H@pp Echristmas

Don’t be alone this Christmas. Just find yourself a good username, a password you’ll remember, a few photos of yourself taken at your best angle (wherever that may be!) and log on to the internet. Yes, there is everything you could ever dream of right there at your fingertips. There are sites for almost everything and everyone. Just a quick search and I found sites for: twinks, bears, jocks, daddies, leather, leather bears, leather daddies, silverdaddies, leather jocks, muscle, dudes, nude dudes, vanilla, fisting, sucking, latex, rubber, S&M, wrestling, spandex, etc, etc. And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Gay men used to go cruising, cottaging or down the pub. Now they sit in coffee shops cruising the net. I was recently speaking to a colleague who said ‘The iphone was invented for the gay man’. Not so long ago I would have said the same thing about the internet. I know from personal experience that gay dating sites opened up my network. It allowed me to meet men I would never have come in contact with otherwise. Guys growing up and living in small towns or rural communities don’t usually have the opportunity to meet other guys or if they do it is usually a very small group. The web allows these men to meet partners and friends from all over the country or world. We have a very close friend that lives in a small community in the Netherlands, but spends weekends travelling around Europe meeting up with guys he has met over a broadband connection. Life has changed and as far as I am concerned it is for the better. Homosexuals have been liberated by the net. You can now have a more active social and sexual life online than living in the vicinity of St. James Street, Brighton or Soho in London.

Gone are the days of meeting someone you have never met before and then discovering at the last minute that in fact you don’t have the compatibility you had hoped for. You can now exchange as many messages or even meet via webcam and explore your wants, needs and desires before you meet face to face. It is now possible to get to know someone in advance of seeing someone in the flesh. Or for the risk seeking men who still want the excitement of an anonymous meeting, there are still lots of guys out there who hide their face so that you can take a chance and go for a 1-2-1 meeting without ever knowing what is in store. Whatever you want, it is out there. I would even go further and say whoever you want, they are out there too. My advice is, just log on search for your particular aspiration and get ready for a rollercoaster of naked flesh. My only warning is beware of the time wasters. As in the real world the virtual world has its fair share of assholes too.

So yes, I fully endorse the idea of sitting at home, in a café or even having dinner with friends, while occasionally glancing at your iphone to check if there is a little bit of Christmas cheer lighting up your screen. Have a h@pp eChristmas.

Hurling abuse

Many gay sportsmen or women still choose to stay in the closet. To be honest I don’t think many of us blame them. In the last year I was very pleased to see that two very macho sportsmen had made the decision to come out. The first that I would like to mention is Dónal Óg Cusack. Dónal plays as goalkeeper for Cork in the Irish sport of hurling. As a child I actually played this game and quite enjoyed it, but as I would never live up to the standard that my father played at, I decided not to pursue it. In hindsight I am really pleased with my decision. I couldn’t have coped as a gay hurler.

Since Dónal came out last October, life has not exactly been smooth. Because of the homophobic abuse his mother has stopped going to watch him play. His sister has also been very upset.

Dónal has said "I hate what it does to those around me, especially when it doesn't hurt me at all."

He also believes that the actions of sports fans will harm younger fans, “If there are people out there in their teens, struggling with the idea of what they are, I hope they'll know that fools with megaphones or runny mouths just don't count."

The other individual that I was very impressed with is Gareth Thomas. He came out last December and since then has appeared in an ITV Tonight programme where he explored attitudes to homosexuality. The programme entitled ‘Afraid to be Gay’ was aired earlier this year and explored British feelings on the subject. Thomas made the decision to come out last year due to a lot of speculation surrounding his sexuality. He is Wales's most-capped player and a former British and Irish Lions captain. The courage shown by Gareth is very similar to the bravery shown by Cusack.

Gareth has also experienced a lot of jeering at his matches but he said he did not want to be known as a "gay rugby player" and hoped people would treat his sexuality as "irrelevant" to his career. "What I choose to do when I close the door at home has nothing to do with what I have achieved in rugby," he said. "I'd love for it, in 10 years' time, not to even be an issue in sport, and for people to say: 'So what?'" He has also said that the response he has had has been very positive and that he wants others in his situation to feel that they too can make the same choice.

I just hope that men like these will help others to come to terms with their sexuality and to be Gay without a barrage of abuse. I really hope that we don’t forget men like Justin Fashanu. Justin, who interestingly played for Brighton and Hove Albion, came out in 1990. After he was harassed by the press he moved to the US. While there he was arrested after he was accused of rape by a gay teenager. Fashnu returned to the UK where the press plagued him until his death in 1998. Most people were not surprised that he had killed himself.

Thanks to men like Gareth and Dónal, I think that society has matured a little more. Hopefully in 10 years time a sportsman’s sexuality will be irrelevant.

Ireland introduces civil partnerships

On July 19, 2010, Mary McAleese, President of the Republic of Ireland, signed the new Civil Partnership Bill into law. It had taken two years of debate in the lower house of the Parliament before this ground breaking legislation was eventually passed and sent to the Senate. It was approved by the Senate by 48 votes to four. The legislation is due to be introduced this December and will also provide rights for people in long term cohabiting relationships who have not already entered into a Civil partnership or marriage. There is however still a lot of concerns by LGBT activists. This new Bill, welcome as it is, does not give the same entitlements to gay couples in relation to the status of children. Under the Civil Partnership Act, children can only be adopted by one of the gay partners. This is not an ideal situation. Senator David Norris, who played a key role in the de-criminalisation of homosexuality, was the first to propose a civil partnership Bill some six years ago. He said “Children can and already have been adopted by gay people. However they can only be adopted singly. This means quite starkly that if the legally adopting parent dies, the surviving parent who has helped to rear, nourish and parent the child is instantly cut off in the legal sense. But much worse than that, the child itself has no connection with the surviving parent and is cast adrift.” Senator Norris went on to say “even the Roman Catholic Church has abolished limbo and yet the State of Ireland, with this legislation, has brought it back in again for a minority of our most vulnerable children.”

There is however hope. The government has stated that the remaining gaps in legislation will be addressed as quickly as possible. Minister for Justice, Dermot Ahern said “We want this Bill to commence when those pieces of legislation are in place so that everything just kicks in at the one time.” When I had the pleasure of meeting David Norris last year he said that he would, in fact, be voting against the Bill as it then stood. However in the final hours before the vote in the Senate, when it was apparent that the government had agreed that there were flaws, he decided that he would vote in favour. He commented in the Senate on July 8, that, “I was very concerned about the children. I very much welcome the clear and positive indications he – the Minister for Justice - has given, that what we all agree is a lacuna (missing section) in the Bill will be speedily addressed, to which I very much look forward. I had intended and had signalled my intention to vote against the Bill, but after the extraordinary and dramatic developments of the past one and a half hours, I was left with absolutely no moral alternative to walking through the division lobbies with all my colleagues. I never thought in my dreams that I would walk shoulder to shoulder with almost the entire membership of Irish Senate into the division lobbies to vote for this kind of wonderful liberalising legislation. I am proud that this day has come. It is a massive overwhelming victory. It is a victory, not for gay people nor for Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, the Green Party, Labour or the Independents; it is a victory for decency and for this country.”

When I contacted David for his comment on the Civil Partnership Bill, I also asked him if the rumours about his intention to run for the Irish Presidency next year were true. His response was simply put, “Yes I am going for the presidency.”

The Republic of Ireland did not enact any legislation to legalise same sex relationships until 1993, but recently has been racing to catch up with the rest of Europe. Senator Norris, the first and - possibly only - out gay politician in this fiercely Catholic country may well have a good chance of winning and Ireland would become the first EU country to have an openly gay president.

