Buckingham University and the Moral Compass

In October of last year, I wrote a post called 'A Moral Compass' in which I pondered the issue of  the Internationalisation agenda for universities, and the issues that come for our own values as part of that.  I recounted the story of one HE manager walking away from a deal (not at my own University) and how this was both unusual and commendable.

This week however, the University of Buckingham (a private institution, and thus we are led to believe, are all about the bottom line) made headlines by walking away from a lucrative deal over the issue of gay rights.

GarStarNews reported: 'The University of Buckingham has announced it is ‘increasingly concerned’ about Uganda’s human rights record, and wanted the country’s Victoria University to include a clause that no person would be discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation. A statement said: ‘Over the last few months, the University of Buckingham has been in discussions with our partners, Edulink, who own Victoria University in Kampala, Uganda, about our continued validation of some of Victoria University’s courses. ‘We have both become increasingly concerned about the proposed legislation in Uganda on homosexuality and in particular the constraints on freedom of speech in this area.’ The University of Buckingham, as the UK's only private research and teaching college, will allow existing students to complete their studies on their validated courses in Dubai and Kenya.'

The BBC also reported on the story, and noted how it raised ethical issues for UK Universities.  Well, indeed.

200 hundred students were affected according to the BBC, and thus one can conclude we are potentially talking about a significant sum of income that Buckingham have wilfully denied themselves.   They deserve credit for arguing that students should not be discriminated against, when enrolled on their degrees and seeking to uphold the same values that a student studying on campus at Buckingham should experience.

How many other British HE congratulate themselves for having strong equality policies, but discard them when the harsh winds of economic reality bite? Will another UK university now seek to negotiate a deal with Victoria?  If a private provider can do this, the pressures on 'public sector universities' are surely now even greater?

Canal Street Fights Back?

How to fight back against the invasion of Hen and Stag Parties and heterosexual 'Zoo' visitors to Manchester's Canal Street?  We know it's a problem from the research of Skeggs and Moran among others, and we know that the Equality Act makes discrimination impossible.  Here's a rather brilliant solution currently on the doors at Via...

HIV and Online Identities

The ever-lovely @leomack87 flagged up this post on the excellent UKPositiveLad blog.  UKPositiveLad or Sam, set up a blog when he was diagnosed as HIV+ in 2011.  He uses the blog to share his activism and document his own journey with HIV.  His latest post post contains a story that is perhaps unsurprising but that does not reduce the importance of examining it.  Within the post he writes:

'I started wondering last weekend (25th Feb 2012) what kind of responses someone would get if their profile said that they were HIV+. So I created myself a second profile on Grindr, almost identical to mine in (but different enough to look like a different person), still looking for “Friends, fun and dates” – but this time I mentioned my HIV status in the profile text.

'Over the course of the week (25 Feb – 03 Mar) my existing profile received messages from 74 users. On the other hand my (almost identical) profile that mentions my HIV status had 11 people message it. Four of those eleven messaged purely to ask me questions about HIV and one felt it necessary to send me foul mouthed abuse for seemingly no reason. Which leaves me with six people actually showing an interest in me.

'Let’s look at that for a second shall we? That’s a 92% reduction in interest purely by mentioning my HIV status.'

The reduction is somewhat unsurprising (although you'll note he still seems to be doing reasonably well!), reminding us of the 'fear' that men still associate with HIV+ men.  For Sam, it undoubtedly highlights issue of prejudice and discrimination in that men just don't want to be with someone who is HIV+ because of ill-educated beliefs, fears for their own safety or unease at the need to adapt their own sexual practices.  This has perhaps been compounded by the rise in bareback sex.   Knowing your partner is HIV+ may lead to a decision that a condom is necessary in order to make sure that you don't become HIV+ yourself.  You therefore opt to have sex (bareback) with someone else who states they are not HIV+ in order to 'protect' yourself from HIV.  Spot the flawed logic.

It also doesn't take a genius to see the sexual market forces this sets in train.  More people don't disclose their HIV status at a time of increased bareback, leading in turn to a rise in HIV rates.  This can - and I believe will - continue exponentially.  The only things that would stop this are (1) death.  The return of the holocaust, or (2) growing drug resistance creating increased complications in HIV treatment.

So it is that this one incident documented by UKPostiveLad gives us an insight into much larger trends that are taking place in sex lives globally and driving increased criminalisation - and ever tougher measures - in relation to HIV transmission.

Read Sam's post here.

Lesbian couple file lawsuit against Hawaii hotel

A fascinating story has emerged from Hawaii.  According to the Pink Paper, a couple from Los Angeles have filed a lawsuit against a bed and breakfast in Hawaii, claiming they were refused a room because they were lesbians.

The story has parallels with the B&B controversies in this country which saw the Equality Act goods and services provisions tested legally, politically and socially.  It's interesting to see a similar sort of testing in another part of the world, indicating the process that such laws perhaps inevitably, must go through.

Check out the full story here.

NWT Canada Finance Minister accused of trans bullying

Jane Fae reports a fascinating incident on her blog. She notes that the Finance Minister of Canada’s Northwest Territory, Michael Miltenberger has been reported to the Human Rights Commission. Why you might ask...Well, he is apparently accused of discriminating against a woman in Fort Smith, NWT, during a visit by the Governor General to Aurora College campus on 9 December because she is transgender.

Read the full story/details on Jane's blog here.

EHRC in Equality Law U-Turn

In the video above, you can hear and see a car screeching as it comes to an abrupt unplanned halt. A similar sound could be heard coming from the Equality and Human Rights Commission as they confirmed that they will not seek ‘reasonable adjustments’ to be made for religious workers who refuse to serve gay people. The Commission had planned on supporting a number of cases appearing before the European Court of Human Rights on the grounds of religious discrimination.

I blogged on the original planned legal action next month (see it here). I wrote:

'This case is about discrimination and ultimately the Commission is trying (and failing) to find a third-way between discriminating against the religious, and discriminating against homosexuals. I often tell students that understanding the law is about the application of values and ideas. There is no such thing as equality in this arena - there is instead the necessary choice of which side you back - a hatred of homosexuals or a hatred of religious freedom.'

Words I stand-by and the Commission has clearly made a fresh choice. In doing so, and as I indicated last month, they merely irritate an alternative audience - this time, the religious.

Pink News reports that Don Horrocks, head of public affairs at the Evangelical Alliance, has condemned the move, stating: “It seems pretty clear that the commission has been successfully intimidated against proceeding as they initially announced.

“They appear to have changed their initial approach as a result of the outcry from those groups who wish to restrict freedom of religion and religious rights of conscience being recognised more fairly by the courts.”

She is right. This is about restricting the freedom of religion, but if you are opposed to that, you must be in favour of homophobia. The EHRC had to made a choice and they have. However, the decision is open for consultation for two weeks so further flip-flopping on this issue can't yet be ruled out.

Consensual Slavery and the Law

Sometimes it seems that Law and Sexuality is just a fun subject, offering some interesting theoretical perspectives in a traditional liberal arts setting. It's not really 'proper' law, some say. Yet, the importance of practitioners understanding the law and sexuality in a socio-legal context is constantly proven in the courts, and before tribunals. Jane Fae comments in the Guardian today on a case that took place last week concerning the issue of 'consensual slavery'.

The case apparently focused on whether BDSM fell within the scope of 'belief' per the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003. Yes, I was surprised too, given that this regulation (along with what would have been more sensible, the Employment Equality (Sexual orientation) Regulations 2003) were repealed by the Equality Act 2010 (from 1 October 2010). I am left feeling a little confused! I'm assuming that the discussion is around the application of section 10 of the Equality Act (essentially, the old religion or belief regulation) but again, section 12 (sexual orientation) would have been a wiser (although still uncertain) course to pursue.

Read Jane's full piece here.

I also continue to strongly recommend Jane's blog which you can check out here. It focuses on trans issues and specifically her own transition but it will be of terrific interest to anyone interested in gender and sexuality.

Academia, Liberation, Equality, and Diversity

I must confess I missed this story when it appeared in the Times Higher as it had a rather bland headline. No fear of missing it in Pink News however. They scream the headline 'Academia Has Ignored LGBT Issues'. These news stories follow the publication by the National Union of Students (NUS) of a briefing document entitled Liberation, Equality and Diversity in the Curriculum which explores the issues of liberation, equality and diversity in high education curriculum's. The report seems to bear very little to the media coverage associated with it. You can check out the briefing document/report here.

It isn't just about sexuality, it's about disability, race and any other discrimination that can take place. The idea is that 'non-traditional' (in the language of the report) students should be catered for. For example, family law problems might commonly include same-sex couples in exam problem questions, but what about contract law, or commercial law, or tort?

In my experience, academia has actually been addressing these issues for years and the ratcheting up of quotes by NUS folks in a bid to get a headline (rather than base them on the substantive report) coupled with the near hysterical academic reactions on the Times Higher story are both misplaced responses.

This was a well meaning report that seems to have suffered a PR disaster. I'd be interested in hearing the thoughts of fellow academics and students on this.