- Pronouns
- He/Him, They/Them
'Go back into the sewers where you come from' was the advice of one New Zealand politician to homosexuals. The comment summed up one side of the bitter public and political debate that swept New Zealand in the mid 1980s during the homosexual law reform campaign. On the other side of the issue, gays and lesbians were urged to 'come out now ... be visible ... be blatant.'
The Homosexual Law Reform Act, which was signed by the governor-general on 11 July 1986 and came into effect on 8 August that year, decriminalised sexual relations between men aged 16 and over. No longer would men having consensual sex with each other be liable to prosecution and a term of imprisonment. Sex between women was not illegal, but many lesbians suffered the same social discrimination as gay men and were staunch supporters of the reform movement.
The campaign to reform the law moved beyond the gay community to wider issues of human rights and discrimination. Extreme viewpoints ensured a lengthy and passionate debate. The outcome would mean that gays and lesbians could be out and about, or the New Zealand family would crumble and AIDS would spread through the community.
There is a long history of opposition to sexual activity between men and an equally long history of legislation that criminalised this activity. New Zealand took its cue from British social and legal traditions.
Sex between men was believed to be an 'unnatural offence' and a breach of moral and Christian codes – it was a crime 'not to be named among Christians'. Some heterosexual activity fell into this category as well, such as anal intercourse. Under English law, this act was known as 'buggery', and men found guilty of this could suffer the death penalty. Many other sexual activities (oral sex and masturbation, for example) were not regulated by the law. They too would be seen as immoral – although that certainly did not mean that women and men did not experience and enjoy them.
In 1861 the United Kingdom replaced the death penalty for buggery with life imprisonment. New Zealand enacted similar legislation six years later. Any sexual activity between men of any age became unlawful in Britain in 1885, and New Zealand followed suit in 1893. In New Zealand, men convicted of these offences could also face flogging or whipping and hard labour.
The UK did not seriously reconsider the laws about homosexual activity for another 70 years. In 1957 the Wolfenden Report called for, among other things, the decriminalisation of consensual sex between males over the age of 21 under certain circumstances. The recommendations, considered too controversial, were shelved.
Ten years later the Sexual Offences Act 1967 enacted the recommendations. Homosexual activities between consenting males remained criminal offences except under specific conditions – only two people present, both over 21, not in the merchant navy – with penalties of two to ten years imprisonment for anything that didn't follow the rules. This law remains in place in Great Britain, though an amendment in 2000 reduced the age restriction to 16.
In New Zealand, men found guilty of sodomy could still be flogged or whipped, and serve their imprisonment terms with hard labour through the 1940s and 1950s. In 1959 Attorney General Rex Mason tried unsuccessfully to reduce the criminal sanctions on some homosexual activity, apparently as a result of the suicide of a homosexual acquaintance. The 1961 Crimes Act removed the term of life imprisonment for sodomy, but all legal sanctions against homosexual activity remained.
The Dorian Society (1962–88) was the first New Zealand organisation for homosexual men. It was primarily a social club and avoided political action. In 1963 it took the first steps towards law reform by forming a legal subcommittee that collected books and other resources. It also provided legal advice to its members. By 1967 it sought advice from the English Homosexual Law Reform Society and Albany Trust on the legislative changes occurring there. This led to a New Zealand society dedicated to law reform. Its first project was a petition, signed by 75 prominent citizens, presented to (and rejected by) Parliament in 1968.
Social and political groups for homosexuals in New Zealand began with the Dorian Society in the 1960s. By the next decade, sexual and social liberation was in the air. The early 1970s saw the growth of the modern feminist and gay movements.
New Zealanders took their cues from events in the USA. In June 1969 gay patrons of the Stonewall Inn, a local gay bar in New York, resisted a police raid. The resulting riot made front page news. The Gay Liberation Front emerged to demand change in laws and in society.
In early 1972 Gay Liberation groups sprang up in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch after the academic Ngahuia Te Awekotuku was denied a visitors permit to the USA on the grounds that she was homosexual. Other groups formed throughout New Zealand in the next few years. A national group, the National Gay Rights Coalition, did not come about until the late 1970s. It was short-lived and disbanded in 1983.
The campaign for homosexual law reform began in earnest in the mid-1970s. Member of Parliament Venn Young introduced a Crimes Amendment Bill in 1974 to legalise private 'homosexual acts' between consenting adults. His bill – not passed into law – followed the British model, with a proposed age of consent of 21 (then reduced to 20).
Age of consent was a major issue for the gay movement. The New Zealand Homosexual Law Reform Society and gay liberation groups made submissions on the bill. They argued that the age of consent should be set at 16 – the same as for heterosexuals – and that a greater emphasis should be put on consent to activities, rather than the nature of the acts themselves. When Member of Parliament Warren Freer proposed legislation in 1979 and 1980 that set the age of consent for homosexuals at 20 or 18, gay groups gave it no support.
