The musings of a UK based 30-something gay

Dear my young self…

July 31, 2011

I noticed a tweet today with a hashtag of #dearyoungself and begun to think about what I’d say to my younger self.  The tweet that I came up with read:

Your parents won’t disown you and the friends that count will still be there.  It gets much, much, much better.  Come out.

The tweet had also reminded me of a book at the end of last year entitled Dear Me: A Letter to My Sixteen-Year-Old Self, and it got me to thinking what exactly I would say to my sixteen-year-old self (if not restricted to 140 characters).  So, here it is:

Dear Andy,

I’m 20 years older than you now, so thought maybe I should let you have some words of wisdom:

  1. No, you’re not bisexual.  I know you think that there might be one special girl out there that will make you go weak at the knees, but it ain’t gonna happen.  As much as you try, it’s only going to make you feel worse about yourself and will lead you to the darkest of places.
  2. In a year or two, you’re going to meet ‘him’.  Believe me, you’ll know him when you meet him.  You’ll fall in love with him, and he’ll completely screw you up.  I’m not going to deny you your first experiences, but if you do go down that route, keep in mind that there’s only one person that he really gives much thought to, and it’s never going to be you.  And, if you really can’t resist, don’t let it push you firmly to the very back of the closet when he destroys you.  It’s him, not you.
  3. Food is not your friend.  You may think that it makes you feel better, but believe me it won’t in the long run.  You’ll put on weight slowly and steadily and before you know it you’ll be 22 stone and faced with a very long and hard struggle to get rid of it (believe me,  at 36 you’re still battling).
  4. Talk to your brother.  You’ll find out that you’ve got a similar sense of humour and he can be one of the best friends you’ll ever need.
  5. Don’t spend too much money.  Save it and use it wisely.  There’s lots of things that you can do with it, and you don’t need to buy every single movie you’ve ever seen on video and then DVD.
  6. Sing, act and write.  You could be really good if you worked at it.
  7. Keep in touch with the people that matter.  You’ll make some great friends over the years, so don’t let them slip away.
  8. You’re not destined to be alone.  It might take a while, but you will find someone who you love and loves you back.
  9. In your first year at university you’ll meet someone called Greg who will be somewhat older than you.  Don’t be tempted.  You can do much, much, much, much, much, much better.
  10. And yes, come out.  It won’t be the end of the world and you’ll be much, much happier.  If you don’t believe me, read below and see what happened when you did come out.

If you do decided to ignore all of the above, don’t worry too much.  Everything that we’ve done and everything that has happened has made us who we are today, and I think we’ve done alright.

Above all though, remember this - Love yourself and everything else will fall into place.

Oh and in the words of RuPaul:

“Don’t fuck it up!”
Andy x

Category:

coming out, family, growing up, pride

2 Comments

Tagged with:

My coming out – from my perspective and that of my parents

February 21, 2011

The Lesbian and Gay Foundation (LGF) have recently published their guide for parents and families of lesbian, gay, bisexual or questioning people – “Our Kids are Alright”.  While they were putting this guide together, they were looking for people to give their perspectives, either as a gay person, or from the parents of gay people that might want to share their own experiences. 

I therefore asked my parents if they would contribute, which they agreed they would.  The LGF had to edit what we wrote down to fit into the guide, so I thought that this would be the perfect place to post the full text.  Obviously my words are my own, but I’ve also not edited what my parents wrote.

The guide is available to download from the LGF website here.

My story

I first knew that I had gay feelings when I was 14, but I didn’t come out until I was 24.  For 10 years I managed to lie to myself and those around me, pretty successfully it seems as most people were quite surprised when I eventually did come out.  But then fear can make you achieve a lot.

My family and friends never gave me any impression that they were homophobic but I was absolutely convinced that, if I admitted to myself, my friends and my family that I was gay, I would lose everything.  I’d heard homophobic language directed at me and other kids at school, and representations on television weren’t exactly encouraging.  There were no out gay kids at school, and I didn’t know any adults who were gay either.  Because of Section 28, homosexuality was never even mentioned at school, so as far as I was concerned it was only a handful of people that felt the same way as me.  I therefore believed that being gay was something to be completely ashamed of and hidden at all costs. 

