Sunday, February 19, 2012

Object - Then and Now

Digging aimlessly through the internet, I found this document which must one of the earliest instances of Object and their lapdancing campaign. Its a .pdf that encourages people to sign up to a petition to change the licensing conditions of lapdancing and strip clubs..

Its a pity they did not see fit to include a link to the 'academic research' so that we could make up our minds for ourselves. Its interesting to note that both Jeremy Coutinho and Sasha Rakoff signed the document as well and as you can see, they obtained 58 signatures, less than that if you exclude people from Object and trolls.

Interesting how Sasha Rakof calls for clubs to no longer be licensed like pubs, I thought the issue was that they were licensed like 'coffee shops' or 'karaoke bars'. Aside from the fact that lap dancing clubs were never licensed like pubs anyway. Love it when people feel the need to write in CAPITALS to make their point.

Anyway, something struck me about the document, nowhere does it mention a wholesale campaign to close every club in the country. In fact if you look at Objects ' Frequently Asked Questions about Lapdancing' document, you see that Question 8 raises the issue of civil liberties....

If I read that first sentence correctly, it says that Object are not calling for lap dancing clubs to be banned. So it is not unreasonable for me to ask how did things go from there to here.....

The above frame grab was taken from Mumsnet, who as you know have never ever supported Objects localised campaigns to close strip clubs...

So when did Object change their minds? When was the press released that said....

'Actually we have changed our minds and want all of the clubs shut.....I know we didn't mention that in the start, but its what we think now'.

Notice that responses were encouraged from anyone that could read the webpage, irrespective of where they lived. This is just one of the issues with Object, they say one thing and mean another and as result nothing they say has any real credibility any more. My best guess is that prohibition has been their objective all along and that their justification is that it is members of the public that are agitating for mass closures and that all Object are doing is providing the means.

'Prohibition? Nothing to do with us guv...its the public innit'.

Although to be fair I am fairly certain that no one from Object really talks like that...


  1. What they probably mean is they want dancers placed in stocks but haven't quite figured out how to get that far. On a serious note they have a habit of changing what they say and what they mean. Their cry of protecting the exploited dancer has failed so now their true agenda is becoming more and more clear and that is do anything necessary to get what they want. And if people don't stand up to them they probably will.

  2. I've just downloaded iStripper, and now I can watch the sexiest virtual strippers get naked on my desktop.