Instead, the gay movement made its own amendments to legislation. The Equality Bill, promoted under the slogan 'The people approve. A Bill is ready. Why delay?', proved to be controversial within the movement and was abandoned in 1983.
To bring about change in the law, the gay movement needed a parliamentary champion. It found one in Member of Parliament Fran Wilde. She consulted with gay groups to develop a private members bill, the Homosexual Law Reform Bill, which she introduced to the House of Representatives on 8 March 1985.
The bill had two parts. The first dealt with the decriminalisation of sexual offences between men as well as the decriminalisation of consensual heterosexual anal intercourse, while providing protection for minors of both sexes. The second would make it illegal to discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation in the areas of employment, accommodation and the supply of goods and services.
Gay and lesbian groups had been assured that the campaign would be short, political and carried out in Parliament. This completely underestimated the depth of public and political opposition to the proposed legislation. The bill's opponents mounted a strong and organised public campaign, virtually from the moment the bill was introduced. Supporters of the bill reacted to rather than led the debate, which became acrimonious and nasty.
'Go back into the sewers where you come from ... as far as I'm concerned you can stay in the gutter.' Was the call from Member of Parliament Norman Jones at a public meeting in 1985, where he would go onto say: 'Turn around and look at them ... gaze upon them ... you're looking into Hades ... don't look too long – you might catch AIDS.'
Opponents got support from organisations such as the Salvation Army and from well-known campaigners against homosexuality overseas – the Reverend Lou Sheldon and John Swan in particular. Their arguments often rested on moral and religious grounds: that homosexuality was 'unnatural' and that the Bible condemned it.
Some people argued that the law would lead to more homosexuality and that this would eventually mean the collapse of the family unit. Fear and a lack of understanding led some to claim that young boys would be put at risk. Homosexuality and paedophilia – sex with children – were sometimes regarded as the same thing.
Some people opposed to the legislation also raised the spectre of AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome). This illness could be passed through the transfer of body fluids such as blood or through sexual contact of any sort, homosexual or heterosexual. In the USA, AIDS mainly affected gay men, so some people saw it as a gay illness or even a divine punishment of homosexuals.
Few cases of AIDS had occurred in New Zealand. Law reformers said that decriminalisation would allow people at risk to come forward for testing. In their view it would also enable a public health response based on prevention strategies such as condom promotion. Health officials soon realised that the gay experts knew what they were talking about, and the government decided to fund campaigns through the New Zealand AIDS Foundation.
Groups such as the New Zealand Homosexual Law Reform Society, the Gay Task Force, Heterosexuals Unafraid of Gays (HUG), the Lesbian Coalition and the Campaign for Homosexual Equality tried to counter their opponents in many ways. There were nationwide street marches and rallies where information was handed out. They disrupted anti-law-reform meetings. Arguments rested on issues of human rights, freedom of choice and an end to discrimination based on sexuality. Pro-reformers demanded greater openness in sexual matters.
A central part of the debate was a huge nationwide petition opposing the legislation. On 24 September 1985 the anti-reform petition was presented at Parliament in a ceremony that some critics likened to the Nuremberg Rally. Ninety-one boxes – one for each electorate – were delivered to the steps of Parliament. It was claimed that there were over 800,000 signatures. In fact, some of the boxes were nearly empty, and some petition sheets contained several signatures in the same hand. These irregularities led Parliament's Petitions Committee to reject the petition, but it still showed a strong and vocal opposition to the Bill.
The Homosexual Law Reform Bill took 14 months to move through the parliamentary process. Members of Parliament had rejected a proposed amendment that would raise the age of consent to 18, so it remained at 16 in the final legislation – the same age as for heterosexuals.
The final vote was held on 9 July 1986, and the bill was passed by 49 votes to 44. The governor-general gave assent to the legislation two days later, and it came into effect on 8 August that year. Gays, lesbians and their supporters partied; opponents predicted doom and gloom. For the first time in New Zealand legal history, homosexual men could enter into sexual relationships without fear of prosecution.
For the law reformers, it was still only a partial victory. The second part of the bill, which would have removed discrimination on the basis of sexuality, was rejected. Opponents argued that homosexuality was not a human rights issue and that discrimination was fair and acceptable. It wasn't until the Human Rights Act was passed in 1993 that it became illegal in New Zealand to discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation.
Other legislative barriers for homosexuals have been removed. In 2005 the Civil Unions Act allowed gay and lesbian couples to formalise their relationship. The debates over this legislation were not as bitter as those in 1985 and 1986, but they still revealed the depth of opposition to homosexuality among some New Zealanders. In 2013 the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill saw New Zealand become the 13th country in the world – and the first in the Asia-Pacific region – to allow same-sex couples to marry. Prejudices die hard, and legislative changes do not mean that attitudes shift; gays and lesbians can still find it difficult to be out and about.
