Not Been Well so a Week in One Post.

Okay this is going to be a bit of a mixture, mainly because writing 3 short reports seems pointless when I can cover everything in one slightly longer post and trying to not spend too much of my day in front of a computer screen.

Firstly congratulations to Delicious in Warrington who have been granted a license. People were trying to use the Kids Planet Day Nursery as an excuse not to grant a license but fortunately the councillors had the common sense to realise that nursery and club would be open at completely different times. Same old argument, same old reason to disregard it but we will no doubt see it again.

Now in the news Farage of UKIP has been into a Lap Dance club shock horror... And the leader of the most sexually free party is a member of Fawcett. Well the greens were but now guessing that title may end up with UKIP (whod of thunk it). Thanks to eagle eyed commentators over this. This site needs to pick up on everything that is going on and we have limited resources so as a reminder or a pointer to others tonyprince@acdcfan.com

So the battle goes on and on, had a discussion with a lady who posts on Mumsnet. She is a neighbour of a dancer and has become much more understanding since talking to her and realising that dancers are human beings with thoughts, desires and minds of their own. Hope the suggestion about religion gave you a starting block to raise discussions.

And here are all the arguments (again) Concise form so hopefully to people who are wondering about what to answer when asked questions.

Clubs cause rape, I read it in a report. That would be the Lilith report and the figures were out of context, not examined in conjunction with population growth and there was no control sample to offer a comparison.

Seen that sexual assaults increase around clubs and it wasn't Lilith. This would be Bristol were 3 of the venues are located in the middle of the night time economy it what the police call a crime impact zone. The council assign no blame to clubs and I have seen figures that show the nightclubs are more likely to cause this type of crime by a magnitude of up to 10 times.

People don't want them. In Prof Hubbard's research on 3% of people said there was no place for them at all.

They shouldn't be near schools or churches. Not many schools operate at night with young children nor many religions hold services late at night. So no one is going to see anything, besides the lay out of the clubs is usually such that a casual glance in from outside would reveal nothing.

How do I explain what goes on to my children? Well what do you tell them about pubs? Adults go there for a drink and enjoyment. People make difficulties for themselves trying to justify their moral judgements.

The dancers are trafficked. No club was raided during Pentameter or Pentameter II the 2 high profile investigations into trafficking.

The dancers do it as they can't do anything else. Actually 87% of dancers have some form of higher education and around one third of dancers are funding their way through university rather than end up with crippling debts.

The dancers are exploited. In the same way that anyone earning a living is exploited, unfortunately to earn money people work and most jobs cause exploitation of some sort. The dancers now have the option though of joining either Equity or the GMB so at least there is representation. Plus the councils issue guidelines that clubs need to follow to look after the dancers.

The strippers are prostitutes grinding on men's laps. This fallacy is one that occurs because of the word lapdance, in the past it was true but now the guidelines say that dancers can't touch the customer and obviously the customer can't touch the dancer so quite how something sexual happens with no contact I am not sure.

Objectification is wrong. I am not going to even try and deny that a level of objectification occurs but we are talking about a process where a man (or woman) views someone as a potential sexual partner. Even though we know that we will not have sex with the person when we look at people we at a subconscious level judge them. Clothes on or off make up on or off it is as natural as breathing. But people are making good money out of of getting everyone wound up over it.

Finally a question that is always asked by people when they run out of arguments and want to turn it personal how would you feel if it was your daughter/wife/mother now I can't answer for others but for me if any member of my family wanted to dance then I would back them 100% to do whatever they wanted. The question is why would people not support members of their family doing what they want? Obviously they don't really care about that person and their own morals are more important than the feelings and desires of a family member.

Edited due to a typo.

Shades Up Before the Beak

So here's the thing, Shades in Leamington lost their license after a local councillor got some religious people to protest about the club and 600 signatures were put on a petition. No consultation just the removal of a license.

Well Leamington a hearing in Birmingham last month found there was reason to grant a judicial review.

