Conservative Party poster criticising the Labour Party's support for LGBTQ education for the 1987 general election campaign, the year before Section 28 was enacted
Section 28 refers to a part of the Local Government Act 1988, which stated that local authorities in England, Scotland and Wales "shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship".[1] It is sometimes referred to as Clause 28,[2] or as Section 2A in reference to the relevant Scottish legislation.[3]
The legislation came into effect during Margaret Thatcher's premiership on 24 May 1988.[4] It caused many organisations, such as LGBT student support groups to either close, limit their activities or to self-censor.[5] In addition, Section 28 had a widespread impact on schools across the United Kingdom. This was due to uncertainty around what constituted the "promotion" of homosexuality, leading many teachers to avoid discussing the topic in any educational context.[6]
Homosexuality was decriminalised for men over the age of 21 under the Sexual Offences Act 1967,[10] following recommendations made in the Wolfdenden report in 1957.[11] However, discrimination against gay men, and LGBT people in general, continued in the following decades.
This was exacerbated in 1981,[12] as the first recorded cases of HIV/AIDS were found in five gay men with no previous health issues.[13] The mass media, as well as medical professionals, then associated HIV/AIDS with gay and bisexual men. Although subsequent medical research showed that gay men were not the only people who were susceptible to contracting the virus,[14] the perceived association with HIV/AIDS increased the stigmatisation of gay and bisexual men. This correlated with higher levels of discrimination towards LGBT people.[15]
Rising negative sentiments towards homosexuality peaked in 1987, the year before Section 28 was enacted. According to the British Social Attitudes Survey, 75% of the population said that homosexual activity was "always or mostly wrong", with just 11% believing it to be "not wrong at all". Five years prior to the enactment, a similar BSAS poll had found that 61% of Conservative and 67% of Labour voters believed homosexual activity to be "always or mostly wrong".[16]
The law's precursor was the publication in 1979 of LEA Arrangements for the School Curriculum, which required local authorities to publish their curriculum policies. Following the legalisation of homosexuality proposals for Scotland (added as an amendment to what became the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980 by Labour MP Robin Cook), guidance was published indicating that schools should not teach homosexuality as part of sex education lessons. This was part of a deal to ensure government support for legalisation of homosexuality in Scotland.[citation needed]
This was followed, two years later, by the School Curriculum (25 March 1981), in which the secretaries of state (for Education and Wales) said they had decided to "set out in some detail the approach to the school curriculum which they consider should now be followed in the years ahead". Every local education authority was expected to frame policies for the school curriculum consistent with the government's "recommended approach" (DES 1981a:5) which required teaching of only heterosexual intercourse in schools.[17]
Despite growing levels of homophobia in 1980s Britain, several Labour-led councils across the country introduced a range of anti-discrimination policies[18] and provided specialist support services for their LGBT constituents. The Greater London Council also granted funding to a number of LGBT organisations, including the London Lesbian and Gay Community Centre in Islington.[19] About 10 of the 32 local authorities in London, most prominently Islington and Haringey were also funding gay groups at that time, one report estimating that these boroughs and the GLC together donated more than £600,000 to gay projects and groups during 1984.[20]
The attention to this, and the alliances between LGBT and labour unions (including the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM)) – formed by activist groups such as Lesbians and Gays Support the Miners and Lesbians Against Pit Closures – led to the adoption at the Labour Party Annual Conference in 1985 of a resolution to criminalise discrimination against lesbian, gay and bisexual people. This legislation was supported by block voting from the NUM.[21] In addition, the election to Manchester City Council of Margaret Roff in November 1985 as the UK's first openly lesbian Mayor[22] and the publication of Changing The World by the GLC in 1985[23] all fuelled a heightened public awareness of LGBT rights.
