Minnesota State University, Mankato
Minnesota State University, Mankato
Cornerstone: A Collection of Scholarly
Cornerstone: A Collection of Scholarly
and Creative Works for Minnesota
and Creative Works for Minnesota
State University, Mankato
State University, Mankato
All Theses, Dissertations, and Other Capstone
Projects
Theses, Dissertations, and Other Capstone
Projects
2019
The Effects and Experiences of Stigma in the Minneapolis Strip
The Effects and Experiences of Stigma in the Minneapolis Strip
Club Industry
Club Industry
Machensey Shelgren
Minnesota State University, Mankato
Follow this and additional works at: https://cornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/etds
Part of the Clinical Psychology Commons, Community Psychology Commons, and the Gender and
Sexuality Commons
Recommended Citation
Recommended Citation
Shelgren, M. (2019). The effects and experiences of stigma in the Minneapolis strip club industry
[Master’s thesis, Minnesota State University, Mankato]. Cornerstone: A Collection of Scholarly and
Creative Works for Minnesota State University, Mankato. https://cornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/etds/919/
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, and Other Capstone Projects
at Cornerstone: A Collection of Scholarly and Creative Works for Minnesota State University, Mankato. It has been
accepted for inclusion in All Theses, Dissertations, and Other Capstone Projects by an authorized administrator of
Cornerstone: A Collection of Scholarly and Creative Works for Minnesota State University, Mankato.
The Effects and Experiences of Stigma in the Minneapolis Strip Club Industry
By
Machensey Shelgren
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Arts
In
Clinical Psychology
Minnesota State University, Mankato
Mankato, MN
May 2019
i
Date: 4/25/2019
The Effects and Experiences of Stigma in the Minneapolis Strip Club Industry
Machensey Shelgren
This Master’s Thesis has been examined and approved by the following members of the
student’s committee.
_______________________________
Eric Sprankle, Psy.D., Chairperson
_______________________________
Jeffrey Buchanan, Ph.D., Committee Member
______________________________
Shannon Miller, Ph.D., Committee Member
ii
Table of Contents
Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… iv
Acknowledgement ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………v
Introduction
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..1
Minority Stress
………………………………………………………………………………………………………2
Aims of Current Study ……………………………………………………………………………………………4
Methods…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..4
Participatory Action Research …………………………………………………………………………………4
Sampling ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………4
Researchers ………………………………………………………………………………………………..4
Participants
…………………………………………………………………………………………………5
Procedure ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..6
Measures ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………7
Online Survey …………………………………………………………………………………………….7
Interview ……………………………………………………………………………………………………8
Analysis and Coding ………………………………………………………………………………………………8
Quantitative
………………………………………………………………………………………………..9
Qualitative
………………………………………………………………………………………………….9
Results
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….9
Online Survey ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….9
Interviews
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………11
Dancer Identity………………………………………………………………………………………….11
iii
Assumptions Made…………………………………………………………………………………….12
Loss of Social Supports ……………………………………………………………………………..12
Profession Weaponized Against Them
…………………………………………………………13
Housing Discrimination ……………………………………………………………………………..14
Lack of Employment Mobility…………………………………………………………………….15
Identity Concealment as Stigma Management ………………………………………………16
Discussion ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..17
Limitations and Future Research ……………………………………………………………………………18
Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….20
References
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..23
Appendix A: Tables ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..27
Appendix B: Definitions of Gender Identities and Sexual Orientations
………………………………….29
Appendix C: Recruitment Script
……………………………………………………………………………………….30
Appendix D: Survey Consent Form
…………………………………………………………………………………..33
Appendix E: Survey Questions
…………………………………………………………………………………………35
Appendix F: Interview Consent Form ……………………………………………………………………………….37
Appendix G: Interview Instructions…………………………………………………………………………………..39
iv
Abstract
Utilizing participatory action research with dancers in the Minneapolis strip club industry, the
present study examined current dancers’ experiences with stigma, its effects on their quality of
life, and stigma management techniques. The present multi-methods study involved an initial
survey and follow-up interviews with approximately 60 current dancers within Minneapolis strip
clubs. Participants reported experiencing stigma in personal relationships and in the workplace,
discrimination by landlords and future employers. Through thematic analysis, seven key themes
were identified: dancer identity, assumptions made, loss of social support, profession
weaponized against them, housing discrimination, lack of employment mobility, and identity
concealment as stigma management. Applying the minority stress theory to dancers in the strip
club industry, it appears the stress experienced by dancers is caused by the discriminatory social
structures and stigma built against the population. Therefore, educating lawmakers about the
needs and rights of dancers and the impact of stigma might inform legislation and eliminate the
power of employers and landlords to discriminate against dancers.
