Degrees of HOMOPHOBIA in the UK vs. Malawi
Did you catch the 5PM news on BBC Radio 4 on Saturday 29th May 2010? If you didn’t there were two news items that caught my attention.
- Ban Ki-Moon the UN secretary General was in Malawi to meet the President who promptly pardoned the two men jailed the previous week for being gay. The President of Malawi said “I have pardoned them but this does not mean I condone their acts”
- David Laws was reported to have claimed housing expenses that he was not entitled to and paid rent to his partner. According to one of the people they interviewed about this matter, It appeared that there was a mix up in what constituted a partner as far he was concerned and this arrangement meant he could protect his private life from the prying eyes of the Press and possibly because some amongst those nearest and dearest to him did not know that he was gay and might be upset by this. David Laws is an honest man and he would not have knowingly claimed money that he was not entitled to and the only explanation that made sense to person being interviewed was that of Mr Laws wish to keep his private life private.
The radio reporter wondered how it was that in today’s Britain people like Mr Laws felt that they needed to keep their sexuality a secret after all other politicians like Mr Mandelson are openly gay. I did wonder about this too
By Sunday the UK story or Mr Laws’ story to be precise had moved on and it transpired that Mr Laws had resigned from the government and some in the news said this would not have happened in the USA and Britain was still a homophobic society. As I write Monday 31 May 2010, it has been reported that Mr Laws is considering resigning as an MP altogether.
Why did these news items catch my attention?
It really is a question of ethics for me.
You may or not have followed the stories of homophobia and the persecution of gay people in Africa. Some Africans are supporting their leaders who have vowed to take draconian steps to end what they consider anti Christ behaviour amongst some of their citizens and imports from the Western culture.
The sentencing of the two young men in Malawi was indeed a cause for celebration amongst some citizens whilst here in the UK questions were asked whether our tax of almost £70M should be paid to a country such as Malawi in Aid under the circumstances.
If we agree that this should not happen is it right that Mr Laws should be hounded out of his job because of his sexual orientation assuming that this is indeed what is behind it all?
To what degree have we here in the UK come to terms with people’s sexual preferences?
Not so long ago a survey of British headlines revealed that here in Britain people had become more tolerant and indeed that being gay and famous in the UK isn’t newsworthy.
Are degrees to which we are or not Homophobic here in UK less or greater than those in Malawi and the rest of Africa?
The answer is probably yes we don’t put people in prison for being gay nor threaten to punish others that may fail to report gay people to authorities.
But if our society has indeed hounded Mr Laws out of his job on the grounds of his sexuality does that make us any better than homophobic folk in Africa?
Over to you folk What do you think?
About IdaHornerFounder of Ethnic Supplies a social enterprise working to alleviate poverty amongst East African women involved in textile and handicraft production. Managing Editor of Africa on the blog
View all posts by IdaHorner →
7 Responses to Degrees of HOMOPHOBIA in the UK vs. Malawi
All that jazz – All in A Day
Review of: Cousin Alice Jazz Music by Cousin Alice: Elaine Sturgess Reviewed by: Elaine Sturgess Rating: 5 On January 21, 2012 Last modified: January 30, 2012 Summary: What makes Alice so distinctive is her wonderfully smokey voice, a quality that furniture designer William Yeoward found so arresting at a concert she was performing for the [...]
Fascinating blog, Ida – thanks!
Homophobia is wrong in any of its guises, but it is a question of degree. In this country gay couples won't be automatically imprisoned by the government for being gay, but they still face institutional racism across many areas, meaning their life opportunities are much more restricted than heterosexual people.
And gay people here still can't take for granted many of the parts of life that heterosexual people do. They can't marry in their chosen place of worship, they face the risk of bullying, discrimination or constructive dismissal (making their life unbearable) if they come out in the workplace, they face the risk of losing friends, family, respect, housing rights, equal health care, safety walking the streets, fair treatment by the justice system etc if they come out at all. Children in schools who are gay, or think they may be gay, or who other people think may be gay still face homophobic bullying in schools (mainly, surprisingly, by teachers).
So we can celebrate not living in a place where gay people are routinely imprisoned, but we still have a very long way to go.
Twitter: evenbreak
It is very sad to note that on the one hand we are very liberal and tolerant as a society but appear choosy when it comes to what we can tolerate.
The debate about Mr Laws continues and was a subject of today's a Week in Westminster http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00slc2k#synopsis
But as you say it could be worse if like Malawi and else where in Africa people were routinely imprisoned for being Gay
He hasn't been hounded out because he's gay, he's been hounded out because he was cheating the system. The fact he was gay is neither here nor there and I find it disgusting that he thinks it is appropriate to use it as an excuse to diddle his expenses. He's done the right thing albeit too late.
Comparing Law's voluntarily standing down and two people who were sentenced for being themselves seems like a waste of time for me.
Well, he actually spent less than he would have done otherwise – where he “broke the rules” was by not declaring his relationship with his partner. The tax payer didn't lose out – in fact we gained – but he didn't play it by the book because he didn't want the whole world knowing his private relationships.
But even leaving his case out of it, homophobia is still rampant in Britain, albeit not at the point where gay men are automatically detained for being gay.
Twitter: evenbreak
I can't claim to be an expert on these matters and as such the purpose of my blog so that those in the know can enlighten me.
In Africa people argue that we in Britain are being hypocrites and that we are just as homophobic as they are. Is that so? I would say not to the extent of putting people in jail.
Jane, you may find this article interesting
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/ma…
I don't agree, Jane. The gay issue is definitely a sideline cover and not the real problem. As Adam says, he broke the rules and claimed money he was not only not entitled to, which was made even worse by the fact that he is a rich man. To say nothing and claim nothing would have been the wisest course of action. And yet, even through the expenses furore, he carried on claiming.
For a man who was supposed to be in charge of our finances, that is absolutely horrifying. Even now, his comments suggest that he did nothing wrong in his own eyes, only in the eyes of others.
I can't believe that David Cameron didn't ask every potential Cabinet member to examine whether there was anything hiding in their cupboards before confirming any appointments.
Of course, it also tells you a lot about the Daily Telegraph, who had the story but kept it for when it would most benefit their sales. Not much interest in turning around the country there, was there?