As mention previously Jonathan Chilvers is a Christian and green party member. Yet the green party are pretty relaxed about sexuality so it is not the party stance but a personal and religious stance we are seeing from Mr Chilvers.

The Hindu Temple focuses on how many days it is open.... think the clue there is days. Not sure that sexually aroused men are really the threat Vik Tara thinks but of course we all know the smear tactics that are used against the clubs.

As the owner of Shades pointed out certain parties just want to take away people's livelihoods and close a legitimate business. The Police and environmental protection have no objections. So lets hope they get a judge who recognises that Shades has done everything correctly.

Good luck Shades in June.

Tower Hamlets, the Con is on.

Tower Hamlets:- Mayor cons the public

As people know TH has been running a public consultation on a a new licensing framework without telling people what is in it. So we can only assume that the council intend to push through changes to the policies that will target the Pubs and Clubs. So after a consultation that results has never been released we go through a second one that we had no idea what the intention is.

Well assuming the first set of results were hidden as it upset the Mayor and his religious backers we are busy hoping that the council get told to leave the pubs alone. Well we can't have women choosing to dance can we, so the council has plan number 3 in case the result of the second consultation on SEVs tells the officials leave the venues alone. I am hoping that the people of Tower Hamlets realise that the mayor and his cronies don't actually care about public opinion and only want to push their own agenda forward.

So how is the council going to con the pubic? Well ignoring public opinion on striptease they intend to push through a nil policy by stealth, in fact they may have already done it although the minutes of the committee are still not on the website a month later. Okay Okay getting to the point. Section 15

15.4 The licensing authority when its discretion is engaged will always consider all
applications on their individual merits, however all applications involving adult
entertainment of nudity or semi-nudity are unlikely to be successful where the
premises is in the vicinity of:
• residential accommodation;
• schools;
• places of worship;
• other premises where entertainment of a similar nature takes place;
• community centres; and
• youth clubs.

So in a London borough this will mean no locations are suitable even after a consultation that may say different. Yep this is the we don't care about the public's opinion unless it matches ours attitude. They may say that it will not affect current venues but how long before they try to block a pub or club renewal? It seems wrong to me but councils can push through things without informing people it seems even if they are doing consultations on the subject. And even better the council has two section 15.4 so we have no idea what they are up to but it would seem that sooner or later the mayor will push through his opinion and to hell with anyone who doesn't agree.

And lets be very clear the council know that they are pulling a fast one

15.9 The Policing and Crime Act came into effect on 6 April 2010. One of the effects
of that Act is to enable local authorities to adopt powers in that act, including sex
entertainment venues (SEVs). This Borough will adopt the powers that will
provide a Sex Encounter Establishment Policy with the intention of banning all
lap dancing premises within the Borough.
15.10 The consultation regarding the Sex Establishment Policy will run
simultaneously to the Licensing Policy and cause this Licensing Policy to be
reviewed again within the next 12 months is adopted.
15.11 If the Sex Establishment is adopted, the changes to the Licensing Policy will be
with regards to Section 15, ‘Striptease’.

So point 15.9 says the framework which we haven't seen is about banning all venues! If they don't ban all venues then they adopt a policy that will effectively ban all venues when the renewal comes around. Well not seen such a clear cut act of sticking it to venues without some sort of public backing. Now I worked for a few years in Local Government and I am struggling to find everything about this. This has hidden agendas, lack of information, deceit and a total disregard for anything other than what Lufter wants to ram down peoples throat. Guess he knows he is not likely to get re-elected so trying to push through policies now while he can. Any consultation should be double checked it seems as there is a definite agenda of disregarding anything that doesn't suit what the councillors want.

So the pubs and clubs in Tower Hamlets you are heading for trouble and now would be a very good time for your legal people to be filing against the council. In the meantime I will be trying to get a copy of the minutes from last month.

TonyN

Flying Scotsman, a trip to Islington

A flying trip to Islington for a man in a Kilt? Actually we are looking at the application of the flying Scotsman to renew its SEV license.