v
Acknowledgements
I would like to first say a heartfelt thank you to the dancers that were generous with their
time and stories as participants in this project. These individuals trusted me to report and share
their lived experiences with integrity. It is my hope that I have done them justice through this
project. In addition, this research would not have been possible without foundational work by
SWOP-MPLS and the principle investigator, Dr. Eric Sprankle.
My sincere gratitude to my co-researcher, Alexander Twohy. I could not have asked for a
better partner to spend hour after hour working on this project, engaging in stimulating
discussion, and all of the fun in the last two years. Additionally, I am incredibly grateful to
undergraduate lab member, Sedona Kintz, for her help annotating and organizing literature for
my paper.
I gratefully acknowledge the funding received towards this research from the Urgent
Response Fund, Third Wave Fund and Minnesota State University which allowed me to fairly
compensate participants and to utilize a transcription service for the hours of interviews we
obtained.
Finally, I thank my committee chair and mentor, Dr. Eric Sprankle, for his continuous
support of my education and related research. This project would not have been possible without
his vision, guidance and patience. I also thank my other committee members, Dr. Jeffrey
Buchanan and Dr. Shannon Miller, for their insightful comments and encouragement throughout
the development of this project.
1
Introduction
Dancers1 in the strip club industry2 are a stigmatized and marginalized group who,
historically, have been studied by academia through the lens of deviancy. The tone of previous
research infers that dancers are either victims of poverty, drug abuse, and/or trafficking, or are
victimized by their own poor life choices (Sherman et al., 2017). Other research focuses on the
motivations (Hardy & Sanders, 2015; Sanders & Hardy, 2015) and self-perceptions of dancers
(Pederson, Champion, Hesse, & Lewis, 2015), and how they manage stigma (Ham & Gerard,
2014; Miller & Major, 2000; Thompson, Harred, & Burks, 2003; Wong, Holroyd, & Bingham,
2011). Unfortunately, much of the previous research has neglected to view dancers as decision
makers, and further perpetuates the stigma surrounding the profession.
This paper will conceptualize the experiences of dancers within the strip club industry
through a lens of minority stress theory (Meyer, 2003). Previous literature has posited that
marginalized individuals experience negative consequences as a result of social stigma
surrounding their stigmatized attributes. In the case of dancers in the strip club industry, negative
consequences from minority stress are a result of the social stigma surrounding working in the
strip club industry, and not inherently from the work (Koken, Bimbi, Parsons, & Halkitis, 2004;
Krusi, Kerr, Taylor, Rhodes & Shannon, 2016; Lazarus et. al., 2012; Scrambler, 2007). While
1 For the purpose of this paper, dancer will be used to define workers who self-identify as having danced in a strip
club within the past two months and whose primary income from the strip club is through customer tips.
2 The strip club industry is defined as adult entertainment venues where dancers provide lap dances, pole dances,
and other erotic entertainment to fulfill the fantasies of customers. The strip club industry does not include the
provision of direct genital stimulation or full-service sex work to customers. Strip clubs may be topless or fully-nude
with differing regulations between each type of venue and geographical locations.
2
previous research regarding stigma has typically been conducted with sex workers3, a review of
the literature revealed the minority stress theory has not yet been applied to sex workers or
dancers.
