Letter: Sex establishments – the other side
I was very disappointed to see two very one-sided articles in the Hackney Citizen recently on the subject of the proposed ‘nil’ policy by Hackney Council on sex establishments in the borough.
These two articles did not put forward any statistics or views supporting the idea that sex establishments should be regulated more than they are at present and that they are not just harmless fun.
That [working in one of these establishments] is a tough life rather than a glamorous lifestyle is indicated by the experiences of Elena, whose experiences were featured in a Guardian article a couple of years ago entitled, ‘I was an object not a person’. Elena articulately describes how the branch of the chain she worked for treated their workers.
There is also the wider social impact to be thought of. How the availability of women in our society as sexual objects in pornographic films & magazines, lads’ magazines, lap dancing and prostitution shapes men’s view of women’s worth and how it shapes women’s thoughts on their own worth. I know that both men and women are involved in the sex industry, but it is clear that the sex industry is made up of many more girls and women than it is of boys and men and that the gross of the sex industry is led by men to attract men.
Women, whether in prostitution, pornography, lap dancing clubs or the soon-to-be opened Playboy Club are just pawns in a business run for men by men. In the end they have to do what the customer (mainly men) want, with nobody really concerned about the psychological and physiological impact it has on the workers or the impact on society as a whole.
With regards to the caution put out in the article published last November that closure of sex establishments will see them go underground, this should not be a reason to not do anything about them. If we followed this logic not only should we legalise drugs but also guns, as both are (more or less widely) available despite having been made illegal. The point of a policy as the one proposed by the council is that of taking a stand and drawing a line.
Björn
Hoxton
—
Related stories:
Hands Off: women speak out over Hackney strip clubs
Hackney TUC condemns council’s proposed ‘nil’ policy on sex establishments
Strippers and vicar unite to fight cleanup campaign
Excellent excellent. Thank you. Some sense.
I write as a feminist and mother of three children, living in Hackney.
‘With regards to the caution put out in the article published last November that closure of sex establishments will see them go underground, this should not be a reason to not do anything about them.’ – Absolutely right. We should do much more about them. We should continue to license them but should also attach conditions to the licenses ensuring that the owners of the clubs adopt model employment rights for those who work in them – a safe place to work, a minimum wage and all of the other rights every other worker is entitled to.
I understand that some people don’t like walking past lap dancing clubs, or don’t like the idea of lap dancing clubs, but I don’t understand why this means they should all have their licenses removed, leaving the women who work in them out of legitimate, safe work, where they can have the basic protections associated with legal employment. I just don’t understand how this is an improvement for womankind or what those who support this proposal want the women who work in these clubs to do if the club licenses are withdrawn? Do you actually WANT women to work in unlicensed sex clubs? Is that better? Perhaps you would prefer them to work as strippers at private parties, where the pressure to do much more than take your clothes off is usually increased. Or do you have a fantastic immediate-start-guaranteed-income-and-meets-with-your-moral-standards source of employment for all of these women?
Many of the women who work in lap dancing clubs in Hackney are unionised and in fact a number of them and their supporters will be demonstrating against this policy this week. Perhaps rather than dismissing these women as ‘pawns’, we should accept that as unionised workers, they are the experts on the impact of a policy like this.
Prostitution is illegal and has been for many years, but this has not helped any of those who work in it, nor assisted in securing its eradication or even decline. The fact that it is illegal has simply made it a more dangerous job, operating in a shady underworld that many of us don’t see, but we all know is there. Is this an acceptable position for the author of this article? Are sex workers all having a brilliant time because their work is illegal? Of course not, which is why Hackney council should not be trying to push lap dancing into the same situation as prostitution, but instead should be campaigning to legalise all sex work, to protect those who do it from the violence and exploitation that so many experience, precisely because it is illegal – those who are violent to sex workers know they can get away with without any fear of police action, as in order to make a report to the police, the victim of their violence will have to provide details of the circumstances in which the violence occurred and in doing so will have to admit to their own criminal activity – something they are rarely going to want to do.
