Boilerhouse at 8pms on Saturday, for example

whiteblueman

Anyone know if that would be a good time.

Thinking of paying my first visit in November - been on my while a lot and just would like to do it.

Nervous that (a) no-one will be there, (b) average age will be 85 and (c) will not be drunk so no dutch courage.

Any thoughts?

L1011

There are realistically people in the Boilerhouse all the time its open - they don't open their doors for the fun of it, its a business not a social centre.

AARRRGH

I pass the boilerhouse probably two or three times each day, and there are always people going into it, no matter what time.

The owner must be totally loaded!

hello932

Just to clarify what is the boilerhouse used for? i mean what do people actually do in that place? have cheap sex with strangers and then leave?

boredboard

hardly 'cheap' judging by admission fee...

AARRRGH

hello932 wrote: »

Just to clarify what is the boilerhouse used for? i mean what do people actually do in that place? have cheap sex with strangers and then leave?

If you look at their website you'll get a pretty clear idea... but to answer your question, from what I've heard it is exactly as you describe.

L1011

hello932 wrote: »

Just to clarify what is the boilerhouse used for? i mean what do people actually do in that place? have cheap sex with strangers and then leave?

Basically. Same with any gay sauna about. They're rather popular with closet cases as its a very sheltered environment. Hence the priest dying in one a few years ago (and no, not of shock!)

LookingFor

Such a pity we still 'need' ghettos like this. Such an awful monument to social retardation.

MicraBoy

whiteblueman wrote: »

Anyone know if that would be a good time.

Thinking of paying my first visit in November - been on my while a lot and just would like to do it.

Nervous that (a) no-one will be there, (b) average age will be 85 and (c) will not be drunk so no dutch courage.

Any thoughts?

Unfortunately all the gays will be watching X-Factor at this time on Saturdays during the month of November. I suggest you wait till after 10 p.m.

gavkm27

I think around that time there will be alot of older guys in there,depends what you are after,but as people mentioned does seem to be busy most of the time nowadays...

shoegirl

Obviously I don't go there, but from friends I understand that the clientele is quite diverse. They do have a cafe etc, but yes, there is hanky panky going on for those who like that kind of thing.

kisaragi

LookingFor wrote: »

Such a pity we still 'need' ghettos like this. Such an awful monument to social retardation.

Some people enjoy going to saunas/cruising for casual sex. I don't really see it as any different from picking someone up in a club.

I would never go to a sauna for sex (I went to a sex club in paris with my boyfriend because I wanted to see what it was like, it really wasn't for me), but the way people talk about them and the people who use them really irks me. Maybe you don't like to have casual sex but there's no need to look down on the people that do and the places that facilitate it.

LookingFor

kisaragi wrote: »

Some people enjoy going to saunas/cruising for casual sex. I don't really see it as any different from picking someone up in a club.

I would never go to a sauna for sex (I went to a sex club in paris with my boyfriend because I wanted to see what it was like, it really wasn't for me), but the way people talk about them and the people who use them really irks me. Maybe you don't like to have casual sex but there's no need to look down on the people that do and the places that facilitate it.

There's a much bigger difference than a pub/club and somewhere like the boilerhouse. The boilerhouse is basically a brothel where client is vendor and vice versa.

Of course, some people do use pubs/clubs purely as pick-up joints, but at least they have a broader social utility.

My problem with a place like the boilerhouse is how it reflects on any gay person and reinforces stereotypes about gay people.

The first time I heard about the boilerhouse? In school. People using it as part of derogatory mocking of other people (e.g. "i saw your Da going into the boilerhouse last night").

There is a surprisingly strong connotation there between gay people and the boilerhouse, and people are (IMO) rightly disgusted by the latter, and so it reinforces negative connotations and disgust with the former. IMO people should think about that broader impact on how gay people are viewed because of places like this before they go and support them.

'Image' aside (and gay people DO have an image problem, let's be honest), the place is facking public health hazard. I know of one person who was riddled with stis after a single visit there, one person who contracted HIV (yes, he was dumb and wasn't safe). I'd love someone to do a study of rates of infection among users of the boilerhouse. And the problem on top of that is that the gay population is small enough here...so even if a small proportion use a place like the boilerhouse, it has a disproportionate impact on the health of the wider community.

