Killing Fairies

What is going on with homophobia in London? And plenty of other places, while we are at it. Have things gone mad? Have the hateful ones risen on a murderous tide of intent? Has the priceless, underestimated lifestyle-laissez-faire of the metropolis, that magnet that draws so many inside the M25, expired? Homos in London no longer hide in blacked-out bars, they work in every industry (did you know that JP Morgan is ‘quite gay’?), they marry, some breed. Things have moved on, immeasurably. Mr Wilde may be tempted to get out of that gutter if he was still around. So it’s 2009 and a gay man was just beaten on Trafalgar Square – by teenagers – so badly that 2 weeks later he died. It’s worth reading that again: man, gay, beaten to death; by teenagers, Trafalgar Square. It appears extremely likely that their initial interaction was driven by homophobia. There are other cases that I’m sure you already know.

On Friday evening, Trafalgar Square was full. A pleasant, solemn, emotionally-charged October night. We were there to commemorate this death, the killing of Ian Baynham, here 2 weeks previous. A candle-lit vigil forming the perfect public response to the horror that this murder – and all its peers – merits. Hats off to the organisers. Bravo. The happening was beautiful and the turnout thankfully remarkable. I had a sense though, a not-exactly-nostalgic notion, more a feeling of disbelief at being here again. I live in a world, as do most around me, where my sexual, relational behaviour does not negatively impact on anything else in my life. The important civil rights and political issues have been won over. London homos are free. But there we were again, in Trafalgar Square, protesting this time for that most basic of human right – to not be killed on the street simply because someone doesn’t like you. Words really fail to encapsulate the gravity of this. The last vigil I attended at this spot was equally moving, that following the July 7 tube and bus bombings. There are disturbing similarities between the fundamental drivers of both commemorated events. The despise of difference.

As it should, the media is paying this due attention. Very good. Much talk however is of the significant rising incidence of homophobic crime. Not to detract, not for a single second, the horror of Ian Baynham’s murder, nor to devalue, even by one iota, the wrong that homophobia simply is; I, an adult, male, gay London resident, am not happy about this. This is, typically, misconstrued. It is quite probably unfounded. What is being said is that the number of incidents classified as homophobic in nature has risen by 18% when comparing Sep 07-Sep 08 to Sep 08-Sep 09. The media persist, blindly or unashamedly, or both, to stubbornly destroy the logic of crime reporting statistics. It’s easy to blame the process: “oh it’s just statistics, they are often wrong.” In fact, no, they are not usually ‘wrong’. What you think they say may be wrong; simply because you can’t be bothered to think about it. But with the media, regrettably, I don’t think carelessness or ignorance are at play. Rather, the sober reality of a statistic would often desex a story too much. Remember the massive ‘increase’ in teenage knife crime? It was always that bad.

In this case, the number represents the fact that annual reports of homophobic crime in London, as recorded by the police, have increased by 18%. Certain reporters encourage you to explain this in terms of only one of the several explanatory factors: that the actual prevalence has increased. Fear, being the cheapest currency of an unthinking and irresponsible media, is therefore palpable. But hold on, what else could have changed here? Two very important things: first, the proportion of actual incidences that people bother to (or dare to) report and second; how the report compiler then chooses to classify them. You can see that it is very easy for the number of reported incidents to rise by a fifth without the actual level of incidence changing very much at all.

I urge you to not get upset with me by assuming that I am trying to trivialise anything that is genuinely monstrous here. Actually, quite the opposite. What I’m really implying is that the rate hasn’t necessarily increased at all, i.e., it was quite probably horrendously high before. This is much worse. And if you are wondering (as I hope you are), what ‘high’ means, then for the London Met it means 1192 reported incidents in Sep 08-Sep 09. Another hack’s near-universal statistical sin is the use of quoted % change without providing the reader with slightest notion of the starting point. Imagine a pilot telling you the plane is about to dive 60% of its current altitude and leaving it at that. So many (all?) reporters can’t help themselves (or are led by their incompetence) in portraying an increase in something unthinkably dreadful as a ‘doubling’ or a ‘100% increase’, when really whatever it is has just gone up from 1 to 2. If the article you are reading quotes a %- or fractional-change but neglects the starting point, base level or whatever you want to call it, stop reading and wipe your arse with it immediately, and then email the writer to tell them. The 18% increase here means 18% of 1008 incidents (in Sep 07-Sep 08), i.e. 184 more incidents. That’s a lot of pain. And that includes the murder above and 3 further suspected. Quotations of an ever increasing tsunami of hate crime gets even more confusing when you read that the police’s own GPA (gay police association) reported an annual 74% increase in homophobic incidents in July 06. So we have +74% in July 05-July06 and then +18% in Sep 08-Sep09. I am not convinced.

