February 10, 2026 • 41 mins
In our second episode with Peter Tatchell, we trace the founding of OutRage!, explore the chilling effect of Section 28 and the culture-war that shaped a generation. Peter breaks down why media moments mattered and shocked the evening news, unpacks the campaigns that equalised the age of consent, and the many years of work that helped to unlock the UK’s immense progress on LGBTQ+ rights from 1999–2013.
Peter explains why legal change is not the finishing line, pushing us into the harder terrain of culture, music, religion and sport.
Peter offers a clear warning about backsliding. Progress can vanish quickly, as Berlin’s queer golden age did in the 1930s, highlighting that the price of freedom is vigilance.
If this story moved you, follow the show, share it with a friend, and leave a review.
This is the final episode of series 1 of The View From Here. We’re already working on series 2, which we hope to launch later in 2026.
This episode was hosted by Jonathan Chambers and James Alexander
Editing by Hannah Stewart
Music: Mystify created by AlterEgo
Visit our website, https://tvfh.co.uk
Follow us on Instagram, https://www.instagram.com/theviewfromherepodcast
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Intro (00:01):
There were a thousand people in the hall, and I said,
My name is Chris Smith.
I'm the Labour MP for IslingtonSouth and Finsbury.
And I'm gay.
Peter (00:11):
A group of us in the Gay Liberation Fund getting the idea
of holding a gay pride march tochallenge that shameful view.
Intro (00:20):
Equality.
And for some people, it's morelikely equality was kind of like
what you got to as a startingpoint.
Jonathan (00:27):
Welcome to the view from here, the podcast that
explores the lives of key peoplein the LGBTQ Plus movement.
I'm Jonathan.
I'm James.
We hope you enjoy the podcast.
James (00:41):
Today we're joined for the second of two episodes with
Peter Tatchell, a lifelong humanrights campaigner known for his
fearless direct action andglobal LGBTQ advocacy.
Jonathan (00:51):
In part two, we hear about Outrage, the direct action
group he co-founded in the UK,a history of the UK's homophobic
laws, and his hopes and fearsfor the future.
You are one of the foundingmembers of Outrage.
Can you tell us a little bitabout that organization's
(01:13):
mission, the inspiration behindforming it?
Peter (01:16):
Outrage was set up in May 1990 at the instigation of
three journalists, um, ChrisWoods, Simon Watney, and Keith
Elkhorn.
They convened the meeting andthen about 35 of us came
together and formed theorganization.
It was basically a response tothe ongoing police policy
(01:42):
towards our community.
On the one hand, little or noaction against queer bashing
violence and murders, hugepolice resources to arresting
gay men and bisexual men forconsenting victimless behaviour.
So our battle cry wasprotection, not persecution.
We argued for, quote, policingwithout prejudice.
(02:05):
So our first ever uh protestwas at High Park Corner Public
Toilets, where the police wereusing argent provocateurs,
plainclothes police, dressed ina style of a gay man to lure gay
men to commit offences and thenarresting them.
(02:25):
Um and we were saying that thisis typical, that unlike the
public presumption of you knowlegit legalization or full
decriminalisation in 1967, thepolice were still having a go at
our community.
And of course, we weren'tjustifying sex in public
toilets.
What we were attacking is theway in which the police would
(02:48):
send in a young attractiveofficer dressed in skin type
white jeans and white t-shirtand you know purely to encourage
people to commit a crime andthen arrest.
Yeah, and play with his willyand then get then arrest anybody
who responded.
Yeah.
It was clearly incitement andentrapment.
Um But they were doing much thesame thing everywhere.
(03:08):
It wasn't just Hyde Park publictoilets, it was it was all
over.
Um and you know, the same thingwith Hampstead Heath, you know,
our view was, you know, wedon't condone people having sex
in public where members of thepublic might see it and be
offended.
But in the middle of the nightin Hampstead Heath, um the
(03:29):
public doesn't go there.
What's happening there is youknow it it it isn't causing
offense.
Um the police are going therejust to have a go, to go there
to get us.
Um easy target.
Yeah, easy yeah.
For homophobic police officers.
And and but this It was like asport for some of them.
Yeah.
Yeah.
James (03:49):
Yeah.
What we're gonna do tonight.
Yeah, you know, oh, let's go upto Hampshire's Heath and we'll
get a few arrests.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's it but this is more thantwo decades after you first
after your first act sort ofstarted activism.
Did you, you know, in in your50 year plan, I presume you
hoped that you'd got a bitfurther forward than that by
then.
Peter (04:09):
Yeah, I mean, in terms of actual legal law reform, it was
a very long, slow, hardprocess.
I mean, years and years ofnothing.
Yeah.
So, I mean, you know, the firstlaw reform was to go backwards.
Yeah.
Section twenty-eight.
Yes, yeah.
The first new anti-gay law inBritain for a century.
(04:32):
Um, and at that time there'd beno progress on changing any of
the existing homophobic laws orproviding any protections.
Um that didn't really kick inuntil 1999.
So up until 1999, Britain hadby volume the largest number of
(04:57):
anti-gay laws of any country inthe world, some of them dating
back centuries.
Wow.
Wow.
James (05:04):
Um did did HIV and AIDS contribute to the government
feeling it had a license toenact more anti or anti-LGBT or
homophobic laws?
Or were those two things notnot fully connected?
Um And did, you know, did diddid the sense the public panic
(05:25):
around HIV and AIDS and the ideathat this was a gay disease
mean that the government feltthey could act on some of their
more homophobic tendencies in away they hadn't been able to
before?
Peter (05:35):
It was a constellation of factors.
Um Margaret Thatcher'sgovernment was elected in 1979
and immediately used homophobiaas a weapon, you know,
criticizing what it called loonyleft Labour councils for
(05:55):
supporting LGBT plus communityorganizations.
So giving funding for a gayteenage group or a a lesbian
support organization, these weredeemed loony left policies.
The modern-day criminal, ofcourse, being a DEI.
Yeah, exactly.
It was coming back to the samecircle.
It was culture wars beforeculture wars.
So the Conservative governmenthad two major public campaigns
(06:21):
in the 1980s.
What the one was family values.
So Thatcher was very muchpromoting the idea that Britain
must get back to respecting andenforcing family values.
There was no place for us inthat family value scenario.
Then she had another campaignwhich was a return to Victorian
(06:44):
values.
She said Victorian values werethe acne of British moral life,
and we should get back to thosevalues.
And again, of course, in theVictorian era, that was a period
of very intense homophobic,biophobic, and transphobic
persecution.
Absolutely.
James (07:00):
Which we exported all over the world.
Yeah, exactly.
Peter (07:03):
So these two campaigns set the scene leading up to
Section 28, but then of coursethe AIDS pandemic came, and that
further escalated things andfurther justified the family
values and Victorian valuesagenda of the Thatcher
government.
So there was this political mixbubbling along all through the
(07:25):
1980s, um, which did eventuallylead to Section 28.
Um and correspondingly, a hugeincrease in the arrest and
convictions of gay and bisexualmen for consenting same-sex
behavior.
Um I did research on homophobicstatistics, which found that in
(07:47):
1989 the number of gay andbisexual men convicted for
consenting victimless behaviorwas almost as great as in
1954-55 when male homosexualitywas totally illegal, and when
the country was gripped by aMcCarthyite style anti-gay rich
art.
That's how bad it got.
(08:08):
And of course, it was given agreen light again, not just by
the Victorian values and familyvalues campaigns, but Thatcher's
speech uh at the Tory Partyconference in 1987, where she
attacked the right to be gay,and then you had James Anderson,
the chief constable, then chiefconstable of Greater
(08:29):
Manchester, saying that gay menwere swirling around in a
cesspit of their own making.
