New Labour has all too many faults, but lack of application on gay issues can hardly be numbered among them. Sure, I’m writing this as a straight man, and in the full awareness that many gay activists wouldn’t agree with such a conclusion. But to me, it looks rather like the political – rather than societal - battle for gay rights in Britain has been won.
There is an equal age of consent and gay marriage exists in all but name, and rightly so. The Tories’ vindictive and pointless Section 28 legislation has been scrapped, while discrimination against gays in housing and employment has been criminalised. No government could have done more.
All of this stands in refreshing contrast with New Labour’s shameful readiness to pander to backward sentiment on asylum seekers or benefits for single parents, for instance. Just for once, it is happy to hold opinions in advance of those of society in general.
But if you doubt that anti-gay prejudice still exists, consider the case of my old friend Iain Dale, a strong candidate in one of the Tories’ most winnable seats at the last general election, who makes no secret of being a ‘confirmed bachelor’ in the great Ted Heath tradition. The Lib Dem majority went up from 483 to 10,000-plus. For goodness sake, find the guy a more open-minded urban constituency next time round.
Then look at the press coverage of the recent mock wedding ceremony – how camp can you get? – involving two Church of England priests and officiated by a third. Britain’s established church and its extended franchise is tearing itself apart on this question.
Indeed, the Anglican Communion looks like it is about to undergo its own equivalent of 1953 split in the Fourth International, with deviationism of the homosexual rather than the pabloite variety the issue at stake. Given that it has 77m million members rather than just a few thousand, the consequences stand to be a great deal more severe.
The Daily Telegraph has even obtained a copy of the oppositionist platform, an 89-page internal document titled The Way, the Truth and the Life, which reportedly socks it to the liquidationists. Details here.
I guess that logically I have to be neutral on this one. Yet I recall being against Tory legislation – never repealed by New Labour - that forces trade unions to accept any member that wants to join, without being able to bind them to observe strike votes, on the simple premise that organisations in civil society should be free to write their own rulebooks. I would exempt most denominations from any requirement to conduct services of blessing for civil partnerships on straightforward libertarian grounds.
The anomaly here is that the Church of England, being integrated into the state, is not properly part of civil society. But hey, this is an inter-Anglican faction fight. I’m sure they can sort it out among themselves.
Ironically, while all this is being thrashed out, Little Britain’s ‘only gay in the village’ star Matt Lucas is in the process splitting up with his civil partner Kevin McGee - that's the couple in the picture - after only 18 months. Just like a hetero break-up, McGee is entitled to a financial settlement and can expect to be awarded a fair chunk of Lucas’s £15m fortune. And how boringly like normal coupledom is that?
Gay marriage and gay divorce underline the spread of conservatism – not radicalism – within the gay community. While hardline Anglicans and the electorate of Norfolk North fear the homosexualisation of society, what we are seeing instead is the socialisation of homosexuality.
Posted at 15:02, 19 June 2008
Comments (10)
It's an interesting point above and similar to my thinking although I wasn't sure that I welcomed gay civil partnership, or marriage, at all.
Not through any wish for discrimination, naturally, but I don't think there should be any state registration or role in marriage.
If you want to get married to you opposite sex partner, same sex, three best friends, brother, goldfish etc then you are welcome to - if you really feel you need a certificate to prove that, you can buy a John Bull printing set and run one off yourself.
The state shouldn't be involved and to do such discriminates by giving a better status to those married over those gay, straight etc who don't wish to have it official.
A bit like the recent awarding of money to Muslim, Sikh and other schools - overcoming a discrimination (it was just CoE, RC and Jewish schools before) but awarding equality of discrimination.
It's also symptomatic of the gay 'movement' in Britain - Gay Pride - from the Gay Liberation Front in the 60s to a large pink pound, retail opportunity that it is now complete with gay cops. The 'socialisation of homosexuality' has a flip side
This hadn't occurred to me until I read about gay groups opposed to "gay marriage" because they felt it was making gay people conform to straight stereotypes for straights' benefit. They do have a point.
I consider this rather more than a faction fight in the Anglican Church or conforming to straights' perceptions. Or indeed anything that's related to religion.