Lastly, and as I alluded in my original post, I just think a place like the boilerhouse is a mark of social retardation. If you want sex-on-tap, then how about dating and forming a relationship with someone? IMO places like the boilerhouse are representative of that not unsubstantial number of gay people who seem to be emotionally crippled and who can't form healthy relationships. Before someone screams at me to stop being so heteronormative, I'd suggest that the relationship model of stability and monogamy that has evolved, evolved for good reasons - that is, because it is much much healthier (emotionally and physically) and much more conducive to basic survival. It is a massive pity that we as gay people seem to have adopted promiscuity etc. as a mark of our culture, as something to be protected just so we're not too like our heterosexual peers. People actually get offended when you start talking out against it, and that's just ridiculous.

shoegirl

LookingFor wrote: »

It is a massive pity that we as gay people seem to have adopted promiscuity etc. as a mark of our culture, as something to be protected just so we're not too like our heterosexual peers. People actually get offended when you start talking out against it, and that's just ridiculous.

The problem is that some people seem to think it is not only their place to be offended, but to judge, and from there to condemn and criminalise. I grew up in an Ireland where the majority not only believed that society had a right to condemn and even criminalise gay people regardless of how and where (and in some cases even if) they had sex, and not only gay people but other "outsiders" in irish society who did not conform.

I just think it is a shame to be so moralistic about other peoples behaviours, especially when heteros themselves have moved away from rigid marriage-based relationship models in droves.

LookingFor

I'm not advocating that we ban this behaviour.

I'm asking people to think about it responsibly and consider its impact.

We shouldn't be forced not to support places like the BH, I just wish we'd get to a point where we voluntarily saw it as irrelevant.

As for the 'straights' sure, there's more movement away from formal relationship structures, but the culutre of monogamy beyond a certain point is still mostly prevalent. And I don't know of any 'straight' equivalent to the BH, though I'm open to enlightenment on that if I'm wrong. Whether it is an exclusively gay phenomenon though, or not, I do think places like that are more particularly dangerous is a gay context (i.e. in a context of a smaller, more closed population).

I don't mean to hijack the thread, but I'd also be curious about what proportion of people have actually used the BH or places like it. Perhaps I have a skewed perception about the numbers using it, but it seems to me based on the people I've got to know that it's more uncommon not to have used it than to have used it. And more worryingly still, it's not just closeted 'appearance-challenged' folks, but guys who are handsome and 'sorted' in every other way too. They talk about it like it's the most normal thing in the world, like it's something everyone does from time to time.

MicraBoy

LookingFor wrote:

I'm not advocating that we ban this behaviour.

I'm asking people to think about it responsibly and consider its impact.

We shouldn't be forced not to support places like the BH, I just wish we'd get to a point where we voluntarily saw it as irrelevant.

As for the 'straights' sure, there's more movement away from formal relationship structures, but the culutre of monogamy beyond a certain point is still mostly prevalent. And I don't know of any 'straight' equivalent to the BH, though I'm open to enlightenment on that if I'm wrong. Whether it is an exclusively gay phenomenon though, or not, I do think places like that are more particularly dangerous is a gay context (i.e. in a context of a smaller, more closed population).

I don't mean to hijack the thread, but I'd also be curious about what proportion of people have actually used the BH or places like it. Perhaps I have a skewed perception about the numbers using it, but it seems to me based on the people I've got to know that it's more uncommon not to have used it than to have used it. And more worryingly still, it's not just closeted 'appearance-challenged' folks, but guys who are handsome and 'sorted' in every other way too. They talk about it like it's the most normal thing in the world, like it's something everyone does from time to time.

I'm going to throw this out there and suggest that this is more to do with gender than it is to do with sexuality. Places like the BH don't exist in the straight community and don't exist in the lesbian community because of there common deniminator: women.

Women in general aren't into the kind of random anonymous sex that the BH facilitates. There are other reasons such as safety etc. that make it infeasable that such a place would exist in the straight community.

If there wasn't the self regulatory woman factor then I think places like the BH would be common place. At least as common as brothels anyway.

sitstill

MicraBoy wrote: »

I'm going to throw this out there and suggest that this is more to do with gender than it is to do with sexuality. Places like the BH don't exist in the straight community and don't exist in the lesbian community because of there common deniminator: women.

Women in general aren't into the kind of random anonymous sex that the BH facilitates. There are other reasons such as safety etc. that make it infeasable that such a place would exist in the straight community.

If there wasn't the self regulatory woman factor then I think places like the BH would be common place. At least as common as brothels anyway.