So off the back of this, thenumber of murders of gay men
escalated, the number of arrestsof gay men escalated.
So David Smith, who was thenthe editor of Gay Times and
myself, we compiled a list oflikely gay men murdered.
(08:54):
These were from national andsome cases local newspaper
reports.
Just from the ones that we wereable to find, which I'm sure is
just a fraction of the fulltotal, we identified fifty-one
men who were murdered betweennineteen eighty-six and nineteen
(09:16):
ninety one in circumstancesthat point to a humble vote
motive, such as the having theirgenitals cut off and stuffed in
their mouths, uh um beingstabbed seventy times, no
robbery, no break-in.
Um of course, in nearly allthese cases there were no public
(09:38):
appeals by the police.
Just another queer, they said.
Who cares?
Just another queer.
What do you expect?
If you're queer, what do youexpect?
unknown (09:47):
Wow.
Peter (09:48):
This is what the police would say.
They wouldn't say it publicly,you know, and the the
commissioner wouldn't say it,but individual police officers
did say those kind of things.
And so there was this hugespike in murders, and you know,
fifty-one murders, there werehundreds of other queer bashing,
(10:09):
v horrendous violent queerbashing attacks, which left some
men paralyzed for life or withpermanent brain injuries.
Um and then this r massiveincrease in arrests for behavior
that wasn't even a crimebetween straight men and women.
So I said there was nosubstantive law reform um in all
(10:33):
my decades of activism up until1999 and 2000, with the end to
the ban on LGBT plus people inthe armed forces, and then
followed by the equalization inDH consent, the repeal of
section 2D eight, and to the banon same-sex couples fostering
and adopting children, um,protection against
(10:55):
discrimination in employment,um, civil partnerships, then
protection againstdiscrimination in housing,
education, other services, thensame-sex marriage.
So from 1999 to 2013 withsame-sex marriage, there was
this phenomenal period of lawreform unprecedented in British
(11:19):
history.
Yeah.
There's an uh far possibly inworld history.
I cannot think of any othermarginalised community where so
many discriminatory laws or newprotections were added in such a
short space of time, literally14 years.
Yeah.
So Britain Britain went fromone one of the most homophobic
(11:40):
Western countries to being oneof the best within 14 years.
But that is down to ouractivism.
Right.
James (11:47):
It did not just happen on its own.
It wasn't just a governmentwoke up one morning and said,
Oh, this doesn't look good.
It was because you and and andpeople like you that have been
fighting this for decades onyour on your five your your
fifty-year plan to to get theselaws off the statute bricks.
And did did that correspondwith changing hearts and minds
(12:08):
at the same time?
Or did it was it was itsomething that that was
happening in Parliament inWestminster but not necessarily
permeating through culture andon the ground?
Or did it correspond to achange in society as well?
Peter (12:23):
Stonewall were very much inside our lobbyists.
Right.
They were working through thecorridors of power.
Parliament and government,yeah, major institutions.
We thought that's fine.
But Outrage knew that thoseinstitutions were impervious to
(12:43):
reason or compassion.
Long before Stonewall started,the campaign for homosexual
equality and others had beentrying to get reform for years.
Mm-hmm absolutely nowhere.
Parliament would not evendiscuss LGBT plus rights.
They said we were sodisgusting, so despicable, that
(13:05):
we will they will not disgraceParliament by even allowing a
discussion of this issue.
You cannot believe the hatredand vilification we endured.
So we wished them all well, butwe knew they're not going to
get anywhere unless there ispressure from outside
Parliament.
So outrageous role was toorganize spectacular, dramatic
(13:32):
protests to highlight aspects ofpersecution and discrimination.
So we would hold a protestabout the arrest of same-sex
couples for kissing.
We had the kissing inPiccadilly Circus where we
sought to highlight the factthat just for kissing, same-sex
couples could be arrested andgiven a criminal conviction.
(13:54):
And particularly we highlightedthe case of two lesbians who
were arrested at the ticketbarriers at Victoria Station for
giving each other a good nightkiss.
We knew that even people whowere not particularly pro-LGBT
would probably find that in manycases, many cases would find
that just excessive.
(14:14):
Yeah.
It wasn't sex, it was just agood night kiss, you know.
Um so we promoted their storyand and got them and others
interviewed.
And the idea was to do twothings.
First of all, through a protestto get media coverage because
(14:35):
media is the main means ofsocial communication in society.
So if you want to get an ideaout there and discussed and make
people aware, you have to usethe media.
Yeah.
So our kissing in theorycircuits got masses of media
coverage.
And that media coverage raisedpublic awareness about the fact
that you could be kissed, uh youcould be arrested for merely
(14:57):
kissing a same-sex partner.
And we found a lot of peoplewho are not particularly
pro-LGBT were quite appalled bythat.
James (15:05):
Yeah.
And possibly didn't know.
Peter (15:07):
Oh, yeah, no, no, no, no, didn't know and were appalled.
Um so we we we that was it wasit was a it was a two-stage
thing.
We we we made people aware ofit, and we also galvanized them
to feel this is wrong.
Yeah.
Um and off the back of the mainnews coverage, then there'd be
interviews in the press, there'dbe TV talk shows, uh
(15:30):
radiophonium programs, we'd goon them all to tell the stories
of people who've beenvictimized.
And through that process webegan to change hearts and
minds.
Yeah.
So on the age of consent, wedid lots of protests on the age
of consent, uh, the unequal ageof consent, which what had been
well, from 1967 it had been 21,then in 1994 it was reduced to
(15:55):
18, but still above the 16 levelfor straight in a moment.
Um so by the mid-1990s,two-thirds of the public
supported an equal age ofconsent.
And that meant we were able togo to politicians and say, look,
(16:16):
the public is onside.
The public supports change.
And that gave MPs, who are verynervous creatures, who don't
like rocking the vote.
It gave them, or some of themat least, the confidence to vote
for equality.
James (16:28):
Yeah.
Peter (16:29):
And the same with the the ban on LGBT LGBT plus people in
the armed forces.
You know, we we staged protestsoutside the Ministry of
Defence, we outed allposthumously all the great
so-called military heroes likeGeneral Haig, Phil Marshall
Montgomery, uh AdmiralMountbatten, um, raising
awareness of the fact that LGBTplus people had been in the
(16:50):
armed forces.
Contributed massively to thiscountry's history, yeah.
Yeah.
And even though we we're notvery happy with the some of the
terrible things the British Armydid, um, still it was important
to draw that distinction thatthe LGBT plus people had been
there.
Yeah.
We'd been regarded as heroeswhile our sexuality was hidden.
Um, you know, why can't weserve now?
(17:13):
So we won that again,two-thirds by by the middle
1990s, two-thirds majority infavour of ending the ban on
LGBTs in the armed forces.
And that did emboldenpoliticians to vote for
equality.
James (17:28):
So, with all the law reform in the 90s and and or the
late 90s and early 2000s, whatwas your sense of what needed to
happen after that?
Clearly we've talked abouthearts and minds and the need to
change hearts and minds.
But was there more law reformneeded?
Was there still hugeinjustices, or was it a case of
looking overseas now to seewhat's happening elsewhere?
Peter (17:49):
For me and those of us in Outrage, we never saw law
reform as the be-all andend-all.
We saw culture, values,attitudes, ideas as equally
important.
It's no good having perfectlaws if the public is still
bamboozled with bigotry.
(18:09):
So our vision was always yes,laural form, but also all these
other things, like challenginghomophobia in the church uh and
other religions, um taking onsport, homophobia and sport, um
(18:30):
in the media.
Yeah, uh yeah.
So after the legalization ofsame-sex marriage in twenty
thirteen in England and Wales,we knew that most of the major
anti-LGBT plus laws anddiscriminations were over.
(18:51):
They were history.
Great progress showing that youcan make change.
But then there's all theseother issues around cultural
manifestations of homophobia,biphobia, and transphobia.
So we took on lots ofhomophobic singers, artists, you
know, performers uh who areputting out um homophobic
(19:17):
lyrics, mostly Jamaicandancehall singers, like Beadman,
Vibes Cartel, uh Capleton andothers.
We worked with J Flag, theJamaican LGBT plus group, to uh
first of all seek to get thoseartists to stop to persuade them
(19:38):
not to incite murder.
Because these lyrics were notmerely homophobic, they were
actually inciting people to goout and shoot, burn, hang, drown
LGBTs.
Yeah.
A clear criminal incitement tomurder, and no government
anywhere was enforcing the law.
(19:59):
We said if these artists werewhite and saying the same things
about black people, they'd bearrested and jailed like that.
Absolutely.
But because of the hypocrisyand double standards in our
society, they could get awaywith it uh when it came to
making similar incitementsagainst LGBTs.
(20:20):
So when the artists did notrespond to our polite, courteous
requests, my our explanationsof the harm and damage, because
in this period, we're talkingabout from the nineteen nineties
through to twenty ten or twothousand and fifteen, these
lyrics uh corresponded to a hugeuptick in homophobic violence
(20:45):
in Jamaica and other Caribbeanislands, where the music
emanated from, but also inJamaican communities in the
diaspora, in the US, in France,in Britain, and other countries.
Jonathan (21:01):
Yeah, absolutely, absolutely.
But I mean that song, boom byebye, um that followed me around
my high school, growing up inKingston.
Peter (21:08):
Yeah.
Jonathan (21:08):
And I I I struggle to listen to Dance Hall, I struggle
to um embrace it, I struggle toidentify with that aspect of my
Jamaican culture because it'sbeen so hostile towards me.
And I will have Jamaicanfriends who listen to this,
who'll be like, no, no, no, man,it's not, it's not, don't worry
about it.
It's not that's not it, don'tworry.
(21:28):
But that's that was the impactit had on me.
Peter (21:32):
Yeah.
Well, I mean, JFLAG contactedme.
Extraordinarily brave people, JFlag.
Um, because they basicallysaid, It's too dangerous for us
to challenge it here in thiscountry.
We'll but we'll be murdered.
We need help.
In fact, they asked a wholerange of organizations around
the world for help.
(21:52):
Outrage was the only one whoresponded and said, Yes, we will
help you.
And so we collaborated withthem, we organized A plan, and
the plan was to target thesingers' concerts, to get them
cancelled, to make them payfinancially.
If they weren't going to listento ethical arguments, moral
arguments about why this musicis wrong, we have to punish them
(22:15):
in their pockets.
Money talks.
So we organized a globalboycott and cancellation
campaign of these artists.
They lost millions and millionsand millions and it really hurt
them.
And it did begin to make themthink, is this really worth it?
(22:37):
But they didn't give up easily.
For a time I had to be underarmed police protection because
either these artists or someoneacting for them sent a hitman to
Britain to kill me.
That's how bad it got.
And some of them openlybragged, you know, you're as
(23:00):
good as dead.
Don't think you can get awaywith this in Britain.
We have our ways of getting toyou.
Quite quite sinister,threatening stuff.
But in the end, they lost somuch money and clearly
recognized that we were notgoing to give up.
So they eventually, throughtheir agents and managers, uh
(23:25):
came to an agreement and theysigned the Reggae Compassionate
Act, which agreed to no longerproduce this music and to play
it.
And some of them most of themkept to it, some didn't.
But overall, the play of thatmusic, the airplay of that
music, went way, way, way down.
And so did attacks on LGBTs inJamaica and other Caribbean
(23:50):
islands.
And also in among Jamaicancommunities here in Britain.
So that was a success.
And it's an example of how wehad an agenda in outrage beyond
mere law reform.
Yeah.
And of course, you know, again,unlike Stonewall, right from
(24:12):
the get-go, Outrage was workingin international solidarity work
with LGBTs in other countriesunder Great Repression, like in
Russia, China, and many othercountries.
James (24:26):
So maybe did did Because obviously there were so many
organizations that were foundedon law reform, Stonewall being
an example.
Was it hard to convince peopleto keep on fighting once a lot
of the law reform had beencompleted?
Once the checklist ofhomophobic laws was ticked off?
How how did you convince peopleto keep fighting?
(24:48):
Or did did did did people justsay, right, well, we've we're
done here, we we move on?
Peter (24:53):
I think the prevailing view was law reforms done, the
rest will follow in due course.
Right.
But when Jamaican dance orartists began openly inciting
the murder of LGBTs, that was awake-up call for a lot of
people.
They thought clearly we havebattles still to fight.
(25:15):
And when black LGBTs in thiscountry started getting beaten
up, inspired by this dance ormusic, that was also another
wake-up moment.
So I think there was atemptation for some to say,
well, the battle's more or lessdone and dusted.
But then things kept onhappening that reminded people,
(25:37):
well, no no no no, we ain'tthere yet.
Yeah.
Um, you know, you know, the theserial killings of um uh
Michael Lupo in the late 80s, umColin Ireland in the 1990s, uh
Stephen Porte more recently,they show just how vulnerable we
(25:57):
are, that there are people outthere for a mixture of variety
and m of motives who are out todo us harm.
And you know, some of them arewithin our own community.
And every time the church orJudais or Islamists denounce and
condemn LGBTs, uh again itreminds us that religion is
(26:21):
still such a huge threat to ourwell-being.
James (26:27):
And your your religious views have evolved presumably
quite substantially from youryour upbringing.
How how does what what whatwhat do you feel about your your
own s sort of spirituality inthe context of the fight that
you've that you've had, and youknow you kind of reflected on
that at the beginning.
And has that has that changedover over time as well?
Peter (26:51):
Contrary to my very devout parents, who saw
Christianity as very much to dowith personal salvation, I had a
much wider, broaderperspective.
Not thanks to them, but just mereading the text, you know.
So where I read the Sermon onthe Mount, the injunctions to
(27:14):
love thy neighbour as thyself,be a good Samaritan, I am my
brother and sister's keeper.
For me, all those elements ofreligion inspired and gravitated
me towards activism.
That, you know, these were notjust meant as lovely holy words,
(27:36):
but they're injunctions to howyou how you should behave, and
that yes, having a piousrelationship with God is
important if you're a Christian,but Christianity also has a
social conscience.
And uh I mentioned that one ofmy early inspirations was the
black civil rights movement inAmerica, uh, which was led by a
(27:59):
black Baptist pastor, Dr.
Martin Luther King.
For me, he was puttingChristianity into action.
He was doing what the NewTestament was advising
Christians should do, um, butwhich my parents and most
Christians weren't.
So I saw, you know, I thinkfrom the from the a I'd never
(28:24):
heard of liberation theology,but in my own mind I had a
similar concept as a teenager,you know, that that Christianity
should be a force for socialchange or neural redemption.
Now, of course, around the sametime I was becoming skeptical
and critical, so I'd never heardof Epicurus, but I began to ask
(28:44):
similar questions, you know.
If God is so powerful and soomnipotent, how can we have
things like, you know, tsunamisand earthquakes and genocides,
you know?
Why didn't God stop Hitler, youknow?
Um so that eventually, plus ofcourse the homophobia and sexism
(29:07):
implicit in religious teachingdrove me out of religion.
So I now call myself an atheistand a humanist.
Right.
So I believe, you know, tounderstand the world, it's not
based on holy text, it's basedon human reason and principles
and values like the UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights.
Yeah.
Do you mind if I ask if youwere ever able to reconcile with
your parents?
(29:27):
Yeah, I mean, uh it was a long,hard battle um to reconcile on
a whole whole range of differentthings, but but primarily
around my sexuality.