Also – this policy is not just about lap dancing clubs. It also intends to refuse licenses to sex shops in Hackney. I note the article is silent on that part of the policy! Maybe it is just too ridiculous to even write about.
This article is totally right in its conclusion though – the point of this policy is simply ‘taking a stand’ – it is just moralising nonsense of no tangible benefit to anyone at all.
I think you have a point Molly. It is hard to curb prostitution and it will be hard to curb sex establishments too, but I think the council is taking a good step in proposing a nil policy. I think that surge of the sex establishments in the last 10 years or so is making it more acceptable for such venues to be in our communities and in the hearts of our neighbourhoods.
I think their visibility and the fact that they are embraced as entertainment – like watching an episode of strictly – will create more demand. That is what I do not like about them. More demand will create more clubs in return and so the cycle will continue. And who guarantees that with legalized clubs there will be no more demand for illegal clubs where more will “go”? Surely there are unlicensed clubs operating in the UK at the moment as well, maybe even helped by the surge in demand due to the widespread acceptance of sex establishments?
Also I wonder where moralising ends and looking after people and society starts. We can put down everything people do to their ‘free choice’. Should we have any rules or regulations at all according to you?
I sympathize with the people whose jobs are on the line, but I feel a bit like this “job loss” stuff is just a smoke screen that fits in really well with all the other demonstrations about job and benefit cuts and increases in tuition fees etcetera. Let us be honest – this is not just about a few hundred people losing their jobs. This is about whether we as a society think that having lap dancing clubs and sex cinemas next to our local Tesco’s is OK. I don’t think so. I think there should be limits to sex venues and I certainly do not want any in my neighbourhood.
Apparently, the author doesnt know what’s going in hackney clubs, since at least half of those concerned by the nil policy are run by women.
He could have found better than one article a couple of years ago when Hackney dancers are currently all organising to save their job and are all opposing the nil policy.
The Strip Venues in question in Hackney are licensed for Table Dancing under Sex Encounter Licenses.
Regrettably, the name of the license that striptease venues must apply for – a “sex encounter license’ – is mis-selling the dancing services that are provided, and misleading customers and the general public about what happens in strip pubs in Hackney.
As Lord Brett points out in the Policing and Crime Bill 2009 link here; http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?gid=2009-07-06a.502.2
‘In truth, this is how they are described in licensing terms, not how they are described in public relations or advertising terms.’
Yet in the Consultation Questionnaire Strip Venues have been labeled Sex Encounter Venues to the vast public and media, which is damaging because;
1) Misleads the public
2) Stigmatises those who work there
3) Gives strength to a moral crusade
4) If it was the case that Sex is being sold – criminal law rather than licensing law is used
Therefore the wording of the Hackney consultation criminalises Strip Venues at the very outset.
So a resident in the next ward or locality (who has no dealings or knowledge of Strip Venues) could be alarmed that they have these ‘sex dens’ in their vicinity.
The consultation has been designed to create panic among residents by wording the consultation in a way that puts crime and moral dilemmas at the heart of the matter, when it’s actually a licensing issue.