Last year the owners had a battle to get the SEV License even though the long term intention is to change the venue to a restaurant diner. Guessing with the current economic climate it is not yet cost effective. So 2013 and the Scottie wants to continue trading. You would think not a problem there are other venues in the borough so it is not like they are the sole place.

However local protesters (and from what I can find it is a small handful) and a councillor are determined to try and close the Scottie down. Cllr Convery said last year that if the venue re-applied this year he expects the committee to turn down the application. Which considering that the venue looks like a fairly normal old style pub from the outside with no windows to the area where the strippers perform it is not obvious or sleazy it just looks like a pub. So a pub where no one can see what goes on and to be honest is hardly noticeable  first time I went there I actually walked past it twice before I realised what it was and I was looking for it.

Even Cllr Convery said last year The pub will not change any of the external appearance as some nearby residents had feared so will retain its current frontage which broadly disguises the what’s-going-on-behind. So we have a venue that is not obvious that has long been a stopping off point for travellers and sport fans coming in and out of London. However a councillor wants it closed so we can assume the licensing committee is going to get their ear bent about this. Now it was never my favourite venue but for many years it has been a traditional strip pub with no private dancing and would be a shame to see it go.

Objections are being sent to licensing@islington.gov.uk so you could assume that you would send your mails of support there too. Now we only have a few days left as I hadn't heard about this before hand so my apologises and wishing the Scottie the best of luck.

TonyN

A Loss (Boo) and a Victory (Yippee)

Well this is turning into a strange week. Two councils one with a new SEV request and the other with an existing club. So what happened?

In Shrewsbury The Source Vodka Bar had been holding monthly events under Temporary Events Notice, they had no problems so were asking for a license so they could have one night of striptease per week. 41 letters of complaint about the application but Tony Mantle, police licensing officer for Shropshire and Telford & Wrekin, said: “From the records I've been monitoring there have been no reported incidents to myself or the police that would impact on crime or anti-social behaviour.” So good news Shrewsbury will be getting a regular night of entertainment.

However not such good news in Wimslow. The ST Lounge which has been operating without incidence has had it's renewal rejected. Now this is pretty unusual as once a club gets a license the European laws are pretty much on the side of the venue. But 390 letters were received and within that 930 signatures, so the council has decided to refuse the renewal. Firstly I really hope the club take the council to court as nothing has changed about the venue since the original granting of the license. Now to actively target a license renewal is something that smacks of good information and co-ordination. The fact that nothing has been said about any letters complaining on moral grounds is even more remarkable. So any original thought or just templates? I am going to guess at the second. So is this object template or Christian Concern? I looked at the online petition about this and found a few anonymous and quite a few double entries so not so sure that the 930 signatures is a true number. The club should be checking that the letters sent in are genuine and are not full of morals just to be sure. ST Lounge I would be in with your solicitors if I was you.

So the battle goes on but readers of this blog, especially dancers and clubs beware as the haters out there are getting organised. If the venues don't get their act together they will be shot down. Chasmal pointed out Unite or Die. Well if the situation in Wimslow stands then expect Christian Concern to start lobbying in other areas. And your club may be next. Brief your Briefs.

TonyN

Welcome to the Woozles

Yeah sitting there scratching your head? Or maybe you are thinking back to reading Winnie the Pooh as a Kid? Well I actually want to look at the Woozle effect or the less fun name of evidence by citation. I started looking at this because of a discussion with a friend who gets his information from what others have been saying.

So where did the word Woozle come from? Yes it came from Winnie the Pooh chapter 3 which is titled "In Which Pooh and Piglet Go Hunting and Nearly Catch a Woozle" which is of course where Pooh and Piglet walk round and round a tree following more and more tracks in the snow from supposedly a Woozle and then more and more Woozles. Except there are no Woozles it is just Pooh and Piglet leading themselves a merry chase (how many people already can see where this is going?)

