Section 28: A Legacy of Censorship

In February, the UK celebrates LGBT+ History Month. Different from June’s Pride Month, LGBT+ History Month focuses on education around and freedom for queer identities, relationships and families. The month-long event was founded by an organisation called SchoolsOut UK, an LGBT+ educational charity. SchoolsOut UK announced the commemoration of LGBT+ History Month in 2004. February 2005 was the first year of the annual event, the second anniversary of the repeal of Section 28. Section, or Clause 28 prohibited the education of anything perceived as LGBT+ in schools and libraries, as well as restricting funding to LGBT+ social causes. To mark this year’s LGBT+ History Month, this short article explores the causes, passage and eventual repeal of the act, alongside the impact it has on LGBT+ education in the UK to this day.

Discussions of queer history typically focus on the 1969 Stonewall Riots and the global impacts which followed. In the UK: The 1964 Wolfenden Report, the 1972 Sexual Offences Act and 2013’s Marriage Act often remain the focus - whilst all important, an often overlooked, yet continually damaging piece of anti-LGBT+ UK legislature was the 1988 passage of Section, or Clause 28. The first piece of legislature in Britain to directly name homosexuality as a disease.

Introduced by the Conservative Thatcher Government in 1986, Section 28 was a small line in the 1988 Local Government Act which stated that:

‘A Local Authority shall not: (a) intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality; (b) promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship Nothing above shall be taken to prohibit the doing of anything for the purpose of treating or preventing the spread of disease.’

Such censorship can be understood as a response to two factors. The HIV epidemic and a book.

Firstly, let us discuss the impact of the HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) epidemic on British homophobia. The first known case of HIV in Britain occurred in 1981 in a 49-year-old gay man who frequently travelled to Florida. By 1985 HIV was listed as the cause of death of 50 individuals, and by 1987 over 1000 people were diagnosed. HIV had likely been transmitted from chimpanzees to humans sometime in the mid-nineteenth century thanks to humans in Africa hunting the animals for sport. The disease spread through Africa but it wasn’t until it became a problem in the USA in the early 1970s that popular panic set in worldwide.

HIV is a (currently) incurable disease which can be spread through an exchange of bodily fluids. AIDS (Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) is often grouped into discussions of HIV, for context, AIDS is the last and most aggressive stage of the disease. If you are HIV positive you are advised to always use condoms, as sex, both anal and vaginal, is historically the most common way in which the disease spreads. It is also spread through shared needles or syringes and other equipment used for drug taking.

It is not a ‘gay disease’ and does not specifically affect homosexual people, heterosexual people were diagnosed during the height of the epidemic, and they continue to be affected by HIV. However, the number of gay men diagnosed with and dying from HIV and AIDS throughout the 1980s-1990s was disproportionate. The reason HIV diagnoses were more common in homosexual individuals is largely because although any penetrative sex can spread the disease, transmission via anal sex is easier; The walls of the rectum are thinner than those of the vagina. As most HIV patients and victims were gay men; fear and hatred towards the community mounted. This is demonstrated by surveys conducted by the British Social Attitude. These show that in 1983, approximately 50% of Brits thought that “sexual relations between two adults of the same sex” were “always wrong”. By 1987 as the epidemic picked up, the figure had risen to 64%.

Sex between two consenting men over the age of 21 was decriminalised in 1967, under the Sexual Offences Act. The age of consent for heterosexual sex was 16, a figure that would not be matched for homosexual sex for almost forty years. Despite decriminalisation, homosexuality continued to be demonised by politicians and the press. An onslaught of deaths seemingly linked to what was still commonly thought of as degenerative behaviour was too good to be true, as public fear set in, reports of a ‘gay disease’ sold papers. Common understanding of homosexuality was fairly reductive by today’s standards and people were concerned that if homosexuality was ‘taught’ then the disease would be spread further.

Secondly, the book Jenny Lives with Eric & Martin was published by Danish author Susanne Bösche in 1983. Bösche’s book featured a young girl called Jenny, her father, and his boyfriend, looking to educate children about different types of families. Looking back in 2024 this is a lovely idea to normalise non-heteronormative families to young children. In 1983, the existence of homosexuality near children was blasphemous. When, in 1986 the book was reported to be on display in a library of a London primary school within a Labour Party Authority, public panic regarding ‘exposing’ children to homosexuality grew. The Education Secretary stated that the book was ‘propaganda’ and the Thatcher Government suddenly had an opportunity to attack the community.

