I have tons of stuff on this as we have recently had 4 SEV applications in Bristol.
If you want to pm me, I can send some documents through by e-mail.
Below is an excerpt from Bristol Fawcett's objection to an SEV licence. The gaps in the text are where references are. I can send the whole document (with others) through by e-mail.
"In 2005, the Child and Woman Abuse Study Unit at London Metropolitan University were commissioned by Glasgow City Council to review lap dancing and table dancing clubs. Their study concludes that there is evidence that activities within lap dancing clubs are in direct contradiction with equality between men and women, and normalise men?s sexual objectification of women.
When women are valued for their supposed sex appeal this is at the expense of their other attributes and qualities (aka sexual objectification, as encouraged by and practised in SEVs) and it acts to reinforce gender inequality . Sexual objectification dehumanises women . Male domestic violence offenders using the sex industry use more forms of aggressive violence and more controlling behaviours than those who do not use the sex industry . After being exposed to images that sexually objectify women, men are significantly more accepting of sexual harassment, interpersonal violence, rape myths, and sex role stereotypes ? all of which act to reinforce gender inequality . Importantly, this increased acceptance of harmful attitudes is not confined to particular women but generalises to women as a group. Objections such as this which cite evidence of harmful attitudes to women and gender inequality arising from commercialised sexual objectification are not employing ?moral? arguments but are foregrounding issues of equality, human rights and public policy.
It may be argued that a small number of women or perhaps a very small number of men will ?benefit? from self-employment as performers if this licence application is granted given the potential earnings available. However there is evidence that working in the sex industry also exerts a toll in terms of impact on spending habits, drug or alcohol abuse, exposure to assault, and psychological well-being . This is not to single out particular performers in this particular establishment, but to make clear that even claims about ?benefit? to the small number of performers in a club are questionable. Otherwise, ?benefit? in the form of financial profit accrues to the owners of the premises.
If it is being claimed that the potential customers who would pay for a sexual experience under the terms of this proposed licence would ?benefit? then the benefit is only that they would be able to purchase sexual gratification and that they would be able to exercise a sense of entitlement to women?s bodies ? both of these ?benefits? are deeply problematic and research shows us that they are to the detriment of women and to gender equality. So the council must ask itself whether the ?benefits? to customers - who could enjoy a night out at the same premises without SEV taking place, in the absence of an SEV licence - outweigh the detriment to women and to the local and wider community.
The Royal Town Planning Institute guide on Gender and Spatial Planning says that ?lap dancing and exotic dancing clubs make women feel threatened or uncomfortable?. There is no mitigation for the feelings of threat, unease and degradation felt by the numerous women who live and work in Bristol and who find the operation of the commercial sexual objectification of women on the high street abhorrent; threatening to their personal safety; and/or an affront to equality."