Police Museum

We organised a private visit to the Police Museum in Manchester, which included a guided tour and a reading of the play “Justice” whilst in the Magistrates Court. The play tells the story of the Altrincham case, and has been added to the Resources section of our website here.

Also more photos can be seen here.

In the “Good Old” bad old days of 1936 when homosexuality was not only disapproved of but also prosecuted, a conviction could destroy the lives of gay men without them having committed a single wrong act. The case was reported in The Manchester Guardian on 6 November 1936 detailing their names, ages, occupation, address and sentence.

In this article by Allan Horsfall (written in 1986), he takes a closer look at one of the largest homosexual prosecutions in British legal history and the shock waves that reverberated around the small Cheshire market town of Altrincham.

The Altrincham Case

Fifty years ago a huge group prosecution devastated the lives of the men involved and placed a mark of “shame” upon the Cheshire town of Altrincham – around which it was centred – which was to persist for generations. Because of this Altrincham became identified among a large section of the population as being synonymous with everything perverted. Whenever the town was mentioned in these circles it was almost certain that homosexuality would rear its head. And if homosexuality was discussed or – more probably – joked about, then the name of Altrincham would invariably be dragged in.

The vision was of a town populated entirely by predatory sodomites. “If you should happen to drop a half-crown in Altrincham,” people were solemnly warned, “don’t ever pick it up.”

I have heard this warning repeated where the half-crown had given way to a fifty-pence piece, demonstrating that this slanderous image of the place persisted at least into the 1970’s and there may well be areas where it lives on still.

Oscar Wilde said the road to homosexual law reform would be “long and red with monstrous martyrdoms,” and this was certainly the case in the years between 1885 and 1967 during which all male homosexual acts were outlawed.

But the pattern of prosecutions was uneven – and not only in relation to times and places. Although one might have expected that those who took the most risks would face the greatest danger, this was often not the case. A stereotypical homosexual who consistently behaved outrageously might sail through life quite untroubled by the law, while for others whose conduct was discretion itself Authority’s heavy knock on the door might come – sometimes even in the middle of the night – many years after the activity for which they were being hunted down.

The atmosphere was captured exactly by Dr R W Reid in a letter published in the Spectator on 3 January 1958:

“The pogroms continue, one in this neighbourhood having started with long and weary police court proceedings on the eve of Christmas, so that the festival may presumably be spent in contemplation of the Spring Assize.

And this for a lad of seventeen. The pattern is much the same in all these cases. The police go round from house to house, bringing ruin in their train, always attacking the younger men first, extracting information with lengthy questioning and specious promises of light sentences as they proceed from clue to clue, ie from home to home, often up to twenty.

This time the age range is seventeen to forty, which is about average. Last time a man of thirty-seven dropped dead in the dock at Assize. Just because this happens in country places and at country assizes it all goes largely unreported.”

Too Many to Ignore

But it did not go unreported when it happened in Altrincham. Although no famous names were involved, it was too big for the national press to ignore. Twenty-nine men were brought before the courts and the number was only limited because others, who had got wind of the police inquiries, had fled the country.

There were no allegations of importuning or public indecency. The men had met, it was said, in cafes and bars in Manchester. It is extremely doubtful whether each of these men knew, and were known by, more than a few of the others, but they were seen by authority -as in nearly all similar prosecutions – as a gang. “I am quite satisfied,” said the judge, “that the prisoners in the dock at this Assizes are a gang.”

Gangs, of course, need to have leaders and this role invariably ascribed not to the oldest accused, but to the one facing most charges. I recall this label being pinned on to a 24 year old man during a group prosecution in Bolton as recently as 1963.

Viewed from today, the press were strangely inhibited in their reportage of the Altrincham case. With the single exception of the ever-salacious Manchester Evening News, there was no mention of gross indecency and certainly none of buggery. The local paper referred throughout to “improper conduct” and both national and local papers reported it simply as “The Altrincham case”, which is probably why the memory of it endured for so long to haunt the town.

Mr Alfred Keogh (prosecuting) said he “did not suppose that in the criminal history of the country had a batch of prisoners been brought before a court on such serious charges – certain of the charges were about the most serious which could be brought against any man. It was something just less than murder.”

There had been no direct complaints to the police. The ages of the accused ranged from 17 to 59. The youngest, “who was unable to work for several months did not make a complaint to anybody, but his employer dragged the truth out of him. As a result the prosecution spread, one prisoner incriminating another.”

