Taboo Strip Club Raided By Police

[Luv2play]

I was not aware of the law that stipulates two different types of "dancing" licences for stripper bars, but I do recall that at one time some of the bars offered clients the choice of "contact" dances or "non-contact" dances for two different prices ($10/$6). I seem to remember this was the case at Campus, but this was quite a few years ago and my memory is a little hazy (it may have been some other club). Campus also used to offer a fixed price for a half hour of dancing, and this was posted on the back wall of the club (that sign disappeared long ago). This may be beside the point but I also remember some dancers who had an informal pricing structure of $10 and $20 where the latter price entitled the client to a lot more!!! But let's not go there!

 

So yes, there was a two-tier pricing structure in place at one time, even in the same club, and Taboo has been the only club in the Village to continue with the lower $6 price. It just never occurred to me that there was a restriction about touching, since the dancers there did not seem concerned about a lot of touching except for the area of the genitals.

 

No doubt, if this is the case, it will come out at the trial. But so far, no newspaper has reported on this aspect of the case as far as I am aware. The local rag, The Mirror, had an article yesterday on Taboo, which suggested that the police were on a witch-hunt for victimless crimes. But unless there are other raids in the offing, I tend to discount this view.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

>...but I do recall

>that at one time some of the bars offered clients the choice

>of "contact" dances or "non-contact" dances for two different

>prices ($10/$6). I seem to remember this was the case at

>Campus, but this was quite a few years ago and my memory is a

>little hazy (it may have been some other club).

 

I also recall reading, no doubt on this board, about the two tier pricing last year before my first time to the clubs. It was my impression that the $6 dances occurred at tableside and thus no touching.

 

>Campus also

>used to offer a fixed price for a half hour of dancing, and

>this was posted on the back wall of the club (that sign

>disappeared long ago).

 

For curiosity I would love to know what that price was if you can recall.

 

This may be beside the point but I also

>remember some dancers who had an informal pricing structure of

>$10 and $20 where the latter price entitled the client to a

>lot more!!! But let's not go there!

 

Have heard this too... from a dancer. :o

 

I have a hard time understanding this whole concept of the licensing board setting the types of dances and charges for them. I can see them setting limits to observe the law as set forth by the Canadian court decision. But proscribing 'lesser dances' dances and fixing prices for all of them... Definitely not Laissez Faire... Can't imagine such licensing regs would hold up in a US court. Just more I don't understand... but it is interesting information and highlights the value of this board and the people that contribute.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

>Well, what is it you want to know about Louisiana Law?:9

>

>the Cajun

 

Well, why WillMaker and Family Lawyer say forms good in all states with the exception of Lousiana (laws based on French Law). :+

[Guest YFSC]

RE: The Long and the Short of IT......

 

>YFSC remarks "Some Americans seem obsessed with the idea of

>making everyone else over in our image and can unintentionally

>often be very offensive by throwing money around. As an

>American (that's right, I'm not criticizing from outside) I

>find that very embarrassing." Again I’m in agreement with

>this. I don’t take this as directed at me but in case I’m

>wrong … I’m definitely not obsessed with remaking anyone in

>‘our’ image.

 

TY -

That remark was *definitely* not directed at you or at anyone in particular, and was not specific to this situation which is a special case. Sorry if it appeared that way to you or anyone else. I have enjoyed your comments here and find you to be a restrained voice of reason in many situations.

 

I was departing from the current situation at Taboo and waxing philosophical in a much more general vein, but I guess that wasn't clear. Stream of consciousness thinking. I was thinking more of situations where there are not exigent circumstances, and connecting Luv2play's comments about making waves in the local market with the essentially identical considerations about the Rio saunas that took up a lot of space recently in another forum here, and with some other similar situations that have been commented on, and also with my own experiences in a number of places that have nothing to do with this site or its focus.

 

> However, there are other issues in contrast to

>these that I also agree with and when they come into conflict

>the decision is not always so clear cut, in my view anyway.

 

This is true. There are special circumstances in this case. See below for some other information and suggestions.

