The Guardian Gay Issue

Don't ever try and edit a post on your iPad.  I managed to delete this whole post earlier when trying to correct a typo.  Huge thanks to Alex who saved me by sending through the original text which is now back below.  Phew!

The Guardian carried a number of 'gay' Tories yesterday as part of their magazine 'gay issue'. A number of people have already commented on various social media platforms that the issue was very gay male focused and I think that's right. Although lesbians were covered (as the reference to 'sleeper-lesbians' demonstrates on the paper header) they didn't seem to be the central focus. Indeed, 'sleeper-lesbians' made them sound like a team of crack terrorists, ready to attack the nearest male meat vendor and disrupt the phallic dildo distribution network. We also had Alan Carr decked out as 'The' Queen on Liz's very own birthday. Republican/gay pride and all that.

Anyway, on to the content. The main piece was by the ever lovely Evan Davis - the openly gay presenter of the popular morning BBC Radio 4 show, Today. He wrote a piece 'Glad to be Gay, Glad to be Tory' which attracted quite a bit of RT action but for me seemed a tad meandering. The central question - which Davis fails to answer - is how such a historically homophobic party has also been stuffed full with homes (at least gay men at any rate). As someone who joined the Tory party at 15 (I'm now a member of the LibDems and a candidate in the local elections) and was also a member of TORCHE (the gay Conservative group before LGBTory) my reasons are as helpful - and as flawed - as any. I was interested in politics and in my neck of the woods that meant choosing between two parties - the Conservatives or Labour. The neighbouring constituency did have a strong LibDem group and so I took a punt and left a message for them as that was were I felt instinctively drawn. Of the other two, I was faced between a choice of a party that seemed to want to tell people what to do, and to treat everyone the same (Labour) verses a party that talked about opportunity, had a leader who genuinely knew what it was to work hard and succeed on your own endeavours and took an approach of giving people more control over their lives. Of course, the following years so the Conservatives drift to the right, and my own views (I think) have remained pretty much in the centre (although maybe more centre left these days). At no point was the issue of sexuality an influence on joining a party. However, I did manage to make the front page of that illustrious Lancashire rag, the Accrington Observer, in 1998 by calling for more people who identified as gay to join the party in a bid to make it more in touch, and more reflective of society. I was forced for resign and as I moved to university, I became disengaged from party politics, working instead first against top-up fees and then for the repeal of Section 28. My story is a personal one but it shows how perfectly rational joining the very party that introduced Section 28 can seem. It is for these reasons of complexity that - I think - Evan failed to find a clear and simple answer to his starting question.

Check out the Evan Davis Tory piece here.

On we move to a piece about gay parenting. I confess, I skim read most of it. This is as far away from my life and interest as reading about straight people and their children. This reaction served as a harsh reminder to me that although we still talk of 'the gay community' - always a problematic label - it is becoming more diffuse than ever before. What did strike me about the piece however were the images. They look very, well, posh. I felt like I was trapped in a Waitrose parenting supplement. I just know they will bore me with talk of granola and skinning holidays in real life. I don't sense any of these kids going to the local rough comp but I could be being entirely unfair. Of course, this is important not as part of some class bashing rant, but because it goes to the heart of our contemporary gay rights discourse. There is an assumption that we can all engage in surrogacy, and create this new families of choice. In truth, many of us - especially men - can't. It's a middle class homosexual activity. The rest of us are looking in, our noses pressed against the glass like some disgruntled street urchin seeking out the promised warmth inside. Oh well, back to the bareback party for the rest of us.

Check out that full piece (and the photos) here.


We also had a mea cupola from someone who tried to 'cure' gay people. The Times (£) also wanted to get in on the act and so the gay columnist - and former Tory MP - Matthew Paris who questions the simple tribe division between 'straight' and 'gay'. He is of course absolutely right in this regard and comes close to applying a queer critique. Unfortunately, he doesn't and instead the piece becomes rather muddled. Nonetheless, it does make a challenging and alternative intervention, worthy of a read.

