Freudian Slips and Coteries of Vice: The Sexual Offences Act of 1967*

Abstract

The Sexual Offences Act 1967 made the first inroads to decriminalising men's homosexual sex since buggery was made a capital offence under Henry VIII. The act was drafted at the direction of the 1957 Wolfenden report, but bore the distinct hallmark of individuals of the 1967 parliament. More complex than the dictated product of Wolfenden, and more idiosyncratic than a simple reflection of the social climate of the 1960s, the private member's bill was a Labour initiative with bipartisan support, driven in the Commons by the bizarre motivations of its sponsor, Labour member for Pontypool, Leo Abse. Contrary to popular myths about the aims of decriminalisation, Abse's crusading Freudian motivation was concerned with discouraging, more than allowing, homosexual behaviour. Similarly, ‘privacy’– the gift of the house of lords to sexual regulation – was aimed largely at curtailing men's sexual practices, along with secreting them away. Thus, while the act is typically associated with a general ideal of freedom, much parliamentary motivation concerned control and the prevention of sexual activities.

Representing the history of LGBT rights: political rhetoric surrounding the 50th anniversary of the Sexual Offences Act 1967

“…The eventually successful legislation was a Private Member's Bill put forward by the Labour MP Leo Abse. The Bill received bipartisan support but, as Gleeson (2008) notes, it could not have succeeded without the support of Harold Wilson and his Labour government providing considerable time in parliament. Gleeson (2008) suggests that in terms of historical analysis, the 1967 Sexual Offences Act has been largely neglected, 'viewed simply as the anti-climactic overdue product of the [Wolfenden] report' and that 'mythologies about the act and the political period have flourished largely unchecked' (p. 394).…”

“…The Bill received bipartisan support but, as Gleeson (2008) notes, it could not have succeeded without the support of Harold Wilson and his Labour government providing considerable time in parliament. Gleeson (2008) suggests that in terms of historical analysis, the 1967 Sexual Offences Act has been largely neglected, 'viewed simply as the anti-climactic overdue product of the [Wolfenden] report' and that 'mythologies about the act and the political period have flourished largely unchecked' (p. 394). The Act was not seeking to pursue gay equality as such (Ashford, 2017, Gleeson, 2008 but, as Holden (2004) notes, many supported the Bill on the basis that homosexual men 'deserved to be pitied not persecuted ' (p. 130).…”

“…Gleeson (2008) suggests that in terms of historical analysis, the 1967 Sexual Offences Act has been largely neglected, 'viewed simply as the anti-climactic overdue product of the [Wolfenden] report' and that 'mythologies about the act and the political period have flourished largely unchecked' (p. 394). The Act was not seeking to pursue gay equality as such (Ashford, 2017, Gleeson, 2008 but, as Holden (2004) notes, many supported the Bill on the basis that homosexual men 'deserved to be pitied not persecuted ' (p. 130). Gleeson (2008) points out that Leo Abse hoped the bill would divert society's attention away from punishing homosexuals and towards preventing boys from becoming homosexual.…”

“…The Act was not seeking to pursue gay equality as such (Ashford, 2017, Gleeson, 2008 but, as Holden (2004) notes, many supported the Bill on the basis that homosexual men 'deserved to be pitied not persecuted ' (p. 130). Gleeson (2008) points out that Leo Abse hoped the bill would divert society's attention away from punishing homosexuals and towards preventing boys from becoming homosexual. Meanwhile, Lord Arran who is also credited as a key supporter of the reform famously stated the following after the Act was passed: This is no occasion for jubilation; certainly not for celebration.…”

“…Rather than promoting gay equality, the law was arguably designed to keep homosexuality out of sight, behind closed doors and to prevent public scandal (Ashford, 2017;Gleeson, 2008). It should also be noted that the number of arrests and convictions of homosexual men actually increased under public indecency laws in the years following the Act (Weeks, 1989).…”