It's about human rights. There was a beautiful American film (not often I say this) about what happens when gay partners do not have the same rights as married couples (can't remember the name for the instant). Some poor gay women lost her house and money because of this. Tossed into misery, As a prominent gay councillor locally told me, when I talked about this film, this is a very real fear when deaths occur.
I personally say: stand by the human rights of all people. No Exceptions!
"Iain Dale... who makes no secret of being a ‘confirmed bachelor’ in the great Ted Heath tradition."
Not since last week!
http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2008/06/our-perfect-day.html
I must disagree with the idea that “the battle for gay rights in Britain has been won.” For while there has certainly been a revolution in legal position for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people over the last ten year, and social attitudes towards homosexuality have dramatically improved, virtually all public and private institutions are organised around the traditional ideal of the heterosexual family.
This is true in the health service, housing and employment and in the assumptions of corporations. For while direct discrimination has largely be eradicated indirect or institutional discrimination still remains. Take social housing for example – it is virtually impossible for childless LGBT people to get a council flat. For with the shortage of social housing priority “naturally” goes to people with children. Ever something as petty and seemingly in consequential as food shopping organised around the needs of families and heterosexual couples. Not only are major discounts on “family size” deals but even buying a couple of pre-packed pork chops is a pain in the neck. Invariably they are different sizes – one large “mans” pork chop spoons the little “Ladies” chop.
This goes for Civil Partnerships as well, which I and I know may other LGBT people fear may turn out to be a dead end akin to the “Family Wage” policies in the early twentieth century. For while undeniably it has improved the life of many same sex couples as Andrew Coates points out, it does so by confining LGBT relationships into one model of coupledom. Other forms of LGBT relationship are being marginalised, particularly with the imposition of the Department of Work and Pensions "co-habiting rules" on to all. It is surprising common, for example, for lesbians couple to want to maintain complete economically independence. In contrast among particularly low income gay young men often live as “sisters” with one or more lad were there is high degree economic interdependent but no sexual relationship. And then there are people who live in threesomes.
Many of the problems LGBT now face are shared with heterosexuals who don’t conform to the supposed "norm". Such as childless couples, single parent families, older people, siblings, swingers etc. And perhaps the best way of seeing this struggles as not so much as civil rights agenda for a minority community, but a broader campaign for liberalisation of domestic economy.
I hear what you say, Richard. But most of these problems are not descrimination against LGBT people specifically.
Childless straights don't get social housing, either. The problem is a shortage of social housing.
And straights that live on their own also run into the 'family pack' problem.
I agree with Richard and Dave - and particularly Richard's conclusion.
I agree with the sentiment of Andrew but think there are problems. Take a devout Hindu parent, for example, who may say - a) it is my 'human right' to educate my child as I see fit and I'm happy for them to attend a school run by a religious body and where they devote a fair part of the day to religious instruction and b) it was discriminatory to not previously allow Hindu school state funding.
I'd say a) it's not your human right to oblige your child to undertake compulsory religious instruction nor is it acceptable for religious bodies to runs schools, rather than elected bodies and for anyone to obtain what (wrongly) is often thought a better and selective education for their child on the basis of your wealth, religion or anything else and b) yes, you are right, it was, we will solve that by allowing no religious schools.
Likewise it is nobody's 'human right' to demand a state recognition of marriage as that always gives them a superior status (from major - I was reading about an Iranian company recently who insist all their workforce get married or be sacked - to minor) to those who are not married.
Abolish marriage.
I don't think Southpawpunch is quite up to speed with Human Rights law yet.
I supose the relationship was on the slide and they thought that by getting married it would re-invigorate it. Just like a lot of straights, really. At least there aren't any children to complicate matters.
And yet this extraordinary removing of a gay kiss advert.
The question on Five was 'is Britain ready for a man to man kiss on the lips in an advert?"
In my office the answer was a vague, not really.
Some fool came on and said he didn't want his kids seeing a gay couple couple on telly. Someone else pointed out that same sex couples were on every TV program from Eastenders to location location location.
First man's answer.. "I just don't think its right that's all"
He did sound a bit Norfolk thinking about it.
Dave's right. "what we are seeing instead is the socialisation of homosexuality."
In 10 years time you could put this advert on at 9am and no one will bat an eyelid.