You Must Read This Trash........

Cruising over Objects marvellous Facebook page, my eye was drawn to a link to an article in The Independent written by someone called Louise McCudden. The article seems to seek to make some kind of point, but for the life of me, I cannot work out what it is. You can see the article here.

The title 'Spearmint Rhinos 24 House Strip Club and Page 3 - You're Not About 'Choice' For Women' is cumbersome to say the least but at least it makes some kind of proposition. Let's go into things in a little more detail...

The piece a opens with a view about Spearmint Rhinos proposed trading licence and what kind of person might want a dance at 7am. It then goes onto to fold in some unattributed comments about feminism being dead, Harriet Harman being linked to the conspiracy of silence over Jimmy Saville and finally mentions the tragic suicide of Amanda Todd due to online sexual bullying. After laying out its table, McCudden then asks the killer question....

What do these stories have to do with each other? Not much, perhaps. But they all exist in the same world. We’ve tried a lot of solutions to this and nothing seems to be working. Has the time come for us to ask whether these issues are all part of one destructive tapestry? Some call it rape culture. Whatever the terminology, we need to ask ourselves whether such a tapestry exists – and how we might all, unknowingly, be adding to it.

Sorry I am a bit confused. In the first instance McCudden admits that the stories don't have much to do with each other, then goes onto speculate that they might have something in common as they all part of something that she refers to as 'rape culture'. By the way its all our fault that it exists.

'We've tried a lot of solutions to this and nothing seems to be working...'

We've tried a lot solutions to what? What is 'this'?

The all-important service provision of 24 hour lap dances by Spearmint Rhino has been controversial: the local council allegedly received 22 letters of complaint, including some from those who make use of, or work at, the nearby almost-as-important service, a local hospital - and its maternity wing. Perhaps they missed the memo on ‘choice’.

22 letters of complaint? Just 22? But how would 24 hour lap dancing affect the maternity wing of the local hospital?

'Earlier this month, John Specht, vice-president of those well-known activists for women’s choice and bodily autonomy, Spearmint Rhino (because that’s what it’s all about, right? They support women’s choices; that’s why they’re always showing up on pro-choice demos, right?) encouraged female students struggling with university costs to work for him as lap dancers.'

Sorry Louise John Specht did nothing of the sort because he was selectively misquoted and furthermore, all of this happened last year, not last month, so let's start doing some research shall we?

McCudden then piles into Page 3 and a comment by Neil Wallis in The Huffington Post, who said as follows....

“Why shouldn't a girl stuck behind the bread counter at Tesco, an office girl down the local council, the unemployed, find a new glamorous life via Page Three?”

McCudden really doesn't go for this at all.

And thus, much like Mr Specht, Mr Wallis rather beautifully demonstrates the irony of his own argument.

I am sorry but I do not see any irony in either comment by Specht or Wallis. Happily McCudden then goes onto to make herself look stupid with the following comment.

I’m keen to hear to examples of millionaire women with either earned or inherited wealth choosing to pose on Page 3 or give lap dances at Spearmint Rhino. I’m keen to learn how many heterosexual rich white men are choosing to wear a thong and gyrate against men they don’t fancy for money.

Well of course you don't see this, people with earned or inherited wealth don't generally need to work at all. What's the point of the above paragraph? People work in clubs and pose on Page 3 because they want to earn more than the average salary and because they are equipped to do the job. What was McCudden trying to prove by mentioning 'heterosexual rich white men' working as strippers? Is the point that because rich people don't work in clubs or Page 3, then the less well off certainly shouldn't. Why isn't McCudden wondering about gay black men that work as strippers?

The No More Page 3 campaign has nearly 50,000 signatures so far, but The Sun, like Neil Wallis, is apparently more concerned with the issues that “really need addressing.” For example, the paper has joined others in spitting juice over the BBC’s part in the Jimmy Saville scandal. Curiously, The Sun’s own rather infamous investigative skullduggery does not seem to have been turned on the likes of Saville either, however. Perhaps they were too busy counting down to Charlotte Church’s 16th birthday.

