Woman fan editor YUN an interview with Senator Liz Barker, a member of the British House of Lords, to comb the issue from detail. The next chapter writes about the process and evolution of marriage equality, and sees the equal rights and interests pursued by comrades.

"The UK has spent more than 50 years on the initiation of marriage equality from the beginning to the real realization of the whole process." 」

Barker said, "I think this sentence should not simply do not write." Wrote, it seems that even the British affirmative way has been gone for so long time, to the Taiwan conservative reactionary delay excuses. To write and not to be honest is to conceal the pursuit and movement of the British Movement for half a century. (Recommended reading:"scene" marriage affirmative interpretation of the constitutional debate: human rights and equality, should not wait for social consensus )

Barker probably saw through the misgivings in my eyes, she added, "The Long Walk of Britain does not mean that the rest of the world must spend so much time." 」

As she said earlier (see above ), countries have their own context, Taiwan and Britain. She did not want to be the British to tell other countries. For the pursuit of gay equality, in different cultures and countries, the way to go must be different. For example, 2017 Britain is celebrating the 50 anniversary of male homosexuality in addition to crime.

Gay man guilty? Even in the eyes of Taiwanese, it's unbelievable.

In the early 50, British men were prosecuted for homosexual sex, nearly half of whom were sentenced to imprisonment, with about 65,000 people convicted of homosexuality.

The most famous is the genius mathematician Turing (Alan Turing), who cracked Germany's Ennima Enigma in World War II, who saved countless British lives in the Second World War, and was indicted by the British government in 1952 for sexual intercourse with a man, forced to undergo female hormonal therapy and chemical castration. In 1954, Turing ate a cyanide-coated apple and killed himself, at the age of 41. (Extended reading: Imitation Game The Imitation Game film review "Love, is not let you solve the riddle")


Image source: Stuttering Foundation

In the 1957, the law was asked to remove the crime of homosexual sex. But until 10 years later, in 1967, Britain finally passed the crime-removing bill.

"From sin to marriage equality is another long road that takes half a century," she changed her posture and exhaled meaningfully, probably remembering another 50 years, wasted too many people's youth and life, she went on to say: "This period of gay equality movement, and the Thatcher era of discriminatory legislation of the breeze." 」

Article 28th of the Thatcher era

The Taiwanese praised Thatcher as a marker of her strength, but in fact, Thatcher was not a gender-friendly leader. Having a female leader does not automatically equate to a friendlier gender equality environment, after all, gender parity is shown only in the leadership's actions and not in the president's female identity.


Image source: CapX

In the Thatcher era of 1988, a notorious bill called clause 28th, which banned positive publicity for homosexuality in the media, schools and other institutions, required "schools to teach traditional moral values". Clause 28th is treated as an amendment and is included in the British Local Government Act (Government Act 1988) of 1988.

In defiance of the Conservative government's gay-discriminatory provisions, Britain's left has unleashed a wave of gay affirmative action.

"The 28th clause is the only discriminatory legislation in Europe since the Second World War that has circled the gay community and told them:" You are inferior to others. ""barker The absurdity of the bill from the European yardstick, "how the United Kingdom came to the same level of same-sex marriage law, in fact, is through constant resistance to this discriminatory legislation. (Recommended reading:"Xu Xiuwen | See comrade" Taiwan "plural family Movement", striving for not only marriage equality )

She pointed out that during this period, Britain had three very important court case judgments, changed the British gay movement process.

Three decisions to change the gay equality process in Britain

Because English law is unwritten law, there is a system of civil law countries (such as Taiwan): "Sentencing precedent binding principle." To put it simply, if a past judgement had confirmed the existence of a law, the court would apply the same law to subsequent people, based on the principle of fairness (note 1). Therefore, the court verdict is very important in the United Kingdom, every time the referee, may be an affirmative progress or retrogression.

"The first important verdict was about a man who shared an apartment with his partner in 40, when his partner passed away and was evicted from the house by the landlord. "Here we sigh together."

Try to imagine: in #vicious, a famous British comedy series by Sir Ian (the well-known Taiwanese man) and Derek Jacobi, Britain's Big star, when Ian passed away, it was heartbreaking and brutal for the landlord to throw Derek out of the apartment where they had lived for decades, ignoring the contract and sensibilities. If so, it would be an outrage to be a bit of a #vicious of drama and cynicism. (Extended reading: Gender Watch: legal disregard of gay stories, no love, no room Biansen )


Photo Source: Vicious Stills

"However, the man expelled by the landlord, a lawsuit against the court and won the decision to be left to live, but also established the relevant events in the future of the referee principle." "What can be summed up in one sentence now is the delay, the waiting and the procrastination of the years."

"The second major court case verdict comes from homosexuals who want to serve their country in the army." 」

Barker told us that in the UK, there were many court cases about gay men trying to enlist in the army, while the British government banned gays from serving. The ban on gay service will not be lifted until 2000.

The third type of decision is about child adoption.