When I was 19, a friend of a friend from my school came out, and he and his boyfriend turned up at the pub one night.  By then, I had managed to convince myself that I was at most bisexual, and that I would eventually meet a girl who would change everything, take all these weird feelings away, and let me lead a completely normal, happy life.  I therefore didn’t relate to them in a way that I could have, and blocked out any possibility of taking solace or comfort from knowing someone else like me.

In the winter of 1999, when I was 24, I bumped into the now ex-boyfriend of the friend of a friend from school.  I had gone into a gay pub near where I lived and, at first, didn’t recognise him at all.  After we’d chatted for a while he said, “You don’t remember me do you?”  I nervously admitted that I didn’t, and then he said, “You live in Bracknell don’t you?”  As I panicked he told me who he was and, noticing my reaction, he assured me that he wasn’t going to say anything.  We carried on talking and I told him that I was bisexual, and that I would meet a girl as I at this point believed.  He then asked me the question that made me think: “What if you don’t?”

Over the next few months my head was all over the place as I started to come to terms with being gay.  In the January of 2000 I came out to some friends that I’d had from University, who were all very supportive.  Following that, I then ended up coming out to my brother and friends from home in the pub.  I then met up with my brother the next week to talk things over a bit more.  From memory I told him that I might be gay, giving myself the opportunity to run back into the closet if the reaction was bad.  He tells me now that he is sorry for the way that he reacted when I first came out to him, but I honestly don’t remember anything bad about it.  He asked me questions, and I answered them as honestly as I felt able.

The one thing I do remember is when he asked me what I would do about telling my parents.  My first reaction was that I would only tell them if there had been a reason to do so, such as if I met someone.  My brother pointed out that, since I had now told friends who knew my parents, it would only take someone bumping into them in the street and letting something slip for them to find out.  Knowing that he was right, I realised that I would have to tell them.  In fact, I ended up leaving my brother and heading straight over to their house. 

The whole process of coming out to my friends at University, and then friends at home and my brother had been just over a week.  Although I had received nothing but support from everyone I’d told I was still petrified about telling my parents.  I’d heard coming out stories that ended with parents disowning their children and never talking to them again.  I also still believed myself that being gay was something to be ashamed of, and the last thing I wanted was for them to be ashamed of me, or disappointed in any way.

When I arrived at my parents’ house I discovered that Dad was late back from work.  I told Mum that I was fine when she asked how I was, but she saw right through it and asked me what had happened.  My insisting that it was nothing and that we should wait for Dad just made matters worse, so I ended up telling her first.  Again, I said that I thought I might be gay, giving myself a back-out plan.  She hugged me, told me that it didn’t matter to her so long as I was happy, and that everything would be fine. 

Dad then came home shortly afterwards, and could obviously see something was up (possibly by the fact that Mum had switched off EastEnders!)  Once more I said that I thought I might be gay, and promptly burst into tears.  He stood up and said, “Well anything that means that I don’t have to babysit grandchildren is a bonus for me!”  He then gave me a hug and reiterated what my Mum had said; that as long as I was happy it didn’t matter.  We chatted some more afterwards, and then I left them to let the news sink in. 

It may sound like a cliché but, as I drove home that evening, I really did feel like a weight had been lifted off of my shoulders.  Regardless of what happened now, people knew and there was no going back.  Even though I’d had a good reaction from everyone, I was still worried that things might change once they’d had a chance to think about it more.  But there was nothing I could do about that now.

In the months and years that have followed, the reactions haven’t changed.  The people that I cared about most didn’t change their opinion about me, and it got easier and easier to be myself.  Once I got into a relationship my family were very welcoming and supportive, and have made him feel like part of the family.  I am now more comfortable in my own skin than I have ever been.  I don’t have to hide myself away and I don’t have to pretend to be something I’m not, and this has made relationships with everyone I know stronger and deeper.

Everyone’s situation is different, and the decision of whether to come out, or how and when to do it must be completely yours.  I can only give my take on how it happened to me.  I know how scary the prospect can be, and it is easy to think that everyone will react badly.  10 years of lying to myself, my family and my friends left lasting scars, and it took me a while to feel comfortable with myself even after I came out.  I have faced a few negative reactions over the years, but in the majority of cases it hasn’t mattered at all.  Those people who do have a problem with gay people are, thankfully, now in the minority.  It is their problem, not ours.