Concerns about the so-called “promotion” of homosexuality were already rife, but these two events in quick succession added hysterical fuel to the homophobic fire. A bill was first introduced in 1986, though it couldn’t get through the House of Commons due to the 1987 general election. Margaret Thatcher publicly supported the bill in her campaign for re-election, using this public fear of homosexuality to shore up both her own and the party’s popularity in the election. At a Conservative Party conference she argued that children were being “cheated of a sound start in life” due to being “taught they have an inalienable right to be gay”.

Support for the Act was not restricted to the Tories, however, with Labour Party opposition also supporting the passage of the act.

The Labour party does not believe that councils or schools should promote homosexuality and I hope that no one in the Committee has any doubt about that [Local Government Bill, Standing Committee A, 8 December 1987, c1211]. – Dr Cunningham

Section 28 censored LGBT+ identities, families, relationships and existences. The Clause specifically targeted areas relating to children, such as schools and public libraries. However, bookshops were also encouraged not to sell LGBT+ literature, and council funds which had been directed to LGBT+ youth support, or any funding towards media which included same-sex relationships was cut.

LGBT+ groups immediately came out (pardon the pun) to protest the passage of the Act. Perhaps most famously, in January 1988 during a public broadcast debating the act, Sir Ian McKellen inadvertently came out as gay live on air at 48 years old. A year later in 1989, McKellen co-founded the LGBT+ charity Stonewall. (The archive broadcast is linked at the bottom of this article and I recommend listening, but please be aware that the presenter is arguing for the Act, and McKellen is, as stated, outed without his own intention. This may be difficult to listen to so please only do so if you feel able.)

A lack of education on homosexuality led to an immediate increase in homophobic prejudice, bullying, assaults, and violence. The Act justified the demonisation of LGBT+ topics, communities and individuals, and the British tabloids were unsurprisingly quick to jump on the scare tactics. Research conducted by Stonewall in 2017 shows that 52% of British teenagers had heard homophobic slurs in schools. It is thanks to this Act that several misconceptions regarding how HIV and AIDs were a ‘gay disease’ persist in public memory. For example, there are still popular misconceptions about the disease being exclusively homosexual, other popular fears include that it can be shared through food, or touch.

As early as 1985 media was produced in the USA which attempted to address the stigma and fear concerning HIV diagnoses. However, there is a noticeable gap in British media until 2018 with the depiction of Freddie Mercury’s HIV diagnosis in Bohemian Rhapsody. Direct attention to the impact of the epidemic is evident in the production of LGBT+ shows such as ITV’s It’s a Sin (2021), based on the real-life experiences of writer Russell T. Davies and his friends at the height of the epidemic. Examples of media like this are indicative that public interest has moved from discriminatory to empathetic. However the dates also demonstrate that fear of homosexuality and a reluctance to depict a human disaster which primarily affected queer individuals continued long after the repeal of the act in 2003. In face, in 2013 at least 50 schools still had policies in place which adhered to Section 28. The Act shaped the way a generation and beyond understood LGBT+ identities and issues, its effects still seen in how such issues are understood and taught today.

The existence of this Act is problematic on several levels, that much has been established. Here I want to highlight the danger and the ignorance of this censorship. Under Section 28 the following could not be taught accurately, a significant impact of which is that large parts of LGBT+ history remain un-taught and under-researched. (This list is a short snippet and is not intended to be exhaustive.)

