Sunday, June 3, 2012

Facebook Fun with Charlie Dacke

In a previous posting, we looked at the reactions to Charlie Dackes call-to-arms style attempt to get Portsmouth lapdancing club 'Elegance' closed down. The debate, held on the 'Portsmouth Against Cuts Together' Facebook page, became very interesting as various prohibitionists competed for the 'Radder Than Thou Award' . Lets re-join the debate and see who was saying what....

So as we can see, Kathryn Rimmington seems to be unable to remember what she did last time and if we recall my previous article, didn't even understand what 'Elegance' actually was. But hang on...I thought 'Wiggle' and 'Elegance' were having a big impact in womens lives in Portsmouth and yet we see that an active prohibitionist doesn't seem to see where Elegance fits into the local 'objectification' scene.

Next we see that its not only Kathryn Rimmingtons memory that is failing, because Charlie Dacke goes on to thank Rachael Victoria Wisniak for her support, forgetting that Rachael has been active on many Facebook debates and could hardly be described as a supporter. In fact we see that she makes the perfectly reasonable point that Charlie Dacke shouldn't be campaigning to make people redundant on a site that is apparently dedicated to saving jobs. Its interesting to note that Charlie scurries away from the debate at this point, largely because she knows when she is on to a loser.

That said Charlie supports Tim Dawes and asks him to consider the effect that the clubs (Wiggle, Elegance but not Heaven Sent for some reason) have on him, his family and the women in his life. Unless Charlie knows Tim personally, she has just made a whole raft of assumptions, but at least she is being consistent in her approach to debate....

Paul Nelson then drops into the debate and makes some impressive comments. Rachael Victoria Wisniak made the perfectly valid point that people who live for example in London or New Zealand should not be able to object against a licence application in Portsmouth, largely because they won't be affected by it. Paul of course takes a different view, because the 'zone of objectification' created by places like Elegance spreads across the world, in an almost quantum like manner and like the butterfly that flaps its wings in Hong Kong, a lapdance in Portsmouth could easily cause objectification in Argentina.

Paul then goes on to deliver lines that are reminiscent of 'Rick' from The Young Ones (look it up on You Tube if you have never heard of it). To my knowledge, and I prepare to be corrected, fox hunters and slave traders have never employed arguments that are remotely similar to any argument that Rachael proposed. So I really don't understand what Paul is talking about, but he probably thinks its a devastating one liner, but sadly the only thing that is speaking volumes is the superficiality of his arguments.

But hang on, because Paul gets even better when he compares campaigning against 'Elegance, to saving the Amazon Rain Forest. According to Paul the impact of losing 224,000 square miles of rain forest since 1980, is the same as a lap dancing club staying open in Portsmouth. Pauls stupidity is compounded when we remember some months ago how a group of loggers in the Amazon tied up and burned alive a six year old native girl. That's a serious issue and it deserves world wide attention, what goes in the Amazon will absolutely affect the rest of the world, what goes on in 'Elegance' in Portsmouth will only affect local crime rates if the place is closed. I say this because I have already demonstrated that incidences of violence flatline in areas where there are clubs.
Paul Nelson - Radder Than Thou
Sanity comes in the form of Ben Norman, who seems to know Paul Nelson of old and we love the 'cringe' comment. Ben talks some sense when he says that 'no true socialist supports the loss of jobs', but it seems that its not true socialists that we are talking about, its designer socialists and their designer feminist pals that are running these shows. Ben explains that nothing comes for free and that if anyone is calling on the council to close clubs, alternative jobs must be made available for those that are affected. Nice idea Ben, but its not going to happen.

That said, it's possible that Ben doesn't really understand how the industry works, especially when he states that it's social and economic problems that force women to seek employment in clubs. No one is forced but we do seem to keep seeing this viewpoint crop again and again.

We bring this article to a close, with Kathryn Rimmngtons comment, where sadly she demonstrates that she either doesn't understand what Ben Norman said or doesn't care when she mentions some kind of long term planning that apparently accords with Bens views, apart from the fact that the 'long term plan' will make loads of women redundant.

I don't know what you think, but debates like this only convince me that the participants aren't fully in sync with the real world. This isn't 'Sim Portsmouth', this is real life with real people who will suffer as a result of the imposition of a groups twisted principles to local society.

Anyway, stay tuned for the next and final episode where Charlie Dacke accuses Equity and GMB members of being prostitutes. No I'm not joking, it's about the best comment that she has ever made and will be one that comes back to haunt her.

Postscript: I have learned that since this time Charlie refused to debate with TonyN on the basis that she will not engage with people that 'buy women', best of all however is the fact that she deleted just about everything she could find. The problem for Charlie is that she deleted everything about three weeks too late...


  1. Charlie has been busy hiding her mess. The not wanting to debate I personally believe is a cover for I can't debate. the use of Holsopple and Lilith reports shows she really cannot think for herself so takes the easy option of quoting reports no matter if they are relevant or accurate.

    It is amazing how many times I have tried to debate with people like charlie on line only to have them block/delete/ignore me and my comments. Really a case of not really understanding the issues and trotting out statements like well trained parrots.

  2. Brilliant comments on Paul Nelson. When a friend of mine started the Facebook support group ( Paul Nelson joined under a fake name after blocking the creator and admins of the group so they couldn't see his comments. He then went on to do pretty much what he did in your example, while throwing in a few personal slurs about the group's creator too. He was eventually removed from the group and blocked and his comments were also taken down, so unfortunately you can no longer appreciate the sheer joy of some of the statements. I know him and can assure you, Rick is alive and well and living in Paul Nelson.

  3. An effective demonstration of the broad overlap between the terms 'activist' and 'narcissist'.


  5. There is a chance you are eligible for a complimentary $1,000 Amazon Gift Card.