Second hand news

There’s been a wide range of stories that have caught my eye in recent times. Some because there was a gay aspect, while others I just couldn’t ignore. Back in early May I was flicking through a newspaper and found a piece written about a gay couple from Malawi, Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza, who were charged and sentenced to 14 years hard labour. The reason was that they wanted to live in an open gay relationship. The couple stated that they would prefer to become martyrs rather than give in to homophobic campaigners. This story brought the fact to mainstream newspapers that gay sex is still illegal in 37 African countries. It reminded me of another story reported last year when Uganda proposed legislation advocating punishments for gay sex that ranged from imprisonment to the death penalty. There are over 80 counties worldwide that have laws against homosexuality. This is something that I think is worth mentioning every so often. In the end, the Malawi President, Bingu wa Mutharika conceded to international pressure and these two men were freed. I hope that I continue to see more stories like this reaching the national press.

“There are over 80 counties worldwide that have laws against homosexuality. This is something that I think is worth mentioning every so often”

World cup fever reared its ugly head in June. (Strangely enough, the country hosting the event, South Africa, is the only country in the world where Gay rights are actually written into the constitution). Of course our country went mad and the Saint George’s cross became a very common sight. It’s great that people feel a sense of pride in their country but what is needed in England is a National day. Why isn’t St George’s day a national holiday? I’m from Ireland and St Patrick’s Day can be a fantastic celebration. Of course it’s a huge excuse for a whole nation to go on the piss, but why not. There’s something in the air on St Patrick’s Day that celebrates the country and all its people. That of course includes all the other nationalities that live there. It’s sad that the English have to wait for a football event to demonstrate their pride. There are a lot of people living here from other countries who would join in and celebrate the country they now call home. So in the words of a football lunatic, ‘Come on In-Ger-Land’, celebrate your country.

The oil disaster off the coast of the US has been headline news since April. I got quite irritated with the way this was covered. All the reporters could go on about was that BP was lying and that the extent of the leak was much greater than they were saying. Any effort to stop it was sneered at. I got tired of it. This was an accident. BP didn’t set out to do it. They of course have to sort it out, the environmental impact is enormous. People lost money and livelihoods, but the journalistic finger of blame kept jabbing away. Then it stopped. When the US media started having a go at the ‘British’ company, the UK press condemned this type of reporting. News reporters seemed horrified that the US media had been blaming the ‘British’ for the whole mess. The reporters almost seemed to be defending the Company they had very recently been attacking. This was yet another example of mainstream media doing a u-turn on how they report the news. I strongly recommend looking at towleroad.com. It’s an American site but it does report some fantastic gay news stories from around the world. If you really want to have a good laugh, type this into your browser: www.towleroad.com/2010/06/photo-vermont-catholicmagazine.html

Reality bites

I have to say that I hate the term ‘reality television’. The phrase makes me shudder. If asked to give an example of an oxymoron, ‘reality television’ would be up there with another of my favourites ‘gourmet pizza’. For the last ten years part of me has actually dreaded the arrival of summer. The continuous advertising of that horrible shattered eyeball, the irritating theme tune and the sounds of birds chirping anytime you accidently flick on to Channel 4 is enough to drive a person to drink. Well if you’re asking I’d love a G&T right now.

Since the inception of Big Brother ten years ago, we’ve been bombarded with a selection of rubbish to watch, usually involving the least interesting people in society. Broadcasters seem to think that the majority of the population is obsessed with watching people eating, drinking, losing weight, gaining weight, buying houses, selling houses, having makeovers, swapping wives, swapping homes and even having colonic irrigations. I’m not interested in these people’s views. I’m even less interested in the views of ‘celebrities’. Nothing would please me more than if a group of so-called celebrities were taken to a remote site, told they were being filmed, when in fact they weren’t, and all of them subjected to continuous colonic irrigations for a fortnight. I wouldn’t watch it but I’d be more than pleased to know it was happening.

Actually, that’s given me an idea for a show which I would watch, called I Think I’m A Celebrity, Can I Have A Lobotomy? The idea is simple; invite these ‘important’ and ‘well known stars’ to take part in a new show where they’re all locked in a room and the public votes every day as to who should have a lobotomy and who should carry it out (preferably with a spoon). This would continue day after day, until there’s a winner - the last remaining non-lobotomised individual. The prize would be to star in the next series. This would solve everything! These people would be removed from society and the quality of television would eventually improve as more and more of them vanish, never to be seen again.

“I hate hearing of individuals being ridiculed, insulted and shamed by such people as Simon Cowell, Louis Walsh or Piers Morgan”

As you can probably tell, I hate the whole format. We shouldn’t accept that this is what we pay a television licence for and Channel 4 is also partially Government funded. The producers seem to think that this is what we want to watch. We don’t choose to have our screens filled with this drivel. It’s what’s on offer and that’s why people watch. I’m looking forward to a time when I don’t have to see or hear anything about X-Factor, Strictly Come Dancing, Britain’s Got Talent or any show with a similar format.

I hate hearing of individuals being ridiculed, insulted and shamed by such people as Simon Cowell, Louis Walsh or Piers Morgan. These ‘judges’ have no right to consider themselves superior to the rest of humanity. Some of the people they attack have mental health issues or struggle with self-esteem and self-confidence. It’s appalling that the public feel that they can laugh at these people. It’s the 21st Century equivalent of the Middle Ages’ stocks and pillories. I feel that by condoning these shows, we’re proving that society hasn’t become more civilised. We’re just fooling ourselves into thinking that this form of so-called entertainment is acceptable.

Forgive me father for you have sinned

Dear Leaders of the Church in the Vatican, It is with great concern that I write to you as a practicing homosexual living in Brighton. Like you, I have been deeply disturbed by the information which has come to light regarding the abuse of children and vulnerable young people by members of the Church in Ireland and elsewhere, particularly by priests. I can only share in the dismay and the sense of betrayal that so many of you have been hounded by individuals asking for the truth and openness.

It is not my intention to accuse you of hiding facts and causing decades of pain and suffering. We are all appalled that in recent times you all have had to endure the pain and discomfort of being accused of deceitfulness and of cover ups. We are all thinking of you during this difficult time. We cannot imagine your distress. It would appear that you are all being harassed by the masses. How dare people question your previous course of action? You were of course protecting each other in a Christian and non-judgemental manner. The decisions you made to hide the truth and to defend the Catholic Church was of course correct. Why should the men and women who gave their lives to your organisation be held up to public scrutiny? You are completely within your rights to create your own laws and to deal with your members accordingly.

Holy Father, it was of course the correct thing to do, deciding to personally approve the transfer of the German priest Fr Peter Hullermann to Munich, to receive psychological treatment for paedophilia. Thanks to you he continued to stay in the church for two decades, after he was convicted of sexually abusing a youth. It was also right for you to allow Father Murphy to remain in the church in Milwaukee, after he had abused 200 deaf boys in his care. The rest of the world has no right to demand that you explain yourself. You have God on your side. The decisions you make are with his blessing.

“Thanks to you he continued to stay in the church for two decades, after he was convicted of sexually abusing a youth”

It must also be very difficult for Cardinal Saraiva Martins who believes that these horrors were not caused by the church. No, all of this was a trial sent by God to test the church. The fact that they failed the test is the most difficult thing for the church to face. Isn’t it appalling that all those young people were more responsible than the men and women who abused them?

So instead of demanding the resignation of every individual that has had part in concealing the abuse of children all over the world, you should in fact protect them. They are all men and women of the cloth and therefore deserve our respect and dare I say it, our love and devotion. We are all mere mortals who lie, cheat and sin. We do not know the pressures of living in an organisation where any wrong doing you commit is immediately forgiven. We do not know the difficulties of being forced to move from job to job in order to hide our sexual preferences for young people. All the victims should accept that you all know best and that the course of action you took was to protect the best interests of your organisation.

Finally, I am sorry that you were found out, that the secret is out and that maybe now you may have to experience some humiliation. It is doubtful that you will ever be really sorry. In your mind you have done nothing wrong. The decisions that were made were deceptive, selfish and hurtful. The actions or inactions you took were as destructive as the abuse that was committed.

Green thinking

This month I was itching to have another rant about the Catholic Church. Then I thought, “no Mike, you get so stressed out about these things, why not take a break and talk about green matters?” So on Saturday morning as I climbed Whitehawk Hill to our allotment; I contemplated the question, “how green am I?” We got the keys to our allotment just over two months ago and this has become our new found release from life’s worries. It gives me a chance to stop running to the beat of the rest of the world. I find that up there, while turning the soil and taking in the amazing view, a person can mull things over with a fresh approach.