Whatever people think about people working in the adult industry, it is nevertheless an industry and no prohibitionist policies will make it go away. And because it is an industry, in a civilised society which professes to seek equal rights for women and to protect the rights of all workers, the workers in the adult industry deserve to have the same safety requirements as any others. The moral high ground is a dangerous place to stand in these emotive waters. The adult entertainment industry and the sex industry cannot be compared to guns: comparing the human body to weapons is very telling, I think. Those who choose to represent human desire deserve to be protected, regardless of whether we participate in the adult industry or not. Everyone is exploited to a lesser or greater degree in their work. Everyone is affected by sexism in the culture we belong to. You cannot wipe out sexism by wiping out the sex industry. Sexism is mostly created by the kinds of laws which set this kind of dangerous precedent. In an enlightened and progressive civilisation which values all workers rights to be safe and protected, sexism will inevitably become less pronounced. The sex industry only reflects what the culture and the values of a society are. I find it very interesting that somebody has compared sex work to weapons and guns. The human body is not a dangerous weapon. It is a terrible shame that some people see it that way. Abolitionism and prohibition will not encourage people to treat the human body with greater respect, it will only reinforce this ‘body as weapon’ fear. It also suggests a very violent response to human sexuality, which I think is certainly symptomatic of the times we live in. Licensing and protecting all aspects of the adult industry will create a peaceful, safe and respectful arena so that these issues can be debated and discussed and we can continue to evolve. The way this subject presses so many buttons in people is an indication that the whole arena needs stabilising, protecting and safeguarding so that progress can be made. If you believe in equal rights for women, you should be demanding especially that those working in the adult industry are treated with the same basic human rights as a librarian, teacher, cleaner or journalist. Stigmatising workers in the adult industry – and this includes pitying them, thinking they are in need of rescue, calling them objectified or commodified – is an act of violence and degradation in itself. Make the playing field level and equal first, give the same rights and working conditions to every kind of worker, before leapfrogging into the whys and wherefores of adult work. Like any other job, workers in the adult industry do it for many reasons. Some are exploited or trafficked, and many are not. It cannot be up for discussion until the basic rights of all workers are established, and we are still a long way from this because we are programmed to think in terms of a Victorian missionary model of ‘rescue’. It isn’t useful. What is useful is having a consensus that every worker is entitled to getting their basic needs met. This is the first stage, and we still haven’t reached it. By suggesting that some members of society don’t deserve this, you cannot claim to have any consideration for basic civil rights.
I am a professional dancer at Browns (part of the Hackney borough), and a freelance burlesque performer.
I love my job and I do not feel like ‘an object’ or a ‘pawn in a business run for men by men’
Browns is owned and run by a WOMEN.
The employees including performers, bar staff, cleaners, and costume designers are WOMEN.
I DO NOT have
‘to do what the customers want, with nobody really concerned about the psychological and physiological impact’
I am free to dance for who I please in the way that I please, and my psyche and physical health are fine thank you very much.
I doubt very much that you, the author, have any real information or experience on the venus that you think should be shut down beyond what you have imagined in your head, read in an article written 2 years ago (that had no relation to the Hackney pub scene) or have been told by other people to think…
You are welcome to come and see me perform anytime, I am sure you would be hard pressed not to find the experience entertaining, beautiful, erotic, and above all else art.
As a previous exotic dancer in the Shoreditch “triangle” for 11 years, I can speak clearly with experience that this “nil” policy is being discussed by council members who have not researched their argument…Not thoroughly, not slightly…but more pitifully!
I can assure you that I have never had the feeling that I was an “object” or being demeened, or had my “self worth” taken from me because of my job as a dancer! I CHOSE that job, I PAID my taxes and I have seen a number of people put themselves and their children through college due to the flexibility of hours and the money.I have also made some amazing women who are happy and healthy and strong and beautiful, and there’s a lot to be said for the friendships I have even now with said ladies.
I shall also state that I have 9 “A” levels and I have a job in the city, and that I see more disgusting behaviour at “Networking” parties and “Soiree’s” than I have EVER seen in a Lapdancing/Strip club!
I am happy to speak to these council members about some particular episodes at their own Christmas parties where more “dubious” exploits take place!
I say look in the mirror and not the microscope….and if you are going to make a point? Make it current, viable, and get your facts correct!
Sincerely
Catherine AKA Ginger
As a customer of strip venues for some years I would like to point out one or two things and express my opinion.
Firstly I want to pick up on “Elena articulately describes how the branch of the chain she worked for treated their workers.” now this was one person working in a chain. None of the venues in Hackney are part of a chain and anyone who has worked in a large a large chain knows that the employess are not valued but seen as a disposable resource. So has Mr Sutka taken the time to interview any dancers currently working in the area? As they have not been quoted I would guess not. So then does exploitation truly exist? Over the years I have spoken to many dancers and I cant think of any that even remotely feel this way.
