Well if you are a regular reader of the blog you will know of my fascination with crime and in particular claims of crime associated with clubs. Now we knew with the death of Lilith those people trying to shut the clubs would need to find another crime to base their scaremongering on.
So anyone who has followed the press recently will have seen a certain MP refer to trafficking in the same breath as talking about clubs. Careful wording of course. the sex entertainment industry is the name used as an all embracing point to try and mix arguments and claims and make any counter claims more difficult.
Now I like a little light reading and felt I needed to read more on the subject not just in the UK but also about America as there have been a couple of cases there and no doubt those in the UK trying to close the SEVs down will use America as an example even though the UK industry doesn't bear any relation to the existing American scene.
So first lets pick up with the claims in Bindel's report of trafficking, I have been looking to see which club it was and I cannot find any record of any club being involved. And I am pretty good about digging through the internet to find info but if a club was involved the club would have been closed but I am struggling on this one. Certainly I can find no article where a club has had a trafficked dancer in the press. The only failure that I know of was an underage dancer with a forged driving license.
So as I am reading all about trafficking and both sides of the arguments I find Ronald Weitzer, Sex Trafficking and the Sex Industry: The Need for Evidence-Based Theory and Legislation, 101 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 1337 (2013). http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol101/iss4/4
This is a document in the US criminal journal and even in this there is regular references to the lack of evidence and the that theories are just that theories without any facts on which they are based. In America there are different definitions of trafficking and if a couple move to a different state and one partner dances that can be seen as trafficking even if no coercion is in play. In the UK with councils being able to inspect the documentation of dancers there is a process to protect the dancers. But our county borders do not have the same effect as state borders in the US so things will be different.
Now there have been very occasional links to trafficking in the US but these have been minimal. Whilst the UK has had no club that has had trafficked dancers. Remember two major police investigations Pentameter and Pentameter 2 did not link one club to trafficking so the use of implication again by those cannot find any facts of wrong doing by the clubs just shows how desperate certain people are to create a fear of clubs centered around fiction. Obviously this is a massive subject that I have tried to minimise for readability and there are many aspects to trafficking but I would suggest readers who are interested read around on both sides of the discussion so they can form an opinion not biased by a single view.
As an aside congratz to Upstairs in York who got it's licensed renewed even though there were a few objections.
TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)
Sunday, February 9, 2014
Thursday, January 30, 2014
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
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
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
A Wander Through the Strange World of........
Well not much is rushing forward at the start of the year but couple of things I want to pick up on in the world of crazy.
First I want to pick up on Camden, you know that borough that Lilith was based on that has given us so many laughs over the years for its inaccuracy (follow up point a bit later). Spearmint Rhino wanted to relax it's conditions and applied to the council this was turned down by the committee and when appealed at court the judge backed the council. Now the rights and wrongs of the judge are one thing but I am concerned by the SEV Licensing committee which was a 4 person committee and if the it is split the chair had final say.
So what was wrong with the committee? Well allow me to introduce Cllr Gardiner and Cllr Eslamdoust who are a couple and both sit on the SEV licensing committee with Thomas G as chair. Now the judge views that one household having complete control of SEV licensing does NOT infringe any rules which may be right but the spirit of fairness does seem to be a little off centre. Now this has been rolling on since 2012 but it is interesting that the council has change the committee to a 5 person version. Think they may have been worried about being taken to court or a regular basis.
Cllr Gardiner and Cllr Eslamdoust may have links to religious circles, Cllr Eslamdoust is on the religious education committee SACRE and noticed that Cllr Gardiner happily tweeted to the church where his and Cllr Eslamdoust BANNS were read. If anyone has any additional info on this Camden power couple I would be happy to find out (e-mail at the bottom).
So Object has not been doing much as they have got all involved in the lets say music objectifies campaign. But I was browsing their facebook page and noticed they had links to e-petitions for Worcester and York. Seems they want people who do not live in the area to get involved in these local campaigns. Surely if the locals did not want the clubs there would be no need for the petitions but typical of Object that they want people who will not be affected by the clubs to have a say in them.