Islington London Borough Council received further attention in 1986, when the Islington Gazette reported that a copy of the children's book Jenny Lives with Eric and Martin was available in a local school library. The copy found by the Islington Gazette was actually located in an Inner London Education Authority teachers’ resource centre, and there was no evidence to support the newspaper's claim that it was seen or used by children. However, the book's portrayal of a young girl living with her father and his male partner provoked widespread outrage from the right-wing press and Conservative politicians.[24] Following this, the 1987 election campaign saw the Conservative Party issue posters attacking the Labour Party for supporting the provision of LGBT education. Jenny Lives with Eric and Martin was referenced frequently in the parliamentary debates that led to the introduction of Section 28.[25]
Legislation
Prior to the introduction of Section 28, Conservative politicians became concerned about the future of the nuclear family[26] as fewer people were getting married and divorce rates were increasing.[18] In an attempt to mitigate these fears, the government introduced a clause to the Education (No. 2) Act 1986 which stated that sex education should “encourage … pupils to have due regard to moral considerations and the value of family life”.[27] However, some Conservatives also blamed the perceived decline of the nuclear family on members of the LGBT community.[28] During this time, Conservative backbench MPs such as Jill Knight also believed that schools and Labour-run local authority areas would provide materials that would ‘promote homosexuality’ to children.[9]
Consequently, in 1986, Lord Halsbury first tabled the Local Government Act 1986 (Amendment) Bill,[29] whose long title was An act to refrain local authorities from promoting homosexuality, in the House of Lords. The bill became commonly known as the Earl of Halsbury's Bill. Although it successfully passed both the House of Lords and the first stage in the House of Commons, further attempts to pass the bill were impeded by the 1987 general election and it ultimately did not become law. Its provisions were not reintroduced by the Conservative government following its re-election.
Instead, on 2 December 1987 in committee, Conservative MP David Wilshire proposed an amendment to the new Local Government Bill, as not yet passed, debated as Clause 27 and later as Clause 28, intended to be equivalent to the Earl of Halsbury's Bill.[30] The government agreed to support the tabling of the amendment in exchange for Knight forgoing her place on the Health and Medicines Bill standing committee;[31] the amendment received the support of the Ministers for Local Government, Michael Howard and Michael Portillo. On being tabled, a compromise amendment was introduced by Simon Hughes on 8 December 1987 that was debated in the House on 15 December 1987 and which was defeated by a majority of 87,[32] and the bill was approved on its first Commons debate that day. The bill was read a first time in the Lords two days later.[33]
I should regret it if this Bill were to go through with this clause unamended. If it were to do so, I think it should certainly be confined to schools because otherwise there would be a real danger that some organisations which do good work in helping those with homosexual orientation, psychologically and in other ways, would be very much impeded.
A spectrum of literature across the ages was cited (in support of these compromise amendments) by Lord Peston. Nonetheless, the Bill passed second reading in the Lords before going to a whole house committee.[34]
In that debate Lord Boyd-Carpenter cited a book display, and proposals for "gay books" to be present in a children's home and a gay pride week to be permissible in schools by named London councils. However, on questioning, he said, "of course, 'promotion' can be treated in different ways. If the clause becomes law it will be a matter for the courts to interpret in the sensible way in which the courts do interpret the law." The SDP peer Viscount Falkland with Lord Henderson of Brompton proposed another compromise amendment, the so-called "Arts Council" amendment, and remarked "There is a suggestion in the clause that in no way can a homosexual have a loving, caring or responsible relationship".
One has only to look through the entire animal world to realise that it is abnormal. In any case, the clause as it stands does not prohibit homosexuality in any form; it merely discourages the teaching of it. When one is young at school one is very impressionable and may just as easily pick up bad habits as good habits.