So, to the question of my eco friendliness. My partner and I are relatively green and do consider our impact to our environment. I do make a difference on a daily basis, as every day, three other people and I car share to work. Between us we reduce the amount of traffic travelling to and from Horsham. There are obvious financial benefits to getting involved in a car share, but it’s a very easy way for four individuals to reduce fuel use, pollution and congestion. If I sound pompous, I apologise, but I’m quite proud of myself for doing this. It takes a small amount of effort to coordinate ourselves and the amount of stress reduced by not driving 50 miles a day, every day, is a huge advantage. Roger, my partner, uses public transport or cycles everywhere. We try to avoid using our car at weekends and we use public transport as often as we can.

“There are obvious financial benefits to getting involved in a car share but it’s a very easy way for four individuals to reduce fuel use, pollution and congestion”

At home, we religiously sort and recycle everything. All green waste finds its way in to our compost bins and regularly transported, on foot, to Whitehawk Hill. I try to switch off lights when leaving rooms. We use an energy efficient boiler and we don’t heat the house if we’re not in. I irritate my partner by switching things off instead of putting them on standby. So ok, we’re perfect. All of you should take a leaf out of our book. However, no matter how hard a person tries, most people, including me, will have an impact. This year we’re taking two holidays, one to Spain and the other to Amsterdam. So what I reduce, recycle and reuse at home is probably not helping much towards reducing our carbon footprint. Also this year I have to return to Ireland for a family event, unfortunately involving the Catholic Church, and this trip will involve another flight. The alternatives methods of travelling from the South coast of England to the Irish midlands are not even worth thinking about.

So I’m afraid I’m not perfect but I do try. The work we do on our allotment is a good step to becoming even greener. We may not even do an overseas trip next year. Right now I do feel very lucky to have the opportunity to work the land and hopefully produce lots of food for ourselves and our friends. I’m also looking forward to having parties and barbeques with all the people we know, while we take in the views from the top of Brighton. I feel very positive about the changes we will continue to make, to reduce our effect. I’m also sure I’ll probably be back to my old self next month and be ranting on about something else. Thanks for reading and remember to think green.

Definition of an oxymoron: equality & church

I’m sure that we’ve all heard equality mentioned in the media in recent months, most likely because there was a proposed addition to the current Equality Bill to include sexuality and religious beliefs. This of course is wonderful news as it seems ridiculous that in 2010, people can still be discriminated against because of their sexuality.

A recent report from the National Centre for Social Research shows that only 36% of the population think that homosexuality is ‘always’ or ‘mostly’ wrong. However it’s not that simple. It may be possible that the other 64% are well represented in the House of Lords. I say this because on January 25th, they decided not to accept the amendments to the bill. I fear this was in direct response to the Church who would prefer to exclude gay people taking up any roles in their organisations. They fear that the changes will force them to employ sexually active gay people and transsexuals other than priests or ministers. The church has always been exempt from laws of equality when it came to employment. Why should we accept this? I don’t want to be a priest or minister but perhaps I’d like to work as a teacher in a church run school. Under current legislation the church could exclude me from the selection process if I was honest about my sexual orientation.

“The Church has always been exempt from laws of equality when it came to employment. Why should we accept this?”

I don’t believe that any organisation should have exemptions from the law when it comes to basic human rights. It makes me laugh, that religious organisations, that enjoy telling us how we should treat people with forgiveness and kindness, blatantly discriminate against 10% of the population. When the government propose that we should have a more equal society, it’s the Christians that make the most noise. I wouldn’t be so angry except that the bill, if passed, would allow churches to avoid appointing homosexuals to clerical roles. Why can’t church officials accept this? They’re determined to fight so that they don’t have to treat any homosexual or transsexual with the same rights as anyone else. There would be outrage if any large organisation in this country attempted to have changes made to the law which allowed them to discriminate against a minority. Yet the majority of the population are quite happy to allow this to continue. There may only be 36% of the population that have a problem with homosexuality, but there’s probably another 30% who are content to say nothing. Yes, I’m accusing a large proportion of our society of being silent bigots.

Pope Benedict ‘Nazinger’ (Yes, the Devil truly wears Prada) was also determined to have his say on the matter. Yet again the leader of the Catholic Church has decided to open his mouth and allow more repugnant drivel to flow from his ever closed mind. He claimed that legislation introduced by Labour to end discrimination, “actually violates natural law,” because it stopped worshippers remaining true to their beliefs. The church has absolutely no right to meddle in this. My advice to him would be to try and deal with the horrendous situation in his own camp first, before interfering with a democratic process in another country. Perhaps if he concentrated his efforts on apologising to hundreds of young people abused by his colleagues rather than trying to protect one of the largest paedophile rings ever known to man, he may earn some respect from the rest of the world.

Should we be worried?

I want to start this article with a quote: “People who have regular, frequent or intensive access to children have to register with the ISA”. The Children's Secretary, Ed Balls, has back-tracked since he released new plans for vetting people who are in contact with young people. Due to this confusion does anybody know who needs to be vetted or not?

Should my partner and I register with the Independent Safeguarding Authority? We have some neighbours that we are very close to. They have two children aged five and two. On a regular basis we have stepped in to take care of the children if they needed to go to a parents evening or if they were stuck for any other reason. I know that we would not be considered to have regular, frequent or intensive access to these two children, but it does make me wonder. Let us just imagine a scenario for a moment. My neighbour Sarah asks me one day if I had an hour to spare as she needs to go to the school for an appointment and she could not take her five year old, Jack, with her. I tell her that I am on my way to my allotment but of course Jack is more than welcome to come with me. We get to the allotment and as I am busy doing something Jack accidentally falls over hurting his arm very badly. A concerned individual nearby comes over as they have seen the incident. They are then joined by another person and so on. Suddenly I have a group of people around me asking what happened and who I am. I say that this is my neighbours’ child and I am looking after him. What would happen next? I don’t know what the outcome would be and I am not sure if I would want to find out.

Since this regulation change we have talked about such potential situations. Last summer my partner often took Jack to the park. He didn’t even think twice about it. Since September however we have decided that we will continue to step in when we are needed but only when we are together. We have already become worried about being alone with these two young people. I am aware of the reasons behind the vetting scheme but I am also concerned about the paranoia that it may cause. My feeling is that when people become paranoid, things can get out of hand. Do you remember the case in 2000 when a paediatrician’s home was vandalised by local vigilantes? This woman’s home was daubed with graffiti. The word ‘paedo’ was written across the front porch and door of her house. This all happened because a few people mixed the word ‘paediatrician‘ with ‘paedophile’.

“A parent should have the right to vet their own childminders”

The Government has decided to take the decision making away from parents. A parent should have the right to vet their own childminders. I agree that schools have a duty of care and I have first-hand experience of this when I ran a youth project seven years ago. I know that I was a very good youth worker but I also know that one of the reasons I left this career was partly due to one event. One day while taking a group of eight to twelve year olds on an outing, one of them shouted out, “you touched my arm I can report you to the police for that”.

This was a joke directed at one of my volunteers, but on that day I realised that my whole working life could be destroyed by a statement like this. Sometimes government over-reaction can cause more damage than good. How many more individuals will leave these professions for similar reasons?

Taking civil partnership for granted

Are we taking Civil Partnership for granted? I know that this sounds like a ridiculous question but we’re very lucky in this country. I’ve lived in the UK for five years. Two years after moving, my partner and I went to the town hall and became Civil Partners. I recently went back to the land of my birth, Ireland. While there I had the wonderful opportunity to meet and talk to Senator David Norris. He was the first out gay man to be elected to public office in Ireland and it would still be a criminal offence to be homosexual in Ireland if it weren’t for him. Senator Norris started his work to change the law in 1977 but eventually had to take Ireland to the European Court of Human Rights. It was found that the existing law were held to infringe on the right of adults to engage in acts of their own choice. Irish law was regarded as too narrow and extreme. This law was repealed in 1993, yes only 16 years ago, so as you can imagine I was very pleased to have the chance to talk to him. I asked him about the new Irish Civil Partnership bill which was announced in June this year. Senator Norris said that he wouldn’t vote in favour for this bill as it essentially would be against gay people’s human rights.

