Under a recent motion made by a delegate at the NUS LGBT+ conference, the following comments were made about gay men's position in LGBT societies:
'Misogyny, transphobia, racism and biphobia are often present in LGBT+ societies. This is, unfortunately, more likely to occur when the society is dominated by white cis gay men.' They went on to say: 'gay men do not face oppression as gay men within the LGBT+ community and do not need a reserved place on society committees.'
All delegates who attend the NUS LGBT+ conference are free to submit motions for discussion but they do not necessarily represent the views of NUS as a whole.
On the back of this motion, NUS resolved: 'to encourage LGBT+ Societies that have a gay men’s rep to drop the position.'
We believe that LGBT societies should represent the full diversity of the LGBT community, including the multiple minority identities that exist within it.
'We believe that LGBT societies should represent the full diversity of the LGBT community, including the multiple minority identities that exist within it. Gay men experience homophobia and oppression daily, both inside and outside the LGBT community. This could be because they are of faith, or have a disability, or are part of an ethnic minority. They also continue to face discrimination in the workplace, at school, in church, in institutions, or on the sports field. The fight against homophobia isn’t over yet. We think the best way to reflect diversity is to proactively engage with and encourage others to apply for positions on the board rather than excluding specific parts of the community.'
The NUS said:
We recognise that the LGBT+ community is far wider than just men.
'The 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 suggested local LGBT+ societies do the same, although ultimately 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.'