Section 28: Inciting and exploiting homophobia
The Conservatives – at both a national and a local level – were happy to buy into – and actively feed – the homophobia. During the May 1986 local elections, for example, Conservatives in the London borough of Haringey produced a leaflet declaring, “You do not want your child to be educated a homosexual or lesbian.”
Extraordinary fictions were created around things like the book Jenny Lives with Eric and Martin and the film How to Be a Lesbian in 35 Minutes.
Labour’s Reluctance on LGBT Rights
Meanwhile, the Labour leadership felt that the best way to respond to this was to pander to, rather than challenge, it. Neil Kinnock, for example, had wasted no time making his views felt when he was first elected Party leader in 1983. When asked if there had been a witch hunt against Peter Tatchell in the 1983 Bermondsey by-election, he had replied:
“I don’t believe in witch hunts – but I can tell a bloody witch from a fairy!”
Motions supporting LGBT rights were passed at the 1985, 1986 and 1988 Labour Party National Conferences. Then the Labour leadership refused to implement them.*
Activists weren’t really surprised, then, when Labour seemed reluctant to oppose Section 28. For example, when the Bill reached the Committee Stage, Labour’s spokesperson was more concerned with reassuring the Committee that his Party supported the basic aims. * Rather than trying to delete Section 28, they tried instead to amend it – without success.
Labour, it seemed, were more concerned about what the media might have to say than challenging the homophobia entrenched in the Bill. In consequence, the hatred and hysteria got worse.
In December 1987, the offices of Capital Gay were firebombed. When this was announced in Parliament, Conservative MP Elaine Kellett-Bowman declared, “Quite right!”.
When asked to explain her response she stated:
“I am quite prepared to affirm that there should be an intolerance of evil!”
Three months later, Margaret Thatcher made her a Dame.
There wasn’t a single prosecution under Section 28. As the Conservative government themselves had admitted in 1986, trying to define ‘the promotion of homosexuality’ was impossible.
Yet the homophobia that was generated in the lead up to, and aftermath of, Section 28 unquestionably helped the Conservatives to election victory. Support for LGBT rights was presented as support for paedophilia, the ‘recruitment’ of young people and the spread of HIV/AIDS.
Sadly, the Labour leadership chose to buy into, rather than challenge, that.
- Labour and Conservative actions in relation to LGBT issues are covered in much greater detail in my book. There is also a specific section on Section 28. Further information is available here.
really interesting article! I’m just wondering where you got these articles from? I can’t find them anywhere and would love to use them in my dissertation on homophobia and HIV/AIDS in the 1980’s
Google Sue Sanders and Gillian Spraggs Section 28 for their comprehensive analysis of Section 28’s passage through Parliament. My other sources are bits and pieces drawn from all over the place: nasty cartoons drawn from the Express, articles from Lesbian and Gay Socialist, material produced by Trades Unionists Against Section 28 and sundry other pieces. (And there are some references in my book!)
Chumbawamba (yes, the “Tubthumping” one-hit-wonders, who started out their career as an anarchist punk band) released a cracker of an anti-Clause 28 single when it was being voted on, although the lyrics call it Clause 29 because events were moving too fast for them. “I saw the truth, the truth behind the emperor’s new clause….” https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HQUMS3Ny4L8