Gay MPs
September 19th, 2005 at 6:38 pm by David FarrarSomeone asked if I would also cover the number of gay MPs, as I had done women, Maori and Muslims. Why not.
First of all this is just the list of openly gay or lesbian (or transgender) MPs. I do not want, and indeed will ban anyone who posts speculation about who they think is secretly gay. I know every rumour there is, and if they were all true 45% of Parliament would be gay it seems.
The numbers have increased from three to five. Joining Chris Carter, Georgina Beyer and Tim Barnett are Maryan Street (L) and Chris Finlayson (N).
Maryan Street is NZ’s first openly Lesbian MP. Marilyn Waring was outed as an MP, but was not widely known.
No tag for this post.
September 19th, 2005 at 7:26 pm
so does that make Chris Finlayson the first openly homosexual National MP? i was wondering this yesterday, and thought you might know but kept forgetting to ask.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 7:36 pm
Yes it does. I caution people though that Chris has made clear his sexual orientation is not a major part of his politics, it is just a fact of life. A bit trite to say like being left handed.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 7:40 pm
I’m left handed… what are you saying?
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 7:43 pm
Left handed people are discriminated against. We will rise up.
I think it will be a positive step for the GLBTI community to be within National as well as Labour. It not only shows they are a diverse community, but provides incentive, and internal argument, for them to promote further reform for the GLBTI community.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 7:48 pm
Does that mean that Georgina Beyer was once a lesbian trapped in a man’s body? I thought she was transsexual, not gay.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 7:50 pm
Sort of “mainstream”, do you think?
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 8:05 pm
National also has equalled Labour in their number of Muslim MPs. I’m assuming they knew about Tim Groser. Are there any more?
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 8:06 pm
what’s wrong with speculation? so long as it’s not done in a bad way, isn’t it discriminatory to imply that speculating on sexuality is in some way in need of banning? would it be any different if someone speculated that Don Brash has a right wing agenda?
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 8:34 pm
Stan: what’s wrong is that to imply or state that someone is gay is potentially defamatory. There have been cases in NZ before (see the Hadlee case) where it has been held to be defamatory to imply that someone is gay or involved in a gay relationship.
DPR is simply limiting his liability as a publisher of those aforementioned statements. Smart move.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 8:50 pm
Is not the idea that being gay is defamatory itself defamatory to people who are gay?
On the topic it is said that the only winner in the German election was Guido Westerwelle of the ACT-like Free Democrats. They became the third largest party in Germany. It is free market and socially liberal. Westerwell is gay himself. More on this at lookinginnz when the blog is working again. It seems down at the moment for me.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 8:54 pm
I’m definitely a lesbian trapped in a man’s body. I checked, and everything a lesbian likes/dislikes… me too! The only area I differ from Georgina is that I do feel at home in a man’s body whereas Georgine dah-ling seemed to feel trapped in hers.
Taking my tongue out of my cheek – I don’t even want to know what that feels like. Can’t be fun.
Pondering, I always have found it “convenient” that transgender men living as women are also lesbian. Seems a bit bob-each-way to me. Or bobette, as the case may be.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 9:15 pm
Perhaps parliament *is* 45% gay?
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 9:18 pm
what about bi-sexual mps are they represented in parliment.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 9:28 pm
rennie: The closest would be Mark Thomas, who had the misfortune to be screwed by Jim Bolger, who told Wellington Central’s National voters to vote for Richard Prebble.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 9:31 pm
DPF: What is the point of putting this post up and then saying you will ban anyone who even dares speculate? Defamatory? Is this the dark ages? Can’t I say who I think is probably gay? Would you ban people for speculating on who is hetero-sexual?
Let’s find out shall we…
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 9:35 pm
im pretty certain that bill english and don brash are straight,as well as gerry brownlee and nick smith.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 9:39 pm
I’d say anyone who is defacto / married and has children is a reasonably safe bet.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 9:43 pm
it would depend on what [name deleted - DPF] is selling,most probably a brand of coffee.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 9:47 pm
Tim – you are banned, but only for a period of one week as you are normally a very good contributor.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 9:51 pm
It’s defamation, morons, because to out an MP you’d have to be able to show that there was a well founded public interest behind your action. There ain’t.
BTW – I believe it would also (technically) be libel to claim an MP were left-handed if they were not.
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 10:00 pm
Dim,
Really? Is it defamation to say anything inaccurate about anyone?