Child-on-Child Sex Abuse

ABC News features a fascinating AP report on the subject of child-on-child sex abuse.  It's quite a detailed story with some fascinating academic and research insights, highlighting the complexities of this issue.  Whilst society arguably has a clear idea of the 'pedophile' and 'child abuser', cases of child-on-child abuse  disrupt these pre-conceptions, and challenge that totemic concept: childhood innocence.

Read the full story here.

Schools OUT Conference

Readers with an interest in education may be interested in this event - particularly if you are a school teacher. As always the Schools OUT Conference will be held on the first Saturday of February 2012. It is entitled: Educating OUT Prejudice through the LGBT Lens. Featuring the Classroom, The Rainbow Project and presenters and speakers from the other protected characteristics, the Conference will be rich in resources and ideas for practitioners in the classroom and stakeholders in education.

To register call the Drill Hall box office: 020 7307 5060

Fees
Until Jan 26 2012 Student or Unemployed £10, Retired £15 Individual £40 Organisation £50
After Jan 26, 2012 Student or unemployed £15 Retired £20 Individual £50 Organisation £60 

EDUCATING OUT PREJUDICE THROUGH THE LGBT LENS

Celebrating our new website the Classroom Gender Intelligence, Mermaids and GIRES will explore how to challenge the concept of binary gender Disability History Month will explore challenging disability HMI/Ofsted will explore how we can use the curriculum to celebrate diversity Workshops will explore the lesson plans on the website and there will be an opportunity to view the Rainbow Project films and hear from young people how they are working on the issues ...plus the usual chance to network and Schools out AGM vote in the new committee

More information here.

Centre for Sex, Gender and Sexualities: Inaugural Lecture

North East based students, scholars and thinkers will be interested in attending this.  I would encourage my own students to attend - it will be relevant to your assessment!  I'll also be going along so hope to see some of you there.

Thursday 17th November
6:15 – 7.30pm Appleby Lecture Theatre
Durham University Science Site, South Road, DH1 3LE

We know that Durham has sometimes had the image of being something of a blue stocking among universities – well, not any more. On 17th November in Durham, the University’s new Centre for Sex, Gender and Sexualities is holding its inaugural lecture.

Titled ‘Equality, Diversity, Queer Theory and Children in the Modern Age’, the lecture will explore the issue of sexuality, queerness and children. It is being given by celebrated queer theorist, Professor Kathryn Bond-Stockton of the University of Utah. 

Professor Jo Phoenix is the Director of the new Durham-based Centre. She says: ‘The Centre for Sex, Gender, and Sexualities will be unique in the UK, so its creation is a break-through moment both for queer studies nationally and for the University. The Centre is going to shape, inform and influence the often contentious debates surrounding sexuality, gender, identity, equality and politics, while the fact that it is being created by what some might regard as a more traditional, establishment university shows how forward-thinking Durham really is.’

 Please arrive from 6.00 pm for registration. The lecture will start at 6.30 pm and will be followed by a drinks reception and nibbles from 7.30 pm. If you have colleagues or associates you think would be interested in attending, please let us know via your RSVP and we will be happy to include them on the guest list. Please note that places are limited and it is wise to reserve your place. RSVP to

JoPhoenix.csgs@durham.ac.uk by 10th November.

The Porn Ban That Wasn't?

Curious times.  I blogged yesterday on briefed plans for new controls on access to pornography and other explicit material in British homes coupled with the launch of a new website - Parentport - through which parents could report their concerns about individual sites and obtain support.  The media reports were, I suggested, muddled.  Conflicted messaged about opt in or opt out and as the day advanced, there seemed a third option of opt in but only for news customers.  So I waited.  And I waited.  Eventually, the BBC updated their story in the evening - buried on the technology pages after it had started the morning headlining on the news and featuring prominently in many newspapers.

So where are we?  Well, Number 10 helpfully published a press release on the event.  It is headlined 'PM launched Parentport website' - so no mention of porn or the ISP's.  It states:  'The Prime Minister and Children’s Minister, Sarah Teather have hosted a summit at Downing Street on tackling the commercialisation and sexualisation of childhood. The Prime Minister was joined by parents and children to view the new Parentport website.'

