Who Are These People? (UPDATED!)

Oh for fuck’s sake. All rested up from starving the universities and killing the film industry, the provincial government is now about to ¬†legalize stripping in bars. Good God, all these people seem to think about is beer and football. And now sex, as long as it’s gross and heterosexual.

UPDATE:¬†This just in from CBC. It doesn’t seem that bad. No nipples for you!

 

About Carle Steel

Carle Steel was a simple moisture farmer on a barren, sun-baked world who, through fate and destiny, brought the mighty Galactic Empire to its knees. She likes cats, bats, mice and you.

18 Responses to Who Are These People? (UPDATED!)

  1. Gregory Beatty November 20, 2012 at 12:18 pm #

    Here’s a link to the CBC report that details some of the proposed changes to liquor and gaming laws. Also on tap, besides “partial stripping”, is booze service in special “adults only” sections of movie theatres.

  2. Melissa November 20, 2012 at 12:20 pm #

    I always said, if the Wall government could figure out a way to make a buck off of legalizing stripping they would.

  3. Paul Dechene November 20, 2012 at 12:26 pm #

    Oh, come on, Carle. That’s one recommendation out of 77. Many of the rest are things I was surprised to find weren’t legal already. Like, as Greg notes, allowing liquor service in an adult-only lounge at a movie theatre. I’ve been to movie theatres that serve alcohol (and decent coffee and permitted smoking) in Europe and they’re awesome.

    Of more concern to me are the loosening up of rules around Texas Hold’em Poker which is a vile game and should be banned outright.

  4. m b November 20, 2012 at 12:57 pm #

    C’mon Carle! This is something Saskatchewan has lagged in for so long compared to what is already accepted as normal across the rest of Canada. We’re upgraded from no stripping where alcohol is sold/served to partial stripping with limiited nudity allowed. Yes! So Saskatachewan like!

    Alcohol in designated areas in a movie theatre is also a nice thing to have.

  5. Talbot Fresh, Jr. November 20, 2012 at 1:52 pm #

    Because the 17,085% mark-up on soft drinks isn’t bad enough, now we need to hit the Cineplex for a $12.50, 12oz beer before Star Wars VIII. While I know where Paul De. is coming from, lounge sections in Sask theatres will never be as cool as those in Edinburgh or Paris (tho it could be those places don;t know they’re cool, and what’s cool is the booze. Je sais pas.)

    As for the strippers, “partial” does sound way ickier than full-blown.

  6. Collette November 20, 2012 at 2:08 pm #

    I don’t think that allowing women to earn money with their bodies is a gross and heterosexual thing. Seems pretty liberated to me.

    Sure, we are now going to be absolutely afloat in a sea of wet t-shirt contests and go-go dancers. Dewdney Ave is going to be gross, ugh, and all of the advertising for it is going to be sexist and awful.

    But, burlesque! It opens the doors to proper burlesque, and my friends in local troupes are super excited for this news. This legislation change will now allow them to remove articles of clothing on stage (like shirts, jackets, feather boas) down to their underwear, instead of just dancing around in their underwear which is all they are allowed to do now. Burlesque is light and funny, it embraces all body types, and it’s just as queer as it is heterosexual.

    I totally didn’t see the law change as a hetero thing at all.

  7. Talbot Fresh, Jr. November 20, 2012 at 2:16 pm #

    I’m sure this is great news for the burlesque industry, but predominantly, this is probably, most-likely about boosting sales among dudes in joints like The Sip.

  8. Amber Goodwyn November 20, 2012 at 2:49 pm #

    Hmm, I wish the law was way more naked and lucrative for professional dancers!!

    Not that earlier commenters are suggesting this, but I think it’s important not to have a double standard when it comes to titillating performance whether it be professional stripping (work) or burlesque performance (largely recreational). One way or the other it’s a choice a dancer makes, either to pay the bills and/or to entertain and express themselves. Often folks who do one or the other are differentiated by race and socioeconomic circumstances. Too often burlesque (or wet t-shirt contests for that matter) is deemed OK because it gives people permission and space to express themselves publicly as sexual creatures while marginalizing other women who do the same because they need the money. My opinion is that choosing to take off ones clothes to titillate others isn’t shameful in one circumstance or the other + hope that folks don’t confuse the two as it obfuscates the unique challenges strippers/sex workers face and ways to support them. Think this particular law doesn’t do much to help out ladies who strip and has everything to do with bar owners making money (potentially off of drunk students and young people?).

    “Girl, girl, get that cash
    If it’s 9 to 5 or shakin’ your ass
    Ain’t no shame, ladies do your thing
    Just make sure you ahead of the game”
    – Missy Elliot

  9. Barb Saylor November 20, 2012 at 3:09 pm #

    Since when is burlesque not work?

  10. Charles Atlas Sheppard November 20, 2012 at 5:59 pm #

    I’m all for beer and football and NIPPLES! And what I like best about them…they are even better when they are cold.

  11. Stephen Whitworth November 20, 2012 at 7:20 pm #

    Barb: Since it’s impossible to make a living wage from it, I’d think.

  12. Barb Saylor November 20, 2012 at 9:29 pm #

    Stephen, I was questioning the distinction made in @8 between professional stripping and burlesque, because for decades, at least in North America, they were one and the same. Is there a new definition of which I am not aware?

  13. Ron November 20, 2012 at 10:04 pm #

    #11 Yer so wrong. How many women paid for their university/college degree, showing off their body? Many.
    At least they didn’t have to go off to some “war”,and expect to die every day that they went to “work”.

    Hey there is always the occasional wardrobe malfunction to look forward to.

    Oh Come On Carle! Cheer up. Men remove their clothes too. If you buy me a beer or not.

  14. Ron November 20, 2012 at 10:07 pm #

    buy me a beer 1st or not

  15. Carle Steel November 20, 2012 at 10:45 pm #

    Tee hee! I trolled! (I wasn’t subscribed to the comments — how lovely to hear you all!) My main objection to stripping and booze in Regina is that we’ll get Calgary’s kind of stripping, where after the dancer performs, the men wing toonies at women’s crotches. Plus Regina’s gross enough. It won’t be classy, whatever happens.

    The hetero thing came from my huffing at the newscast — I thought I heard that June Draude (of harassment over Queer City Cinema fame) announced the legislation. My mistake. You can’t hear very well when you’re constantly muttering angrily to the radio I guess.

    I did have a thought about the nipple thing – We could buy a fake vomit factory and make fake nipples instead. I don’t get nipplephobia at all.

  16. anonymous November 21, 2012 at 5:47 am #

    I am glad we can now drink in every establishment we now attend. If the Sask. Party keeps us all tipsy and giggly, it makes the pain of all their cuts and selling off all our assets easier to take. Sooner or later the party will end, we`ll sober up, and realize we live in La La land. Their political strategists are very smart! Announcing the sell off of a crown corporation at the same time as changing liquor laws makes everyone talk about drinking not thinking about losing one of our institutions.

  17. Stephen Whitworth November 21, 2012 at 8:45 am #

    Barb: Isn’t contemporary stripping more about dancing at the hotel bar or strip club every day while burlesque is more about occasional cabaret-type events with costumes, scenes and a deep connection to vaudeville? The former is a viable way of making a living. The latter isn’t, at least in Saskatchewan. I believe that’s what Amber meant. Also she qualified the statement with “largely”.

    Anyway, I’m not into strippers or burlesque so I’m not an expert.

  18. Barb Saylor November 21, 2012 at 8:51 am #

    Thanks for the clarification, Stephen.

Leave a Reply