Um I didn't initially tell thembecause I thought they were so
extreme that they might have aheart attack or a mental
(29:51):
breakdown, or that they mightturn me and my then partner over
to the police.
So I didn't initially tellthem.
What I did was I dropped hints.
I thought, slowly, gently, doit the ki kind way, you know,
because c coming out shouldn'tbe an act of revenge.
You the aim is not to hurtpeople, it's to tell the truth.
(30:12):
But if your family or friendsare coming from a very ignorant
and bigoted place, probably justblurting it out isn't gonna,
you know, be the best way to doit.
So what I would do is, youknow, little by that, I'd say,
you know, there's a at work, uhthere's a gay guy I work with,
(30:33):
he's very nice.
I don't know what people arefussed about.
Um if there's an item on thenews about a gay bashing, I'd
say, oh, that's terrible, youknow, whatever you think of gay
people, they shouldn't be beatenup like that.
So o over a period of two orthree years, my parents began to
put sort of two and twotogether and got four, or eight.
And then they they said to methat was a very kind and
(30:57):
thoughtful way of doing it.
Because they they said we wouldnot have been able to if you'd
just c at the age of seventeenjust blithered it down, we would
not have been able to cope.
Yeah.
They swore we wouldn't haveturned you over to the police,
but I'm not I'm not sure aboutthat.
James (31:11):
But you know, that that remains the case that that
blurting it out is for a lot ofpeople coming, you know, a lot
of a lot of this podcast, we'veheard people's coming out
stories and and some have gonewell, some haven't, and and you
know, but everybody that is onething that unites our whole
community is having to come outregularly and repeatedly to a
(31:31):
society that assumes the the thethe normal inadverted commas
way of life until you tell themotherwise.
Um and that's to me feels likeone of the biggest things we
have to address in society isthat normal means lots of normal
means variety.
Normal means that you can'tmake presumptions about
(31:51):
someone's life and that thatsomeone, you know, your your
child or your niece or nephewmay just as much likely grow up
um being LGBTQ as they would bebeing straight, and that's
totally fine and unacceptableand and and and that coming out
shouldn't have to be a thing.
Jonathan (32:09):
Absolutely, absolutely.
If if you look back at yourextremely long, productive,
inspiring career, are there isthere a moment that you could
say, Wow, I'm really proud ofthat?
And are there any moments thatyou can say, Oh, I wish we
hadn't done that?
Peter (32:28):
It's very hard to single out one thing above all others
because I've done so much, andreally that judgment is not
really for me, it's for othersto make.
Um But I guess I would say thatI'm I'm quite proud of the two
attempted citizens' arrests ofthe Zimbabwean president Rob
(32:49):
Mugabe because it did helphighlight the abuses there in a
period when there was verylittle media coverage about the
torture, rape, executions thatwere going on inside Zimbabwe.
It was a huge news story whatyou did.
Yeah.
Intro (33:06):
It's huge.
I remember.
Peter (33:08):
Um So the fact that you know I didn't get him arrested,
but I did raise public awarenessand gave a huge morale boost to
people inside Zimbabwe whothought the rest of the world
had forgotten and didn't care.
So to give people that moraleboost is that's that's that's
something I'm I'm really gladthat I was able to do.
James (33:31):
And and we're entering an era where it feels like a
couple of decades of consensuson LGBTQ rights and progress and
moving forwards feels like it'sfaltering.
It feels like we've as acommunity forgotten how to be
activists and forgotten that thefight doesn't end once you've
got law reform, but that's justthe start, we've still got much
(33:52):
more to do.
What what do you feel about theworld as it is right now and
and where where where both law,culture, society, where that's
all moving, and how what areyour fears for the moment that
we're in right now?
Or hopes.
Or hopes, of course, you know,we can be let's be positive and
optimistic as well as as well asconcerned.
Peter (34:14):
I can remember after same-sex marriage repealed the
last great discriminationagainst our community, warning
that we shouldn't take anythingfor granted.
We should certainly not assumethat there would be continued
unbroken progress forward.
I remember saying that um whocan say what might happen in
(34:39):
ten, twenty or thirty years'time.
Um I said, you know, there's noimmediate apparent threat from
far right extremists like therehad been in the 70s, but they
could come back.
And they have.
I always used to say as a youngboy to older people, you know,
(35:25):
how come people allowed Hitlerto get to power?
Why didn't they stop him?
No one had a satisfactoryanswer, but they'd always you
know brushed me off withsomething, oh, that's that's not
relevant to you now.
It's that's the past.
But I can remember saying tomyself, if I ever was faced with
(35:45):
a situation like Nazism, Iwouldn't step back and do
nothing.
I'd work with others and tryand change it.
And for me, in a different sortof way, the Vietnam War was
something similar.
I mean, monstrous human rightsabuses by the Americans and
Australians, massive killing ofcivilians, and that's why I got
(36:09):
involved in the anti-Vietnam Warmovement.
James (36:14):
Do you worry about the future of the world where we're
where from what you can seeright now?
Or are you do you remainoptimistic that we're gonna keep
forward momentum and progress?
Peter (36:26):
I'm worried because things are slipping backwards,
but I'm also in the long termoptimistic that we're in an
epoch and moment of humanhistory where bad things are
happening and will happen, butoverall today people are freer
(36:49):
and more equal than they were ahundred years ago.
Now that is not to say thatthings cannot be put in reverse.
I always tell people the priceof freedom is eternal vigilance.
We have to always be vigilantand ready for new threats and
(37:13):
new dangers.
We should not assume thatthings would get better.
And I point to the fact ofGermany.
In nineteen thirty, Berlin wasthe queer capital of the world.
LGBT plus people flocked therefrom all over Germany and other
(37:33):
countries.
Germany was on the verge ofrepealing paragraph one hundred
five.
There were gay bars and clubs,sporting associations,
newspapers, cultural troops.
It was queer heaven.
And then three years later,Hitler came to power in nineteen
thirty-three, and queer heaventurned into queer hell, with the
(37:58):
first gay and bisexual menbeing carted off to
concentration camps by the endof nineteen thirty-three.
James (38:05):
It's astonishing how quickly things can go backwards.
Jonathan (38:09):
And in fact, one of the first institutions they
attacked was the HirschwaldInstitute.
Um in in Berlin.
James (38:15):
Peter, this has been an extraordinary interview.
Thank you so much for sharingyour insights with us, but but
more importantly, thank you somuch for more than five decades
of absolutely incredibleactivism on behalf of well, as
you as you said, love of yourcommunity of fellow, of fellow
(38:38):
citizens and people and peopleto come, people for generations
to come are going to live abetter life because of the
activism that you've shown andthe sacrifice and commitment
that you've made.
And on my on our side, I thinkjust to say a huge thank you for
everything you've done, it'sextraordinary.
Peter (38:58):
Well, of course, it's not just me alone, it's me with
many, many others.
And you know, I always say I'moff on the front man, but
there's always been a team withme, and I pay tribute to them as
well.
Yeah.
And to the many unsung unknownLGBTs who've contributed, you
know, often from small towns orvillages, never got any public
(39:19):
acknowledgement or thanks, but Iknow their contribution has
been part of how we've wonchange.
Well, thank thank you.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
And can I say that if anybody'sinterested, um, please go to my
Peter Tatshaw Foundationwebsite,
PeterTatshawFoundation.org.
(39:40):
In the top right hand corner,there's a little button which
says subscribe, and you can giveus your name and email address,
and we will send you a weeklyboss on a range of LGBT plus and
other human rights issues.
It's totally free, there's nocharge.
And then because we don't getany funding or support from any
(40:01):
institution or foundationourselves, um, next to the
subscribe button is a donatebutton, and if you can afford to
make a standing order donationto keep us going, that would be
really appreciated as well.
