I'll put my opinion, which I note lots of contributors haven't. I think the application should be rejected. Not because I'm a prude but I just think its in an inappropriate place and, incidentally, I think the various bits of the Diocese of Southwark have not only the right but an obligation to object.
If they wanted to put it in, say, the bits of Soho where the sex industry is most public then fine, I have no problem with that. It fits with most large European cities and it works OK in the main. I've been to most and live sex shows are'nt the worst things in the world to go and see, but you tend to get them in areas where it is clear what is going on. Mixing this stuff up with hoards of kids queueing for the dungeon or people out for the evening for a stroll and a meal at the restaurants around will cause some problems I think.
My final point is about the planning process. If it is approved, first, it will be a hell of job to get it shutdown if there are any problems, and the problems will have to be more than "a fetish club near my house/business because it's noisy and its visitors take antisocial behaviour into the streets". And, second, to echo one of the points above, it would be difficult to prevent similar places getting permission once this one was running. Is that what you really want??
I agree with TLMJJ and Tom - I want the proposal rejected too.
Whatever the seedy history of Bankside yester-year - Wicked is clearly in an inappropriate location to support these kinds of activities.
In the earliest of threads regarding Wicked, the Sheridans defended their fetish nights as being discreet and having discerning guests (rubber SM gear hidden under overcoat until behind closed doors etc).
I'm concerned that if this club gets the go-ahead, this will change for the worse into one of the Soho-type hang-outs with half-naked girls standing in the doorway encouraging clientele in. No doubt, the porn shops and drug dealers and thieves will follow...
IMO, this type of club should be kept in Soho where it belongs, and where it is known and easier to control.
The lap-dancing/stripping thing was a new side of the argument to me. In all the previous arguments this has not been stressed at all. It's taken LMJJ (thanks) to point that out. The other arguments against it were mixing anti-stripper with anti-private club, and as a result seemed to be a bit jumbled IMO
I can now understand why everyone's so worked up about it. I think I agree with objections to Bankside's own Spearmint Rhino.
I have to admit, I was much more interested in a debate on the S&M/members' clubs side of things. I couldn't understand why there was so much indignation about people getting up to whatever in private.
I don't see what harm it can do. It's hardly the same as the knocking shops and branches of Anne Summer that line the streets of Soho.
It is a nightclub and those that would be attending would be consenting adults after all and I am sure that members of the public would be safer outside Wicked than they would outside the Union Jack on Union Street at 11pm on a Friday night.
You live in London. a cosmopolitain city with a diverse mix of people and cultures. If you are going to get prissy about some people wearing a bit of rubber to a nightclub, then maybe the Hampshire countryside is more suited to you.
There are plenty of gay and straight fetish clubs in the Vauxhall area and their prescence there in the last ten years has contributed to the regeneration of the area.
Borough already has the more sanitised attractions like Clink Street and the sweet but hugely overated Borough Market. If SE1 is not careful, it could end up like Chiswick High Road with its many StarBucks and Coffee Republics. The gay XXL club which is alongside Borough market has a naughty side to it but it certainly has not brought down the area in any way during the last four years. In fact, quite the opposite.
Im not sure that this has to be a country vs town debate as the recent press attention towards 'dogging' shows that geographical location doesn't determine what you (or your family) might see whilst walking around your neighbourhood.
My main objection wicked being approved is that there is a massive difference between people having sex and the sex industry. I agree with LM Jo Jo's comments about where things might lead and in short the sex industry involves people paying for others to be used and abused.
I don't have any problems with it. I would have more of a problem if they wanted to site a brothel there but not a private club with consenting adults as customers. How it is marketed and promoted would need to be looked into, you wouldn't want people touting for business on the streets.