31 March 2016

Time To Wind Down Gay Pride?

Surely this movement has now served its purpose

By John Watson

Those who spend their time trawling through second-hand shops will tell you that in every one of them, if you look hard enough, there is something worth finding. It may be hidden at the back, it may be covered with dust, but in the dross there is a spark of gold. You could say just the same about the resolutions at the National Union of Students LGBT+ conference and here the precious item was well hidden. Slipped in at subclause 5 of resolution 408 entitled “Defending Safe(r) spaces and No Platforming”, were the slightly surprising words;

“Misogyny, transphobia, racism and biphobia are often present in LGBT+ societies. This is unfortunately more likely to occur when the society is dominated by white cis gay men.”

The conclusion two paragraphs further on was that

“Gay men do not face oppression as gay men within the LGBT+ community and do not need a reserved place on society committees.”

For those who think that LGBT is a kind of sandwich, a little re-education may be in order. “LGBT” stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender and “cis” means that you identify with the sex you were born with. It follows that a white cis gay man is a white man who feels like a man but is a homosexual one.

It is hardly surprising that individuals in this category do not suffer oppression within the LGBT community.  It would be very surprising if they did. The spark of gold hidden in the dross in the NUS resolution is not that conclusion but rather the suggestion that a different question should be asked. What happens in the wider society? Do gay and lesbian people really suffer much prejudice in society any more?

There is no doubt that they once did, of course. It isn’t so long ago that homosexual acts were illegal and the repeal of that prohibition did not immediately remove the public prejudice against them, something acknowledged by Roy Jenkins, the then Home Secretary with the words “those who suffer from this disability carry a great weight of shame all their lives”.

That though was 1967, almost half a century ago, and since then public opinion has moved a very long way indeed, so that now the fact that some people are homosexual is generally regarded as a very normal feature of society.  That is no surprise. Unlike racial prejudice, the prejudice against homosexuals was not underpinned by any fear of terrorism or any concern that the native population was being pushed out. Absent any sort of threat, what is more natural than that the easy going attitude of a tolerant public should assert itself so that now it is widely recognised that homosexuality has always been there and is a perfectly natural state?

Where though does that leave the campaigners? Every year there are Gay Pride marches and festivals throughout the land celebrating the Gay and Lesbian communities. Originally, of course, they fulfilled a very real function by making it clear that this was a self-confident community – the very antithesis of people hiding in the closet. It also allowed others to associate themselves with the cause and to demonstrate their support for it. What now, however?  Are the marches and festivals still needed and is it a good thing that they should continue? If they are still needed to combat prejudice now, will they still be a good thing once that prejudice has finally evaporated?

Oddly, once the marches are no longer needed to combat prejudice they take on the opposite significance. Instead of being a statement by the gay community that they wish to break down the barriers between them and the rest of society, they become a way of reinforcing those barriers. If nobody really notices who is gay and who is not, why force them to do so through a public demonstration? Surely that is a backward step not a forward one?

To test this, let us is look at it the other way round. Suppose the straight community were to have their own marches? We would quickly say that that was undesirable because it created a barrier between straight people and gays and implied some form of social superiority for the former.  Certainly we wouldn’t allow the divisive nature of such proceedings to be concealed behind waffle about “celebrating the paticipants’ sexuality”. They would be a bad thing, period; so why doesn’t the same apply to gay marches once the initial need for them has dissipated?

One way past this objection is to imbue the marches and parades with a different significance. Perhaps they are no longer part of a crusade but rather something commemorative: a commemoration of a campaign well fought and of a successful outcome. That would be harmless enough, wouldn’t it? It doesn’t wash, though, for two reasons. The first is that I don’t think that it really reflects the spirit of the demonstrations.  That isn’t the reason people go on the marches or attend the festivals. The second is that commemorative events can be as divisive as campaigning ones. The apprentice boys’ marches in Northern Ireland are still going more than 300 years after the Glorious Revolution and they still take their part in preserving divisions between the Catholic and Protestant populations.

Actually, I think that the reason why gay pride marches will continue long after they have become unnecessary and harmful is a different one. As with all protest movements, there are those who build careers out of exploiting a grievance and it is in their interest that the sense of grievance should be kept alive. No matter to them that by doing so they prevent the community from uniting as it should.  No matter that they hold back the very people whose cause they claim to espouse.  Their own interests take precedence.

As has been said before in these columns, if you want to know why something happens you should look for the men with their bums in the butter. I fancy you will find a fair sprinkling of them among the organisers of the Gay marches and festivals.

 

Please click here if you would like a weekly email on publication of the Shaw Sheet