James (40:15):
Fantastic.
Peter (40:16):
I'll just finish with my motto, which is don't accept the
world as it is, dream of whatthe world could be, and then
help make it happen.
Brilliant.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
James (40:34):
That's it for season one of The View from Here.
Thanks to everyone wholistened, donated, and supported
the podcast in its firstseason.
And of course, a huge thanks toall of our guests.
Jonathan (40:44):
We're already working on season two, which we hope to
put out later in 2026.
Keep following us on Instagramor check out our website for
more details.
Bye for now.
There were a thousand people in the hall, and I said,
My name is Chris Smith.
I'm the Labour MP for IslingtonSouth and Finsbury.
And I'm gay.
Peter (00:11):
A group of us in the Gay Liberation Fund getting the idea
of holding a gay pride march tochallenge that shameful view.
Intro (00:20):
Equality.
And for some people, it's morelikely equality was kind of like
what you got to as a startingpoint.
Jonathan (00:27):
Welcome to the view from here, the podcast that
explores the lives of key peoplein the LGBTQ Plus movement.
I'm Jonathan.
I'm James.
We hope you enjoy the podcast.
James (00:41):
Today we're joined for the second of two episodes with
Peter Tatchell, a lifelong humanrights campaigner known for his
fearless direct action andglobal LGBTQ advocacy.
Jonathan (00:51):
In part two, we hear about Outrage, the direct action
group he co-founded in the UK,a history of the UK's homophobic
laws, and his hopes and fearsfor the future.
You are one of the foundingmembers of Outrage.
Can you tell us a little bitabout that organization's
(01:13):
mission, the inspiration behindforming it?
Peter (01:16):
Outrage was set up in May 1990 at the instigation of
three journalists, um, ChrisWoods, Simon Watney, and Keith
Elkhorn.
They convened the meeting andthen about 35 of us came
together and formed theorganization.
It was basically a response tothe ongoing police policy
(01:42):
towards our community.
On the one hand, little or noaction against queer bashing
violence and murders, hugepolice resources to arresting
gay men and bisexual men forconsenting victimless behaviour.
So our battle cry wasprotection, not persecution.
We argued for, quote, policingwithout prejudice.
(02:05):
So our first ever uh protestwas at High Park Corner Public
Toilets, where the police wereusing argent provocateurs,
plainclothes police, dressed ina style of a gay man to lure gay
men to commit offences and thenarresting them.
(02:25):
Um and we were saying that thisis typical, that unlike the
public presumption of you knowlegit legalization or full
decriminalisation in 1967, thepolice were still having a go at
our community.
And of course, we weren'tjustifying sex in public
toilets.
What we were attacking is theway in which the police would
(02:48):
send in a young attractiveofficer dressed in skin type
white jeans and white t-shirtand you know purely to encourage
people to commit a crime andthen arrest.
Yeah, and play with his willyand then get then arrest anybody
who responded.
Yeah.
It was clearly incitement andentrapment.
Um But they were doing much thesame thing everywhere.
(03:08):
It wasn't just Hyde Park publictoilets, it was it was all
over.
Um and you know, the same thingwith Hampstead Heath, you know,
our view was, you know, wedon't condone people having sex
in public where members of thepublic might see it and be
offended.
But in the middle of the nightin Hampstead Heath, um the
(03:29):
public doesn't go there.
What's happening there is youknow it it it isn't causing
offense.
Um the police are going therejust to have a go, to go there
to get us.
Um easy target.
Yeah, easy yeah.
For homophobic police officers.
And and but this It was like asport for some of them.
Yeah.
Yeah.
James (03:49):
Yeah.
What we're gonna do tonight.
Yeah, you know, oh, let's go upto Hampshire's Heath and we'll
get a few arrests.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's it but this is more thantwo decades after you first
after your first act sort ofstarted activism.
Did you, you know, in in your50 year plan, I presume you
hoped that you'd got a bitfurther forward than that by
then.
Peter (04:09):
Yeah, I mean, in terms of actual legal law reform, it was
a very long, slow, hardprocess.
I mean, years and years ofnothing.
Yeah.
So, I mean, you know, the firstlaw reform was to go backwards.
Yeah.
Section twenty-eight.
Yes, yeah.
The first new anti-gay law inBritain for a century.
(04:32):
Um, and at that time there'd beno progress on changing any of
the existing homophobic laws orproviding any protections.
Um that didn't really kick inuntil 1999.
So up until 1999, Britain hadby volume the largest number of
(04:57):
anti-gay laws of any country inthe world, some of them dating
back centuries.
Wow.
Wow.
James (05:04):
Um did did HIV and AIDS contribute to the government
feeling it had a license toenact more anti or anti-LGBT or
homophobic laws?
Or were those two things notnot fully connected?
Um And did, you know, did diddid the sense the public panic
(05:25):
around HIV and AIDS and the ideathat this was a gay disease
mean that the government feltthey could act on some of their
more homophobic tendencies in away they hadn't been able to
before?
Peter (05:35):
It was a constellation of factors.
Um Margaret Thatcher'sgovernment was elected in 1979
and immediately used homophobiaas a weapon, you know,
criticizing what it called loonyleft Labour councils for
(05:55):
supporting LGBT plus communityorganizations.
So giving funding for a gayteenage group or a a lesbian
support organization, these weredeemed loony left policies.
The modern-day criminal, ofcourse, being a DEI.
Yeah, exactly.
It was coming back to the samecircle.
It was culture wars beforeculture wars.
So the Conservative governmenthad two major public campaigns
(06:21):
in the 1980s.
What the one was family values.
So Thatcher was very muchpromoting the idea that Britain
must get back to respecting andenforcing family values.
There was no place for us inthat family value scenario.
Then she had another campaignwhich was a return to Victorian
(06:44):
values.
She said Victorian values werethe acne of British moral life,
and we should get back to thosevalues.
And again, of course, in theVictorian era, that was a period
of very intense homophobic,biophobic, and transphobic
persecution.
Absolutely.
James (07:00):
Which we exported all over the world.
Yeah, exactly.
Peter (07:03):
So these two campaigns set the scene leading up to
Section 28, but then of coursethe AIDS pandemic came, and that
further escalated things andfurther justified the family
values and Victorian valuesagenda of the Thatcher
government.
So there was this political mixbubbling along all through the
(07:25):
1980s, um, which did eventuallylead to Section 28.
Um and correspondingly, a hugeincrease in the arrest and
convictions of gay and bisexualmen for consenting same-sex
behavior.
Um I did research on homophobicstatistics, which found that in
(07:47):
1989 the number of gay andbisexual men convicted for
consenting victimless behaviorwas almost as great as in
1954-55 when male homosexualitywas totally illegal, and when
the country was gripped by aMcCarthyite style anti-gay rich
art.
That's how bad it got.
(08:08):
And of course, it was given agreen light again, not just by
the Victorian values and familyvalues campaigns, but Thatcher's
speech uh at the Tory Partyconference in 1987, where she
attacked the right to be gay,and then you had James Anderson,
the chief constable, then chiefconstable of Greater
(08:29):
Manchester, saying that gay menwere swirling around in a
cesspit of their own making.
So off the back of this, thenumber of murders of gay men
escalated, the number of arrestsof gay men escalated.
So David Smith, who was thenthe editor of Gay Times and
myself, we compiled a list oflikely gay men murdered.
(08:54):
These were from national andsome cases local newspaper
reports.
Just from the ones that we wereable to find, which I'm sure is
just a fraction of the fulltotal, we identified fifty-one
men who were murdered betweennineteen eighty-six and nineteen
(09:16):
ninety one in circumstancesthat point to a humble vote
motive, such as the having theirgenitals cut off and stuffed in
their mouths, uh um beingstabbed seventy times, no
robbery, no break-in.