Minority Stress
The Minority Stress Model (Meyer, 2003) posits that excess stress for stigmatized
minorities is caused primarily by oppressive social structures (e.g., discriminatory legislation and
regulation) rather than by their stigmatized attributes (e.g., self-identification as or perception of
a dancer). These oppressive social structures built against the stigmatized group include
discriminatory laws, prejudice, and religious traditions that act as core stressors by perpetuating
stigma, prejudice, and discrimination (Meyer, 2003). The minority stress model has, historically,
conceptualized the stress of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) population, but has also been
applied to other marginalized populations including transgender individuals (Bockting, Miner,
Swinburne-Romine, Hamilton, & Coleman, 2013; Katz-Wise, Mereish, & Woulfe, 2017), people
of color (Chen & Tryon, 2012; Cyrus, 2017; Wei et al., 2010) and immigrants (Negi, 2013).
As a result of the unique, socially-based stressors (Meyer, 2003) affecting individuals
within the strip club industry, minority stress has a strong impact in the lives of the stigmatized
individuals and may lead to adverse physical and mental health outcomes (Hatzenbuehler,
Phelan, & Link, 2013; Link & Phelan, 2006; Meyer, 2003). The minority stress model describes
experienced stressors as distal or proximal (Meyer, 2003). Distal stressors are external sources of
stress which are independent of personal identification with the stigmatized attribute. Therefore,
3 Traditionally, sex work is considered an umbrella term that includes stripping. However, for the purpose of this
paper, a distinction has been made between the two terms in order to specify the population for comparison. For the
purpose of this paper, sex work is defined as the sale of a sexual service for money or material goods including
escorting, cam-working, pornography, professional domination/submission, street-based work, erotic massage and
providing “extras” within strip clubs.
3
even if the individual does not self-identify with the stigmatized attribute, he/she may still
experience discrimination, prejudice, or violence as a result of others’ perceptions of the
stigmatized attribute. Proximal stressors, on the other hand, are internal sources of stress that are
related to self-identity with the stigmatized attribute. Proximal stressors might include
anticipating rejection, internalized stigma, and techniques to manage stigma such as identity
concealment (Meyer, 2003).
Dancers experiencing proximal stressors manage their stigma using a variety of stress
management strategies. Previous studies (Forsyth & Deshotels 1998; Thompson, Harred, &
Burks, 2003; Wong, Holroyd, & Bingham, 2011) have found that dancers and sex workers are
concerned about how others will react or perceive them and engage in identity concealment to
avoid negative consequences associated with the stigma surrounding their profession (Miller &
Major, 2000). Sex workers often lose access to social support due to stigma (Koken, 2012), or
socially isolate themselves from others to avoid the experienced stigma and stress when
concealing their work (Ham & Gerard, 2014). Other studies have found that dancers may create
alternate positive identities about themselves and distance themselves from other dancers to
differentiate themselves from, or disconfirm, the stereotypes associated with the profession (e.g.,
engaging in prostitution, being “loose,” or being drug addicted) (Miller & Major, 2000; Trautner
& Collett, 2010). As another technique of stigma management, they may choose to affiliate
themselves with similarly stigmatized persons, such as other dancers, as a self-protective
measure to avoid negative consequences as a result of self-disclosure to others (Crocker &
Major, 1989, Postmes & Branscombe 2002; Miller & Major, 2000).
4
Aims of Current Study
This study was part of a larger needs assessment that utilized participatory action
research with dancers within the Minneapolis strip club industry to examine the various
workplace, health, legal and social needs of current dancers. The major objective and research
questions of the present study were: (1) “What are the Minneapolis dancers’ experiences with
stigma relating to their profession, and its effects on their quality of life?”, and (2) “How do
Minneapolis dancers in the strip club industry manage stigma as a result of their profession?”. A
mixed methods approach to gather quantitative and qualitative data was utilized.
Methods
Participatory Action Research
Utilizing participatory action research, as described by McIntyre (2008), this study was
designed to produce a more representative picture of the needs of dancers within the Minneapolis
strip club industry and to correct problems of previous studies which have not been worker-
centered. Specifically, dancers were included not just as participants and consultants, but as
coresearchers, emphasizing collaborative research at all levels of the research process. This level
of inclusion throughout the research process is essential when working with marginalized
populations, particularly within sex work (van der Meulen, 2011). Through mutual discussion
and collaborative effort, the structure of the present study was developed with members of the
Sex Workers Outreach Project of Minneapolis (SWOP-MPLS).