The bill, if passed, won’t give Civil Partners the same equality as married people. One of the main concerns for LGBT activists is that partnered couples will not have the same civil liberties in relation to having children. While the introduction of Civil Partnerships here in the UK actually changed the law in relation to adoption, in Ireland it would seem they are taking a backward step. Even with the introduction of Civil Partnerships in Ireland, my partner and I won’t be fully recognised by the Irish state. It probably wouldn’t make much difference to me but it did make me think of others.

Let’s just say that I was partnered in a country where the law treats homosexual partnerships the same as marriage (the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, Spain, Norway, or Sweden) and then I decide to live in Ireland. As soon as I land there, my partner and I would realise that our relationship isn’t recognised in the same way as it had been previously. In the eyes of the Irish state we wouldn’t be treated the same as married heterosexual couples. Now, let’s just say that my partner and I had a child. For instance, my partner was the biological father and I had adopted this child. This wouldn’t be recognised by the Irish state. As the biological parent, my partner would be fine, but if anything happened to him, I’d have no legal rights in relation to our son or daughter. It could result in the child being taken into care.

“The introduction of Civil Partnerships in this country was a huge step in the right direction, but we mustn’t take it for granted”

The UK however does recognise partnerships from most other countries. I think that the introduction of Civil Partnerships in this country was a huge step in the right direction, but we mustn’t take it for granted. As long as I live here I’m content that my partner and I are treated no differently in the eyes of the law, but by visiting Ireland it brought it back to me that we shouldn’t stop fighting to be recognised elsewhere. The time for prejudice should have passed by now, we shouldn’t stop the debate until all LGBT people are accepted like everyone else. What I do with my penis shouldn’t influence what rights I have. Why should heterosexuals have more rights than me?

Hate crime

A lot of us have had some experience of homophobia in our lives. It may have been comments in the schoolyard, a colleague that went one joke too far or even verbal abuse on the street. For a few of us it gets a lot more serious. James Parkes was attacked by up to 13 people while out with three friends on Stanley Street in Liverpool. 13 people! As I sit here scribbling, James is still in hospital but I hope that he’ll have the opportunity to see these people brought to justice. What makes this situation even more disturbing and sad is that it happened just a week before Liverpool’s annual gay festival, Homotopia. This year’s theme being Homotopia NOT Homophobia for 2009. Why do people still think that this sort of abuse is acceptable?

People are being physically and emotionally harmed and in some cases, dying. Recently in Brighton I can think of at least two cases of hate crime. A young lesbian couple were attacked while walking home after a night out by three men in their early twenties. They were initially verbally abused and then two of the young men punched them before running away. Only a few weeks after that, the body of 29 year old transgender woman Andrea Waddell was discovered by firefighters who attended a fire at her apartment. She had been strangled to death. Could it be that Andrea was murdered because of her transgender identity? From reading the reports of abuse in recent times, it seems that attacks have become much more violent. I know that there’s always been homophobia and I know that it has at times resulted in people being physically assaulted and killed. Statistics show that hate crime reporting has decreased in Brighton over the last few years, but in London, Scotland Yard figures show that numbers there have gone up in the last year by 18 percent. These statistics were released just a few weeks before the death of Ian Baynham, a 62-year-old gay man who was attacked by teenagers in Trafalgar Square. Three people, an 18 year old man and two 17 year old girls, have been charged with his manslaughter.

“It’s very important for us all to report any homophobia that we experience”

If we’re charging individuals for abusing people, then I also think that Jan Moir’s comments about Steven Gately's death should be treated in the same way. Her column stated that his death “strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships,” and “under the carapace of glittering hedonistic celebrity, the ooze of a very different and more dangerous lifestyle has seeped out for all to see.” People like her should be exposed for their homophobic hate, so that others in society think twice about attacking others.

The police state that the increase in reporting is a positive sign. They believe that the growth in reporting of homophobic hate crime shows that LGBT people are becoming more confident in the police and the justice system. I agree that it’s a good thing that more people are reporting hate crime. It’s very important for us all to report any homophobia that we experience. If the brainless yobs that carry out these attacks were aware that more and more people were being prosecuted for these crimes, then the number of attacks may fall too.

www.galop.org.uk www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-victims/reducing-crime/hate-crime/ www.stonewall.org.uk/documents/homophobic_hate_crime__final_repo rt.pdf www.stonewall.org.uk/ www.lgf.org.uk/

That old river in Egypt

A movie called House Of Numbers had its world premiere at Nashville Film Festival on April 19 this year. Last month a breakthrough in the quest for a vaccine for HIV was announced. What do these two statements have in common? Does this movie tell a story about someone living with HIV? Or does it tell you the background behind the science? I am afraid not: House Of Numbers is a movie that tries to rewrite the story of HIV/Aids. It attempts to inform us that we should not accept the conventional theory of HIV/Aids. We shouldn’t believe the general scientific research about the damage it does to the human immune system. We should also question how it is transmitted from person to person. I haven’t seen this movie but I’ve read a few things about it. I decided to have a quick look online to see what else I could find. I’m aware that there are a lot of people out there who don’t believe there is any connection between HIV and Aids, but I was amazed at the results I got back. If you search for ‘HIV denial’, you get more than 2.8 million results.

A lot of denialists believe that HIV and Aids are not connected and that, in fact, the medication that people receive to help them will cause their deaths. If you avoid toxic drugs and live a healthy lifestyle it will cure Aids. Yes, of course having a healthy lifestyle can definitely benefit people living with HIV – doesn’t it help everyone? Isn’t it scary that even recent leaders such as South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki thought this? Even worse, Mbeki’s minister of health, Dr Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, promoted nutrition and natural remedies as key weapons against Aids. They also questioned and doubted the effectiveness of antiviral drugs. Now, I’m all in favour of people questioning science and coming up with new ideas, as this can force scientists and doctors to look at things in a different way. However, I find it disturbing and dangerous when influential people broadcast this ignorance. As a minister for health, you should be promoting healthier lifestyles, but condemning people to death is a step too far.

“As a minister for health, you should be promoting healthier lifestyles, but condemning people to death is a step too far”

Another wonderful belief I found was that the use of amyl nitrate by gay men is responsible for their deaths. Denialists believe gay men have a higher incidence of recreational drug use than the general population, accounting for their higher HIV/Aids death rates. So gay men using poppers are responsible? Reading these articles made me feel like I had entered a parallel world. This new planet sounds great! In this world gay men could have as much bareback sex with as many partners as they like and as long as they avoided recreational drugs, they would have nothing to worry about. In fact I read on one site that condoms could cause cancer, genital warts or sterility.

As you may have noticed, I’m angry. I’m happy for people to question science, but I will never accept these outrageous and dishonest statements. We cannot and should not allow these myths to continue. How can people say that HIV is not sexually transmitted? How can they spread misinformation about how infectious it can be? We need to tell the truth. HIV/Aids is not, in my opinion, reported enough. I feel that more education about the causes, symptoms and treatments needs to be disseminated. We need to tackle these denialists. Hundreds of scientists have devoted thousands of hours to proving and refining HIV science, yet these individuals say all of them are wrong. It’s time to stand up and shout out loud, “We know the truth”.

Till the truth do us part

This month two friends from Northern Ireland are coming to visit. Andrew is in his mid-60s and Peter is 40. They have been together for about three years now and seem very happy. This is the first long-term gay relationship that either of them has been in. The reason I highlight ‘gay’ is because both these guys have previously been married and have grown-up children. I have known a lot of gay men that have been in this situation. These men have lived a lie for a long time and the pattern seems very similar for all of them.

