Some members of the public will be given a greater say on whether table-dancing clubs are given licences under new plans unveiled
by the Scottish Government.
Ministers will consult on proposals to establishnew licensing restrictions for sexual entertainment venues. The Government said the consultation also seeks specific views on whether licensing authorities should be able to totally ban such venues.
The Government is launching the consultation after similar plans were rejected in the last Parliament.
The move has the support of MSPs and gender extremists. The Women's Support Project in Glasgow said:
This move recognises that what is for sale on premises is sexual arousal and such premises should have their own specific license and no longer fall in the same category as leisure or entertainment venues.
This move also provides better consistency with the overall approach in Scotland which sees lap dancing as a form of exploitation and helps support a culture in which women are viewed in narrow and objectifying ways.
'Justice' Secretary Kenny MacAskill claimed:
This consultation seeks views on proposals that will give licensing authorities the powers to reflect local views and control the presence and operation of such venues in their areas.
These venues undoubtedly divide opinion. However, the proposed licensing regime is about ensuring the safety and protection of customers and workers while making sure the interests of local communities are protected.
The newspaper chose not to include opinions from the venues, employees or customers.
The Scottish Government have launched a consultation on the introduction of sexual entertainment licensing.
If enacted the legislation would effectively allow councils to close down strip clubs, under the guise of protecting people.
Consultation on Regulation of Sexual Entertainment Venues
A consulation on proposals to establish a dedicated licensing system for venues offering sexual entertainments such as lap dancing. A robust licensing system will allow local communities a greater say over the nature of actvities that take place in their
ATVOD's chief censor says he's in discussions with processors about blocking payments to non-U.K. websites that
offer hardcore porn.
Peter Johnson, who leads the British Video On Demand censor, claimed that websites that offer hardcore porn outside of restricted sections, without rigorous age-verification barriers, could be violation of the U.K.'s Obscene Publications Act and be
operating illegally in the country.
However it seems entirely ludicrous that viewing depictions of such a commonplace and normal activity as sex could 'deprave and corrupt' children. They are well prepared for sex via sex education, endless discussions in the media, not to mention sex
being a top topic of conversation in just about every classroom in the country.
The ongoing debate has featured the subject in great detail lately, and most commentators seem concerned by the more realistic worries that multi partner sex, and particularly rough sex featured in some material, are not great sex education lessons for
kids. But few are suggesting that such harms go as far as to 'deprave and corrupt' children as required to breach the Obscene Publications Act.
And of course if the kids were being depraved and corrupted, then we would realise by now, because apparently most of the kids have already seen it anyway. Crime rates are falling in Britain, hardly evidence of this supposed mass corruption.
Johnson claimed at last week's Westminster forum debate, presumably addressing foreign businesses:
If you're offering [hardcore porn] in your shop window, you're breaking U.K. law. Even if you're not in the U.K., you're breaking U.K. law because our children can access it.
Therefore your shop is trading illegally. Therefore funds should not be flowing from the U.K. to your shop, because your shop is fundamentally operating in an unlawful capacity.
According to Wired, Johnson mentioned one porn site as a target, Manwin's PornHub.com. Johnson said that this site offers hardcore pornographic content freely without age-verification barriers, including credit card, passport or driving license checks.
The free stuff is the shop window, he said, referring to PornHub's opening web page.
I can't imagine the payment companies are very impressed by being asked to police internet porn, especially on such a flimsy legal case. Every nutter in the world would clamour for them to ban payments to their pet hates.
Millions of people enjoy porn, the world isn't ending, crime rates are falling, yet gender extremist Gail Dines is 'outraged' that some academics are seeking to publish porn research that isn't dogmatically anti-porn
Interesting piece by Carole Cadwalladr. In many respects, it's fair-minded and makes some effort at balance, even if she does seem a bit naive in being shocked that a Google search for rape porn turned up, err, rape porn. I quite like Cadwalladr,
who seems a much more grounded writer that some of the scribblers at the Graun and Obs who identify themselves as feminists.
To what extent the anti-porn writers on the Graun titles really are feminists I'm not sure. To my mind, there doesn't seem to be much feminism about a mindset which insists upon seeing women as permanent little girls who need protecting . The
blinkers seem to stay on even when they encounter, say, Dr Brooke Magnanti or the feisty ladies in the Max Mosley hanky-spanky case. Mr Justice Eady's order notwithstanding, the names by which they are known on the BDSM scene are pretty widely known. Woman D
, for instance, has completed her doctoral thesis but continues to work as a professional submissive (now also branching out as a dom) and as one of the big names in spanking erotica. Presumably she finds it a better earner than organic chemistry.
