Strip club clampdown could backfire
“This was T’s Massage on Great Eastern Street, it used to be pink now it looks like dirty skin. Sex clubs aren’t perfect but they are a lot safer than working in the street,” says Hackney artist Stik. Photo: Claude Crommelin
Local business owners have criticised new proposals to restrict licences to sex shops and strip clubs.
As reported in the Citizen last month, Hackney Council is currently carrying out a consultation its new draft document on sex establishments, which introduces a ‘nil’ policy such that new licences will not normally be granted and existing ones will be less likely to be renewed.
Although the move will be welcomed by some, others claim that it will result in the closure of legitimate businesses during a recession and that it may force those employed in such businesses into unlicenced sex trade activity. Hackney currently has one licenced sex shop and four premises that are ‘licenced to provide live performances or displays of nudity solely or mainly to sexually stimulate audience members. All but one of these are located in Shoreditch, which has many clubs and bars with late licences and a limited number of residential buildings.
Expectations, on Great Eastern Street, is Hackney’s only licenced sex shop. It is open during normal business hours and does not have an explicit fascia. Yet, under the new policy, this business is under threat. Chris Graham-Bell, a director of the Millivres Prowler Group which owns Expectations, said: “We are contesting the policy. It is stupid to lump sex shops and clubs together as we are completely different.
“We have been going 30 years and until five years ago there was no question of us having a licence at all – we didn’t need one. We chose to get a licence so we could stock R18 DVDs, we were not forced to get one. We have no objection to having a licence, or the council restricting the number of licences it gives out. If necessary, we will withdraw the sale of the DVDs.”
Pauline Bristow, partner and licensee of the White Horse on Shoreditch High Street, has also voiced objections to the proposed policy. “You cannot turn around and say we cause more problems than discos that open until 4am,” she said. “We are open from 12 noon until 12 midnight, we have a 1am license but we only use it in December.”
A licensee for 25 years, Pauline has lived in Hackney for 32 years and has seen the borough change. “The problem is, the council are thinking ‘we are an up and coming area, we have all this stuff like the Olympics coming up, we don’t want these sorts of places’.
“If we have to close, 75 people will be out of work including bar staff, the girls and security. In Hackney overall we reckon it will be 300. It is not going to help the unemployment figures in Hackney, which the council considers a deprived borough. They will also lose money from the licences, about £5000 per venue. It’s not going to help anything at all. Our livelihoods will be threatened.”
There are fears that closing licenced establishments will not only lead to more unemployment, but may force the workers into more dangerous, unlicenced venues, some of which operate as brothels. This is a prospect Pauline is well aware of. “If we close, there are a lot of unlicenced venues where the girls will be encouraged to do much more than dance,” she said.
The question of the illegal venues and brothels is not directly addressed by the policy, but such establishments could be affected by it. Thierry Schaffauser, 28, has been a sex worker in Hackney for more than a year and thinks a ‘nil’ policy will not lead to a net reduction in the number of establishments, merely an increase in the number of ‘underground’ ones.
Schaffauser also believes the policy is out of touch with the views of with the populace: “I think the council is afraid for the reputation of Hackney. But I am sure the majority of Hackney residents have no problems with the few clubs which are for the most concentrated in Shoreditch, a non-residential area.
“Even if they stop the licence, the owner will just change it into a bar or another night club so all the issues around noise, people drunk will remain the same.”
Opponents of lap dancing clubs often object to the way they commodify women, but not all agree. Chique, 30, has been a dancer in the Hackney for eight years. “I choose to dance because I like it and it pays my bills,” she said. “I am an adult, I come from happy family. I love my mum and dad, I am not a crack-head or anything. People say it is degrading but I don’t think it is and there are a lot worse jobs out there”.
Have your say on licensing sex establishments in Hackney. The consultation runs until 13 December.
Related stories:
Hands Off: women speak out over Hackney strip clubs
Strippers and vicar unite to fight cleanup campaign
Hackney TUC condemns council’s proposed ‘nil’ policy on sex establishments
this is a very one-sided report on this issue I think. There is only mention of people who are pro-sex establishments. I wonder why there isn’t any any mention at all made of any arguments against sex establishments, such as testimonies from lap-dancers who have quit the industry.
There should also have been mention of Object (http://www.object.org.uk/index.php/campaigns/about-the-campaign) one of the groups
behind the campaign to re-license lap-dancing clubs recently which has brought on Hackney’s consultation.
I live in the vicinity of Shoreditch and often have to pass the numerous lap-dancing clubs on my way out to pretty much everywhere I go and I DO MIND! I do not care whether or not it is a residential area to be honest, I do not want lap-dancing clubs in my neighbourhood and I do not think anyone else should have to live close or next to one. It is not just about the noise or drunken people, it is about the message these establishments send and the sexism and exploitation that is inherent to this industry.
Live and let live, Bjorn. You do not have to be pro these establishments to prefer them to be allowed, as long as they continue to cause no trouble. If the gentrification of the Borough – something many would doubtless object to in itself – leads to their decline and disappearance, that would be preferable to forcing them to go out of business. Why should you be sheltered from everything you disapprove of? Do you imagine you never walk past muggers, thieves or gangsters in the street?
Yep, a pretty one-sided article.
I’m sure some sex workers (always referred to as ‘girls’ when talking about sex clubs aren’t they) like their jobs, but a there’s many more who would rather not have to work in these places (which are, after all, pretty seedy and degrading to women). They have to, because they need a job.
The policy may be convenient to those keen to gentrify Hackney, but it’s still the right way to go. It isn’t about ‘disapproving’ but trying to create a world where no one has to do this kind of job.
Bjorn,
How can you speak about sexism when you refuse to speak to the women working in the venues and who will lose their job as a result of your campaign ?
In fact, you don’t care about them,.
Chloe,
You imply that dancers are forced to work in the venues. This is not true.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Oppose-the-nil-policy-on-adult-venues-in-Hackney-and-other-boroughs/175854385758740
The Council have been completely one-sided on this issue. Despite the recommendations from the Human Rights Commission they have failed to produce an Equalities Impact Assessment which, I’m sure, would show a disproportionately negative impact on women.
In the consultation they have not indicated to the public the number of jobs that will go as a result of the policy.
The definition of a the type of entertainment covered is “any live performance or live display of nudity which is of such a nature that, ignoring financial gain, it must reasonably be assumed to be provided solely or principally for the purpose of sexually stimulating any member of an audience (whether by verbal or other means).”
So … dirty jokes at a burlesque review could be banned!
By having a nil policy, the interpretation of that is removed from Councillors and given to bureaucrats. Remember the Banksy being painted over?
The policy that Hackney Council is pursuing is ill advised and quite franky ludicrous.
Bjorn, you state that you do not wish to walk past these kinds of venues. As a vegan I do not wish to walk past butchers shops, but I would not campaign to see them closed. Its about choice, something you seem to want removed from peoples lives.
Why is it that Object choose lap dancing clubs as their campaign focus? I imagine it is because they saw it as an easy target. I read the testimonies and I have to say that I really wonder who wrote them. Furthermore, the pursuit of this campaign will make at least 200 women redundant. Well done Object!
For those of you that wish to see these clubs closed, I have a question….Have you ever been in the White Horse or Browns? Do you actually know what you are talking about? I visited these venues and as an equity feminist I have no problem with someone doing this kind of job if it is their choice. Please try and understand that they are not brothels and the workers there are not engaged in sexual activity. Although I am sure that if you wished to twist definitions until they suit your world view, you could try and make a case against my view.
Chloe, you state that this is about “trying to create a world where no one has to do this kind of job”. I disagree, it is about trying to create a world where no one is allowed to do this kind job and that is a very dangerous thing indeed.
The adoption of this policy will also create an activist template that will inspire any cause fascist to campaign against anything that they do not like in their neighbourhoods…..
“Abortion clinic down the road, lets get it closed like they did the lap dancing clubs….womens refuge, lets get that closed as well, it brings down the tone fo the street”.
I sincerely hope that Hackney Council have asked their insurers to set a reserve for whatever court action will be brought against them. It will be costly and the council will lose, Ratepayers money could and should be spent to benefit all residents and not to please a handful of naive social activists.
I hate to say this, but I am sad that the progress made in womens issues over the past 40 years in this country is now being sidelined by groups like Object who wish to fight the battles of 1970s all over again for it seems no other purpose than self-aggrandisment and the imposition of neo-liberal middle class values on society.
Hackney always seemed to stand for tolerance and social inclusion, I therefore ask that we do not travel down a very slippery slope of cosmetic psuedo-politics inspired by armchair feminists whose only cause for action is to feel ‘rad’.
