As many of you may know already, the UK Parliament will this month be debating a measure to reduce the age of consent for male homosexuals from 21 to 16 (the same as for heterosexuals and lesbians). Below is the full text of a pamphlet produced by Stonewall setting out the arguments in favour. Reproduced and distributed by permission. I've also sent this to the Queer Resources Directory at nifty.andrew.cmu.edu. -- ____ Richard Kennaway __\_ / School of Information Systems jrk@sys.uea.ac.uk \ X/ University of East Anglia \/ Norwich NR4 7TJ, U.K. The Case for Change =================== Produced by The Stonewall Lobby Group Ltd. September 1993 Written by Angela Mason, Executive Director, Stonewall Copies are available from Stonewall free of charge, however contributions toward the cost of printing and postage will be gratefully received. Stonewall 2 Greycoat Place Westminster London SW1P 1SB Tel. 071 222 9007 Fax 071 222 0525 The Case for Change =================== This pamphlet sets out the case for changing the criminal law in the United Kingdom by removing sexual discrimination against gay men. We argue and believe passionately that: 1. the law should provide an equal age of consent for all sexual acts. 2. the offence of gross indecency, which only applies to gay men, should be repealed. This year lesbians and gay men have achieved a new degree of visibility. 120,000 people came together to celebrate this year's Pride festival. Armistead Maupin's Tales of the City is a major TV series. The Evening Standard told us it's cool to be a lesbian. Major companies like Kingfisher and British Telecom are among the growing number of employers with company policy on sexual orientation. Lesbian and gay police officers can be increasingly open about their sexuality. This visibility presents a powerful argument for change, which is brushing away cobwebs of bigotry, overcoming discrimination. Yet the law in Britain still treats gay men as criminals. Every year men are arrested and prosecuted and sent to prison. Edwina Currie MP asked a question in Parliament about how many men were being convicted. Between 1988 and 1991 there were over 2,000 arrests for offences involving consensual sex with men under 21 years of age. Gross indecency, the offence under which Oscar Wilde was convicted and imprisoned, is still on the statute book. In 1991 nearly 1,500 men were arrested for gay sex offences and just over 1,000 men were convicted. In 1967 homosexuality was made semi-legal. The price of this reform was what is now the highest age of consent for gay men in Europe. In 1967 homosexuality could only be tolerated if it was hidden away. It was something to be ashamed of. Reforming the criminal law will not only challenge discrimination, it will help redefine the public status of homosexuality. It will be a part of the process which enables lesbians and gay men to take our place within society. This year Stonewall launched a case to the European Court of Human Rights on behalf of Will Parry, Hugo Greenhalgh and Ralph Wilde. But even that was too much for the police and prosecution service. Hugo and Will were subjected to a criminal investigation, required to attend an interview at Rochester Row police station and asked a series of intrusive questions about their lives. If this had happened to a heterosexual man or woman they would, quite rightly, be outraged. The law is not a dead letter. It distorts the life of every generation of gay men as they come into adulthood. It endorses old fashioned bigotry. It justifies our second class status. It legitimises prejudice towards all lesbians and gay men. Please read The Case for Change. If you are convinced of the arguments, as I am sure you will be, become involved today and make your voice heard along with thousands of others arguing for a fairer society where we car all exercise individual responsibility. Angela Mason Executive Director, Stonewall Arguments for an equal age of Consent ===================================== The Historical Compromise ------------------------- The law for England and Wales was established by the Sexual Offences Act 1967, which was based on the proposals of the Wolfenden Report in 1957. The Scottish law was brought into line with England's in 1980, and Northern Ireland in 1982. The 1967 Act provided that a homosexual act between two (and no more than two) men in private was not an offence 'provided that the parties consent thereto and have attained the age of twenty one years ". The price of reform was an unequal age of consent for gay men. The age of consent for heterosexuals and lesbians is sixteen. Despite two further reports to Parliament that both recommended lowering the age of consent, the law has mouldered on the statute book for the last 25 years. In 1967 many thought that the justification for 21 was very weak but it was accepted as a political compromise. We look now at the arguments that were advanced then against equality to see if they have any validity today. 1. Homosexuality is a sickness In fact the Wolfenden Report rejected suggestions that homosexuality was a sickness and the years since have only seen recognition of this from medical authorities. This year the World Health Organisation officially 'declassified' homosexuality as a disease. 2. Young men are still confused about their sexuality. Wolfenden looked at these arguments very carefully and it is worth quoting their conclusions again. "We have made it clear throughout our report that we recognise the need for protecting the young and immature. But this argument can be carried too far: there comes a time when a young man can properly be expected to 'stand on his own feet' in this as in other matters, and we find it hard to believe he needs to be protected from would-be seducers more carefully than a girl does. "We have given special attention to the evidence on a recognisable age in the fixation of young mens sexual patterns. On this point we have been offered many and conflicting opinions which agree however in admitting the difficulty of equating stabilisation of sexual pattern with a precise chronological age. Our medical witnesses were unanimously of a view that the main sexual pattern is laid down in the early years of life and the majority of them held that it was usually fixed in main outline by the age of sixteen. Many held that it was fixed much earlier." 