I have often said that I don’t regret anything in my life, as every event has made me the person that I am proud of today.  In reality though there is only one thing I regret; that I didn’t come out earlier.

There’s a reason that they call it being in the closet.  When you’re in the closet you’re trapped, it’s dark and it’s scary.  Opening those doors is a big step, but it might just be the best and most important step that you’ll ever take in your life.

My Dad’s story

Our Son Andrew is 35.  Back in the late 90’s he was starting to make his way in the world.  We were immensely proud of him – he was the first family member to go through University and get a degree, he was a kind, sociable and considerate person and (in our view) a credit to the way we had raised him.  He appeared to have a number of girl ‘friends’ but nothing regular, just a number of different faces from time to time.  One evening I arrived home from work to find my Wife and Son sitting in the lounge.  I knew immediately something was up – my Wife simply saying that there was something Andrew wanted to talk to us about.

A typical Father, I suppose, I started to think it was financial difficulties, some form of driving offence, or, maybe one of those ‘girl friends’ was slightly more than just a ‘friend’ and was pregnant (speaking to my Wife after she confirmed similar thoughts).  It was clear Andrew was finding it difficult to tell us, whatever ‘it’ was.  He was uncomfortable and hesitant (not at all like him!).  You can imagine our collective surprise when Andrew finally told us he was gay.

I still don’t think we can really remember what happened next.  I don’t think we reacted badly; we didn’t get angry – I think it was just so far from what we thought our Son would be telling us that it took a while to fully sink in.  We talked for a few hours and then Andrew left to go back to his flat.  My Wife and I indulged in a stiff drink and then talked for a further couple of hours.  We were shocked, we were surprised but at NO stage did either of us feel in anyway ashamed, uncomfortable or disgusted.  We were both concerned about the life style Andrew had chosen – even now there is a bad reaction from parts of our society toward the gay community.

We talked about the news on and off for a while and then over a short period of time it became less of a ‘talking point’ and more of everyday life.  Andrew, at time of telling us, was not in a regular relationship.  Eventually he told us he had met someone and effectively had a partner.  We eventually met Paul – all slightly nervous I suspect but I hope we made him feel welcome within our family.  Andrew and Paul are still together, are very happy and when we meet up it is the most natural of feelings and situations.  Our eldest Son is also very comfortable with his brother’s arrangement and life style (has been from day one) and if anything the bond between them is stronger now than at any previous time.

Have we simply accepted our Son’s choice? – definitely not!  It is not about acceptance – acceptance suggests that you are coming to terms with something that is wrong or unacceptable.  I’d like to think we’ve embraced our Son’s choice, embraced his life style and whilst recognising that the road he is travelling will not be easy that it is HIS road, HIS life and HIS choice.

We said at the start that back in the late 90’s we were immensely proud of our Son and that he was a “kind, sociable and considerate person”.  Over ten years later Andrew is still our Son, we are still immensely proud of him, we love him, we support him and feel very, very fortunate that he felt able to come to us and tell us he was gay.  Andrew is still the same person he has always been – sexuality doesn’t make a person, it is their individual contribution to life, society and family that defines who they are and the mark they leave.

Presumptive, we know but if we can give a small piece of advice based on our experience.  Only in sci-fi films or books do people change before your very eyes.  Telling you that their sexual preferences may not be what are considered ‘normal’ does not change the person standing in front of you, someone who has been your Daughter or Son for all those years.  Just like with Andrew – he is our Son; we love him as we have always done; if possible we are even more proud of him now and he is leaving lasting footprints as he makes his way through life.

So, he is gay – so what?

Footnote from my Mum

I wholeheartedly agree with my husband’s comments above.  Yes, it was a surprise when Andrew told us that he was gay; but never in any way or form did it adversely change our feelings for him.  You cannot choose your sexuality any more than you can choose the colour of your eyes and I cannot understand why anyone would feel differently for a Son or Daughter once they “came out.”  BOTH of our Sons are extremely important to us and we love both of them completely and unconditionally.  Nothing can ever change that.

Andrew and Paul make a super couple.  They care deeply about each other and that much is apparent.  I wish them all the happiness in the world.