The narrowing amendment failed by a majority of 55 voting against it; and the Lords voted the clause through the following day by a majority of 80.[35][36]
Michael Colvin MP thus on 8 March asked whether the minister, Christopher Chope, would discuss with the Association of London Authorities the level of expenditure by local authorities in London on support for gay and lesbian groups to which he replied:
No. Clause 28 of the Local Government Bill will ensure that expenditure by local authorities for the purpose of promoting homosexuality will no longer be permitted.[37]
The following day Tony Benn said during a debate in the House of Commons:
[...]if the sense of the word "promote" can be read across from "describe", every murder play promotes murder, every war play promotes war, every drama involving the eternal triangle promotes adultery; and Mr. Richard Branson's condom campaign promotes fornication. The House had better be very careful before it gives to judges, who come from a narrow section of society, the power to interpret "promote".[38]
Wilshire added that "there is an awful lot more promotion of homosexuality going on by local government outside classrooms", and the tempering amendments of that day's final debate were defeated by 53 votes.[39]
Section 28 became law on 24 May 1988. The night before, several protests were staged by lesbians, including abseiling into Parliament and an invasion of the BBC1's Six O'Clock News,[40] during which one woman managed to chain herself to Sue Lawley's desk and was sat on by the newsreader Nicholas Witchell.[41]
Controversy over applicability
As the Education (No. 2) Act 1986 gave school governors increased powers over the delivery of sex education, and Local Education Authorities no longer retained control over this, it has been argued that Section 28 was a redundant piece of legislation.[26] Section 28 was heavily influential in spite of this, and many of its opponents campaigned for its abolition as "a symbolic measure against intolerance."[42]
In response to widespread uncertainty about what the legislation permitted, including a common misconception that teachers were banned from discussing homosexuality with their students,[43] the National Union of Teachers released a statement to try to provide clarity for its members. The statement asserted that the legislation restricted “the ability of local authorities to support schools in respect of learning and educating for equality”, had an adverse impact on schemes designed to curb discrimination and made “it difficult for schools to prevent or address the serious problems that arise from homophobic bullying."[44] A government circular also stated that Section 28 would “not prevent the objective discussion of homosexuality in the classroom, nor the counselling of pupils concerned about their sexuality."[45] This contributed to further confusion around what was permitted under Section 28, with Jill Knight asserting that the aim of Section 28 “was to protect children in schools from having homosexuality thrust upon them."[46]
Both the Education Act 1996 and the Learning and Skills Act 2000 reduced Section 28's impact on sex education policy prior to its repeal, as the Secretary of State for Education solely regulated the delivery of sex education in England and Wales under these policies. However, the policy continued to have a significant impact on LGBT inequality across Britain.
Prosecutions and complaints
No local authorities were successfully prosecuted under Section 28.[6] However, there were legal attempts to use it to stop the funding of LGBT and HIV/AIDS prevention initiatives.
In May 2000, Glasgow resident Sheena Strain took Glasgow City Council to the Court of Session, with support from the Christian Institute. Strain objected to her council tax being used for what she viewed as the promotion of homosexuality. She particularly took issue with the provision of funding to the Scottish HIV/AIDS awareness organisation PHACE West, which produced and distributed a safe sex guide named ‘Gay Sex Now.’ Strain claimed that the guide was pornographic.[47]
Glasgow City Council countered this by arguing that the funding granted to PHACE West was for the purpose of preventing the further transmission of HIV/AIDS, and that the organisation was not promoting homosexuality. The council also emphasised that the Scottish Parliament had recently passed the Ethical Standards in Public Life etc. (Scotland) Act 2000, which would consequently repeal Section 28.
However, two months later, Strain dropped the case after reaching an agreement with the council. Under the agreement, Glasgow City Council was required to include a covering letter to grant recipients, stating that "You will not spend these monies for the purpose of promoting homosexuality nor shall they be used for the publication of any material which promotes homosexuality."[48]
Political response
Demonstrators in the Netherlands protest Section 28 during a state visit by Elizabeth II to the country, 1988
The implementation of Section 28 divided the Conservative Party, heightening tensions between party modernisers and social conservatives.[49] In 1999, Conservative leader William Hague controversially sacked frontbencherShaun Woodward for refusing to support the party line for Section 28's retention.[50] Woodward then defected to the Labour Party in opposition to the Conservatives' continued support of Section 28.[51] His dismissal also prompted Steven Norris and Ivan Massow to speak out against both Hague's decision to sack Woodward, and against Section 28. Ivan Massow, an openly gay man, defected to the Labour Party in August 2000.[52]
Section 2A was repealed in Scotland under the Ethical Standards in Public Life etc. (Scotland) Act 2000 on 21 June 2000. While 2 MSPs abstained from the vote, a majority of 99 voted for the repeal of Section 28 and 17 voted against it.[56]
Although New Labour's first attempt to repeal Section 28 in England and Wales was defeated following a campaign led by Baroness Young,[57] backbench MPs introduced a new amendment to repeal the legislation as part of another Local Government Bill in early 2003. This amendment was supported by the government and was passed by the Commons in March 2003, with a majority of 368 to 76.[58] As the impact of organised opposition within the House of Lords diminished following the death of Baroness Young, the legislation was subsequently passed with a majority of 180 to 130 in July 2003.[59] The Local Government Bill received Royal Assent as the Local Government Act 2003 on 18 September 2003, and Section 28 was removed from the statute books.[60]
Despite this, Kent County Council produced its own school curriculum guidelines as the county's “own form of Section 28.” The guidelines attempted to prohibit schools from “promoting homosexuality", while urging schools to emphasise the perceived importance of marriage and the nuclear family to their pupils.[61] The guidance distributed to local schools by Kent County Council was eventually quashed by the Equality Act 2010.