Finally back to Lilith, as we know Eaves has removed it completely from their site and we know (because we have the figures) that in fact the true story behind Lilith is that there is no link to rape. Now I thought I would help Object by tweeting this at them but strangely I have had no reply or acknowledgement. Not a surprise really but the fact they know that there is no Lilith report and still have a dead link even after doing new pages for the music campaign just shows how far they will go to manufacture issues that do not exist to try and prove their point.
TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)
First I want to pick up on Camden, you know that borough that Lilith was based on that has given us so many laughs over the years for its inaccuracy (follow up point a bit later). Spearmint Rhino wanted to relax it's conditions and applied to the council this was turned down by the committee and when appealed at court the judge backed the council. Now the rights and wrongs of the judge are one thing but I am concerned by the SEV Licensing committee which was a 4 person committee and if the it is split the chair had final say.
So what was wrong with the committee? Well allow me to introduce Cllr Gardiner and Cllr Eslamdoust who are a couple and both sit on the SEV licensing committee with Thomas G as chair. Now the judge views that one household having complete control of SEV licensing does NOT infringe any rules which may be right but the spirit of fairness does seem to be a little off centre. Now this has been rolling on since 2012 but it is interesting that the council has change the committee to a 5 person version. Think they may have been worried about being taken to court or a regular basis.
Cllr Gardiner and Cllr Eslamdoust may have links to religious circles, Cllr Eslamdoust is on the religious education committee SACRE and noticed that Cllr Gardiner happily tweeted to the church where his and Cllr Eslamdoust BANNS were read. If anyone has any additional info on this Camden power couple I would be happy to find out (e-mail at the bottom).
So Object has not been doing much as they have got all involved in the lets say music objectifies campaign. But I was browsing their facebook page and noticed they had links to e-petitions for Worcester and York. Seems they want people who do not live in the area to get involved in these local campaigns. Surely if the locals did not want the clubs there would be no need for the petitions but typical of Object that they want people who will not be affected by the clubs to have a say in them.
Finally back to Lilith, as we know Eaves has removed it completely from their site and we know (because we have the figures) that in fact the true story behind Lilith is that there is no link to rape. Now I thought I would help Object by tweeting this at them but strangely I have had no reply or acknowledgement. Not a surprise really but the fact they know that there is no Lilith report and still have a dead link even after doing new pages for the music campaign just shows how far they will go to manufacture issues that do not exist to try and prove their point.
TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Random Thoughts and Ideas
So all is currently quiet in the world of SEVs (odds on that will change in the near future) but I have used the time to refresh my batteries a bit and also to look at things to sharpen my mind. Objectification of the disabled, prejudice and hate crimes and thought through why SEVs are good for the community. So I have these brain waves and decided that I want to discuss why SEVs might be linked to the reduction of rape. No I am not claiming it is a definite idea but given the figures I have seen over the years and the fact that my most recent research had a SEV close and rape go up. Before I get into the nitty gritty I want to first look at a quick issue of perspectives. The following two statements come from the same website and I find the similarities interesting and it will relate later in my thoughts.
"I travel to work regularly by bus and this morning this lovely man who is on the bus most days complimented me on how good I looked. Should I ask him out? He smiles at me every day and I have fancied him rotten since the first time he smiled at me."
"There is this creepy guy who gets on the same train as me everyday. He smiles at me most days and I feel my skin creeping. He tried to talk to me today should I report him to the police as I am worried he may be a rapist."
Two very similar situations and it is just the perspective of the person who is under scrutiny that decides how the thing is viewed. So how does this apply to SEVs and why would it imply that it may benefit society by relaxing men? Those of us who have been regulars at clubs and pubs over the years know that we are viewed by some dancers as walking ATMs which is not a problem. The dancers sell the customers a fantasy of they are the most attractive/intelligent/witty guy and they are grateful for our company. Yes it is a fantasy and yes it reflects the desires the average man has. Also we will probably find that the dancers would be considered out of our league outside of the club but for a short period we are the most satisfying company for the dancer. This is calming, it sends a positive and supportive message to us as men and it allows us to escape the world for a little bit.