So to the issue of people walking past the venues being assualted with decandent images that would embarrass anyone (well thats what the suggestion is). I remember the first time I walked the area I actually walked past a venue because the lack of overt advertising. There is no ramming down the throat images outside these places and in fact is so low key that I am fairly certain that anyone coming to the area for the first time would not realise they are there unless they were looking for them.
As to womens self worth the media in general has done so much damage with the size zero imagery that I find any argument on that basis laughable.
Now on a personal level, as a bi-lateral amputee and wheelchair user, I have found that striptease venues have allowed me to recover my own self confidence after suffering a massive loss of self worth during a long period of illness. I am certain less likely to be pitied or ignored as I have been in normal pubs. I am not going to go into the whole Psyche thing but lets just say it has made me a better person after a period of physical and emotional loss.
There are so many things I culd say but the dancers if they read this will probably put it better.
Here we go again…. This ‘Elena’ is a pawn used by the fanatical pressure group Object. Just because ‘Elena’ didn’t particularly like where she worked or her job, does not mean any legal action should be taken based on one persons opinion. ‘Elena’ worked in a big corporate chain and she found it unpleasant. I’m sure working in any corporate chain, whether it be McDonald’s or a strip club chain is not ideal.
I didn’t like being a PA and felt badly treated by the CEO and MD but I’m not about to start a campaign against PAs. That would be ridiculous!
I worked in Browns and The White Horse for over 12 years and was very happy there. I look back on my dancing days fondly and am still good friends with lots of the girls. Both of these Hackney venues are run by East End WOMEN who run a very tight ship. No prostitution, drug taking or sexual contact with the customers is tolerated. You will be fired immediately if you do any of the above.
Definitions: I danced for over a decade and have never given a lapdance in my life so lets get to the definitions.
Striptease – a cheeky, funny, seductive stage dance, now including pole dancing.
Private dancing – a personal dance for one or two customers on a podium, with the customer seated three feet away. There is absolutely no contact.
Lapdance – a full contact dance, where the girl physically stimulates the customer by rubbing in his groin.
Browns and The White Horse do not provide lapdances as it is against the conditions of their license. Hackney has always issued strict licenses and imposed fines if these are not followed. The current crusade against these venues is unnecessary and counter-productive.
I used to be the brewery Area Manager for both Browns and the White Horse. Their primary function is to sell drink, and entertainment (Striptease and table dancing) is provided to entice customers onto the premises. They are both extremely well run and adhere to the rules and regulations covering their premises. They do NOT provide lap dancing!! It is a travesty they have been classed as sex establishments because they are not! They are entertainment venues where customers from all walks of life come to see women dance, albeit in the nude. They do not, and have never, sold sex. To remove their license is an infridgement of human liberties and removes choice for those wishing to frequent these establishments. I cannot believe this is proposed to happen in 2011 because we are not living in the dark ages. What is next? The closure of newsagents because they sell nude magazines and the Sun newspaper displays naked women. My mind boggles at the narrow mindlessness of it all.
Alan Gregory.
As a Hackney resident it is not just a vague hypothetical discomfort I feel about these places. I have been intimidated by a large group of men outside one – clearly bolstered up in their sexism by spending an evening in a legitimised sexual harassment establishment. Inside is no better – i fortunately haven’t been in, but friends who tried to be ‘open-minded’ about it felt nothing but disgust at the contemptuous men viewing jaded women as diposable pieces of meat in the interior. These are not places that belong in a society that values gender equality and respect for women.
Hackney should totally go for a nil policy, it makes so much sense. In this day and age how can we still condone renting women’s bodies like slaves for 20 minutes and having them parade around naked for men like cattle.
If it were a club for white people to attend where they could pay to be waited on by a black men in loin cloths it would be in outrageously bad taste and horrendously racist. Despite the fact that some black people might need to work there because they need employment or to make ends meet it would not be allowed because correctly, we would not tolerate institutionalised racism. Why on earth should we allow this just because it’s women?
It’s important to see these sex encounter establishments for what they are; an opportunity for men to pay women to treat them like owners/masters in a society where men and women are meant to be equal. We can’t just pretend it’s ‘harmless fun’ because it isn’t.
By deciding on a nil policy Hackney will be saying ‘we don’t allow sexist degrading establishments in our area because we want to be inclusive and we want the area to become more popular with all sorts of people, not just pander to men who feel entitled to pay for women’s bodies’. Women and men will feel more comfortable in the area and will feel more inclined to go out there and have fun rather than avoiding the areas surrounding these sex encounter establishments because of the intimidation and loutish behaviour caused by their presence.
I can understand what everyone is saying, as a Feminist, Artist, Performer and women who lives in this hypersexualized culture. I can understand why one might fight for the right to have a ‘choice’ to be a voyeur or participant in sexual activities. I can understand and believe that women haven’t had completely negative experiences as erotic dancers or prostitutes. I can see that there will be a lot of women out of work or in safe regulated work because of the knock on effects of a ‘nil policy’ but I can not escape from the facts as I see them.
Why aren’t women able to get better paid jobs with flexible hours?
Why does stripping have to be associated with other nude performance work?
Why do men ‘need’ these environments to be stimulated?
Why aren’t we looking at the current decay and disturbing break down between the sexes in the younger generations relationships’ (because of the levels of porn forced into our minds?)
I am not interested in blaming the men or women, enablers, colluders, governments and/or policies in the sex industry.
I think it is time we all took responsibility. There has to be an intelligence in understanding our motives, to work and earn money as we please, to get an aroused from a stranger’s nudity, to create a performance using the body, to defend women’s rights and promote equality, to feel safe in your community, to stop the normalization of the sex industry in our society. All of these issues seem to crossover in each comment above, we are too complex for a blanket solution at this stage I think. We can read from the posts that it is possible to wear more than one of these hats. Can I be a Feminist, Artist, Performer (who is sometimes partly nude), can I appreciate some Burleques work, can I protest against lap dancing clubs and prostitution? Can I enjoy the female form on stage? I am all of the above.
The female gaze has also been missing from a lot of these conversations about the sex industry.
A lot of subcultures, the gay and s&m scenes for example reinforce the heteronormative gender dynamics and power roles from mainstream culture. Choosing to look at these complex structures in our culture could lead to a continuous circle of finger pointing and judgement on how to fight for what is ‘right’ for our society.
In my life, actions, art and for paid work I ask myself why I am doing it and what it is for and what are my motives and reasons. This lack of questioning and understanding ones individuality plays a big part in the society we have today. These are just my opinions based on my experience of (my) life to date. It is unfortunate that if there is a ‘nil policy’ bought into force the industry may go on even more off the radar for equal rights as a woman and employee. In this economical climate I think better paid flexible working hours jobs for women urgently needs to be addressed.
Jenny(also my name),
You say in your post that the “sex license” that lap dancing clubs must apply for is mis-selling the dancing services provided but in truth it is the lap dancing industry that is mis-selling itself. This vile industry has cynically portrayed itself as being “respectable” by using very clever marketing techniques such as calling the venues “gentlemens clubs”, the strippers(who incidentally do not need any dance training whatsoever) are called “dancers” and the punters are called “gentlemen” (as if!).It is totally wrong to call these strippers dancers- it is an insult to professional dancers who have to work and train to very high standards to become professional dancers. It cannot be right that this industry is allowed to get away with referring to its strippers as dancers. By doing so they have made stripping seem more respectable as well as equating it with dancing and this has contributed to the way in which these clubs have proliferated so rapidly.Many people do not realise what lap dancing clubs are all about-the title misleads them and they think it is just dancing and not full nudity with bodily contact. Perhaps if lap dancing clubs had been called strip clubs more people would have realised sooner what was happening in their neighbourhoods.Shame on all those councils that have pornified our towns and cities
I wholeheartedly support Hackney’s draft policy and hope that the nil cap stays in for the final version.
