As one of the promoters of the club night Endorphine Visions, I was fascinated to see that a woman was going to attend a Brighton nightclub wearing nothing but UV reactive paint as a protest against the imminent Gulf War II.

I wonder if Brighton police's licensing officer was aware of this impending breach of public decency and whether she will put as much effort and professionalism into that matter as she did in implicating the loss of this city's longest-running fetish club?

Another interesting article caught my eye - the sex-toy vending machine installed in a Hove nightclub (The Argus, February 28), the very same nightclub that was prepared to host Endorphine Visions until it was "advised" by the police licensing officer that, because it had a 50-year-old condition on its licence that prohibited the sale of alcohol to anyone wearing a "bathing costume", it may be contravening its licence if it were to host Endorphine Visions.

I do not think many people would be going out on a February night wearing just a pair of Speedos and I have not noticed a revival in Victorian-style striped swimsuits.

When are this city's police going to realise the date is 2003 and they have the responsibility to police and protect the population of the UK's most diverse city and put their own prejudices and blinkered outlooks aside and get on with the job in hand?

We constantly hear the police are undermanned and overworked. They oppose the opening of a new nightclub on Brighton seafront and give the reason as they cannot cope with the added number of people in the city.

This is a holiday and university city with a huge young population yet the public face of Brighton and Hove's police is the second-in-command waving an infantile Valentine's Day card that was used to harass someone who had served his debt to society. This is obviously where our council tax is used.

I would like to invite, publicly, Brighton and Hove's police to state what people can and cannot wear when they go out to a club in the city since this seems to be one of their priorities.

By presenting a petition to Brighton and Hove City Council regarding the transgender shop in Portslade, Councillor Heather James is not supporting a "transphobic campaign" ("Think pink", Letters, February 26).

"Trans-suffragettes" Zoe, Valerie and Stella display a shocking lack of understanding in thinking so.

Coun James, like all other councillors, is duty-bound to present any petition from residents in her ward, regardless of whether she supports the content or not (and friends tell me she did not personally agree with the content of that petition).

Her following letter to The Argus regarding the issue merely stated her visit to the shop and did not express any transphobia.

I took her letter to be implicit in its support of diversity in the community. I should imagine Coun James would be extremely upset to be portrayed as transphobic.

Her confusion of sexuality and gender identity is quite acceptable.

Who, apart from those with a particular interest, would be able to comprehensively understand the tangle of sexual identity, sexual preference and gender and then be able to express them simply to as diverse a readership as The Argus audience?

It is not a simple thing to appreciate and I am sure Coun James meant no offence.

I am sure Zoe, Valerie and Stella have a good point to make about the public's poor appreciation of these issues but to target Coun James is pretty mean and actually misses the point.

Brighton and Hove is a mixed and tolerant place but trans-suffragette city it ain't - yet!

-James Lyddiard, Portland Road, Hove