So why would this potentially reduce rape? Well for me there was a point not so long ago where I went through a massive period of ill health and found myself confined to a wheelchair. I had awful issues with self image particularly body image. I found though that when I went to a strip pub I was treated like every other man. There was no pity, no loathing and no disgust at my looks or personality. I felt like a normal average man for the first time in a couple of years. Obviously now I have become much more relaxed and accepting of my issues but the very negative message that the antis send out about the fantasy dancers portray actually helped me.
Now when you think about it the fantasy that is portrayed in SEVs and how it may affect people you come to realise that the message it sends out is a positive re-enforcement of the individual customers. It would seem that the positive messages and the acceptance of individuals will create a view of the world that is less likely to want to control and rape. In fact the atmosphere of the SEVs, in my humble 20+ years experience, would be almost diametrically opposed to the attitudes that have been described in rapists. We have seen that sexual and violent crimes around SEVs is low and when compared to nightclubs is incredibly low. Assigning issues to clubs is just a lazy attempt to create a fear of something that should be embraced the claims that men will constantly see women as sex object falls apart when we can separate fact from fantasy, maybe we might for 3 minutes see one person as an object of our desires but before and after we engage and talk. In a society where zombies are a cornerstone of a lot of violent fantasies the short term positive message from dancers seems a hell of a lot better.
Of course these are just my thoughts but as I continue to look at crime and in particular sexual crime it seems to me that SEVs actually do good for men and women. I am sure some of the radical feminists will say I am talking out of my backside and I have no empirical proof but then claims about rape being linked to clubs has no proof but doesn't stop people making those claims. Be interested in the views of dancers (or naked social workers as I like to think of them) about this as well customers. Does the positive re-enforcement of the male psyche actually produce a benefit not just to the individual but to society as well, as he feels better about himself? Obviously there will be examples of bad customers just as there will be examples of good customers and a whole raft of in between but the more I look at data and facts about sexual crime the more it appears to be totally disconnected. Okay ramblings over for the time being.
TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)
"I travel to work regularly by bus and this morning this lovely man who is on the bus most days complimented me on how good I looked. Should I ask him out? He smiles at me every day and I have fancied him rotten since the first time he smiled at me."
"There is this creepy guy who gets on the same train as me everyday. He smiles at me most days and I feel my skin creeping. He tried to talk to me today should I report him to the police as I am worried he may be a rapist."
Two very similar situations and it is just the perspective of the person who is under scrutiny that decides how the thing is viewed. So how does this apply to SEVs and why would it imply that it may benefit society by relaxing men? Those of us who have been regulars at clubs and pubs over the years know that we are viewed by some dancers as walking ATMs which is not a problem. The dancers sell the customers a fantasy of they are the most attractive/intelligent/witty guy and they are grateful for our company. Yes it is a fantasy and yes it reflects the desires the average man has. Also we will probably find that the dancers would be considered out of our league outside of the club but for a short period we are the most satisfying company for the dancer. This is calming, it sends a positive and supportive message to us as men and it allows us to escape the world for a little bit.
So why would this potentially reduce rape? Well for me there was a point not so long ago where I went through a massive period of ill health and found myself confined to a wheelchair. I had awful issues with self image particularly body image. I found though that when I went to a strip pub I was treated like every other man. There was no pity, no loathing and no disgust at my looks or personality. I felt like a normal average man for the first time in a couple of years. Obviously now I have become much more relaxed and accepting of my issues but the very negative message that the antis send out about the fantasy dancers portray actually helped me.
