they want, and men are free to see it if
    they want to, it is demand and supply, this is free country, go live
    in Cuba if you dont like stripping, or dont watch it, like someone
    else said, many people are paid for silly things too like carrying
    a ball around all day and kicking a the funny shaped one over 2 sticks
    and they make tones of money too at it, there is no difference here,
    the only difference is that you are hung up on the 'sex' thing, 
    it is probably the rigid way you grew up that makes you think like
    this, try to loosen up a little.
    a women is free to strip if she wants to, and men are free to go see
    it and pay to watch if they want to. 
    
    long live freedom in AMERICA!

    \nasser

    nassar, I think its time to wake up and smell the coffee. Whats with
    the  "most normal, healthy, guys get excited....
    
    Are you saying that if a guy looked at a picture of a naked woman and
    did  not get excited, he would not be considered normal or healthy? So
    are gay  men not normal as well? Because I doubt that they would get
    excited about  naked woman. (no offense intended, just saying it like
    it is). 
    
    I agree with you that this is a free country, I'm not saying outlaw
    strip  joints. What I'm saying is that I think men can pretty much
    control what  they deem as exciting or not exciting. 
    

    
    "Exciting" may be a relative term. I think that many heterosexual males
    "notice" when a woman is posing provocatively, wearing revealing
    clothing, or just generally looks nice. I would go so far as to say
    that MOST het males "notice". What makes each one different is what he
    does with that information. Its certainly not uncommon for males in
    puberty to not have complete control of how their bodies react when
    they "notice" a woman. Could be a nice looking teacher who isn't doing
    ANYTHING... except maybe bending over for chalk.  And poor Joe sits in
    the back of the class praying that she doesn't call on him so that no
    one will know...
    
    I think, and can't know first hand, that as men grow older/more mature,
    they recognize that their senses and brain can embarrass them if they
    don't learn not to react to the women in their environment. On the
    other hand, some men decide that they don't care about controlling
    this. The ones like this whom I've encountered are a rather crude
    sort...
    
    And somewhere in between is the grey. Because sometimes, its okay to
    let a woman's presence excite you, and sometimes its not. Its not
    exactly okay to get excited about your wife in a gorgeous outfit when
    you're standing next to your boss and giving a speech to the company
    president. But its okay once you get home. Same woman, same outfit,
    different setting. Sometimes its the same outfit, different woman.
    Sometimes its the same setting, different woman.
    
    Strip joints are loosely defined as places where it is "okay" to get
    excited (excited=sexually stimulated). 
    
    And the relationship between sexual stimulation and LOVE is pretty
    nebulous, so I can't make the jump between the man who gets excited
    over an attractive woman in a tight skirt at a night club and the man
    who makes love to his wife. Suffice to say that some of the physical
    and anatomical responses are similar, but what goes on in his MIND (and
    heart) is what counts.

    
    
    > what goes on in his MIND
    
       I suspect it's not an objective apprecitaion of God's handywork:-)
    :-)  
    
    
    Peace,
    David
      

    
    Perhaps it is when its his wife...

    
    
     Touche' :-)
    
    
    David

    >Yeah I'm certain every little girl's dream....
    Probably not likely. However, it probably becomes some of the big
    girl's dream of making lots of $$$ rather than having some crap job
    in a hamburger haven or being some secretary where she has to kiss
    a__ all day. Many of us have jobs like that where internal politics
    reign supreme. 
    
    >Women and men should not cater to the carnal sides of human nature...
    Who appointed you God? Your apparent feeling of moral superiority is
    getting in the way of the fact that a lot of women strip because they
    want to and, since that doesn't fit in your world of "good" and
    "right", anyone who does enjoy it is far below your impeccable
    standards. So, which of the 10 commandments do you break on a regular
    basis? At least you can always point to the rest of us and say with
    certainty (in YOUR mind) "Ha! At least I am better than THEM!" As I 
    once told my very religious cousin who had just finished a morality
    speech (on MY morals - or lack of), "Hey! If it wasn't for people like
    me, YOU wouldn't have anyone to feel superior to!" So, continue to 
    wallow in your righteousness. It becomes you.
    

    
    
    re .79
    
    
    You have to realize there is a definite line between men getting
    excited vs men acting on the excitement.  I think you still arent
    listening to what the men in here are saying to you.  My understanding
    of what they are trying to say to you is that it is a natural thing
    for a male to look at a female and possibly get sexually aroused.
    This is not to say that they must and do act on that arousal.  
    