Um of course, in nearly allthese cases there were no public
(09:38):
appeals by the police.
Just another queer, they said.
Who cares?
Just another queer.
What do you expect?
If you're queer, what do youexpect?
unknown (09:47):
Wow.
Peter (09:48):
This is what the police would say.
They wouldn't say it publicly,you know, and the the
commissioner wouldn't say it,but individual police officers
did say those kind of things.
And so there was this hugespike in murders, and you know,
fifty-one murders, there werehundreds of other queer bashing,
(10:09):
v horrendous violent queerbashing attacks, which left some
men paralyzed for life or withpermanent brain injuries.
Um and then this r massiveincrease in arrests for behavior
that wasn't even a crimebetween straight men and women.
So I said there was nosubstantive law reform um in all
(10:33):
my decades of activism up until1999 and 2000, with the end to
the ban on LGBT plus people inthe armed forces, and then
followed by the equalization inDH consent, the repeal of
section 2D eight, and to the banon same-sex couples fostering
and adopting children, um,protection against
(10:55):
discrimination in employment,um, civil partnerships, then
protection againstdiscrimination in housing,
education, other services, thensame-sex marriage.
So from 1999 to 2013 withsame-sex marriage, there was
this phenomenal period of lawreform unprecedented in British
(11:19):
history.
Yeah.
There's an uh far possibly inworld history.
I cannot think of any othermarginalised community where so
many discriminatory laws or newprotections were added in such a
short space of time, literally14 years.
Yeah.
So Britain Britain went fromone one of the most homophobic
(11:40):
Western countries to being oneof the best within 14 years.
But that is down to ouractivism.
Right.
James (11:47):
It did not just happen on its own.
It wasn't just a governmentwoke up one morning and said,
Oh, this doesn't look good.
It was because you and and andpeople like you that have been
fighting this for decades onyour on your five your your
fifty-year plan to to get theselaws off the statute bricks.
And did did that correspondwith changing hearts and minds
(12:08):
at the same time?
Or did it was it was itsomething that that was
happening in Parliament inWestminster but not necessarily
permeating through culture andon the ground?
Or did it correspond to achange in society as well?
Peter (12:23):
Stonewall were very much inside our lobbyists.
Right.
They were working through thecorridors of power.
Parliament and government,yeah, major institutions.
We thought that's fine.
But Outrage knew that thoseinstitutions were impervious to
(12:43):
reason or compassion.
Long before Stonewall started,the campaign for homosexual
equality and others had beentrying to get reform for years.
Mm-hmm absolutely nowhere.
Parliament would not evendiscuss LGBT plus rights.
They said we were sodisgusting, so despicable, that
(13:05):
we will they will not disgraceParliament by even allowing a
discussion of this issue.
You cannot believe the hatredand vilification we endured.
So we wished them all well, butwe knew they're not going to
get anywhere unless there ispressure from outside
Parliament.
So outrageous role was toorganize spectacular, dramatic
(13:32):
protests to highlight aspects ofpersecution and discrimination.
So we would hold a protestabout the arrest of same-sex
couples for kissing.
We had the kissing inPiccadilly Circus where we
sought to highlight the factthat just for kissing, same-sex
couples could be arrested andgiven a criminal conviction.
(13:54):
And particularly we highlightedthe case of two lesbians who
were arrested at the ticketbarriers at Victoria Station for
giving each other a good nightkiss.
We knew that even people whowere not particularly pro-LGBT
would probably find that in manycases, many cases would find
that just excessive.
(14:14):
Yeah.
It wasn't sex, it was just agood night kiss, you know.
Um so we promoted their storyand and got them and others
interviewed.
And the idea was to do twothings.
First of all, through a protestto get media coverage because
(14:35):
media is the main means ofsocial communication in society.
So if you want to get an ideaout there and discussed and make
people aware, you have to usethe media.
Yeah.
So our kissing in theorycircuits got masses of media
coverage.
And that media coverage raisedpublic awareness about the fact
that you could be kissed, uh youcould be arrested for merely
(14:57):
kissing a same-sex partner.
And we found a lot of peoplewho are not particularly
pro-LGBT were quite appalled bythat.
James (15:05):
Yeah.
And possibly didn't know.
Peter (15:07):
Oh, yeah, no, no, no, no, didn't know and were appalled.
Um so we we we that was it wasit was a it was a two-stage
thing.
We we we made people aware ofit, and we also galvanized them
to feel this is wrong.
Yeah.
Um and off the back of the mainnews coverage, then there'd be
interviews in the press, there'dbe TV talk shows, uh
(15:30):
radiophonium programs, we'd goon them all to tell the stories
of people who've beenvictimized.
And through that process webegan to change hearts and
minds.
Yeah.
So on the age of consent, wedid lots of protests on the age
of consent, uh, the unequal ageof consent, which what had been
well, from 1967 it had been 21,then in 1994 it was reduced to
(15:55):
18, but still above the 16 levelfor straight in a moment.
Um so by the mid-1990s,two-thirds of the public
supported an equal age ofconsent.
And that meant we were able togo to politicians and say, look,
(16:16):
the public is onside.
The public supports change.
And that gave MPs, who are verynervous creatures, who don't
like rocking the vote.
It gave them, or some of themat least, the confidence to vote
for equality.
James (16:28):
Yeah.
Peter (16:29):
And the same with the the ban on LGBT LGBT plus people in
the armed forces.
You know, we we staged protestsoutside the Ministry of
Defence, we outed allposthumously all the great
so-called military heroes likeGeneral Haig, Phil Marshall
Montgomery, uh AdmiralMountbatten, um, raising
awareness of the fact that LGBTplus people had been in the
(16:50):
armed forces.
Contributed massively to thiscountry's history, yeah.
Yeah.
And even though we we're notvery happy with the some of the
terrible things the British Armydid, um, still it was important
to draw that distinction thatthe LGBT plus people had been
there.
Yeah.
We'd been regarded as heroeswhile our sexuality was hidden.
Um, you know, why can't weserve now?
(17:13):
So we won that again,two-thirds by by the middle
1990s, two-thirds majority infavour of ending the ban on
LGBTs in the armed forces.
And that did emboldenpoliticians to vote for
equality.
James (17:28):
So, with all the law reform in the 90s and and or the
late 90s and early 2000s, whatwas your sense of what needed to
happen after that?
Clearly we've talked abouthearts and minds and the need to
change hearts and minds.
But was there more law reformneeded?
Was there still hugeinjustices, or was it a case of
looking overseas now to seewhat's happening elsewhere?
Peter (17:49):
For me and those of us in Outrage, we never saw law
reform as the be-all andend-all.
We saw culture, values,attitudes, ideas as equally
important.
It's no good having perfectlaws if the public is still
bamboozled with bigotry.
(18:09):
So our vision was always yes,laural form, but also all these
other things, like challenginghomophobia in the church uh and
other religions, um taking onsport, homophobia and sport, um
(18:30):
in the media.
Yeah, uh yeah.
So after the legalization ofsame-sex marriage in twenty
thirteen in England and Wales,we knew that most of the major
anti-LGBT plus laws anddiscriminations were over.
(18:51):
They were history.
Great progress showing that youcan make change.
But then there's all theseother issues around cultural
manifestations of homophobia,biphobia, and transphobia.
So we took on lots ofhomophobic singers, artists, you
know, performers uh who areputting out um homophobic
(19:17):
lyrics, mostly Jamaicandancehall singers, like Beadman,
Vibes Cartel, uh Capleton andothers.
We worked with J Flag, theJamaican LGBT plus group, to uh
first of all seek to get thoseartists to stop to persuade them
(19:38):
not to incite murder.
Because these lyrics were notmerely homophobic, they were
actually inciting people to goout and shoot, burn, hang, drown
LGBTs.