So what does it mean when used to discuss evidence presented about striptease? Well a Woozle effect occurs when frequent citation of previous publications or research that lack evidence mislead individuals, groups and the public into thinking or believing there is evidence, and nonfacts become urban myths and factoids (thanks wiki for a good definition). It describes a pattern of bias seen within social sciences and which is identified as leading to multiple errors in individual and public perception, academia, policy making and government. A Woozle is also a claim made about research which is not supported by original findings.

Okay so we now know what a Woozle effect is so how does it apply to striptease? Well Lilith and Eden both would be Woozles in my mind as would the quoting of Holsopple for the UK. Remember the research has to be full of errors (Lilith and Eden) or in the case of Holsopple lacks relevance due to the age of the research and where the research was done.

Must admit I have a picture in my head of leading anti striptease proponents walking around a tree and them dragging in people who are not aware of the errors and more and more footprints are left in the snow and the belief gets bigger and bigger even though there is nothing there. So now we know what a Woozle is and how the anti striptease people use it..... OH BOTHER


TonyN

Some Random Thoughts

I have been spending some time broadening my understanding of the industry and looking at researchers and projects from around the world. From the political disaster that is Iceland that has passed very touchy feely laws but is unlikely to get the revision of it's constitution through to the Christian right in American and their plausible but ultimately untrue arguments about strip clubs. Wasn't how I was intending to spend my time but you read a little here and a little there and next thing you know you have lost a couple of day and your eyes have gone squinty.

Judith Lynne Hanna... never heard of her? Well I hadn't until the last few days and yet this woman is a powerful acedemic and is a Senior Research Scholar in the Department of Dance and Affiliate in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Maryland, an educator, writer and dance critic. Hanna has been an expert witness in more than 100 cases around exotic dancing all over America and there is one statement she makes more than any other that sticks out for me. The naked truth is that the separation of church and state is under siege and our civil liberties—free speech, women’s rights, and free enterprise are at stake. And once again we see sections of feminists partnering with religious organisations that are likely to be more oppressive to women than the most exploitative club manager. As she points out the Christian right  has been against all forms of dance over the years.

I also enjoyed reading an interview with her where she pointed out a different view to some radical feminists. She points out that objectification can actually give women power over men. She points out that in America the dancers are primarily educated and dance for the money as well as the empowerment. Her expertise on dance means that she can analyse striptease and make value judgements on the industry. I have been fascinated with her work and the fact she is so aware of the big challenges and who is really leading with them.

Now of course there are people putting forward all sorts of theories and it is easy to cherry pick those that most fit our personal views. I would not be human if I wasn't subjective in my attitude. However I like to think I have an open mind I will listen to empirical evidences. My brain is geared far more to mathematics than language (can't you tell from my grammar and typos?). Single test cases whilst interesting need a control sample and clearly defined terms of reference. Having read Eden, Lilith, Bindel 2004 and the latest report from Professor Hubbard I have seen a lot of discourse about clubs. What I haven't seen is commentary from say a customer of 20 years or a dancer of over 5 years. The podcast from Moronwatch and information on this blog as informed from the industry side as it could be.

So dancers have started to unionise in the UK, this is a positive you would think, however there is the issue with the political correctness in the Union hierarchy. Recently the Scottish Trade Union Congress offered to host Sex Work Open University events. And then withdrew the offer, which considering the GMB has an adult workers branch is pretty harsh. It also suggests there will be a backlash against dancers who unionise. So here we have an organisation that has been promoting rights for works who is starting to ignore those workers that do not fit in with someone's theory of how things should be. Now considering the National Union Teachers has recently been commenting on porn and the lap dance culture and how it will affect young boys and girls. I have a few issues with the stance taken as who are the most vocal members of NUTS? Who are likely to be out there with  an agenda? Could it be a feminist or two? We have already commented on this but lets be sure we all understand that within the political agenda there are subsets and those are the ones I fear.