Gay Solidarity

The defendants, who had been reported as looking drawn and dejected at the start of the preliminary hearing, had apparently brightened up considerably by the second day, as evidenced by the following defending counsel, Mr Backhouse (addressing the magistrates) said, “However much you admire the Cheshire police, it is impossible for your worships to believe that one after another these men, against whom the police had no evidence, immediately volunteered statements which convicted themselves.”

This was followed by a spontaneous outbreak of applause from all the defendants. I am quite certain that this early and previously unheard-of demonstration of gay solidarity in adversity must have come as a profound shock to the prosecution and the Bench. And as quite an eye-opener to the defending solicitors and counsel as well, I should imagine.

There were signs, too, that even some of the police did not regard the defendants as belonging to the general body of criminality. Cross-examining Detective Harris on his evidence, Mr Lustgarden asked, “Did you ever know a more accommodating crowd of defendants?”

Detective Harris: “No, Sir.”

“They have an extraordinary urge to write statements?”

“They are not criminals, Sir.”

The prosecution was not content to rest its case on the confessions of frightened and confused prisoners. Dr W H Grace, pathologist at Chester Royal Infirmary, stated that he had medically examined 24 of the 29 prisoners. He came to the conclusion, as a result of his examinations, that 12 of them “had acted as receiving agents in the committal of a certain offence” (as the papers put it). He had made his examinations on the instructions of the police superintendent at Altrincham.

Strenuous efforts were made by the defence to have the trial held in Manchester rather than Chester. Mr Turner said his client lived in Stretford. He was a youth of 20 years of age and his widowed mother had raised money for his defence. It would be a great hardship if they were put to more expense than was necessary. Manchester Assize Courts were only a twopenny (tram) car ride from his client’s house.

All the solicitors in the case and all the counsel, with the exception of one, were not in the Chester circuit. It would be beyond the means of the defendants to support their own defence if the case went to Chester. But to Chester it was sent!

Beacon of Humanity

The prosecution there followed the drearily familiar pattern of such cases. Seized letters and photographs, powder, lipstick, greasepaint. Evidence of presents – slippers, flowers, chocolates. Hotel registers were produced to demonstrate who had stayed with whom and where and when. Evidence of nicknames – one of them had been known as the Queen Mother.

Perhaps worst of all, the mother of one of the defendants was put up by the prosecution to testify that her son had entertained a male friend while she was away on Good Friday.

A tiny beacon of ‘humanity’ flickered when the employer of one of the accused pleaded in court that if any treatment could be found for his workman as an alternative to imprisonment he would be willing to meet the full cost of it, including accommodation. This was the only defendant to be subsequently dealt with by way of a treatment order.

A handful were acquitted and a few were treated leniently, but brutality was the order of the day. Men were sent away for terms of two, three and four years and, in the most savage case, one man was sentenced to seven years penal servitude with 18 months hard labour.

Paul Tench, writing about the case in the Sunday Empire News, produced a strange mixture of moralising and attempted explanation.

“Less than two years ago Herr Hitler started a campaign to eradicate this brand of vice from Germany. His method was drastic and sentences against those convicted ranged from the death sentence to life imprisonment.

There is good reason for saying that the Altrincham round-up has touched only the fringe of the scandal rampant in other areas now receiving police attention.”

But the writing was already on the (admittedly distant) wall for the German dictator in a war which served to concentrate British minds wonderfully on more important and worthwhile pursuits than legalised queerbashing.

Commemoration?

And no subsequent trawl of homosexuals was to net so many victims – not even when the British police were acting under post-war pressure from the American security agencies. So the Altrincham case remains unique in the breadth and intensity of its persecution – a pinnacle of cruelty in an 82 years long homosexual wilderness – the result, as the Empire News put it, “of one of the most searching investigations that have ever been undertaken in this respect with a large number of detectives working day and night.”

Although it is easy now to portray these men as the victims which they undoubtably were, there seems to be no ready way in which their suffering and the injustice of it can be commemorated in a form more permanent than this article.

And even here I have named nobody, although most of them will now be where publicity can do no further damage and where they stand in no need of any protection from the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act.

But the time has surely come to lay the ghost so far as Altrincham is concerned. No City of Vice, this pleasant, wealthy town, but merely – like some of its unlucky sons – the hapless victim of an unjust law and a capricious prosecution policy.

The town, in its turn, has a duty to help in rehabilitating the memory of the victims. Though it may not be exactly another Tolpuddle, fate has nevertheless awarded Altrincham a minor but undeniable place in the unhappy chronicle of martyrdom.

