A leading LGBTQ charity has blasted the NUS LGBT+ campaign’s decision to rid LGBT societies of gay male representatives.
Gay male students in the UK’s University system are facing the prospect of not having a representative at their LGBT+ society after the NUS LGBT+ voted to abolish a reserved space for gay male reps after claiming that “misogyny, transphobia, racism and biphobia were more likely to happen if societies were “dominated” by white cis gay men.”
It also called for current gay male representatives to relinquish their role if it already exists within a LGBT+ society.
A statement from Push Projects in Warwickshire shared its concerns and called upon the NUS and the NUS LGBT+ to “take a hard look at itself and reassess the direction it is heading in”.
In the statement the charity said the dropping of gay male representation was “concerning” and “shocking”,
This type of message of great concern to us as a charity, as we actively support a number of LGBT+ students. We see the discrimination, prejudice, violence and abuse that many of those LGBT+ people endure. This of course includes gay men, and indeed white cis gay men.
Acting to remove gay men’s reps from LGBT+ student societies is a shocking turn of events. Gay men, along with lesbian, bisexual and trans people, continue to experience discrimination, violence and abuse in society, at work, school, college, university, and also within the LGBT+ community. Homophobia still exists, even within the LGBT+ community. That is why it is imperative that gay men’s reps remain within LGBT+ student societies.
Speaking to THEGAYUK a spokesperson for the NUS said,
“All delegate who attend NUS LGBT+ conference are free to submit motions for discussion but they do not necessarily represent the views of NUS if at all.
“NUS itself does not have any committee places solely reserved for men, this is because we recognise that the LGBT+ community is far wider than just men, at a national level we have an open place where anyone can put themselves forward for nomination.
“The conference resolved that local LGBT+ societies to do the same, although ultimate we have no jurisdiction over them. This has nothing to do with the views of an individual about the validity of issues anyone faces but is simply because we believe its fairer practice.”