Most men I have spoken to tell me something like this: in their early teens they become aware that they have strong feelings towards men. While going through their teenage years, they have girlfriends (a lot of us did), as it is easier to conform than to accept the inner desires. It is usual for a lot of these men not to have a sexual relationship until they are well into their 20s. This is commonly when they meet a woman they like and decide to marry and have children.

Jump forward about 20 years. The married man is now in his late 40s or early 50s. His children have grown up and are starting to embark on their own lives. This is usually when he will have his first gay experience. After years of containing these feelings, he suddenly gives in. This is when the real confusion begins. Suddenly he becomes very adventurous and can have up to 100 sexual partners in this first year. The guilt builds up and eventually it is too much to take. This is when he has to tell his wife. She had probably guessed prior to this but now they are both forced into confronting the elephant in the room.

It will probably be some time before they actually separate or divorce. He will most likely have had his first real boyfriend. He will also possibly finish this relationship due to the fear of fully separating from his straight world. Eventually he will get divorced and his wife will at last have the opportunity to get on with her own life. He will in turn start to live life without the lie.

I only started thinking of this because of our friends visiting, but I realised that I was quite close to going down this route myself and, in fact, the course I took was pretty much the same. My first longterm partner and I shared a very good sex life for almost ten years. I was 17 and he was 42 when we met. The whole relationship was built on a lie. Sean was a local politician and that meant he was constantly afraid that his sexuality would affect his political advancement. I was happy to go along with this situation for the first few years because the age gap, rather than my sexuality, meant that I was afraid of telling family and friends. Sean was adamant that his sexuality should never be revealed. He was scared of how his family and friends would see him.

When we eventually finished, I was 26 and a bit more confident. I realised that Sean would never change and I suspected that in his mind he really hoped that he was straight. I think he felt that being with me was purely sexual and that it did not actually mean he was gay. I believe that it is this fear that holds gay men in straight marriages. I feel sad for Sean because I am lucky enough to have moved on but he hasn’t. It is a shame that in 2009 there are still men trapped in these situations. However, we should not forget the hurt that it causes the wives, children, families and secret lovers who are also victims of this unmentionable lie.

Paul's story

Paul is one of my oldest mates. As a teenager in a small town in the north of England, he wanted to feel the same as everyone else. He wanted to walk down the street holding a boyfriend’s hand. He wanted to be able to feel normal but still be gay. In the early ‘90s this was not an option. Things were changing but it was not until 1998 that the first gay bar opened in a nearby town. Even then Paul felt that he had to sneak down the street, wait until nobody else was around and then slink into the bar. Several hundred units of alcohol later he could walk proudly, head held high, out the same door.

So for him, alcohol became a huge crutch. He relied on alcohol to help him go into gay bars, to talk to other gay men and to talk to family and friends about his sexuality. Over time this crutch became a major part of Paul’s life. He drank to dangerous levels but I think it helped him come to terms with himself. This may sound strange to some people, but those strange and messy years, pouring cheap lager down his throat, probably helped him to come to terms with his sexuality. It also contributed to several episodes of depression.

“What he didn’t understand was that being bipolar is your life and not just an aspect of it”

Then one day he met John and that changed everything. He fell in love for the first time. He was comfortable with who he was and this helped Paul to feel comfortable too. It was a bit of a whirlwind romance and after three months they were living together. Life was good. Paul was proud to walk down the street with John. He was even prouder to walk into bars with him. This, all his friends hoped, would be forever. However, John had bipolar disorder and Paul soon realised that life was going to be a bit more difficult than he had expected. Working in a social care environment, Paul felt quite confident that he could deal with this problem. He could, to a certain degree, understand what John was going through.

Paul himself had been through very serious bouts of depression for years, mainly due to alcohol abuse, but the depression was very real. What he did not understand was that being bipolar is your life and not just an aspect of it. John had been reliant on his medication for about 15 years. When he did not take his medication, he would very quickly descend into a very dark place. Paul confided in me that it felt like he was being pushed away. He simply could not understand how John felt – and probably never will.

Looking back now, I have to be honest and say Paul was probably very naive and cocky to think that he would be able to understand and support John. His mental-health issues were not the reason they broke up but in hindsight, probably didn’t help. It was a very messy break-up due to John going through a very severe low and Paul going through something similar, fuelled by alcohol. He had a breakdown and it took a long time to recover, but he did and today Paul is a lot stronger. I was with Paul when he saw John, by chance, only a few months ago and he looked really well. I was happy to see they could speak to each other without all the pain and emotion returning. I hope I never have to go through an experience like that and I hope John is well and happy. Paul is, and is moving on with his life.

One final note to add: did you know that the government did not officially strike homosexuality off its list of psychiatric disorders until 1993? Now that really is mental.

Are we proud of Pride?

Two years ago I was in charge of setting up and running an information stall for a local charitable organisation at Pride in Preston Park. I was proud of the work that my colleagues and I carried out for them and felt that they should be represented at Brighton’s largest free event. I started planning the event about four or five months prior to the day. I sent out an email to all colleagues asking if they would like to offer an hour of their time. The response was excellent. I had expected that there would be a few offers of help but I was delighted at the support. Most people said that they were going to be around anyway, so why not.

One response did surprise me. I got an email from a very angry man. He said that Pride was his Christmas. This was his day to go out get drunk and have fun. He didn’t appreciate being made to feel guilty about not volunteering his time. I’d never heard of this person and would have been blissfully ignorant of his existence to this day had he not sent such a vicious reply. He went on to imply that I was probably not gay and that my intentions were for self-promotion. I sent a response, which thanked him for getting back to me and said I hoped he would visit the stall on the day to say hello. He didn’t and I’ve never had the privilege of meeting him. I had a great day that day. It was a lot of work and I did feel proud for myself and for everyone else who turned up. However, the whole experience made me look at Pride with new eyes.

“The pink pound is worth a lot, but are gay people?”

Last year I didn’t go to Pride. I didn’t feel particularly proud. It’s been 40 years since the Stonewall riots. I’m very proud of all the work that gay men and women have done over the past 40 years. I’m very comfortable being a gay man and it makes me feel proud that I can have the same rights as everyone else in this country. However, I now think that Pride has become a big party for everyone and anyone. It was about people coming together to parade through the streets to emphasis the lack of equality in society. Can we honestly say that today? The theme for 2009 is Pride Beside the Seaside. Am I missing something? I’m not saying we should abandon a great big piss-up in the park. The straight businesses all over Brighton that become gay overnight would be up in arms. I just feel that it’s become a funfair for the masses and that the original reasons for Pride have been forgotten. This year’s theme could have been an opportunity to make a statement. Why not have a theme like ‘Proposition 8 Inspires Hate’? We could use Pride to emphasise the fact that gay men and women are still fighting for equality all over the world. I think we have the perfect opportunity to use Pride as a way of flagging up inequalities that are still experienced by gay people. How about highlighting the fact that homosexuality is now a criminal act in Burundi, or that you can’t be a policeman in Peru if you’re gay?

The Pride parade is now just an opportunity for local businesses to advertise. I’m not proud that one week every summer all the businesses in Brighton become gay. The pink pound is worth a lot, but are gay people? Let us not kid ourselves – the only reason why Pride continues in our city is because the council and tourist industries benefit from it. Let’s take Pride back and use it for something positive. I think we can all be proud again.

What does it all mean?

I was watching the news the other night. They were covering the story that California’s Supreme Court had upheld a ban on same-sex marriage. This came about due to a vote last November, in which Californians backed Proposition 8 (the proposal to restrict marriage to heterosexual couples) by 52.3 per cent to 47.7 per cent. One of the activists said, “This decision has done damage to the gay community”. I’d been thinking about the term ‘gay community’ for some time and this again made be question what it really means.

