Sensuality, Sexuality, and Stuck Up Pole Dancers

A Pet Peeve of Mine

It has driven me crazy for years whenever I hear belly dancers insisting that their dance style is sensual, but not sexual.

“Oh,” they say, in voices dripping with honey, “belly dance is a very sensual dance. It’s not sexual at all,” they then add in a scolding tone, implying to all within earshot that they are a true feminist icon, while I obviously see women as mindless chattel good for only one thing.

And now I’m finding the same thing in the pole dance community.

Ah, the stench of self-righteousness

The thing that drives me nuts about this is the smugness. The sense that they are not only better dancers, but better people. Better women. And all because there is no sexuality in their dancing. Just none. They are so pure, you see. The rest of us may be content to prance around like a bunch of unfeminist whores, but they are delicate little flowers.*

Why is sexuality in dance a bad thing?

If you take the sexuality out of dance, you wind up with something about as thrilling to watch as Lawrence Welk.** Cute and peppy it may be, but in no way does it resemble what your average pole dancer is trying to achieve.

This virgin/whore split is absolutely destructive to creativity. You can’t be a good dancer if you look like a passionless drone, so why would any dancer want to buy into this mentality?

Sexuality and Pole Dance

Historically, a lot of dance styles have made their way from the lower classes to the higher classes, gaining acceptability to the middle classes along the way. Tango is the classic example of this – a bawdy, working-class dance that was too risque to be indulged in in good company. Bit by bit, of course, it gained acceptability, and now Latin Dance competitions featuring tango are considered highly cultured.

Given pole dancing’s association with strip clubs, it’s no surprise it’s frowned on as being too sexual. The problem, of course, is that it’s also too fun – which means even the smugly politically-correct want to give it a try. They just have to separate themselves from the Great Unwashed by insisting that when they do it, there’s no sexuality in it at all.

What it all boils down to

The real issue is not whether the dance is sexual or sensual. The issue is whether the dance is good. And good dancing requires dancers to feel into every cell of their bodies, to be fully present with each movement and gesture, and to lure the audience into their world. There is no way this can be done without a physical consciousness and emotional awareness that cannot be separated from either sensuality or sexuality.

To immerse yourself in your creativity, to drench yourself in the passion of your expression is to be sexual. If you connect with your body and express the pleasure of movement when you dance, there will be sexuality in your dance style.

Nobody has a problem with this when it’s Bob Fosse’s Chicago being staged on Broadway.

But start talking about this in connection with pole dancing, and all hell breaks loose.

*What exactly do we mean by the terms “sensuality” and “sexuality,” anyway? There’s not a heck of a lot of difference – just look up sensuality in the dictionary. Of course, perhaps they mean to say sensuous instead of sensual, but I find it hard to believe anyone is that clear on the distinction. (I sure wasn’t.)

**Now, personally, I find the old Lawrence Welk show absolutely fascinating. I mean, how can musicians and dancers be so absolutely sexless? Perfect steps, perfect turns, but no zing at all. I just don’t buy it – I figure they were all engaging in wild bondage and whipping orgies the minute they were through taping. But maybe that’s just me.

If you liked this article, you’ll also want to read Strippers and Pole Dancing.

15th June, 2009 - Posted by PoleSkivvies - 13 Comments
Filed under: Jennifer's Rants