■ Peter Tatchell: “The BBC and other media are guilty of double standards when it comes to homophobic language, compared with racist language.  It tolerates the former but never the latter.”

By Peter Tatchell

Radio 1 caved in to mass pressure.  I doubt the BBC would have done this u-turn if the song’s lyrics had included the word ‘n*gger’.

A BBC online poll asked the public whether the word faggot should be deleted.  Over 95% said no.  They apparently believe that a song using the f-word as an insult is acceptable.  Faced with this deluge of criticism, Radio 1 capitulated.

Compared with the world’s many grave human rights abuses, this fuss over a Christmas pop song is trivial and absurd.

It diverts attention away from really serious, hard-core homophobia, such as the Jamaican dancehall songs that call for the murder of gay people and from high street record stores and radio stations that promote this murder music.

The BBC and other media are guilty of double standards when it comes to homophobic language, compared with racist language.  It tolerates the former but never the latter.

I want to see a consistent, uniform policy applied to all bigoted, hateful words.  Either all of them should be okay to use or none of them should be acceptable.

The BBC does not accept the use of the words n*gger, p*ki, y*d or sp*stic as insults.  For the sake of consistency, either faggot should be unacceptable too, or these other bigoted words should also be permitted.  It’s the BBC's inconsistency that is so irritating.

It is important to remember that in Fairytale of New York, whatever the intention of the lyric writers, the word faggot is being sung as an insult – ‘you cheap lousy faggot’ – alongside abusive words like scumbag and maggot.  In this disparaging context, it is difficult to feel comfortable about its usage.

But the key issue is the double-standards.

I challenge those who defend the use of the word faggot in these lyrics to state publicly that they would also defend the right of white singers to use the word n*gger as a term of abuse in a song.  They won’t and that makes them cowardly homophobic hypocrites.

It is sad that Radio 1 and other radio and TV stations are willing to play Fairytale of New York with the word faggot included, when they would never give airtime to the equivalent racist epithets.  It shows that they don’t take homophobic language as seriously as racist language.

What is needed is a consistent policy covering all bigoted insults, so that anti-Semitic, racist, homophobic, anti-Muslim and sexist lyrics are all treated in the same way.

I don’t favour heavy-handed bans.  I campaign against words that incite violence and murder, not against language that is merely prejudiced.  That is why the Stop Murder Music campaign did not target homophobic singers; only those who advocated the killing of queers.  It is why I have opposed the prosecution of homophobic Christian preachers like Harry Hammond and the anti-gay Muslim leader, Iqbal Sacranie.

Free speech fundamentalists argue that there should be no constraints at all on any form of homophobic or other hate speech and music.  They want total freedom to commit libel and to incite hatred and genocide.  They don’t agree that the exercise of freedom speech should have any qualifications, responsibilities or limits.

I challenge these critics to state whether they support, in the name of free speech:

1) The repeal of the incitement to murder laws;

2) The abolition of the laws against inciting racial hatred;

3) The right of the BNP to incite the killing of black, Asian, Muslim, gay and Jewish people;

4) The right to spread false, libellous claims that a person is a paedophile or child murderer.

Perhaps the critics will state where they stand on these “free speech” issues?  If they support all of the above, then at least they are consistent and deserve some respect.

If not, they are hypocrites.

■ Gay and human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell is also the prospective Green Party Parliamentary candidate for the Oxford East constituency.

LINK