"The government prefers to allow children to stay in reception centres or foster homes, rather than allowing them to be adopted as parents," said Barker, who was still discouraged in the tone of the time, after all, that the system was so bad that once children entered the foster care system, they often had difficulty in turning over the opportunities.

"Some gay couples have passed the criteria for various test evaluations of adoption, and to show that they have good parenting qualities, and that the government is not allowed to adopt them because they are gay, and that it is not in the best interests of the child that the child is kept in an adopted or foster home in a worse environment. (Recommended reading: The true confession of a gay family: being gay is helpless before the law )

Also at this stage, British affirmative campaigners have collected and collated a number of real cases to prove that gay foster parents care for children far better than those under the government's foster care system, and that they have a better life and a more futuristic feel.

"This is where we start to promote the legalization of partnerships." "barker went on to say that since the LGBT community has de facto families and children, it is time to legalize their de facto marriage. "It is also guaranteed to grow children in gay families with their rights,"

The promotion of "child welfare", which is more common in British society, is not a tricky one, but rather a cost for the public to see discrimination, not just in the gay community, but at the expense of the happiness of another group.

LGBT Rights is not a sign of progress, it's just an equal right to life

For every question I put forward, Barker would have a long, very careful answer, "because it's a slow, gradual process, we can't talk about LGBT rights abstractly, we have to be very specific about how LGBT people live." 」

Yes, "life", that is the vocabulary of the public, do not need to translate or explain, the rights of LGBT people are equal rights to life.

Equality does not mean special progress or tall, it is daily necessities YOUYANJIANGCU tea, is gay can not be discriminated against the government rent housing, can not be PA Lingdi Enron through each section of class, whether on holidays with their partner proud to appear. Life is everywhere, and LGBT Rights is so urgent and important. (Recommended reading:National Geographic magazine cover story: I am a nine-year-old transgender girl )

The general public has too much misunderstanding and too little understanding of gay life to be afraid. If you want to communicate, Barker will do it, "I tell the truth about our lives because it's totally different from what they're afraid of." The influence of same-sex marriage is that every family can therefore believe that their children can have a better future, and be proud of their gay children. 」

The cost of discrimination is too high, especially in the capitalist perspective.

"What I want to say is that discrimination is a costly business (discrimination is a very very expensive business.)" At the end of the interview, Barker this conclusion.

The cost of discrimination is to waste the talents of a certain group of people, so that they can not be relieved to play their own talents for the society.

This is not lip, in fact, when the marriage Bill enters the United States Supreme Court, there are a large list of multinational companies such as Nike, Microsoft and even small companies have all expressed support for the bill. "These companies emphasize: we want LGBT employees to know that he and their families are protected because if we don't, they can't focus on their work," Barker. 」

"Big companies know very well that supporting LGBT rights is a big help to the company itself." 」

Inefficient work is bound to greatly increase the cost of the company, and the company will eventually have to earn profits, to protect the comrades is the most capitalist reality of practice. At the expense of corporate interests to maintain discrimination, it is too idealistic to be said.

"When American activists began to gather evidence, some from the World Bank and some from different parts of the United States, the evidence suggests that states with same-sex marriages are performing far more economically than those that have not." Because they attract the most talented people, they don't have to waste their time worrying about meaningless things. 」

Barker very pragmatic, very landing, she from the specific life of comrades, talking about the cost of operating the company's economy. Perhaps from the long and bitter experience of Britain, she knows that the term "human rights, constitutional rights" may not be very efficient in communicating with the public.

"If I were a senior manager of a multinational company, if I had a group of very serious and outstanding LGBT staff, would I want to put them in a stigmatized country?" Or is it a country that is willing to treat comrades equally and give their comrades legitimate rights? "barker this question, I hope everyone from the multinational business perspective, think of gay equality issues.

Taiwan is used to saying "economy" as a slogan, but as Barker on gay rights-we have to talk specifically. It would be meaningless if we could not specifically discuss what kind of economy and who enjoys the fruits of the economy. (Recommended reading:"Robing-wen" Dear Mayor: gay rights, more than marriage)

If Taiwan is always anxious about its own internationalization, wants to have multinational talents, and wants Taiwanese enterprises to maximize their human resources and to reduce costs, the economic utility of gay equality is quite obvious.

In a manifesto published in the House of Lords, she said: "Some opponents argue that" when the country faces a huge economic downturn, we should not be discussing the issue of gay marriage equality. "I don't agree with that, because the cost of discrimination is too expensive," he said. (Discrimination always comes with a price tag.) "

Gay marriage equality, to fight the economy, you support the marriage of equality of friends, may try and opponents around so to explain.

And then back to the 2017-year, last question, I deliberately asked Baker a question about the principle of "not telling the other country's affairs": "What is your expectation of marriage equality in Taiwan?" "Unexpectedly, she picked eyebrow, a bit naughty to answer me:" For me, if Taiwan's people and Taiwan government want this country to flourish, what should do? I think the answer is clear. 」