“I don’t think that you can group several different types of people together and call it a community”

The Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary defines community as: “People living in one particular area or people who are considered as a unit because of their common interests, background or nationality”. So does the ‘gay community’ fit this definition? Do I feel part of a gay community? This is a very difficult question to answer. When I lived in the small Irish city of Galway I didn’t feel there was a gay community. The first gay bar opened there in the mid-90s. At that time there was suddenly a stronger sense of a common background. Maybe we felt closer than we did before. Prior to this, gay men met in the usual ways: in cruising areas, in regular bars, internet sites or dating columns in newspapers. With the introduction of a gay bar we could all suddenly feel a sense of togetherness, sharing something in common: our sexuality. But did I feel part of a gay community? I can’t really say that I did. I had a group of friends both gay and straight. I went to pubs, clubs and restaurants with all my friends. I felt part of a group of friends rather than a wider community.

A community to most people implies a few different interpretations: • A group of people living in the same locality. Well, I could say that in Brighton there is a group of gay people living within a large locality. I cannot, however, say that there is a particular area where gay people live and therefore I cannot say that this definition works (even taking Kemp Town and St James’s Street into account). • A group of people having common interests. This definitely does not apply to gay people. I know a lot of gay people and quite a few of them share no interests with me whatsoever. • A group viewed as forming a distinct segment of society. Well, this is a little closer to a definition of gay community. I would agree that gay people are part of a minority within society, which does have distinct differences. But again, I am little uncomfortable with the overall term.

In recent years the introduction of the term ‘LGBT community’ has confused me even more. I was reading an article just the other day where a local councillor referred to the LGBT community. What is an LGBT community? I don’t think that you can group several different types of people together and call it a community. I think that if he had said LGBT communities, I would not be so pedantic about it. This to me is like saying CJMP community: the Catholic, Jewish, Muslim and Protestant community. It doesn’t really work, does it? Yes, they all have religion in common, but they have no logical connection.

When we can clearly define sub-groups, such as the leather community, the bear community, the chubby community, the lesbian community, the bisexual community, the transgender community, the drag community and so on, I don’t really think that we can use the term gay community.

Are we being served?

What does gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender mean to most people? Recently a straight friend of mine and I were talking about when we first met. He said, “I would never have assumed you were gay when I met you”. I asked why. “Well, you don’t act like a gay man.” I took this as a compliment but it also made me wonder. I asked several friends and colleagues whether they made any assumptions about me on first meeting. All had assumed that I was straight. The standard stereotype of gay men as perceived by the heterocentric world is one of being camp, slightly effeminate, bitchy, constantly on the lookout for casual sex and needing to be the centre of attention. Mention lesbians and immediately the image is one of butch women wearing male clothes, generally being rude and aggressive.

“Television has a lot to answer for in the stereotype argument. For years gay men have been portrayed as flamboyant and queenly”

I wanted to check that my thoughts were right so I asked several colleagues to name one or two gay men that came to mind. The top three were Dale Winton, Paul O’Grady and Graham Norton, with Julian Clary and John Inman close behind. Television has a lot to answer for in the stereotype argument. For years, gay men have been portrayed as flamboyant and queenly. Graham Norton, Eric McCormack of Will & Grace (and he wasn’t even gay), Julian Clary, and Village People all made careers out of being camp stereotypes. When I was growing up I was aware that when people spoke about gay men, they often referred to or mimicked camp celebrities. Such characters as Mr Humphries (John Inman) from Are You Being Served? was the public perception of homosexuality. He portrayed a camp senior assistant in the menswear department, who became infamous for trilling his catchphrase, “I’m free!”

Recently individuals such as Will Young, Peter Mandelson, Sir Ian McKellen, Rupert Everett and Stephen Fry, to name but a few, have created a new face to the rest of the world. It is these gay men who I look up to. Don’t get me wrong – I love the humour of Graham Norton and Julian Clary, and I feel that we should all be proud that gay men are so successful while being honest about themselves. Thankfully, movies such as Brokeback Mountain and now Milk have gone a long way to dispel the old stereotypes. Gay activists often criticise media coverage of Pride parades, saying, correctly, that the media focus on the extreme, the more flamboyantly feminine men and very masculine women. But that’s not us, they say. Most of us are just like everyone else.

I feel that the gay image has moved on in recent years and I think that the perceptions are slowly changing. Stephen Fry is one of the most followed people on Twitter. In January he was sixth most followed individual, just trailing behind Barack Obama. More recently The Ellen DeGeneres Show is the third most followed. Ten years ago, would any of us have guessed that gay men and women would be idolised not only by the gay community but also by a wider audience? I think that the world is slowly starting to accept us for who we are and not what we are. We are individuals. We are Anglican vicars, civil servants, builders, politicians, singers, actors, writers and so on.

I don’t want to be stereotyped but just to be accepted in society as a person. I feel it is unnecessary to be labelled but I do accept that others may feel differently about this.

The pope and I

When I woke up this morning, all had changed. It was being reported on the news that Pope Benedict XVI had had a revelation.

Overnight an angel had visited him in his dreams. He had told him that he was doing a great job, however, he had a few facts wrong. He would have been allowed to continue on his path, as man does have free will, but his recent remarks that condoms ‘aggravate’ the problem of Aids in Africa had caught God’s attention. The angel told Benedict that God wanted to rectify a few matters. He was sorry that He had taken His eye off the ball. He had taken a well-earned break. All that creation had taken its toll so He decided to take two millennia to go on long-awaited holidays. While He was away things went a little pear-shaped. It wasn’t until Michael, His right-hand man, contacted Him to say, “Sir, the shit’s hit the fan”, that God grasped the severity of the situation. How could humanity get a simple list of instructions so muddled in so short a space of time? Hence the visit by the angel to poor Benedict. This mess needed to be sorted – this guy was giving Him a bad name when he was supposed to be God’s representative on this planet.

So the message was delivered and this time the instructions were very clear. Benedict was told that this time the guidelines were to be written down and when the time came to translate them, that more care should be taken. God did not want this going wrong again due to people interpreting things in their own way. So here it is.

When God said “Love thy neighbour as thyself”, He did in fact mean to say exactly this. This simply means treat each other well, whether you are male or female, black or white, or of any sexual persuasion, just be nice to each other. He also wanted us to take care of our health. If there was an easy way of preventing the spread of HIV, go ahead and use it. It also meant to respect each other and each other’s opinions. God did also say, “And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein”. God intended for a bit of common sense to be used here. Multiply yes, but don’t go crazy. Take some simple advice: don’t make a mistake – cover that snake.

The dream continued this way for quite some time. Benedict was given a lot of advice to follow and a lot of information. This time it was idiotproof (God had recently discovered that George W Bush was in the White House). What in My name will happen next, He asked Himself. Benedict, however, was a respected theologian and when he awoke, he was amazed he hadn’t understood earlier. It was clear to him now that his interpretation had only resulted in people the world over laughing at his recent babblings. He also realised that it was time to accept not only homosexuality, but also his and his staff’s first-hand experience of it. It was time for two men to live together and love one another. His friends had all being doing it for years.

I was astounded. This was all over the radio, TV and internet. People rejoiced in the streets. People throughout the world, of all religions, cultural backgrounds and sexuality were relieved to hear that one of the world’s religious leaders had said such wonderful, realistic things.

This, of course, is a dream I had. This did not happen. But isn’t it a fun idea? The Pope’s recent statement on condoms made me very angry. He has potentially damaged the work that has been done. HIV is at epidemic levels in parts of Africa. By his actions, the Pope has possibly condemned millions to death. I will leave you now with a quote I read in a daily newspaper, from one of the cardinals: “He’s shut up in his study. He’s a theologian, not an executive. A great theologian may not necessarily have his finger on the pulse of reality.”

Jim Stanford was diagnosed hiv-positive in 1990. He’s run the gauntlet of meds and sideeffects and now juggles uni and work at the sussex beacon

Jim Stanford is 49 and lives in Seaford with his long-term partner, Dirk. He is the youngest of his family with three older sisters. He grew up in North London and went to the University of Sussex, taking a BA in American Literature. He decided to train as a nurse and in 1985 qualified then worked as a district/community nurse until 1993. He retired from nursing at this point because he was diagnosed in 1990 as being HIV-positive.