Well said MicraBoy. Men are men, regardless of their sexual orientation. If a venue existed where straight men could go and be guaranteed no-strings sex - they'd go. But women generally have a different approach to sex than us men do.

I have been to the Boilerhouse a couple of times and enjoyed myself each time. I didn't leave "riddled with STIs" nor do I have any kind of mental problems as some previous posters have implied a visitor might. So long as the guy going there accepts the possible risks he is taking and uses protection then there should be no problem. And I see it as no different than somebody gay or straight going to a club with the intention of bringing someone home with them.

To the OP - 8PM on a Saturday will probably have an older crowd, getting busier and generally younger as the night goes on.

shay_562

sitstill wrote: »

If a venue existed where straight men could go and be guaranteed no-strings sex - they'd go.

It's called Coppers, and it's heaving most nights. (Though it does, for bizarre reasons I have yet to figure out, see its fair share of female clientelle)

MicraBoy

shay_562 wrote: »

It's called Coppers, and it's heaving most nights. (Though it does, for bizarre reasons I have yet to figure out, see its fair share of female clientelle)

Coppers doesn't have a dark room though! Well may be the dance floor counts.

Donnaghm

LookingFor wrote: »

There's a much bigger difference than a pub/club and somewhere like the boilerhouse. The boilerhouse is basically a brothel where client is vendor and vice versa.

Of course, some people do use pubs/clubs purely as pick-up joints, but at least they have a broader social utility.

My problem with a place like the boilerhouse is how it reflects on any gay person and reinforces stereotypes about gay people.

The first time I heard about the boilerhouse? In school. People using it as part of derogatory mocking of other people (e.g. "i saw your Da going into the boilerhouse last night").

There is a surprisingly strong connotation there between gay people and the boilerhouse, and people are (IMO) rightly disgusted by the latter, and so it reinforces negative connotations and disgust with the former. IMO people should think about that broader impact on how gay people are viewed because of places like this before they go and support them.

'Image' aside (and gay people DO have an image problem, let's be honest), the place is facking public health hazard. I know of one person who was riddled with stis after a single visit there, one person who contracted HIV (yes, he was dumb and wasn't safe). I'd love someone to do a study of rates of infection among users of the boilerhouse. And the problem on top of that is that the gay population is small enough here...so even if a small proportion use a place like the boilerhouse, it has a disproportionate impact on the health of the wider community.

Lastly, and as I alluded in my original post, I just think a place like the boilerhouse is a mark of social retardation. If you want sex-on-tap, then how about dating and forming a relationship with someone? IMO places like the boilerhouse are representative of that not unsubstantial number of gay people who seem to be emotionally crippled and who can't form healthy relationships. Before someone screams at me to stop being so heteronormative, I'd suggest that the relationship model of stability and monogamy that has evolved, evolved for good reasons - that is, because it is much much healthier (emotionally and physically) and much more conducive to basic survival. It is a massive pity that we as gay people seem to have adopted promiscuity etc. as a mark of our culture, as something to be protected just so we're not too like our heterosexual peers. People actually get offended when you start talking out against it, and that's just ridiculous.

You summed up my thoughts on the matter nicely there, but in a much more eloquent fashion.

swirlser

MicraBoy wrote: »

I'm going to throw this out there and suggest that this is more to do with gender than it is to do with sexuality. Places like the BH don't exist in the straight community and don't exist in the lesbian community because of there common deniminator: women.

Women in general aren't into the kind of random anonymous sex that the BH facilitates. There are other reasons such as safety etc. that make it infeasable that such a place would exist in the straight community.

If there wasn't the self regulatory woman factor then I think places like the BH would be common place. At least as common as brothels anyway.

+10 on the first sentence.

shoegirl

MicraBoy wrote: »

Women in general aren't into the kind of random anonymous sex that the BH facilitates. There are other reasons such as safety etc. that make it infeasable that such a place would exist in the straight community.

If there wasn't the self regulatory woman factor then I think places like the BH would be common place. At least as common as brothels anyway.

This is an appalling generalisation. There are several parts of the womens communtiy who are CRYING out for this kind of event. Indeed play parties and occasional womens sauna nights are commonplace in parts of the UK. The feminist separatist strangehold over the womens scene has prevented these kind of events from openly happening for women, but there are a LOT of women interested and indeed, I am told a vibrant fetish and bondage scene "off the scene" for fear of repression and victimisation by the dominant separtist element of the womens community.

