Louisiana legislator proposes strippers be 21-28 years old, weigh less than 160 pounds; calls sugges
28 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Rep. Kenny Havard proposed an amendment to Louisiana's the strip club bill Wednesday, suggesting strippers "trim to the fat," be no older than 28 years old and weigh no more than 160 pounds, prompting criticism from colleagues.
Havard, R-St. Francisville, called the amendment a "joke."
Rep. Nancy Landry and Rep. Julie Stokes called the suggestion "offensive," "utterly disrespectful," and "disgusting."
Havard, who immediately pulled the amendment, told The Advocate he doesn't regret the "joke" and called it satire -- not sexism. He said he meant for the amendment to point out that the bill teeters on overregulation.
The bill under consideration at the time is meant to raise the minimum age of for exotic dancers in Louisiana from 18 to 21 years old.
Supporters of the bill say that they are trying to protect teens from human trafficking. It has won bipartisan support through the legislative process.[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://theadvocate.com/news/15832365-83/louisiana-legislator-proposes-strippers-be-21-28-years-old-weigh-less-than-160-pounds-calls-suggesti"]Source[/URL]
If an offensive joke fails as a joke and isn't funny, all it is then is offensive.
I detect a hint of seriousness in this joke.
I thought it was funny, sue me
I'm not sure if the bill merited a joke, its actuallyquite a serious issue
I get the sentiment though I really do
160 is a bit too heavy for a woman, I agree with the good legislator.
i can kind of agree but only in the sense that its a pretty physically tiring job
the age bit makes a little less sense since some people prefer older performers, but being a stripper means being flexible and on your feet throughout the night -- if your health is bad, then itd impact your job performance. its a bit strange for this to be a state issue than a business one though, does this guy have nothing better to do?
maybe he had a bad run-in with an old overweight stripper.
couldn't you just you know tell a stripper you don't fancy no thank's?
Seems it was pretty clearly intended as a joke to me, albeit a stupid unnecessary one. To quote Fapplejack:
[QUOTE=Fapplejack;50347319]If an offensive joke fails as a joke and isn't funny, all it is then is offensive.[/QUOTE]
I don't particularly see anything wrong with that even it it was a joke.
If I was the kinda guy that went to strip clubs, seeing girls within my age and weight bracket is pretty much exactly what I would want to see there. I'd probably bail if they had some 250lb 50 y/old chick try'na put on a show.
[QUOTE=Fapplejack;50347319]If an offensive joke fails as a joke and isn't funny, all it is then is offensive.[/QUOTE]
I mean, I found it funny. But maybe I just have a shit sense of humor.
[QUOTE=Monkah;50347967]I mean, I found it funny. But maybe I just have a shit sense of humor.[/QUOTE]
Even if you don't find the joke offensive or unfunny, I think we all deep down we all love dirty jokes but that kind of conduct shouldn't be happening in that kind of setting when policy that affects the country is part of the equation.
And I still think the joke was pretty tactless because of the fact that women were around. For example if I'm gonna pull the classic "women driving in the kitchen" joke I'm gonna do it with a group of my male friends.
[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;50347977]Even if you don't find the joke offensive or unfunny, I think we all deep down we all love dirty jokes but that kind of conduct shouldn't be happening in that kind of setting when policy that affects the country is part of the equation.
And I still think the joke was pretty tactless because of the fact that women were around. For example if I'm gonna pull the classic "women driving in the kitchen" joke I'm gonna do it with a group of my male friends.[/QUOTE]
The real reason he introduced the amendment was as a statement on how it's overregulation. The "it's a joke" is just a defensive mechanism.
As to the actual issue, is human trafficking [I]really[/I] an issue here that targets strippers who are 18? Why would 21 be any different of a risk?
Why even if these things were legitimate issues, would it mandate restricting the liberties of adult citizens? This is part of a worrying trend of trying to push legal adulthood (and voting) to 21.
[QUOTE=bitches;50348541]As to the actual issue, is human trafficking [I]really[/I] an issue here that targets strippers who are 18? Why would 21 be any different of a risk?
Why even if these things were legitimate issues, would it mandate restricting the liberties of adult citizens? This is part of a worrying trend of trying to push legal adulthood (and voting) to 21.[/QUOTE]
i think the idea is more that 18 year olds are being coerced into the sex trade from working as strippers, and 21 is a an age where people are a little more responsible
[QUOTE=Sableye;50348718]i think the idea is more that 18 year olds are being coerced into the sex trade from working as strippers, and 21 is a an age where people are a little more responsible[/QUOTE]
Is 18 the age of adulthood, or not? Nobody can claim the right to draft another of the same age into war and allow them all the legal benefits of adulthood and yet deny freedom of occupation, legal drugs, or otherwise. The ulterior motive is political to rebrand the age of adulthood.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;50348143]The real reason he introduced the amendment was as a statement on how it's overregulation.[/QUOTE]
So in other words, it was a joke?
