I believe your interpretations are clearly more sexist than the original
post. IMVHO...

The original post made no assumptions. It was a public announcement of an
interesting attraction for pilots.

You have managed to make it sexist by creating the distinction that anyone
who might be interested is "male pilots who aren't getting any". But I
think it isn't until you create that distinction that it becomes sexist.
Certainly there are many people who are interested in strip clubs,
otherwise there wouldn't be so many of them in this country. And
presumably, they are not all pilots who aren't getting any, otherwise
there wouldn't be so many HBO specials about them.

There are many announcements of interesting places to visit for pilots. I
appreciate all of the announcements, even if they don't necessarily apply
to me.

For example, some announcements are about hiking and camping spots. I
don't do much hiking or camping, as I am a fat guy with 3 kids including
an 18 month old toddler, and hiking and camping are not real practical for
me. I wouldn't be interested in visiting a hiking/camping spot. But does
the act of posting an announcement about a hiking/camping spot insult me?
Is it a bigoted post that should have included a preface in the title that
the post is only for thin, fit, single people without kids? Should it
insult ALL fat people with young children? Should I start the AFPYC
(American Fat People with Young Children) association to protect all of
the oppressed like myself?

That is ass-backwards if you ask me. People have become so hyper-sensitive
about their unique qualities and about being simply human that we spend
all of our time fine tuning everything we say and do to avoid offending
somebody. And most of the time, that only offends somebody else, anyway.

No wonder it's so easy for us to be terrorized!


Jim Logajan wrote in
:

"City Dweller" wrote:
Warning: adult content. Prudes and john ashcrofts of this group do not
read further.

Grumble. This dang thread refuses to die a proper death. Was going to
remain silent, but what the heck - may as well throw in my 2 cents.

Anyway, to make a long story short, I discovered a strip club in
Pennsylvania where the girls are good looking and the view is
unobstructed. And, what's most important, this club is within short
walking distance from a GA airport.

City Dweller's post is IMVHO, indeed sexist, based on the following:

It assumed all pilots are male and all r.a.p readers are male. It
doesn't say "Single heterosexual male pilot report" (or more accurately:
"PIREP for male pilots who aren't getting any"). Nope. Only warns Former
U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and prudes to not read further. So -
presumably women who don't get excited seeing other women nearly naked
are prudes? I would have thought they were merely heterosexual females -
go figure! Nothing like a lead-in that implicitly insults heterosexual
women! Nice job CD!

For City Dweller, only good looking "girls" need apply. (Equity on this
issue would seem to require the presumption that City Dweller be an
Adonis - though if that were the case, one has to wonder why he has to
fly long distances to see nearly naked women. Hmmm.) So it seems that
women don't seem to register in City Dweller's world view as either
pilots _or_ Usenet readers - they only register with City Dweller if
they are "good looking girls" who strip. If that doesn't add up to a
sexist attitude, then nothing does.

In my youth I went a few times to "strip clubs"/"topless bars". The very
first time was in the company of a female friend. After dressing after
her "act", one of the performers came over to our table to chat. It
seems that couples were sufficiently rare that the woman was curious why
my friend was there (my friend was curious - in fact she was the one who
suggested we go there!). But other than that incident, I'd say the
experience in those joints is a waste of money at best, and frustrating
at worst. There are better, legal, and more enjoyable ways to satisfy
sexual desires - but none of them are related to the OP's alleged PIREP.

All IMHO of course.