I abhor this misreporting for 2 crucial reasons:

First, it retrospectively portrays such hideousness as being less widespread in the past. It conveys this message based on absolutely no evidence. And it leaves us, quite intentionally I posit, yet even more fearful that yet another aspect of life is getting worse and even more fearful. For me, this bit is simply unpleasant and irresponsible.

More importantly, this shadow-casting journalistic mode removes the one possible source of joy, the sole shred of glimmering positivity in the whole torrid affair: that people are increasingly standing up for themselves (reporting) and something is actually being done about it (police response). The whole thing is utterly shit, for sure, but let’s not under-represent the one aspect that is good. Progress.

This year, as you may know, I became involved in confronting and combating homophobia. Following another hideous incident in East London in August 2008 that you may know about, in which a 20 year old met 7 times with someone’s knife for being queer, leaving him severely paralysed, the infamous George and Dragon was actually ambushed by more than one carload of angrys this May. Things seemed to be getting a bit too serious.

The reaction has been marked and proactive. Tower Hamlets and Hackney councils, through their hate crime divisions have shown support and solidarity. Some feel that they are lacking conviction however, through fear of igniting the possibly incidental but nevertheless characteristic racial angle of homophobia in E2. One would be next-to-ignorant to oversimplify the problem in this neighbourhood down to asian versus gay, but at the same time we are left with a current situation in which there is an effective homo-exclusion zone of approximately one square kilometre, roughly centred on Arnold Circus. There are more than a couple of angry British Bangladeshi lads in this area, who no doubt feel hemmed-in by all the social delights, much of them pretty ‘mo, on the perimeter of their estate, forbidden, inaccessible or just irrelevant to them. Not liking the way others socialise is a problem faced in all cities, multicultural or not; human societies will always fractionalise and find ways to not like each other. But, to attack it for the sake that it is different is wrong. All the holy books say this loud and clear. The local authorities ignore this at their peril. And don’t forget, there will undoubtedly be more than one white, gay fascist in E2, so let’s not get carried away with the racial generalisation. A proactive, involved and wide dialogue is required in E2. No-one owns the streets, they are to be shared.

The police, very mindful of the connection between the two incidents just mentioned above (it is likely the storming of the George was a vengeful attack following further arrests relating to the earlier stabbing), have responded very actively and are begging for more data. They cannot do anything, cannot increase resources if people continue the precedent of not reporting homophobic attacks. The whole point of this campaign is to encourage people to report and tell them how to do it. The police take all of this very seriously, I even know of a case where families have been visited, to their abject shame, as a result of a homophobic egging by their son. The Met are also self-policing: I know of one report of an improper police response to an incident that was vigorously followed up internally. The Stephen Lawrence inquiry has done much to improve things – capitalise on them.

Why all the hate, the abuse, the kickings, why kill? What is homophobia about anyway? I think it’s motivated by at least 2 factors, and they are not necessarily mutually-exclusive.

The first I call the ‘easy target’ phenomena. It is, to the ultimate shame of those that perpetrate it, the pinnacle of dishonourable cowardice. In our socioeconomic fuck up of a society, it is never condonable but remains otherwise comprehendible that angry defavourised youths lash out at others ‘better off’ in their environs. The misguided ones that unfortunately believe the fight out of their predicament should be a violent one often cherry pick the easiest targets. Let’s face facts. It’s less risky to pick on someone who is obviously gay and maybe not the toughest looking passer-by. How many times have you heard of a 100kg ‘muscle-mary’ being gay bashed? Exactly. The attacker would be crushed by just a homosexual handshake. This strategy can go painfully wrong though: I’m sure you heard about the misidentified cage fighting transsexuals. Amusing though this story maybe, these two kids have most probably contributed more against transphobia than anything else I’ve encountered.