When Jim retired he’d just met his partner Dirk and later that year they moved to Holland. Only a couple of years after moving, Jim had a setback and went into hospital suffering pneumocystis pneumonia. When he was admitted the doctors advised that he start anti-retroviral medication for the first time. Prior to this he had been involved in a trial of a homeopathic treatment. Since then he has been on about half a dozen different combination therapies with differing sideeffects. In the early days he would experience nausea and severe diarrhoea and developed peripheral neuropathy. The combination that Jim is on now doesn’t seem to have any short-term side-effects, however, he’s very aware that there could be long-term side-effects. Taking medication and being HIV-positive can result in higher blood pressure and higher cholesterol and there is a greater chance of developing heart disease. “People are living longer,” Jim says, “but dying of heart disease or other illnesses that are not only HIV-related but treatment-related”.

Jim is very active, works out three times a week, eats healthily and chooses not to drink, but he may still develop heart disease or cancers. There is currently one tablet you can take (which is a combination), however, Jim is on three and due to other side-effects such as peripheral neuropathy, risk of heart disease and cholesterol, he is taking up to 14 tablets a day. Jim asked me, “Have you ever had to go on a course of antibiotics? How many did you forget to take? Now think about taking that medication every day at the same time – and you can’t be more than an hour late each time – how difficult do you think that could be?”

Three years ago the couple returned to live in the UK and decided to settle in Seaford. Jim now works for The Sussex Beacon as a nurse and feels confident and at ease with talking about his status at work. He said that he could offer himself as a ‘role model’ to his clients but was not comfortable with using this phrase. I feel it is a very good expression, as he offers so much more from a personal level and experience. At the moment The Sussex Beacon is in a stronger financial position, as management is very efficient, otherwise the need for charity fundraising might have been lost! Due to this the Beacon has been able to expand its services.

He feels he is fulfilling his potential at the moment – working part time. “You need a lot of mental and physical strength to return to work.” Mentally it can be challenging but he feels he has the ability to be at work. Jim has also returned to university to do a Masters and at times the medication that he has to take to control the pain from peripheral neuropathy can cause drowsiness and a lack of focus; this can be difficult while continuing a career and studying.

Jim says he doesn’t mind people knowing his status, especially over the past year, and says this is linked to more self-confidence and selfawareness. Only one of his sisters knows, but he thinks he’ll tell the others some day. Jim told me he feels quite good about telling people and doesn’t feel the prejudice or stigma so much now as may have been around 30 years ago. “Generally, some people can feel very vulnerable,” he says, “and if they have HIV this vulnerability is heightened and individuals could feel less comfortable or less safe about telling others.”

I asked if he had experienced HIV-phobia. Jim says he hears of it from friends. It was a contributing factor but not the sole reason for the split from his ex-partner when he was first diagnosed. He does hear it in subtle ways: “People ask are you ‘clean’ or ‘healthy’. Yes, I am clean and healthy. I find the emphasis on the words ‘clean’ and ‘healthy’ offensive. People don’t ask ‘Are you positive?’ It’s a form of phobia and I’ve experienced it in both Holland and here.”

Jim has seen a lot of changes since returning to Brighton. When he was here in the early 1990s, Brighton Body Positive (BBP) was, in its early days, about people-involvement and self-help. “Such active involvement in services is no longer encouraged.” Jim spoke about people going to each other’s homes and cooking meals, sharing problems, life, good times, bad times and helping each other. But then the point came where BBP felt the need for a constitution to raise funds from local and national sources. Due to this, it became more like a service provider and people were no longer working for themselves. It wasn’t about like-minded people working together but a social service, where you had to jump through hoops. Jim says he feels “the state system is much less allowing or encouraging”. Since Brighton Body Positive and Open Door folded, there are virtually no places to meet. There’s no peer support. The Sussex Beacon does provide a day service but it’s limited in what it can offer.

Sexual-health promotion at the moment can be in patient forums or positive people going to clubs or schools and so on to give talks, but this needs to be national. The national initiatives have fallen on their face in the past, “especially in the early years,” Jim says. “Health promotion needs to empower people to make an informed decision, then what decision they make is up to them.” He does think that it all helps – articles such as this can inform and educate.

So what does the future hold? “I’m enjoying being a student again; I complete my Masters at the end of 2010. I’m looking forward to it finishing but not ending. I may do a PhD (but don’t tell Dirk). After that I may do some gardening.”

I was pleased when Jim agreed to be interviewed, as I felt his story is one that could inform. After the interview we had tea with friends and then Jim got on his bike and cycled the 14 miles back home to Seaford. Jim is, in my opinion, even if he is uncomfortable with the phrase, indeed a ‘role model’.

Homophobia: Alive and well

Recently, my partner was in a large supermarket based in the Marina on a Saturday morning. He was at the self-service checkout, waiting patiently with everyone else, when, as he described, a very large man pushed his way through and skipped the queue. My partner – not a man to keep his opinions to himself – told the individual that there was a queue. The response went a little like this: “There are too many fucking queers around here.” My partner was a little shocked. He was on his own, doing some shopping and felt that he didn’t stand out as a ‘fucking queer’ or even as a gay man at all. There were staff nearby but none stepped forward to see if he needed assistance. There were a lot of other people queueing and not one of them said anything. It would seem that people are not really interested. I had to ask myself if the situation had been slightly different, say, had my partner been eastern European and this individual had said, “There are too many fucking Polish around here”, would the situation have been different? Probably not – most people don’t want to get involved. Why should they? If you were working in a supermarket for minimum wage, would you want to risk being attacked just for speaking up for someone else? Or if you were queueing up and heard this interaction, wouldn’t you turn the other way and hope that it just goes away?

Recently I was planning to go for a few drinks after work with colleagues. I saw one of them, David, during the day having a chat with one of his colleagues, and they asked me if we had decided on where to go. I said we would meet in a pub near Preston Park. David’s colleague then said, “At least you will be able to bend over out there!”

I immediately responded with a wide grin and said, “Are you sure about that?” I have to say I wasn’t overly offended. This bloke is just one of those people who opens his mouth and speaks – not a lot of effort goes into thinking first. I accepted this as one of those times where there was nothing malicious intended. Later that day I caught up with David and he said that when he told his colleague that I was, in fact, gay and in a civil partnership, he was very embarrassed. I stated that it was not malicious and it was the typical kind of thing that straight guys say without thinking about who they may offend.

A friend of mine recently approached several well-known gay men living in Brighton about doing a series of one-to-one interviews for Gscene. Initially all of them said yes but then, within days, contacted him to say that they’d changed their minds. My friend felt disappointed because he felt that the reason was quite simple. Each of them, even though openly gay among their friends, colleagues and family, still feared a homophobic reaction that could result from having an article appear in a gay magazine. I think he guessed right.

So, when I sat down to write this, I thought for a moment about my partner’s experience, which was frightening, malicious and intentionally directed. Then I thought about my experience, which was silly and childish. I felt that this subject needed more exploration. How many LGBT people experience these interactions on a daily basis and never respond to or report it? The movie Milk is on release at the moment and is about a very strong gay man who was murdered because of his sexuality. This is at the extreme of homophobia – vicious attacks happen regularly all over this country and the rest of the world. I want to find out more. I want to know if homophobia is an unreported issue. Wouldn’t it be good if there were a place where we could all speak openly about the kind of homophobia that is around us on a daily basis? I’ve decided to conduct an experiment and I want your help. I’ve created a blog which could be a complete failure, because nobody feels that their experiences warrant writing a comment on a blog, or it may just happen that a lot of you will go to the link and leave a message. The decision is for you to make. To see Mike’s blog, go to http://homophobiatoday.blogspot.com

Sexual health do young people need a short, sharp shock?

When I was growing up in the early 1980s in apparently repressed rural Ireland, I remember my first exposure to sexual-health information being broadcast on television. Of course, I am talking about the HIV/Aids campaigns. I was quite young at the time, probably only eight or nine, but I can recall the feelings I had. I felt a lot of fear. I had a vague idea about where babies came from and I can remember being quite scared that the sexual act could result in death. It stuck with me over my formative teen years and I once asked a biology teacher, during a lesson on viruses, about HIV. The school books were recently updated and a chapter on the HIV virus had been included. It seemed that my teacher was going to skip past this chapter and I was curious why we were not discussing the subject. The fact that I was in a Catholic school run by nuns probably had something to do with it and my teacher, a nun, was going to completely ignore a section from a book that was probably an offence to her religion and her ‘sensitive’ nature.

