‘To glorify burlesque is kind of silly’

Kaitlyn Regehr learned from former striptease dancers that what they did was not a safe, sex‑positive hobby but often a means of survival that intersected with sex work

Published on
December 7, 2017
Last updated
October 19, 2018
Tammi True
Tammi True

POSTSCRIPT:

Print headline: Show and tell

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (1)

Holiday O'Hara here. Kaitlyn, I trusted you, and I am saddened that my words were taken out of context, and misrepresented. I have NEVER devalued or looked down my nose at anyone in the sexy/sexy/adult industry. As a feminist in 1968 when I began, many of us called stripping/dancing sex work, but whether one did or not it ALL had value. The business of sexuality extends as far back as time. There is definitely a continuum, and to say the following, "The denial of this continuous history, in which dancers quite literally step off the stage and into the laps of patrons, is concerning in that it marginalises the women who did or do perform in these other forms of entertainments," ignores that, and what actually happened. There is no denial, dancing CHANGED. The business of stripping/dancing was changing across the country, varying in manner from state to state, city to city, county to county. When you "literally step off the stage and into the laps of patrons..." and let the audience touch you are simply doing a different job, no better, no worse. I did phone sex in the 1980s and then I became a professional dominant. I simply did not want to be touched, and it's Ok that I felt that way, just as it's ok for those who were/are Ok with it. It's called choice. It wasn't the job *I* wished to do, and that is all there is to the matter.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT