Object Recruiting New CEO

A little fun from blog founder Chasmal

In a move that we find surprising, Object are looking for a new CEO to replace Anna van Heeswijk. But who will they find that can live up to the standards that Anna set? We've been thinking about it and if we were a betting shop, these are the odds that we would be offering.....

An Open Letter From an Angry Stripper

Edit this letter first appeared in Sex and Censorship. I was asked to edit the letter for grammar and spelling but felt it should be as the writer put it.

There was a rather annoying piece in the Guardian from Anna of Object where she made claims and attacked dancers indirectly. This is a response to Anna's piece, there is already support for the letter amongst dancers and we would like to see the message spread. Alternatively contact me at tonyprince@acdcfan.com or if people want their name or organisation added to the signatures again let me know.

Feminist organisations need to listen to the voices of the dancers. Here’s why.

A response to Ms. van Heeswick letter, from the perspective of a dancer with 14 years’ experience working in clubs. 

Dear Ms. van Heeswick, after reading your article published yesterday, I would like to respond to each of your points from a different perspective…

1. Let me first challenge your assertion that dancing clubs market women as sexual objects for male gratification.
I firmly disagree. If so, how can an object dance with high heels and do pole dancing tricks? Behind every action of every worker is a human being taking decisions for themselves. If anybody objectifies us, it is your organisation.
We dancers are entertainers, entertaining an audience that pays our bills.
I also have to disagree with your statement that the presence of strip clubs increases the demand for “prostitution”, as strip clubs offer a very different service. I assume that you take prostitution – that I call ‘sex work’ - as a ‘lower’ practice than stripping, but as a stripper, I will not judge other sex workers in a way that creates hierarchy. 

2. Are women who work in lap dancing routinely subjected to harassment, exploitation and the expectation of sexual services?
I question your honesty in the characterization of ‘Object’ as a human rights organisation. To me, it is pure hypocrisy, as it is only making female workers more vulnerable. If more strip clubs disappear in these hard times of recession and unemployment, do you think that is supporting the rights of women? As you thought to assert what is best for us, let me also advise you to put your energy and your dubious concern towards creating more jobs for women, rather than undermining the work that we decide to do. We are thousands of mothers, migrants, students, fighters, activists and more, and every one of us has a story to tell. With over a decade’s experience in the industry, I can’t help but laugh sourly at your research.
Real feminism should defend our choices and show solidarity with all women, and that includes working class women.
Yes, it is true that we have to pay nightly house fees to work in clubs. Paradoxically, those fees rose dramatically after ‘feminists’ like you pushed for harder legislation that increased clubs’ licensing fees. Yet, this does not even appear to be enough for you. 
Lastly, you try to prove your perspective with the case of ‘one woman’ who felt it was the hardest job that she ever did. I could name hundreds of women who are still in the industry by choice, but as you only mention one, to mention myself is more than enough. Still, you will notice that several workers’ collectives support my position.

3. Next, do lap dancing clubs indeed create a threatening environment for women and girls who live around the clubs? You support your answer again by referring to ‘one woman’ who spoke to Object. Can I meet her? Where is she? Where does she live? Because throughout my career I have generally worked in places that are much more discreet than your average pub. Again, Ms. van Heeswijk, why don’t you provide more evidence? 

4. I agree with your statement that councils can still operate under legislation that equates lap dancing clubs with restaurants and karaoke bars. But I question why you’re so offended. Is not a karaoke bar a place where people perform, as I do during my shifts? I don’t see why any of us need to ask permission to work in a particular neighbourhood. Do you know the location of many strip clubs, Ms. van Heeswijk? Because I have worked in places where even the locals did not notice that there was a stripping venue. 

5. In your last ‘reason’, you assert that bars and pubs can get around the licensing regime by holding entertainment events on an occasional basis. Let me ask you again, why does it bother you so much that people work even only on an occasional basis? Why would you make it more difficult for us to work? Why not focus on protecting our rights as workers and fighting stigma with us, instead of making us your target?

I urge you and Object not to patronise working class women. Start including sex workers and trans women in your outdated discourses. If you don’t agree with my decisions, I simply do not care. But if you try to make my job even harder than it already is, this letter will only be the beginning.

