“It terrifies me, the fragility of these moments in our lives.”
Wednesday, 26 July 2017
its nearly fifty obe years since Wolfenden and legalisation of homosexuality
Fifty obe years since Wolfenden and legalisation of homosexuality
The Thorpe Scandal must remind us us of the way things stood prior to the legalisation of male homosexualiy. it is likely that not only jeremy thorpe was gay but also that Ted Heath leader of the Conservative party was as well. This means that two of the political parties were led by men who technically had commited a criminal offence. When I see today gay men extolling Conservative and far Right or Alt Right views then I know that they are both ignorant of the struggles of their predecessors and severely limited in their own appreciation of liberation and sacrifice that others have made.
It will be 51 soon years on since the decriminalisation of
homosexuality occured. Today most of us are aware that our sexuality
is a given . There are slill those unsure either of themselves,
misquoting and misinterpreting Hebrew laws of the Torah or who are just
ignorant. Today transgender equality is needed. Gender, biology and
sexuality are all one intersecting area on a Venn diagram of identity. If we are secure in our identity then we are healthy
If we are oppressed by others claiming religion ,authority or wisdom
we become mentally ill and afraid. How dare conservatives claim that
other sexualities make people mentally ill. It is the narrow actions
that many conservatives they promote that is the cause. In an age of
binary categories many are crushed by the stones of ignorance, prejudice
and fear.
My own sexuality is I am afraid a product of the era I
was born in. It's a product of the society and the film's I watched
with my father. My perception of the feminine belongs to another world
of black and white female filmstars. But the difference is that I
recognise that my sexuality is culturally constructed. We should all
realise this and do our best on inderstanding our own prejudices and
conditioning....
I can't help anecdotally noting that throughout
history those who are oppressed and denied often are the most creative.
Throughout history I have noticed how many of the most creative and
artistic have had other sexualities and gender awareness. Those of us
who are more conventional are often poorer in expressing both our
emotions and creativity. The price of being persecuted may in turn give
other gifts, abilities and awareness. And that is not a justification
for prejudice. . Those who have different sexualities and embrace the
right are spitting on those who struggled for gay and transgender
equality.... thanks
The Wolfinden commission heard testimony from
many gay men and consequently led to the legalisation of homosexuality
in 1967. Tonight the BBC have a film about the last man to be imprisoned
for loving other men. His name was Peter Wolf and he was the only gay
man to testify to the commission. Many others were too scared to do so.
We still see many men over 70 today prejudiced and still afraid of
homosexuality.
Some thirty years ago I had a client who was
unable to be with his life time lover because in the 50s gay men were
not able to be the next of kin. They said goodbye on a hospital phone
because it the love that date not speak it's name. It still upsets me
now just remembering what I was told. Please educate yourself tonight on
how things were....
The Wildeblood scandal: the trial that rocked 1950s Britain – and changed gay rights
It was the case that had everything: aristocrats, airmen, entrapment
and immunity. But one gay man in the dock refused to go quietly. Adam
Mars-Jones on how the courage of Peter Wildeblood paved the way to a
more tolerant Britain
The Wildeblood case was less sensational than the Wilde
case, but it has had as much of an afterlife. Peter Wildeblood’s ordeal
– he was tried and convicted in 1954, along with Lord Montagu of
Beaulieu and Michael Pitt-Rivers – is as far in the past now as Wilde’s
imprisonment in 1895 was then. It is the contrast in their actions after
prison that marks the difference between Wilde’s and Wildeblood’s
experiences of disgrace.
While he was serving his sentence Wildeblood resented the
well-meaning assumption, made by warders and others, that he would
disappear when he was released, most likely living abroad as Wilde had
done. Instead, he intended to take up his interrupted life – and he did,
though with a new reformist agenda. He had been a journalist, but
hardly a campaigning one (he was the diplomatic correspondent of the
Daily Mail at the time of his arrest). He had found a subject, and his
memoir, Against the Law, was published in 1955, the year of his
release. The title of the book has a subtle double meaning, perhaps
muffled on first publication by the prominence of the word “victim” on
the cover – those were the days when the marketing of a hardback could
be more lurid than the paperback that followed it. The title plays with
the overtones of the word “against”: before Wildeblood was sent to
prison his activities merely contravened the law; afterwards they
opposed it.