Information for this piece came from nzhistory.govt.nz
The Homosexual Law Reform Act, which was signed by the governor-general on 11 July 1986 and came into effect on 8 August that year, decriminalised sexual relations between men aged 16 and over. No longer would men having consensual sex with each other be liable to prosecution and a term of imprisonment. Sex between women was not illegal, but many lesbians suffered the same social discrimination as gay men and were staunch supporters of the reform movement.
The campaign to reform the law moved beyond the gay community to wider issues of human rights and discrimination. Extreme viewpoints ensured a lengthy and passionate debate. The outcome would mean that gays and lesbians could be out and about, or the New Zealand family would crumble and AIDS would spread through the community.
There is a long history of opposition to sexual activity between men and an equally long history of legislation that criminalised this activity. New Zealand took its cue from British social and legal traditions.
Sex between men was believed to be an 'unnatural offence' and a breach of moral and Christian codes – it was a crime 'not to be named among Christians'. Some heterosexual activity fell into this category as well, such as anal intercourse. Under English law, this act was known as 'buggery', and men found guilty of this could suffer the death penalty. Many other sexual activities (oral sex and masturbation, for example) were not regulated by the law. They too would be seen as immoral – although that certainly did not mean that women and men did not experience and enjoy them.
In 1861 the United Kingdom replaced the death penalty for buggery with life imprisonment. New Zealand enacted similar legislation six years later. Any sexual activity between men of any age became unlawful in Britain in 1885, and New Zealand followed suit in 1893. In New Zealand, men convicted of these offences could also face flogging or whipping and hard labour.
The UK did not seriously reconsider the laws about homosexual activity for another 70 years. In 1957 the Wolfenden Report called for, among other things, the decriminalisation of consensual sex between males over the age of 21 under certain circumstances. The recommendations, considered too controversial, were shelved.
Ten years later the Sexual Offences Act 1967 enacted the recommendations. Homosexual activities between consenting males remained criminal offences except under specific conditions – only two people present, both over 21, not in the merchant navy – with penalties of two to ten years imprisonment for anything that didn't follow the rules. This law remains in place in Great Britain, though an amendment in 2000 reduced the age restriction to 16.
In New Zealand, men found guilty of sodomy could still be flogged or whipped, and serve their imprisonment terms with hard labour through the 1940s and 1950s. In 1959 Attorney General Rex Mason tried unsuccessfully to reduce the criminal sanctions on some homosexual activity, apparently as a result of the suicide of a homosexual acquaintance. The 1961 Crimes Act removed the term of life imprisonment for sodomy, but all legal sanctions against homosexual activity remained.
The Dorian Society (1962–88) was the first New Zealand organisation for homosexual men. It was primarily a social club and avoided political action. In 1963 it took the first steps towards law reform by forming a legal subcommittee that collected books and other resources. It also provided legal advice to its members. By 1967 it sought advice from the English Homosexual Law Reform Society and Albany Trust on the legislative changes occurring there. This led to a New Zealand society dedicated to law reform. Its first project was a petition, signed by 75 prominent citizens, presented to (and rejected by) Parliament in 1968.
Social and political groups for homosexuals in New Zealand began with the Dorian Society in the 1960s. By the next decade, sexual and social liberation was in the air. The early 1970s saw the growth of the modern feminist and gay movements.
New Zealanders took their cues from events in the USA. In June 1969 gay patrons of the Stonewall Inn, a local gay bar in New York, resisted a police raid. The resulting riot made front page news. The Gay Liberation Front emerged to demand change in laws and in society.
In early 1972 Gay Liberation groups sprang up in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch after the academic Ngahuia Te Awekotuku was denied a visitors permit to the USA on the grounds that she was homosexual. Other groups formed throughout New Zealand in the next few years. A national group, the National Gay Rights Coalition, did not come about until the late 1970s. It was short-lived and disbanded in 1983.
The campaign for homosexual law reform began in earnest in the mid-1970s. Member of Parliament Venn Young introduced a Crimes Amendment Bill in 1974 to legalise private 'homosexual acts' between consenting adults. His bill – not passed into law – followed the British model, with a proposed age of consent of 21 (then reduced to 20).
Age of consent was a major issue for the gay movement. The New Zealand Homosexual Law Reform Society and gay liberation groups made submissions on the bill. They argued that the age of consent should be set at 16 – the same as for heterosexuals – and that a greater emphasis should be put on consent to activities, rather than the nature of the acts themselves. When Member of Parliament Warren Freer proposed legislation in 1979 and 1980 that set the age of consent for homosexuals at 20 or 18, gay groups gave it no support.