Sampling
Researchers. Members of SWOP-MPLS were approached by the PI to conduct a needs
assessment that would best serve their community. SWOP-MPLS members elected to focus on
5
strip club dancers due to impending regulations in the strip club industry that were not worker-
focused, and potentially harmful. SWOP-MPLS members who identified as current dancers
within the Minneapolis strip club industry were approached and provided with information on
the purpose and processes of participatory action research. Traditionally, PAR seeks to include
as many stakeholders in the research team as possible. However, given the consequences related
to stigma, such as being outed as a dancer, and the hidden nature of the population, the research
team was limited in stakeholder involvement. Based on interest and availability, three members
of SWOP-MPLS, who were already public with their profession and could represent the interests
of the community, volunteered to become co-researchers, and one member volunteered to serve
as a consultant. In total, the research team consisted of six co-researchers (three academic
researchers from Minnesota State University, Mankato, and three community researchers from
SWOP-MPLS), and one community consultant (from SWOP-MPLS).
Participants. Purposive sampling was used to approach participants who identified as
current dancers4 within the Minneapolis strip club industry. For complete demographic
information, please see Table 1 in Appendix A. Approximately 80 individuals initiated the online
survey, and of these, 62 participants completed enough of the survey to be included in analysis
(criteria was completion of 90% or more of the quantitative questions). Of the 62 survey
participants (aged 20-47, M=27.26, SD=4.875) included in the analysis, the majority of
participants identified as white and were aged 20-25 or 26-30 (43.55% and 35.48%,
respectively). More specifically, 56.45% identified as white (n = 35), followed by black
(17.74%, n = 11), mixed race (16.13%, n = 10), Hispanic (6.45%, n = 4), middle eastern
4 For the purposes of this study, current dancer has been defined as having worked as a dancer in a strip club in
Minneapolis within the past two months.
6
(1.61%, n = 1), and other race (1.61%, n = 1). 91.2% of participants identified their gender
identity as female (n = 57), 6.4% identified themselves as non-binary (n = 4), and 1.6% as gender
fluid (n = 1). 55.74% of participants identified their sexual orientation as heterosexual/straight (n
= 34), 14.75% as bisexual (n = 9), 11.47% as queer (n = 7), 8.2% as pansexual (n = 5), 4.92% as
homosexual/gay (n = 3), 3.28% as open (n = 2), and 1.64% as fluid (n =1). For a complete
glossary of gender identity and sexual orientation terms, see Appendix B. When asked about
current relationship status, 16.1% of participants (n = 10) reported they were single and not
dating, 25.8% were casually dating with no committed partner (n = 16), 53.2% were partnered (n
= 33), and 4.8% were legally partnered (n = 3).
67.8% of participants (n = 40) indicated that the majority (76-100%) of their income is
earned through dancing. Most frequently, participants identified Downtown Cabaret or
Spearmint Rhino as their primary club (26.67% and 16.67%, respectively). For complete club
affiliation information, please see Table 2 in Appendix A. Following the online survey,
participants were able to voluntarily participate in follow-up interviews. From the 62 survey
participants, 33 elected to participate in the follow-up interviews used for analysis.
Inclusion criteria for the study was having worked in a Minneapolis strip club within the
past two months. Inclusion was also restricted to dancers, as opposed to other workers inside
strip clubs such as bartenders and management, and those who are at least 18 years of age. To
control for these criteria, participants were required to answer a screening question regarding
specific Minneapolis clubs that they have recently worked at.
7
Procedure
Participants were directly recruited by members of SWOP-MPLS and identified as a
current dancer within the Minneapolis strip club industry. Through personal contacts, recruiters
asked potential participants if they were interested in completing the survey. If a potential
participant was interested, the recruiter emailed them a direct link to the online survey.
Additional recruitment was conducted on social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter) from the PI’s
and recruiters’ accounts with the following post: “If you have worked in a Minneapolis strip club
within the past two months and would like to participate in research asking your opinions on
workplace conditions, please DM [Direct Message] for the survey link.” Potential participants
direct messaged the research team declaring their interest and were subsequently emailed the
direct link to the survey. For a complete recruitment script, please see Appendix C.