Now when you think about it the fantasy that is portrayed in SEVs and how it may affect people you come to realise that the message it sends out is a positive re-enforcement of the individual customers. It would seem that the positive messages and the acceptance of individuals will create a view of the world that is less likely to want to control and rape. In fact the atmosphere of the SEVs, in my humble 20+ years experience, would be almost diametrically opposed to the attitudes that have been described in rapists. We have seen that sexual and violent crimes around SEVs is low and when compared to nightclubs is incredibly low. Assigning issues to clubs is just a lazy attempt to create a fear of something that should be embraced the claims that men will constantly see women as sex object falls apart when we can separate fact from fantasy, maybe we might for 3 minutes see one person as an object of our desires but before and after we engage and talk. In a society where zombies are a cornerstone of a lot of violent fantasies the short term positive message from dancers seems a hell of a lot better.
Of course these are just my thoughts but as I continue to look at crime and in particular sexual crime it seems to me that SEVs actually do good for men and women. I am sure some of the radical feminists will say I am talking out of my backside and I have no empirical proof but then claims about rape being linked to clubs has no proof but doesn't stop people making those claims. Be interested in the views of dancers (or naked social workers as I like to think of them) about this as well customers. Does the positive re-enforcement of the male psyche actually produce a benefit not just to the individual but to society as well, as he feels better about himself? Obviously there will be examples of bad customers just as there will be examples of good customers and a whole raft of in between but the more I look at data and facts about sexual crime the more it appears to be totally disconnected. Okay ramblings over for the time being.
TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)
Sunday, December 15, 2013
Yet Another Round Up
Coming towards the end of the year so rounding up the craziness that is Xmas spirit by some councils. The attitude and timing of some of the actions seems an effort to kill Xmas business. Not sure why but hey thats what grinchy councils are there for.
La Salsa in Halifax is due its hearing tomorrow (16th) now it is interesting because the club opened in the same week and same street as WomenCentre Ltd back in 2002. All of a sudden after 11 years of operating now it seems there is a concern of exploitation and that the club could act as a deterrent. strange they have only just figure this out. Of course now that the clubs have the branding sexual entertainment venue it does create a picture that does bear any relation to reality. 3 public objections have been received 2 associated to the women centre, there does seem to be several bars and restaurants in the area so will be interesting to see if any police complaints are centred on the club.
As people have been expecting the clubs in Leeds have decided to fight, Deep Blue and Wildcats have both been given permission to trade while seeking a judicial review. There could end up being 3 of these and each could run up a bill of £1m per review. Time to feel very sorry for the Leeds public who will have to foot the bill given that the council is already talking of cutting services. Add to that the clubs will be trading when the tour de france starts there this is a big slap in the face for Reeves and Charlwood. No doubt the legal people will be looking at the links between the licensing committee and SAR. Just what has been said behind closed doors and why has this been hidden from the public? Should make a good book out of this.
Upstairs in York is due for it's first license renewal, York Feminist Network has go an online petition going. The use an Object banner and claim that the lobby group Object are in fact a human rights organisation. Once again there is a claim that clubs are linked to sexual violence but don't mention lilith. No matter how many times that zombie stat/woozle is killed it rears its ugly head at the next battle. Either none of these groups talk to each other or they just cannot admit their claims have no place in reality. Nearly all the meetings for the last 2 months of the licensing committee have been cancelled so it is hard to actually confirm what is going on. However I will start digging further into this. Nothing like a new group of people to check out and find out what they are up to. I was looking through the signatures for the petition and there is a Dr Grandhighpriest on there once I stopped laughing I started to wonder how many signatures are based in York and it appears that very few do. Still not even 20% towards their target so we can assume it is not going to amount to much.
Worcester will get it's club Black Cherry after all, Ash Patel had dropped plans to open one in a location called the Butts (must not make inane jokes) but dropped it as the location was an issue with a councillor who as we had previously pointed out had been misleading people into believing the objection was from the council. Well now he has taken over the old DNA nightclub which has most of the licenses in place. So looks like at least we will get one new club.