 

> I appreciate the effort

>that many dancers put out on stage – many more than I can

>afford to take in the back. Their stage show entertains me

>and I show my appreciation with a $5 or $10 tip. I believe

>that if someone entertains me while getting no pay other than

>tips or whatever, then I should tip or whatever. My pockets

>aren’t deep enough to give them all multiple dances in the

>backroom nor do I want to stoke their enthusiasm for a back

>room session and then cut them off after one dance with them

>wondering if I was displeased.

 

I agree with you (with one difference below) and understand the problem of spreading the resources. Mine too are not unlimited. I have a couple of suggestions, keeping in mind that this is a special situation.

 

In this situation I think it is not a bad idea to take them to the back for one dance. I have seen that happen a number of times in the last week or so that I have been here, and I have done it myself. And you can make it clear with words and a big hug and maybe even a kiss on the cheek after he gets dressed that you were not displeased.

 

The boys themselves know that what they can do now in this situation is not very attractive to the clients. Without exception, every one that I have gone to the back with has apologized for the "boring" or "different" nature of the backroom dances, sometimes even more than once - during, after, etc. In connection with that, let me relate something that happened to me the other day, with a boy that I planned to have for more than one song, but had not known before. After the end of the first song he stopped and started to get down off the stool. Then he stopped and looked at me quizzically, because I wasn't starting to get up, and he asked in a surprised tone if I wanted him to go on. I said yes, and he did, but he was truly surprised and pleased. True, he was a newbie and had been dancing there only for 3 weeks; a more experienced dancer probably wouldn't have reacted that way. But he was obviously accustomed to 1-song dances in the back. (Sidelight: he had been dancing there for only a little more than a week before the raid, but he's still there and didn't get scared off. And there are a couple of others who had also been there for less than a month before the raid and are still there. Some of them were there that Friday and got arrested after only a week or two on the job (!), and others weren't.)

 

So that's one alternative for someone that you would want to tip $10. And giving him $10 for a $6 dance (now also in fact as well as officially) is not bad from his point of view.

 

Another alternative is to wait until they come off stage and then tell them that you enjoyed their dance and discreetly slip them a tip. That obviously works for smaller tips as well as $10, and will usually get you a hug, as well as giving you the opportunity to talk to them instead of just handing them a tip on stage. You can motion to them to come over to where you are, or you can even get up and go over to where they are if necessary. At that point many of them have pockets, and so you can even make use of $1 and $2 coins, which are awkward on stage, if you want to spread the resources a little further.

 

Both of these ways, and there must be others, will accomplish your purpose, sometimes even better than in the original way, and will avoid disturbing the local custom.

 

>My post was intended to inspire those too reticent to go in

>the back room in these troubled times but who want to support

>the dancers with contributions. I’m certainly open to other

>suggestions but I haven’t seen any and tipping is a way to

>help. I was a little too exuberent when I advocated it but I

>was trying to instill enthusiasm and confidence to those

>interested and that, I now fear, this exchange has dampened.

 

I'm sure that was your intention, and my desire is to support them too, as much as I can. I hope that this exchange has not dampened any enthusiasm or interest on the part of clients in supporting the boys.

[Guest YFSC]

RE: The Long and the Short of IT......

 

>First let me say that I have been at Taboo with Tampa Yankee,

>and he is the furthest thing from an obnoxious American

>throwing his money around. He is a gentleman, and very

>discreet.

 

I didn't mean to cast doubt on that. I know him only from his posts, but I find them appropriate and well-reasoned. I was speaking in general terms, and partly what I wrote was just rehetorical venting. Also that if one did make a practice of doing that one would risk being taken for "an obnoxious American" (to use your term), no matter how well-intentioned the person was.

[Guest YFSC]

>YFSC: If this is in fact the issue, then I hope it is still

>correctable.

>

>I have always maintained that at $6 a song, Taboo was the

>bargain of North America. Truth be known, I would not

>hesitate for one second to pay $10 for the boys there.