Neil Wallis gets a kicking again because he believed that 50,000 people signing a petition against Page 3 was less of an issue than the fact that Jimmy Savile ran a one man campaign of sexual abuse that lasted over 40 years with the knowledge of certain parties in the BBC. Well, Wallis and The Sun are correct and making comments about The Sun not picking up on Savile in the past is an utterly stupid thing to say because to my knowledge The Times, The Guardian and The Independent seemed to miss it as well.

At the heart of all this misdirection lies a failure to understand the difference between consensual sex between equal partners, and sex as a negative thing; as a power transaction. Whether the manifestation of it is referring to adult university students as girls because they dance naked, or a sneering panic about too much sexual pleasure, we are too quick to blindly accept the notion of sex as a miserable commodity, and increasingly unable to understand it as anything else.

What the fuck has Spearmint Rhino and Page 3 got to do with 'consensual sex between equal partners'? McCudden seems to be one of the ignorant few that believe lap dancing clubs offer sexual services and they do not, but nonetheless she doesn't let this fact get in the way of her.....article.

There is no simple explanation for sexual abuse but if we’re serious about it then every thread in the tapestry that facilitates and normalises it needs to be challenged. And I’m terribly sorry if this makes you uncomfortable, but I’m afraid that at some point, that might even include questioning the implications of the idea that there is some basic societal need for 24 hour access to naked female bodies, if you can afford to pay for them.

McCudden states that there 'is no simple explanation for sexual abuse', but then goes on to imply that there is a simple explanation and its Page 3 and Spearmint Rhino and then goes onto make the point that only a certain sector of society can visit the club because it can get a bit expensive.

Louise McCudden, your article only made me uncomfortable because I couldn't see any sense in it. Indeed, someone made the following comment on the thread that accompanied your piece...

I do wish the Indie would re-employ some subeditors - they at least would try to restrain this dreadful rambling. The conclusion is so far from the start as to be two separate pieces. The conclusion asks a good question, it would have been a better place to start and work towards rather than finding the original idea for the piece had no conclusion.

Please follow the link to the article and read it through for yourself. Maybe I am wrong and it all makes sense, but I really struggled to see the point that was being made. That said, if this is a typical expression of prohibitionist thinking, then we have no worries at all, because no one will be able to work out what they are arguing against and why.

Cognitive Dissonance in Prohibitionist Campaigning

I want to prove a point.

I believe that the greater bulk of prohibitionist campaigners actually know that what they are doing is wrong  and spend a lot of time desperately trying to justify their beliefs to themselves and others. Lets consider some key issues....

Groups such as Object have been engaged in what almost amounts to a ten year campaign to close every club in Britain. They know that this will lead to thousands of people losing their jobs as dancers, bar staff, cleaners and doormen. They know this but still they proceed with their campaign. But at some point, some of them started to feel uncomfortable with the idea of women making other women jobless, uncomfortable with the idea of women telling other women what to do. Let's face it,  isn't the key feminist battle with the 'patriachy' one for female freedom of choice? A freedom that Object wish to see removed.

At some point in the past prohibitionist campaigners started to consider that as they were essentially campaigning to reduce female choice and freedom then what was the difference between them as feminist campaigners and the patriarchy that they so despise.

Justifications had be sought, reasons for their actions that brought them back into the prohibitionist comfort zone. So let's introduce the concept of Cognitive Dissonance.

The phrase Cognitive Dissonance was coined by Leon Festinger in his 1957 book, 'When Prophecy Fails', which was about a UFO cult that fervently believed in an impending apocalypse a subsequent rescue of cult believers by space aliens. The apocalypse didn't happen at the predicted time and date and this was justified by the cult members not by admitting the entire premise was horse shit, but that God had decided to spare the Earth and as a result they should go forth and proselytise.

Festinger developed his cognitive dissonance theory on the basis of his observations of the cult members. The theory suggests that we have an inner drive to hold all our attitudes and beliefs in harmony and avoid disharmony (or dissonance).

Festinger stated that a powerful motivation to maintain cognitive consistency can give rise to irrational and sometimes maladaptive behaviour. According to Festinger, we hold many cognitions about the world and ourselves; when they clash, a discrepancy is evoked, resulting in a state of tension known as cognitive dissonance. As the experience of dissonance is unpleasant, we are motivated to reduce or eliminate it, and achieve consonance (i.e. agreement). We do this by coming up with or accepting sometimes ludicrous justifications for what we believe and how we act.

