We don't even know if this story is even true.
If he made up a story like that about himself then that's a whole different set of subscriptions (which are like issues, except you get a new one every month). Lacking evidence to the contrary, it's more appropriate to treat it as true.
Most of us consent to go to work, or mop, or see the dentist. Who's happy about that? Doing what we don't want to fit into our society or sub-societies is simply life. Things, realistically, we can't say not to. The dancer could.
Why would you suppose she has any more control over her job than anyone else does?
Suppose instead of an exotic dancer she were a waitress in a cocktail bar. Suppose a customer starts putting his hands on her every time she comes to his table - pinching her ass, sliding his hands up her skirt, and commenting on her breasts.
What are her options?
1) She can raise a fuss, talk to her boss, etc. But if her manager doesn't choose to take action, she's stuck. In fact a woman who makes waves like that might find herself fired, if her club relies on a permissive policy to bring in business.
2) She can slap the guy, but if her boss won't act on a complaint he's sure not going to back her up for assaulting a customer.
3) She can quit, if she doesn't need the money.
4) She can plaster a smile on her face, grit her teeth, and take it.
A dancer's choices are exactly the same. In a lot of clubs a guy who puts his hands on a dancer in any way at all will find himself out the door - the bouncers are told to watch for that. In other clubs it's more complicated - the owners won't allow anything they consider to be TOO sexual, but within those limits it's up to the girls: as long as they don't call for help, the bouncers let it go. In still other clubs, the management gives little or no help. If a dancer makes trouble, she's out.
Since the bouncers didn't move in, it obviously wasn't the first sort of place. So it lies somewhere on the spectrum between the other two choices. Regardless of where on that spectrum in falls, though, the point is that NCT believes that the woman he was dealing with did not want him to do what he was doing, and he didn't care.
There are two kinds of unpleasantness associated with any job. One is the annoyance that's just naturally associated with the work. There's no way to make working in a slaughterhouse truly pleasant, for example. The other kind is the sort that people (especially customers) bring in with them. That kind isn't excusable, because it's based on the choices those people make. So I'm not persuaded by any argument that says "Well, all jobs are unpleasant; this is no different." It is different, because the source of the unpleasantness is a person who had the choice to be pleasant instead.
And no one got hurt. And she got paid for it. And she could have said no. And he would have go on to someone else. And he says that he held back, anyway.
As I wrote in an earlier post, there are lots of ways to get "hurt." There's never a good excuse for making anyone's job harder or more unpleasant than it needs to be.
And please, the argument that "It's OK because he could have done worse" is NEVER an excuse. One can always be worse; that doesn't excuse being bad.
So some of us here would rather condemn than prevent.....
Besides the OP and a large man with a club, who can prevent this?
He wrote a story, apparently based on real life. Pointing out his flaws are a service? And how is that any of our jobs, anyway?
There are three basic approaches to take to any post made on this forum: Ignore it, offer empty praise, or be honest. Which is better for the health of the forum in the long run?
Maybe he's consenting to this service, but nbot really happy about it, so now you've become NonCon.
Hardly. If he's not happy, then he can ignore the poster. If he does that, what are the consequences to him? Does he lose any money? Does he lose a job? No, he suffers no consequences at all. Unlike the dancer, he has absolutely no pressure on him here to do anything at all he doesn't like.
