The elusive Peter Tatchell

I have mixed feelings about the gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell. In 1983 he stood as Labour candidate in a notorious by-election in Bermondsey, and lost by a landslide. I deplored his selection as Labour candidate and greatly regretted that the Labour Party reversed its initial inclination to block him (Michael Foot had quite properly denounced Tatchell in the House of Commons for the latter's tenuous hold on the notion of parliamentary democracy, but then - predictably for such a feeble leader - reversed himself). Yet the campaign was vicious, and Tatchell - who was horribly vilified for his homosexuality - showed a degree of courage and dignity that was to his credit. A few months later he spoke to my university Fabian Society, and I had the chance of a long discussion with him over a pizza. Intending to denounce him for ever having supposed he was suitable to be a member, let alone a candidate, of the Labour Party, I found Tatchell's political views bizarre (his belief in a citizens' militia to replace our nuclear defences) but his personality engaging. Unlike so many extremist Labour candidates of that period, he was affable, good-humoured, thoughtful and transparently decent. I liked him, and reflected to my embarrassment that he was politically more tolerant of me than I was of him.

After his crushing defeat, Tatchell devoted his campaigning to the issue of gay rights, through the campaign he founded called 'Outrage!' (though he las lately joined the Green Party, which I suspect is politically the right place for him). I am a supporter of homosexual equality before the law, and of gay marriage and adoption rights; the radical turn in public sentiment on this issue over 20 years among people of my generation, born in the 1960s is - as Mary Ann Sieghart commented in The Times recently - a striking phenomenon that is much to the benefit of British public life. Yet the techniques of Outrage! in pursuing these campaigns were, to my mind, morally repugnant. Disrupting Church services was ill-mannered and counterproductive; but publicly revealing the alleged homosexuality of churchmen who had chosen never to disclose the fact was despicable. One senior Anglican - Mervyn Stockwood, formerly Bishop of Southwark, who was a chaste as well as celibate homosexual - was the object of one such demonstration; he was understandably distressed by it and died a short time later.

Yet just when I thought I had Tatchell accurately assessed as an arrogant fanatic, he went and did something admirable: he attempted a citizen's arrest of the despot Robert Mugabe in protest at the persecution of homosexuals in Zimbabwe. Last night he surprised me again: he appeared on Newsnight denouncing the far Left's association with elements that I can only reasonably describe as clerical fascism. Tatchell recounted his protest at the 'National Day of Action for Palestine' where he attacked Israel along with everyone else, yet also called on the Palestine Authority to cease its violent persecution of homosexuals. His analogy between Israeli policy towards Palestinians and Palestinian brutality towards homosexuality is risible, but his intentions are a good deal less ugly than those of the other participant in the discussion, Lindsey German of the Respect 'Coalition' and the Stop the War 'Coalition' (both front organisations for the Socialist Workers' Party).

Questioned by the presenter, Gavin Esler, Lindsey German attempted to evade the question of whether she had ever protested against Mugabe (to which she replied that she had been on as many political demonstrations as anyone - a massive non sequitur), before asserting that she didn't consider the issue significant. But more disturbing still than her uninterest in oppression - a characteristic of the SWP that is well-known, and that even led the party to call for military victory for Saddam Hussein - was her unembarrassed alliance with bigotry. During the visit to Britain this week of Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Respect's campaigners protested not against him but against those who found his views abhorrent. When given the opportunity on Channel 4 News last night to rebut allegations against him:

[H]e defended the use of suicide bombing by Palestinians as “permissible”, because it was the only weapon open to them in their conflict with Israel. And he described homosexuality as an “unnatural and evil practice” and said the Koran permitted wife-beating as “a possibility” in certain circumstances.

To the practised apologetics proffered by Lindsey German, Tatchell was mightily confused overall. But one facet of his contribution stood out. Human rights, he declared, were universal.

I don't know what the Respect Coalition made of that simple and unexceptionable statement, but the applause in my sitting room was long and loud.

Comments

[s.c.]

I have known Peter Tatchell since my days as a fellow campaigner with OutRage! (in the early 90s). He was always a frustrating person to work alongside (control freak would be an understatement); I also never shared his other political view points (eg on "animal rights") - and we diverge hugely on Israel, Iraq etc etc. However, there is no doubt in my mind that Oliver is absolutely spot on in his observations about Tatchell's basic decency and humanity - "Unlike so many extremist Labour candidates of that period, he was affable, good-humoured, thoughtful and transparently decent. I liked him, and reflected to my embarrassment that he was politically more tolerant of me than I was of him".
Peter lives frugally and although he is addicted to the limelight of newsrooms, he has undergone a considerable amount of self-sacrifice for his beliefs (unlike careerist, self-serving gay rights campaigners like Angela Mason, formerly of Stonewall, Michael Cashman et al). He's lived with constant threats to his personal safety and with abuse from gays and straights alike. I've seen him spat at by gay men in London's Soho as well as threatened with death by Muslim activists.

Peter has a quixotic belief in human progress and is indefatigable in his personal commitment to the values of tolerance and equality in which he believes. In these respects, he is the polar opposite of the hate-filled, ignorant and dangerous goons in Respect and their Islamo-Fascist comrades.
S.C.

[Tim Worstall]

My views of him changed immensely when he attempted that arrest of Mugabe. I will admit to still thinking he's a kook but a decent one. Yes, I know that doesn't make much sense but there we are.

[Tom]

I was once the witness to an Outrage! attack. Back in the early nineties their activists burst into a meeting of the Labour Party National Executive Committee. I think they were attempting to tip a large sack of white feathers over David Blunkett who was chairing the meeting at the time. It all went pair shaped. Mr Blunketts's dog was terrified. The guy carrying the sack of feathers tripped over the Engineering Union delegate and emptied the sack over of feathers him in the process. Another Outrage! member tried to photograph the event but I don't think his camera was working. It was like an episode of Tiswas.

The comments about Michael Casman above are ungracious and incorrect. My office is next to his. I see the letters and hear the phone calls. He has made a great contribution to liberation campaigning and still does.

[Luniversal]

Another blog gone dead. Heigh-ho.