Is this starting to ring some bells for you, especially in terms of recent prohibitionist campaigns?

As I said at the start of the article, prohibitionist campaigners know that one end result of their activities will be unemployed dancers. They know that they as women are campaigning for female freedom but at the same time, are campaigning for certain freedoms to be removed. This conflict creates a dissonance that must be reconciled. Lets look at some reconciliations that we have seen over the past year...

Dissonant Event: We are taking the right of the dancers to earn money in the manner that they see fit....

Reconciliation: We are in fact rescuing the dancers because they are so abused that they have gone crazy....

It is an increasingly common justification used by feminists that the dancers are so essentially so traumatised by their work that being made jobless is the only way to help them. If you think I am joking, take a look at the frame grab below....

If you read it again, you can almost see the cogs turning in the writers brain as they justify ignoring dancer opinions and any academic study that contradicts the standard feminist viewpoint.

Dissonant Event: We tried to rescue the dancers from their traumatic circumstances, but they protested against us in public.

Reconciliation: They protested because they were forced to. Therefore we must redouble our efforts to rescue them by closing down the club where they work.

The above frame grab taken from the Portsmouth on-line newspaper was a reaction to the protest held by dancers outside the Town Hall. The writer justifies their stance by stating that the dancers were coerced, which in this persons view is an industry norm. This therefore justifies the campaign to make the dancers redundant because the campaigners are actually doing them a favour by removing them from a life of coercion. We also see a half baked attempt to brush over the job loss issue by dismissing it on the grounds that maybe the dancers can get jobs in the other places that will open and better still, they will be paid more as well, so everything is good really.

Dissonant Event: The evidence produced to counter the prohibitionist campaigns is well thought out and contains statistics that we find hard to argue with.

Reconciliation: Its all a load of lies and they would say that anyway..

Wiggle made a detailed submission that contained statistics and analysis that demolished the campaign run by Object and the Solent Feminist Network. This was not appreciated by the campaigners, as we saw the other week...

Wiggles submission can be ignored apparently because 'it is full of lies'. Dr Brooke Magnatis demolition of the Lilith Report was based upon statistical analysis of publicly available figures on the incidences of sex attacks in boroughs in London that do and do not have clubs. It was not about opinion dressed as fact. Lilith is the cornerstone of prohibitionist campaigning and feminists were very upset to see it demolished. Some were so upset about the implications of Magnatis work that they just had to dismiss it...

We can see above how a thorough, rigorous analysis of the shortcomings of Lilith are dismissed by feminist campaigners on the basis that Magnati 'would say that sort of thing so can be ignored'.

Dissonant Event: The Licensing Committee considered the SEV applications of seven clubs and after due process, awarded the licences to all of them.

Reconciliation: We need the views to other experts that maybe agree with us and anyway it was all a conspiracy anyhow.

A previous article on this blog, discusses how Leeds councillor Rebecca Charlwood is leading an SEV Working Group that has Object lined up as an 'expert' on the industry. Read more about it here where you will see some Tweets that try an imply the existence of a councillor who is apparently highly knowledgeable about lap dancing clubs in Leeds.

I could go on, but the entire feminist campaign to close clubs is based upon cognitive reconciliations and is therefore intellectually suspect. In many respects the views and justifications for the prohibitionist campaigns is strongly reminiscent of the UFO cult that Festinger wrote about.....

Rebecca Charlwood, SEV Working Group and a Mystery Councillor

We all knew that the Charlwoods would not leave the decision to licence 7 lap dancing clubs in Leeds alone. We know that they tried a petition that went essentially nowhere, so now it seems that Rebecca Charlwood has set up a 'SEV Working Group'. Now, do not get the impression that is a group that is seeking better understanding of the industry. No, its a group that seems dedicated to finding new and exciting ways to close down at least half of the cities clubs, starting with red Leopard and Wildcats (largely due to their location on the main drag, opposite the Town Hall).

Let's have a look at a cut and paste compilation of their Tweets, where we will find something interesting in the conversation....

