Sexuality and Society Week 8 The regulation of male homosexuality

Outline Introduction Nineteenth century constructions --- Legal changes --- Medical constructions Twentieth and twenty-first century legal changes and the assumptions on which they are built/ which they foster

Discourse are creative and controlling, but are also contested and challenged. ‘Where there is power there is resistance’ Foucault. Constructions of homosexuality are historically very varied

Nineteenth century English law 1861 Sexual Offences Against the Person Act removes the death penalty for sodomy 1885 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act– Labouchere Amendment

Medical discourse Sexology defines ‘the homosexual’ as a (deviant) type of person Foucault’s understanding of the process of the construction of ‘the homosexual’ is that it gave rise to a reverse discourse of resistance which, however, continues to carry within it the binary categories of the oppressive discourse that it seeks to contest.

1967 Sexual Offences Amendment Act Based on the recommendation of the Wolfenden Committee 1957 Provides for the decriminalisation of homosexual activity between men, in private, who are 21 and over. The outcome is that homosexual practices and relationships are permitted to exist within a legally defined private sphere but are not to be culturally validated in any way, or to be visible in the public sphere. Not surprising therefore that the gay, post-Stonewall movement revolves around making gay and lesbian life styles publicly visible. Shift in discourse from ‘toleration’ of the ‘plight’ of homosexuals to celebration of ‘Gay Pride’. (I will cover this period in more depth in the lecture in Week 10 as part of the 1960s, so you will to incorporate it in your writing on the history of regulation.)

Section 28 of the Local Government Act A local authority shall not: intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality. Promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship” Section 28 was repealed in November 2003.

Campaigns to raise the age of consent to homosexual acts between men 1994 Age of consent lowered from 21 to Bill to lower the age of consent to homosexual acts to 16 fails to pass Parliament 2000 Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act lowers the age of consent at 16. NB Note also successful campaign for the legal recognition of same-sex partnerships, to be covered next term.

D. Epstein et al (2000) Three discourses dominate debate on legal change: (1) Traditional moralism which identifies what it sees as the normal, the Christian nation, British family, and defends it against what it sees as ‘unnatural’ and ‘perverse’: ‘If it were not from the fact that there are young people in the public gallery, it might be useful to explain it…but that one offence is so disgusting and degrading that I don’t wish to give details of it in public here or anywhere else, but let nobody be in any doubt of the disgusting nature of that offence.’ Or see all too many examples in the video of the programme A Bill Called William (in SRC)

(2) Liberal tolerance ‘I have every respect for some of the pressure groups that have been acting on behalf of homosexual people--- Stonewall, for example, is measured and reasonable in its campaigns—but with respect I have no sympathy whatsoever for militant groups such as Outrage! That want to publicise the cause of homosexuals at all costs…Once equality [before the criminal law] has been achieved, there is no reason for all the fuss that is often made to go on. Let all the publicity seeking pressure groups accept that equality will have been achieved and let them leave the rest of society in peace.’ (Laing, col. 772, cited by D. Epstein et al 2000)

(3)Critical/ radical ‘solidaristic’ definitions of Britishness ‘Families- mothers, fathers, brothers,. sisters- who love and respect their gay family members are pained and angered when prejudice and criminal law discriminate against their loved ones. It is about time that families were all equal. These principles represent the foundation stones of the new clause.’ Ann Keen MP (1998) cited by Epstein et al 2000)

Arguments developed by Matthew Waite (2003) and others Campaigns to reduce age of consent put into place notions that may not be very helpful but which are convenient for gaining acceptance of a change in the law, or drawing in certain experts in support.

Constructions in play in debate on age of consent Shift in debate from focus on ‘homosexual acts’ to the age of consent for gays or gay sex Supporters gain support from experts who reassure the public that certain people are ‘born gay’- problematic, and also why should experts be the ones to listen to? Campaign directed at ‘equalising’ the age of consent with heterosexuals. Does this (re)confirm ‘heterosexual’ as the norm with which to be equal? That people are either heterosexual or homosexual? And why is the issue equality rather than, for instance, pleasure or experimentation?

Conclusions It’s not just a question of getting a law passed, but how the terms of debate shape understandings of diverse sexualities and practices. Clearly attitudes to homosexuality have changed remarkably, in a progressive direction, both in Parliament and more widely. Weeks in his new book The World We Have Won (Routledge, 2007) puts the case for this quite well and strongly. But it can also be argued that this acceptance is built around new presumptions which make homosexualities acceptable to rather than challenging of wider norms. The presumptions about homosexuality affect thinking about sexualities and their construction and relation to each other, to reproduction, to family, for everyone. This is a key issue for us in this module. For instance, what arguments are made in favour of legalising prostitution and what presumptions about women, men and sexual needs and opportunities do they imply?