Instead, the gay movement made its own amendments to legislation. The Equality Bill, promoted under the slogan 'The people approve. A Bill is ready. Why delay?', proved to be controversial within the movement and was abandoned in 1983.
To bring about change in the law, the gay movement needed a parliamentary champion. It found one in Member of Parliament Fran Wilde. She consulted with gay groups to develop a private members bill, the Homosexual Law Reform Bill, which she introduced to the House of Representatives on 8 March 1985.
The bill had two parts. The first dealt with the decriminalisation of sexual offences between men as well as the decriminalisation of consensual heterosexual anal intercourse, while providing protection for minors of both sexes. The second would make it illegal to discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation in the areas of employment, accommodation and the supply of goods and services.
Gay and lesbian groups had been assured that the campaign would be short, political and carried out in Parliament. This completely underestimated the depth of public and political opposition to the proposed legislation. The bill's opponents mounted a strong and organised public campaign, virtually from the moment the bill was introduced. Supporters of the bill reacted to rather than led the debate, which became acrimonious and nasty.
'Go back into the sewers where you come from ... as far as I'm concerned you can stay in the gutter.' Was the call from Member of Parliament Norman Jones at a public meeting in 1985, where he would go onto say: 'Turn around and look at them ... gaze upon them ... you're looking into Hades ... don't look too long – you might catch AIDS.'
Opponents got support from organisations such as the Salvation Army and from well-known campaigners against homosexuality overseas – the Reverend Lou Sheldon and John Swan in particular. Their arguments often rested on moral and religious grounds: that homosexuality was 'unnatural' and that the Bible condemned it.
Some people argued that the law would lead to more homosexuality and that this would eventually mean the collapse of the family unit. Fear and a lack of understanding led some to claim that young boys would be put at risk. Homosexuality and paedophilia – sex with children – were sometimes regarded as the same thing.
Some people opposed to the legislation also raised the spectre of AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome). This illness could be passed through the transfer of body fluids such as blood or through sexual contact of any sort, homosexual or heterosexual. In the USA, AIDS mainly affected gay men, so some people saw it as a gay illness or even a divine punishment of homosexuals.
Few cases of AIDS had occurred in New Zealand. Law reformers said that decriminalisation would allow people at risk to come forward for testing. In their view it would also enable a public health response based on prevention strategies such as condom promotion. Health officials soon realised that the gay experts knew what they were talking about, and the government decided to fund campaigns through the New Zealand AIDS Foundation.
Groups such as the New Zealand Homosexual Law Reform Society, the Gay Task Force, Heterosexuals Unafraid of Gays (HUG), the Lesbian Coalition and the Campaign for Homosexual Equality tried to counter their opponents in many ways. There were nationwide street marches and rallies where information was handed out. They disrupted anti-law-reform meetings. Arguments rested on issues of human rights, freedom of choice and an end to discrimination based on sexuality. Pro-reformers demanded greater openness in sexual matters.
A central part of the debate was a huge nationwide petition opposing the legislation. On 24 September 1985 the anti-reform petition was presented at Parliament in a ceremony that some critics likened to the Nuremberg Rally. Ninety-one boxes – one for each electorate – were delivered to the steps of Parliament. It was claimed that there were over 800,000 signatures. In fact, some of the boxes were nearly empty, and some petition sheets contained several signatures in the same hand. These irregularities led Parliament's Petitions Committee to reject the petition, but it still showed a strong and vocal opposition to the Bill.
The Homosexual Law Reform Bill took 14 months to move through the parliamentary process. Members of Parliament had rejected a proposed amendment that would raise the age of consent to 18, so it remained at 16 in the final legislation – the same age as for heterosexuals.
The final vote was held on 9 July 1986, and the bill was passed by 49 votes to 44. The governor-general gave assent to the legislation two days later, and it came into effect on 8 August that year. Gays, lesbians and their supporters partied; opponents predicted doom and gloom. For the first time in New Zealand legal history, homosexual men could enter into sexual relationships without fear of prosecution.
For the law reformers, it was still only a partial victory. The second part of the bill, which would have removed discrimination on the basis of sexuality, was rejected. Opponents argued that homosexuality was not a human rights issue and that discrimination was fair and acceptable. It wasn't until the Human Rights Act was passed in 1993 that it became illegal in New Zealand to discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation.
Other legislative barriers for homosexuals have been removed. In 2005 the Civil Unions Act allowed gay and lesbian couples to formalise their relationship. The debates over this legislation were not as bitter as those in 1985 and 1986, but they still revealed the depth of opposition to homosexuality among some New Zealanders. In 2013 the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill saw New Zealand become the 13th country in the world – and the first in the Asia-Pacific region – to allow same-sex couples to marry. Prejudices die hard, and legislative changes do not mean that attitudes shift; gays and lesbians can still find it difficult to be out and about.
Information for this piece came from nzhistory.govt.nz