CONSPIRACY OF IGNORANCE
AM a
fortunate homosexual. In the minority of
minority
a
Living comparatively peacefully
group.
With two young children, after ten years of marin which my secret was like an unexploded ?irib. The hundreds of fears, real and imagined, ^hich are synonymous with homosexuality are, for rrie' at last reduced to one. I tried hard to make my marriage succeed. With
j",a?e
a
kind of man it might have worked But weighted down with the resmy own guilt for nine wretched I did not see that my husband was sicker ^an I. In the years of parenthood we constituted 0ur children's greatest menace to adult health. After seven years of marriage, in desperation, Went to a psychiatrist. It was a great shock to that, in place of the realistic help I had ex-
different
tolerably well. P?nsibility of
J,ears,
one
definite mould assigned to acted, "at did not fit. assigned My husband too that of kindly victim: his did not fit either, ^?uld, needed and essential prerequisite of a
me:
was
was
.
y'ee
help,
a
an
doctor's help is the patient's trust. I felt I had
'nadvertently stripped
in front of the wrong
man.
Six months later I went to a probation officer, he talked in terms of sickness, cure, pills and
I recovered from these experiences and aced the fact that I must escape without aid. I ^as aware of what it could mean to believe that 11 Was everyone else who was mad. Finally, with the clarity of near nervous collapse, knew we must separate. I count myself very Ucky to have found a psychiatrist, at this time, ^ho saw to the roots of our problem. He
Prayer.
right
of action which included of cruelty, and advised me grounds riot to mention this my private problem as he felt c?uld only confuse the issue and that my external Problems were sufficient grounds. When my husand realised my action could succeed he agreed to let us go if I would drop the case. ^e left?on his terms. It became clear, as my
r?commended
divorce,
a
course
on
a.ction developed,
that I was entitled to a conshare in the value of a large detached ?use I had helped to buy, to a fair division of its to reasonable maintenance?in proporto his salary?with which to bring up our and sufficient custody of the children to possible a stable environment. I left everything in exchange for peace and the minimum arnount of maintenance laid down by the national
querable
^?ntents,
children,
^ake
distance
We had
board. two main weapons. One was my homo-
which he suspected after having found from an organisation: the other, his tears, e cried over of all the many things, but most ?Use. Property was everything to him. Our mar-
Se*uality,
a
letter
ried life centred round househunting, constantly into bigger and better houses. I felt a
rri?ving
to make him believe could he But not, right up until his future. in last tearful hours with us, nor could I make him believe that one day he'd find another, more suitable partner. All he had to cling to was the house. So I left everything in exchange for peace, and not to give our children another chance. I was freed like a heterosexual would have been. There we both knew I had were many restrictions which was to accept. Within a week a young woman herself by his name. This with calling him, living had was another great shock as my difficulties been intensified by his often demonstrated plight. It was a shock to our young children to find another lady in Mummy's bed so soon. (They go to my husband's home every weekend). He did not keep his part of the bargain. I do 'wife' have a large not have peace. He and his house and a large car to maintain. The maintenreach cerance has become an issue. Together they tain conclusions about me, and make it quite clear the usual human rights do not apply because of what I possibly am. All this is conveyed in a pleas-
terrible pity for him and tried a
ant and
civilised
manner.