Newmarket's Heaven's Gentlemen's club had its license renewed even though the signage is a little bigger than it is suppose to be, considering that it is co-located with a night club with a really big sign I can see why the sign was allowed, also is is not one of those that would titillate the public. The local press has done the usual anger aspect of reporting even though only 3 objections were sent in. If people had a problem then they should use the established process and not just try and get their names in the paper.
Finally Flirtz in Nottingham renewed it's license in the face of no objections. However it still had to go before the committee. This does beg the question why? Surely if a legal business has no one objecting the license should be approved, if the police had issues it would have come up as an objection so no reason at all really for the meeting apart from councillors trying to look like they are doing something.
TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)
La Salsa in Halifax is due its hearing tomorrow (16th) now it is interesting because the club opened in the same week and same street as WomenCentre Ltd back in 2002. All of a sudden after 11 years of operating now it seems there is a concern of exploitation and that the club could act as a deterrent. strange they have only just figure this out. Of course now that the clubs have the branding sexual entertainment venue it does create a picture that does bear any relation to reality. 3 public objections have been received 2 associated to the women centre, there does seem to be several bars and restaurants in the area so will be interesting to see if any police complaints are centred on the club.
As people have been expecting the clubs in Leeds have decided to fight, Deep Blue and Wildcats have both been given permission to trade while seeking a judicial review. There could end up being 3 of these and each could run up a bill of £1m per review. Time to feel very sorry for the Leeds public who will have to foot the bill given that the council is already talking of cutting services. Add to that the clubs will be trading when the tour de france starts there this is a big slap in the face for Reeves and Charlwood. No doubt the legal people will be looking at the links between the licensing committee and SAR. Just what has been said behind closed doors and why has this been hidden from the public? Should make a good book out of this.
Upstairs in York is due for it's first license renewal, York Feminist Network has go an online petition going. The use an Object banner and claim that the lobby group Object are in fact a human rights organisation. Once again there is a claim that clubs are linked to sexual violence but don't mention lilith. No matter how many times that zombie stat/woozle is killed it rears its ugly head at the next battle. Either none of these groups talk to each other or they just cannot admit their claims have no place in reality. Nearly all the meetings for the last 2 months of the licensing committee have been cancelled so it is hard to actually confirm what is going on. However I will start digging further into this. Nothing like a new group of people to check out and find out what they are up to. I was looking through the signatures for the petition and there is a Dr Grandhighpriest on there once I stopped laughing I started to wonder how many signatures are based in York and it appears that very few do. Still not even 20% towards their target so we can assume it is not going to amount to much.
Worcester will get it's club Black Cherry after all, Ash Patel had dropped plans to open one in a location called the Butts (must not make inane jokes) but dropped it as the location was an issue with a councillor who as we had previously pointed out had been misleading people into believing the objection was from the council. Well now he has taken over the old DNA nightclub which has most of the licenses in place. So looks like at least we will get one new club.
Newmarket's Heaven's Gentlemen's club had its license renewed even though the signage is a little bigger than it is suppose to be, considering that it is co-located with a night club with a really big sign I can see why the sign was allowed, also is is not one of those that would titillate the public. The local press has done the usual anger aspect of reporting even though only 3 objections were sent in. If people had a problem then they should use the established process and not just try and get their names in the paper.
Finally Flirtz in Nottingham renewed it's license in the face of no objections. However it still had to go before the committee. This does beg the question why? Surely if a legal business has no one objecting the license should be approved, if the police had issues it would have come up as an objection so no reason at all really for the meeting apart from councillors trying to look like they are doing something.
TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)
Monday, December 9, 2013
Leeds Council - If This Isn't A Conflict of Interest..........
Chasmal write again on the crazy situation in Leeds
On the first day of Christmas
Leeds Council gave to me:
The loss of my job and social insecurity.....