3. Homosexuality is undesirable and young men need special protection. Why then did Wolfenden recommend an age of consent of 21? It was because that was the 'legal age of contractual responsibility' - the age of majority. Ironically only a year after reform was achieved it was reduced to 18. But even more it was because the Committee felt that a young man was unable to make mature judgements about actions which "might have the effect of setting him apart from the rest of society." This has always been a contradictory position. The effect of setting the age of consent at 21 criminalises those young men it is meant to protect. In fact it does not stop younger men having sex. A pilot study by the SIGMA Project, which is researching into gay male sexual behaviour, surveyed over 1,000 gay and bisexual men and found that 90% of them had their first sexual experience with a man before they were 21. The law is no deterrent and everybody knows this. The law can only operate by turning a blind eye and this means that the enforcement of the law is necessarily arbitrary. This is particularly serious in the absence of any public policy guidelines for the police or the Crown Prosecution Service on how the law should be enforced. We know that between 1988 and 19912,000 men were arrested. The law is a licence to prosecute with no public accountability. But more fundamentally the view that homosexuals have to live apart from society can no longer be sustained. We now have an openly gay MP, lesbian and gay police officers, journalists, actors and pop stars, sports women and men, bankers and barristers, postmen and nurses. There is intense public interest and discussion about lesbian and gay life. This is a profound social change. It has been made possible by thousands of individual men and women who have 'come out' and made the decision to live openly, confident of their sexuality and the integrity of their lives. In 1992, Stonewall with TORCHE, the Conservative Homosexual Reform Group, commissioned a Harris Poll. 74% of those polled said there should be an equal age of consent for all and that the law should not discriminate against lesbians and gay men. 4. Homosexuals will seduce young men. This seems a particularly English concern. In other countries where the age of consent has been equalised young men have not been exploited and seduced. It is simply not a problem. Yet this is the official justification, such as it exists, for having a different age of consent for lesbians and gay men. We believe that unwelcome sexual attentions of a seriousness warranting criminal prosecution are equally offensive whether the victim is a man or a woman: the same law can apply to all. And yet English law has only recently admitted the possibility of rape within marriage and an offence of male rape is still not recognised. Young gay men and the law ------------------------- If we do what the Parliamentary committees and law makers have never done and let young people speak for themselves about how our unequal criminal law affects them there is a very different picture. Stonewall are trying to do this by conducting a survey about the age of consent and the experience of young gay people. What follows are some of their stories. "I am 24 and my partner is 19. We are out in other regards but the fear of prosecution will loom over us for two years. Why is this country so unjust? " "I knew I was gay when I was 15 years old. I had my first sexual experience at 17. But even when I was almost 21, my partner (who was then 22) worried about having consensual sex with me because he was training to be a solicitor and any criminal offence would have caused problems with the Law Society. My 21st birthday was a great relief! The age of consent should be 16. There is no sensible reason for it to be otherwise. " "When I was 29 I was questioned by the police and taken to a police station where I was kept all night. I was questioned about my relationship with a young man who I had believed was 21. I had to wait two months whilst they decided whether to charge me. I later found out that my friend had been caught 'cottaging' and arrested. At the police station he had been told that if he 'named' 'older' men they might drop the charges. He was very frightened and gave my name as the only name that he knew." In fact our present law makes criminals of those it seeks to protect. Young gay men must still pursue their early experiences of adult emotional relationships in an atmosphere of fear and suspicion. As they become adult they are forced into isolation, cut off from the advice and support of parents and teachers. These feelings of isolation and anxiety in early manhood are a constant theme in the responses to our survey. AIDS and safer sex education ---------------------------- All the discussions about the criminal law have taken place prior to the AIDS epidemic. We believe quite simply that young gay men have a right to information about how to protect themselves from HIV infection. In February this year there was a major article in the British Medical Journal giving an up-to-date account of the epidemiology of HIV infection. The authors concluded: "Health promotion for all men who have sex with men is important, but safe sex information aimed at young homosexual men needs special emphasis" (BMJ Vol 306, February 1993) We have no doubt that the greatest barrier to more effective safer