The first interesting thing, is not I admit very interesting, just completely predictable and it refers to their 'experts'. I am not sure who the 'academic' from Leeds  University is and they don't name the person, but it might be a ham fisted attempt to imply that it was Dr Teela Sanders, who I doubt would give these fools the time of day. Who or what the 'P from equality unit' is, but I imagine they lectured on how lap dancing clubs violate some aspect of equality law a la Object. Speaking of Object we can see that they are lined up to speak at the next meeting along with someone from the Domestic Violence Unit, who will attempt to link clubs with incidences of abuse.

So in terms of 'expert' advice, it seems to be exclusively those that have things to say that the 'Working Group' wants to hear. I tried looking some minutes on Leeds Councils website, but couldn't find any reference to the group, so that tells me that this is an unofficial undertaking.

Now, I am sure that you are sure that you spotted the interesting stuff in the above exchange. Alex Sobel asks who was on the 'expert panel' and right on time Andy Charlwood opens his gob again and makes a comment about the identity of a Leeds councillor being 'an expert on Leeds lapdancing clubs'.

Alex in his innocence requests clarification and Andy Charlwood asks him to guess the name of the Councillor. At this point some discretion in demonstrated and Alex Sobel quite wisely declines to play the game and states that he will 'leave this alone'.

I have a couple of observations to make here. The first is that for these people to be indulging in public 'nudge nudge wink' antics about a councillor that they won't name, is of course very childish. The second point is that this clearly one of their conceptual platforms from which they plan to reverse the Licensing Committees decision to license the 7 clubs. Yes readers, it was all a conspiracy orchestrated by a Leeds Councillor that secretly visits the venues....

The clubs in Leeds are very lucky that the primary opposition to their existence is people like this who will, lets face it, shoot themselves in the feet every chance they get. Nonetheless, it will be interesting to see how things develop.....

The Guardian in Positive Article About Strippers Shock

No, you're eyes are not deceiving you.

No you are not experiencing a hallucination.

There is actually an article in The Guardian about strip tease that is positive. Go here and read it and make some positive noises as well. In fact go there quickly before Polly Toynbee finds out and has it deleted.

The comments make predictable reading of course, but for The Guardian to publish something like this is quite frankly unprecedented. The author, Susannah Breslin is running a blog project, 'Letters from Men that Go To Strip Clubs', which is as it says and maybe its worth a visit, you can find it here and make a contribution as well.

This is all happening right in Objects backyard and maybe this signals a change in perceptions, then again maybe not, but still its better than the kind of stuff we are used to reading....

Its been a better year than I dared imagine for the industry and Object and its group of middle class supporters have suffered defeat after defeat....

The Horns opened in Islington,
Wildcats, Red Leopard, Black Diamond, Liberte, The Purple Door, Silks and Deep Blue in Leeds all had their licenses renewed,
Urban Tiger was re-licensed in Northampton,
Portsmouth has allowed its existing club to stay open (also Wiggle won its planning appeal as well so will be staying open. Never mind eh Charlie),
Leamington Council rejected the Nil Cap so Amara stayed open and Shades got its licence,
Newmarket rejected the Nil Policy so Heaven Awaits remains open.

When I started writing in this blog in January, I hoped that it would act as a focus for opposition to the Nil Policy enthusiasts. I never imagined  that almost 28,000 page views later that we see so so many successes and Object trading out of a flat in South London.

This is not a time to be complacent though, prohibitionists are almost certainly planning to cause some kind of trouble, but for the time at least, the pressure is off. So go and visit  'Letters from Men That Go To Strip Clubs' and tell the world why you are part of the scene.

Let's All Go To Ampthill

Lets face it guys, we have to support the new lap dancing club which I am sure is opening soon. In preparation for our journey I thought it would be a good idea to write a brief guide to the town, just to ensure that we know what we are getting into.

Well Ampthill is a small town in Bedfordshire with a population of 6,767 people and here are a few things that I bet you didn't know about it.....

The name 'Ampthill' is derived from the name Aemethyll, which was the name of the first settlement. 'Aemethyll' means 'ant-hill' or 'ant infested heap'.

Ampthill has a market every thursday and has been doing this for over 750 years, which by coincidence is the age of some of the stall holders.