In a British sex scandal it is no surprise that class should be a
factor, but it plays out in the Wildeblood case in a variety of ways.
The obvious point is that toffs were targeted for prosecution, Lord
Montagu above all, in a way that was hardly disguised. It was all very
selective: two young airmen, Edward McNally and John Reynolds, received
immunity in return for their incriminating testimony and named more than
20 other sexual partners, against whom no action was taken. (There was
never any suggestion that either McNally or Reynolds had been seduced by
any of the men – they were willing participants.) The intention may
have been to underline that social privilege offered no protection, or
to reinforce the myth that homosexuality is inherently an aristocratic
perversion or pastime.
Wildeblood in his book proposes that the prosecution of prominent
homosexuals was part of an agenda, strongly urged by the United States,
to weed such people out from important government jobs. In America,
McCarthy’s red scare had been accompanied by a “lavender” one, with mass
firings of gay employees from the state department. Lurking somewhere
in the background are the figures of the spies Burgess and Maclean,
whose betrayals made social privilege, homosexuality and treason seem a
mutually reinforcing trinity. It was put to Wildeblood during his trial
that it was a “feature” of gay men to seek “love associates” in
different walks of life from their own, and that McNally was infinitely
his social inferior. He replied that it had never been flung in his face
that he was consorting with his social inferiors during the war (he
served in the RAF). As the book describes, the war years had given him a
welcome taste of social inclusion after an education he experienced as
alienating – his fellow-servicemen, seeing he was hopeless at it,
covered for his deficiencies in drill. He claimed the right to choose
his friends.
Wildeblood
acknowledges the importance of his legal team, making the comment about
Arthur Prothero: “There is some truth in the saying that a man’s best
friend is his solicitor.” Prothero lent him a pair of long johns so that
he wouldn’t shiver in the cold courtroom and thereby seem frightened.
The anti-authoritarian solicitor has never been a common type, and in
the 1950s Prothero was possibly unique. He was a friend of my family’s –
though it was his younger brother Stanley, who died on 6 June this
year, a day after his 101st birthday, I knew personally – and the
background they shared may be relevant. Their father was one of the “big
five” detectives at Scotland Yard, but Arthur seems to have enjoyed
making mischief. As a young man he enjoyed visiting dodgy nightclubs and
making sure the management knew whose son he was, confident that they
would sit him near the front door and keep the food and drink coming
indefinitely as a sort of insurance policy. In the event of a raid his
presence would make the police think twice about making any fuss.
Prothero of the Yard instructed his children to go into the
law, and they all did (both boys, and their sister Dorothy as well).
Arthur’s obedience, though, was laced with insubordination, since he
didn’t shy away from calling police evidence into question. In the case
that recommended the barrister Peter Rawlinson to Wildeblood, the
“towpath murders”, Rawlinson was junior counsel, and Arthur Prothero was
crucial in persuading him to cross-examine the murder squad detective
Herbert Hannam aggressively over two days, casting doubt on much of his
evidence, a controversial procedure in those days. Even in a case where a
bloodstained axe that had been found in the accused’s car went missing
(a police constable had taken it home and was using it to chop wood).
The accused, Alfred Charles Whiteway, was convicted and hanged, and this
is unlikely to have been a miscarriage of justice, but Peter Wildeblood
wanted a legal team that didn’t blindly assume police procedures were
above board. Dishonest police dealing with gay men was a matter of
course on the streets of London, and entrapment a constant risk for the
unwary. It had already emerged that a date stamp in Montagu’s passport
had been altered while it was in police possession, so as to make him
seem a liar.
To look at it from the other side, what was it that attracted
Prothero to a case that most solicitors would regard as unsavoury,
particularly as Wildeblood was resolved to announce his sexual
orientation in court? It may have been one more defiance of his father’s
values. Chief Inspector Prothero had been the only witness called in
the prosecution of The Well of Loneliness in 1928. He testified
that the very theme of Radclyffe Hall’s novel was offensive, and the
magistrate ordered all copies of it destroyed. If he had wanted to
dramatise a generational shift of attitude about same-sex relations,
Arthur could hardly have done the job more clearly, or more publicly.