    Think back to the very first time you saw your now-fiancee.  
    Were there ANY physical things that attracted your gaze his
    way?  Any at all?  If there were, and it only has to be just
    one, you have also proven what these guys are saying.  
    If just by looking at him, you were attracted to him, then you
    are just as normal as all the rest of us.  Something natural 
    inside you caused a reaction to something in him.  
    The difference is that you might have looked a bit further 
    to see just what he was like.  
    
    Michele

    re .85
    
>    excited vs men acting on the excitement.  I think you still arent
>    listening to what the men in here are saying to you.
    
    That's the impression I get, too.  I don't think she wants to learn. 
    She wants us to support her so she'll feel good about badgering him.

    
    
    > who appointed you God
    
      A blue ribbon Clinton transition team.. Lighten up Clark, nobody has
    to be God to have an opinion or a moral conviction.
    
    David 
    

    Speaking of God, I am reminded of the Song of Songs, a book in the
    Bible which doesn't mention God very much, if at all, but it does
    mention women's breasts quite often.  I did a quick scan of this Holy
    work and came up with seven references to breasts (I may have missed
    some, but I didn't spend a lot time on this project.)  Those admiring
    references are not necessarily expressed in conjunction with any
    discussion of their beneficial milk producing qualities; no, those
    breasts (along with various other parts of the human anatomy mentioned
    throughout the Song of Songs) are admired as objects of beauty and
    erotic praise.
    
    -- Mike

    
    Actually, if I called Solomon a horny ole b*stard, I wouldn't be too
    far off.

 re: .88

 How utterly relevant, Mike. Oh, I suppose this is just another of those
ephemeral notes of yours that will magically disappear after having provoked
a response...

    My notes never disappear through magic; they disappear only through the
    use of the "delete" command.
    
    -- Mike

    
    
     Mike,
    
      I suspect it was the beloved King David describing the comfort of a
    womens breast( boosom). If you could bring the dead back to life I
    doubt they would go down to hooters( a local bar owned by the Japanesse
    that hires big breasted women only) and declare it a place worthy of
    praise..
    
    David

>    Bible which doesn't mention God very much, if at all, but it does
>    mention women's breasts quite often.  I did a quick scan of this Holy
>    work and came up with seven references to breasts (I may have missed

	were these references to seven *pairs*, or seven individual
	ones ?  it might be important...

    
     Hmmm, don't know about you David, but the last time I was at Hooters,
    there certainly wasn't an abundance of big breasted women. 
    
     I don't see where a certain amount of objectification of things is
    necesarily a bad thing. It gives pleasure to a great many people,
    whether this objectification takes the form of a busty woman, a tight
    butted man, an elk standing in a snow storm, or a dolphin surfacing on
    the ocean. It is the same as art, some people enjoy viewing naked
    women, some do not.
    
     I think the problem arises when people carry this objectification over
    into their personal relationships and their day to day activities
    become dependant upon it. For the rest of us,it is mearly a diversion
    to the day to day drudgery of daily existance.
    
    Tony
    
    
     

    David,

    Perhaps you are right.  However, I think the author of that work,
    whoever it actually was, was clearly expressing the joy of eroticism. 
    It wasn't seen by that author as base or evil at all to take erotic
    pleasure in another person's body.  Of course, it was expressed through
    beautiful poetry and images, and it was between two lovers, not between
    strangers in--but the joy of eroticism is clearly apparent in that
    work.  Each of the lovers quoted in that work express praise for one
    another's bodies.  For example:

        "Your eyes are doves behind your veil.  Your hair is like a flock
        of goats, moving down the slopes of Gilead.  Your teeth are like a
        flock of shorn ewes that have come up from the washing, all of
        which bear twins, and not one among them is bereaved.  Your cheeks
        are like halves of a pomegranate behind your veil.  Your neck is
        like the tower of David built in courses; on it hang a thousand
        bucklers, all of them shields of warriors.  Your two breasts are
        like two fawns, twins of a gazelle, that feed among the lilies. 
        Until the day breathes and the shadows flee, I will hasten to the
        mountain of myrrh and the hill of frankincense.

    Here is an example of where breasts are mentioned in the context of a
    clearly erotic passage:

        How fair and pleasant you are, O loved one, delectable maiden!  You
        are stately as a palm tree, and your breasts are like its clusters. 
        I say I will climb the palm tree and lay hold of its branches.  Oh,
        may your breasts be like clusters of the vine, and the scent of
        your breath like apples, and your kisses like the best wine that
        goes down smoothly, gliding over lips and teeth.

    I think if our friend from Wayne's World were here right now, he would
    be talking about how he feels when climbing rope in gym class.  This is
    some pretty hot stuff.  In fact, and I have said this before in another
    notes file, the passage about the breasts being like the clusters of a
    palm tree, followed by the assertion that "I will climb the palm tree
    and lay hold of its branches" reminds me a lot of those famous words
    echoed by the Steve Miller Band, "Really love your peaches, wanna shake
    your tree", 

    -- Mike

The Song of Songs is a metaphor.  If you think it's to be taken literally,
explain why there are no other "erotic" books in the Bible.

    I am aware that many religious viewpoints superimpose an allegorical
    interpretation upon the Song of Songs; if any individual wishes to
    believe that, they are certainly entitled to do so.  Personally, I see
    nothing in the content of that work to suggest that it is anything but
    a collection of beautiful and erotic love poems.  However, even if one
    believes that an allegorical meaning should be superimposed upon its
    literal text, one would still have to accept that boldly erotic
    imagery was used within its literal text to express this alleged
    allegorical meaning.  If one were to take this work and give it to
    someone unfamiliar with the Jewish Bible, I doubt that it would occur
    to that person that this were some sort of allegory on the love between
    God and his/her people or church.  The text itself doesn't, as far as I
    can tell, suggest it.  On the other hand, I suppose you could take
    *any* work expressing erotic love between two partners and interpret it
    as expressing a true meaning that involves a different kind of love.

    In fact, this whole allegory theory is interesting to me, because it
    may illustrate a fundamental discomfort with the idea that eroticism is
    joyous and has spiritual value.  This allegorical interpretation seems
    like a post hoc interpretation of what it *ought* to mean.  There seems
    to be a fundamental attitude that sex at least in some sense base or
    impure, and therefore any joyous celebration of it within the Bible
    *must* not really be that at all, but rather an allegory of something
    else that is purely asexual.  One of the things that I particularly
    like about this book, by the way, and which writers like Judith Plaskow
    and Arthur Waskow have highlighted, is the egalitarian interplay
    between the male and female lovers in Song of Songs.

    As for why certain works make it into a religious canon, while others
    are rejected, that is certainly an interesting subject, which no doubt
    the moderators would consider appropriate for another time and another
    notes file.  
    
    -- Mike

    
    Wow!!!
    
    I *never* thought of Song of Songs as anything but Erotica written by
    Solomon about the most beautiful black woman in the world - the Queen
    of Sheba. (David wrote most of the Psalms, but Solomon gets credit for
    the Songs. Some Bibles call the chapter "Song of Solomon" instead of
    Song of Songs.)
    
    But I can understand how, in order to sustain the puritanism which
    exists in many sects of Christianity, this chapter would be "explained
    away" as an allegory. I'd love to hear what various Jewish scholars
    have to say about the "allegorical aspects" of Song of Solomon, since
    their culture does not have the same beliefs around human sexuality as
    many Christian cultures do.
    
    Heck, I'm gonna go ask somebody.

    
    
    
    > but I can understand
    
     I think you have to put it all into context.
    
    
    Sincerely,
    Puree

re .98:

>                          I'd love to hear what various Jewish scholars
>    have to say about the "allegorical aspects" of Song of Solomon, since
>    their culture does not have the same beliefs around human sexuality as
>    many Christian cultures do.

The traditional Jewish interpretation is that's it's an allegory for the
love between God and His chosen people.

    
    Merci...
    
    I got this from others as well. Just goes to show how easily us
    "non-scholars" can miss an allegory.
    
    Of course, I was also told that SoS was added late to the Biblical
    canon, by popular demand, and wonder if perhaps the "allegorical
    aspect" was determined long after it was written so that there would be
    a justification of putting it in. Certainly if taken LITERALLY, it is
    erotica. Those of us who are not of the faith will probably have
    difficulty seeing it as anything else. But I can respect the rights of
    believers to have a different viewpoint.

    >Certainly if taken LITERALLY, it is erotica. 
    
    The Song of Solomon must present problems to those who state that
    the entire Bible is literally true.                                    
    
    >Those of us who are not of the faith will probably have difficulty
    >seeing it as anything else. But I can respect the rights of believers
    >to have a different viewpoint.
    
    An admirable point of view; I won't say anything more, and emulate you.