This industry has crept into the mainstream and needs to be put back out. The more I read about lap dancing clubs, and the more I learn about what goes on inside them, the way the women are treated and the impact they have on women and girls living and working in the area, the more amazed I am that they are allowed anywhere in the UK, let alone on our high streets.
Well done to Object and to Hackney Council for taking a stand. I hope that this inspires other councils to follow suit.
An interesting mix of opinion, with thoughtful contributions from people actually involved in the industry in Hackney to the usual tired arguments from those whose only experience of the clubs is what they have read on Objects website.
Katherine makes an interesting point though, as I have long suspected that Object are pulling the Licensing Committees strings.
I find it amazing that the comments made supporting Hackney Council have been written by people who have never been inside any of the venues on Hackney. So in future, if you wish to make any further contributions, visit Browns or The White Horse and then reach a conclusion that is based upon personal experience, as opposed to something that you read somewhere.
Lets see things for what they are….Hackney Council are going to try and make 300 people redundant because they feel like doing it and a highly vocal minority are cheering them on.
Finally the almost hysterical tone to some of the anti club comments, such as….
“…..dancing clubs and sex cinemas next to our local Tesco’s,,,,,”
“…..contemptuous men viewing jaded women as diposable pieces of meat…….”
“…..If it were a club for white people to attend where they could pay to be waited on by a black men in loin cloths……”
“…….It is totally wrong to call these strippers dancers- it is an insult to professional dancers,,,,,”
I like to read comments like those above as they more than anything expose the intellectual bankruptcy that lies behind the proposed Nil Policy and its apologists.
In terms of the plan to close Expectations, something that Bjorn seems curiously silent about…
Is there no one that finds the idea of closing a bookshop rather frightening? We have freedom of expression in Britain and now Hackney Council are implementing a policy template that will see that freedom curtailed. I wonder how comfortable Object are with the possible closure of Expectations? Maybe they see it as an acceptable casualty in the war they have brought to the borough.
What kind of person could admire such a policy?
Oh I know someone that would be right behind it…..Fred Phelps would approve. I am sure that many of you have heard of the Westboro Baptist Church. If not please go to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church
You can read about the group and speculate about how they would approve of what is going on in Hackney. Maybe you can e-mail Fred for his views as I am sure he would be very supportive.
I was violently sexually assaulted by a gang of four boys when I was 14 and raped by a co worker using drugs to subdue me when I was 15. All the men there treated me as an animal, not a human being. My no counted for nothing to their yeses. That’s what you get from clubs that teach men that women are animals … and whilst men argue for the right to buy and sell naked women, and women argue for their right to be bought and sold – spare a thought for the millions of women currently undergoing domestic violence, rape or sexual assault who say what about my right not to live in the fallout of your rights … I’m a human being too and I have rights to be treated with dignity and respect, whatever your rights are. No man, or woman is an island, and what you do washes up in my life too.
I really hope this nil policy goes through. I’m sick of having to live with these clubs in my neighbourhood. I don’t think you have to have been in one of the clubs to have an opinion about them. I’ve heard testimonies from ex-dancers about how contemptuously the women are treated, and seen the effects of being bale to treat women like this in the crowds of rowdy men exiting the clubs. As a woman, I know what it’s like to be treated as less than human by men who think it’s OK to sexually harass us just because we are women. These clubs promote the sexist attitutes which underpin this type of behaviour. We shouldn’t have to live with this.
The real question for me is – why does have everything have to be commercially available?
Is sex really something people feel they cannot do without? Or even their fantasies? Why do women have to perform in sexually seductive ways for men in order for them to feel powerful and aroused? Is it not because they find the power arousing and what they can make the women do for money rather than caring about the woman who performs?