Property prices in Ampthill are very high, in fact it is one of the most expensive places in Bedfordshire to buy a home, unless you are The Queen or at least was once in the band of the same name.

Ampthill doesn't have a railway station, because it was closed in 1959 by the Government in order to discourage local residents from going to London because of the high levels fail they were responsible for generating everywhere they worked.

Ampthill is famous for the quality of its hairdressers, of which there are 56 in the town centre.

When Waitrose announced they wanted to open an branch in Ampthill, local residents tried to resist because Waitrose wasn't seen to be 'middle class' enough.

Ampthill is a haunted as fuck! Locals have reported seeing strange lights, heard strange noises and there have been rumours of murder, ritual sacrifice and live burials, but the police couldn't get enough evidence to prosecute anyone.

When someone tried to open an alternative clothing store in Ampthill, local residents tried to resist because they didn't want 'vampires walking the streets'.

The night life in Ampthill has been described as 'a handful of shitty pubs and an even shittier 'nightclub' which you can't even really call a nightclub'.

When someone tried to open a tattoo parlour in Ampthill, local residents tried to resist because they 'didn't want those kind of people' on the streets.

Did you know that the people of Ampthill will get their kit off at the drop of a hat for charity? Here's the guys...

Bigger boobs than the dancers in Shaylers club.......

Here the girls......

Whatever must their children think......?

Did you know that recently over 700 local Ampthill residents attended a protest against the opening a lap dancing club in the town. 

Did you know that Ampthill has links with the Beatles? Local resident, Emily Atack has a grandmother who is Paul McCartneys cousin.

Speaking of The Beatles, they were once booked to appear in Ampthill but were driven out by a mob of enraged locals because of the 'unacceptability of their hair styles' and 'drug songs'.

Center Parcs are building a new resort near to Ampthill, much to the annoyance of the locals who don't want outsiders shitting in the streets and being sick everywhere.

Ampthill even has a football club, Ampthill Town FC and did you know that they were the South Midlands League champions in 1959 and in 1999 they were runners up in the Spartan South Midlands League Senior Division. Wayne fucking Rooney or what?

Did you that the 1972 John Boorman film Deliverance is based upon the James Dickey novel of the same name. James Dickey never visited Ampthill at all, which is a fucking shame, given the inspiration the town could have given his writing.

Did you know that is it rumoured that the girls in the lap dancing club are rumoured to be East European and Brazilian, but somehow I doubt that any of them will be arsed to make the journey up from London.

And another literary coincidence....it is possible that John Wyndham, author of The Midwich Cuckoos (later filmed as Village of the Damned) drove through Ampthill once and if he did, what inspiration did he draw from his time there?

Did you know that Ampthill has my almost undivided attention at the moment and that this blog has a world wide readership?

Did you know that when someone tried to open a lap dancing club in Ampthill, the locals tried to resist because there wasn't a sneaky side entrance they could use to get inside without being seeing by their wives?

Did you know that some of the locals are worried about how the town looks to the outside world?

Did you know that no one outside Britain even knew that Ampthill existed until I started blogging about it?

Did you know that this protest has given the club quite literally priceless publicity and that the locals still haven't worked out that had kept their mouths shut it would have all been over in a matter of months, but now half of England is going to want to visit the place.

So that's Ampthill for you, a place like no other (outside Iran) and I bet you can't wait to visit it......

In The Wake Of Portsmouth - A Message For Paul Nelson

It was inevitable that prohibitionists in Portsmouth would become agitated at the failure of their campaign, in fact  there have been some really cool responses on the Portsmouth on line newspaper. One however really stands out and it was made by you, Paul Nelson. You are clearly very upset by the submission to the Council made by Wiggle Club. This is what you had to say about it....

According to you Paul its all lies. I am familiar with the submission and as result can comment on your allegations.

The submission does not claim that 'all the people who oppose these clubs are a member of either Object or the Solent Feminist Network. What it does illustrate is that Object and SFN were the prime movers behind the campaign.

I fail to see how you can be bemused about anything because the submission clearly shows frame grabs from both Object and SFN inviting objections and assuring people that they do not have to be residents of Portsmouth to take part. What is hypocritical about using comments from the news website? They demonstrate local depth of feeling and I bet an analysis of the IP addresses would reveal the geographical location where they were made from and I bet its Portsmouth.