sex education for young gay men is the criminal law as it now stands. The pattern of change --------------------- The British law is now totally out of line with that of most other Western democracies. The United Kingdom now has the highest age of consent in Europe. Cyprus is changing its law following an adverse judgement in the European Court. The only other countries with a harsher criminal code than the United Kingdom are Bosnia, Macedonia, Romania, Serbia and Bielarus where homosexuality is still totally illegal. This year Russia repealed its sodomy laws. This year too, Ireland introduced historic legislation which not only gave an equal age of consent but also abolished the offences of gross indecency and buggery, which are still on the British statute book. Introducing the Bill, the Minister for Justice, Mrs Geoghegan-Quinn, explained why reform was now necessary: "What we are concerned with in this Bill is a necessary development of human rights. We are seeking to end that form of discrimination which says that those whose nature it is to express themselves sexually in their personal relationships, as consenting adults, in a way which others disapprove of or feel uneasy about must suffer the sanctions of the criminal law. What we are saying in 1993, over 130 years since that section of the criminal law was enacted, is that its time we brought this form of human rights limitation to an end. " Sixteen or eighteen? But how far should change go? -------------------------------------------------- Many people recognise that an age of consent of 21 just doesn't make sense, but they are still worried about equality. We have dealt with some of the fears that are commonly expressed, but what difference would it make in practice if the age of consent for gay men were reduced to 18? In fact it would make almost no difference. All the problems would remain. The law can only operate at the moment by turning a blind eye. There is a deliberate policy of non-prosecution for offences where both parties are over 18. That is why gay clubs can flourish, why every Saturday night thousands of young men commit criminal offences. In Scotland this policy is written down in Crown Office Circular No. 2051/1, which makes it clear that the public interest is not served by routinely prosecuting men over 18 for participating in still-unlawful homosexual acts. Only where there are circumstances pointing to "exploitation, corruption or breach of trust" would prosecution be appropriate, says the Circular. In fact in 1991 the then Lord Advocate for Scotland, Lord Fraser, published another circular recommending that there be no prosecutions where both men were over 16, if there were no special circumstances. This was subsequently withdrawn as concerns were expressed that this would result in a change in the law, which should properly be a matter for Parliament. But it is clear that the Lord Advocate would have supported such a change. In England and Wales we believe there is also a non-prosecution policy for 18 year olds, although this has been denied by the Crown Prosecution Service. The case of William Parry and Hugo Greenhalgh, two of the young men making an application to the European Court of Human Rights, illustrates how the law works now. William is 25, Hugo is 20 and they have a loving, consensual relationship. Following a discussion of their case on a BBC radio programme a complaint was made to the Crown Prosecution Service and they became the subject of a criminal investigation in which they were both interviewed by the police and asked intimate details about their sexual relationship. After several months the CPS advised against prosecution. Clearly they were 'turning a blind eye' because they know that there is no public support for enforcing the law. Nor is it a priority for the police. When he met with London Lesbian and Gay Policing Initiative, the Metropolitan Commissioner, Paul Condon, said that enforcing the law "was not an operational priority". Yet while the law is on the statute books it is a constant threat. When someone complains, any young gay men can be subject to a criminal investigation, like Will and Hugo. If the age of consent were reduced to 18 there would either have to be a new non-prosecution policy for those over 16 or, which is even more frightening, the situation would be worse and all gay sex where parties were over 16 and under 18 would be prosecuted. We need to get the law right now. If there is a reduction to 18 the issues will constantly come back before Parliament until there is equality. Prolonging reform will not benefit anybody. The Opponents of Change ----------------------- It is worthwhile asking who are now the opponents of change. Today the most organised opposition to legal equality for lesbians and gay men comes from religious fundamentalists who are often at odds with their own churches. At heart their case is that homosexuality is unnatural because it is not sanctified by marriage and does not have procreation as its end. We believe that in a pluralistic society everyone is entitled to their views, but the sincerely held religious beliefs of a small group within society cannot be used to justify the criminal law on homosexuality. The Wolfenden Report made a very important distinction between the criminal law and private morality which still holds true today: "Unless a deliberate attempt is to be made by society, acting through the agency of the law to equate the sphere of crime with that of sin there must remain a realm of private morality and immorality which is, in brief and crude terms, not the law's business." The Ethical Case ---------------- It is also important to put the positive ethical case for an equal age of consent. We have talked about the principle of equality, but we would also stress the principle of individual responsibility. The criminal law at the moment takes away