Fridae

The homosexual movement has now been publicly active in Australia for more than thirty years. In that time it has managed to establish its voice through a regular press and a powerful parade. These iconic speakers have insisted that the gay "community" is no longer made up of deviants; that the homosexual is just like everybody else. This "normality" is maintained by the movement's unwillingness to question beyond the boundaries of its current comfortable cage.

Over the past year, activism efforts have continued to attack perceived social inequalities. In Western Australia, where the legal ages of consent currently stand at 16 for vaginal sex and 21 for anal sex, the recent defeat of the Liberal's parliamentary majority introduced a new Labour government and the chance of changes in the law. This political shift was welcomed. "The fact that the attorney general has decided to attack this problem by seeking input from a committee is extremely positive for gay and lesbian social justice in this state," said Damian Meyer, convenor of Gay and Lesbian Pride WA.

In NSW, the introduction of the Adoption Bill 2000 was attacked by the gay "community" for its apparent creation of an anomaly. While it appears to allow gays and lesbians to seek adoption as single parents, it does not offer this same right to those who identify as being in a stable same-sex relationship. Co-convenor of the Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby, Kathy Scott, has blasted the state government for ensuring that "same sex couples can't adopt even if it's in the best interests of the child."

Victoria has been at the centre of a national debate over access to in vitro fertilisation treatment. A federal Amendment Bill to the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 which allowed for states and territories to restrict access to IVF on a marital basis, caused the gay "community" to rage with anger. Co-convenor of the Victorian Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby, Ken Miller, insisted that the state government there recognise its election promises of social reform, stop discriminating against lesbians, or stop calling itself an "open government".

Nationally, reaction to the behaviour of the church has continued to be mixed. While the Sydney gay press expressed concern over the appointment of Brisbane Anglican Archbishop Peter Hollingworth to the position of Australia's Governor General, the suggestion by the Perth Archbishop Peter Carnley that the word "marriage" should be changed to "friendship" was heralded as a great step towards "intelligent and compassionate discussion about homosexuality."

---

The way in which the gay "community" has addressed these example issues reveals a definite level of success in the aim of the homosexual movement to remove homosexuals from the peripherals of society and to position them closer to the centre. What happens in society now happens to them. But it also reveals the growth of a minority "community" that now consistently focuses on self as "victim" while ignoring the effect these issues may also have on those who do not identify as "homosexual". The movement's fierce insistence on an equal age of consent will once again lead to a compromise that secures safety for those above the line but leaves many behind in a disempowered position. Anger over access to the adoption rights of gays goes nowhere near towards asking why children are continually being denied any right to assert what they see as in their "best interests". Concern over lesbian access to IVF treatment fails to address how Australia can still permit its predominantly male heterosexual dominated political institutions to control a woman's freedom of choice. Constant worrying about the church and the law merely reveals an internal acceptance of the rights of these constructors of "deviance" and "normality" to continue to govern our lives.

The homosexual movement has chosen to work from within and to work for itself. In the 2001 Mardi Gras Parade, the lead float attempted a deconstruction of "family" by offering a glimpse of what lies "Beyond the Pink Picket Fence". While such a theatrical parody displays diversity, it does nothing to question the normalisation of the cultural construct of "family". It does nothing to question how "family" itself may be an instigator of sexuality control. As a major voice of the Australian gay movement, the Mardi Gras exemplifies the movement's current position as a closeted force. Its major concern is to preserve the status of the homosexual as a "normal" species deserving of rights. It does this on the basis of a naturalised assumption that equality for the homosexual can be achieved by equating his position to that of the heterosexual. The homosexual movement's focus is not innovative and direct action against the barriers that are imposed on the construction of "self". It merely attacks systems which appear to exclude the homosexual with the intended aim that the homosexual should be permitted to live on the inside.

The result of this has been a crushing by the movement of all reference to deviance. The movement claims to be loud and proud, but the loudness is limited. It can attract its "community" members to the hardcore bars and club, to silent candlelight vigils on the steps of parliament, and to capitalist driven Expo consumer trade exhibitions. Its pride also runs thin. When in November 2000 a significant part of the country's gay media collapsed, the movement did not respond with grave disappointment. It did not question how money and greed had managed to eat away at a significant part of its voice. It simply prepared new publications with new title names and exactly the same content inside. Its own history disappeared in a cloud of glossy covered smoke and a clone was created in its place.

The homosexual movement can now look back on a past of "have not" from its current position of "have". It has a voice and it has success. It has constructed its aim of "normality" in the minds of the "community" it controls. It has made sure that life for these people alongside their oppressor is comfortable, safe and gay.