Without the aid of very good friends and a charthe first year ring job I could not have survived financially. Occasionally I am overwhelmed by a sense of injustice, and the knowledge of being cheated: and I panic at the increasing restrictions Now he feels my husband places on our lives. back when children the like they are a would he little older. He has a weapon which he wields gently: it is sufficient. I would do nothing to jeopardise my children's newfound security. I do not fight to keep the children with me for my sake, my life would be much easier without them. It is that I can provide a better alternative?my husband is dangerously repressive. In one year they have changed from children who fantasised excessively to escape their own painful reality, into happy, more confident individuals. Six months ago a friend and I decided to live together. She too is separated from her husband (a university lecturer) and has two children. Our children blended together excellently and we knew we could make a happy home for them. We were all overjoyed at the prospect, not least at sharing the financial burden. Neither husband would allow such a union to take place. Each referred to the 'sickness' of the friend. My friend, a trained child care officer, in addition to the threat we both faced of a public battle over the children citing our homosexuality, also had the fear of losing her job?still in the experimental stages?of studying children in a particular environment and referring those in need of help. We have not met since. Thus a chance of further integration was denied
us. One cannot
blame the husbands,
nor
the wider
society: these are simply the products of a conspiracy of ignorance. It is that they do not know themselves or recognise their own share of responsibility for our plight. I expected to meet many more like myself, but it was not so. Many are sick. This is cited as evidence that the homosexual is sick. If the heterosexual community were subjected to the same stresses as the homosexual, from the moment the sexual-loving impulses develop against the accepted direction, there would be the same evidence of widespread sickness. The position of the homosexual in our society is not an enviable one. The more fortunate ones, that is those freed from guilt and confusion and able to view their situation realistically, owe a great debt to the unborn and have an inescapable lifelong responsibility?a duty to perform. The others, at best, have an occasional escape from
reality. A more enlightened, conditioning climate in the schools would teach the heterosexual child tolerance; the homosexual child to equate love with his desires, instead of sin. Other doors could be opened to homosexual children, instead of the traditional one they pass through to succumb to the pressures of society and to try to live the heterosexual role: to repress and marry with little hope of success: and to cripple their children because of their own stress situation. This they can do, but they cannot love a member of the opposite sex. Neither can the heterosexual be diverted in the schools from his natural desires and inclinations. What are the results of the suppression of the true facts about homosexuality? What does this conspiracy of ignorance actually achieve? It has become like a malignant growth, rooted into society and feeding a major cause of mental illness. In individual terms this means human blobs of misery hidden, as best they can be, all over the country, together totalling one colossal whole of misery?a shocking indictment of society as we know it. A large scab of married homosexuals: these are society's 'successes'. Corrupted into a heterosexual role they cannot possibly live: shrivelling, in the name of decency, their capacity to love. To spotlight the married homosexual is to spotlight the greatest evil of corruption. For the single homosexual, though he carries his burden to the grave, cannot swell the growth, his is the individual plight. It is those who succumb to the pressures, marry, and have children, that are the agents of disaster: society's successes. Their children are the casualties, heterosexual and homosexual alike, who will swell the sick maladjusted core because of society's attitude.
Learning to live with oneself lengthy, painful process. For
as
the
an
adult is
majority
0
}'
casualties it is not possible. They are trapped layer upon layer of symptoms which arise inevi* ably from faulty foundations, the layers of pr? tective devices which were the escape routes 0 childhood. Who can rescue the adult from ^ form his illness will take? Who can do more tb& alleviate his distress? The child of healthy parefl1 who is capable of love and grows in the knowledg that he is worthy and acceptable will not be tb1 adult having to learn to live with himself-"0
needing drugs
to escape.
The married lesbian mother is the most dire? agent of disaster. It is she who is exhorted by b?l husband to be a 'proper' wife, a 'real' wife. The* are many wives whose husbands all say the saflij thing. If by 'proper' one means 'like the others then, sadly, the unhappy, frustrated wife has million counterparts and is behaving like thos others, heterosexual and homosexual. If by 'pr? per' the husband means ideal then his hopes doomed. She will not be an ideal-proper wife uflf she is in the ideal-proper setting. A husband caH not provide, for the lesbian, the ideal setting. N" his fault, or hers, simply a fact. Homosexuality will not be allowed to functio1 openly or healthily while society believes the my'' that this will contribute to moral decay and tb weakening of the institutions of the family art'
marriage. True, the homosexual
once freed, will not mart and produce children in such vast numbers. Tb1 will mean fewer divorces, a vast reduction in tb1 numbers of children born into doomed farnil environments, and much less mental illness. Ar we, in our present system with its taboos again5 homosexuality, ensuring the stability of the famfl and the continuation of the species? Or are ^ instead ensuring the continuation of mental $ ness? The homosexual can create in other ways: 8 homosexual partnership can create works of afl some enduring beyond the confines of mortality Not all homosexuals will do this, not all heterf sexuals will create children. To many, the trutb which is that it is not who one loves but how ofl1 loves?the quality of loving?which is all import tant and that freedom to love is the great healer all our ills, will be too shocking to contempla1' when it embraces homosexual love. Yet they m^5 face the fact that homosexuality exists, in f3' greater proportion than is generally realised, ar^ that driven underground, what might have be?f love becomes something very different: with gra^"
consequences. There is a cure: it is not requires it.
homosexuality whi^
AM a
fortunate homosexual. In the minority of
minority
a
Living comparatively peacefully
group.