that sense of individual responsibility from young gay men. It demands sexual abstinence. But the hidden message is, 'thou shall not be caught'. Far from protecting young men it makes them vulnerable and alone at an age when they do deserve social support and education. An equal age of consent would allow young gay men to be open about their relationships. It would allow them to seek and be given advice on HIV prevention. It would also allow them to assume full responsibility for their own lives. Homosexuality is not an immoral lifestyle. The range of sexual behaviour among lesbians and gay men is as various as within the heterosexual community, although historically it has been more difficult for homosexuals to live together because of the criminal law. Extraordinarily despite all the prejudice many have done so. The widespread existence of female prostitution in all societies testifies to double standards for heterosexual men. This has never been used as a justification for denying them basic civil rights. A question of human rights -------------------------- This year ILGA, The International Gay & Lesbian Association, was granted consultative status at the United Nations and lesbian and gay rights were recognised at the United Nations Human Rights Conference in Vienna. In 1967 when the Sexual Offences Act was passed Britain was in advance of other countries. In 1993 we lag far behind. We are discussing the case for change in the United Kingdom at a time when world opinion is recognising the rights of lesbians and gay men as an inseperable part of all human rights. A benefit for all ----------------- Changing the law would be a benefit to all, not just to gay men. The world won't change dramatically overnight, we will still have our private and public attitudes and responsibilities. Prejudice will still exist. Parents will still teach their children according to their own moral values. AIDS will not be cured. God's law, whoever defines this, will remain the same. But the law in removing discrimination will have removed an artificial barrier between us. Removing the barriers of irrational fear of homosexuality will harm nobody. To quote again Mrs. Geoghegan-Quinn, the Irish Minister of Justice; "We know in ourselves that values which are truly worthwhile are strengthened - not weakened - when we remove forms of apparent support which ignore the rights of others." AGE OF CONSENT LAWS IN THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE IN 1993 (Where two ages are shown this is either because a higher age applies where the older person is in a position of authority or influence over the younger, or because sexual activity is legal at the lower age unless the younger person subsequently complains.) COUNTRY AGE OF CONSENT M/F F/F M/M AUSTRIA 14 14 18 BELGIUM 16 16 16 BULGARIA 14 14 14 CYPRUS 16 16 n.a.[1] CZECH REPUBLIC 15 15 15 DENMARK 15/18 15/18 15/18 FINLAND 16 18 18 FRANCE 15/18 15/18 15/18 GERMANY 14 14 18 [2] GREECE 15 15 15 HUNGARY 14 18 18 ICELAND 14 14 14 IRELAND 17 17 17 ITALY 14/16 14/16 14/16 LIECHTENSTEIN 14 14 18 LUXEMBOURG 16 16 16 MALTA 12/18 12/18 12/18 NETHERLANDS 12/16 12/16 12/16 NORWAY 16 16 16 POLAND 15 15 15 PORTUGAL 16 16 16 SAN MARINO 14/16 14/16 14/16 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 15 15 15 SPAIN 12/18 12/18 12/18 SWEDEN 15 15 15 SWITZERLAND 16 16 16 TURKEY 18 18 18 UNITED KINGDOM 16 16 21 An equal age now exists in 21 out of 28 Council of Europe countries. NOTES 1. Cyprus: Sex between men is completely illegal. The European Court has ruled that this is unlawful and the law will soon change. 2. Germany: The German government has announced its intention to introduce a common age of consent of sixteen for heterosexual, lesbian and gay sex. Stonewall lobbying tips ======================= Lobbying Tips is a beginner's guide to lobbying your MP on lesbian and gay issues. MPs place great emphasis on public opinion in their constituency. They read and respond to editorials in the local paper, and they respond to most letters and calls they receive. Even more importantly, MPs make time available to meet their constituents. How MPs judge opinion in their constituency helps direct their voting behaviour. They want to know who supports an issue, how many support the issue, why they support it and how it will affect their area. If you've never communicated with your MP on gay and lesbian issues, now is the time. People who lobby their MPs make an important contribution to the struggle for full equality. One thing MPs do - and do well - is to count. They count votes, contributions to their campaign, phone calls and office visits. Every contact you make is an important one. It's one more voice for lesbian and gay equality. Make your voice count! Who is your MP? --------------- Call the electoral registration officer at your local authority. Tell them your address and full post code, and they can tell you who your MP is. You can write to your MP at House of Commons, London SWlA OAA. Students have two MPs - your MP for your address in term time, and your MP for your home address during the holidays. You can take advantage of this to lobby two MPs on lesbian and gay issues. Your student union should know who your MP is. Tips for writing to your MP --------------------------- It is important to stay in written contact with your MP. MPs use letters as one way to measure public opinion in their constituency. MPs count the letters they get FOR and AGAINST every issue. Arranging the visit ------------------- Members of Parliament have offices both in London and in their constituencies. You can arrange a visit at either location. MPs are usually in their constituencies at weekends and during recess. You can write or call to ask for an appointment. If you call, ask to speak to the secretary. Keep your request for time brief -15 minutes is a long time to discuss your views on a vote