Yeah.
A clear criminal incitement tomurder, and no government
anywhere was enforcing the law.
(19:59):
We said if these artists werewhite and saying the same things
about black people, they'd bearrested and jailed like that.
Absolutely.
But because of the hypocrisyand double standards in our
society, they could get awaywith it uh when it came to
making similar incitementsagainst LGBTs.
(20:20):
So when the artists did notrespond to our polite, courteous
requests, my our explanationsof the harm and damage, because
in this period, we're talkingabout from the nineteen nineties
through to twenty ten or twothousand and fifteen, these
lyrics uh corresponded to a hugeuptick in homophobic violence
(20:45):
in Jamaica and other Caribbeanislands, where the music
emanated from, but also inJamaican communities in the
diaspora, in the US, in France,in Britain, and other countries.
Jonathan (21:01):
Yeah, absolutely, absolutely.
But I mean that song, boom byebye, um that followed me around
my high school, growing up inKingston.
Peter (21:08):
Yeah.
Jonathan (21:08):
And I I I struggle to listen to Dance Hall, I struggle
to um embrace it, I struggle toidentify with that aspect of my
Jamaican culture because it'sbeen so hostile towards me.
And I will have Jamaicanfriends who listen to this,
who'll be like, no, no, no, man,it's not, it's not, don't worry
about it.
It's not that's not it, don'tworry.
(21:28):
But that's that was the impactit had on me.
Peter (21:32):
Yeah.
Well, I mean, JFLAG contactedme.
Extraordinarily brave people, JFlag.
Um, because they basicallysaid, It's too dangerous for us
to challenge it here in thiscountry.
We'll but we'll be murdered.
We need help.
In fact, they asked a wholerange of organizations around
the world for help.
(21:52):
Outrage was the only one whoresponded and said, Yes, we will
help you.
And so we collaborated withthem, we organized A plan, and
the plan was to target thesingers' concerts, to get them
cancelled, to make them payfinancially.
If they weren't going to listento ethical arguments, moral
arguments about why this musicis wrong, we have to punish them
(22:15):
in their pockets.
Money talks.
So we organized a globalboycott and cancellation
campaign of these artists.
They lost millions and millionsand millions and it really hurt
them.
And it did begin to make themthink, is this really worth it?
(22:37):
But they didn't give up easily.
For a time I had to be underarmed police protection because
either these artists or someoneacting for them sent a hitman to
Britain to kill me.
That's how bad it got.
And some of them openlybragged, you know, you're as
(23:00):
good as dead.
Don't think you can get awaywith this in Britain.
We have our ways of getting toyou.
Quite quite sinister,threatening stuff.
But in the end, they lost somuch money and clearly
recognized that we were notgoing to give up.
So they eventually, throughtheir agents and managers, uh
(23:25):
came to an agreement and theysigned the Reggae Compassionate
Act, which agreed to no longerproduce this music and to play
it.
And some of them most of themkept to it, some didn't.
But overall, the play of thatmusic, the airplay of that
music, went way, way, way down.
And so did attacks on LGBTs inJamaica and other Caribbean
(23:50):
islands.
And also in among Jamaicancommunities here in Britain.
So that was a success.
And it's an example of how wehad an agenda in outrage beyond
mere law reform.
Yeah.
And of course, you know, again,unlike Stonewall, right from
(24:12):
the get-go, Outrage was workingin international solidarity work
with LGBTs in other countriesunder Great Repression, like in
Russia, China, and many othercountries.
James (24:26):
So maybe did did Because obviously there were so many
organizations that were foundedon law reform, Stonewall being
an example.
Was it hard to convince peopleto keep on fighting once a lot
of the law reform had beencompleted?
Once the checklist ofhomophobic laws was ticked off?
How how did you convince peopleto keep fighting?
(24:48):
Or did did did did people justsay, right, well, we've we're
done here, we we move on?
Peter (24:53):
I think the prevailing view was law reforms done, the
rest will follow in due course.
Right.
But when Jamaican dance orartists began openly inciting
the murder of LGBTs, that was awake-up call for a lot of
people.
They thought clearly we havebattles still to fight.
(25:15):
And when black LGBTs in thiscountry started getting beaten
up, inspired by this dance ormusic, that was also another
wake-up moment.
So I think there was atemptation for some to say,
well, the battle's more or lessdone and dusted.
But then things kept onhappening that reminded people,
(25:37):
well, no no no no, we ain'tthere yet.
Yeah.
Um, you know, you know, the theserial killings of um uh
Michael Lupo in the late 80s, umColin Ireland in the 1990s, uh
Stephen Porte more recently,they show just how vulnerable we
(25:57):
are, that there are people outthere for a mixture of variety
and m of motives who are out todo us harm.
And you know, some of them arewithin our own community.
And every time the church orJudais or Islamists denounce and
condemn LGBTs, uh again itreminds us that religion is
(26:21):
still such a huge threat to ourwell-being.
James (26:27):
And your your religious views have evolved presumably
quite substantially from youryour upbringing.
How how does what what whatwhat do you feel about your your
own s sort of spirituality inthe context of the fight that
you've that you've had, and youknow you kind of reflected on
that at the beginning.
And has that has that changedover over time as well?
Peter (26:51):
Contrary to my very devout parents, who saw
Christianity as very much to dowith personal salvation, I had a
much wider, broaderperspective.
Not thanks to them, but just mereading the text, you know.
So where I read the Sermon onthe Mount, the injunctions to
(27:14):
love thy neighbour as thyself,be a good Samaritan, I am my
brother and sister's keeper.
For me, all those elements ofreligion inspired and gravitated
me towards activism.
That, you know, these were notjust meant as lovely holy words,
(27:36):
but they're injunctions to howyou how you should behave, and
that yes, having a piousrelationship with God is
important if you're a Christian,but Christianity also has a
social conscience.
And uh I mentioned that one ofmy early inspirations was the
black civil rights movement inAmerica, uh, which was led by a
(27:59):
black Baptist pastor, Dr.
Martin Luther King.
For me, he was puttingChristianity into action.
He was doing what the NewTestament was advising
Christians should do, um, butwhich my parents and most
Christians weren't.
So I saw, you know, I thinkfrom the from the a I'd never
(28:24):
heard of liberation theology,but in my own mind I had a
similar concept as a teenager,you know, that that Christianity
should be a force for socialchange or neural redemption.
Now, of course, around the sametime I was becoming skeptical
and critical, so I'd never heardof Epicurus, but I began to ask
(28:44):
similar questions, you know.
If God is so powerful and soomnipotent, how can we have
things like, you know, tsunamisand earthquakes and genocides,
you know?
Why didn't God stop Hitler, youknow?
Um so that eventually, plus ofcourse the homophobia and sexism
(29:07):
implicit in religious teachingdrove me out of religion.
So I now call myself an atheistand a humanist.
Right.
So I believe, you know, tounderstand the world, it's not
based on holy text, it's basedon human reason and principles
and values like the UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights.
Yeah.
Do you mind if I ask if youwere ever able to reconcile with
your parents?
(29:27):
Yeah, I mean, uh it was a long,hard battle um to reconcile on
a whole whole range of differentthings, but but primarily
around my sexuality.
Um I didn't initially tell thembecause I thought they were so
extreme that they might have aheart attack or a mental
(29:51):
breakdown, or that they mightturn me and my then partner over
to the police.
So I didn't initially tellthem.
What I did was I dropped hints.
I thought, slowly, gently, doit the ki kind way, you know,
because c coming out shouldn'tbe an act of revenge.
You the aim is not to hurtpeople, it's to tell the truth.
(30:12):
But if your family or friendsare coming from a very ignorant
and bigoted place, probably justblurting it out isn't gonna,
you know, be the best way to doit.