Which all sounds rather lovely.  A Lib Dem minister plus the PrimeMinsiter had a few parents and children around to number 10 to take a look at a website.  Lovely, but it doesn't exactly set the heather alight does it?  What of the four ISP's trailed in the media stories, or the issue of opt in/opt out to website controls.  Buried mid way through the press release is the following line:

'The commitment from the top four Internet service providers (BT, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin) that all customers will receive an active choice at the point of purchase over whether they want to block adult content on their home Internet or laptops.'

Ahhh, an 'active choice'.  Seemingly vague but it does indeed suggest that these companies will have a box on their website or a question during purchase offering parents the opportunity to request a block - although the press release still doesn't define what 'adult content' is.  Questions continue to abound.

One of the interesting revelations in this press release was the inclusion of Sarah Tether - this was not a Cameron only, Conservative proposal.  It was a coalition proposal.  So, what are the Department of Education saying about the event?  This is the department that Tether is based in and which has produced the same press release text as Number 10 except the headline has mysteriously changed.  They go with:  'Prime Minister welcomes progress on tackling commercialisation and sexualisation of childhood but says more must be done.'  So perhaps we start to get to the bottom of the muddle - two departments involved in an event both attempting to say the same thing but spinning the story in a different way.  Then we add into the mix the Mothers Union who seem to have a more prominent say in the BBC report - and who - given their inclusion - were obviously briefed before the event and may well have also been briefing the media on how their understood the proposals.

So, we have a set of measures by some members of the Internet industry that still seem incredibly ill-thought out, badly conceived and unlikely to achieve the misplaced aims that the British Government seems to want to achieve.  Yet, I am less concerned than I was this time yesterday morning as the changes are perhaps more stupid than scary.

Internet Control, Censorship and Child Safety: New Parliamentary Inquiry Launched

I've just posted news and initial thoughts on a new Parliamentary Inquiry into online child safety on the new IT Law Node blog I've been setting up. Check it out here.

Hold the Confetti! No Wedding For Bert and Ernie

I confess I am a bit of a Muppets fan, and as a child, like so many generations, I was a big Sesame Street fan. I was therefore pretty thrilled with the campaign to marry Bert and Ernie. Whatever your thoughts on marriage (and I remain in the sceptic camp) I do believe that same-sex marriages should exist and it would be great for children to see two much loved male characters get married.

Sadly, the BBC reports the campaign has not succeeded. A statement from the show's makers said: "They remain puppets and do not have a sexual orientation."

But they conceded that the pair are "male characters and possess many human traits and characteristics".

The confirmed bachelors have lived together for 40 years and sleep in the same bedroom, albeit in single beds.

"Bert and Ernie are best friends," the statement from Sesame Workshop added. "They were created to teach preschoolers that people can be good friends with those who are very different from themselves.

If you've had some sort of deprived life and have never seen Bert and Ernie check out the clip below. Personally, they've always struck me as looking like Joe Orton and Kenneth Halliwell (with wig) - maybe Ernie will one day be found bludgeoned to death by a hammer? As it is, we see a much more gentle relationship in the clip below but I'm sure I'm not the first one to think Ernie was to later say: "this one's really hard Bert, what's in my pants?"


In case you were wondering...Grover was always my favourite character.

The Long Legal Shadow of Section 28

I've just had another short webzine piece published entitled 'The Long Legal Shadow of Section 28'. I offer my reflections on the legacy of the mow repealed 'Section 28' in the wake of the recent Opera North controversy. There's a link with background on the main article for non-UK readers (and anyone else who doesn't know the ON background). Check it out here. Please feel free to comment on the post.

The Sexualisation of Youth

The publication of the Bailey Report on the so-called sexualisation of children coincided with me being out of the country, and swamped with work. I may be back in the UK, but I'm still swamped. Let me therefore point you in the direction of an excellent discussion of the issues with the wonderful Petra Boynton - check out her blog here - It's full of all the links you could possibly want. Charlie Brooker has added his ever caustic and wise voice to the debate in today's Guardian; check out that piece here.