The trial requires a permanent memorial. A blue plaque on the courthouse or the new library would be appropriate. This idea, however, is unlikely to commend itself to civic leaders who have within this decade elected as Mayor a man who, immediately before his installation to that office, prescribed “a bullet between the eyes” as appropriate treatment for homosexuals.

The political composition of the council has changed a little since that disgraceful comment was perceived as no bar to high office in the borough, but not so much as to easily permit the act of atonement which is still called for.

But it might be worth a try.

Kathleen Stock: New ruling could make it harder to prevent anti-trans bullying in UK Universities

Thanks to Jamie Wareham for this article.

The regulator who oversees universities in the UK has fined the University of Sussex over its transgender-inclusive policies that banned speakers from making anti-trans statements.

The university has been fined £585,000 by the higher education regulator, the Office for Students (OfS). It follows a three-year battle over the regulator’s rules about protecting free speech and academic freedom on campuses – BBC

The regulator said the university’s policies that included a requirement to “positively represent trans people” could lead to staff and students preventing themselves from voicing opposing views. The university plans to appeal the ruling, accusing the regulator of pursuing a “vindictive and unreasonable campaign.”

It says that if the ruling goes unchallenged, it will leave the institution and universities across the UK “powerless to prevent abusive, bullying and harassing speech.”

Arif Ahmed, OfS director for freedom of speech, said the fine could have been as high as £3.7m and there was “potential for higher fines in the future” – BBC

The investigation started because of the wider debate around Professor Kathleen Stock. She left the university in 2021 amid on-campus protests accusing her of transphobia because of her ‘gender-critical’ books, lectures and views – The Guardian

Who is Kathleen Stock?

Stock is the author of Material Girls: Why Reality Matters For Feminism and has a background in philosophy, publishing academic work on sexual objectification and sexual orientation. The book, which takes a trans-exclusionary approach to feminism, was at the centre of the row that ultimately led to her leaving the university. 

Stock quickly became a darling of the right-wing press after her departure.

Despite regularly claiming over the past four years that she has been silenced, she has become one of the most common commentators on broadcast TV and in right-wing newspapers on transgender rights. She has picked up a number of newspaper columns and helped prominent anti-trans and so-called ‘gender-critical’ organisations to grow in prominence.

As well as being a trustee for the LGB Alliance for a significant period, she also launched The Lesbian Project to much fanfare. The organisation said it would lobby, build communities and develop research into lesbian communities. However, since launching it has done little more than produce a short blog series and a paid-for podcast.

Analysis: A dangerous precedent from a regulator with an “absolutist” approach to free speech

When I was at university, I learned an important theory during a discussion with a lecturer in the LGBTQIA+ staff group about the approach of ‘no-platforming’ those with hateful views. 

He explained how the absolutist idea of free speech is ultimately self-defeating. The logic is simple: if you allow all speech – even hate speech – that hate speech will be used to end free speech. To put it another way, hateful actors will use democratic principles in order to take over and impose their hateful views on everyone else. One look to the US, and Trump’s control over scientific research and shuttering of the Department of Education is a clear example. 

That’s why whenever you hear people arguing for unlimited free speech, you should question their intentions. As a society, we’ve always had rules about where to draw the line on speech or actions that harm people and society. The claims from the right-wing press that free speech is under attack are hypocritical because they, too are arguing for a different form of control over language.

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson says she will use “robust action” to uphold the legal right to ‘Academic Freedom’ established by the 1988 Education Reform Act. But as the University of Sussex points out, this free-for-all approach to speech has a detrimental impact. It’s the same ideology that Musk shares, and we saw what that meant for the hellhole formerly known as Twitter.

If the University of Sussex is unable to overturn this ruling, it will have a chilling effect at universities across the UK. At their best, our unis are bastions of progressive nurturing, but this precedent would undermine their purpose with hateful views when they should be focusing on imagining a better future for our world.

…………………………………………………………………………….

The University of Sussex was fined £585,000 for “failing to uphold freedom of speech”, which is the largest-ever issued by the regulator at around 15 times larger than any other sanction imposed.

The university intends to challenge the fine. Professor Sasha Roseneil, vice chancellor at the university, described the investigation as “Kafkaesque”, adding that the fine was “disproportionate”. She stated: “We will strongly contest these findings and have grave concerns about the implications of its decisions for students and staff, especially those from minoritised groups. Sussex will not be the last to face the challenge of a debate on gender, sex and identity that has become toxic.” 