The second root of homophobia is altogether more complex, not automatically independent of the ‘easy target’ affect, more controversial and would no doubt provoke a more indignant reaction. This cause, I feel, is intrinsically paradoxical. The thing is with us humans, we are lazy. Indifference rarely speaks its name. The anger required for homophobia demands an energy. Such an energy must have a source. The homophobia therefore cannot be based on indifference. There must be something self-referential burning inside. If you’ve got no uncomfortable feelings inside regarding same-sex sex, then you don’t have anything to drive strong feelings. But lots of teenage boys do. Society, on all levels, from parent, to school, to church, to mosque, to office needs to deal with this head on.

LoveHate England

I know lots of you share my despair and hilarity at the tsunami of ridiculousless that abounds us. Here's a classic:

First 'Great' Western. Paddington - Penzance (I'm sure you will agree that we should legislate to prevent them using the term Great in their company name - there is certainly nothing great about this train company). I'm in first class; it wasn't much more expensive, it's a busy weekend and I want to do some work. The trolley has been past but it was a lot less interesting than Julie Walters's. So I head to the buffet and order a mint tea. Said tea is prepared. I ask if it's complementary.

At least I think that's what I ask. However given the poor gentleman's facial reaction I think I must have actually asked if he would care to fellate me in the toilets; and whether such a service was also complementary.

Excessively flustered, he asked to see my ticket. So I trundle back to my seat to retrieve my ticket. The inspector, standing next to me at the buffet, looked at his feet expectantly rather than choosing to tell his colleague he knows I'm in first class. I return with my ticket and notice my hot, freshly prepared mint tea no longer adorns the counter top. I look bemused I suspect - as the ever-so-familiar here we go again feeling rushes over me. The steward can't catch my eye and shuffles slightly.

"Err.. where is my tea?"
"Ermm, yes well Sir, I had to, I had to, err, I had to put everything back in the right place, put things back in order so I can make you the right complementary tea."
"But I want the tea you've just made me."
"It wasn't complementary."
"But you already made it, don't worry, I'll just buy it. Can I have it back please?"
Shuffle.
"Are you telling me you've thrown it away?"
Shuffle, sidestep, shuffle.
"The complementary teas have a different cup size? Is that what you are trying to tell me?"
"And a different brand, Sir."
(No points for guessing which direction on the size and quality scale is taken by the complementary version ....)
"The trolley service is on the way Sir."
I'm struggling with how this relates to my tea.
"But I just want my tea. This is ridiculous."
I feel bad: "I'm sorry, I don't mean you, I'm talking about your company policy."
The staff exchange glances. admissive glances.
I get my smaller, lower quality mint tea and thank them. My original tea irrigates the weeds on the track somewhere just west of Taunton.
England, oh England...

Important absent legislation

1 Criminalise the tortuous, intentionally confusing grammar in the email marketing opt-out question when registering on websites:

'Please do not tick here unless you want us to not want to tell our service providers to not contact you regarding our products and services.'

2 Equate legislation with the risks: why do you have to MOT your car but not your sexual health? Controversial this one...

a/c is not cool

I've attended two climate change events (as in lectures and not SuperStorms) recently where the audience had to put their coats back on due to over zealous air conditioning*.

I can no longer handle the irony.

Without a/c, people seem content with an indoor temperature around 25C. With, people feel the need to set the target temperature to 18.

* drying/cooling

For World Malaria Day

From October 2, 2008

Malarial epidemiology data

(R. Carter and K. Mendis. Evolutionary and historical aspects of the burden of malaria. Clinical Microbiological Reviews, 2002. 15(4): p. 564 – 594)

Mortality (M/year)          1930       1975       2000

Americas                             0.1          <0.01>

S Asia + Middle East        2.6          0.1          0.1

China + NE Asia                 0.5          0.2          0.0

Africa                                    0.2          0.3          0.9

                                                3.4          0.6          1.0

 

This little table.. better shown as a graph (sorry) highlights some fascinating facts about the history of malaria. Pre the WHO-precursor DDT spraying programs starting in the 40s, malaria mortality stood at ~3.4M/year with ¾ of cases occurring in S Asia/ Middle East. From the peak in 1930 to 1975 we saw a drastic reduction in global malaria (something I never knew) down to 1M cases per year, the lion’s share of this reduction comprising the near eradication in S Asia / Middle East. (I wonder what the role of the US military activity in the region plays in this story?) China and environs also saw > 50% reduction over the same period. In per capita terms this decrease is orders of magnitude larger, i.e. this incidence of global malaria has been massively reduced. Unfortunately, just as with many other socioeconomic factors, the trend reversed in Africa during this time, with mortality rising by a factor of 5.