A lot of hetero and bi friends of mine are basically polyamorous and massively jealous of the kind of freewheeling sexuality they perceive places like the BH represent. The BH does not cater to women because frankly, there is no precedent to show it would be profit making, yet there is definitely a small demand for it. What stops it happening is a powerful socialization in the womens community itself.

Get yourself to LAX and go to West Hollywood to a bar run by friends of mine called Girlbar. Or view any of the various manifestations of the Dinah Shore weekend videos on YouTube. You might be surprised to know that your tired and stereotypical view of womens sexuality is not the norm the world around. Same goes for parts of Australia, especially Sydney.

MicraBoy

shoegirl wrote: »

This is an appalling generalisation. There are several parts of the womens communtiy who are CRYING out for this kind of event. Indeed play parties and occasional womens sauna nights are commonplace in parts of the UK. The feminist separatist strangehold over the womens scene has prevented these kind of events from openly happening for women, but there are a LOT of women interested and indeed, I am told a vibrant fetish and bondage scene "off the scene" for fear of repression and victimisation by the dominant separtist element of the womens community.

A lot of hetero and bi friends of mine are basically polyamorous and massively jealous of the kind of freewheeling sexuality they perceive places like the BH represent. The BH does not cater to women because frankly, there is no precedent to show it would be profit making, yet there is definitely a small demand for it. What stops it happening is a powerful socialization in the womens community itself.

Get yourself to LAX and go to West Hollywood to a bar run by friends of mine called Girlbar. Or view any of the various manifestations of the Dinah Shore weekend videos on YouTube. You might be surprised to know that your tired and stereotypical view of womens sexuality is not the norm the world around. Same goes for parts of Australia, especially Sydney.

Ok you've convinced me. Women are just as whorey as men. :rolleyes:

swirlser

MicraBoy wrote: »

Ok you've convinced me. Women can be just as whorey as men. :rolleyes:

/fixed.

LegacyUser

"dominant separtist element of the womens community."

who are these separatists?

gavkm27

LookingFor wrote: »

There's a much bigger difference than a pub/club and somewhere like the boilerhouse. The boilerhouse is basically a brothel where client is vendor and vice versa.

Sorry that really is'nt anywhere near the same,men are paying for a somewhat safe(minus the possiblity of getting a std! of course) to meet other men for sex,you have already made up your mind so i'm not trying to convice you,just saying that i disagree with your comparsion

LookingFor wrote: »

Of course, some people do use pubs/clubs purely as pick-up joints, but at least they have a broader social utility.

A broader social utility,what does that exactly mean? you can stand around and chat and feel some what normal,as apposed to sneaking into the seedy boilerhouse to lurk in the corner and feel someone up?
Many time i have arsed about the bars and then headed to the boilerhouse for quickie,guilty as charged,i'm a retard

LookingFor wrote: »

If you want sex-on-tap, then how about dating and forming a relationship with someone? IMO places like the boilerhouse are representative of that not unsubstantial number of gay people who seem to be emotionally crippled and who can't form healthy relationships. Before someone screams at me to stop being so heteronormative, I'd suggest that the relationship model of stability and monogamy that has evolved, evolved for good reasons - that is, because it is much much healthier (emotionally and physically) and much more conducive to basic survival. It is a massive pity that we as gay people seem to have adopted promiscuity etc. as a mark of our culture, as something to be protected just so we're not too like our heterosexual peers. People actually get offended when you start talking out against it, and that's just ridiculous.

So my synopsis of you post,you seem to have a problem with men being men and cast pretty harsh judgements on the rest of us for being so.
Ok i'm 28,single and have never been in a relationship,nor have i the intention of being in one anytime soon,so what am i? a crippled social retard? Hell no,i'm one happy healthy human being,i live a great life,surrounded by great people.And what is conductive to basic survival,well it's food,water and shelter,monogamous relationships? i think some people have stayed alive without those.me included.so far!
Adopted promiscuity? It's just part of the scene,has been for ages and it will be for a lot longer,you need a dose of acceptance lad,it really is'nt any of your business what other people do,maybe if you did'nt cling to the identity of gayness this would'nt affect you so much.

AARRRGH

shoegirl wrote: »

This is an appalling generalisation. There are several parts of the womens communtiy who are CRYING out for this kind of event. Indeed play parties and occasional womens sauna nights are commonplace in parts of the UK. The feminist separatist strangehold over the womens scene has prevented these kind of events from openly happening for women, but there are a LOT of women interested and indeed, I am told a vibrant fetish and bondage scene "off the scene" for fear of repression and victimisation by the dominant separtist element of the womens community.