Paul, you clearly didn't read the analysis of Lillith at all. It clearly illustrates errors in the original authors mathematics and highlights shortcomings in the statistical analysis methodologies employed. There is a very nice graph there as well, which clearly shows that incidences of rape and sexual assault actually fell in boroughs that had clubs.

Paul, I note that you chose to keep quiet about the analysis that demonstrates the dramatic drop in crime around 'Wiggle', but then again you probably think its all lies.

Now Paul, lets its time to look the 'HARD FACTS!!!'.

In the above comment that you submitted against an article in Portsmouth.co.uk, that has been frame grabbed for all to see above, you make some very serious allegations. You said the following...

'...........I have been met with abuse, lies and threats from the Wiggle/Elegance mob...........'

Its grown up time now Paul and I want answers to the following questions.....

1. You state that you have been met with abuse from a party that you refer to as the 'Wiggle/Elegance mob'.

     

    What form did this abuse take?

    When did this abuse take place?

    Who conducted this abuse?

2. You state that you have been lied to by a party that you refer to as the 'Wiggle/Elegance mob'.

     What lies were told to you?

     What evidence can you provide that what you was told was untrue?

     Who told you these lies and in what format were the lies told to you?

3. You state that you have been threatened by a party that you refer to as the 'Wiggle/Elegance mob'.

    Who threatened you?

    What form did the threat take?

    When did the threat take place?

    Did you inform the police about the threats?

    What action are the police taking?

    If you didn't  report the threats to the police, can you please explain why not?

4. You state that you are neither a member of Object or the Solent Feminist Network.

    Can you confirm that you are not an associate member of either organisation?

    Have you an association with someone called Charlie Dacke?

Making allegations in a public forum about 'abuse, lies and threats' is a very serious matter and I look forward to your responses. Surely it is in the best interests of the prohibitionist campaigners for you to prove your allegations.

Update....

5. Paul, how accurate is the following comment about you?

Brilliant comments on Paul Nelson. When a friend of mine started the Facebook support group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/279733368761821/) 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.

Paul I am so sorry....I remember you now and I have to apologise for taking you seriously. Still, let's have some answers and lets have them fairly soon, just for the sake of my personal amusement more than anything else......

Lets Look At Some Comments

In my previous posting, I said we would look at the anonymous comment made about the person who would prefer to remain nameless. Well, this afternoon has been a bit quiet, so I took their text and broke it apart into easily arguable chunks. Depending upon your connection, the image may take time to load...

If people make comments like this I will treat them in this manner, largely because its fun to do so and we all need a laugh at times. But the important issue is that the above level of comment is essentially as good as prohibitionist comments actually get. Lets look at the issues....

Are prohibitionist comments all  like the above because they have nothing else to say and they know it?

Why do nutters always use BLOCK CAPITALS to make their point?

Will I ever get a comment from a prohibitionist that actually takes some time and thought to argue against?

Don't you find it weird it strange that the one workplace where men groping women or making lewd comments would never be tolerated is a strip club?

Does this mean that strippers have done more to promote the equal treatment of women than any feminist in existence because they have immediate access to people willing and able to deal with morons?

By the way, glad to back and will be blogging again soon.

Lets Look At Freedom of Speech....

In terms of the subject area I choose to write about, my blog examines the views of other people and criticises them. As you know, I allow comments to appear unmoderated. I have no interest in suppressing freedom of expression, If you have a point to make, please feel free to make it.

I wrote a piece some months ago which mentioned as a sideline, some comments a particular individual made about clubs and the 'damage they do to society'. I am not going to mention the name of the posting for reasons that will become clearer later in this article. Anyway, my piece attracted the attention of someone, because this comment appeared in response......

