Throughout, the term "queer" is used as a synonym for LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgendered). "Transgendered" refers to anyone crossing gender boundaries, whether transsexual, transvestite, drag queen/king, 'gender neutral' or happily intersexed. "Gay" refers to homosexuality in either gender.

"I have no problem with heterosexuals, as long as they act gay in public"

We are often told that it's fine to be gay, as long as you don't flaunt it. Examine the statement above, and see how logical this is the other way around. This is particularly true given the changing, and dubious, definitions of 'flaunting it':

• Holding hands in public?
• Wearing t-shirts with gay slogans, or rainbow badges?
• Shaving one's head?
• Listing two females or two males on the nameplate on one's front door?
• Saying, "Well, actually..." when office conversation assumes one has an opposite-sex partner or spouse?
• Saying, "Well, actually..." when expected to join in homophobic banter?
• Daring to act like a couple in a - shock, horror - non-gay pub or club?

Firstly, heterosexuals shove their sexuality down our throats all the time. This isn't straight-bashing, it's not bitterness or jealousy; it is a simple fact. One sees straight couples holding hands and kissing in public. One sees heterosexual women wearing t-shirts with slogans such as "Man-teaser", "I will not chase the boys" and "Boys are great: every girl should have one." Your humble queer narrator sees these and thinks, "If she can do it, why not me?"

One person's flaunting is another person's natural, normal (oh, it feels so good to reclaim those words) behaviour. Provocation is in the eye of the beholder. This is the problem with public displays of affection: it is the watcher, not the participants, who declares them 'public displays', and therefore ascribes a motive which was simply not in the original behaviour. If I wear my '4 out of 5 cats prefer lesbians' t-shirt, someone could say, "You're shoving your sexuality down our throats." To which I would be justified in replying, "No, I'm wearing an item of clothing. If I didn't, I would be arrested for indecent exposure, and my tits would get cold. Any motive or agenda behind my clothing is entirely in your head, making it your problem, not mine. Why do you presume to know what goes on in my mind?" People have the right to behave in a way that seems natural to them, and doesn't harm anyone, without being forced on to the defensive and expected to police their every word and action. It is simply not reasonable, in a conversation about romance or partners, to expect someone to play the pronoun game, use gender-neutral nouns or just plain lie about their other half, for fear of being accused of 'flaunting one's sexuality.' Referring to "my girlfriend" rather than "my boyfriend" or "my partner" is not provocative, it is merely accurate.

Which leads neatly on to one of my other concerns: demanding that people live a lie. In a world where no-one made any assumptions about people's sexuality then yes, remaining closeted would not constitute living a lie. However, that is not the world in which we live. In this world, it is assumed that one is heterosexual unless one specifically says otherwise. It is also assumed that 'they' look different, that it would be obvious if one of 'those people' was in the room. I have had this experience before: stuck in a crowded postroom, listening to constant (and I mean constant: the amount it was on these people's minds, I swear they had some sexuality issues of their own) homophobic comments, and too afraid to tell them to fuck off or even say, "Hey, I'm gay and that's offensive" for two reasons:

1. My contract had no equal opportunities clause for sexuality and
2. I was seriously outnumbered.

Fourthly, Victoria A. Brownsworth, in 'Too Queer: Essays from a Radical Life' argued that passing for heterosexual is a very unhealthy thing to do. To pass as something one is not, as something which is more socially acceptable, betrays a certain amount of self-loathing. It implies that the way one was born is inferior, and that it would be better if one were this other thing. Failing that, that one have a duty to pretend to be this other thing. I also think that it devalues whatever relationship one is in: two people may be in love, may have been together for many, many years, but for the sake of not upsetting bigots, they have to pretend that this relationship doesn't exist. They are forced to act as though they do not love each other and that, my friends, is the sad and unnatural thing.

"Come out of the cupboards closets, you boys and girls"

In Isabel Miller's lesbian classic, 'Side by Side' (better, for my money, than the more famous 'Patience and Sarah'), the young Sharon, having been outed to her parents, runs to see Lucille and Vera, the lesbian mothers of one of her schoolfriends. In an argument with Vera over whether they can safely talk to Sharon (this is set in the early 1960s and Sharon is a minor), Lucille says "I can't bear for another generation to have nowhere to turn." This is, for me, a very sad line, and also a major part of my philosophy.

Isolation, and an accompanying lack of positive role models, are serious problems for young gay people. This is particularly the case in strict religious or right-wing communities, and states such as Texas and Oklahoma, which still prosecute sodomy. Basically, in many areas, coming out (or, more often, being outed) is more liable to result in exorcisms, 'aversion therapy', ostracism or being disowned than a hug and a point in the direction of the nearest LGBT youth group. Even in supposedly liberal and secular Britain, clause 28 of the 1987 Local Government Act declares that councils may not "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship." It is eshrined in British law that gay kids can only be told that they get an unacceptable pretended family relationship. People then have the nerve to wonder why LGBT youth, particularly Christian ones, are the social group with one of the highest rates of suicide and self-harm.

When I was young and unsure (so from the age of 13 to, um, now), it was a great comfort to see people that I thought might be gay. Rainbow flags, bumper stickers, women with shaved heads and piercings, women holding hands. I know I'm not the only one who hung around the gay and lesbian shelves in Birmingham Central Library, hoping to see someone who was like me. Sad, I know. Give me a break, I was fourteen, with no gay friends, no girlfriend and no hope of getting into a gay bar (indeed, no idea of where such an establishment might be). Even now, I think "yay" when I see someone or something which is identifiably queer. I get a warm and happy feeling when a gay or transgendered person is essentially saying, "This is who I am; deal with it. If you can't, that's your fault and your problem." I am happy with my sexuality, I am out of the closet and my parents are fine with it. My job has an equal opportunities policy which includes sexual orientation, something which is a rarity and not required by law. So if I feel happy and comforted to see my fellow queers, imagine how someone less sure, and more at risk, will feel. This is why I believe it is important to be out and proud, to be seen to be queer and happy. There is so much propaganda saying LGBTs will always remain alone, miserable, diseased¹, hated, whatever, that the only way to combat it is to be publicly LGBT and none of the above. Not 'flaunting', not going out of one's way, but simply living one's life happily and honestly, the way any heterosexual would.

¹ No offence intended to anyone living with HIV. Homophobes' idea, not mine.Back to text