I study near the Shoreditch area and I know a few young men in my university who openly admit having been to lap dancing clubs. They have no shame what so ever. From a mutual friend, who is friends with one of the them I was told in what derogative ways the men talk to each other about the women. He also told me how they tried pushing the women to break the rules or to entice them to let them touch them. What “enterntainment”! To me it just sounds nasty and sleazy and I am sure stories like this are not the end of it.
It seems as if some people here feel that any objectors have to have been into a lap dancing clubs, that the testimony from an article of 2 years is too old and not applicable to the excellently and female run gentlemen’s clubs in Shoreditch.
None of these so called counter-arguments are actually valid or substantial! The fact that the clubs are run by women does not make them “better” or “good”. It just means that they are run by women who view lap dancing and stripping as liberating or a positive experience.
Secondly people seem to say that anyone who is opposed to the clubs in question has their thoughts spoonfed to them by Object and that Object falsifies things – how convenient! I suppose this Elena is hired and all the other testimonies on the Object website are falsified too? Or are you saying that standards in clubs have been improved since those women worked there, or it is because they worked in chain clubs or unlicensed ones? To be honest I don’t care what “exception of circumstance” you throw in my face! Fact is what these women say has done and probably does still take place in these clubs. Who needs to visit them to know that anyway? We have just come to accept that this is “what life is like”…
Hi,
I have been working as a dancer for the last few years and I just to make clear I DO NOT LAP DANCE..there is no physical contact whatsoever and the place I work for THE WHITE HORSE in shoreditch high street is run by a mum and her daughter..so none of that men exploiting women business in here..I never felt scared while working in this venue and the girls I work with are hard working women and very honest..I do understand that this is not to everyone’s taste but that’s what life is ..some things we like some things we don’t..But I can honestly say that the white horse is a well run business and that everyone who works here, bar staff, Dj’s ,cleaner, security and so on are a good team of workers we all respect each other..
So it will be a shame that this place is close and that so much energy is being spend on doing so when this city has so many other big issues to deal with rather than pointing at some girls that do some strip shows and trying to get on with their life’s like everyone else..
I don’t understand why I have to be punish or being look down when we are causing no trouble to anyone..I have seen more violence and crime in a normal club and a football match than I ever seen in a strip joint as guys know that they have to behave otherwise they get thrown out by security..
I can also proudly say that I loved my job as a dancer and I have lots of girls that come and see my show because they find it fun..so is not only men coming in here..I chose to be a dancer after I was 22 so and no one pushed me or bullied me into it..I did because I wanted to and I don’t come form a horrible background or have personal issues I come from a loving family ..The money I made and the time flexibility of the job was helpful to learn other things and to save a bit of money
I think there are worse places to close down and bigger problems to tackle rather than all this nonsense
Isn’t the bottom line in this that the law has now changed, with the help of Object, into such that strip clubs etc. aren’t licensed as cafes anymore, as they used to be, but now have to apply new licenses as sex establishments. The council can decide whether to adopt a complete nil-policy, or just get the establishments to apply new licenses.
I think licensing strip clubs not as cafes anymore is not a bad thing. As they really aren’t just cafes as, say, Starbucks is. They just aren’t.
So in that sense, Object’s pointed out an important issue and getting the law through is great.
Then there are of course the problematics of can all ‘sex establishements’ be lumped together under the same thing. Is a sex shop the same as a strip club etc. I think not.
And it seems the whole thing is so complex, and it’s all too easy to fall into extremes – people on the other end are labeled as misogynists who just see women as lumps of meat, and on the other as fanatical prudes from the far-Right Christian moralist sector.
I worked in the City of London, just down the road from Hackney for 14 years. My male colleagues would visit the clubs in Hackney both in the evening and (in one firm) at lunchtime. I can report that the language they used to talk about the women working in the clubs was degrading to the extreme. It was totally clear that the women were not viewed as human beings by these men at all. These clubs encourage men to see all women, not just the women working there, as sexual objects and encourage wider discrimination and violence towards women.