(Person X)  totally understands the concept of civil liberties just the same if not more than you. I think the point you quite obviously can't comprehend is that the fact that these ladies are exploiting their sexuality for a job is wrong within it and is sadly representative of society as a whole. Because of this, women in this society are set certain expectations which unfortunately men are not and this is clearly imbalanced and further unequal. Have you ever seen an advertisement/magazine/movie accentuating the penis of a man? Do men have a certain sexual image to live up to?Do you see a valid proportion men jumping around working as lap dancers and flopping their penises around? Furthermore, a study done by Jacobeson and Mazur (1995) states that both MEN and WOMEN are more likely to read women's magazines. Why? Because this society PROMOTES THE EXPLOITATION OF FEMALE SEXUALITY. Furthermore places/jobs like these are perpetuating this matter and it is completely wrong. It is not about liberating the 'society' as you so beautifully put it, it is about liberating a gender that is completely and utterly degraded to a state where only sexuality matters and brains are not! (Person X) totally understands the concept of civil liberties just the same if not more than you. I think the point you quite obviously can't comprehend is that the fact that these ladies are exploiting their sexuality for a job is wrong within itself and is sadly representative of society as a whole. Because of this, most women in this society are set certain expectations which unfortunately men are not and this is clearly unequal. If you still can’t comprehend, then answer: Why is it that women of higher statuses are expected to fullfill a certain image and men are not. Have you ever seen an advertisement/magazine/movie accentuating the penis of a man? Do men have a certain sexual image to live up to? Furthermore, a study done by Jacobeson and Mazur (1995) states that both MEN and WOMEN are more likely to read women's magazines. Why? Because this society DISGUSTINGLY PROMOTES THE EXPLOITATION OF FEMALE SEXUALITY. Furthermore places/jobs like these are perpetuating this matter and it is completely wrong. It is not about liberating the 'society' as you so beautifully put it, it is about liberating a gender that is completely and utterly degraded to a state where only sexuality matters and brains are not! 

This quite wonderful stream of consciousness comment was withdrawn because it names the person who I wrote about in the blog. This is important because I later received an e-mail from Person X, which reads as follows....

As you can see I have redacted everything I can and I have to say that the request was made in a polite manner and that is why I agreed to it. That said, I wish to make a point.....

Anyone that makes a comment on a public forum that I feel is noteworthy, will attract a comment from this blog. If people do not wish to attract the attention of this or any other blogger, then don't make comments in public. The character that made the comment stated that Person X 'totally understands the concept of civil liberties just the same if not more than you'. Well I quite obviously can comprehend that they clearly don't when they email me and demand that I remove all reference to them in a posting and then go on to instruct me that I cannot write about them again.

Freedom of expression is critically important for a healthy society. Anyone can say what they wish, but others will comment upon it and that must be accepted. I will not, without very good reason, withdraw a posting or even part of one again.

At some future point I will go through the above comment in detail and highlight what I view to be its flaws, but in the interim I would advise whoever sent in the comment to not write things like that when they are drunk, because it undermines their ability to make lucid arguments and it also means that write the same comment twice and fail to notice.

Finally, speaking of comments, I also had this one appear as well, written in response to a piece I wrote about Cath Elliot in January...

WOMEN NOT SEX SLEVES. WOMEN GOT KILLED BECAUSE THEY SO NO TO PERVERTS BACK IN ROMANS DAYS AND BECAUSE FEMINIST WHAT WAS THERE CRIME THERE ONLY CRIME WAS NO CRIME. NAZIS LIED ABOUT THE JEWS. JUST BECAUSE A SLAVES THINK THERE NOT SLAVES IT SILL WRONG. FEMINIST THEY THE FRIGHTING FOR FREEDOM THEY TRY CHANGES THINGS THEY WILL TRY,TRY,AND TRY FOR EQUAL RIGHTS. I WAS BULLY A SHCOOL BECAUSE I WAS FAT AND BECAUSE I DID NOT SEE WOMEN SEX OBJECTS. 

I really don't know where to start with this one, maybe someone can help me.....

Victory In Portsmouth

After a month long lay off I can say that things are somewhat clearer in my life and as a result, I can return to blogging. That said, not at the same rate as I have done in the past but you can expect an article a week or an article whenever there is something worth writing about. Happily, we absolutely have something worth writing about as well.....

Friday 12th October saw Portsmouth Council meet to decide the future of lapdancing clubs in the City. As you know it has been a long and hard campaign and clubs have been subject to a variety of  tactics by prohibitionist campaigners. We have seen Facebook campaigns, anonymous mailshots, untrue accusations of  trafficking and protesters appearing outside venues trying to intimidate customers and staff. I am glad to report that the anti-club campaign failed....