Upon opening the survey link, participants were presented with a consent form.
Participants indicated their informed consent to participate and their assurance that they were 18
years of age by clicking the link at the bottom of the page which continued to the survey. For a
complete survey consent form, please see Appendix D. The survey took approximately 15-20
minutes to complete. After completion of the survey, participants were directed to a separate
survey to enter an email address for a $20.00 Amazon gift card as compensation, as well as
inquiring whether they would like to participate in an optional interview.
Participants who expressed interest in participating in an interview were sent an email
from which informed consent was obtained. For a complete interview consent form, please see
Appendix F. Interviews were conducted via ZOOM meeting platform (a video conferencing
program similar to Skype, but that meets HIPAA compliance for privacy), or in-person recording
on the interviewer’s iPhone. All participants who expressed interest in interviewing were
8
interviewed by the SWOP-MPLS co-researchers. Interviews lasted approximately 30-60
minutes. Upon completion of the interview, SWOP-MPLS co-researchers ensured the recorded
file was saved using the participant’s pseudonym as the file name. SWOP-MPLS co-researchers
sent the files via email to the academic co-researchers who compensated the participant with a
$100 e-gift card to Amazon. Interviews were conducted via ZOOM meeting platform during a
pre-scheduled meeting time. Upon entering the meeting and before recording, the assigned
SWOP-MPLS co-researcher explained the nature of the interview (i.e., duration, purpose,
confidentiality, and compensation) and held for questions. The SWOP-MPLS co-researcher
asked each participant whether they would like to use an alias or pseudonym to further protect
their identity, and asked permission to begin recording. SWOP-MPLS co-researchers were
instructed to ask specific questions related to needs assessment topics during the interview,
allowing for expansion and clarification as needed.
Measures
The present study utilized an online survey and follow-up interviews to gain information
on dancers’ experiences of stigma and quality of life.
Online survey. The quantitative survey was part of a larger needs assessment which was
designed to ask participants about numerous experiences and perspectives on workplace
conditions and stigma. Question topics such as demographics, places of employment, safety, pay
structure, contract details, cleanliness, stigma, police presence, as well as others were included
(for a complete survey questionnaire, please see Appendix E). Quantitative scaling questions
utilized a five-point Likert scale with a variety of anchors to match the question. Question
examples included, “Are your friends supportive of you working in a strip club?”, or “Are you
treated differently when someone knows you work in a strip club?”. Free response and open-
9
ended questions were included at the end of each section allowing participants to share any
additional insights they may have. For example, “Do you have any other comments relating to
stigma about your job or how stigma has affected you?”
The first draft of the online survey created by the academic co-researchers and was sent
to SWOP-MPLS co-researchers for review. This led to changes in ambiguous wording and
refocusing content to worker-centered questions. After SWOP-MPLS approved the content, the
survey was released and conducted over a 3-month period (February 13, 2018- May 18, 2017).
The survey was hosted by the Qualtrics website with details about the study and contact details
for support. The only questions that were required affirmed the inclusion criteria mentioned
above. The survey was anonymous. However, emails were voluntarily provided in a separate and
unattached survey in order to receive compensation and indicate whether they would like to be
contacted for the in-depth interview.
Interview. A short, semi-structured interview script was developed for the larger needs
assessment. The present study focused on aspects of stigma, which included the following
questions: (a) “Do you have any other comments relating to stigma about your job or how stigma
has affected you?” (b) “Is there anything else you would like to share with me and the other
researchers?”. The interviews followed a conversational style, and all participants agreed to
interviews being recorded. For complete interview instructions and script, please see Appendix
G.
Analysis and Coding
The survey questionnaire was analyzed using a mixed methods approach. All survey
material was organized utilizing SPSS software.
10
Quantitative analysis. Quantitative data was analyzed by reporting simple means and
descriptive statistics from the various questions and distinguishing responses between clubs. The
only questions that were required were those confirming the individual met inclusion criteria.
Therefore, while there were 62 participants included in quantitative analysis, the number of
respondents (n) vary by item.
