Recap of “Contextualizing The Anti-69 Movement”

This year, the Canadian government released a commemorative coin, alongside other celebrations, to mark fifty years since the supposed decriminalization of homosexuality. Whether or not those celebrations were justified, however, is another story. On October 8, 2019, members of the StFX community gathered to discuss the history behind the celebrations and debate their legitimacy at this year’s first talk in the GSDA lecture series: “Contextualizing the Anti-69 Movement.” The discussion was facilitated by Dr. Chris Frazer, a local 2SLGBTQIA+ activist and professor in the StFX Department of History.

The supposed decriminalization of homosexuality was part of the Criminal Law Amendment Act (also known as the Omnibus Bill), passed in 1969. Alongside changes to two anti-gay laws (buggery and gross indecency), the bill also laid changes to abortion access, and included The White Paper – eliminating the Indian Act and all treaties held between Canadians and Indigenous peoples. The bill was part of the Liberal’s call for a “just society” under Pierre Trudeau, and the government talked a big game about what it would accomplish. Frazer, who was ten years old when the bill was passed, shared that in reality, “nothing happened in 1969.”

View fullsize

A 1971 demonstration opposing the limitations of the 1969 Omnibus Bill - Jerald Moldenhauer

Essentially, the government realized that they couldn’t police private spaces, and decided to waive the enforcement of certain laws, rather than change them. Buggery and gross indecency laws were not repealed, but would not be enforced when the concerned acts took place between two adults in private. Many might be familiar with a famous statement of Pierre Trudeau’s, in which he claims that “the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation.” While this is true in a number of contexts, Frazer suggests that there are certain cases in which the state should intervene – in instances of sexual and gendered violence, for example. It is those situations, regardless, that should cause the government greater worry than men who sleep with men, or women who sleep with women. Trudeau’s statement also only applied to certain kinds of sexual activity; the government would still intervene if more than two people were found to be involved in sexual relations.

In Frazer’s opinion, the alleged decriminalization in 1969 and celebrations in 2019 share one big similarity: they are both political acts, done in the interest of political success rather than social good. The 1969 bill provided a false sense of security to the 2SLGBTQIA+ community – leading many to come out in an environment that was just as hostile as it was before, and where they were unable to access protection. In fact, the number of gay people arrested immediately following the release of the bill increased dramatically.

2019 Commemorative Coin - Royal Canadian Mint

The fact is, in 1969, Canada didn’t have a law prohibiting homosexuality. What they had was a number of laws that disproportionately affected 2SLGBTQIA+ individuals – including the two that were changed by the Omnibus Bill, among others. Laws prohibiting indecent acts, obscenity, gross indecency, indecent assault on a male, anal intercourse, vagrancy, nudity, and immoral theatrical performance were all enforced more frequently upon homosexual individuals. “Immoral theatrical performance” applied mainly to drag and burlesque performances, for instance. Vestuary laws were also biased against drag performers and trans individuals, as they required people to wear at least three articles of clothing that corresponded to their gender assigned at birth, and were enforced up until the early 2000s. Bawdy-house laws were used to carry out raids on bathhouses (“places of indecency”) in Montreal and Toronto for decades. Research on the bawdy house law shows that from 1968 to 2004, more than 1,300 men were charged for being in a gay bathhouse.

Of the laws detailed above, many are still in the books. Indecent acts, obscenity, nudity, immoral theatrical performance. Buggery (renamed “anal intercourse” in 1988) and vagrancy were only just repealed in 2019.

This is what passes for “decriminalization” in Canada.

Celebrating the anniversary of 1969 is not only unjustified, but serves to erase decades of 2SLGBTQIA+ activist work that has done far more for the rights of the community than the government ever has, and fails to acknowledge all those who were harmed in the aftermath of the bill. “Actual history is about the activism of our communities,” says Frazer. In present day, it’s a liability for a politician to say something homophobic during an election campaign – it didn’t used to be. That’s the result of decades of activism. Instead of celebrating the fiftieth anniversary of 1969, then, Frazer suggests celebrating the activists. The fact that Canada is failing to acknowledge their contributions is demonstrative of a deeper, underlying homophobia. “They need to be known.”

Interested in learning more? Much of the information for “Contextualizing The Anti-69 Movement” was sourced from “Anti-69 FAQ” on ActiveHistory.ca