Is Erotic Pole Dancing Immoral?

[Sunstone]

Is nude or near nude erotic pole dancing immoral?

My opinion is that it is morally neutral, and any morality or immorality of it obtains to the viewers. Specifically, do they treat the dancer only as a means to an end, or do they treat her also as an end in herself? If they treat her only as a means to an end, then that is immoral. While if they treat her as also an end in herself, there is nothing immoral about it. But what do you think?

 

[xexon]

I think you filet questions like a fishmonger filets fish.

It's designed to promote lust, and profit

Some can walk on by, some can't.


x

 

[Sunstone]

I think you filet questions like a fishmonger filets fish.

I'm not following what you mean here.

It's designed to promote lust...

I don't care what it's designed to do: I care only for what can be gotten out of it. Which is a life affirming experience, if you approach it without greedy lust.

[...and profit]

Can you name a commerical activity that is not designed to promote profit?

Some can walk on by, some can't.

I personally don't know of anyone who is addicted to watching pole dances, but I'm sure there are some people who are because there are some people who are addicted to just about anything.

 

[Moni_Gail]

With your answer to the question I'm curious as to whether you are talking from the perspective of the dancer, audience member, or a mixture of both. In other words, is it immoral for her to dance, is it immoral to use the dancer for the lust she prompts, and so on...

 

[Sunstone]

With your answer to the question I'm curious as to whether you are talking from the perspective of the dancer, audience member, or a mixture of both. In other words, is it immoral for her to dance, is it immoral to use the dancer for the lust she prompts, and so on...

The dancer who uses the audience member as only a means to an end is acting immorally. By the same token, the audience member who uses the dancer as only a means to an end is also acting immorally.

For instance: if a dancer treats her customers as only a means to get money, then she is acting immorally. Again, if a customer treats a dancer as only a means to sexual stimulation, then he is acting immorally.

The moral thing to do, in both cases, is to always treat the other person as also an end in themselves. That is, always treat the other as also a person in their own right, even if you are also using them as a means to an end. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with using a person as a means to an end --- we do it everyday --- but there is something morally wrong with treating people as if they were only a means to an end.

 

[Feathers in Hair]

Poles should never dance erotically. The last time the ones outside our house did it, the power lines went down. They had a severe scolding after that!

 

[Buttercup]

How does the audience member treat her as a person to ensure moral behavior?

And, do people treat those that they love soley as a means to an end? What exactly does, "means to an end" mean?

 

[Moni_Gail]

I see where you are coming from. But also consider it as a business transaction where there are no expectations further than the mutually beneficial transaction. Both parties are aware of what the other wants, there's no dishonesty so in knowing this how can it be morally wrong?

 

[Sunstone]

Poles should never dance erotically. The last time the ones outside our house did it, the power lines went down. They had a severe scolding after that!

Exactly! Once again your awe inspiring powers of insight have cut through the clutter and identified the core moral problem raised in this thread, Feathers! Frubals!

 

[Sunstone]

I see where you are coming from. But also consider it as a business transaction where there are no expectations further than the mutually beneficial transaction. Both parties are aware of what the other wants, there's no dishonesty so in knowing this how can it be morally wrong?

I think what you've described here is a proper business transaction, but I'm not sure that the mere fact it is a proper business transaction makes it moral. For example: What you've described could also describe a drug deal. But would the drug deal be moral simply for the reasons you've given?

I think the conditions you speak of are necessary to make the transaction moral, but are not sufficient by themselves to make it moral. There must be something else too. And that something else, I propose, is the principle that we should never treat people as only a means to an end, but rather as always an end in themselves too.

Does this make any sense?

 

[Mike182]

i don't see pole dancing as immoral, but then again, i also don't see prostitution or porn as immoral ways of gaining quick cash - and likewise, i don't think the people who consume such products are immoral either.

 

[Sunstone]

i don't see pole dancing as immoral, but then again, i also don't see prostitution or porn as immoral ways of gaining quick cash - and likewise, i don't think the people who consume such products are immoral either.

Why not?

 

[Buttercup]

I think the conditions you speak of are necessary to make the transaction moral, but are not sufficient by themselves to make it moral. There must be something else too. And that something else, I propose, is the principle that we should never treat people as only a means to an end, but rather as always an end in themselves too.

Does this make any sense?

Could you explain it further? I don't get it.

 

[Sunstone]

What exactly does, "means to an end" mean?

Teating someone as a means to an end means treating them as a way to get something. For instance, when you ask a waiter to bring you food, you are to that extent treating the waiter as a means to an end --- a means to your getting food.

 

[Mike182]

i understand your proposition Phil, but what counts as jsut using that person as a means, and what makes it so that someone is treating them as an end in themselves?

we had this debate on a small scale in a seminar while looking at Kant. if i were using my seminar tutors and lecturers as simply a means to an end, i would not appreciate them for parting their knowledge to me - the fact that i am respectful to them, means that not only am i using them as a means to an end (which i deffinatley am, there is no debate about that!) i am also treating them as an end in them selves - i value their worth as the imparter of knowledge, and this is shown by repecting them by reading the texts they set, writing the essays they set, and turning up at the assigned times.

practically, how would someone show their appreciation of the pole dancer as a means in themselves, while still using them as a means to an end?

 

[Buttercup]

Teating someone as a means to an end means treating them as a way to get something. For instance, when you ask a waiter to bring you food, you are to that extent treating the waiter as a means to an end --- a means to your getting food.

I understand this moral principle and how to treat people who are in our circle of family, friends and acquaintances....you love them and take care of their needs, and let them know their thoughts have value to you and they mean something to you as a person. They provide caring to you but you respect and care for them in return.

But, in a professional situation such as watching an exotic dancer, how can you be sure to treat her as "an end in themselves" other than being polite and kind?

 

[Sunstone]

Could you explain it further? I don't get it.

The basic question is what makes an act of pole dancing moral or immoral? Moni Gail rightfully pointed out one set of conditions that must be met for the act to be moral. I added to that set of conditions she gave my own condition that for the act to be moral, we must treat the other not only as a means to an end, but also as an end in themselves. So, now we have two sets of conditions that must be met for an act of pole dancing to be moral. Are there more?

 

[Buttercup]

The basic question is what makes an act of pole dancing moral or immoral? Moni Gail rightfully pointed out one set of conditions that must be met for the act to be moral. I added to that set of conditions she gave my own condition that for the act to be moral, we must treat the other not only as a means to an end, but also as an end in themselves. So, now we have two sets of conditions that must be met for an act of pole dancing to be moral. Are there more?

Well, I'm still stuck on how you treat that dancer as an end in themselves. Like I said, you or anyone else I know personally is no problem to figure out. But, how do you treat a dancer morally other than being nice to her and viewing her as a worthy human being?

 

[Mathematician]

It's immoral to charge me money to watch!

 

[Mike182]

Why not?

because it's victimless. the drug transaction you mentioned has a victim because drugs can, and do, mess up peoples heads.