Maybe a progressive newspaper might take more interest in wages in the research sector so crap that a Ph.D. prefers to turn a copper having her arse spanked.
Dines' predictable whinge takes your breath away. One of the editorial board has actually worked in porn. Shock! Horror!!! Pass the smelling salts!!!!!! In my own field of expertise, industrial relations, it's not unknown for journals to be edited by,
and publish articles by, academics who have been, or are still, engaged practically as HR managers or trade union officials. The British Medical Journal does from time to time publish articles by people who have dispensed a pill or removed an appendix.
Some academic articles on the Dangerous Pictures Act in academic legal journals are written by lawyers who have prosecuted or defended such cases. If I wished to find out more about spanking porn, I think I would learn more from Woman D, with Ph.D. in
chemistry but plenty of experience, than from Prof. Dines with her apparently more relevant academic qualifications.
Licensees are warned following the conviction of Tony Bowman for knowingly allowing hands-on lap dancing to take place in breach
of miserable licensing conditions.
The case centred on the operation of the Divas Lap Dancing Club during 2011 up until the premises licence was revoked by Plymouth City Council Licensing Sub-Committee in January 2012.
The supposed offences centred around a condition on the premises licence which prohibited Any form of Physical contact between the customer and the dancer...
Acting Inspector Martin Worthington of Force Alcohol Licensing and Crime Reduction Team said:
This is not the first time an adult entertainment establishment has fallen foul of conditions prohibiting physical contact between dancers and customers. We work in partnership with Licensees to ensure that business operate so as to promote the licensing
objectives. We make regular checks to ensure that all licence holders adhere to the conditions of the premises licence and where appropriate the police Local Authority and other responsible authorities are prepared to take further action to ensure these
standards are maintained including utilsing the Criminal Justice System where appropriate.
Bowman was sentenced to an £ 800 fine, £ 620 costs and £ 15 victim surcharge including the forfeiture of his personal licence.
A proposed new name for a Leeds table dancing club could inflict moral or psychological harm on children, licensing
officials ludicrously claim.
Owners of the Black Diamond club, on New Briggate in the city centre, have applied to Leeds City Council to double the size of the premises, from two floors to four. They also want to rename it Tantric Blue .
But the council's own licensing department has now criticised the application -- because the suggested new name would undermine the requirement to protect children from harm. In a letter of objection, the department spewed:
Whilst 'Tantric' is linked to spiritualism and certain religious practices, for the purpose of a lap dancing venue it takes on another interpretation and associates the premises with sexual practice.
The licensing authority is of the opinion that the name of the premises has the potential to cause moral and/or psychological harm to children as well as offence and embarrassment to parents when visiting the city with children.
The sub-committee is due to make a decision at a meeting on 10th June.
Internet pornography is usually abusive and often violent. Mark Bridger, convicted yesterday of the murder of April Jones, had compiled a store of it. Pornography is easily and freely accessible, and at most requires only a credit card. The link between
such material and violence, most commonly against women and children, is not quite beyond dispute -- occasional studies claim there is, as one headline had it, a sunny side to smut. But there is strong evidence that at the very least it is addictive, can
normalise violence, and at the same time diminishes sympathy for its victims. It is a kind of incitement to hate. It should be banned. But that is easier to say than to do.
A few hours later the Guardian edited the leader to retract from the 'all porn should be banned' and to call for a ban on 'abusive and violent porn'. But as the article opens with 'porn is usually abusive', then the edit makes little difference.
Update: The Guardian explains that it doesn't seek to ban porn
Internet pornography is sometimes abusive and often violent. Mark Bridger, convicted yesterday of the murder of April Jones, had compiled a store of it. Violent pornography is easily and freely accessible, and at most requires only a credit card. The
link between such material and actual violence, most commonly against women and children, is disputed -- occasional studies claim there is, as one headline had it, a sunny side to smut. But there is strong evidence that at the very least it is addictive,
can normalise violence, and at the same time diminishes sympathy for its victims. It is a kind of incitement to hate. Abusive and violent pornography should be banned. But that is easier to say than to do.
The NSPCC said there was a worrying link between his looking at indecent images online and the crime he went on to commit.
It called for effective measures to curb the ease with which extreme pornography and indecent images of children can be accessed.
End Violence Against Women
The End Violence Against Women (EVAW) coalition wrote to the Prime Minister, David Cameron, calling for a change in the law to close a loophole that allows some simulated images of rape.
A spokesman for Rape Crisis, a campagn group, said: Our concern is that given current legal loopholes, similar men using pornography simulating acts of sexual violence including rape, child sexual abuse and incest, would not be committing an offence
under existing extreme pornography legislation.
Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre
Jim Gamble went on FiveLive demanding that CEOPs role and budget be dramatically expanded.
John Carr of UKCISS wants people to register to view porn
But John Carr, a member of the government's Council on Child Internet Safety, has suggested Google could do more.
They could for example turn safe search on by default. That would block access to all hardcore porn sites.
Google could set it up in such a way they'd have to register with them to get an account. They could ask them to verify if they're 18 or above. That would be a huge deterrent for many of these guys. That would stop them getting on the pathway to child
abuse images we've been discussing.
Carr said being forced to register to view pornography would act as a significant deterrent to paedophiles, who use mainstream pornographic websites advertising barely legal or teen sex images as a gateway for illegal material.
They will eventually get to places where the images are, he added.
Blocking access or putting any kind of barriers to sites like that would help reduce the number of guys who get involved with this stuff in the first place.
Daily Mail always likes to big up any film connections
When police searched Bridger's cottage they found that he had been watching a brutal rape scene from the 2009 re-make of the slasher film, The Last House on the Left.
He had recorded the scene where a young teenage girl is raped by the leader of a gang in front of his watching gangmates, some of whom help to hold the victim down while she is being attacked.
Police then discovered that the murderer recorded the rape scene for a second time when the film was repeated on a +1 channel an hour later. Horror: Police outside Bridger's white-washed cottage, where he watched violent films and child pornography
before he murdered April
Horror: Police outside Bridger's white-washed cottage, where he watched violent films and child pornography before he murdered April
Elwen Evans QC, for the prosecution, said given what happened in that room, the discovery was significant and Bridger must have watched the scene not long before whatever happened to April took place.
She added: This is not just the playing of a rape scene on television. That particular rape scene had been recorded twice. A deliberate action to capture the most distressing aspect.'
Editors Feona Attwood (Middlesex University) and Clarissa Smith (University of Sunderland), and Routledge publishers have announced the launch of a new journal devoted to the study of pornography.
Porn Studies is the first dedicated, international, peer-reviewed journal to critically explore those cultural products and services designated as pornographic and their cultural, economic, historical, institutional, legal and social contexts.
Porn Studies will publish innovative work examining specifically sexual and explicit media forms, their connections to wider media landscapes and their links to the broader spheres of (sex) work across historical periods and national contexts.
Porn Studies is an interdisciplinary journal informed by critical sexuality studies and work exploring the intersection of sexuality, gender, race, class, age and ability. It focuses on developing knowledge of pornographies past and present, in all their
variations and around the world. Because pornography studies are still in their infancy we are also interested in discussions that focus on theoretical approaches, methodology and research ethics. Alongside articles, the journal includes a forum devoted
to shorter observations, developments, debates or issues in porn studies, designed to encourage exchange and debate.
Update: Gender extremists attempt to censor anyone that disagrees with their miserable views
A group calling itself Stop Porn Culture has initiated a petition calling on Routledge publishers to pull out of publishing the journal, Porn Studies, in its current setup. The group writes:
We understand that Routledge is scheduled to publish a new journal, Porn Studies. While we agree that pornography and porn culture demand and deserve more critical attention, as a group of academics, activists, anti-violence experts, health
professionals, and educators, we are deeply concerned about the journal's intention and focus and about its editorial board, which is uniformly pro-porn.
Routledge is in a position of authority, and framing the editorial experts on porn as pro-porn under the auspices of neutrality (which is what the journal title does) further fosters the normalization of porn and misrepresents the academic,
political and ideological debates about the issue. The composition of the editorial board (at least thus far) risks marginalizing any critical or anti porn position.
Given this, we have three questions:
In what ways and to what extent, if any, will this journal feature essays which represent an array of perspectives on the complex and vexed issues concerning pornography and porn culture?;
How likely is it that diverse perspectives will be represented, given that the editorial board has a pro-porn academic record?' and
What might Routledge do to address this bias?
In the interest of academic integrity and thorough critical inquiry, it is imperative that a journal titled Porn Studies creates space for critical analyses of porn from diverse and divergent perspectives. Our hope is that you will change the composition
of the editorial board, confirm the journal's commitment to a heterogeneous interrogation of the issues embedded in porn and porn culture, and ensure that diverse perspectives are represented -- on the board and also in the essays published in the
journal. Failing that, we ask that you change the name to reflect and make evident the bias of its editors (Pro-Porn Studies) and create another journal which will represent the position of anti-porn scholars and activists and the voices of mental health
professionals, porn industry survivors, and feminist scholars whose analyses examine the replication and reification of misogyny, child abuse, and sexual exploitation in mainstream pornography (for instance, Critical Porn Studies).