East London News A Force for the community…
Emdad Rahman ::
Councillor Rania Khan
Tower Hamlets Councillor Rania Khan and C.A.P.E TowerHamlets are asking for support in stopping lap dancing and strip clubs operating locally.
The Council is currently consulting on a new policy which would allow it to revoke the licences of all Sex Encounter Establishments, including Strip Clubs and lap dancing Clubs.
The recent Policing and Crime Act allows concerned parties to speak out on the issue. Lap-dancing clubs are now licensed as Sexual Entertainment Venues (SEVs), which means that local residents and workers have a greater say, and Tower Hamlets can apply greater restrictions and controls to these clubs, and even apply zero tolerance.
If this policy were to be enacted it would be the first borough inLondon to have a nil policy towards sexual entertainment, where even existing establishments would lose their licences.
Residents and people who work in Tower Hamlets have found it difficult to object to the nuisance of lap-dancing venues in the community.
Councillor Khan said: “I have been involved in the feminist movement and campaigned on this issue for a long time. In 2007, following residents concerns, we led a campaign with Object which led to the national government change on the legislation. We are now in a position to make use of this new legislation.
“It is crucial to state that we can only implement this policy if we get a favourable response from respondents to the consultation. We are obviously up against unscrupulous large businesses who will try to ensure the maximum amount of pro-sex encounter establishments answer the consultation. We have to make sure we also mobilise people who feel strongly about this issue.”
There are 11 Lap-Dancing clubs in Tower Hamlets that are accused of fostering a sexist culture in which it is deemed acceptable to treat women as sex objects, not people, and areas surrounding these venues can become ‘no-go’ areas for women, children and students. Lap-dancing clubs may also
fuel anti-social behaviour and unacceptable levels of noise.
Many operate during the daytime, and into the night, near to homes and residences, nurseries, schools, universities, playgrounds, parks, art galleries and places of worship. Most are therefore located in totally inappropriate areas.
A public meeting is taking place on September 8th, 6pm at the London Muslim Centre, 46-92 Whitechapel Road London E1 1JX.
Invited speakers will include Lutfur Rahman, the Mayor of Tower Hamlets, John Biggs from the London Assembly, Shaikh Abdul Qayyum from the East London Mosque, the Reverend Alan Green, Councillor Rania Khan, LibDem Councillor Stephanie Eaton, The OBJECT group and The East London Communities Association (TELCO).
Councillor Khan and the organisers are extremely keen to publicise the event and encourage community involvement.
The consultation is only open for six weeks and residents and employees of the borough are being encouraged to participate and contribute by visiting http://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=14754.
The organisers of the Say ‘NO’ campaign have organised a second meeting, scheduled for Tuesday the 11th of October, entitled ‘LAP DANCING – A CHOICE OR EXPLOITATION’.
However, the course of a few days, they have changed the format from a public debate, to an invitation-only (female-priority, or possibly women-only) private rally in favour of the proposed ‘nil’ policy. The venue was initally to have been the Bancroft Library in Mile End, but has now been changed, and the new location of the meeting is yet to be announced.
Say ‘NO’ to lap-dancing in Tower Hamlets have also come in for considerable criticism on their Facebook page, and that of the event, with particular regard to the accuracy of their information, the balance of the panel of invited guests, and the manner in which they have organised this second meeting. Their most recent response to their critics has been to hide/delete comments on both pages.
Facebook links for:-
Say ‘NO’ to lap-dancing in Tower Hamlets: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Say-NO-to-lap-dancing-in-Tower-Hamlets/195992953799007
‘LAP DANCING – A CHOICE OR EXPLOITATION’: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=159898667431930
With regard to the statement that there are eleven striptease venues in the borough, I am only aware of the following seven which are currently operational:
Images, 483 Hackney Road E2 9ED
Majingo’s, 187 Marsh Wall, South Quay E14 9SH
Metropolis, 234 Cambridge Heath Road E2 2NN
Nag’s Head, 17 Whitechapel Road E1 1DU
Club Oops!, 30 Alie Street E1 8DA
Secrets East Smithfield 43-45 East Smithfield E1W 1AP
White’s Gentlemen’s Club 32-38, Leman Street E1 8EW
Are there more, or are the other four simply figments of their imagination?