So we have this whole issue about porn and lap dancing and how it causes young men to turn into out of control sex beast and rapists. So I thought well they didn't have striptease going back in history but rape still occurred  So unless I missed something and the Vikings all popped into Spearmint Valkyrie before going off pillaging. Or the Romans had a high speed feed from the walls of Pompeii with all the naughty bits on the walls causing them to behave the way they did? Actually apart from cultural issues and war the average human being deplores rape, yes even me that horrible sex beast that has spent so much time inside the dens of iniquity. It is not the environment that causes people to descend into animal behaviour. Sometimes you have to accept that there are people that are arseholes out there and it is nothing to do with where they go of an evening but what is hard wired into their brain. Just remember when you label a whole group that has fans across all aspects of society you objectify everyone you have labelled as you say they have no agency,

Amazing isn't it everything these people protesting about objectification do seems to involve objectifying others but that's okay as they are doing it for the right reasons (at least in their minds).

TonyN

A Catch Up

Ok just been going over the consultations and ongoing council issues. This is just a reminder to all the readers so where they are able to comment/get involved they can. And people remember if you don't get involved don't complain if we lose venues. I will put my opinion in each but it is only my opinion.

Tower Hamlets part two, second consultation on SEV this time trying to force a framework through that would see venues closed if they are near churches, schools or hospitals. Link Here This is for residents, businesses, sev owners and sev employees.

Leed has a consultation going and once again it is about trying to railroad through changes. It is an abuse of power but what appears to be a christian councillor and an old friend whi is a Leeds MP. Link Here this will take you to the page where all the consultations are.

Hounslow has required people to e-mail in and there is no acknowledgement or any response to e-mails it seems. Not sure what is going on but there is not current clubs so this could get pushed through as no one is going to challenge it.

There is a club applying to open in Canterbury but with all the issues around strip clubs I would not be putting money on the club getting anywhere.

So to things that have happend. Coventry has gone with a nil policy that allows the existing Club to continue operating. Also Bedford has gone with a nil policy and this is down to lobbying by the Christian Legal Centre but as far as I can tell no actual consultation took place. It is very tempting to see if we could get enough people protesting to get the council to rethink?

Things keep on and we do not see everything. I personally have health issues so I may disappear at times. Which means we are very reliant on the people out there spotting things and passing information on. tonyprince@acdcfan.com is checked everyday so if you spot anything or want particular issues discussed please mail me.

TonyN

A Simple Message For Club Owners - Unite or Die!

This Is A Dead Strip Pub and Your Club Could End Up Just Like It.

Hi, its Chasmal here to remind you that late last year I made a posting that highlighted the possibility that Object and their campaign against clubs could empower other organisations to start looking at issues that concerned them, such as abortion and same sex marriage. I do so hate to be proven correct, but TonyNs article on Christian extremism reveals a whole network of related organisations that wish to see and end to  clubs, same sex marriage, abortion and even Islam.

So, we have another enemy to face, but this blog cannot fight for every club, so club owners are going to have to get their acts together and create an effective national organisation to safeguard their interests. There is no other choice...

I have had discussions with club owners that have tried to at least unite the clubs in their local area, but all that happens is that the owner of Club X is happy to attend a meeting as long as the owner of Club Y isn't invited and the owner of Club Z is happy to come to a meeting as long as etc etc...

It's all bollocks...

It is my belief that the striptease industry in Britain faces a clear and present danger in the form of radical Christianity and the danger can only be faced behind a united front, one that it well funded with access to the best legal advice that money can buy.

Of course, club owners could choose to ignore my advice, but if they do they risk the loss of their businesses.

Someone, somewhere needs to start to act..

I intend to put together an article that will complement Tony's and explore the Christian extremist network that aims to see every club in Britain closed down.

Open Letter to Politicians

This is an open letter to councillors and MPs who believe that Striptease venues are a risk to society.

Dear Politician

I am writing to you to express my concern in your beliefs about striptease venues or SEVs as they are branded by the councils. I have several issues about the beliefs that people have expressed and want to be sure you understand the opposing point of view. Obviously there is only so much that can be expressed in this format but if you open your mind and research further you may be surprised.