[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;50349344]So in other words, it was a joke?[/QUOTE]
It was satire. You can shrug it off as a joke and not give a shit for the implications if you want, or you can pay attention to why he did it.
[QUOTE=Cureless;50347965]I don't particularly see anything wrong with that even it it was a joke.
If I was the kinda guy that went to strip clubs, seeing girls within my age and weight bracket is pretty much exactly what I would want to see there. I'd probably bail if they had some 250lb 50 y/old chick try'na put on a show.[/QUOTE]
why should it be enshrined in law though? what about the ones who like fat strippers?
i think this is a question for the invisible hand of the free market
[QUOTE=bitches;50349365]It was satire. You can shrug it off as a joke and not give a shit for the implications if you want, or you can pay attention to why he did it.[/QUOTE]
What are you on about? If it's satire, it's a joke, because it's not a serious statement. Of course I know what the implications were and why he did it.
[QUOTE=bitches;50349273]Is 18 the age of adulthood, or not? Nobody can claim the right to draft another of the same age into war and allow them all the legal benefits of adulthood and yet deny freedom of occupation, legal drugs, or otherwise. The ulterior motive is political to rebrand the age of adulthood.[/QUOTE]
Why are people so hung up on 18 vs. 21 in shit like this? I never get it. Why do you all think that 18 is some magical number where government responsibility goes out the window? Laws which set the drinking age, and in this case the stripping age, to 21 are there to protect teenagers. I have no problem with this
[QUOTE=proboardslol;50351517]Why are people so hung up on 18 vs. 21 in shit like this? I never get it. Why do you all think that 18 is some magical number where government responsibility goes out the window? Laws which set the drinking age, and in this case the stripping age, to 21 are there to protect teenagers. I have no problem with this[/QUOTE]
Maybe you were irresponsible trash when you were a teenager, but it's insulting to responsible teens to restrict their liberties. Alcoholic restriction is just as asinine.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;50351517]Why are people so hung up on 18 vs. 21 in shit like this? I never get it. Why do you all think that 18 is some magical number where government responsibility goes out the window? Laws which set the drinking age, and in this case the stripping age, to 21 are there to protect teenagers. I have no problem with this[/QUOTE]
How does this help protect teens?
[QUOTE=bitches;50351818]Maybe you were irresponsible trash when you were a teenager, but it's insulting to responsible teens to restrict their liberties. Alcoholic restriction is just as asinine.[/QUOTE]
No, it's just simple statistics. Raising the drinking age to 21 has lowered the rate of drunk driving deaths among teens, the #1 killer of teenagers in America. It restricts access to alcohol to those who are out of highschool. It just makes sense
[QUOTE=proboardslol;50353452]No, it's just simple statistics. Raising the drinking age to 21 has lowered the rate of drunk driving deaths among teens, the #1 killer of teenagers in America. It restricts access to alcohol to those who are out of highschool. It just makes sense[/QUOTE]
21 is 3/4 through a university education. You ignored the rest of my post and the one before it.
Either you consider 18 a mature age of legal responsibility for one's actions, or you don't.
[QUOTE=bitches;50353476]21 is 3/4 through a university education. You ignored the rest of my post and the one before it.
Either you consider 18 a mature age of legal responsibility for one's actions, or you don't.[/QUOTE]
But if it massively reduces drink-driving fatalities, injuries, and crashes then surely it's a sensible policy?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;50353549]But if it massively reduces drink-driving fatalities, injuries, and crashes then surely it's a sensible policy?[/QUOTE]
And I'm sure making alcohol completely illegal would reduce drunk-driving fatalities, injuries, and crashes even more, so why stop at 21? What makes 21 any better than 18? Because by that time we're suddenly mature enough? At 18 we aren't old enough to drink alcohol or dance for money but we are mature enough to be trained to kill in war and to help decide the leadership of the country.
[QUOTE=Vitalogy;50353717]And I'm sure making alcohol completely illegal would reduce drunk-driving fatalities, injuries, and crashes even more, so why stop at 21? What makes 21 any better than 18? Because by that time we're suddenly mature enough? At 18 we aren't old enough to drink alcohol or dance for money but we are mature enough to be trained to kill in war and to help decide the leadership of the country.[/QUOTE]
Well, raising the age for soldiery is something I wouldn't be against to be honest.
Also we make compromises with this sort of thing all the time. There's different ages for different reasons.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.