Although Portsmouth Council declared a Nil Policy, existing venues can remain open, although there will have to be a compelling reason for anyone new to try and establish themselves in the City and be allowed to trade..

I was unable to attend the meeting, but I have been given a flavour of what happened. The Solent Feminist Network attended and tried to defuse the clubs counter argument about job losses. This was a silly idea because any campaign to close clubs will lead to widespread redundancy, but I gather the view presented was that this was necessary for the 'collective good'.

I am also informed that certain people were very unhappy about the clubs and this blogs campaign to counter their arguments and tried to sell the idea that the presentation of arguments contrary to their own amounted to harassment. Really? If that's harassment, I wonder what their name is for people standing outside a club and screaming their heads off.

The Solent Feminist Network commented on their Facebook page....

I find it amazing that the letters from women complaining about harassment never thought to report it to the police at the time, but let's face it, they always appear at licensing time and we do know that this tactic was pioneered by Object some years ago and as a result, Councils tend to ignore the letters as they are somewhat doubtful.

There is one group that will be free from harassment though and that is the dancers and bar staff of the clubs in Portsmouth, because no longer will they have to run the gauntlet of feminist protesters outside the venues. Perhaps the most incredible statement from SFN is the assertion that they are not 'anti-stripper'. Is this some kind of joke? So we are expected to believe that a campaign that aims to close every club in Portsmouth is not 'anti-stripper'?

Lets look at it another way....

Radical vegans start a campaign to close every delicatessen in the City, but they assure us that they are not 'anti-butcher'....

Racist clowns start a campaign to close every synagogue in Britain, but they go onto assure us that they are not 'anti-semitic'.

Of course SFN are 'anti-stripper', because dancers are seen as 'gender traitors' and therefore are letting down the side.

The most contemptible part of the SFNs statement is the 'society where women and girls are not for sale'. So once again, we see the dancers insulted by being referred to as prostitutes and for good measure, SFN throw in the nudge nudge wink, 'girls' angle.

One of the most heartening results from the meeting in Portsmouth was when SFM tried to use their well worn 'the girls are exploited, traumatised and don't know what they are doing' angle, they were firmly slapped down by the Council. Councillor Les Stevens said as follows...

"We listened to well-thought out, eloquent arguments from both sides who were for and against changes to policy.

"Our decision was to agree a policy where the number of current sex establishments premises were sufficient for the city and when considering any new applications there would have to be very persuasive argument to agree to any more. We took our lead from public consultation which was overwhelming in its response against adopting a nil policy.

"We listened to people working in these venues and felt that the current sex establishments have not caused a rise in crime in the area. We noted the women working there did so by choice and were extremely well looked after and adopting a nil policy would put jobs at risk."

97% of respondents were against the Nil Policy furthermore the Police confirmed that crime in the areas around the clubs has in fact decreased. A resident from the flats opposite Wiggle stated that they were initially very worried about the club opening, but since then had learned that their fears were unfounded and that residents felt safer due to the constant presence of security staff. This blog made the same point some months ago.

So there we are, another shattering defeat for Object (especially after Leeds), but what will the future bring? It will bring more protests of course, because feminist campaign groups cannot be seen to have failed in what they promoted as being a landmark campaign. So where does this leave us? It means that the dancers and staff in the Portsmouth clubs can now look forward to the next year with some degree of security and maybe even make some concrete plans for the future. In terms of the Solent Feminist Network, it leaves them making plans to ensure the dancers and staff can't make any plans at all.....

I am told that this blog has played a part in these campaign victories and I know that prohibitionist feminists read it. They must also be aware that I am reducing my postings, but do not misunderstand me, if the need arises I will post everyday. I wish to make another point as well, I do not wish to learn that any dancer, club staff member or venue has been the subject of harassment by feminist groups frustrated by their lack of campaign success. If this happens, this blog will do its upmost to ensure that the perpetrators are prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Stuff Coming Up...

Over the next week or so we will look at freedom of expression, stupidity in Oxford, middle class horror in Ampthill and look at some of the stranger comments this blog gets