Support for Section 28
The main supporting argument for Section 28 was that it would protect children from being ‘indoctrinated’ into homosexuality.[62] Other arguments made in support of the legislation included that the ‘promotion’ of homosexuality undermined the importance of marriage,[26] the claim that the general public supported Section 28,[63] and that it did not prevent schools from discussing homosexuality objectively.[45] The Conservative Party whipped its members to support Section 28 in 2000, but allowed a free vote on its proposed repeal in 2003 following dissent from some of its members.
One of Section 28's most prominent supporters in Scotland was the businessman Brian Souter, who led the country's Keep the Clause campaign.[68] This included privately funding a postal ballot, after which he claimed that 86.8% of respondents were in favour of retaining Section 28. However, the poll received responses from less than one third of registered voters in Scotland.[69] The poll's result was dismissed by the Scottish Executive and acting Local Government and Communities Minister Wendy Alexander MSP,[70] and received further criticism from LGBT rights campaigner Peter Tatchell.[71] In contrast, Nicola Sturgeon of the SNP responded to the poll by stating that “the result confirmed that many Scots were concerned about repeal” and claimed that the debate regarding Section 28 was “difficult.”[72]
Those who advocated for the repeal of Section 28 argued that the legislation actively discriminated against LGBT people, and put vulnerable young people at further risk from harm by failing to offer appropriate pastoral support or address homophobic bullying.[74] They also stated that Section 28 contributed to the further stigmatisation of LGBT people, particularly gay men, by framing them as inherently “predatory and dangerous to be allowed around children.”[75]
Section 28's implementation served to “galvanise [the disparate British LGBT rights movement] into action”, leading to the formation of campaign groups including Stonewall and OutRage!.[76] The Equality Network led the campaign in favour of repealing Section 28 in Scotland.[77] Other organisations that supported repealing the legislation included Gingerbread, the Family Planning Association and the Terrence Higgins Trust.[42]
In February 1988,[74]John Shiers led a demonstration in Manchester in protest against Section 28. 25,000 people attended the protest.[80] The night before Section 28 came into effect in May 1988, several protests were staged by lesbian campaigners. These included abseiling into Parliament and invading the BBC1's Six O'Clock News. During the invasion, one woman chained herself to Sue Lawley's desk and was sat on by the newsreader Nicholas Witchell.[74]
After Section 28 was implemented, some local authorities continued to deliver training to education practitioners on how to deliver their services without discriminating against LGBT people. Manchester City Council also continued to sustain four officer posts directly involved in policy making and implementation, contributing to the 1992 report Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988: a Guide for Workers in the Education Service, produced by Manchester City Council, May 1992.[84]
Legacy and cultural depictions
Rainbow plaque marking the location of protests against Section 28 in Victoria Gardens, Leeds
Some prominent MPs who supported the bill when it was first introduced have since either expressed regret over their support, changed their stance due to different circumstances which have evolved over time, or have argued that the legislation is no longer necessary.