Signed: 

An Angry Stripper
Sex Workers Open University
Stripping the Illusion Blog

Designer Feminist of the Year - Voting Analysis

Its been just over a week since we announced our competition and although we only have 14 votes, a pattern is clearly emerging.....

The Muffia have polled no votes at all. Now if only they had done that stripper event in Hackney, things might have been different and I must admit I had high hopes for them. Sadly it seems that all that running round London flashing their pube wigs was all for nothing....

Cllr Rania Kahn has also underperformed with only 1 vote and I must admit I am shocked, but bear in mind she hasn't said or done anything about persecuting strippers for a long while now. In fact in a recent blog posting she reveals that she believes that she should become a ninja....

Things become a little more interesting when we move onto the real heavyweights of the designer feminist world....

Anna Van Heeswijk is struggling with 3 votes and you may be shocked, but I think this is indicative of the fact that Object has been a bit rudderless for 6 months now. I think it is becoming increasingly clear that the future of feminism lies with a new kind of activist as embodied by.....

Rachel Reeves MP currently in second place with 4 votes and at one point she was neck and neck with Charlie Dacke, but I think that Rachel saw the voting spread and decided to act. We announced the competition prize on July 2nd, then on July 3rd apparently by coincidence Rachel announced her latest project, a petition to pressure Leeds Council to close every lap dancing club in Leeds or at least get them moved somewhere else. Its clear that Rachel saw the prize and it galvanised her into action. The problem is that so far her latest move hasn't paid off....

Charlie Dacke is a legend and is currently leading with 6 votes. By playing it cool and keeping quiet she is building up a lead that Rachel Reeves will find hard to overturn. Time will tell, but I have a feeling that Rachel Reeves will be making an effort to put Charlie Dacke under pressure, especially now as I gather that Charlie Dackes dad will be the one making a presentation to Portsmouth Council regarding the proposed Nil Policy in Portsmouth.

Rachel Reeves... "So proud to be recognised for my designer feminism"....

Designer Feminist of the Year

I thought that if other blogs could have a proper competition, then so could I. I wondered what the theme could be and then I remembered the various people that we have encountered over the last 6 months who seem to spend their waking hours trying too close down strip clubs....

So it gives me great pleasure to announce the StrippingTheIllusion 'Designer Feminist of the Year Competition'. To makes things a bit more straightforward, I did the nominations although I will happily add new ones if anyone cares to make a suggestion. Nonetheless, these are the competitors......

Anna Van Heeswijk - The original designer feminist, now CEO of Object. You can all about them here and here.

Rania Khan - Tower Hamlets Councillor and general loather of the strip club scene. Read about her here.

Charlie Dacke - Someone who campaigns against clubs in Portsmouth such as Wiggle and Elegance as you can read about here and here.

Rachel Reeves - MP for Leeds who failed in her bid to get 7 clubs in Leeds closed. Read about her here....

The Muffia - Rad fem street theatre duo who you can read about here.

You will see the poll on the right hand margin of this blog and the competition will close on July 31st, at which point the winner will be announced. I can't imagine the winner will want to come to a prize giving, but it might be fun to invite them.

Postscript: The font is nearly invisible, but I have just spent 10 minutes trying to make it more legible and I have to say I failed. So I am afraid you are going to have to look closely and you can just about see whose button to push. Actually you can highlight it with your mouse....

Anna Van Heeswijk - Levenson Recommendation

I thought it would be good to read Anna V's submission to the Levenson Enquiry. Most of it was what you would expect, apart from one recommendation, that I think is absolutely brilliant. Read it for yourself.....

We like the idea that 'groups' could be included as the basis for a complaint, that way groups of people could complain somewhere if they feel they are being victimised or being subject to 'persistent stereotyping' on the basis of their group identity.

We would like to suggest an amendment though, we would like to broaden the scope to include internet websites that are UK hosted, not just print based media. If Anna V's recommendation was adopted the scope could include stuff that appears on websites that persistently stereotype identified groups of people. If this were the case then maybe the dancers and club owners in Hackney would not have to put up again with what appears below, which appeared on a UK hosted website....