This must not pass. We are Pro Freedom, Against Censorship – if we lose, you’re next!
In my opinion, one of the most important social advances of recent decades has been the sexual emancipation of women and along with this; men, gay, lesbian and trans-gender people in our society. This is a very important step and one to be defended strongly, against those who would take it away from us. Women’s sexuality and sexual expression is something that has always been feared and suppressed, and a woman challenging this is always derided and feared. Remember Madonna in the 80s? She provoked outrage by being fully in command of her sexual self and expressing it totally.
The covering and the hiding of women will drag us all back to a more uptight and dangerous society. It follows that a more conservative society is more restricting for women and minorities in all ways. One of the most dangerous things about the current crusade against strip pubs is the way that it perpetrates divisive ideology regarding women. Harking back to the days of women falling either into the category of ‘good woman’ or ‘fallen’, the Madonna or the whore, rather than many millions of individuals with a variety of needs and desires. This pseudo-morality makes life difficult and dangerous for those of us who would fall into the ‘bad woman’ category and gives misogynists license to abuse and deride. The control of women’s sexual expression is at the heart of patriarchy and oppression.
The so called ‘feminist’ groups who oppose these places are unwittingly aligning themselves with the misogynists they claim to be against.
Thanks for your response Chloe.
People writing on this page merely seem interested in hearing one side of the story. People who speak out against lap-dancing clubs are not believed and even the testimonies on this site
http://www.object.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4&Itemid=29
are doubted to be real. What does that say about you?
I think it is interesting that people feel lap dancing clubs and other sex establishments are liberating and allowing women’s sexual expression. I do not think anything could be further from the truth! Women working in lap dancing clubs are like animals in a zoo. They are confined to the “rules” of the club and what sells. They are there to be looked at. They have little power over what goes on in the clubs.
Women working in lap dancing clubs are like animals in a zoo. Do you know many Bjorn? Do you think that might be a tad offensive or sexist?
The problem with media that portrays women as a single stringed instrument (in this case sexual) is that a great deal of men believe this and use force to make females comply with their one dimensional viewpoint, hence the escalating figures in rape, sexual assaults and domestic violence. The attitude of these men is rarely supportive and empowering towards females and that is the area that really needs to be discussed, not why women do this but why men want to treat and use women and girls like this. After all, when you examine racism you don’t spend hours debating black people, you look at the racist …
Lap dancing clubs and strip clubs do definitely degrade women and are a serious retrograde step for women who have fought long and hard for equality. No one should have to strip naked and degrade themselves in return for money from sad, inadequate knuckle grazing neanderthal men in the 21st century.
Is this an opinion piece? It’s hardly balanced.
It omits the main reason why the council is considering this. The commodification of womens’ bodies leads to unequal treatment of women in society. Getting a quote from one happy dancer who doesn’t feel degraded ignores the wider impact on perceptions of women.
A 2003 report by the Lilth Project found that the rate of sexual assault increased by 50 per cent in Camden following the opening of lap-dancing clubs in the area.
It’s not harmless. If a man hands over some money to have a women sexually perform in front of him in such a relaxed and acceptable place as a bar, what does it matter if he doesn’t part with the cash in an alleyway later on?
I am completely against lap dancing venues. Men should not be encouraged to see women as sexual slaves whose bodies can be bought and sold. I see the effects of ‘lad culture’ amongst my peers, they speak disrespectfully about young women on the street, in the shops, in clubs, as if they are sub human and they only serve one purpose. Men don’t see the error of their ways because these attitudes are condoned by sex establishments and the mainstream media. We need more legislation to put across the message that women should be treated as our equals and loved for their souls not their bodies.
“Women’s sexuality and sexual expression is something that has always been feared and suppressed, and a woman challenging this is always derided and feared.”
Yes ex dancer. Just as the current culture of sexual objectification suppresses women’s sexuality and sexual expression by repackaging it into a commodity to be bought and sold by men. Women are allowed to express themselves sexually – if they fit into a narrow ideal of ‘sexiness and perform for men.
A woman challenging this is always feared and derided – just as u fear and deride the ‘feminists’ who are challenging that very thing.
I really hope this nil policy goes through. I am sick of having these clubs in my neighbourhood. They make the area really seedy, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they are a front for prostitution.