In an interview with gay magazine Attitude at the time of the 2005 general election, Michael Howard, then-Leader of the Conservative Party, commented: "[Section 28] was brought in to deal with what was seen to be a specific problem at the time. The problem was the kind of literature that was being used in some schools and distributed to very young children that was seen to promote homosexuality... I thought, rightly or wrongly, that there was a problem in those days. That problem simply doesn't exist now. Nobody's fussed about those issues any more. It's not a problem, so the law shouldn't be hanging around on the statute book".[85]
In February 2006, then-Conservative Party Chairman Francis Maude told Pinknews.co.uk that the policy, which he had voted for, was wrong and a mistake.[86]
In 2000, one year prior to his election to the House of Commons, Conservative Party member David Cameron repeatedly attacked the Labour Government's plans to abolish Section 28, publicly criticising then-Prime MinisterTony Blair as being "anti-family" and accusing him of wanting the "promotion of homosexuality in schools".[87] At the 2001 general election, Cameron was elected as the Member of Parliament for Witney; he continued to support Section 28, voting against its repeal in 2003.[88] The Labour Government were determined to repeal Section 28, and Cameron voted in favour of a Conservative amendment that retained certain aspects of the clause, which gay rights campaigners described as "Section 28 by the back door".[89] The Conservative amendment was unsuccessful, and Section 28 was repealed by the Labour Government without concession, with Cameron absent for the vote on its eventual repeal. However, in June 2009, Cameron, then-Leader of the Conservative Party, formally apologised for his party's introduction of the law, stating that it was a mistake and had been offensive to gay people.[90] He restated this belief in January 2010, proposing to alter Conservative Party policy to reflect his belief that equality should be "embedded" in British schools.[91]
Section 28 received renewed media attention in late 2011, when Michael Gove, in Clause 28 of the Model Funding Agreement for academies and free schools, added the stipulation that schools must emphasise “the importance of marriage”. Although the clause did not explicitly mention sexual orientation (same-sex marriage was not legal at the time), it prompted The Daily Telegraph to draw comparisons between the newly published clause and Section 28.[92]
A 2013 investigation conducted by LGBT activists and the British Humanist Association found that over 40 schools across Britain retained Sex and Relationship Education policies that either replicated the language of Section 28, or “[were] ambiguous on the issue” of teaching pupils about LGBT identities. Following this, the Department for Education announced its own investigation into the schools in question, stating that education providers were prohibited under DfE guidance from discriminating “on the grounds of sexual orientation.”[93]
Several academic studies on the impact of Section 28 show that it has continued to impact LGBT teachers and pupils in the years following its abolition[94][95] For example, a 2018 study by Catherine Lee[96] found that only 20% of participating LGBT teachers who had taught under Section 28 were open about their sexual orientations to their colleagues, compared to 88% of participants who qualified following Section 28's repeal. The study also found that 40% of the participants who worked in schools under Section 28 saw their sexual orientation as incompatible with their profession. In contrast, only 13% of those who received their training after Section 28 was repealed felt the same way.[97]
In 2016, research by Janine Walker and Jo Bates found that Section 28 still had a lasting effect on school libraries; the availability of LGBT literature, resources and student support was very limited, and participating librarians lacked the knowledge required to appropriately support LGBT young people.[98] A book chapter written by John Vincent stated that while conducting his research, he had met British library workers who assumed Section 28 was still in place. The book to which Vincent contributed was published in 2019.[99] A 2014 report on homophobic bullying in schools, published by Stonewall, found that 37% of primary school teachers and 29% of secondary school teachers did not know if they were allowed to teach lessons on LGBT issues.[100]
Recent British policy approaches to the provision of healthcare and pastoral support for young trans people, including a statement made by the acting Minister for Women and Equalities Liz Truss in 2020,[101] have also drawn comparisons to Section 28.[102][103]
Due to its longstanding impact on British LGBT people, Section 28 has inspired a number of cultural depictions. These include the 2013 drag comedy musical Margaret Thatcher Queen of Soho,[104] Chris Woodley's comedy drama play Next Lesson[105] and the 2022 film Blue Jean.[106]Russell T. Davies also included references to the legislation in the TV dramas Queer as Folk (1999) and It's A Sin (2021).[107]
1 2 Lee, Catherine (2023). Pretended: Schools and Section 28. Historical, cultural and personal perspectives. Melton, United Kingdom: John Catt Educational Ltd. p.92. ISBN978-1915261694.
1 2 Jones, Carol; Mahony, Pat, eds. (1989). Learning our lines: sexuality and social control in education. London: Women's Press. ISBN978-0-7043-4199-9.
"Knitting Circle". Section 28 1989 Gleanings. Archived from the original on 14 November 2006. Retrieved 21 February 2005. (Newspaper clippings from 1989 demonstrating use of Section 28 to close LGBT student groups and cease distribution of material exploring gay issues)
"Knitting Circle (9 August 2001)". Section 28. Archived from the original on 12 December 2006. Retrieved 21 February 2005. (History of Section 28 with notes on attempted legislation that led up to the final amendment)
"Gay and Lesbian Humanist Society". Section 28. Archived from the original on 8 March 2005. Retrieved 28 February 2005. (Notes and links on Section 28 from a humanist perspective, with notes on usage of the Section 2a name.)
"USSU National Policy Issues (28 January 1988)". Section 5.2.1 Stop Clause 28 (of Local Government Bill). Archived from the original on 5 May 2005. Retrieved 29 June 2005. (USSU National Policy Issues detailing notes on heightened violence against gays and lesbians in the lead-up to Section 28 enactment)
"Tory adviser defects to Labour". BBC News. 2 August 2000. Retrieved 21 February 2005. (Report of gay Conservative Ivan Massow's defection to the Labour Party)
"Scotsman.com News". Nicholas Witchell: A Celebration. Archived from the original on 28 December 2005. Retrieved 18 May 2005. (Nicholas Witchell's encounter with Section 28 protesters)
"National Union of Teachers (5 April 2003)". NUT campaign to repeal Section 28. Archived from the original on 25 December 2004. Retrieved 9 February 2005. (Statement by the NUT on the controversy of applicability of Section 28)
"The Sunday Times (London) (29 May 1988)". Schools Escape Clause 28 in 'Gay Ban' Fiasco. Retrieved 9 February 2005. (Knight's response to the controversy of applicability of Section 28)
"(30 May 2000)". Poll supports S28 retention. 30 May 2000. Retrieved 19 February 2005. (Brian Souter's Keep the Clause campaign runs unofficial poll to discredit reformers)
"The Christian Institute". Briefing Paper – Section 28. Archived from the original on 4 August 2015. Retrieved 9 May 2005. (Summary of points in support of Section 28)
The United Kingdom Local Government Act 1988 is an Act of the United Kingdom Parliament. It was famous for its controversial section 28. This section prohibited local authorities from promoting, in a specified category of schools, "the teaching of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship".
Opposition to legal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) people exists throughout the world. LGBTQ rights opponents may be opposed to the decriminalization of homosexuality; laws permitting civil unions or partnerships or supporting LGBT parenting and adoption, LGBT military members, access to assisted reproductive technology, and access to gender-affirming surgery and gender-affirming hormone therapy for transgender individuals.
California Proposition 6, informally known as the Briggs Initiative, was an unsuccessful ballot initiative put to a referendum on the California state ballot in the November 7, 1978 election. It was sponsored by John Briggs, a conservative state legislator from Orange County. The failed initiative sought to ban gays and lesbians from working in California's public schools.
Canadian lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) rights are some of the most extensive in the world. Same-sex sexual activity, in private between consenting adults, was decriminalized in Canada on June 27, 1969, when the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1968–69 was brought into force upon royal assent. In a landmark decision in 1995, Egan v Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada held that sexual orientation is constitutionally protected under the equality clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In 2005, Canada became the fourth country in the world, and the first in the Americas to legalize same-sex marriage. In 2022, Canada was the third country in the world, and the first in North America, to fully ban conversion therapy nationwide for both minors and adults.
The rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland have developed significantly over time. Today, lesbian, gay and bisexual rights are considered to be advanced by international standards.
New Zealand lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) rights are some of the most extensive in the world. The protection of LGBT rights is advanced, relative to other countries in Oceania, and among the most liberal in the world, with the country being the first in the region to legalise same-sex marriage.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) rights in Australia rank among the highest in the world; having significantly advanced over the latter half of the 20th century and early 21st century. Opinion polls and the Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey indicate widespread popular support for same-sex marriage within the nation. Australia in 2018, in fact was the last of the Five Eyes set of countries - that consisted of namely Canada (2005), New Zealand (2013), United Kingdom (2014) and the United States (2015) to legalize same-sex marriage. A 2013 Pew Research poll found that 79% of Australians agreed that homosexuality should be accepted by society, making it the fifth-most supportive country surveyed in the world. With its long history of LGBTQ activism and annual Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras festival, Sydney has been named one of the most gay-friendly cities in the world.