I asked my older sister to explain things to me. It was awkward at first but talking to her about it helped me understand. We assume that these days young people are more aware of the risks involved in unprotected sex due to school sex education, but is this the case? According to the 2008 Sexually Transmitted Infections and Young People in the United Kingdom Report: “Young people (aged 16 to 24) are most at risk of being diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection, accounting for 65 per cent of chlamydia, 50 per cent of genital warts and 50 per cent of gonorrhea infections diagnosed in genitourinary medicine clinics across the UK in 2007.”

Due to the campaigns in the 1980s, I was curious about sexual health and especially about HIV. As I grew older and started to identify myself as a gay man I felt I had the information and I knew the risks involved. Was it the harsh images that helped me to ask questions about sexual health and to gain knowledge for myself or would I have asked questions anyway? I’m not sure, but I think that without them I wouldn’t really have cared. Is it time again for this sort of media campaign to inform us all of what the potential risks involved in having a carefree attitude to sex? Would this sort of promotion work again? Young people should be getting the message in schools because of sex and relationship education (SRE), but with rises in STIs in the 16-to-24 age group, you have to wonder. I feel that if the government presented the stark reality of this increase to young people at a time when they are watching television or if they teamed up with websites that are predominantly used by young people, the message would be stronger. We now have photographs on cigarette packs informing us of the risks of smoking. Should we be exposed to sexual-health messages at bus stops, on alcohol containers or other forms of advertising?

I think from my own personal experience, watching these adverts on TV when I was young helped me to explore my sexual health. I know that when I was in my late teens and sexual health was discussed in school, most people made jokes and did not really take it seriously. I think because it was in the public domain I took it seriously. It was not solely directed to me as a young person, but at society. I believe that young people would feel less awkward about asking questions and learning about STIs if the message was again directed to a wider audience. Doesn’t it make sense to really sell the message to everyone? If we were all seeing the message, it could open debates at school, at work, at the bus stop or even within families. www.hpa.org.uk/webw/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/121602 2460726?p=11

Gay Blood

I asked myself a question today: is my blood good enough? The National Blood Service (NBS) does not want my blood. Why? Is it because I am gay? No, the reason is that I am a man who has had sex with another man. Even if I had sex with another man ten years ago and never again since, this rule still applies. The National Blood Service states that you cannot donate if “you’re a man who’s had sex with another man, even safe sex using a condom.”

I looked up the most recent statement from the NBS: ‘Exclusion of Men who have Sex with Men from Blood Donation Position Statement’, April 10, 2008. “We test every blood donation for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), syphilis and human T-lymphotropic virus (HTLV). However, despite improvements in blood-screening tests, a small number of infected donations may be missed because of the window period between getting the infection and the test showing a positive result.”

OK, let me see if I can understand what they are stating. If I am a man who has had sex with another man (ever), I am unable to give blood. If I am a gay man in a monogamous relationship, I cannot give blood. If I am a straight man who has had sex with another man at some point in my life, I cannot give blood. If I am a man who has safe sex with other men, I cannot give blood. The window period for me as a man who has had sex with another man does not seem to be measurable and therefore I can never give blood.

Well, that seems pretty straightforward. I cannot donate my blood.

What does the Terrence Higgins Trust say on the matter? Well, it seems very clear. It states on its website: “We believe that the current policy of the National Blood Service is justifiable and was based on the best available evidence when it was drawn up. Unless a subsequent review finds that risks to the blood service have changed, the current policy is sensible and pragmatic.” It also states: “Gay men aren’t banned from giving blood – men who have sex with men (MSM) are.”

Fine. I understand that this is a public-health issue. I understand that we cannot risk having blood that is infected with HIV, hepatitis or other blood-borne infections being used for a transfusion. I absolutely agree that this has to be the case. My difficulty in understanding this issue is that all blood is screened. If I stated when donating blood that I have not had sex with another man for a long period of time or if I only have sex with my partner in a fully committed, monogamous relationship, I will be excluded from giving blood. This does upset me. I am in a monogamous relationship. I would like to donate my blood. I would like the opportunity to help save another life.

Again in the NBS statement, in the frequently asked questions section, I found this: “How can it be fair to treat all gay men as high risk? What about those in long-term monogamous relationships?” “There are, clearly, a range of lifestyles among gay men, with many practising safer sex and seeking regular HIV testing. However, the National Blood Service collects blood from 7,000 donors every day and it is simply neither feasible, nor appropriate, to take a detailed sexual history from every donor.”

“Gay men aren’t banned from giving blood, men who have sex with men (MSM) are.” Terrence Higgins Trust

I don’t feel that I should give a full sexual history, but I do feel that if I can be 100 per cent sure that I am not a risk, then I should have the choice. I fully understand that there are policies that have to be put in place to ensure that public health is protected; however, I don’t feel that I am being fairly treated by this policy. I can donate blood as a gay man but not if I have sex with my partner. I don’t feel that I am being prejudiced against because I am gay. I don’t see this as a homophobic issue. I see this as a statement that all men are potential liars and therefore cannot be trusted.

www.blood.co.uk/pdfdocs/position_statement_exclusion.pdf www.tht.org.uk/informationresources/policy/healthpolicy/blooddonations www.tht.org.uk/binarylibrary/blloddonationsbypeopleathigherriskofhiv.pdf https://secure.blood.co.uk/c11_cant.aspwww.blood.co.uk/pdfdocs/position_statement_exclusion.pdf www.tht.org.uk/informationresources/policy/healthpolicy/blooddonations www.tht.org.uk/binarylibrary/blloddonationsbypeopleathigherriskofhiv.pdf https://secure.blood.co.uk/c11_cant.asp

HIV Phobia in the gay community

Just recently I was talking to a friend about the difficulties of being a gay man in a small community, or even large towns and cities where there is little or no support for gay men. As the conversation continued, Tony mentioned that his son, John, who is in his early 30s, lives in a part of the country, the East Midlands, where he finds it quite difficult to be out. He said that thanks to the internet his son was able to meet other men. Tony was very concerned for John, as he felt that he is more comfortable with his son’s sexuality than his son was. I asked Tony why he felt this and he went on to tell me more.

In the past two years John had had two serious boyfriends and was very happy with each until they informed him of their HIV status. John was terrified by what he heard and ended both relationships within days of being told. This news made me feel very sad. I have worked in the past in sexual-health-related roles and met some wonderful men and women who happened to be positive. To me, their status would never have been an issue if I had been single and looking for a new relationship. Tony went on to say that John is very wary now of meeting anyone new in case this could happen to him again. He said that due to this John had stopped trying to meet new men. I asked Tony what his feelings about HIV were and was pleased to hear that he had met both of John’s partners and would have been happy for John to have continued to see either of them.

This made me think and I started to consider two things. First, how many men are cutting themselves off from meeting new people just in case they are HIV-positive? And secondly, how difficult is it for HIVpositive people to find new relationships? I cannot measure the first as it would take a lot more research and a lot of time – which unfortunately I don’t have a lot of. But I could find some answers to the second. I looked online and was pleasantly surprised to find that there are ‘positive’ dating sites out there, but they’re mainly for positive people to meet other positive people. I then looked at a site that my partner and I are members of, to see if it had a section included where you can state your status. It did not seem to have any such section anywhere on the site.

I started to think about this and was left wondering two things. If you did advertise your status would this limit the number of people visiting your profile? This could prevent you from meeting someone who could be an ideal partner. However, if you could advertise your status it may help people like John to contact you anyway and educate themselves about what living with HIV is truly like.

I am really glad that I had this conversation, as it made me think about HIV phobia in the gay community and it reminded me of conversations I had had with people who I had met in my previous work. I truly hope that John is able to come to terms with his fears and that he does find friends or lovers who are people, and not a status.