The Don't-Show-Me State


I think the correct term is "boring".
That's funny because Missouri in known as the "Show Me State".
in chimes slog poster "lark" with a brilliant contribution
I think you already thought up the perfect name, Dan. "Missouri - The Don't-Show Me State."
Steadily losing ground on almost all fronts, cultural conservatives turn in a search for easy victories to the most vulnerable, the outsiders, the safe targets. "Let's outlaw and stigmatize the ones no legislator will dare speak up for," they think. "That way we can sit around and grope our big ol' legislative hard-ons while we congratulate one another on being so righteous and civic-minded. It's just strippers, after all, and they're basically whores, right? Nobody cared when Jack the Ripper killed 'em. Nobody will care if we kill their livelihoods."

Fucking jackals. Ugh. You'd think old men in positions of responsibility would be above the same shitty cycle-of-abuse behavior that you see in bratty kids who get disciplined for being awful and then take out their impotent rage on animals or younger siblings.

Fuck 'em. Fuck Missouri. Fuck legislatures in general.
This should give a boost to the economies of East Saint Louis, IL., and Kansas City, KS.
Show me what? According to this there is nothing to see. I say we should call it NO MO.
I have a few suggestions for the new motto:

"Keep your damn clothes on!"


"Put that thing away!"

or, my favorite:

"Get off my lawn!"
Dan, you demon-spawn, don't you know that Jaysus says nekkid wimmen are e-villl? You must want all those men to spend the rest of eternity burning in Hell.
Supporters argued that strip clubs and adult video stores are a scourge on society—contributing to seedy behavior, demeaning women, causing divorces and driving down property values....

While most of the supporters are undoubtedly conservatives, I'm sure a significant minority are "liberals" (with most of those probably being women.)

There's a certain type of "liberal" who thinks women should have the right to do what they want with their bodies when it comes to having an abortion but then turns right around and wants to restrict what women can do with their bodies when it comes to taking their clothes off (or fucking) for money.
From that RFT article: "The bill now heads to Governor Jay Nixon's desk, where the Democrat is inclined to sign the bill so as not to be attacked by his opponents as being soft on porn."

Strip clubs are small businesses, and Missouri's two biggest cities border other states, presumably with better strip club laws. Jay Nixon should swallow the "soft on porn" thing (really? that's the attack?) and respond with good-for-small-businesses and keeping-Missouri-tax-dollars-in-Missouri.

Also, ha ha ha, the phrase "soft on porn."
Missouri: Where even jizzing in your sleep is illegal.
What's the opposite of being "soft on porn"?
The reality is it won't affect St Louis because they have basically outlawed strip clubs in the immediate area anyway. Now East St Louis & surrounding IL towns are far less regulated so everyone goes "to the east side" when they wanna see titties (& cock! hi Boxers-n-Briefs!).

What this will do is kill all the strip club/video booth/porn shops along the I-44, I70 & I-55 corridors. Those places are pretty skanky, but for the love of pete those poor truckers gotta get out of their cabs & bust a nut sometime...
Republicans are dickwads! Can they make it illegal to call them dickwads? DICKWADS!
Don't forget this has the added side effect of marginalizing women in the state. Less high paying jobs for women means women wield less political influence. The problem solves itself!

Also by reducing the number of good paying jobs available to women you keep they reliant on men to provide for them which in turns keeps (abusive) marriages together. Remember that an abusive heterosexual marriage is better than any gay marriage, for the kids of course.

Does one not pause an admire a beautiful sunset? Or flower? Or elk? The reason women (and men) are so beautifully made is so you'll linger over it and realize life is full of beauty. Here's hoping that you find yourself surprised by beauty today.

And, I'm being cheeky. I have a house full of relatives, 12 bottles of whisky, and I'll consent to acting my shoe size but not my age. Buffalo Trace and my Martin are on the agenda.

Take care.
I wonder if this will effect St Louis' Mardi Gras, the second biggest in the country. When I went in 2003 I saw so many tits it was unreal.

While the legislature of MO may be blue nose, the people of St Louis know how to have a good time.

Of course, our dumb state isn't that much better. We're a puritanical island between the much more open minded BC and OR.
Don't get too high and mighty....we still can't drink in strip clubs here, which is fucking lame.
As others mentioned, St. Louis won't be affected anyway... just east across the river (and Illinois border), there are a few little towns that are essentially nothing but strip clubs.

Last time I was in St. Louis, I remember one of those little towns was called Brooklyn, or New York, or Hollywood or something, and it consisted of eight strip clubs, a gas station, and a church (?!?). Nothing else. If Missouri enjoys seeing a huge tax revenue disappear to Illinois just a half-mile from its borders, all in the name of good ole' fashioned puritanism, then that's their loss.
Less high paying jobs for women means women wield less political influence.

You get points for most creative and asinine argument against this law.

Strippers don't make as much as you seem to think, and most age out pretty damn fast.
What with our wonderful former AG being from Missouri, I think our new motto should be "Cover that shit up!"
Conservatives in Seattle? Please the stripper 4ft rule I'm Seattle was feminism run amok.
If we were to accept St. Louis into Illinois, I'm pretty sure we'd in so doing call down a reprisal of fire and brimstone from Milwaukee. Also, we'd have to deal with the St. Louis Lambs.