This was a case that would make front-page news.
There were other shifts of attitude taking place, of the sort
conventionally associated with the 1960s, as the last day of the trial
showed. There was a delay before the convicted men were taken away,
though they only understood the reason for it later. Wildeblood had been
spat at by a stranger a few days before (“a middle-aged, tweedy person
wearing a sensible felt hat”), in an echo of Wilde’s ordeal on the
platform of Clapham Junction railway station, but on the day of
sentencing the current of public feeling ran the other way. It was
McNally and Reynolds who were jeered and barracked, by a crowd of
perhaps two hundred, as they left the court. The small group of people,
mainly women, who surrounded the car (an old Rolls-Royce) taking the new
convicts away were conveying messages of support not condemnation –
saying “keep smiling”, giving the thumbs-up and applauding.
The existence of public support for gay people was a new element of
the Wildeblood case, and it features in his book even before the text
begins, with the dedication (in capitals to make sure no one missed it)
“TO MY MOTHER AND FATHER”. It’s not that homosexuals were always
disowned by their families – support was always a possibility. It was
making that support public that was new. It suggested that the shrouding
corrosive fog of disgrace that had seemed a permanent feature of the
British moral landscape was thinning, and might eventually blow away. Against the Law agitated for civil rights for homosexuals,
but the book is also an attack on conditions in the prison system, and
after his release Wildeblood involved himself in the process of
rehabilitating criminals, trying to break the pattern of their
reoffending and returning to prison. His support wasn’t conditional on
sharing an orientation. He understood that the privileged new idea of
gay people not being a separate species brought obligations along with
it.
In those days hardback and paperback publication were not smoothly
co-ordinated, to the point where they count almost as separate events.
That was certainly how it worked with the Penguin version of Against the Law.
It was during Wildeblood’s prison term that the Woolfenden committee
was set up to investigate the state of the law as it regarded
homosexuality and prostitution, and to make recommendations for reform
if need be. In fact his conviction along with his socially prominent
co-defendants lent a strong impulse to the formation of such a
committee, and he gave evidence to it. The paperback of Against the Law was published early in 1957, and the committee published its report later that year.
There was a stubborn assumption in some quarters that controversial
material only became dangerous when widely distributed and made cheaply
available. Pamela Hansford Johnson, for instance, in her book On Iniquity,
subtitled “some personal reflections arising out of the Moors Murders
trial” and published in the year that homosexuals finally received some
civil recognition (1967), recalls the “little storm” she had raised, not
long before, “by suggesting, in a letter to the Guardian, that it was
not desirable for Krafft-Ebing [whose Psychopathia Sexualis was
intended as a serious study] to be available in relatively cheap
paperback edition on the bookstalls of English railway stations.” Class
again. The idea was indirectly expressed in the Lady Chatterley
trial in 1960 (Penguin Books the defendant) in the suggestion made to
the jury that “you” wouldn’t want your wife or servants exposed to such a
book – the implication being that “you” might not need protection, but
others did.
Naturally enough Wildeblood wanted his book widely and cheaply
available, since one of the points he made in it, by breaking down
criminal convictions by social category, was that homosexuality cut
across class lines. A cheap book available from station bookstalls would
reach exactly those people who needed to know they weren’t alone.
George Weidenfeld, who had sold the rights to Penguin, was mortified
that Weidenfeld & Nicolson was not credited as the original
publishers in the paperback, especially as it was the first book Penguin
had acquired from him, though his firm had been in operation since 1949
(the correspondence is part of the Penguin archive held at the
University of Bristol). He described himself as “terribly distressed”,
since he had assumed that such an acknowledgement was standard practice:
“The prestige of the mention of one’s name in a Penguin book – a
tribute to your reputation – is a very material point in favour of an
arrangement with your house as distinct from other reprint houses.”