Qualitative analysis. All interview material was sent to an independent firm, VerbalInk,
for transcription. Interviews and qualitative responses from surveys were organized and analyzed
utilizing a qualitative research software program (MAXQDA), which allowed participants’
statements concerning their feelings about sex work, stigma and quality of life to be identified
and captured within each narrative. Using an iterative thematic analysis, two academic
researchers, first on their own and then collaboratively, analyzed and categorized statements,
codes, and themes. The process of thematic analysis involved: reading participants’ statements
for familiarity, clustering statements of meaning into codes, clustering codes into themes,
reviewing codes and themes, and sharing analyzed statements, codes, and themes with other
researchers.
Results
Online Survey
62 online surveys were completed to inclusion criterion. Participants were asked whether
they are treated differently when someone knows they work in a strip club. 77.2% of participants
indicated that people treat them differently due to knowledge of their profession (n = 44). For
example, “Many people have a preconceived idea about what it means when a woman is a
stripper. This translates into how people view and treat you inside and outside the club.”
11
Participants were asked whether people make assumptions about their personal lives based on
their job. 89.5% of participants (n = 51) answered “yes,” of which were assumed to engage in
prostitution or full-service sex work (19.2%), to have multiple sexual partners (17.6%), and to
engage in drug use and parties (11.2%). Other, lesser reported assumptions were being
unintelligent (3.6%), having “daddy issues” (3.6%), having sexually-transmitted diseases (3.2%),
lacking morals (1.6%), being a victim (1.6%), or being unable to consent (1.6%). 53.6% of
participants (n = 30) felt that other people do not respect their job as a dancer or do not see their
profession as a legitimate profession. In contrast, 91.2% of participants (n = 52) respect their job
and see it as a legitimate profession.
Participants were asked to report on their experiences with disclosure of their profession
to important others. 74.1% of participants (n = 43) indicated their family was aware of their
profession. Of those participants, 18.6% (n = 8) were non-consensually outed to their family. For
example, “My mom and sister know because someone they know found me at a club” or, “Was
outed by someone I was dating.” Many participants indicated they told their family members
outright and aimed to reduce the stigma and stereotypes by explaining the profession. Of the
25.9% of participants (n = 15) whose family was not aware of their profession, dancers reported
they did not disclose due to fear of embarrassment (n =2), fear of disapproval or stigma (n = 5),
or the belief that it is no one’s business (n = 3). 91.4% of participants felt their friends were
aware of their profession, and some participants indicated their friends were also dancers (n = 6).
69.2% of participants (n = 36) reported they felt their friends were supportive of their profession
working in a strip club.
Participants were asked at what point they disclose their profession in a new intimate
relationship. 47.4% (n = 27) indicated they would disclose immediately, 29.8% (n = 17) after a
12
couple dates, 15.8% (n = 9) after a few months, and 7% (n = 4) reported they would never
disclose their profession to a partner. Of the 83.8% (n = 52) participants who indicated they were
currently in a relationship, 100% (n = 38) of respondents indicated their partner is aware of their
profession. 59.6% (n = 34) of all participants reported their profession has been weaponized
against them (i.e. used against them in an argument) by a current or former partner. For example,
“I have been threatened and blackmailed by an ex-partner. This person threatened to spread
untrue lies about my work in the sex industries that would endanger my safety. I was afraid for
my well-being after this threat.”
Interviews
In-depth interviews were conducted with 33 participants who self-identified as having
worked as a dancer in a Minneapolis strip club within the past two months. Through thematic
analysis, seven main themes were identified from participant interview responses: dancer
identity, assumptions, loss of social supports, profession weaponized against them, housing
discrimination, lack of employment mobility, and identity concealment.
Dancer identity. When dancers disclose their profession to others, their profession
becomes their identity to others even if they do not identify with it themselves. Many dancers
reported when they disclose their profession to important others, they are then seen as “the
stripper.” With the identity of “stripper” comes the stigma and assumptions associated with the
profession. Therefore, dancers easily lose respect and are immediately treated differently by
those who are aware of their profession. As soon as they disclose their profession, people’s
perceptions are “warped instantly.”
“Everyone’s like, ‘You’re only a stripper. You’re only a sex worker.’”
