I said "You know what, if being gay really was the way to get on in life and THEY really did get preferrential treatment, we'd all be pretending to be gay, just like THEY used to pretent to be straight so they wouldn't get beaten up". He then said "What about all of the illegal immigrants pretending to be gay so they aren't deported?". I replied "What, you mean being deported to countries where you get murdered for being gay?". He then said "What, so you think we should let anyone in, if they say they are gay?". I replied "I don't think that anyone who is gay should be deported to a country where they might be killed by the state for it, so until there is a perfect way to tell, I would say it is the lesser of two evils". I added "If it can be proven an asylum seeker has lied, then I would support the rejection of their application". Not for the first time in my life, I have upset someone with my liberal views.
It did get me thinking about the protest element of Pride. Does London Pride really need to still be a protest movement? Not being gay and so not having to have to endure homophobia, I am not well placed to say. I have gay mates and members of my band have been gay. It is so much of a non issue that I have not discussed whether any of them have felt discriminated against in recent years in London. However, it i a fact that there are violent homophobes in our society. I would guess that London is possibly the best and most liberal place in the world to live. Gay people have historically moved to London for this reason. Even before homosexuality was legalised, London was relatively relaxed. Of course there were all sorts of harrassment of the community by police etc, but in relation to the rest of the UK, you could have a life.
When the law was changed in 1967, it did not mean that homophobia was banned. In fact, we still don't have full legal equality. Religious organisations are exempt from laws concerning homophobia. Being a Roman Catholic, if I was gay and wanted to marry another man, the church is legally allowed to discriminate. Should religious organisations be allowed to make such discriminatory decisions. If you'd asked me 30 years ago, I'd have said yes. I was raised a Roman Catholic and the environment at Finchley Catholic High School in the mid 1970's was wildly homophobic. I cannot deny this affected and influenced me. I was a fully fledged homophobe at the age of 15 when I left the school.
This soon disappated. I got into punk rock. When Tom Robinson sang Glad to Be Gay, I was horrified. How could a punk rocker be such a disgusting degenerate? Then I listend to the lyrics. A penny dropped. I realised that Tom was perhaps the bravest of all of the punk artists. I wore a TRB badge in solidarity. A rather amusing event happened at FCHS. Being a punk, I bought a pair of luminous pink socks and wore them to school. I was sent to the headmaster, who sent me home to change. I pointed out that the school dress code didn't include socks. He said that I was deliberately causing trouble. At the next parents night, he asked my mother if she knew I was gay. She was surprised and asked how he'd deduced this. He said "He wears pink socks". My mum replied "So does Elvis Presley and he's not gay, is he". She decided Kelly was an idiot at that moment.
Why did he say it? I have always believed that he just wanted to cause a rift with my parents. My mother only told me the story 30 years later. I asked her if she had been worried. She replied that "Mothers always know if their sons are gay, it was a completely idiotic thing to say about you". She then told me about another family we know, who had a gay son. The mother had been telling my mum that she knew her son was gay, but he was completely in the closet. My mum asked if she was upset. She replied "Oh no, at least I'll have someone to look after me when I am old". The lady was a very religious Irish Catholic and my Mum explaind that although the Church hierarchy are full of bigots, when its your son or your brother, most decent people are far more tolerant.
Perhps the saddest element of the story is that the chap in question is married now, but his Mum never got to see him walk up the aisle in our Church. I was discussing it with my Mum. She said "You know what, its not for us to Judge, if it makes people happy, so what". In my Mums view, God is a God of love and if he makes someone have a certain sexual orientation, it is for a reason.
Which brings us back to does Pride still need to be a protest? Is the fact that a mum can't see her son walk up the aisle with his husband in Church worth protesting about? Of course, there are plenty of other issues, but it is one that is easy to understand. Well when it comes down to it, whilst we deem people to be second class citizens and let people discriminate for whatever reason, then clearly there is. The argument that "They can get married in a registry office if they want" doesn't wash for me.
I was interested to see what Pride were actually protesting about. I had a look at the Stonewall site. I wasn't surprised to see that a London Pride march was more interested in protesting the awful global injustices, where people get murdered by states, than issues here. However they are also fighting bac the push back on Trans rights in the UK. For people like me, this is a more complex issue. I am not entirely sure I can see any way that in elite athletics it is fair for bilogical females to compete against biological males. In sports like boxing, it strikes me as rather unsafe. Prisons are another area where I find the arguments to be hard to make. I am less concerned about toilets and changing rooms. My wife, who is definitely biologically female tells me she has no problem with trans women using changing rooms. I guess I'd take the view that so long as someone behaves themselves in the changing room, it doesn't matter.
I was born in 1962, when homosexuality was illegal. I live in London, where we are very tolerant. As a white, fat, 63 year old, who has had friends and work colleagues, etc from just about every part of the rainbow, I'd have to say that if you are a homophobe, get over yourself.