With two young children, after ten years of marin which my secret was like an unexploded ?irib. The hundreds of fears, real and imagined, ^hich are synonymous with homosexuality are, for rrie' at last reduced to one. I tried hard to make my marriage succeed. With
j",a?e
a
kind of man it might have worked But weighted down with the resmy own guilt for nine wretched I did not see that my husband was sicker ^an I. In the years of parenthood we constituted 0ur children's greatest menace to adult health. After seven years of marriage, in desperation, Went to a psychiatrist. It was a great shock to that, in place of the realistic help I had ex-
different
tolerably well. P?nsibility of
J,ears,
one
definite mould assigned to acted, "at did not fit. assigned My husband too that of kindly victim: his did not fit either, ^?uld, needed and essential prerequisite of a
me:
was
was
.
y'ee
help,
a
an
doctor's help is the patient's trust. I felt I had
'nadvertently stripped
in front of the wrong
man.
Six months later I went to a probation officer, he talked in terms of sickness, cure, pills and
I recovered from these experiences and aced the fact that I must escape without aid. I ^as aware of what it could mean to believe that 11 Was everyone else who was mad. Finally, with the clarity of near nervous collapse, knew we must separate. I count myself very Ucky to have found a psychiatrist, at this time, ^ho saw to the roots of our problem. He
Prayer.
right
of action which included of cruelty, and advised me grounds riot to mention this my private problem as he felt c?uld only confuse the issue and that my external Problems were sufficient grounds. When my husand realised my action could succeed he agreed to let us go if I would drop the case. ^e left?on his terms. It became clear, as my
r?commended
divorce,
a
course
on
a.ction developed,
that I was entitled to a conshare in the value of a large detached ?use I had helped to buy, to a fair division of its to reasonable maintenance?in proporto his salary?with which to bring up our and sufficient custody of the children to possible a stable environment. I left everything in exchange for peace and the minimum arnount of maintenance laid down by the national
querable
^?ntents,
children,
^ake
distance
We had
board. two main weapons. One was my homo-
which he suspected after having found from an organisation: the other, his tears, e cried over of all the many things, but most ?Use. Property was everything to him. Our mar-
Se*uality,
a
letter
ried life centred round househunting, constantly into bigger and better houses. I felt a
rri?ving
to make him believe could he But not, right up until his future. in last tearful hours with us, nor could I make him believe that one day he'd find another, more suitable partner. All he had to cling to was the house. So I left everything in exchange for peace, and not to give our children another chance. I was freed like a heterosexual would have been. There we both knew I had were many restrictions which was to accept. Within a week a young woman herself by his name. This with calling him, living had was another great shock as my difficulties been intensified by his often demonstrated plight. It was a shock to our young children to find another lady in Mummy's bed so soon. (They go to my husband's home every weekend). He did not keep his part of the bargain. I do 'wife' have a large not have peace. He and his house and a large car to maintain. The maintenreach cerance has become an issue. Together they tain conclusions about me, and make it quite clear the usual human rights do not apply because of what I possibly am. All this is conveyed in a pleas-
terrible pity for him and tried a
ant and
civilised
manner.
