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.