So what I would do is, youknow, little by that, I'd say,
you know, there's a at work, uhthere's a gay guy I work with,
(30:33):
he's very nice.
I don't know what people arefussed about.
Um if there's an item on thenews about a gay bashing, I'd
say, oh, that's terrible, youknow, whatever you think of gay
people, they shouldn't be beatenup like that.
So o over a period of two orthree years, my parents began to
put sort of two and twotogether and got four, or eight.
And then they they said to methat was a very kind and
(30:57):
thoughtful way of doing it.
Because they they said we wouldnot have been able to if you'd
just c at the age of seventeenjust blithered it down, we would
not have been able to cope.
Yeah.
They swore we wouldn't haveturned you over to the police,
but I'm not I'm not sure aboutthat.
James (31:11):
But you know, that that remains the case that that
blurting it out is for a lot ofpeople coming, you know, a lot
of a lot of this podcast, we'veheard people's coming out
stories and and some have gonewell, some haven't, and and you
know, but everybody that is onething that unites our whole
community is having to come outregularly and repeatedly to a
(31:31):
society that assumes the the thethe normal inadverted commas
way of life until you tell themotherwise.
Um and that's to me feels likeone of the biggest things we
have to address in society isthat normal means lots of normal
means variety.
Normal means that you can'tmake presumptions about
(31:51):
someone's life and that thatsomeone, you know, your your
child or your niece or nephewmay just as much likely grow up
um being LGBTQ as they would bebeing straight, and that's
totally fine and unacceptableand and and and that coming out
shouldn't have to be a thing.
Jonathan (32:09):
Absolutely, absolutely.
If if you look back at yourextremely long, productive,
inspiring career, are there isthere a moment that you could
say, Wow, I'm really proud ofthat?
And are there any moments thatyou can say, Oh, I wish we
hadn't done that?
Peter (32:28):
It's very hard to single out one thing above all others
because I've done so much, andreally that judgment is not
really for me, it's for othersto make.
Um But I guess I would say thatI'm I'm quite proud of the two
attempted citizens' arrests ofthe Zimbabwean president Rob
(32:49):
Mugabe because it did helphighlight the abuses there in a
period when there was verylittle media coverage about the
torture, rape, executions thatwere going on inside Zimbabwe.
It was a huge news story whatyou did.
Yeah.
Intro (33:06):
It's huge.
I remember.
Peter (33:08):
Um So the fact that you know I didn't get him arrested,
but I did raise public awarenessand gave a huge morale boost to
people inside Zimbabwe whothought the rest of the world
had forgotten and didn't care.
So to give people that moraleboost is that's that's that's
something I'm I'm really gladthat I was able to do.
James (33:31):
And and we're entering an era where it feels like a
couple of decades of consensuson LGBTQ rights and progress and
moving forwards feels like it'sfaltering.
It feels like we've as acommunity forgotten how to be
activists and forgotten that thefight doesn't end once you've
got law reform, but that's justthe start, we've still got much
(33:52):
more to do.
What what do you feel about theworld as it is right now and
and where where where both law,culture, society, where that's
all moving, and how what areyour fears for the moment that
we're in right now?
Or hopes.
Or hopes, of course, you know,we can be let's be positive and
optimistic as well as as well asconcerned.
Peter (34:14):
I can remember after same-sex marriage repealed the
last great discriminationagainst our community, warning
that we shouldn't take anythingfor granted.
We should certainly not assumethat there would be continued
unbroken progress forward.
I remember saying that um whocan say what might happen in
(34:39):
ten, twenty or thirty years'time.
Um I said, you know, there's noimmediate apparent threat from
far right extremists like therehad been in the 70s, but they
could come back.
And they have.
I always used to say as a youngboy to older people, you know,
(35:25):
how come people allowed Hitlerto get to power?
Why didn't they stop him?
No one had a satisfactoryanswer, but they'd always you
know brushed me off withsomething, oh, that's that's not
relevant to you now.
It's that's the past.
But I can remember saying tomyself, if I ever was faced with
(35:45):
a situation like Nazism, Iwouldn't step back and do
nothing.
I'd work with others and tryand change it.
And for me, in a different sortof way, the Vietnam War was
something similar.
I mean, monstrous human rightsabuses by the Americans and
Australians, massive killing ofcivilians, and that's why I got
(36:09):
involved in the anti-Vietnam Warmovement.
James (36:14):
Do you worry about the future of the world where we're
where from what you can seeright now?
Or are you do you remainoptimistic that we're gonna keep
forward momentum and progress?
Peter (36:26):
I'm worried because things are slipping backwards,
but I'm also in the long termoptimistic that we're in an
epoch and moment of humanhistory where bad things are
happening and will happen, butoverall today people are freer
(36:49):
and more equal than they were ahundred years ago.
Now that is not to say thatthings cannot be put in reverse.
I always tell people the priceof freedom is eternal vigilance.
We have to always be vigilantand ready for new threats and
(37:13):
new dangers.
We should not assume thatthings would get better.
And I point to the fact ofGermany.
In nineteen thirty, Berlin wasthe queer capital of the world.
LGBT plus people flocked therefrom all over Germany and other
(37:33):
countries.
Germany was on the verge ofrepealing paragraph one hundred
five.
There were gay bars and clubs,sporting associations,
newspapers, cultural troops.
It was queer heaven.
And then three years later,Hitler came to power in nineteen
thirty-three, and queer heaventurned into queer hell, with the
(37:58):
first gay and bisexual menbeing carted off to
concentration camps by the endof nineteen thirty-three.
James (38:05):
It's astonishing how quickly things can go backwards.
Jonathan (38:09):
And in fact, one of the first institutions they
attacked was the HirschwaldInstitute.
Um in in Berlin.
James (38:15):
Peter, this has been an extraordinary interview.
Thank you so much for sharingyour insights with us, but but
more importantly, thank you somuch for more than five decades
of absolutely incredibleactivism on behalf of well, as
you as you said, love of yourcommunity of fellow, of fellow
(38:38):
citizens and people and peopleto come, people for generations
to come are going to live abetter life because of the
activism that you've shown andthe sacrifice and commitment
that you've made.
And on my on our side, I thinkjust to say a huge thank you for
everything you've done, it'sextraordinary.
Peter (38:58):
Well, of course, it's not just me alone, it's me with
many, many others.
And you know, I always say I'moff on the front man, but
there's always been a team withme, and I pay tribute to them as
well.
Yeah.
And to the many unsung unknownLGBTs who've contributed, you
know, often from small towns orvillages, never got any public
(39:19):
acknowledgement or thanks, but Iknow their contribution has
been part of how we've wonchange.
Well, thank thank you.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
And can I say that if anybody'sinterested, um, please go to my
Peter Tatshaw Foundationwebsite,
PeterTatshawFoundation.org.
(39:40):
In the top right hand corner,there's a little button which
says subscribe, and you can giveus your name and email address,
and we will send you a weeklyboss on a range of LGBT plus and
other human rights issues.
It's totally free, there's nocharge.
And then because we don't getany funding or support from any
(40:01):
institution or foundationourselves, um, next to the
subscribe button is a donatebutton, and if you can afford to
make a standing order donationto keep us going, that would be
really appreciated as well.
James (40:15):
Fantastic.
Peter (40:16):
I'll just finish with my motto, which is don't accept the
world as it is, dream of whatthe world could be, and then
help make it happen.
Brilliant.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
James (40:34):
That's it for season one of The View from Here.
Thanks to everyone wholistened, donated, and supported
the podcast in its firstseason.
And of course, a huge thanks toall of our guests.
Jonathan (40:44):
We're already working on season two, which we hope to
put out later in 2026.
Keep following us on Instagramor check out our website for
more details.
Bye for now.
Popular Podcasts
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com