A lot of hetero and bi friends of mine are basically polyamorous and massively jealous of the kind of freewheeling sexuality they perceive places like the BH represent. The BH does not cater to women because frankly, there is no precedent to show it would be profit making, yet there is definitely a small demand for it. What stops it happening is a powerful socialization in the womens community itself.

Get yourself to LAX and go to West Hollywood to a bar run by friends of mine called Girlbar. Or view any of the various manifestations of the Dinah Shore weekend videos on YouTube. You might be surprised to know that your tired and stereotypical view of womens sexuality is not the norm the world around. Same goes for parts of Australia, especially Sydney.

In fairness, he did repeatedly say "women in general". Considering you yourself say it is only a small group of women who would be into a boilerhouse scene, his "in general" comments appear to be true, at least according to your own logic!

Boston

LookingFor wrote: »

There's a much bigger difference than a pub/club and somewhere like the boilerhouse. The boilerhouse is basically a brothel where client is vendor and vice versa.

Of course, some people do use pubs/clubs purely as pick-up joints, but at least they have a broader social utility.

My problem with a place like the boilerhouse is how it reflects on any gay person and reinforces stereotypes about gay people.

The first time I heard about the boilerhouse? In school. People using it as part of derogatory mocking of other people (e.g. "i saw your Da going into the boilerhouse last night").

There is a surprisingly strong connotation there between gay people and the boilerhouse, and people are (IMO) rightly disgusted by the latter, and so it reinforces negative connotations and disgust with the former. IMO people should think about that broader impact on how gay people are viewed because of places like this before they go and support them.

'Image' aside (and gay people DO have an image problem, let's be honest), the place is facking public health hazard. I know of one person who was riddled with stis after a single visit there, one person who contracted HIV (yes, he was dumb and wasn't safe). I'd love someone to do a study of rates of infection among users of the boilerhouse. And the problem on top of that is that the gay population is small enough here...so even if a small proportion use a place like the boilerhouse, it has a disproportionate impact on the health of the wider community.

Lastly, and as I alluded in my original post, I just think a place like the boilerhouse is a mark of social retardation. If you want sex-on-tap, then how about dating and forming a relationship with someone? IMO places like the boilerhouse are representative of that not unsubstantial number of gay people who seem to be emotionally crippled and who can't form healthy relationships. Before someone screams at me to stop being so heteronormative, I'd suggest that the relationship model of stability and monogamy that has evolved, evolved for good reasons - that is, because it is much much healthier (emotionally and physically) and much more conducive to basic survival. It is a massive pity that we as gay people seem to have adopted promiscuity etc. as a mark of our culture, as something to be protected just so we're not too like our heterosexual peers. People actually get offended when you start talking out against it, and that's just ridiculous.

As far as I know the boiler-house does work hand in hand with sexual health organisations such as johnny. This ensures that every "client" is handed two free condoms upon entry and the staff monitor as best they can unsafe behaviour. If you remove places like the boiler-house either through legal means or moral enforcement, you simply drive people back to cottaging, where there's no one making sure you have a condom, that the person beside you isn't shooting up or that the next person who walks into the premises isn't going to kick you to death.

Gay Saunas arn't my cup of tea (neither is casual sex for that matter), but it's not like they drive the demand for sex, its the other way around and additionally, from what I've heard, the boilerhouse is pretty respectable as gay saunas's go.

MicraBoy

AARRRGH wrote: »

In fairness, he did repeatedly say "women in general". Considering you yourself say it is only a small group of women who would be into a boilerhouse scene, his "in general" comments appear to be true, at least according to your own logic!

And I never suggested that women don't want, need and enjoy sex as much as men. They don't however (in general ) want the kind of anonymous sex the Boilerhouse caters for.

shoegirl

unsure4 wrote: »

"dominant separtist element of the womens community."

who are these separatists?

About 8 years ago I went off to live in London for about 9 months. The weekend before I left I was at a womens club night which at the time was changing hands to "new management" to an acquaintance. A bunch of us, including her, ended up at a party where we managed to talk her into hiring a stripper for the opening night.

8 months later I arrived back in Ireland to find the GCN letters page STILL full of bile and outrage from women who were "offended" by the stripper. What stunned me was that they got literally months of hatemail about having a stripper at a womens event, and the acquaintance was basically run off the scene.