A Spot of Bikini Bottom Bother

Oh dear readers, I have a confession to make. I am a bit of a Spongebob Squarepants fan (as luck would have it I'm wearing a pair of my newly acquired Spongebob Squarepants socks as I type). Poor Spongey has got into some terrible scrapes off screen in recent years - not least with questions about his sexuality. Now, as the Guardian highlights this morning, he's in a spot of bother with a line of merchandise, shown below. The Bikini Bottom Groom and Go is obviously in reference to Bikini Bottom, the place where lovable Spongebob lives. Unfortunately, for the uninitiated, it suggests that 3 year olds are about to embark on some waxing of their nether regions. As I blogged yesterday, some feminists are worrying about porn but maybe it's Spongebob that's lead young girls on to the path towards Veet.

In all seriousness, I think people need to get a grip (if you'll pardon the phrase). This is potentially a 'toy' that will socialise children into 'adult modes' of behaviour - but as the picture suggests, this is pitched at the face - and men. In any case, I suspect that more middle aged gay men bought this as an amusing gift than parents trying to socialise their daughters into shaving their crotch.

Sexualisation of 'Children'

One of David Cameron's 'issues' was the apparent 'sexualisation of children' -padded bras and Playboy stationary and such like. Yes, one day your charming 7 year old Felicity might be playing with a playboy pencil and the next day she would be playing with a penis - her mind polluted by naff looking stationary products. A Playboy 2011 diary will turn you into a veritable slut.

I do think we need to get a grip of ourselves (as you can hear a minister saying without irony). Well today the LibDem minister, the plucky Sarah Tether, has launched a review of the 'commercialisation and sexualisation of children'. She's the Children's Minister but thanks to a post-election Whitehall re-structure she sits in the Department of Education (which seems a bit odd to me but what do I know).

For all my gentle mockery, I do think there are some issues that need exploring but I think it needs to be done on a rational measured basis rather than asking a load of ranty yummy mummies off certain well-known websites. The review is going to look at the following areas:

* risks of harm and barriers to parenting
* principles – what is acceptable in this area and what is not
* consumer voice
* corporate social responsibility.

Interestingly for a Tory led coalition, the review is based on the notion that the market has failed - and that state intervention is needed in order to influence the development of gender and sexuality, with tether quoted in the press release as saying:

"We’ve all read the headlines about high-street shops selling inappropriate products for children and many of us are worried about some of the marketing practices that are being used specifically to target children. By reviewing commercialisation and sexualisation of childhood we want to better understand not only how we can help parents resist these things, but also how we encourage all businesses to take their responsibilities as seriously as the best ones already do."

I'm really curious to see if the report will result in legal change. The BBC reports on the story here (overseas readers might not be able to see the video).

The terms of the review and a written ministerial statement can both be viewed here.

Abuse by Under 18s

The Today Programme on Radio4 carried a fascinating little interview today. It featured an anonymous father and also a spokesman from Stop It Now. The interview comes in the wake of new evidence that shows about one-third of all sexual offences are committed by people under the age of 18.

The anonymous father found himself facing the issues that law and society present when his 12-year-old son was accused of touching inappropriately an eight-year-old girl at a party.

Well worth a listen.

Obscene Child Pornography Laws?

Katherine Sansom has written a wonderful piece for the online webzine FIPA in which she explores and challenges the child pornography laws in England and Wales. It's controversial and challenging stuff but I think Sansom makes very valid and important points in an area that makes it very difficult to offer new and challenging perspectives.

I personally think there's an argument to abolish all child pornography laws (Sansom doesn't go this far) - whilst criminalising the acts that are depicted/acts performed under duress. Thus, a 14 year old masturbating on their camera phone and who sends it to his/her/zir girlfriend/boyfriend/lover would not be criminalised (together with the recipient) but the abusive family member forcing a 14 year old to make such a recording would still be criminalised. On the other hand, I continue to listen to the arguments about pornography making 'real world' acts more likely and I remain open to persuasion on that point. I confess it's an area I'm still exploring and thinking through (before the lynch mob arrives!) but contributions such as that Sansom makes, are important in a measured and rationale exploration of an emotive area of law.

Check out the full piece here.

Public Sex, a Knight and Oxford's Capture by the Whore of Babylon

One might be mistaken for believing that Oxford has come under the jurisdiction of the Whore of Babylon going off the local rag - the Oxford Mail - this week. You might argue that could be a good thing but that's one for another post...