Royal British History, namely Edward II, James VI & I and Queen Anne all had same-sex relationships during their reigns, which in all three cases were hugely significant to the trajectory of their political lives
Alan Turing, the cryptanalysis of the Enigma machine, was chemically castrated in the years following the Second World War before dying by cyanide poisoning two weeks before his 42nd birthday after being found guilty of homosexuality
Women in the military, especially those who served in the auxiliary forces in WW2 who often had secret relationships with each other, many joining the force to avoid heteronormative ideals all together
English Literature/writers including Shakespeare, Oliver Wilde, Virginia Woolf, E.M. Forster, Walt Whitman and Audre Lorde.
Ancient civilisations including Greece, Rome, and the Celts all had known and often celebrated same-sex relationships. In Greece, there was even an elite band within the Theban Army which consisted of 150 couples, 300 men. They were chosen and trusted because it was believed that each pair would rather die bravely for the other than allow himself to be seen as a coward by his beloved. They were undefeated from 371BCE – 338BCE.
In Japanese history, in the pre-Meji period (800-1868 CE) same-sex relationships among men were considered an “honoured way of life … [that] in some respects even surpassed ancient Athens.” (Crompton, 412)
Native American indigenous tribes mostly recognised at least four genders, if not more.
Gender is also seen to be non-binary in Hindu Texts, a third gender is noted in the Manusmriti, a law code from approximately c.1250 BCE

You may have noticed from this list that homophobia and censorship of same sex love emerge as Western Colonialism and Culture takes root. (A discussion of this nuance is important but overwhelming for this article. I recommend reading the articles listed below by María Lugones, “Heterosexualism and the Colonial / Modern Gender System”, and “The Coloniality of Gender”).

By the end of the 1990s, support for the Act had waned. The HIV and AIDS epidemic had slowly begun to improve, consequently, so had public and political fear. In 1994 Conservative MP Edwina Currie introduced an amendment to the 1967 Sexual Offences Act to lower the age of consent for homosexual men to 16, in line with the age of consent for heterosexual individuals. While the act was rejected, the age of consent was lowered to 18. Crucially, Currie’s amendment had the support of then Shadow Secretary Tony Blair who stated that ‘a society that has learned, over time, racial and sexual equality can surely come to terms with equality of sexuality.’

From 1997, under Blair’s new Labour Government, efforts to change legislation were more successful. Labour MP Jack Straw was the Home Secretary for only two months in 1997 when he started to push for reform on LGBT+issues, notably around the age of consent. Part of Straw’s reasoning for this was clearly the upcoming publication of a report by the European Commission of Human Rights. Straw wanted to fix Britain’s homophobic legislation before it could be declared in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Despite his desire to pre-empt an issue, Straw’s support for ‘homosexual rights’ was not simply a proactive legal effort. To cut a long story short, Straw was successful in 2000, the bill was passed and in 2001 the law changed: the age of consent was 16. However, Section 28 still stood.

Also in 2000, the Scottish Parliament voted to remove the Act from Scottish legislation 99 votes to 17. Whilst parliamentary support was not entirely unanimous (when is it in politics?) public support was fairly strong. Nicola Sturgeon, then first minister for Scotland, stated "A discriminatory and shameful piece of legislation that was imposed on Scotland by Westminster will today be repealed by the Scottish parliament ahead of other parts of the UK. That says something about the state of Scotland that we can all be proud of."

Meanwhile, in Westminster, Tony Blair also brought a bill to parliament in an effort to repeal the Act. It was rejected by an alliance of Tory and Cross-benchers in the House of Lords. The Labour Government then retreated from the effort to protect themselves amid the general election. Whilst we can decry this cowardice, Blair’s re-elected government did return to the repeal. In January 2002 support for the repeal of Section 28 received backing from the unlikeliest of places, Tory Party Members.

Section 28 was removed entirely from the British legal system in November 2003, but it was February 2003 that saw the abolition of the Act passed through Parliament. To mark this point of improving the education of LGBT+ issues and history, activist group Schools Out UK initiated the first LGBT+ History Month in February 2005, a concerted effort to correct almost two decades of direct censorship and centuries of criminalisation.

The abolition of Section 28 was by no means the end of LGBT+ oppression in the UK but the removal of censorship has allowed for LGBT+ communities and individuals to establish themselves within a national identity, heading towards a normalisation of some sorts.

Section 28: A Legacy of Censorship

Further Reading:

Recent Posts

Stay Up-to-Date on HERstory and sign up to our mailing list

LINKS

Contact us

Write for us

Policies

OUR WORK

Donate

About us

Our Values

The Team

COMMUNITY

Sign up

Login