 

Well, it might have been the issue before, or a way to forestall the current situation, but it probably isn't the issue any more, now that charges have been filed.

 

Also, I don't know anything at all about the licensing environment here, but it may not be so easy to rectify. Assuming that Taboo wanted to have the other license, they have probably already tried/been trying. There could be a lot of factors involved, including limitations on licenses, zoning and proximity to other things (remember that Taboo is "off the beaten track", not on "the strip" (so to speak) on Ste. Catherine and that may make a difference), local opposition, pull at city hall and paying off the right people, etc. But then also they may have or may have had reasons for not wanting to have the other license. But for now that is moot.

[Guest YFSC]

>I was not aware of the law that stipulates two different

>types of "dancing" licences for stripper bars, but I do recall

>that at one time some of the bars offered clients the choice

>of "contact" dances or "non-contact" dances for two different

>prices ($10/$6).

 

My source, whom I will call Gorge Profonde , is fairly knowledgeable about strip bars, but is not a lawyer. Gorge used the term "the law", but it may be a regulation of the licensing board or other authority instead, or it may just be an urban legend which arose as a supposed explanation for the differential pricing. If there is such a distinction somewhere, I would assume that if a bar has the right to have contact dances, it can also have non-contact dances if it wants, but that the reverse is not true.

 

I was rather surprised at this distinction, and as I said before I would not have imagined it, but it does seem like the kind of thing that bureaucrats and/or legislators like to get into.

 

> Campus also

>used to offer a fixed price for a half hour of dancing, and

>this was posted on the back wall of the club (that sign

>disappeared long ago).

 

I remember that now from some of my very early visits to Montreal. I had forgotten it - thanks for reminding me. That was before Campus got remodeled.

 

> It just

>never occurred to me that there was a restriction about

>touching, since the dancers there did not seem concerned about

>a lot of touching except for the area of the genitals.

 

The genital area and the butt are officially out, even in contact dances.

I remember being told "no touching except below the knee" at Taboo a long time ago. On my first visit I was new enough and naive enough to ask how it worked and what you could do, and that's what I was told, which I suppose was the official rule then as now, but it soon became obvious that a little more was allowed to go on, but not as much as at some other bars. Actually that was my second visit to Taboo, not my first. On my first visit I didn't realize that there was a back room or that you could go there with the dancers (!) x( . It was very crowded, and there was a wall of people standing in front of the entrance. I saw dancers going in and out through the wall of people, but I assumed that was their locker room/dressing room area. As I said, I was a newbie and naive. But my impression is that over the years what you could do in the back room became more liberal. Or maybe I was just by accident starting from a cautious period something like this after a crackdown/raid and it only seems that way to me. Since I'm not here as much as I'd like I don't have the perspective of a local resident.

 

>No doubt, if this is the case, it will come out at the trial.

>But so far, no newspaper has reported on this aspect of the

>case as far as I am aware.

 

According to how I understand the charges and the article from Xtra! quoted here, they are for things that go well beyond what is allowed in contact dances, so the contact/no-contact distinction becomes more of a background issue. Simply having contact dances in a presumably non-contact dance context can't be enough to qualify someplace as a "common bawdy house".

[kjun]

That's because all the other states are so messed up.

 

Seriously, I would bet that most of the laws are the same in most things. The will bit has been changed in the last few years and it fits pretty closely with most states.

 

the Cajun

[Guest YFSC]

Also, a detail that seems to suggest at least that the types of dances are defined and that the prices of the dances are regulated and engraved in stone somewhere is that the prices are the same all over -- in the Village bars, at West Side, and in the female-stripper bars (going by the signs outside ) and in different parts of the city. Also they don't seem to change or rise. Drink prices vary according to the bar, but not dance prices. And they have been $6 and $10 for a long time, while drink prices have doubled. That doesn't usually happen in a free market situation. Also Luv2play points out (and I dimly remember this too) that when there were both prices in the same bar they were differentiated as "non-contact" and "contact".

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

RE: The Long and the Short of IT......