A couple of years ago I was in the company of bunch of women who are very influential in the local womens community where I live and was showing them photos of a couple of womens night I'd been to in Sydney and you want to hear the hysterics of a couple of them over the fact that there was a pole dancer in the photos. They had no idea in roaring to the whole place how offensive and degrading they found the idea.

I love by the way, why you ask about "who" these people are, but hide behind anonymity yourself? What are you hiding?

shoegirl

AARRRGH wrote: »

In fairness, he did repeatedly say "women in general". Considering you yourself say it is only a small group of women who would be into a boilerhouse scene, his "in general" comments appear to be true, at least according to your own logic!

There is no logic to it. How can you possibly assess demand for a service that is unavailable as there is no way to measure demand for it?

My point is that we simply do not know about the demands and wants of womens sexuality and cannot make assumptions that simply because a service is not there, that there is no demand for it.

MicraBoy

shoegirl wrote: »

There is no logic to it. How can you possibly assess demand for a service that is unavailable as there is no way to measure demand for it?

My point is that we simply do not know about the demands and wants of womens sexuality and cannot make assumptions that simply because a service is not there, that there is no demand for it.

Market research?

Cabbage Brained

Shoegirl, you can never accurately assess the demand for any product or service, as it depends on so many factors that to get a true picture would be mathematically impossible.

However, the fact that a potentially profitable good or service isn't on the market is generally an indication that there is little or no demand for that good or service. Economics would argue that if there was demand for that good or service, and somebody could profitably establish one, then it would already have been established.

I don't know of any lesbian saunas around the world, let alone in Dublin. So I think it is fairly safe to assume that there is not much lesbian demand for saunas.

EDIT to apologise for shoegirl for not reading the whole thread. That feminist movement could well be acting as a barrier to entry, despite there being demand for such a place for women. I think you should set up your own separatist movement and establish Irelands first lesbian sauna!

shoegirl

MicraBoy wrote: »

Market research?

Rather expensive. I certainly know of two places in the UK that are running events for women. Fetish events are especially popular with women, and to me, it certainly does raise questions (based on a long history of being on the Irish scene) as to why these events are not happening at all on the mainstream scene.

Fun 4 Females in London organize regular play parties for women in the London region and a different group in the Brighton area arrange a womens night a few times a year in one of the mens saunas, which apparently are so popular THEY SELL OUT in advance!!

Its far easier to just cater for a "traditional" clientele than to take risks doing new things. Especially where women scene is concerned as a lot of womens nights, even mainstream ones, just don't get supported at all.

A lot of the problem I see, certainly in Ireland, is that there is a big cultural thing about a woman going into a bar on her own, and a lot of gay women are a lot more closeted than guys ("lezzie" is still a huge insult in much of Ireland) so they often don't know any other women. As a result a lot of women go out with gay guys - and this makes it hard for them to go to womens events that exclude men. Its not surprising that many of the most long standing and popular clubs over the last 10 years in Dublin had a "men as guests" policy. In fact its fascinating to watch what looks like "straight couples" arriving into places like Kiss and then realise that the guy has gone off with another guy, and the girl has gone off with another girl! Amusing, and definitely something some day I'd love to research further. There is a very deep friendship very often between individual gay men and gay women that is very interesting in cultures which are often very monogendered.

Nevyn

Firstly can we quit it with the feminist bashing, not all feminist are prudes there are sex positive feminists.

Secondly I think it part of how closeted the Irish female gay scene still is, Ireland is a small place and generally backwards when it comes to the expression of sexuality so there is still the fear of a gay female being raped which a gay male generally does not have to face from gay bashers.

Thirdly there are fetish nights in this country, yes they are a lot tamer then those in other countries but we do have them and they are not hetroexclusive.

Fourth there are female play nights and weekends away arranged in this country but they are usually tacky through like the likes of escort Ireland or exclusive to word of mouth in certain circles or restricted access web forums.

Ireland is frankly too small of a conservative country for public events like Fun 4 Females imho

shoegirl

There is a little more on the UK scene here, and a few links.

Not sure I'd quite call Fun4Females "public", they are picky about letting people in - apparently they can you to make sure you're not a guy before you're given information as to where the party is. On the other hand, the Brighton sauna is well publicised.