@14: Viagra prescription.
I don't necessarily know about that, Roma. I'm a liberal, and I think sexually-oriented business CAN do all of those evil things to a community, but it's actually restrictions like those enacted in MO that CAUSE the businesses to harm the communities. See, those restriction will inevitably cause sexually-oriented businesses to open in already poor, blighted communities - those with lots of vacant space and few business/schools/homeowners/etc. Located in an inconvenient, ugly, possibly dangerous neighborhood, only the bottom of the barrel patronize them.

The people in my neighborhood recognize this. I've actually seen a number of comments on development blogs noting that the strip clubs that want to open here should be forced to do so in well-trafficed, transit-accessible, well-policed areas, to reduce the problems they create. Of course there are old fogies and NIMBYs who would oppose this, but there are also decent, intelligent people who get how this can work effectively.

FWIW, the strip clubs in nice, busy, transit-accessible neighborhoods in DC are quiet, discreet, and have great security. Even if their clientele (gross old businessmen and sketchy politicos) are still slimy.
This story makes me want to go visit Portland. Who's coming with me?
I’m with you. Road trip to Union Jacks!
St. Louis doesn't even have full nude strip clubs. You have to cross the river to Illinois to see that kind of action.

Though there is a pasties strip club near my brother's home there. We didn't even know it existed until about a year ago.
@ 19, you went during an exceptionally good year. It was like lower 60s & sunny that year, so the crowd was twice as big as usual & three times as drunk.

Normal weather for MG is lower 40s & rainy. Still lots of fun but not nearly as many titties.

You are right about The Lou knowing how to party. :)

21: It is Brooklyn, and that is no exaggeration. You just forgot to mention the seedy swingers club.
Those Missouri pimps are about to get richer.
oh no.
poor Mo is lagging behind our skip-a-long to Gommorah....
A new name for Missouri? How about buzzkillville, or lamesville
@17 Ummm, I certainly hope stripping isn't the highest paying and most influential job women can get in Missouri.
Prohibition : Liquor :: Inhibition : Sexxx
Missouri: Lamer than originally assumed.
@6 - Well said.

@22 - You say that like you know what you're talking about, but it depends on where they work and when they start. I've known women in the biz for 20 years (and still looking great when they retire at 40). And while Missouri wasn't known for good money before, now it'll just be worse. It's a hard enough job without those kinds of ridiculous restrictions. Restrictions club management will likely encourage the performers to ignore. Stupid family values.

I like "hohibition", myself.

While I'm in the UK, not the US (seriously, what the fuck is going on with all the social conservatism over there? We have a long way to go on that over this side of the Atlantic, but you guys have some real insanity going on), and I'll admit that personally I've got no interest in strip clubs, surely it's just plain stupid to legislate them out of existence just because some people are worried about THE DEGENERATION OF FAMILY VALUES OMG... what does that even mean, anyway? Everybody in bed with the lights out by half past nine? And it's slimy to try and stamp something out without having the basic honesty to say "I don't approve of this, so I'm going to say it's altogether illegal".

When I see the "can't open within such-and-such distance of schools" I always think of two things....

First, is there really that much trouble keeping grade-schoolers out of strip clubs? Or is the concern that the patrons, frustrated by being unable to get close to the dancers, are going to go abduct the kids?

Second, does it work both ways? We had a situation here locally where there was an ordinance that you can't operate a bar within a specific distance of a school, and when the nearby school expanded into that zone, they forced one of the oldest and most popular gay bars in town to close. The rule should work both ways - you can't open or expand a school within the same distance of an existing establishment (or else the establishment gets grandfathered.)
Ugh. As a native Missourian, I sometimes feel guilty for choosing the path of least resistance and just moving away, rather than sticking around to fight this kind of nonsense as a citizen. But I would like to add, @17, that my reasons for moving away had nothing to do with not being able to find high-paying stripping work.
Can they legislate anything about proximity to churches? That kind of sounds like pushing through the wall of separation.

Also makes me wonder if this prohibits churches from constructing within 1000 feet or if they'll force the sex workers to move.

The bigger scourge on our society is the religious (pretty much all Christian) right, and crucifixes they have shoved up their asses.
@41: I think they can legislate proximity to churches. Where I live (Nashville, TN) no establishment can sell alcohol with a certain distance of a church. I forget what the exact distance is, but several years ago when we got a new football stadium there was a lot of debate over whether it should be given an exemption to allow the sale of beer during football games or other events.

Speaking of alcohol consumption, the legislature here wants to move up last call to midnight or earlier, but at the same time wants to allow people to be able to carry concealed weapons in bars. I can't be too critical of Missouri when where I live seems even more backward.
It's amazing how Conservatives decry "Nanny State" laws that Democrats make, but when they're legislating out things that folks should have the FREEDOM to decide if they want to enjoy, it's a "scourge" and needs to be eliminated to protect society.