Category:

coming out, family, pride

1 Comment

Tagged with:

An open response to Edward Leigh MP

February 18, 2011

On his website, Edward Leigh has posted a statement regarding the current debate around Same Sex Marriages and Civil Partnerships. If you do want to read it, you can here. Unsurprisingly, Mr Leigh doesn’t allow comments on his posts, so I am writing this response here.

Mr Leigh does say that it is right that homosexual people should be allowed to get on with their lives, but apparently not to the same extent as straight people. He is concerned that allowing gay marriage will ‘mangle the language of marriage’ and that apparently this is for a tiny number of gay people who prefer marriage to civil partnership.

On some levels he is right, there are a number of gay people who do want to retain civil partnerships for gay people, and not have full gay marriage. However, from my experience and from recent polls, it is them who are in the minority. The majority of gay people that I know would much rather have full gay marriage, a view which is backed up by Stonewall’s recent poll of their supporters which resulted in them also joining the fight for gay marriage.

Mr Leigh is concerned that the traditional view of a marriage will be done away with. Unfortunately though, the ‘traditional’ view of marriage is not as clear cut as it seems. Some 300 years ago, the Church solemnised same-sex marriages and mixed-sex marriages on equal terms. These ceremonies did not mention children, but were otherwise exactly the same. The service for such unions followed directly on from the mixed-sex service. So which is the ‘traditional’ view?

And what about the traditional view of marriage that two people want to express their love and commitment to each other? Why is that not available to gay people? Mr Leigh suggests that this is due to the fact that two people of the same sex cannot conceive children, and this is the purpose of marriage. By this rationale, then an elderly widow and an elderly widower who fall in love should also be prevented from getting ‘married’, as well as any unfortunate person who, for whatever reason, finds themselves infertile. Does this also mean that a man and woman who want to adopt or foster children should also be prevented from getting married?

One argument to this is that children develop and perform better when they are raised by a man and a woman. Recent research from a number of sources begs to differ. Children raised by two men have been shown to perform and develop in exactly the same way as children raised by a man and a woman. Children raised by two women on the other hand, have been shown to outperform those raised by a man and a woman or two men. And for those wondering, children raised by same-sex couples are no more likely to grow up gay.

Mr Leigh also suggests that allowing gay marriage will lead to three people getting married, or thirty-three. There is nothing that suggests this, so this appears to be scaremongering tactics to try and belittle gay marriage. If gay people are allowed to marry, then this is still only one person marrying another. We’re not asking to be allowed to marry 3 different boyfriends.

To return to an earlier point, Mr Leigh suggests that a minority of gay people want gay marriage and therefore the law should not be changed to satisfy the needs of the few. However, surely Church-going Christians are also in the minority in this country today. So why should a law be kept to satisfy the needs of a few people on the other side?

Mr Leigh is also concerned that the change in the law will lead to Churches being prosecuted for preventing gay marriages being held in their buildings. There may be some who would wish to push it this far, but I believe that here they would be in the minority. Divorced couples are allowed to get married, but cannot marry in a Church so why should it be any different for gay couples? I do believe that the Church should retain its right to act on its own beliefs wherever they are not receiving money from the government to offer a public service.

However, here again there lies a problem. Some Churches, such as the Quakers, also want to be able to act on their own beliefs and allow same-sex marriages to be held in their Churches. Under the current law they are prevented to do so, whereas under the new law they would be free to act on their own beliefs, giving exactly the same rights as it would to the Church of England.

Mr Leigh also mentions that he and the Pope agree that religious people do not seek to impose their views on others. When it comes to the Pope I would find this laughable if it weren’t so tragic. The fact that the Pope enforces the views of the Catholic Church on society has led to the huge issue with HIV in Africa and other areas of the world, with the position on the use of condoms that has only recently been addressed.

Mr Leigh’s argument essentially boils down to the Church trying to defend the ‘traditional view of marriage’. However, there is one final problem that I have with this when it comes to the Church of England. How can a Church that was created so that Henry VIII could get out of a marriage justify themselves as defending the sanctity of marriage?

Category:

christianity, civil partnerships, equality, gay marriage, gay rights, religion

1 Comment

Tagged with:

Get back to your roots – The importance of knowing gay history

February 16, 2011

You may or may not be aware that February is LGBT History Month, a month of celebration of the lives and achievements of the LGBT community. With UK society much more accepting of gay people now than they were 50 years ago and with legal changes having brought us much closer to equality, it’s all too easy to get complacent and ignore our gay heritage.