or issue. Your respect for their time will be appreciated and remembered the next time you want access to that office. During the visit ---------------- Be direct and concise in your presentation. Know what you want your MP to do (sponsor a bill, vote for or against, write a letter to a minister, etc) and be able to present your views clearly. It's the quality, not the length, of discussion that will be important. If you're going to see an MP who has a bad record on lesbian and gay issues, you might be tempted to tell them off. Don't! If they say things that offend you, keep a cool head and respond rationally, with facts. In some offices all you may achieve the first time is a civil exchange of conflicting opinions, but if you handle yourself well you can begin to establish a working relationship. After the visit --------------- Be sure to summarise your discussion in a letter as a follow up. You may also want to send a copy of your letter or other correspondence you receive from your MP to us. Stonewall keeps files on MP's attitudes and your feedback is important for our future lobbying work. Identify yourself ----------------- Make sure your MP knows you are a constituent. You can identify yourself as a constituent but you can also assume the MP's staff will recognise most addresses in the constituency - which means you must include your name and address. Don't send anonymous letters. Selling your position --------------------- Be brief and concise. Type or write clearly so your letter will be easy to read. State your position and exactly what you want your MP to do in the first paragraph. For example, "I urge you to attend the debate on an equal age of consent and support the motion". Avoid deeply emotional appeals, demands, threats or promises. These are not effective tactics. But if you are writing about discrimination and you have personal experience, explain that in your letter. Your experiences could help. Follow up your contact ---------------------- Request a reply. You can ask how your MP will vote on a particular issue. You are more likely to receive a reply if you ask for one. If your MP replies saying they agree with your position, or they intend to vote for the position you have advocated - write back and thank them. If your MP replies informing you of their intent to vote against the position you have taken - write back and explain your position again. Don't let them off the hook. If you don't receive a reply, write again, enclosing your original letter. If you receive a non-committal reply, write again, asking them where they stand. Keep up the pressure! Media Tips ---------- Spend half an hour with a news editor and you quickly discover that they aren't much interested in issues - it's people that interest them: people who have been the victims of injustice; people who have overcome obstacles or prejudice; people who want change and are fighting for it. You don't have to go to Wapping or Broadcasting House either. Local radio stations have thousands of listeners and many local newspapers hundreds of thousands of readers. You could start by writing a letter to your local paper or by calling a local radio phone in, always remembering it is you and your experiences that will be of most interest. Invite the newspaper to an equality event in your area or ask them if they would like to do a feature about someone criminalised by the age of consent law - but find a willing candidate first! Radio stations always have topical discussion programmes so ask them to talk about the age of consent and offer to take part. But beware! They might invite someone to oppose you and it's easy to fall into the trap of discussing homosexuality, not the age of consent. You don't have to defend your sexuality, your opponent has to defend an outdated, unjust law. More information about Stonewall ================================ Stonewall is our national lesbian & gay lobbying organisation working for legal equality and social justice. Established in 1989, Stonewall has grown into a respected and effective organisation that voices lesbian & gay concerns to a range of influential social groups, including parliament and the media. We campaign and lobby on a wide variety of issues. We ensure the media has a lesbian & gay perspective on issues that affect all our lives. We research the issues to ensure the facts are clear and the case for lesbian & gay civil rights is presented rationally and convincingly. anti-discrimination equal age of consent partnership rights parenting employment rights armed forces sex education fostering & adoption rights Support an equal age of consent, Support Stonewall -------------------------------------------------- At Stonewall we recognise that our work is long term, that it will take vigilance, determination and patience to fight homophobia and win equal rights. We intend being around for many years to come, offering an effective, professional response to attacks on our rights and building a movement for positive change. No group can plan for the future without being able to rely on regular income. We hope our friends across the UK will recognise this and support us by committing at least 5 pounds a month. I appreciate that you may not feel able to make a regular contribution and I want to assure you that, whatever you decide, your support will play an important role in achieving lesbian and gay equality. Please complete a standing order but if you are unable to, but would like to keep in touch with developments, Stonewall Friends membership is 20 pounds a year or 10 pounds unwaged. Please enclose your cheque and fill in the name and address section of the Standing Order form only and return it to our office in this envelope. Thank you for supporting our work. Michael Cashman, Chair Please help to secure our future so we can get on with the job of securing yours. [Standing Order form omitted]