What disappointed me about the show was that Anderson Cooper
and Goldie Hawn cast pole dancing into such a black and white light. Is it sexy or is it not sexy? Well, the
truth is, it’s both. And like
everything in this world, what pole is depends on the context in which it is
being explored. And yet, this
narrow attempt to define pole dancing in an oversimplified way highlighted not
just how little the general public knows about pole but also how the pole dance
community lacks a strong defining image.
When Anderson Cooper points out that the adult classes focus on
“increasing the libido” and have overtly sexual names like “sexy-flexy” and
“babes on bikes”, he is making a very valid point: How can you say what you are
doing is not sexual when all of your adult classes focus on sexuality? We
cannot, as a community, vigorously argue that we want to move past the stereotype
of pole as a sexy activity and then market our classes as sexy. It makes no sense. We, as a pole community have to be
clear on our message and our definitions of pole, and paradoxically, we have to
be able to defend the sexy in order to defend the fitness.
Another problem I saw with Anderson’s line of thinking and
therefore his questioning was the assumption that pole dancing will somehow
lead girls down a shameful, sex-driven, promiscuous path of harlotry and
immoral behavior. He asked two
versions of the same question. The
first was, “Why pole dancing? Why
not something with less of a sexual connotation?” The second was, “Once they reach maturity, THEN what happens?”
I love these kinds of questions because they reveal our culture’s
innate reaction to female sexuality:
Keep it secret and keep it safe.
As if a woman who learns the art of sexuality and pleasure
through dance is also learning to disrespect her body and her sexuality. I would argue that in fact, the
opposite is true.
One of the biggest concerns with young women and sex today
is that they often view sex and sexuality as something you give as a
performance for attention, rather than something you engage in because you want
to. There is a psychologist named
Deborah Tolman who has written extensively on this topic. She talks to girls about their
experience of “wanting” versus their experience of “sex”, which is more often
than not about being wanted. Tolman uses the phrase “silent bodies”
to describe the sexual experiences of these young girls. Whether or not these young women had sex, they had a difficult time
expressing if or how they felt desire or arousal in their bodies.
They instead chose to muffle
their feelings, out of fear for where it might take them, out of shame and out
of anxiety. Nevertheless, they
were still engaging in sexual activities and, more often than not, these
activities were described as having “just happened” to them. This is dangerous. When a girl does not know what her own
feelings and desires are she is much more vulnerable to the power of others
feelings and desires.
If what Tolman is saying is true, then teaching young women
how to develop a subjective sense of their sexual selves would actually be a
solution to them giving away their sexuality, when in fact we must teach them
to own it. In other words, our
culture needs to teach women how to get in touch with what desire and arousal
feel like, how to experience it in their bodies, and how to express what they
want and don’t want. Pole dancing
is actually an excellent vehicle for such an education. And this is because sexuality and
desire are primarily experienced in the body.
So to turn Anderson Cooper’s line of thinking on its head, I
would argue that it is important for every young woman to learn how to explore
her sexuality through pole dance in a safe, all-female environment. I won’t teach my daughter to pole dance
because I want her to go to the Olympics or win a competition somewhere- I will
teach her to pole dance because it will teach her about her body and her
sexuality in a healthy and sane manner.
Clearly Anderson’s question about where someone would “go”
after learning to pole dance is based not just on his lack of understanding about the value of the sensuality of the movement, but is also designed to point out that pole dancing has no
organizational strength. And here,
he also has a point. We are so new
that we do not yet have all of the things that other sports have to show their
validity: scholarships, corporate sponsors, official coaches, etc. But that will come, if we want it
to.
I think the question is, do we want it to? Goldie Hawn’s parting advice to the
brave trio was to take the sexuality out of the movement and out of the
marketing campaign immediately.
But should we really do that?
It brings us back to the age-old debate: Do we jettison sexuality in
favor of mainstream acceptance of pole dancing?
Personally, I don’t think that will ever happen. But what this interview highlighted was
just how confused people are about what pole dancing is.
My personal belief is that until we can defend the value of
the inherent sensuality of the movement, we will face ridicule and
misunderstanding from the general public.
The truth of the matter is the majority of pole dance studios (in the US
anyway) are focused on the sensual aspect of pole. It is impossible to argue that pole is a sport and a form of
fitness only while marketing classes
as a form of sensual empowerment and putting on shows that highlight the
sensual nature of pole dancing.
We need to address the issue of sensuality, the inherent value of the
sexiness of the movement before we can defend it as nothing more than a form of
fitness.
I wish Anderson Cooper and Goldie Hawn had been far more
curious in their line of questioning.
I wish they stuck to their promise of having a “chat” about the topic
with these ladies, rather than assault-style questioning. Because perhaps then, all the beautiful
aspects of pole could have been shared and understood by people around the
country. Next time ladies…next
time.