Talking to one gay person I met recently, I was quite surprised that he’d never heard of Harvey Milk before visiting San Francisco. I was also more surprised that he’d never heard of the Wolfenden Report and didn’t know what Section 28 was all about. OK, so maybe I shouldn’t be quite so surprised about these things, but it did lead me to wonder whether many gay people had even the slightest interest in gay history.

When I was born, homosexuality had been legal for less than 10 years and, as a friend on Twitter reminded me, it only became legal in Ireland in 1993. It may also surprise many people that Guernsey in the Channel Islands only voted to equalise the age of consent less than 12 months ago. Homosexuality is still illegal in many countries, some of which carry the death penalty. If we are to try and educate people and change the hearts and minds about gay people, then it’s important that we know where we’ve come from.

Some people argue that, as sexuality should never have been an issue, it’s hypocritical for us to keep harping on about it ourselves. However, the fact remains that sexuality has been, and in some cases still is, an issue. We don’t have full gay marriage, and homophobia is rife in our schools. Only this week a man in East Yorkshire suffered a “vicious” beating by youths who hurled anti-gay abuse at him before attacking him.

It’s therefore important that we remember those who have got us to where we are, and those who still fight for our world to be a better place. People like Peter Wildeblood, who admitted his sexuality in court and wrote ‘Against the Law’ while serving 18 months for ‘conspiracy to incite certain male persons to commit serious offences with male persons’. People like Emma Goldman who spoke publically in favour of gay rights in America in 1910, or the people who stood up against police persecution in New York in 1969 at the Stonewall Riots.

People may well be accepting of gay people now, but many straight people are completely oblivious to how gay people were treated in the past. I wouldn’t necessarily expect them to be aware of that much, but it’s important that we can impart that knowledge when appropriate. Gay people, along with other minorities such as the deaf community or Gypsies are often overlooked during discussions about the holocaust. And one thing that is very rarely mentioned is that once those gay people were ‘liberated’ from camps such as Auschwitz, most were then immediately imprisoned for the same ‘crimes’ which saw them imprisoned by the Nazis.

As you may have guessed, for me personally it is a subject that I’m quite passionate about. I believe that gay people should know about things that have happened in the past and specific legislation that served to treat gay people as lesser individuals. After all, if we don’t know what happened in the past, how can we stop it happening again in the future?

As Glennis Perry said at a Campaign for Homosexual Equality Conference:

“Freedom isn’t just won then automatically kept. It is only kept by constant vigilance.”

If you do want to find out more about gay history, check out the LGBT History Month website which has details of activities taking place around the country during February. I would also recommend “Peers, Queers and Commons: The Struggle for Gay Law Reform from 1950 to the Present” by Stephen Jeffrey-Poulter, and also “Rid England of this Plague” by Rex Batten.

Category:

equality, gay history, gay rights

1 Comment

Tagged with:

Once again Melanie Phillips conveniently misses the point

February 14, 2011

Well surprise, surprise. Melanie Phillips is on her ‘moral code’ bandwagon again.

This time, she’s objecting to the government’s decision to pass legislation that allows civil partnerships to be held in religious buildings. And her reasoning? Because marriage is all about procreation and therefore must be between two people that can have children.

So what about elderly couples then Melanie? What if two people aged 70, and therefore not likely to have children want to get married because they love each other? By Ms Phillips’ comments it shouldn’t be allowed.

She also says that people who are protesting for gay marriage are treating it just like any other contract, and ignoring the deeper aspects of marriage. Not so Melanie. we already have a contract that we can enter into which affords us similar rights as a married couple. What we’re fighting for is that full recognition of love between two people that a ‘marriage’ implies.

According to Melanie, such legislation would “overturn centuries of Biblical understanding of the sacrament of marriage”. She is obviously unaware that the Church in the Middle Ages performed marriage ceremonies between same sex couples. They even had a special prayer book for it.

I’m also guessing that, since divorce is so frowned upon by the Church, that Melanie will be campaigning for a union that involves a divorcee to no longer be called a marriage.

She also says that things should not be changed due to the wishes of a small section of a minority. So why should things stay the same because of a small section of a minority? The fact of the matter is that church going Christians are also a minority. And many Christians believe there is nothing wrong with gay marriage.