Firstly I want to pick up on the claims made by many feminist groups that there is a correlation between striptease venues and rape. This claim is made based on a couple of fallacies. One the Lilith Report commissioned by the EAVES group, the mathematics used in this report was not examined properly and checked. When it was it was shown to contain errors that meant the data could not be trusted. There is a full systematic tearing apart of the report by Dr Brooke Magnanti if you want to find out how badly wrong the report was. Also claims have been made by a member of police in Cornwall that clubs would increase rape. This was later shown to be inaccurate and an online regional newspaper showed that the area concerned had seen a downturn in sexual crime since the introduction of Striptease.

Then there is the claim of increased crime in general around striptease venues, this again is a fallacy and if investigated you will find that nightclubs are between 5 and and 10 times more likely to have crime in comparison to strip venues.  The obvious reasoning behind this is security inside and outside the SEVs and CCTV covering the area around the venue. The clubs want to continue trading and will be very aware of the issues of crime and do what they can to minimise anything associated with themselves.

Occasionally you will hear people claim that the dancers must be trafficked. As you will know there have been no links to clubs found during both Pentameter and Pentameter 2 and this is just a desperate smear attempt to create fears in people who have no knowledge of the industry.

So there is the suggestion that dancers offer sex in these venues. Since the regulations have been introduced by the councils about minimum distance, no contact and the risk of clubs losing their license if anything was to happen then you can see that nothing is likely to happen. Once again it is a smear tactic by people opposed to striptease who wish to create fears. The campaigners against clubs uses smears and fears as they have no evidence to back their suggestions and need to play on people's lack of knowledge. This is true in the fact that they constantly use the term lap dance even though it is physically impossible with the no contact rule. Still the truth seems to have no place in the arguments used by people challenging clubs.

Now we come onto the biggest issue (apart from NIMBY) that children are going to be corrupted or that churches and schools are at risk. Clubs that open during the day should use discrete signage and the fact that it is behind closed doors means children can't actually see anything. And I have yet to see a school or church that is open when clubs are open and busy. If you feel that neon signs should remain off until after the watershed and the club names need to be subtle then you will receive no argument but to claim that children are at risk from these clubs make no sense when sensible precautions are taken.

Many feminists will claim objectification and to some extent that is true, objectification is natural and about sexual desire. However the feminists are objectifying the dancers by denial of autonomy  and inertness  by denying their agency and giving no value to their opinions. This also creates silencing as it treats the dancers like they are unable to speak. Find it strange that people can claim objectification while objectifying the dancers by their claims.

Finally there is the issue of exploitation, and rather than a long winded discussion I would just point out that all people working are exploited in one fashion or another.

So when deciding to challenge a club please consider the above and also remember the number of people employed in the industry and the suppliers of clubs who will lose business and/or jobs.

Yours sincerely

A strip fan.

Christian Extremists?

There was me witn my nice plans to write a positive piece about someone I had never heard of till the last 2 weeks. Then something comes along and slaps your face and you realise that the rights and wrongs of this world will never balance and if we do not become active and support what we believe in then it is our fault if we lose it.

This blog has always been about the right to choose, so long as striptease is legal each adult has the right to go in or not go into a venue. Because of the belief of freedom of choice I would never deny anyone the right to choose religion and practice it so long as it is within the laws of the land. Now we know that religious people are against people having the right to choose but sometimes you find a group that is beyond the pale.

So who is this hate group? Well it is Christian Concern and their legal arm Christian Legal Centre.  Now why would anyone call Christians a hate group? Well in this case it is because of their attitude towards anything that doesn't fit in with their views. They are campaigning about not being ashamed about being a Christian and I whole heartedly agree that people should be able to practice their religion WITHIN the laws of the land. However they have been battling to support the nil policies and have been involved in Bedford adopting the nil policy. Now I hadn't heard of a consultation so how did this happen? Seems that a lot of letter writing has been taking place and that Christian Legal Centre has been heavily involved.