There seems something barbed in that condescending phrase “reprint
houses” after praise of Penguin’s reputation, as if he felt that the
paperback publishers were claiming too much credit for a book originated
by someone else.
Penguin, though, had the resources and willingness to turn the book
into something of a campaign. At a party in November 1958 Sir Allen
Lane, the founder of Penguin, suggested to Wildeblood that a copy of Against the Law
should be sent to every sitting MP, since a debate was expected during
the parliamentary session. The Penguin archive shows that the idea
originated with Lane, just as he personally initiated the publication of
Lady Chatterley’s Lover
a year or so later. Wildeblood felt that the intervention would be most
effective with a covering letter from Lane rather than himself. Lane
agreed, and although the wording of the letter was submitted to
Wildeblood for approval it didn’t originate with him. Signing your name
600 times or so may not seem much of a political act, now that mass
mailshots can be generated with a click of a mouse, but anyone who
thinks so should try it. In any case it was almost another decade before
the law was changed.
Lane asked to see A Way of Life, Wildeblood’s sequel to Against the Law, and the first of his two novels, but didn’t acquire the rights. This is a shame in the case of A Way of Life,
which richly opens out its personal material. The book describes a
variety of gay lives, profiting not only from Wildeblood’s journalistic
skills but his new status. As he puts it, “By going to prison I had
become what statisticians call ‘socially mobile’, but to an extent of
which no statistician had ever dreamed.” He befriends some entertaining
young men on the make, such as the endlessly complaining Reggie: “They
always want to take you to the ballet or something instead of paying
hard cash. All you end up with is a lot of old long-playing records and
your memories of Miss Fonteyn in Firebird, which doesn’t help
much in your old age.” Wildeblood himself speaks up for the virtues of
monogamy, feeling that one of the iniquities of the law was that it made
it more dangerous for two men to live together than for the unattached
to have shallow adventures, but he doesn’t invalidate conflicting
testimony.
He is also fascinated by heterosexual prostitution, inspired perhaps
by the Woolfenden committee investigating that area. The effect, to be
po-faced about it, is to destabilise the normality of straight
behaviour, to the benefit of gay prestige, but his informant Pam is a
wonderful character in her own right. She leaves a barrow boy who has a
taste for bondage trussed up and suspended, with the maid keeping an eye
on him while she catches up on the ironing. Meanwhile Pam nips out to
the pub to see what else she can find. Next thing she knows, the barmaid
is passing on an unusual message from home: “She says you’ve given her a
chicken to cook and it’s all trussed up, but she thinks it’s a bad one
or something because it’s turning quite black. . .” It’s a close call. A Way of Life also contains a brief passage, paraphrasing
someone else’s experience, in which Wildeblood allows himself to channel
homosexual desire with a power startling for the period: “Gordon had
never looked at a man’s body in this way before; he saw it for the first
time as something to desire and fear, an instrument of tenderness and
annihilation whose purposes he could not know.”
Judged by that standard, Wildeblood’s novels, The Main Chance (1957) and West End People (1958), must count as missed opportunities, though The Crooked Mile, a musical version of West End People,
had a successful run. It’s not that the books aren’t lively or
inventive. “It groped around inside itself with its slim mechanical
hand, coughed, and placed the chosen record on its spinning navel” –
anyone who can describe a jukebox in those terms knows what he’s about.
There are bits of camp dialogue: “Don’t you ever read the papers!” /
“Good heavens, no, dear. It’s bad enough having to write for them.”
There’s social diversity of a certain restricted sort: “He stumbled,
picked himself up and ran down a side-turning, followed by a hooting mob
of espresso-bar skifflers, pacifists, pickpockets, evangelists and
tarts.” But no gay men in evidence, though a writer of the period like
Angus Wilson could introduce homosexual characters and themes into his
novels without the world ending. Instead Wildeblood, particularly in West End People,
takes a bizarre side turn into Damon Runyon territory, with lovable
villains called Jug Ears Jones, Fingers, the Bishop, Bugsy, Mugsy and
the Horse. It’s an odd choice for him to make, after refusing for so
long to compromise or disappear. He puts everything into his novels
except his bravery.
No comments:
Post a Comment