Well it's getting very interesting in Leeds. On the Yorkshire Evening Post, someone tried to draw a comparison between the clubs being axed and the recent closure of the local Remploy factory. The person that made the comparison was trying to say that the only reason that people were protesting against the Council with regard to the clubs was that they wanted them to stay open and if they were being genuine about things, they would have complained about the closure of the Remploy factory, which none of them did.
The two situations bear no comparison and the person making the comment is a fool, but nonetheless, they did give me an idea about presenting the situation in a different light....
I want you to imagine that within Leeds there are a number of gay clubs, all of which have been threatened with closure. One reason for this is that certain people within the Council believe that gay clubs lower the tone of the area and put families off from visiting the City. So the Council do a survey about the future of gay clubs and maybe their best location. One thing becomes clear and that is that it has been decided that there should be no gay clubs near the town hall, largely because what people imagine goes on inside them. The Council have a committee that will decide what to do about gay clubs as well and they are going to decide.
There is an issue however.....
One of the people on the committee has publicly stated her distaste for gay clubs and homosexuals and has been campaigning for years to have them chased out of town. Furthermore there are a number of religious organisations in the City that loudly campaign against gay clubs, in fact they have a report, published by a grossly homophobic organisation that states that incidences of male rape sky rocket in areas where there are gay clubs and that men fear walking down any street where there are gay clubs because they are terrified that they will be assaulted and bum raped.
The day of the big decision arrives and the Council decide to close three of the gay clubs, because they are in 'sensitive locations'. But what are sensitive locations though?
Well, obviously you cannot have gays near schools because, you know.....This is despite the fact that school closes at 4.00 and the clubs don't open until 11.00.
You can't have gay clubs near places of worship because as the Westboro Baptist Church state, 'God Hates Fags'.
You can't have gay clubs near a railway station because of........well, something or other but it can't be allowed to happen anyway.
You can't have a gay club near an art gallery because the gays might start hanging around outside or even try see some of the artworks.
Play areas are right out because, well you know what they say.......
Youth facilities ar the same, they must be protected from gay clubs....
Gay clubs near a cinema? No way, the last thing that cinema goers want to see after going to a movie is the gay cub opposite.
Places of celebration or commemoration? Forget it, the people celebrating or commemorating would be put off by what they imagine goes on inside a gay club and wouldn't feel able to celebrate or commemorate anything.
Retail shopping areas cannot have gay clubs near them just in case the gays do some window shopping after the shops have closed.
Historic buildings? Gay clubs play Jimmy Somerville records and his falsetto might damage the foundations of the town hall.
Sports facilities? Can't have gay clubs near sports facilities as the gays might try and peer into the gents changing rooms.
Banks. No way for anyone of a number of reasons, but actually no one bothered to ask the banks what they thought, they just decided to decide for them.
So as I said, three gay clubs are closed. The Council committee that decided to close them down was made up of five people, two of which were ardently homophobic so in the light of objectivity they pulled out so it left just three people to do the deed.
Just one problem...
One of the directors of the most vocal anti gay club organisation (the one that rejoiced about the closure of the three clubs and said 'three down, three to go') is Facebook friends of the chairman of the committee that decided to close the three gay clubs.
Now if this was reality, there would be uproar. In fact if any city council made a move against gay clubs on any grounds they would be finished by next week. But if the decision to close was made by a person with homophobic friends, the police would be knocking on their door tomorrow morning.
So whats the point of the story?
Well, Cllr Ghulam Hussain, Chair of the Licensing Committee for SEVs, the same one that decided to close Wildcats, Red Leopard and Deep Blue is Facebook friends with Miriam Leontine Moss, who is a director of SARSVL, the same organisation that campaigned against lapdancing clubs, the same organisation that were deliriously happy to see them closed and implied that this was just the beginning of the closures.
You see minorities are protected in this country and a good thing too because if they weren't, all sorts of arseholes would spend their waking moments thinking of ways to persecute them. Stripper aren't protected though. They can be blamed for anything and lets face it we all know what goes in those clubs don't we. wink wink. So they can be deprived of their income at a weeks notice, who cares, they're only strippers or 'gender traitors' as someone on Mumsnet once said.