 

>That remark was *definitely* not directed at you or at anyone

>in particular, and was not specific to this situation which is

>a special case. Sorry if it appeared that way to you or

>anyone else. I have enjoyed your comments here and find you

>to be a restrained voice of reason in many situations.

>

YFSC,

 

Honestly, I never felt that it was directed at me personally. But this is an open forum with many looking on who may interpret remarks differently than you or I. So I thought I should post a response for the audience. I appreciate and understand where you and Luv2play are coming from.

 

>In this situation I think it is not a bad idea to take them to

>the back for one dance. I have seen that happen a number of

>times in the last week or so that I have been here, and I have

>done it myself. And you can make it clear with words and a

>big hug and maybe even a kiss on the cheek after he gets

>dressed that you were not displeased.

>

This of course is an option and I hope many will avail themsleves of the opportunity. If enough do then it will take some of the disapointment out of it. Let me explain. I don't mean disappointment of the dancers with the customers but rather with the circumstance as you pointed out --

 

>The boys themselves know that what they can do now in this

>situation is not very attractive to the clients. Without

>exception, every one that I have gone to the back with has

>apologized for the "boring" or "different" nature of the

>backroom dances, sometimes even more than once - during,

>after, etc.

 

Nevertheless some of these boys are desparate and depressed. I have been in contact with two (neither of which asked me for money BTW) and I know of others who have been contacted. All of these guys paint a depressing picture of the very rare back room dance with little money passing hands. If they haven't completely lost hope yet I'm sure that a trip to the back room stirs expectations and hope. And the boys understand and apologize for the situation. But understanding doesn't remove the dispair and the embarrassment some of them feel for the back room atmosphere. Feelings, I suggest, heightened by the well intended short back room dance. And let me be clear -- I am not advocating not doing what you suggested, any help is better than none and this is good help. It just has a smalll price to be paid IMO. Maybe tipping incurs part of the same price? That part of inspiring more hope. But I don't think it has the downside of embarassment and some disappointment at the short dance. BUt I know they are very appreciative for whatever they can get.

 

> In connection with that, let me relate something

>that happened to me the other day, with a boy that I planned

>to have for more than one song, but had not known before.

>After the end of the first song he stopped and started to get

>down off the stool. Then he stopped and looked at me

>quizzically, because I wasn't starting to get up, and he asked

>in a surprised tone if I wanted him to go on. I said yes, and

>he did, but he was truly surprised and pleased.

 

I have heard this from the other side too. If gives me pause because while the story you present is positive, it highlights the negative. These guys are not getting multiple dances to the point that they are surprised when they get one. If this is not a sign of losing hope then it is a sign of despair at the present circumstances

 

>

>So that's one alternative for someone that you would want to

>tip $10. And giving him $10 for a $6 dance (now also in fact

>as well as officially) is not bad from his point of view.

>

 

I may occur some disapproval here too but... I always pay $10 for a dance. They gave the same quality dance as the other places IMO so I paid the same price. Before this revelation about offically licensed dances and dollars, I saw no reason to discriminate against the Taboo boys and no reason why the management should dictate $6 fee when they had no apparent part of the transaction that I could determine.

 

Your suggestion is a good one though for those who customarily pay the $6 fee.

 

>Another alternative is to wait until they come off stage and

>then tell them that you enjoyed their dance and discreetly

>slip them a tip. That obviously works for smaller tips as

>well as $10...

 

That I have done and will do again and i think it viable if you can get to the dancer. HOwever, my experience has been that can be difficult to get a dancer's attention on crowded nights, what with the crowd and waiters, the tables (you're sitting at one then those between you and the dancer) and if he gets stopped by someone do you interrupr or wait around or say to yourself a little later maybe and then maybe it happens or maybe it doesn.t, or worse lose interest because of the hassle.

 

I also have to wonder how acceptable this practice would be viewed. I speculate that any tipping, openly or discretely, in the front room might be found offensive.

>

>Both of these ways, and there must be others, will accomplish

>your purpose, sometimes even better than in the original way,

>and will avoid disturbing the local custom.

>

You might very well be right. I support your suggestions, for those comfortable and willing to perservere. I urge whatever works for them. I will consider them myself. But this is an extraordinary situation. The house is on fire and we are being directed to bring water to the fire by a certain protocol that doesn't seem the most efficient on a few levels. The reason is 'that is how it has always been done' ie. custom. Are we gathered to observe custom or put out the fire? This attitude may be peculiarly American, maybe not. Or it may be viewed as the 'bull in the china shop' approach. If so, I try to be a low key bull if not a discrete one and I urge any other bulls to be low key.

 

>... and my desire is to support

>them too, as much as I can. I hope that this exchange has not

>dampened any enthusiasm or interest on the part of clients in

>supporting the boys.

>

 

We are in 100% agreement here. Most of my discussion has been centered around exigent circumstance, some not. Hopefull there is some flexibility for these exigent curmstances. The other remarks, though with merit IMO, carry less weight with me regarding the long term resepct of local custom which also carries a lot of weight..

[Guest YFSC]

Thursday at Taboo

 

Thursday at Taboo there were 18 -- that's eighteen(!) -- dancers (actually 19, but not all at the same time; 2 left early and one more arrived later).

 

There was a reasonably good house, at least for part of the time, but not really enough to support having 18 dancers.

 

I'm not sure why there were suddenly so many, except that it may have to do with (U.S.) Memorial Day weekend, which they know is a big weekend when lots of Americans come up. And there were really more dancers than there should have been for the number of patrons. But I think it's an important indication that the boys are trying to hang in there and not give up.

 

Of 15 names of arrestees known to me (there were 8 more), 1 was the underage boy (obviously not allowed to be back), and 13 of the other 14 have appeared as dancers at least once since the raid. Most of the 14 more than once, and several of them almost every day.

 

Occupancy in the back room at least at times was not bad, *much* better than anything I had seen in over a week, and coming close to what I had seen on previous visits. But the traffic was not sustained throughout the night. One time when I went in with a boy I was astonished to find -- as was he -- that there were not many empty places left for us to choose from.

 

But a lot of times the number of songs per visit is smaller, the boys are still hurting financially, and 18 dancers was too many for the size of the house yesterday.

 

I did a circuit of the Village bars again, both when I was going to Taboo and after I left. From my observation I don't think the size of the house at Taboo was an anomaly. Both times there were considerably more patrons at Taboo than at Adonis and slightly fewer than at Campus. There were a lot more at Taboo than at Stock early, which was again not very well attended, but more at Stock on my late pass around 1:00, when the Taboo crowd had already thinned out a lot and some of the dancers were leaving too. Stock again had a shortage of dancers for the early shift, with only 5.

 

If the number of patrons at Taboo is down, then it's probably a general phenomenon at all the bars, and not a result of the raid. I don't think that lots of customers are staying away from Taboo, but some of them *are* staying away from the back room, either through fear of getting into trouble or because the dances aren't as "interesting" or a combination of both. I asked a few of the dancers, including some of the newbies who had been there only for a week or two before the raid, whether they weren't afraid to continue to dance there (and for the newbies why they weren't scared away). They are clearly discouraged by the financial aspect, but to this question they all replied no, that they weren't doing anything illegal, and that especially now with everyone being so careful to observe the letter of the law it was probably less risky than ever vis-a-vis the law to be dancing there.

[Guest YFSC]

RE: The Long and the Short of IT......

 

> All

>of these guys paint a depressing picture of the very rare back

>room dance with little money passing hands.

 

That's true. But as I just posted, I think the situation was a little better on Thursday. Maybe that's a sign of improvement or maybe it's just an outlyer on the graph. We'll have to wait to see.

 

>>So that's one alternative for someone that you would want to

>>tip $10. And giving him $10 for a $6 dance (now also in fact

>>as well as officially) is not bad from his point of view.

>

>I may occur some disapproval here too but... I always pay $10

>for a dance.