Not sure I'd quite describe the fetish scene in Ireland as "tackY". I've friends who are really into it, and they wouldn't be in the least bit tacky. Nobody is feminist bashing here anyway, there are just lots of assumptions being made about female sexuality and what women want that are based on conservative notions about what women want that are not universal. We forget to easily that the so-called "lesbian sex wars" were between two entirely different sets of feminist worldviews - the viewpoint that all pornography was demeaning, and a sex-positive persepective that was trying to include non-traditional groups such as sex workers who sex postive feminists felt were being marginalized further by the anti porn crusades (however well intentioned it might have been).

Nevyn

I didn't call the fetish scene tacky I referred to parties organised via escort ireland as being tacky.

Yes there is a struggle between sex postive feminists and hardcore 3rd wave feminists and then there is the issue of women wanting to have sex like men to be equal :rolleyes:.

There has to be a middle path when it comes to women owning their own sexuality and copping on that what is right for them personally may not be right for the rest of the sisterhood.

Again Ireland is too small for such events be they fetish, swing bi/hetro/homo.

kisaragi

LookingFor wrote: »

There's a much bigger difference than a pub/club and somewhere like the boilerhouse. The boilerhouse is basically a brothel where client is vendor and vice versa.

Of course, some people do use pubs/clubs purely as pick-up joints, but at least they have a broader social utility.

My problem with a place like the boilerhouse is how it reflects on any gay person and reinforces stereotypes about gay people.

The first time I heard about the boilerhouse? In school. People using it as part of derogatory mocking of other people (e.g. "i saw your Da going into the boilerhouse last night").

There is a surprisingly strong connotation there between gay people and the boilerhouse, and people are (IMO) rightly disgusted by the latter, and so it reinforces negative connotations and disgust with the former. IMO people should think about that broader impact on how gay people are viewed because of places like this before they go and support them.

'Image' aside (and gay people DO have an image problem, let's be honest), the place is facking public health hazard. I know of one person who was riddled with stis after a single visit there, one person who contracted HIV (yes, he was dumb and wasn't safe). I'd love someone to do a study of rates of infection among users of the boilerhouse. And the problem on top of that is that the gay population is small enough here...so even if a small proportion use a place like the boilerhouse, it has a disproportionate impact on the health of the wider community.

Lastly, and as I alluded in my original post, I just think a place like the boilerhouse is a mark of social retardation. If you want sex-on-tap, then how about dating and forming a relationship with someone? IMO places like the boilerhouse are representative of that not unsubstantial number of gay people who seem to be emotionally crippled and who can't form healthy relationships. Before someone screams at me to stop being so heteronormative, I'd suggest that the relationship model of stability and monogamy that has evolved, evolved for good reasons - that is, because it is much much healthier (emotionally and physically) and much more conducive to basic survival. It is a massive pity that we as gay people seem to have adopted promiscuity etc. as a mark of our culture, as something to be protected just so we're not too like our heterosexual peers. People actually get offended when you start talking out against it, and that's just ridiculous.

Sorry for a bit of delayed reply but...

Yes I was trying to say that I didn't think there was much of a difference between picking someone up in a club and meeting them in the boilerhouse. Not that they're similar places in terms of utility.

The place isn't a health hazard, if people weren't having sex there they'd be doing it somewhere else, meeting people online or crusing bars. And I presume that the boilerhouse provide condoms and lube there so if peope aren't safe there, there's nothing to suffest they would be otherwise.

Likewise I would say that if it wasn't "I saw your da going into the boilerhouse" it'd be "I saw your da going into the george/doing something else gay". Anyway, I can see your point about image, but I don't think the solution is to try and stop gay people from having casual sex. Rather to make those who condemn it realise that straight people (from my experience) do it just as much. And anyway, it's not a big deal. I wouldn't have sex with a woman myself but I don't mind if other guys do it, it seems the same to me in regards to casual sex, everyone is free to choose.

As for having a relationship so you can have as much sex as you want, relationships aren't for everyone. Some people like to sleep around and not have to be committed to anyone. There's no point in trying to force people into relationships when they don't want to be in them. As for gay people adopting promiscuity as part of their culture, well, as I've said before, the straight people I know are just as promiscouos as the gay ones.

Nevyn

I think its more that there isn't a place for straight people or women of what ever sexuality to go and have sex like the boilerhouse.

anotherlostie

I love how the women have taken over a thread about the Boilerhouse!

Bottle_of_Smoke

How in god's name does this place avoid the religious folk who protested unrelentlessly outside stringfellows?