Unfortunately it seems that Christian Concern are only concerned with their views and do not care about anyone else's  Their campaigns against same sex marriage and anti abortion reflect that they wish to impose their morals on everyone else. Well you can't go round demanding freedom of religion and then ignore everyone else's freedoms. Well not with out being complete hypocrites. However this doesn't seem to bother them. So they are against striptease, or as they call it the sex trade. Why do they call it the sex trade rather than what it is? The fact they want to generate images in the minds of their supporters that are nothing to do with reality just what they need to get their money in from people.

People might say I am being harsh about them being a hate group but the views they hold are bigoted and fight to stop people choosing how to live their lives. We hear about the backlash against some religions because their views are harsh as are their laws. Christian Concern are a fundamentalist group with a political agenda. State and church are never a good combination and I have spoken to a former reverend for the Palace of Westminster the key should be making the right decisions for all the people not a select few based on religion or other agendas.

Not going to link to them, people can use google to find out just who these people are but I do want to react every time we hear that they are involved in a campaign to close down a club as they are acting on moral grounds and it has nothing to do with anything other than that. We know and understand the regulations as do they so rather than be honest that is their morals that are offended they bring out the lies about rape (aka Lilith report) and go on about objectification which as we are all aware by now is hilarious as one of the key factors of objectification is denying people agency. Which is exactly what Christian Concern does by not engaging with the dancers.

And a quick final thought a message to all the rad fems out there. These people have campaigned against same sex marriages and against women having the right to choose what they do with their body. Are these really the people you want to align with?

Lemington Spa stand by for action

Well I had a couple of things I was going to write about but as usual events have overtaken us and we have more fun and games started this time in Lemington Spa. But it is not just one incident but two. So I will take them in the order I received them. I have to thank John for supplying with this info and would remind any readers if they find anything they think is important please mail me at tonyprince@acdcfan.com

The first incident occured at Amara VIP Gentleman's club on the morning of the 1st April (yeah okay I wondered the same) where the club was robbed and vandalised, you can read more about it and see pictures at this page Now reading the article a couple of things had jumped out at me. Firstly the club had ceased operating as a strip venue and secondly they had been refused when trying to change to a night club. So crime of opportunity? Young vandals after alcohol? Activists not realising the club wasn't going to do striptease any more? Insurance Scam? Well lets hope the police find out who did this. Now lets move onto the issue I find so much more interesting, knowing the club owners wanted to change from striptease to a night club you would think the council would be jumping up and down over this for joy. Well maybe not, I have been doing comparative analysis of strip venues and night clubs under the same council because of this. It seems night clubs are likely to have between 5 and 10 times the amount of violent crime around them to the strip venues and remembering sexual crimes are included in the violence category by the police. You sort of see why a council with any sense would prefer striptease over a night club.

The second incident is that the Green Party, the Hindu Temple committee and local residents have challenged the council decision to grant a SEV license to Shades and you can read the local news article about it here so here we go again? Well it is a judicial review and both sides will have to present on why Shades finally got its' license. Now interestingly having read the judicial review procedure this could be a lot of fun. The issue will come down to the council ignoring certain letters against the club as far as I can see it. But here is the kicker, the guidelines say that moral judgements cannot be taken into account and the letters are likely to be full of moralistic judgements rather than reasoned and valid arguments. So whilst it seems a shame a judicial review should take place it will be interesting but I am really hoping that the review in this case backs the council or we could see religious groups applying for reviews everywhere.

So lets look at the guy behind the judicial review, drum roll please, lets welcome Jonathan Chilvers to the stage. From the Green Party, a blogger since 2005 although he hasn't done anything this year and only one piece last year but then it seems he is now on a different blog although on there he seems to only deal with religion. His interests are god and politics and the role of the church in society. Now I would guess that Mr Chilvers is making moral judgements as are the Hindu temple. Why oh why are people so quick to cast moralistic views at people? The next step is censorship and from there..... well those who have read Bradbury and Orwell have some idea of where censorship can lead if unchecked.

So here we go another crazy set of circumstances and most of it is down to people playing moral guardians. I will be keeping my eye on the goings on in Lemington Spa and you can be sure that we will be backing Shades. And lets hope the criminals who destroyed Amara are caught and punished.

TonyN