The vast majority of dancers at these establishments are happy in their work and don’t feel that they’re being exploited. In fact it is they who are exploiting guys who are willing – or fool enough – to spend a lot of money on a mild sensual experience, eg £20 to see an unclothed girl moving around in the gloom a yard away for 3 to 4 minutes.
Close these licensed, controlled places down, and they will be replaced by “underground venues” that will be very difficult for the council to detect. By all means close down somewhere where the rules are being broken but if everything is in order let the clubs remain open.
I would have thought there were far more serious problems for the council to tackle – high unemployment, drunkeness in the streets and silly, vulnerable girls behaving in public in a way that no dancer would think of.
Gordon
I am out of Borough and wholly unconnected to the industry but many of us in the rest of the country are watching this case aghast because it strikes us as the reversal of hundreds of years of English freedoms – back to medieval attitudes towards women, sex and freedom.
It seems like the game is given away by the phrase ‘feminist movement’ and by the dominance of faith-based groups in the campaign. Both feminists and faith-based groups (very similar in their authoritarian prescriptiveness) makes some uncritical assumptions about the relationship between desire and exploitation.
The only central facts should be these: are the women involved in the industry (that is, for the sake of dim ideologues, women with the right to choose) making as free a choice as someone who decides to work at Tesco’s?; and are the establishments actually causing serious (not presumed) harm (like a noisy pub or street party) to local residents?
The only people who have a right to complain in a free country are the girls themselves (who should be protected not demonised) and the immediate local residents’ who can reasonably complain not about ‘objectification’, and other abstract ideas spouted by ambitious local politicians who read a book once, but only about peaceful enjoyment of their own homes …
As for the campaigners, the dictation by activists of policies against lifestyles that they find offensive might, one day, be turned on them. What if I found being hectored by feminists and Marxists offensive? What if I found the wearing of Islamic codes of address offensive? I don’t at all (not even the hectoring, I simply think it stupid) but I do expect an attitude of live-and-let-live and an end to people dictating life choices to others based on ideology.
This is nothing but the further deterioration of the once great English Left into something close to fascism-lite, the application of private neurosis to public space and the placement of ethnic and identity prejudice where freedom should be. I do hope East Londoners resist this imposition for the sake of the rest of the country and themselves. We hope for the spirit of Cable Street to re-emerge at the last moment …
The council and the campaign to stop lap dancing are very vocal with their views. However the arguments they put forward as usual have so little basis in reality it is laughable. Many dancers are in higher education and using dancing to pay their way. Seems strange to me that womens groups are busy trying to take away the ability to study and further themselves from other women. Putting women into student debt or stopping them from studying is not a good thing in my mind.
As for Councillor Khan’s remark that parts of Tower Hamlets are becoming no-go areas for women, children and students: could it be that the real force responsible for that is Islamism? It was only a few months ago that stickers declaring a ‘gay-free zone’ appeared in Whitechapel and Spitalfields, and posters in the area of women dressed ‘immodestly’ are also known to have been defaced for similar reasons.
I was going to butt out as an outsider but this is real street evidence of what Tony M. says from some months ago. I met a lap dancer (with my wife who shares my view on sex-positivism and women’s rights) and had a great conversation with a really bright lady.
She had a business plan and was raising funds for it. She went to a famous charity for help and it was sniffy. But she knew what she was doing – and she clearly had a boy friend who knew who wore the trousers.
This was a tough, bright and feisty lady who just happened to be beautiful and non-academic and she was using her talents at something she enjoyed without worrying an ounce about this objectification nonsense.
The more I see of the assault on these woman, the more I suspect girlish playground jealousy … and the hidden patriarchy of showing daddy how good and responsible you are. Modern feminism is often secretly patriarchal – taking the attitudes of old Iron Age religions and imposing them on free and happy men and women alike.
…Which is why gender ‘feminists’ so often find common cause with religious ‘fundamentalists’ and conservatives, both here and in the USA – they share similar sexually repressive, authoritarian mindsets.
A dancer I know is currently studying to be an astro physicist. I guess that she is not intelligent enough to make up her own mind though. As to the statements about no go zones how much is because of street culture and nothing to do with dance venues.