Must go read the legislation
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 10:11 pm
The Defamation Act 1992 is possibly the most useless piece of legislation I have had the misfortune to read
Here is something more useful taken from a random webpage(http://www.clendons.co.nz/library/articles/hate_sites.htm):
The Defamation Act 1992 does not contain a precise definition of
Vote:September 19th, 2005 at 10:18 pm
Anita – yes, the Defamation Act 1992 is a odd piece of legislation because to understand it you need a thorough understanding of the case law. Defamation is a tort and thus developed through the common law, the Defamation Act 1992 was only passed to tidy up particular aspects of the law (relating to malice, mainly), although some argue it’s just confused matters even more.
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 7:34 am
There at least two others well known in the gay world in the National Caucus, one of whom has been married.
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 7:49 am
Now how about a list of all the heterosexuals. How many of the heterosexuals are still virgins (if any)?
What does a person’s sexual orientation have to do with anything? When I see Chris Carter discussing an environmental issue and arguing with the opposition I wonder what his sexual orientation has got to do with it.
Perhaps we will have reached a level of maturity when we stop even caring about someone’s sexual
Vote:orientation. Though we might have to drag the Churches kicking and screaming into the 21st century especially the fundamentalist idiots.
September 20th, 2005 at 8:25 am
“The Defamation Act 1992 does not contain a precise definition of
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 8:30 am
I can reveal that Parliament has no de-registered dentists.
Vote:This much feared group is the only profession lower than MPs, Journalists, and used car salesmen
September 20th, 2005 at 8:46 am
David, please also provide a list of ginger haired MPs with speech impediments. I’ll think of some other lists later
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 9:07 am
Kia Kaha Bob, right on. It really shouldn’t matter what anyones sexually preference is.
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 11:42 am
i don’t think it matters, but i do find it interesting that it has taken so long for National to have an openly out MP elected.
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 12:22 pm
The issue about whether unwanted imputations of gayness are defamatory is an interesting legal question – I wrote a paper on this a couple of years ago: see http://laws179.blogspot.com/2005/09/im-not-gay-not-that-theres-anything.html
And, unfortunately, not easily distillable into a 200 word comments field…
Dean
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 12:30 pm
Dim, what I think you are getting at is not defamation but the tort of privacy (public disclosure of private facts).
You talk about “outing” an MP – if this is false it could be defamation, but if true could not. However people have a right not to have their private lives paraded in public (unless there is a public interest) and this coul apply to a closetted homosexual MP.
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 12:31 pm
The issue about whether unwanted imputations of gayness are defamatory is an interesting legal question – I wrote a paper on this a couple of years ago: see http://laws179.blogspot.com/2005/09/im-not-gay-not-that-theres-anything.html
And, unfortunately, not easily distillable into a 200 word comments field…
Dean
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 12:36 pm
The issue about whether unwanted imputations of gayness are defamatory is an interesting legal question – I wrote a paper on this a couple of years ago: see http://laws179.blogspot.com/2005/09/im-not-gay-not-that-theres-anything.html
And, unfortunately, not easily distillable into a 200 word comments field…
Dean
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 12:52 pm
I think there is WAY too much discussion about MPs sexuality. The only reason their sexuality should be duscussed is if their policies have a sexual component. But perhaps it’s Fraudian…
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 1:04 pm
Fraudian? haha…!!
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 1:31 pm
Surely the issue isn’t that labelling someone a homosexual is discrimatory. Instead, have you considered that a person’s sexuality is a personal issue? The fact is that there remains a large amount of descrimination in our society against gays. People should have the right to come out of the closet in their own time.
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 1:55 pm
We all know Winstons homosexual – he’s metrosexual!
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 1:58 pm
Sorry that should have read
“We all know Winston’s NOT homosexual – he’s metrosexual!
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 2:18 pm
Sexual orientation matters only in the sense that the people who represent us should also be representative of us. The sexual orientation of individuals rarely matters – but the extent to which our parliament is a true reflection of the people who vote them in is important.
An increase in the number of queer MPs is a Good Thing in the same way that finally getting a reasonable number of women and Maori in was.
If parliament was full of straight white men in their 60s I would be pretty concerned about their inability to truly represent me and most of the rest of New Zealand.
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 2:43 pm
“Marilyn Waring was outed as an MP, but was not widely known.”
Vote:As in only known for getting rid of the Muldoon Government singlehandedly, one malt bottle at the time?
September 20th, 2005 at 3:19 pm
A person’s sexuality is a private matter. Some chose to make a public policial statement about it and some such as Chris Findlayson do not see it as part of their politics and I respect and agree with that. There are much bigger issues in play for a politician than self indulgent branding about their sex life. And to be fair the National Party while tolerant of homosexuals do not encourage turning it into a political statement. But then the Labour Party has MPs who are not out.