 

I was referring to his point of view - the "list price" and what he would be expecting for a dance ($6), not to what you were planning to pay ($10). And nowadays the dances *are* pretty strictly the $6 non-contact variety, and he knows that. Also, if you were just going to tip him and not take him for a dance he probably doesn't know how much you pay for a dance, though it doesn't matter even if he does.

 

> Before this revelation

>about offically licensed dances and dollars, I saw no reason

>to discriminate against the Taboo boys and no reason why the

>management should dictate $6 fee when they had no apparent

>part of the transaction that I could determine.

 

As the "revealer", let me reiterate that I don't know for sure that it is accurate, and it would be good if some one of our Montreal denizens could find out if it is.

 

>>Another alternative is to wait until they come off stage and

>>then tell them that you enjoyed their dance and discreetly

>>slip them a tip. That obviously works for smaller tips as

>>well as $10...

>

>That I have done and will do again and i think it viable if

>you can get to the dancer. HOwever, my experience has been

>that can be difficult to get a dancer's attention on crowded

>nights, what with the crowd and waiters, the tables (you're

>sitting at one then those between you and the dancer) and if

>he gets stopped by someone do you interrupr or wait around or

>say to yourself a little later maybe and then maybe it happens

>or maybe it doesn.t, or worse lose interest because of the hassle.

 

These days and under these conditions that's not a problem . And that's why we're talking about these alternatives in the first place. In better times when it might be a problem you wouldn't need to do it.

 

>I also have to wonder how acceptable this practice would be

>viewed. I speculate that any tipping, openly or discretely,

>in the front room might be found offensive.

 

On stage is also in the front room, so it wouldn't seem to be any more offensive than that alternative, but it might be less (not because it's offstage, but because you can do it more discreetly). I noticed a few people doing it, and there must have been more that I didn't notice.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

RE: Thursday at Taboo

 

YFSC,

 

Thanks for the update. The latest news seems positive for the dancers with regard to this weekend anyway. I hope it continues and that dancers and patrons alike have a good holiday weekend.

 

Can you post the name of the lone dancer of the 15 who has not reappeared at Taboo?

[Guest YFSC]

RE: Thursday at Taboo

 

>YFSC,

>

>Thanks for the update. The latest news seems positive for the

>dancers with regard to this weekend anyway. I hope it

>continues and that dancers and patrons alike have a good

>holiday weekend.

>

>Can you post the name of the lone dancer of the 15 who has

>not reappeared at Taboo?

 

I have 16 names now. One of the 16 was the underage kid, who, of course, has not reappeared. I was not in Montreal the day of the raid or the first few days after, so I can't speak for that time. But starting from the middle of the week after I have seen all of the other 15 dance at least once except for Dominique. And there are 8 whose names I don't have. Some of those may have reappeared and some not. Among the dancers since the raid there have been some who had started there from a week to a month before the raid, arrestees and not, but they have been back too. Some others may not have been, I don't know. And finally there have been a few hardy souls who started *after* the raid.

[Guest YFSC]

Friday at Taboo

 

19 dancers

 

Good house, full for a while but not "packed".

I don't know what is "normal" but the house again compared favorably with other bars between 8 and 9. Stock again almost empty then, Campus a little more than Taboo, Adonis somewhat less.

 

Back room traffic not too good. For a while it seemed to pick up a little but then died down again. For the number of customers it seemed very slow and different from what I remember from before. Aside: one of the dancers at Stock (early shift) was also complaining to me that he wasn't making much money (obviously, since there have been very few people there before 9), and that the other day he went through his entire 6 hours without anything. Shades of Taboo!

[marc anthony]

Memorial Day weekend at Taboo

 

Just finished an online conversation with a dancer from Taboo. He seemed much more upbeat and said that the Memorial day weekend crowd was great, and that his earnings had come close to pre-raid levels. He said that the atmosphere was better, and the that even the backroom had more activity and more intimacy.

 

This is all good.

 

Holding my breath for June 12.