....where someone published a feature that made persistently stereotypical comments about the striptease scene, or maybe this....

 ......where someone accused the clubs of facilitating sexual abuse, without contextualising the comment....or what about this........

 .....where someone accused innocent dancers of being trafficked, drug abusers that performed sex acts and someone else made an accusation of assault against club customers that to my knowledge was never reported to the police....

Actually if Anna V's recommendation was adopted, the comments like the one below are unlikely to appeared again....

 Furthermore, dancers would not be blamed for the stalled careers of losers in the City, like this.......

 Finally, dancers wouldn't be objectified as abuse victims.....

But whose website did this come from?

Objects website of course, when Anna V was Campaign Manager.

Its incredible, Anna Van Heeswijk accuses The Sun of content which objectifies women, yet she herself is responsible for content that was arguably far worse....

Object, Page 3 and Public Art...

You may know that Object are currently focussing their rage on News International because of The Sun newspapers Page 3. For those that don't know, since 1970, The Sun features a photograph of a topless or sometimes naked female model. The pose always obscures the genital area. Object believe that Page 3 is a terrible thing, in fact in a recent interview in The Guardian, Anna Van Heeswijk said

"Our argument and solutions are simple," she says. "This type of sexually objectifying material would be restricted on television because of the recognised harms associated with these stereotyped portrayals of women and it would be considered sexual harassment if it was in the workplace. Why is it, then, that they should be printed in mainstream newspapers which are not age-restricted and are sold and displayed at child's eye level?"

Kat Banyard, the writer of the article believes that 'the legal footing for this so-called "institution" has never looked so precarious'.

I have a view on this matter. When Van Heeswijk says that Objects arguments and solutions are simple, she is absolutely correct. They are simple to the point of naivety and Kat Banyards comment about the legal footing of Page 3 is utterly contemptible.

Object and its supporters are ushering in a new era of censorship and the fools that publish The Guardian are cheering them on. But lets imagine that they succeed and Page 3 is banned. So images such as the one below, will no longer be legal in newspapers...

Remember that Object want this kind of image banned from newspapers, because anyone could see them, children for example. Fine, then if there is any substance behind Objects campaign, then what about the image below....

As you can see this a sculpture in a public garden somewhere in London. I am not going to say where it is or what its called, in case some moron tries to take a hammer to it in the name of objectification. My point is as follows; If Page 3 is objectionable, then so must be the sculpture above. In fact if you apply Objects 'simple arguments', it is worse. Its located in a public space, where children might see it, its available all of time for anyone to see and worse than that, the figure is completely naked.

So where do Object go with this?

Do they one day plan to force the removal of statues of naked women from public spaces?

Somehow I doubt it, they wouldn't survive the uproar.

I have a feeling that the basis for Objects argument against Page 3 is not the image, because if it was, Object would be busy stickering up statues now and would be working to get them carted away and melted down. No. I think the issue that drives the Page 3 campaign is the models themselves. Object will never bother to try and censor public art, for the simple reason that the models are not accessible, in fact many cases, such as the sculpture above, the models are long dead. What Object and its activists want are real people that are still alive and that can be reached.

We see how Object have tried to close strip clubs, damaging the livelihoods of thousands of dancers. Now they want to end the careers of Page 3 girls and models that pose for lads mags as well.

I hate to say this, but Object and their activists just seem to hate the women that are involved in the business, but they are not brave enough to admit (maybe even to themselves) what lies at the heart of their agenda.

Over the next week I will be releasing more frame grabs from my Object archive that will support this view.

Anna van Heeswijk 'Really Liked The Idea' of Criminal Damage

Its been a while since I did anything on Object, so I thought I would go through frame grab collection to see what I could find. Found a good one and yes I know that it dates back to 2008, but it does have Anna van Heeswijk posting about how enthused she is about a spot of 'stickering' or put another way, criminal damage.

One way of looking at this would be that if the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust had paid for the stickers, wouldn't that make them accessories to criminal damage? Probably not actually, but its fun to think about...