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 3:58 pm
Chris Finlayson seems to be a very capable man, but his party leader certainly didn’t do him any favours. After Brash had one of his foot-in-mouth moments and said on the radio that gay people weren’t mainstream New Zealanders, Finlayson was naturally approached by reporters and obliged to come up with a competent (but absurd) rationalisation, declaring himself “absolutely” mainstream, but then saying “I totally agree with Don that there’s no exclusive membership to mainstream New Zealand.”
No, I don’t know what it means either.
But Finlayson does strike me as unusually magnanimous: he opposed civil unions because he thought they would undermine marriage, but doesn’t appear to support gay marriage either. It’s sort of saying: I’ll deny any other gay people the chance to have their relationships recognised because it might upset conservative heterosexuals.
Like Craig, and Andrew Sullivan, he’s also a practising Catholic, which always puzzles me. At *best* the Vatican’s attitude is that gays aren’t wicked so long as they don’t have sex with each other, and under the new guy even that little bit of tolerance seems to be going south. Craig, help me here: how do you rationalise it? By drawing a distinction between the Church and the Vatican? Hanging on for a liberal Pope?
Tim, in principle you’re quite right that sexuality is a private matter; the problem is that in *practice* it tends to slide on over to *keeping* it private for your own good, and I would hope that we’re past that in New Zealand.
Should sexuality be political? Well, given that it’s only in my lifetime that homosexual acts were removed from the Crimes Act, and that oafs like Brian Connell still stand up in Parliament and make speeches condemning it, it’s a bit na
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 4:05 pm
Someone up the thread mentioned a former National Party candidate who was white-anted by his leader so Richard Prebble could win an electorate seat for ACT.
What follows is a story that to my mind sums up National rather well
[story deleted by DPF. I am appalled that you would post such a story here. Go set up your own website and polute it, not mine]
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 5:22 pm
?
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 8:36 pm
Has anyone else seen the Holmes ad on Prime that shows Mr Peter Davis clearly kissing another man on the lips on election night? Is anyone else a) surprised this would be shown on tv, but b) not surprised it happened?
This is not speculation, I saw it myself!
Vote:September 20th, 2005 at 10:56 pm
“…a servile cur, this unsavoury type has a reputation for being willing to submit to the amorous advances of other men…”
Insert that reference into your C.V. and you are certain to find a job as a Labour MP.
Vote:September 21st, 2005 at 10:13 am
RB, according to this item on gaynz.com, Chris Finlayson DOES support gay marriage, and in fact sees it as a “great civil rights issue”.
http://www.gaynz.com/aarticles/templates/Elections.asp?articleid=977&zoneid=27
It’s refreshing to see an openly gay MP say this! My impression of the stand of other (i.e. Labour) gay MPs is that they never advocate same-sex marriage with any passion, and have no interest in expending any political capital on pursuing it. It might take a centre-right gay MP to push the whole issue along.
I don’t know about Craig, but Andrew Sullivan stopped attending Mass a couple of years ago, as he recorded on his blog.
Vote:September 21st, 2005 at 1:03 pm
Yes I saw Peter Davis on TV but I thought he kissed the man in the cheek, neither is remarkable.
Vote:September 21st, 2005 at 1:28 pm
RB:
There are many, many things in my life that I don’t need you – or anyone else – to understand: my religious faith in one of them.
It isn’t contingent on being in perfect agreement with Benedict XVI; just as no gay/lesbian Anglican of my acquaintance became an atheist following the election (with liberal support) of Whakahuihui Vercoe as Primate – despite his long record of anti-gay rhetoric and unchanged opposition to the ordination of women.
Beyond that, I don’t think anyone really wants to read my spiritual autobiography. I’m no Cardinal Newman or Saint Augustine.
NickB:
Yes, I still go to mass three or four times a week (parish priest is too trendy for my blood, but you take what you get) which is neither here nor there. Not as devout as I used to be, but i’m not quite a “weddings, funerals, Christmas Day and Easter” Catholic yet.
Roger:
Vote:On the lips, you say? How queer… Given that there was probably a lot of well-lubricated relief in the air, I’m surprised Peter Davies didn’t end up snogging one of the cameras.
September 21st, 2005 at 1:54 pm
roger: puhlease… this is boring; who the f**k cares who he kisses, where or when? I’ve heard Je Lan has non-Asian friends and eats italian food – big-freak’n-deal!
This blog was apparently about gay MPs and about how they fare in parliament, in society and whether or not a person’s sexuality defines their politics (clearly not).
Vote: