‘But What About Meeeeee!?’

Peter Tatchell has yet another whine in ‘CiF’, this time over the Equality Bill which has just been handed to the Lords like a giant turd concealed beneath Cartier wrapping in some hideous game of ‘Pass The Parcel’.

His complaint isn’t that it’s illiberal, potentially explosively devisive or designed to enshrine victimhood at the heart of all dealings, oh no.

It’s that it doesn’t specifically mention the LGBT community:

Way back in 1983, when I stood as the Labour candidate in the Bermondsey byelection, I proposed the idea of a single, comprehensive anti-discrimination law, to guarantee equal treatment and protection for everyone. At the time, this proposal was dismissed as "ultra left", as too radical and daring. Three decades later, however, it is close to reality.

Really..?

The equality bill is continuing its passage through parliament this week and, baring sabotage in the House of Lords, will become law in 2010. One of its key aims is to remedy the uneven, variable patchwork of equality legislation. The separate laws on gender, race, disabilty, age, sexual orientation, gender identity and religion or belief, will be replaced by an all-inclusive legal framework. This will harmonise and standardise equality law, so that everyone has the same rights and protection.

No, it’ll merely create a smorgasbord of victim’s rights. If you don’t belong to one of the favoured victim groups, it won’t apply to you.

Sadly, the proposed legislation does not quite live up to this laudable aim. Despite its name, the equality bill is less than equal. While guaranteeing full and direct protection against harassment to other vulnerable social groups, it denies this protection to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. This is not an omission or oversight. We are explicitly excluded from the anti-harassment clauses of the bill.

And you are now throwing a hissy fit as a result.

Since the equality bill was intended to ensure comprehensive legal equality, all forms of harassment should be covered by its clauses. There should be no exemptions.

But all forms of harassment aren’t covered at all, are they? As commenter ‘calmseas’ puts it:

“What about me? I am a white native non-homosexual young man. It seems the government would prefer if I just go into a corner and die.

If I want any children I may have to advance in life, will I have to marry an ethnic "minority" woman? Sorry I forgot the government doesn't like marriage also. I meant to say sire children and then live elsewhere.”

Not that that bothers Tatchell, because despite his proclamations at the start of this article, he isn’t interested in equality, but superiority.

Why the double standards? What happened to the level playing field and equal treatment that was promised when this bill was first tabled?

Labour lied. That’s what happened.

The way the government has handled the equality bill is typical of its frequent arrogance and high-handedness.

Welcome to the real world, Peter.