And while we’re at it, what about the rights of religions that do want to allow same sex couples to be married in their Churches, like the Quakers?  Currently, their religious beliefs are prohibited by law so why is that right?  This change in legislation would allow Churches to choose whether they allow same sex unions to take place in their religious buildings, not force them into doing so.  It basically affords all Churches the same right in terms of choosing what they believe is right.

Melanie says that we’re missing the point of marriage, but I think it’s her that has missed the point. Marriage is about two people loving each other and wanting to show their commitment to their relationship. I can only assume that she hasn’t experienced true love, or she would understand.

Category:

christianity, daily mail, discrimination, gay marriage, gay rights, religion

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

Has the government again failed on gay rights?

February 11, 2011

Today, Nick Clegg unveiled the Protection of Freedoms Bill which promised to restore British freedoms.  As part of this long awaited bill, the government promised to ‘wipe clean’ any convictions for consensual gay sex that had taken place before the equalisation of the age of consent. 

However, the bill actually allows a person who has been convicted of such offences to “apply to the Secretary of State for the conviction or caution to become a disregarded conviction or caution.”  This means that the conviction will stay on people’s criminal records, but that it will be marked as disregarded.  That’s hardly ‘wiping clean’ is it?

People who were convicted of these ‘crimes’ were convicted because of the inequalities that existed in this country at the time.   An unequal age of consent meant that two fully consenting gay men aged between 16 and 21 would have been breaking the law by engaging in sex.  Now that the law has been changed and the age of consent has been equalised, these convictions should be completely stricken from their record, not just marked with a ‘disregarded’ comment. 

Although victims of this inequality will no longer have to declare a criminal conviction, they will still show up in background checks, and on police databases.  Again, this is not ‘wiping clean’.

UPDATE – Following the completion of this post, a representative from the Home Office has confirmed that, while the wording of the bill was misleading, such convictions will be completely removed from police databases etc.  So long as this is the case when the bill is passed, the government will have made good on their promises.

Category:

Uncategorized

1 Comment

Are civil partnerships enough?

February 4, 2011

The Civil Partnership Act of 2004 afforded gay couples who register their partnership similar rights to those of married straight couples. Previously, the partner of a gay person who had been taken into hospital would not be allowed access to their loved one, and any property or significant amount left in a will would be open to challenge from the family. Among other things, it also provided the same exemption as married couples on inheritance tax, social security and pension benefits.

Obviously this is a good thing, but is it enough?

For many people, a civil partnership is exactly the same as a wedding. Although I’ve yet to make it to one myself, the videos that I have seen of civil partnerships do seem exactly the same as a marriage – two people who obviously love each other making a lifelong commitment to one another. However, I also wonder about the broader population, and how they view civil partnerships.

Civil partnerships still leave discrimination. Gay people are not allowed to be married, just as straight people are not allowed to enter into a civil partnership. Whenever I go to a wedding of my straight friends, the part that always frustrates me is when we’re reminded that, “marriage in this country is the union of one man and one woman”.

The Equal Love campaign, organised by Outrage! serves to challenge this, with one gay couple applying for a civil marriage, and one straight couple applying for a civil partnership each month. Each of these applications is duly rejected, and so the 8 couples filed a joint legal application to the European Court of Human Rights yesterday in an attempt to overturn the ban.

On the whole, the argument against gay marriage seems to come back to religion. However, the Church isn’t exactly fond of divorced couples getting married, and this is why you cannot marry in a church if you have already been divorced. So why is it different for same-sex couples? Surely the same should apply?

I have heard arguments from some sections of the gay community that want civil partnerships to be only for same-sex couples and not for straight couples. Civil partnerships were hard fought for, and so some people do believe that they should remain as evidence of the fight that had to happen. Others believe that having full gay marriage would normalise same-sex union too much, leading to the disappearance of the ‘queer identity’.

While I understand the arguments to keep civil partnerships separate, I do believe that we should push for full gay marriage. I do worry that some people see a marriage between a man and a woman to be undertaken because they love each other, but that a civil partnership between a same-sex couple is undertaken to get similar rights to a married couple.

From the gay couples that I know who are in civil partnerships, this is far from the case. They did it because they love each other and wanted to show their friends/family that they were fully committed to each other. However, while civil partnerships and marriage are set apart from each other, it will always give certain people the excuse to see civil partnerships as inferior.