Without the aid of very good friends and a charthe first year ring job I could not have survived financially. Occasionally I am overwhelmed by a sense of injustice, and the knowledge of being cheated: and I panic at the increasing restrictions Now he feels my husband places on our lives. back when children the like they are a would he little older. He has a weapon which he wields gently: it is sufficient. I would do nothing to jeopardise my children's newfound security. I do not fight to keep the children with me for my sake, my life would be much easier without them. It is that I can provide a better alternative?my husband is dangerously repressive. In one year they have changed from children who fantasised excessively to escape their own painful reality, into happy, more confident individuals. Six months ago a friend and I decided to live together. She too is separated from her husband (a university lecturer) and has two children. Our children blended together excellently and we knew we could make a happy home for them. We were all overjoyed at the prospect, not least at sharing the financial burden. Neither husband would allow such a union to take place. Each referred to the 'sickness' of the friend. My friend, a trained child care officer, in addition to the threat we both faced of a public battle over the children citing our homosexuality, also had the fear of losing her job?still in the experimental stages?of studying children in a particular environment and referring those in need of help. We have not met since. Thus a chance of further integration was denied
us. One cannot
blame the husbands,
nor
the wider
society: these are simply the products of a conspiracy of ignorance. It is that they do not know themselves or recognise their own share of responsibility for our plight. I expected to meet many more like myself, but it was not so. Many are sick. This is cited as evidence that the homosexual is sick. If the heterosexual community were subjected to the same stresses as the homosexual, from the moment the sexual-loving impulses develop against the accepted direction, there would be the same evidence of widespread sickness. The position of the homosexual in our society is not an enviable one. The more fortunate ones, that is those freed from guilt and confusion and able to view their situation realistically, owe a great debt to the unborn and have an inescapable lifelong responsibility?a duty to perform. The others, at best, have an occasional escape from
reality. A more enlightened, conditioning climate in the schools would teach the heterosexual child tolerance; the homosexual child to equate love with his desires, instead of sin. Other doors could be opened to homosexual children, instead of the traditional one they pass through to succumb to the pressures of society and to try to live the heterosexual role: to repress and marry with little hope of success: and to cripple their children because of their own stress situation. This they can do, but they cannot love a member of the opposite sex. Neither can the heterosexual be diverted in the schools from his natural desires and inclinations. What are the results of the suppression of the true facts about homosexuality? What does this conspiracy of ignorance actually achieve? It has become like a malignant growth, rooted into society and feeding a major cause of mental illness. In individual terms this means human blobs of misery hidden, as best they can be, all over the country, together totalling one colossal whole of misery?a shocking indictment of society as we know it. A large scab of married homosexuals: these are society's 'successes'. Corrupted into a heterosexual role they cannot possibly live: shrivelling, in the name of decency, their capacity to love. To spotlight the married homosexual is to spotlight the greatest evil of corruption. For the single homosexual, though he carries his burden to the grave, cannot swell the growth, his is the individual plight. It is those who succumb to the pressures, marry, and have children, that are the agents of disaster: society's successes. Their children are the casualties, heterosexual and homosexual alike, who will swell the sick maladjusted core because of society's attitude.
Learning to live with oneself lengthy, painful process. For
as
the
an
adult is
majority
0
}'
casualties it is not possible. They are trapped layer upon layer of symptoms which arise inevi* ably from faulty foundations, the layers of pr? tective devices which were the escape routes 0 childhood. Who can rescue the adult from ^ form his illness will take? Who can do more tb& alleviate his distress? The child of healthy parefl1 who is capable of love and grows in the knowledg that he is worthy and acceptable will not be tb1 adult having to learn to live with himself-"0
needing drugs
to escape.
The married lesbian mother is the most dire? agent of disaster. It is she who is exhorted by b?l husband to be a 'proper' wife, a 'real' wife. The* are many wives whose husbands all say the saflij thing. If by 'proper' one means 'like the others then, sadly, the unhappy, frustrated wife has million counterparts and is behaving like thos others, heterosexual and homosexual. If by 'pr? per' the husband means ideal then his hopes doomed. She will not be an ideal-proper wife uflf she is in the ideal-proper setting. A husband caH not provide, for the lesbian, the ideal setting. N" his fault, or hers, simply a fact. Homosexuality will not be allowed to functio1 openly or healthily while society believes the my'' that this will contribute to moral decay and tb weakening of the institutions of the family art'
marriage. True, the homosexual
once freed, will not mart and produce children in such vast numbers. Tb1 will mean fewer divorces, a vast reduction in tb1 numbers of children born into doomed farnil environments, and much less mental illness. Ar we, in our present system with its taboos again5 homosexuality, ensuring the stability of the famfl and the continuation of the species? Or are ^ instead ensuring the continuation of mental $ ness? The homosexual can create in other ways: 8 homosexual partnership can create works of afl some enduring beyond the confines of mortality Not all homosexuals will do this, not all heterf sexuals will create children. To many, the trutb which is that it is not who one loves but how ofl1 loves?the quality of loving?which is all import tant and that freedom to love is the great healer all our ills, will be too shocking to contempla1' when it embraces homosexual love. Yet they m^5 face the fact that homosexuality exists, in f3' greater proportion than is generally realised, ar^ that driven underground, what might have be?f love becomes something very different: with gra^"
consequences. There is a cure: it is not requires it.
homosexuality whi^
