The current Attorney General Suella Braverman has said schools should not be teaching kids “keywords” about the LGBTQ+ community or affirm trans identities.
Braverman claimed in a speech to the Policy Exchange thinktank that schools could be “indoctrinating children” by allowing them to live their lives as
their authentic selves after coming out as trans.
Her statements reflected the harsh reality that LGBTQ+ people are still under attack, despite the repeal of Section 28, the much hated and discredited
legislation from the 1980's that banned local authorities and schools from either promoting or discussing homosexuality.
Attorney General Suella Braverman
David Woolfall CC BY 3.0
via Wikimedia Commons
Braverman argues that legally, under-18s are entitled to be treated only by the gender corresponding to their sex and that the "unquestioning approach" adopted
by some teachers and schools is the reason different parts of the country have very different rates of children presenting as transgender. Braverman also
referred to author J. K. Rowling as "a heroine" of hers.
In her opinion it is not “age-appropriate” for children to learn about LGBTQ+ identities or information about the queer community from educational facilities, a view that
takes us back to the days of Section 28. That cruel legislation brought in by Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in 1988, was singly responsible for the bullying of many young
children in school, whether they were gay, or just thought to be gay.
It claimed the lives of many young people, particularly young men, who committed suicide as
a result of them realising they were gay and them being unable to face the prejudice of their every day lives. It gave bigots and thugs all the excuses they
needed to verbally and physically attack LGBTQ+ people, in particular young people.
since that controversial and homophobic legislation was repealed.
The legislation meant that councils were prohibited from the funding of books, plays, leaflets, films, or other materials showing any
same-sex relationships, while teachers weren't allowed to teach about or discuss gay relationships in schools.
A newly updated edition of
Young, Gay & Proud is still
available from Amazon.
Section 28 was introduced following a difficult period for the LGBT+ community in the UK. There had been some progress, but
the outbreak of HIV/AIDS led to the widespread demonisation of gay and bisexual men in the 1980s. Young gay people suffered
prejudice and isolation, particularly at school or college. Many committed suicide.
The Conservative Party capitalised on this anti-gay sentiment. In the run-up to the 1987 general election, they issued posters
claiming that the Labour Party wanted LGBT+ friendly books like Young, Gay and Proud and The Milkman's on His Way to be read in schools.
In 1987, a British Social Attitudes Survey found that three-quarters of the population thought homosexuality was "always or mostly wrong".
Just 11 per cent of the UK population in those days said it was "never wrong".
Section 28 was UK law for more than 15 years. It was in November 2003, that Ed Davey who was then deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats,
now knighted and their leader, introduced a clause in the House of Commons that would repeal this appaulling and cruel law.
He said that Section 28 left young people feeling "alone and vulnerable".
In his role as Spokesperson for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, he went on to say, "It is wrong to have a prejudicial piece of legislation on the statute book.
I am proud to have moved the clause that abolished Section 28
once and for all. But we still have so far to go. From trans rights, to the persistent discrimination faced by the LGBT+ community:
the fight is far from over".
The House of Commons then voted by a massive majority of 368 to 77 votes to repeal Section 28
and sent the battle on to the House of Lords.
Labour MP Kali Mountford pointed to the redundancy of
Section 28 by pointing out that it is a myth that
Section 28 has had any role in protecting children when
"The protection is in the good sense of the parents,
teachers and governors on the governing bodies."
Commenting on the vote, Stonewall's Director of
Parliamentary Affairs Sacha Deshmukh said:
"The Commons has voted overwhelmingly for Section 28
to go. They understand that there is no place for a
law that is offensive and completely redundant."
Two Conservative amendments were tabled for debate.
The first called for the retention of Section 28.
The second, supported by the Tory leadership, sought
to modify the management of sex education classes in
schools. Both amendments were overwhelmingly defeated.
Sacha Deshmukh added:
"The Conservative leadership's amendment was rightly
defeated by a huge vote. They proposed adding layers
of pointless bureaucracy in every school and wanted to
set up complicated ballots that would have turned
every school into an electoral battleground. Their
proposals were completely unnecessary and unworkable."
"The bigots who wanted to keep Section 28 have been
shown to be a small, sad and isolated axis of
"Tory modernisers who backed the straightforward
repeal of Section 28 deserve congratulations. People like
John Bercow, Michael Portillo and Archie Norman
realised long ago that the Conservative party will only have
a future if it rejects hate and stops trying to
stigmatise different sections of society." That was of course said
long before the Johnson era, and the current band of Conservative
politicans who have abandoned any hope of social justice and inclusion
from the ranks of the Tory party.
Conservative Anti-equality campaigner
Although Commons sense prevailed in 2003, some in the Lords did everything they could to queer the pitch.
This was largely due to an orchestrated anti-gay campaign led by Tory peer Baroness Young.
She had previously worked hard to try to stop legislation going through that would allow unmarried couples, including gay men and women
to adopt children and led campaigns in the House of Lords to prevent equalisation of the age of consent.
She was of course ultimately defeated on all counts and died a few months before the vote of repeal of Section 28.
After the House of Lords vote, Campaigning group Stonewall hailed it as "a triumph for tolerance over prejudice."
Ben Summerskill, Stonewall chief executive, said:
"Section 28 was a pernicious piece of legislation
deliberately framed in order to stigmatise a minority group.
We're delighted that the House of Lords has
demonstrated a willingness to listen to reason at last.
"Stonewall has worked long and hard to have this
deeply offensive law overturned. Today's vote was a triumph
for twenty-first century tolerance over nineteenth
"A noisy minority of politicians have defended this
indefensible totem for far too long. I suspect that many
voters around the country hope they will now turn
their attention to issues such as schools and hospitals."
A Conservative amendment to allow parental vetting of sex education classes was
very convincingly defeated. Sex education in England and Wales continued to be regulated
by the Learning and Skills Act. The Section 28 repeal
did not change the regulation of sex
education in schools in any way.
Former Prime Minister David Cameron
Tom Evans OGL 3
via Wikimedia Commons
At the 2001 General Election, future Prime Minister David Cameron was elected as the Member of Parliament for Witney. He supported
Section 28 at the time, voting against its repeal by Tony Blair's Labour Government in 2003. Cameron voted in favour of that
"cling-on-to-something" Conservative amendment that retained certain aspects of the clause.
Gay rights campaigners at the time described it as "Section 28 by the back door", and
as we said the Conservative move was totally unsuccessful. Strangely, Cameron made himself absent for the vote on the eventual repeal Section 28.
It was an issue he would be forced to come back to some years later.
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. 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.
All that happened before the current group of Conservative Politicans gained power. It's clear that some, like Attorney General Suella Braverman,
now want to try and reverse some of the reforms that have been achieved in parliament by the LGBTQ+ community.