Category:

civil partnerships, discrimination, equality, gay marriage, gay rights, homophobia, religion

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

Are Pride marches still relevant today?

February 2, 2011

With Christmas and New Year behind us and the prospect of warmer weather heading our way (for the love of Kylie let it be soon), our thoughts soon turn to summer.  One such longing for the warmer weather in a recent conversation then led to a topic that has cropped up a number of times over the last few years – whether Pride marches are still important considering the advances in equality that have been made.
 
Once civil partnerships were brought in under the Civil Partnership Act of 2004, it seemed that one of the last inequalities for gay people had been resolved.  We were no longer able to be sacked from our work for being gay, and we were now afforded pretty much the same rights as married couples once we’d entered into a civil partnership with our loved one (stay tuned for a post on that topic).  It can therefore be easy to forget that the fight against discrimination still continues in this country.

As evident from Melanie Phillips article last week, some attitudes to gay people still attempt to class us as second class citizens.  Back in 2008, Stonewall commissioned YouGov to carry out research which found that 1 in 5 gay people have suffered homophobic attacks, and such violence to gay people has made headline news in some instances such as those on Jody Dobrowski on Clapham Common, and Ian Baynham in Trafalgar Square.  At the end of 2009, The Metropolitan Police suggested that homophobic crimes had rised by nearly a fifth.

The upshot is that, yes things have drastically improved for gay people in the UK, but we still have a way to go before we are fully accepted.  Pride marches serve to show local communities that gay people are a factor of everyone’s society, as well as giving other people the opportunity to show their support to the gay community.  I have marched at London Pride for the last 5 years with Stonewall, and it is truly heartening to see gay and straight people alike clapping and cheering as the march proceeds through the steets, showing their support.

Pride also gives support to those who have not yet taken the step of coming out.  Seeing news coverage of Pride events helps show other gay people, young and old, that they’re not the only ones that feel the way they do, and that being gay can be something to be celebrated.  The same is true for showing support to other gay people around the world, not just in terms of showing other gay people that things can get better, but also showing other countries that the UK is supportive of the rights of gay people.

So, as you may have guessed, I do believe that Pride marches are still relevant, and should remain at the core of such events.  It’s more than just an excuse to have a massive party in the street and get drunk with your friends (although I agree that part is great too).  Standing at the sidelines and showing your support is great, but if you haven’t marched in a Pride event before I encourage you to do so.  Aside from the chance to meet new people, you can be part of something that shows the world that gay people are not going away.

Category:

discrimination, gay rights, hate crime, homophobia, pride

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

A few thoughts on the Melanie Phillips article from today

January 24, 2011

I read the article today by Daily Mail columnist Melanie Phillips entitled “Yes, gays have often been the victims of prejudice.  But now they risk becoming the new McCarthyites.”  Obviously, I’m not particularly impressed by the article.  I’m not impressed by some of Ms Phillips comments, and I’m not impressed by the fact that the Daily Mail continues to publish these types of comments on their website or, indeed, in their newspapers.  But then again, I’m not surprised.  The Daily Mail has positioned itself as anti-gay for many years (possibly enjoying the ‘controversy’), and this isn’t exactly the first time that Ms Phillips has aired these types of views (possibly also enjoying the attention). 

The article is predominantly in reaction to the so called ‘gay agenda’, and the fact that (according to Ms Phillips) children will soon be ‘bombarded’ by questions on exam papers that relate to homosexuality.  I am assuming from the fact that Ms Phillips uses the word ‘bombarding’ that the majority of questions on these exam papers will therefore be based around homosexuality.  Hmmm, not convinced Melanie.  As a marketing professional I understand the use of specific language to try and get across a key message, so I’m assuming this is what you’re doing here?

Section 28 was a hugely damaging piece of legislation.  Aside from ensuring that no education about homosexuality existed (which could be considered particularly damaging in the realms of sex education), it also meant that any child being bullied for either being gay or being perceived as gay had nowhere to turn.  They couldn’t talk to their teachers about it as the teachers weren’t allowed to discuss it. 