13
“Yeah, that becomes your identity. Then it’s like, ‘Oh, yeah, I’m going to invite my friend
to this party. She’s a stripper.’”
“That and the judgment I receive from people when it is disclosed that I was a dancer.
I’m not treated as if I had any kind of brain which I mean I went to college, I have a
degree, yeah, I’m smart. But I’m not treated that way because – just because of that label
of being a stripper.”
Assumptions made. Dancers were asked to identify whether assumptions were made
about them based on their profession. Some dancers reported people making assumptions about
their work ethic, budgeting skills, and intelligence. Others reported assumptions about their
lifestyle, drug use and sexual partners. These assumptions were typically based on stereotypes
and stigma associated with the profession and were used to discriminate against the dancers in
several facets of life.
“However, you’re also making assumptions – you’re then making assumptions – about
my ability to budget and my credit score, my savings, I mean, you’re making a bunch of
other assumptions that aren’t okay.”
“You’re making assumptions about my work ethic and that’s shitty.”
Loss of social supports. As a result of disclosing their profession, dancers often lose
social supports (i.e., family members, friends, intimate relationships) due to the stigma
associated with the industry. Many participants reported their family members disapprove of
their profession, and many reported their families “disowning” them. This loss of social support
can occur with any important other who disapproves of the profession (e.g., parents, siblings,
14
extended family, friends, and significant others). As a result, dancers are often selective about
who they disclose their profession to.
”So, I started doing this. I was very, very excited. Told my family about it, and
immediately my step-mother disowned me, shut me down, did not speak to me for two
months. I did not go to Christmas with my family and my extended family because my
aunts and my cousins were all very disappointed in me.”
“Like my family didn’t disown me but, like, is it difficult every time I see them? Yes.”
Profession weaponized against them. Many dancers indicated their profession has been
weaponized against them by a current or former partner. Partners may use the dancer’s
profession against them during an argument to get their way, to obtain custody of children, or to
scare dancers into staying in the relationship. Many dancers reported meeting partners in strip
clubs, thinking he or she would be accepting and supportive of the profession. However, many
partners would eventually use the profession against the dancer, even if they indicated previously
that they never would.
“He literally made me cry all the time. Like he would be like, ‘Go sit on some dicks or
something.’ Like, Go to the club and – He’d be like, ‘You’re for everybody. You’re not for
me. You’re not loyal to me. You can’t be loyal to me, because everybody is – wants
you.’”
“Every time I fight with my baby dad, like, having to worry at someplace in the back of
my mind, like, he’s gonna use me being a drug-addicted stripper to, like, take my baby
away from me, which, like, totally fucking happens.”
15
Housing discrimination. As a result of the stigma and stereotypes surrounding the
dancer identity landlords often make assumptions about dancers and discriminate against them
when dancers are trying to obtain appropriate housing. Participants reported being faced with the
dilemma of disclosing their profession to landlords and having their application passed over due
to stigma, or not disclosing their profession and having to lie about their income. Some dancers
reported landlords requesting pay stubs or 1099s, which independent contractors (especially in
an all-cash profession) would not have, in order to avoid renting to the dancer.
“Yes. It has honestly affected a lot of things, like renting, for instance. I’ve had a couple
times when I was looking for an apartment, like even though I make over $100,000 a year
and I claim that, they still won’t give me apartments because they’re like, ‘You don’t have
paycheck stubs.’ Just because of that they’re like, ‘Oh, no paycheck stubs? Red flag.
Sorry, that’s it.’ Either that, or they just don’t say anything and they’re like, ‘Oh, sorry.
This isn’t enough,’”
“Getting my apartment was difficult, but that was just because all my income is mostly
cash, so I had to prove my income three different times. I had to send them three different
bank statements and then deposit slips.”
Lack of employment mobility. As dancers attempt to leave the strip club industry and
enter a new field or profession, the stigma associated with previously or currently being a dancer
can affect their chances of being hired. Future employers may discriminate against dancers based
on stereotypes and assumptions associated with the stigma of the dancer identity. Many dancers
report fear of disclosing their profession to future employers and are faced with the dilemma of
disclosing their current or past profession as a dancer and being passed over for the position or
explaining several years of unemployment to the potential employer. Many dancers experience
16
this fear and stigma even if they have the skills for the position or have attended higher
education.