Bottle_of_Smoke

shay_562 wrote: »

It's called Coppers, and it's heaving most nights. (Though it does, for bizarre reasons I have yet to figure out, see its fair share of female clientelle)

Why does coppers have this reputation, its no more easy to pull there than anywhere else in Dublin!

cotwold

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

How in god's name does this place avoid the religious folk who protested unrelentlessly outside stringfellows?

Yeah good question. Well i suppose on a basic level the difference is you're not paying for sex in the boilerhouse, just somewhere to have it. But then again you weren't in stringfellows. I'd imagine its something to do with the 'objectification' of women but most likely that it was a high profile club.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Why does coppers have this reputation, its no more easy to pull there than anywhere else in Dublin!

Not anymore but apparently it used to be a lot easier. Its a different animal altogether these days apparently.

Boston

I went to coppers once to gawk at the hetro, they're fantabulous.

shoegirl

cotwold wrote: »

Well i suppose on a basic level the difference is you're not paying for sex in the boilerhouse, just somewhere to have it. But then again you weren't in stringfellows. I'd imagine its something to do with the 'objectification' of women but most likely that it was a high profile club.

I think its to do with the profile of Stringfellows and its attempts to sell itself as a normal place to hold business meetings etc. I doubt somehow, a lot of talk about business goes on in the Boilerhouse. I can understand the unease about Stringfellows as I have worked in a couple of companies where work meetings after work ended up in lap dancing clubs and some of the hetero women present were both criticised by colleagues for going along (as if they picked the location, come on!) and one I know was very afraid that her fiance might find out and get upset.

Boston

cotwold wrote: »

Yeah good question. Well i suppose on a basic level the difference is you're not paying for sex in the boilerhouse, just somewhere to have it. But then again you weren't in stringfellows. I'd imagine its something to do with the 'objectification' of women but most likely that it was a high profile club.

Sorry, missed this. The local residents thought that stringfellows was lowering the tone of the area. A laughable suggestion given the area.

Nevyn

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

How in god's name does this place avoid the religious folk who protested unrelentlessly outside stringfellows?

Most of them don't know about it or how it operates.

You can't compare the lies of coppers with the boiler house, you won't see people dressed in just a towel in coppers and going off to private massage rooms together.

shoegirl

Boston wrote: »

Sorry, missed this. The local residents thought that stringfellows was lowering the tone of the area. A laughable suggestion given the area.

Ah now, not entirely fair I think. That whole area was notorious until the Legion of Mary cleaned it up through a massive campaign of "rescuing" fallen women. Isn't that what our Magdalen laundries was for? My mother remembers her uncle (who was big in the legion) had a number of old ladies who stayed in touch down through the years after he'd help them get away from pimps and out of prostitution and into half decent jobs. While its probably likely that some "fallen women" may have ended up in laundries, some were genuinely helped out.

There have been pockets of prostitution around the area over the decades but its tended to fan out in recent years. I can't blame them for trying. The risk with Stringfellows was that other similar style clubs would follow them into the same area and encourage kerbcrawling. I cannot see loads of Boilerhouses popping up in town! Its not like there is room for a lot of competition there - or is there!?

AARRRGH

Thaedydal wrote: »

I think its more that there isn't a place for straight people or women of what ever sexuality to go and have sex like the boilerhouse.

You're deluding yourself if you think a heterosexual sex club would have a significant number of female guests.

I base this comment on the fact that every sex club in the world has a problem attracting female guests. It's not just a conservative Ireland thing.

shoegirl

AARRRGH wrote: »

I base this comment on the fact that every sex club in the world has a problem attracting female guests. It's not just a conservative Ireland thing.

Thats because most of them are either a) based on prostitution or services that are arms-length away from it b) really put off female customers by the sleazy way they market themselves or c) are marketed solely towards gay men.

Any sort of "sex club" that markets itself in any way that doesn't represent traditional pseudo porn style generally tends to do a lot better than those who do.

stephen_n

LookingFor wrote: »

I'm not advocating that we ban

And I don't know of any 'straight' equivalent to the BH, though I'm open to enlightenment on that if I'm wrong.

I think you will find that has more to do with hetrosexual women's attitudes to sex. If most hetro males could go to a place like the BH and have sex with a woman they would jump at the chance. I think you will find the level of hetrosexual prostitution is much higher to compensate for the need for casual sex in the straight community.

Males gay or straight are naturally more drawn to casual sex than females, the only difference is when your talking about gay men you already have the two to tango.

This is not a reflection on the gay community just a reflection on men in general!