Since its repeal, it is right that gay issues are taught about in schools.  Discrimination comes from fear of the unknown, so educating children on the issues around homosexuality will hopefully stop more people growing up with the type of views that Ms Phillips expresses.  Will it make kids gay?  No.  Homosexuality is not a choice and is something that is part of the make-up of you as a person.  A person can’t make themselves gay, just as much as I couldn’t make myself straight.  And I tried for 10 years to make myself straight, so don’t think it wasn’t through lack of effort.

Now, if the government is trying to shoe horn a huge number of questions onto exam papers specifically around homosexuality then I would agree that it would be wrong.  But I don’t see there’s any issue with teaching about other species of animals that perhaps engage in same sex relationships, or teaching on what the percentage of gay people are in the UK or indeed world.  Topics like this help to help de-stigmatise gay people, and allow children to see that it really is quite normal. 

Ms Phillips also references the B&B hoteliers Peter and Hazelmary Bull who have been sued for turning away a gay couple.  Apparently they are the ‘latest religious believers to fall foul of the gay inquisition’.  Wrong I’m afraid Ms Phillips.  They were the latest religious believers to fall foul of THE LAW.  The law was changed for a reason.  In today’s society it is unreasonable for someone to be discriminated against on the grounds of their sexual orientation.  Just as it is unreasonable to discriminate someone based on, for example, the colour of their skin, or their religious beliefs.  If you don’t want to have to accommodate gay people in your B&B, then don’t run a B&B. I also wonder whether they demand marriage certificates and ID before a straight couple share a bed in their B&B, or are they not so religious as to mind unmarried couples and potential adultery going on under their roof?

Since Ms Phillips seems to believe that you should be able to discriminate against someone because of their sexual orientation, she presumably believes it is OK for a white B&B owner to turn away a black couple, or a gay B&B to turn away a Christian couple.  Otherwise she might be in danger of running some kind of campaign specifically against gay people. 

Ms Phillips also references the appointment of Dr Raabe to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, and the resulting outcry due to him being a leading member of the Maranatha Community which campaigns against gay rights.  Ms Phillips poses the question: “what have his views on homosexuality got to do with illegal drugs?”  If he thinks homosexuality is wrong, then it does indeed have nothing to do with his ability to advise on drug issues.  However, his views on being able to ‘cure’ gay people by using methods that have been discredited does cause me concern.  If he believes that discredited methods should be used to ‘cure’ homosexuality then his views on how to discourage people from taking drugs may also be somewhat suspect.

Ms Phillips also references documents that he produced for MP’s that identify the benefits of marriage in fighting drug addiction, and goes on to say that marriage leads to greater happiness, less depression, less alcohol abuse and less smoking.  “It happens to be true”, she says.  I don’t doubt that it’s true but then, as a gay man, I can’t be sure because I’m not allowed to marry the person I love.  Yes I can have a civil partnership which affords me the same rights as a married couple, but for many straight people this is still seen as a way of getting equal rights and not an expression of the love and commitment that two people feel for and to each other.

Ms Phillips also states that, “penalising religious people for speaking and acting in accordance with their beliefs is neither liberal nor tolerant”.  However, it seems that penalising someone for something they have no control over, such as their sexual orientation, is perfectly OK by Ms Phillips.  How does that work then?

Personally, I believe that everyone has the right to speak their mind, and live their lives the way that they want to so long as they are not hurting anyone else.  Christians have the right to denounce a gay lifestyle, just exactly the same as I have the right to say that the Bible has been mistranslated and reworked to allow a group of people to push their own thoughts and beliefs onto an unsuspecting audience.  Melanie Phillips has the right to write her articles denouncing gay rights and this so called ‘gay agenda’ just exactly as I have the right to write this piece here.  It’s a basic right that I would fight for on all grounds.

Throughout the article, Ms Phillips refers to this ‘gay agenda’.  I am assuming that this ‘gay agenda’ that she refers to is the work undertaken by organisations such as Stonewall and people like Peter Tatchell in the UK, to try and ensure that people are treated fairly regardless of their sexual orientation.  Whilst Ms Phillips may not like the fact that this work goes on she seems completely oblivious to the fact that she and her comments are one of the reasons why this work continues.  The fact that bigoted, hypocritical and misinformed people like her are around in the UK is what makes it so important.

Category:

christianity, daily mail, discrimination, equality, free speech, gay rights, homophobia, media, religion

3 Comments

Tagged with:

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.