“I’ve known plenty of girls that gave it up and then they can’t find jobs and then they end
up going back. But then often because they get discriminated against in the regular
employment business”
“But if we don’t write that we worked there and we try to cover it up, they’re gonna find
out because they’re still documenting us. We’re still out there documented under [club]
and all this other shit so we can’t get a job. But yet there’s no safe way for us to […] Or
we just don’t pay taxes and we just act like we haven’t been working for five years.”
Identity concealment as stigma management. The stigma management technique that
was primarily reported by dancers was identity concealment. Dancers reported hiding their
profession from important others, landlords, and potential employers. Often, dancers are
selective of who they disclose their profession to in order to avoid the negative consequences
associated with being a dancer, such as the previously described themes. While this is an
effective strategy for managing stigma much of the time, it adds an extra source of stress to many
dancers.
“I don’t tell people. Because I’ve even had friends – in the beginning, I did tell people, my
friends and stuff. It would turn into like, ‘Oh, yeah, my friend, she’s a stripper.’”
“I’m from a really small town. So, I don’t tell anybody and it’s kind of just like I keep it
on the hush-hush.”
“I mean, it’s hard and it’s like gotten harder, because – because I’m like in the closet
with the door open kind of.”
17
Discussion
The focus of this study was to examine dancers’ experiences with stigma and minority
stress, and its effects on their quality of life. As predicted, dancers reported experiencing stigma
in a variety of situations and by a variety of individuals. The majority of dancers (74.1%)
indicated their parents were aware of their job, but many of these instances involved being outed
to their family. Of the 25.9% of dancers who did not disclose to their family, it was commonly
reported that their family would not approve due to the stigma attached to the profession.
Furthermore, it was common for dancers’ significant others to be aware of their profession, but
many dancers (45.6%) reported delayed disclosure of their profession. In addition, it was
common within these intimate relationships for their profession to be used against dancers in
arguments.
Dancers also discussed how others make assumptions about them based on their
occupation. Dancers commonly reported being labeled a “whore” or “prostitute” because of their
profession of working in a strip club. As a result, workers frequently reported discrimination by
landlords and future employers.
The present study provides support for extending the minority stress theory to the strip
club industry and sex work community in order to better understand the impact of stigma and
minority stress. The stigma and minority stress associated with being a dancer is not a result of
the job per se. While dancers may experience some stress as a result of financial distress, safety,
and cleanliness, the bulk of the stress experienced by dancers is the result of minority stress. The
social structures and social stigma regarding the profession result in discrimination of dancers in
all facets of life. As a result of their profession, dancers have lost social support, and respect.
They are often assumed to be drug addicts, promiscuous, and unintelligent. Dancers experience
18
difficulty obtaining housing and jobs within other industries due to the preconceived notions and
assumptions made by landlords and potential employers.
This study also examined dancers’ stigma management techniques. As predicted, dancers
reported engaging in various strategies of stigma management. However, the primary source of
stigma management reported was identity concealment. Many dancers reported hiding their
profession from important others, people they just met, future employers, and landlords to reduce
their experienced stigma. Dancers often reported being selective in the individuals they disclosed
their profession to, and often delaying disclosure until they were certain the important other
could be trusted with the information. Other stigma management techniques included affiliating
themselves with other stigmatized individuals, such as being friends with other dancers, and
socially isolating themselves from others.
Limitations and Future Research
While making important contributions to existing literature, the present study had several
limitations related to sampling and research design. This study only included current dancers
within the Minneapolis strip club industry. As such, many dancers from Minnesota outside the
metro area were excluded from the sample, so the results are not necessarily representative of
dancers across the state or country. The sample size was also relatively small considering the
large population of strip clubs and dancers nationwide, which is difficult to quantify since
dancers are typically independent contractors rather than documented employees. Future
research should explore the strip club industry of other geographical areas. In particular, future
research should include rural area strip clubs to compare cultural and environmental differences
in stigma experiences.