The Sexual Offences Act 1967 is an act of Parliament in the United Kingdom. It legalised homosexual acts in England and Wales, on the condition that they were consensual, in private and between two men who had attained the age of 21. The law was extended to Scotland by the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980 and to Northern Ireland by the Homosexual Offences Order 1982.
Homophobic propaganda is propaganda based on homonegativity and homophobia towards homosexual and sometimes other non-heterosexual people. Such propaganda supports anti-gay prejudices and stereotypes, and promotes social stigmatization or discrimination. The term homophobic propaganda was used by the historian Stefan Micheler in his work Homophobic Propaganda and the Denunciation of Same-Sex-Desiring Men under National Socialism, as well as other works treating the topic.
The Equality Act Regulations 2007 was secondary legislation in the United Kingdom, outlawing discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities, services, education and public functions on the grounds of sexual orientation.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in Bhutan face legal challenges that are not faced by non-LGBTQ people. Bhutan does not provide any anti-discrimination laws for LGBT people, and same-sex unions are not recognised. However, same-sex sexual activity was decriminalised in Bhutan on 17 February 2021.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people in Uganda face severe legal and social challenges not experienced by non-LGBTQ residents. Same-sex sexual activity is illegal for both men and women in Uganda. It was originally criminalised by British colonial laws introduced when Uganda became a British protectorate, and these laws have been retained since the country gained its independence.
The Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980 is an act of Parliament in the United Kingdom. Most of the act's provisions were merely a consolidation of already existing legislation, and as such subject to little controversy, with the notable exception was section 80, which partially decriminalised private homosexual acts between consenting adults in Scotland.
The Keep the Clause campaign was a privately funded political campaign organised in 2000 with the aim of resisting the repeal of legislation known as Clause 28 of the Local Government Act 1988 in Scotland and the United Kingdom, which forbade local authorities to "intentionally promote homosexuality".. The campaign involved the first privately funded referendum to take place across Scotland. The campaign was ultimately unsuccessful.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) rights in Scotland are generally in line with the rest of the United Kingdom, which have evolved extensively over time and are now regarded as some of the most progressive in Europe. In both 2015 and 2016, Scotland was recognised as the "best country in Europe for LGBTI legal equality".
A sodomy law is a law that defines certain sexual acts as crimes. The precise sexual acts meant by the term sodomy are rarely spelled out in the law, but are typically understood and defined by many courts and jurisdictions to include any or all forms of sexual acts that are illegal, illicit, unlawful, unnatural and immoral. Sodomy typically includes anal sex, oral sex, manual sex, and bestiality. In practice, sodomy laws have rarely been enforced to target against sexual activities between individuals of the opposite sex, and have mostly been used to target against sexual activities between individuals of the same sex.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) rights in Queensland have advanced significantly from the late 20th century onwards, in line with progress on LGBTQ rights in Australia nationally. 2019 polling on gay rights consistently showed that even in regional areas, Queensland is no more conservative about the subject than any other states.
This is a timeline of notable events in the history of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community in the United Kingdom. There is evidence that LGBT activity in the United Kingdom existed as far back as the days of Celtic Britain.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBTQ) rights in Western Australia have seen significant progress since the beginning of the 21st century, with male sex acts legal since 1990 and the state parliament passing comprehensive law reforms in 2002. The state was the first place within Australia to grant full adoption rights to same-sex couples in 2002. As of 2024, Western Australia is the only place within Australia to ban altrustic surrogacy for same-sex couples and also the only mainland state to still legally allows conversion therapy practices.
Censorship of LGBTQ issues is practised by some countries around the world. It may take a variety of forms, including anti-LGBTQ curriculum laws in some states of the United States, the Russian gay propaganda law prohibiting the "promotion of non-traditional sexual relationships", the Hungarian anti-LGBT law banning "content portraying or promoting sex reassignment or homosexuality", and laws in Muslim-majority states such as Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Malaysia prohibiting advocacy that offends Islamic morality.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