Unfortunately this data, although informative, can be non-instructive in terms of suggesting possible explanations as it is not quoted on a per capita basis – according to the World Bank, sub Saharan African population has doubled since the 60s. It also does not give any information on change in infection rate. An often cited reason for the increase is increased drug/insecticide resistance. However, at this stage I cannot see why this problem would be limited to Africa. Of course many other factors are proposed for Africa including weakening control programs, deteriorating primary health care and humanitarian crises in endemic areas.

So, a dangerously rough estimate of increase in per capita mortality for Africa would be something in the region of a factor ~ 2.5 since 1930 while the rest of the planet has drastically reduced its occurrence. Looking at it like this, it is not surprising that something serious is finally being done to combat this regional problem, although still shamefully late.

Cowcross to Farm

Ever since the bookshop closed and another "it's not just not a supermarket, it's an M&S not-supermarket" opened, lovely Cowcross St was losing nearly all its charm. There's a reason to go back.

Film 'Genova' courtesy of Micheal Winterbottom and... Ryanair

Not a bad film, although handling such a ludicrous coincidence as the one you are force-fed at the end could be termed galling. And I'm not sure whether the audience's attention to female teenage sexuality matches that of the director. However, it would have been a perfectly fine movie were it not for the:

embarassing, 

vulgar, 

inappropriate and 

hugely conspicuous 

Ryanair product placement. The last thing I want to be reminded of when sitting watching a film is that airline's screeching scratch card adverts. Subtlety a foreign concept in this publicity invasion. It was as if the film had stopped for 2 minutes and the guys from the joke Orange don't-let-mobiles-ruin-movies advert had actually taken over.   

Poor show.

Divide and conquer in EC4?

Click here if you can't see images.



Today a day in the City like none before. I’m not a total stranger to peaceful civil protest – partly due to student days in the "manif "mecca that is Paris – but if you do engage in this form of democratic action, you’re accustomed to march around Westminster or Hyde Park. If you are one of the many that seem to have a default huffish disapproval of any form of demonstration, then put down Grazia for a second and reflect for a moment that you would still only enjoy serfdom if many others had not done it before you. To see civil protest, even civil unrest, in the City of London, the new location chosen for obvious reasons, is something else. After many years in investment management, my associations with the City couldn’t be more different. To see this hyperinstitutional place so transformed and in the minds of some at least – invaded – by democracy, the mob, had something of the surreal about it.

I head first to the Bank, one focus of protest. Relief at the lack of ambient tension my first and welcome reaction. Threadneedle Street felt like it was hosting a carnival. A heavy, alert (but cheerful) police presence dividing the street in sectors, sure, but the drumming, whistling, dancing and cheering of the protesters, the observers (and everyone in between) completely unthreatening. It felt momentarily like someone had opened a wormhole from Cornhill to Rio de Janeiro, albeit , regrettably, minus the Samba Boys. The first placard I read: Resistance is Fertile summed up the serious but smiling nature of the demonstration’s embryonic phase.

Much of the clearly identifiable strictly-observer-only attendees were actually city workers; amused or bemused but with a pronounced lack of the condescending disapproval I may have expected and maybe with just a seasoning of solidarity? Certainly analogous to the atmosphere of a trouble-free football terrace. To witness this lot in mandated casuals was actually quite amusing; just because the Essex money broker lads were in tight Abercrumble & Vadge and gleaming trainers instead of pin stripe (that they actually never wear anyway – that’s the insurance brokers), it didn’t make them any more difficult to identify. It’s not hard to understand why city firms’ management were probably advised and felt obliged to instruct their staff to dress down through reasons of duty of care. Lynch mobs were dreaded. Nevertheless I don’t think you can underestimate the profundity of this sartorial limitation. Bosses actually decreed that staff must spend the whole day in a part of town they inhabit at least 5 days a week in disguise. Prudentially precautious? Or is it just me that senses a hint of shame, a veneer of cowardice? 