Today, the illustrious rag features a piece on a local vicar complaining about children drunk and 'having sex' in his church yard. The alcohol seems well evidenced (like much of the country) and we are right to be concerned about this tiny minority of young people who do drink alcohol to excess underage - and we ought to work with families to address this. The sex point seems a bit more odd. No-one seems to have witnessed sex in the article (I can see how "vicar watches teens have sex in church yard" might take the story in a different direction), but the vicar comments that: "I notice the condoms in the path when I go to open up, and sometimes we pick up empty vodka bottles. You would think it would be in the summer, but it’s any time of year".

I do like the implicit idea that you can understand a 13 year old having sex outside in the summer, but the winter, now come on that's just plain naughtiness. There is no indication whether the condoms are used or not (and thus whether they are just young kids messing around with condoms or using them for sex) but at a time of sky-rocketing STD rates, isn't it great that these kids are managing their sex lives? Doesn't it perhaps show that even when pissed out of their skulls, these kids are switched on enough to think about their health and make reasoned decisions about pregnancy and/or sexual health?

Anyway, that's just a minor story I stumbled upon and you can read it in full here. The real story that drove me to the Oxford Mail (for it is not my general source of news) appeared on Pink News on Friday. It's the story of Sir Beville Stanier (only in England can we have people called that) who Pink News tells us is a 'Tory grandee' and also 'a friend of the Queen.' That's not code apparently -they mean the little elderly lady we think of as Her Majesty.

Well, Sir Beville has got a spot of trouble with some blighters on his land. TB carrying badgers? Foxes? No, it's those rampant horny men humping and bumping all over his modest 2000 acre estate. This noble knight of the realm (heaven help us) is upset at recent moves by the council to 'clear up' his site and install a new fence - which the Pink News helpfully tells us 'can be accessed from a layby on the M40.'

Apparently, it's not good enough and the blighters are returning for some nocturnal cruising. Now, one presumes this is not in direct sight of Sir Beville? If it is going on in trees one does wonder how he knows about it? Who exactly is it bothering? Why on earth are the Police maintaining a "presence" at the site, and why should Sir Beville get his way and have even more Police there? I for one suggest he dons his armor like knights of old and guards the fence himself, or alternatively digs into his presumably substantial pockets and pays for a new improved fence.

Check out the Pink news story here and the Oxford Mail story here.

Mapplethorpe's Unsuitable Willies

The second great value piece in the Guardian today is an article by Kathryn Flett on the front page of the Family section. Her piece 'Call me a prude, but...' is a bit middle-class dinner party "oh the the modern nightmare", but is no less brilliant for being so. It seems inspired by the Mapplethorpe exhibition at the Towner gallery in Eastborne. At this point I should declare an interest, I am a Mapplethorpe fan.

Anyway, Flett noticed the presence of kids being dragged around the gallery and for whom Mapplethorpe's various photographs of willies and leather might not be standard viewing fodder. Part of me giggles with delight at the vision of the middle class parent "look Oliver, here's a rather wondrous BDSM-esque depiction". With great humor, Flett bemoans her minority status as a 'square' who wouldn't like her children getting up-close and personal with a Mapplethorpe picture.

I sit from the dizzying moral heights of a childless gay man. For me, Children in art galleries mean an irritating noisy distraction (felt like throttling a kid in London's Tate Britain gallery last week) but I'm also the now middle class academic who thinks if I had kids I would take them to an art gallery and...and...and...off we go to the land of fiction with perfect kids. The reality is a bit more messy, a bit more compromise and muddling through.

Where Flett compromises, other parents seem intent on instilling some form of self-improvement and worldly-wise attitudes. If it means that we have a generation that is a little more comfortable with diverse sexual lifestyles and identities, that's got to be a good thing. However, like Flett, I suspect for many it's probably just a rather dull visit. Children should be encouraged to engage with this art (and all art) as a way of engaging with society but you can do that y showing your child pictures at home, and if they show genuine interest, taking them to a gallery. More often than not, I suspect parents are publicly declaring "look at me, and my superior moral outlook" rather than truly doing something that benefits the child.