Leeds City Council have, in concert with others behaved in a manner that is despicable and cowardly and will be held to account.
Oh before I forget.....
You should also realise that Deep Blue, one of the lap dancing clubs closed by Cllr Hussain, seems to be geographically close to the building used by SARSVL, one of whose directors is Miriam Leontine Moss, his Facebook friend...
Ps
If you want evidence, have a look at the frame grab below before Miriam changes it.....
Thursday, December 5, 2013
Leeds Council - An Absence of Common Decency
Chasmal has been writing about the issues in Leeds and here has the latest on the issues there.
December is a period that many bar owners look forward to. It's christmas party time and takings can soar, which is good because January is always a very quiet month. The same of course applies to lapdancing and strip clubs, the dancers have a great opportunity to earn well...........unless of course they work at a club in Leeds, specifically Deep Blue, Red Leopard and Wildcats. This is because Leeds Council Licensing Sub-Committee decided on 29th November not to renew the licenses of the clubs. The Council are demanding that the clubs should close on Friday 13th December at 4.00am in the morning.
The Licensing Sub-Committee consists of Cllr Karen Bruce, a long time opponent of clubs, Cllr Ryk Downes, Cllr Ghulam Hussain, Cllr Ashgar Khan and Cllr Chris Townsley. They are of course ultimately answerable to Cllr Becca Charlwood, who in an article in The Yorkshire Post seemed keen to distance herself from direct involvment in the decision, despite glorying in the fact that the clubs are to be closed and that 200 people will lose their jobs three weeks before Christmas.
These people must hate dancers and the clubs they work for to an extent that I find quite frightening. If anyone in the Council that had even the remotest connection to this decision had even a shred of comment decency, they could have at least let the clubs run until the New Year, at least let the people who rely upon the venues for income to save some cash. But they didn't do that. In act what they did was worse. They decided which clubs would close on 29th November and then kept quiet about it for 5 days, saying only today (5th December) that the clubs could stay open for just over a week.
It's not of course just dancers that will be affected, the club has bar staff, cleaners, door people and administrative staff as well. All out of work after next friday, all out of work 12 days before Christmas, all facing uncertain futures, all because of a group of vindictive, self righteous moralists want to get their own way.
I found it amazing how Becca Charlwood strives to justify what has happened.
“.....I’m very pleased that the committee have applied the policy of the council.....".
In other words Becca is expressing her delight that the security and futures of scores of families is now threatened because their main income was derived from something that Becca disapproves of.
“This policy change was created through public engagement and was heavily consulted upon".
Really. Do you mean the Leeds Citizens Panel? Where apparently 1092 people said there should be 4 or less clubs in Leeds? Do you mean the 25 boiler plate objections that referred to the Lilith Report?
“These were no doubt difficult decisions to make, but I think it is right to use the powers we have available to us as a council to help fulfill our ambition to be the best city in the UK for all our citizens and visitors.”
Sorry? '.....The best city in the UK for all our citizens....'. Becca has just made 200 of them redundant so its hard to see where she is coming from there, but it's interesting that she thinks it's 'right' that 200 people are going to lose their jobs.
I find it fascinating that the deliberations of the Licensing Sub Committee have been embargoed by the Council. So in other words we will never know what was said, or how they arrived at the decision to close three businesses that have never violated the terms of their licenses.
The owners of Wildcats and Red Leopard have stated publicly that they will take legal action against the Council. It is my sincerest hope that this materialises because if nothing else, court action will see some light shone on what I see to be a very murky set of decisions.
This is going to be a short article. I have others planned that will run all the way to Christmas. Now that Becca Charlwood has played her hand, we can respond and I ask readers of this article to consider something very important.
On July 18th of this year, I published on this blog an article that predicted that Red Leopard and Wildcats would be lined up for license refusal. How is it that I was correct?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)