One female marketing/ops (meaning given on request) -type person was nevertheless only very slightly dressed-down. She obviously finds it impossible to operate minus twin set and heels, think Joseph. At one point she seemed aghast: “Oh no, they can’t arrest Jesus!” (Jesus .. as in stop usury in the Temple Jesus… did appear under pursuit by 3 officers, but they were only using his wake in the crowd created by the crucifix for speed). But then she confidently informed me that no-one protesting would have a job and are living off her taxes. £35 a week? Hmmm. Not thought through that one. She was the most upset by her presumption of their ignorance of what the City does. If only they understood what goes on then she could respect their protest. Interesting point. But I do wonder if she herself had a good grasp of CDS-squared, for example? Did she understand the unquantifiable level of multilayered, opaque, illiquid investment in US sub-prime? Did she see through the fog and capture why these products had the same investment grade as a FTSE 100 Company? Doubt it very much: and there resides a more interesting point. Most in ‘the City’ did not grasp what sections of their institutions were up to. In some cases the management didn't 'know'. I bet no-one (except maybe 5 managers and a quarter of the board) at Lehman for example knew their Temple was about to flounder. The conclusion: the City workers, the (vast majority of the) protesters and the public in general share a much commoner interest than they realise (look what’s been agreed today). Yet they are projected as being on different sides.

Within a nanosecond the atmosphere plummeted: destination Armageddon. Some violence erupted. I cannot comment on the nature of the trigger and don’t fancy the violent thug / incendiary police debate; I did not remotely see enough to make an assessment. I only saw one very bloodied police man and then the very bloodied protester photograph on the cover of the Standard. Not that a tit for tat analysis is appropriate either. The speed of change of atmosphere was exhilarating, yet petrifying. The tone of chorus stepped down to something markedly more adversarial. The police ran in, shields, batons etc; the (non-fighting crowd) ran out the other way, a painful collection of moments of panic. The already relatively narrow Threadneedle Street now feeling like the smallest medieval City alley. Remember Cheapside next time, it’s wider. Just to calm things down someone let off a red flare, nice. Thankfully for my trachea no CS gas ensued. But for the record; the 'RBS building' into which a storming was attempted was already vacant and embellished with its For Let signs. Thanks, as ever, to Sky News for giving us a version of events totally divorced from reality.

It did calm down again. It was, as ever, a tiny, tiny minority of people involved; this was no poll tax riot. Extraordinarily, the potential average per capita loss due to the current crisis dwarfs by orders of magnitude any perceived loss to Maggie’s Poll Tax, but the Poll Tax was much easier to understand. Whoever was behind the violent escalation however, managed to assert a permanent degradation in the event. The police water-tightened cordons, very scary dogs were corralled in, the mounted police arrived in serious number. Determined but joyful(?) civil action had irretrievably descended into conflict. Movement was suppressed. The music died. The sirens and shouting of police instructions urgently incessant. There were sides to be on. Shame. Inevitable?

Being trapped in the central pen, but not being one of the few after a fight, not an enviable outcome, fortunately I was not.

Further back amongst the (still mainly city boy) ‘spectators’, how were people reacting to the paradigm shift? Some disgust, anger and disapproval at both ‘sides’, yes, but maybe a smidgen of delight at ‘a bit of action’? Sure there was. Quite a lot of it. Modern coliseum, Big Brother, small riot: wherever or whatever, quite a lot of English do love to watch a fight.

Tiring of observing the residual tension undulate down the street, I made my way to Bishopsgate to check out Climate Camp. The short transfer was unexpectedly lovely. The roads, lanes and alleys of EC4 were void of diesel fumes, substituted for a while by the milling groups of demo tourists and bathed in a lovely spring sun. Serious media hardware everywhere. It was just gorgeous to see the square mile like this. Turning from London Wall into Bishopsgate, I got all in a tizz at the thought of a second wormhole encounter in one day. Or someone had just teleported Glastonbury to the City. Tents everywhere, students basking in the sun, talks and various demonstrations of non fossil fuel energy. And a compost loo. I don’t know how the rest of the night panned out, but if there ever was a model protest, it was this one.