Object have announced the following meet-up on their website:
Saturday October 8th between 12 – 3pm at Whitechapel Station
Considering the short notice I wonder if they got police permission or are they just making it up as they go along?
Want to pick up on a couple of points in the press release (can’t be describle as an article due to the lack of facts)
“areas surrounding these venues can become ‘no-go’ areas for women, children and students. Lap-dancing clubs may also fuel anti-social behaviour and unacceptable levels of noise.”
The key words in the above statement are can become and may also fuel. These are not statements of fact but are playing on individual fears where the author has no ability to use truths. Perhaps I should people walking past these venues may ecome millionaires, it has no basis in truth and about a 14m to 1 shot (assuming that someone does the lottery).
Now we move onto “We are obviously up against unscrupulous large businesses who will try to ensure the maximum amount of pro-sex encounter establishments answer the consultation. We have to make sure we also mobilise people who feel strongly about this issue.”
The fact that Object have the link plastered on their website extolling people outside of the borough to complete the consultation. Who would you describe as unscrupulous? The Nags Head is a family run pub don’t see that as big business.
The council and Object resort to scaremongering and distorting facts. They have had to censor their own facebook page because they were challenged on these issues. Makes you think doesn’t it!
This NO to lap dancing venues is misguided and ill informed. I am run a business in close proximity to one of these establishments and am also a home owner in the area. This club has been operating for over 30 years and maintains good relations with local businesses and residents. It is frequented by Men and Women (inceasingly more women and couples over the past year or two!)who enjoy the entertaiment provided safely and in a well controled enviroment. People are under no pressure to visit the club and do so out of free choice. There is no more evidence of, its presence encouraging anti social behaviour then any other bar or club in the area, infact the ever present security staff help prevent such behaviour by their continual monitoring of events both outside and inside the club.
The club provides employment and also trade for local busnisses in a time when unemployment in the borough is high and small businesses need all the trade they can get.
To close this club and other well run establishmenys like it would be misguided and only serve to increase unemployment in the borough and negativly effect local business. As an Art Gallery owner in the area I welcome its presence and feel it adds to the diverse and eclectic nature of the area
So the same old words are being used to try to shut these clubs,high crime levels,anti social behaviour etc. The groups that say this never come forward with any facts to support what they are saying. Now we are told that :large unscrupulous businesses are behind all these clubs.If this and all other things stated are true,why havent the police acted.The answer to that is that the police live in the real world and know where high crime levels come from,its not from these clubs.
If the campaigners want to do something about noise and anti-social behaviour, they’d be better off turning their attentions to Brick Lane on Friday and Saturday nights, which has become a de facto theme park for ‘hipsters’ and tourists at weekends. And the current licencing regime makes provision for individual venues (striptease or other) to be shut down and their licences revoked, if legitimate complaints are received and it can be proven that the owners are in breach of their licence terms – no ‘nil’ policy necessary.
What is particularly notable about striptease in this respect is that, when the police were consulted by the government on this issue in the past, they remarked that such venues actually tended to be well run and their customers were generally better behaved than those using other types of licenced premises!
Apologies for leaving the one gay pub with striptease in the borough off of my list:
BJ’s White Swan, 556 Commercial Road E14 7JD
The usual tired rhetoric about ‘objectification/sexual exploitation of women’ and the ‘fostering of a sexist culture’ clearly doesn’t apply in this instance.
GSOB,its the same thing again,those places that are well run and cause no trouble are being singled out.This was the case in Hackney.However,I hear that some residents there have had enough and are putting in complaints about how the licensing officers go about their duties.
The following comments were posted on Say ‘NO’ to lap-dancing in Tower Hamlet’s Facebook wall this afternoon:
“I will encourage those comenting [sic] on this site to refrian [sic] from being racist and homophobic. Some of you have been removed from this page and will be reported to the relevant authorities. We welcome opinions buth [sic] being bullyish [sic] and harrassing [sic] supporters is crossing the line…”
“Once I get confirmation after police investigation we can clarify our position better.”
I too would strongly discourage everyone from expressing racist and/or homophobic views in the discussion of this topic – that goes for supporters of the ‘nil’ policy, as well as opponents. They add nothing positive to the discussion, distract from the real issues, and affect all of us – regardless of our race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation.