The Flett piece is well worth reading in full. Check it out here.

"Mom, Can I go as Daphne?"

This is the sweetest story I've read in such a long time. A US Mom has blogged in defence of her son's request (and her consent) that her son dressed up as Daphne from Scooby-Doo for Halloween. Her five year old son can be seen on the right of this post. Christian mothers (Chritains celebrating a pagan festival, surely some mistake?) criticised her decision as she recounts in her post:

“And then Mom C approaches,” writes Nerdy Apple Bottom. “She had been in the main room, saw us walk in, and followed us down the hall to let me know her thoughts. And they were that I should never have ‘allowed’ this and thank God it wasn’t next year when he was in Kindergarten since I would have had to put my foot down and ‘forbidden’ it. To which I calmly replied that I would do no such thing and couldn’t imagine what she was talking about. She continued on and on about how mean children could be and how he would be ridiculed.

“My response to that: The only people that seem to have a problem with it is their mothers.”

What a fab Mom. Well done you.

The Advocate reported on the story and the original full blog can be read here.

Values and Kids TV

My favourite character in the political drama The West Wing was Toby (no surprise to those who know me) and one of my favourite scenes is where he defends PBS and Sesame Street. This (and my last post) got my thinking about kids TV. A quick trawl of YouTube highlights so many value laden shows that I grew up with in the 80s.



One of the earliest shows I watched was 'The Get Along Gang' (I had the toy haunted mansion. lol), clip below. A show based on the whole notion of 'getting along' and overcoming difference.



Then there was the endless string of shows about battling 'evil', from Thundercats and Transformers through to He-Man and the Gummi Bears. Then there were the shows that fostered a sense of conservative values such as one of my favourite shows as a child, The Wind in the Willows:


There were also shows that celebrated difference. Listening back to the opening credits of Raggy Dolls, it's hard not to find new meaning in the lyrics:



Later on, we even had shows that addressed the emerging issue of the environment - notably Captain Planet.



When I look at my generation, now in their late twenties or early thirties, it's a generation that has so clearly been affected by these values. If those shows socialised us into the people we are today, how are today's children's shows socialising kids? How are they shaping conceptions of gender,sexuality, right and wrong? Lacking kids, I really don't know the answer, but I hope those who do will post some comments. What shows did you watch as kids?

Teaching Kids Feminism

The Guardian ran an interesting story yesterday about gender constructions amongst children. The piece wanted to explore whether it was possible to teach a five year old feminism through the books that children are provided with. Five different books were considered and the piece concluded by stating: 'you can't teach gender studies to small children in a day, but you can make a start'. Of course, we don't know the range of other books that the children had been exposed to but thinking about the perceptions of gender (and sexuality) that children are exposed to should be something that parents think about in terms of providing a mix of texts to young kids.

Gay Men and the Church

A couple of stories doing the rounds today on the subject of the church. First off, Rev Scot Rennie has been appointed as a minister in Aberdeen. He is the first openly gay clergyman with crucially, a sexually active relationship in the UK. Wowzers I hear you cry. Yes this is significant but fear not, more than 12,000 people including 272 serving Church of Scotland ministers, more than 700 ministers from Protestant and Catholic churches in Britain and more than 500 from oversees signed an online petition protesting. Having been appointed, the question must surely be - how long can he stay appointed? Read more here.

More cheery news from the church, this time from father John Owen, the communications officer (surely some mistake? lol) for the archdiocese of Cardiff who popped up on the BBCs 'Big Questions' show yesterday morning and proclaimed in light of the Ryan Inquiry (published last week) that 'most of these offences [priests having sex with children] are being committed by homosexuals'. Read the full story here.

Bob the Builder

The Sunday Times has rather a fun little piece on Bob the Builder today. You can see an original design for Bob on the right. The ST points to camper origins and the Village People writing:

'Some observers have remarked that, with his chunky moustache and hands on hips, the early sketch of Bob bears a resemblance to David “Scar” Hodo, the “construction worker” character who sang with the Village People, the camp 1970s disco ensemble best known for the song YMCA'.

Rather like the New Labour project, Bob was stripped of his moustache in the final version.

Read the full article here.