As Ali said in her post above, by deciding on a nil policy Hackney will be saying ‘we don’t allow sexist degrading establishments in our area.’ Hear hear!
I agree with Clair. When I hear the way my male peers describe and refer to young women I am disgusted. And I’m not talking about strippers, I’m talking about normal women, from work and in the shops.The sex industry promotes and condones their attitudes so why would they ever change? Legislation curbing the sale of women’s bodies sends out a clear message that they are equal human beings and do not exist for the titillation of men. All these dancers and ex dancers keep saying they are treated well, and that’s great, but I don’t really care. I care about what men say and think when one of my sisters walks by. Because thinking that men view my sisters the way they view strippers in a club really angers me. Women are human and will never have full human status until men stand up and reject the sex industry.
Until fathers (and mothers) instil decency in their childrens’ minds, no amount of governmental regulation will make men view women as equals.
I don’t disagree that these clubs may contribute to the problem. But there’s a lot more to it. I’d rather we allow women to make their own decisions about what they want to do with their bodies. They’re adults and it’s their choice.
…but I don’t want one of these clubs in my neighbourhood!
hear hear Adam! I agree!!!!
i wonder if the moral supremacists at object will be having a whip round amongst their wealthy members to compensate the workers who will lose their jobs?
This is a simple matter of Hackney attempting to do some pre-Olympic clean sweeping. The issue of these clubs or venues isn’t really an issue that needs any attention. They are trying to incite an argument that is […] moralistic and allows simple public outrage to fuel the issue and incite the ill-informed pious section of the community to do their dirty work.
I believe in the right of freedom of choice and non censorship of the public. I am a female professional working in film and advertising industry and consider myself to be educated and informed, there is no real relevant reason to close these venues. Licensing and regulation are the key, this already exists. I would go as far to say they are better run and safer then most venues in the area.
I feel I must speak out as someone who lives in the area and having several friends who dance and have always made me aware of their professional outlook, this is a reactionary issue and one that must be treated as a balanced fair debate.
There is no crossover into the sex industry, which seems to be inferred or hinted at, when filling in a questionnaire for hackney [council] the question of sex shops also was introduced almost to insinuate a direct link.
There is in no way any enticement from the patrons to solicit customers through the doors. The noise pollution is not an issue from the late licensed venues and there is no direct increase in crime, littering or any other out of hours problems.
I don’t feel that the issue is being correctly addressed. You can look hard and find a darker side to any industry, this is just inflammatory and not the real issue. The question should be redirected back to Hackney Council and ask for the real reason for this […] clamp down.
I work at Browns as a bar maid and the establishments that Object are speaking about are nothing like the venue where I work. No abuse takes place there, sexual or otherwise. It is extremely well run, the owners care very much about the girls that work there, and every dancer there is a grown adult who is working there of their own volition. The idea that a well run establishment like Browns is a den of sleaze, exploitation and vice is just ludicrous. If Denise the owner got a whiff of any of the dancers doing drugs they would be sacked on the spot, and they only need to give the doorman a nod and any customer will be thrown out onto the street. Why on earth would a club like Browns need to employ trafficked women? Dancers are queueing up to work there as it is well known as the best place to dance in london. It has the best management, is the safest, the most friendly and the girls make the most money. The idea that it creates a no go area for women and children is insane, many of our customers are women, especially on a Saturday night. It is completely unobtrusive, many people come in accidentally because they think it is a restaurant, most walk out again but some, male and female stay and have a drink there. It is not just your area, it is mine too, I live and work in Hackney as do most of the staff and dancers. Browns has been there for 30 years. It is a disgrace when people move to an area and then set about trying to change it to suit them. The place of local government is not to censor what goes on legally between consenting adults. I hope so much that this unlawful policy is rejected as I love working at Browns and would hate for my dancer friends to move to other clubs which don’t respect and care for the girls in the way that Browns does.
Men like looking at naked women. Women like making easy cash. What is wrong with that ? If men didnt like looking at women then no one would get married and have babies ?