If someone has making these kind of comments, by all means let the culprit(s) face the appropriate consequences; by the same token, the rest of us ought to be allowed to see the evidence on which these accusations have been based, to judge their seriousness for ourselves.
It’s true that an element of ridicule has started to feature in the remarks about the ‘nil’ policy on Facebook: perhaps it’s because the people making them have found the recent censorship of the relevant Facebook pages, and the contents of many of the comments in support of the campaign, frankly ridiculous. I’m certainly not aware of anything malicious or threatening having been posted however, which is what is implied in the above quotes.
Whilst I genuinely hope that no one is using the discussion of the ‘nil’ as an excuse to harass its supporters (completely unacceptable behaviour in a democracy), attempting to portray oneself as a victim without adequate justification is a pretty cheap political trick. And the police take a very dim view of people who waste their time with unfounded, frivolous or vexatious accusations.
A flyer for tomorrow’s meeting at 6:00 pm has now been published, advertising the venue as the Bancroft Library and making no mention of the mooted invitation-only admission policy. Curiouser and curiouser…
What if they gave a meeting and practically no one was to attend? I dont think I could force myself to sit through the 2 hours of drivel they are going to put out. I am still trying to convince a female I know to attend who has a day job on a national newspaper but not sure she would be prepared for that diatribe either.
Did the meeting take place?And would minutes have been taken?
http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2011/10/12/lap-dancing-and-morality gives a pretty good review of the meeting unless you are anti lap dance
So, the Socialist Workers Party is involved with the Say ‘NO’ campaign – why does that come as absolutely no surprise?
If people in Tower Hamlets want to know the real deal about striptease in east London, they’d be far better off reading this article than listening to anything the Say ‘NO’ campaign has to tell them:
http://spitalfieldslife.com/2010/09/03/the-strippers-of-shoreditch-2/
If people in Tower Hamlets want to know the real deal about striptease in east London, they’d be far better off reading this article than listening to anything the Say ‘NO’ campaign has to tell them:
http://spitalfieldslife.com/2010/09/03/the-strippers-of-shoreditch-2/
(NB: Some images which accompany the article are NSFW)
Let’s see…the online consultation closed on the 17th of October, but Tower Hamlets Council have yet to publish the results. What exactly is it that Mayor Rahman and his stooges have to hide.
There’s a conflict of interest scenario emerging, regarding one of the organisers of the Say ‘NO’ campaign – watch this space!
What is this because? I do look here no good what is this shit no good no good
Apparently, Tower Hamlets Council is delaying the results of the consultation due to ‘irregularities’ with the data, and is hiring in an outside ‘Forensic Data Company’ to reanalyse the results.
Hmm – it that the whiff of Old Billingsgate Market I can smell…? 😉
As for the conflict of interest…let’s just say that it has to do with the owner of 21 Whitechapel Road.
CAPE – Campaign Against People Exploitation or Campaign to Augment Property Earnings?
I live near Tower Hamlets and will be saddened if the Council decides to to close down these venues.
I have never been to any of these venues, and don’t have any intention to do so. However, I feel blessed to live in a places where different groups of people can express themselves differently and in their own ways.
It is VERY important that we as a multicultural society respect the different ways of lives – as long as it doesn’t stop us from expressing ourselves.
These venues do not stop other people going about their ways of lives.
We need to tolerate and celebrate the differences amongst us.
I am Muslim, but I do not want to live where other people’s choices are restricted.
That could create trouble and prove a divisive issue.
Although we live in democracy,we also need to protect differing ways of lives within us. Otherwise, democracy could easily degenerate into tribalism, where the absolute biggest group takes control.
We often here talks of inclusivity within our society, I fear that this closure if goes ahead signifies refusal of our society to co-exist.
The biggest trouble within our society is not the strip clubs, but segregations, youth employments, racial discourse etc – and strip clubs are not the causes if these troubles, not would closing them solve these issues. In fact, I for one would feel like liberty is at risk should Tower Hamlets decide to close down these places.
A whole YEAR has now passed since the consultation closed, yet the council STILL hasn’t announced the results – is that some kind of record?