She added: ”Universities across England are grappling with claims and counterclaims about academic freedom and freedom of speech regarding issues of equality, identity and inclusion. … Levying a wholly disproportionate fine after a flawed, politically motivated, and wasteful investigation – when the higher education sector is in financial crisis – serves no one. ”

A University of Sussex spokesperson confirmed: “We have taken legal advice and, as our Vice-Chancellor Professor Sasha Roseneil has already said, we will be challenging the OfS’s findings proceeding via a judicial review. Our lawyers are currently drafting a pre-action protocol letter.”

Richard Chamberlain, heartthrob actor, dies at the age of 90

Richard Chamberlain, who was dubbed “the King of the miniseries” for his iconic leading performances in some of the most celebrated television productions of the 1980s, came out of the closet to the public in 2003 at the age of 70 in connection with the publication of his memoir “Shattered Love.”

In interviews promoting the book, Chamberlain talked about the difficulty some people face in coming out.

“There’s still a tremendous amount of homophobia in our culture,” he said. “Please, don’t pretend that we’re suddenly all wonderfully, blissfully accepted.”

Chamberlain shot to fame as TV heart throb Dr Kildare on the series of the same name in the 1960s. His dashing good looks won him legions of female fans, as well as some male fans.

Cat-and-mouse game with the press

During middle age, 20 years later, his career spiked once more.

Chamberlain became king of the 1980s TV mini-series after playing a western prisoner in “Shogun” (1980) and a Catholic priest tempted by love in “The Thorn Birds” (1983).

“I played a cat-and-mouse game with the press,” Chamberlain said about keeping his love life private through the years before coming out.

“I had to be very careful and very circumspect. Magazines did lots and lots of interviews, and they sort of suspected. They would ask me questions like, when are you going to get married and have children? I would say, ‘Well, not quite yet. I’m awfully busy.’ I had to be careful for a long time.”

“It was inhibiting,” Chamberlain added. “But I got so used to it that it was just habitual to be sort of careful and on guard in certain situations. Yes, I would’ve been a happier person to be out and free and all that. But I already had so much to be happy about. I was a working actor, and that’s the main thing I wanted out of this lifetime.”

Richard Chamberlain’s death, partner Martin Rabbett

Chamberlain died on 29 March in Waimanalo, Hawaii, of complications from a recent stroke, at the age of 90, just before his 91st birthday.

“Our beloved Richard is with the angels now. He is free and soaring to those loved ones before us,” Martin Rabbett, his life-long partner said. “How blessed were we to have known such an amazing and loving soul. Love never dies. And our love is under his wings lifting him to his next great adventure.”

Rabbet and Chamberlain started their long-term relationship in 1977 and had a commitment ceremony in the 1980s. They remained a couple until 2010 when they separated. But the couple recently resumed living together. Rabbett is a writer, actor and producer, whose credits include “Island Son,” “Finite Water,” “The Bourne Identity,” “All the Winters That Have Been” and “Bare Essence.” He appeared in “Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold with Chamberlain” in 1986.

ALLfm Queeries

In February we advertised a radio opportunity at ALLfm 96.9 on our Facebook page. Eight people from our LGBTQ+ community across Manchester could volunteer to learn how to make radio shows.

We’ve come together and called ourselves “ALL fm Queeries”. The first live show was broadcast on 1 April! You can listen in here.

We were even given certificates for all the hard work we had put in.

Connect, Learn and Join the PROTEST! – Trafford Archives Session

When: Saturday, 5 April 2025 – 11.00am – 3.00pm

Where: Sale Library, Waterside, Sale M33 7ZF

Come and join us and get connected and to your local LGBT+ History. All of us have a personal archive – in a special box, in a messy drawer, in a cherished album … 

We are looking for YOU to share your memories of LGBT+ heritage in Trafford and beyond – badges, gig tickets, posters, home-made banners, zines and almost anything else. We want to digitise and share these important pieces of our shared heritage.

Come and meet our PROTEST! team and get involved – drop in anytime between 11.00am and 3.00pm.

AN AFTERNOON OF FUN AND ACTIVISM

Everyone welcome

For more information or to register your interest email volunteer@iapmcr.co.uk

Research requests

Please consider responding to these research requests. Your assistance will contribute to LGBTQ+ advocacy and improved service provision.

Research for older transgender men, women and non-binary people

Dr Blair Hamilton is a researcher at Manchester Metropolitan University.

They are interested in the bone and muscle health of older transgender people. They are transgender themselves, so they are pretty keen to see what their bone is going to be like when they age! 

They are running a focus group for older transgender men, women and non-binary people who have been on hormone treatment for a little while to see what challenges they face and how we can improve their healthcare.

If there are any participants who would be interested, please contact b.hamilton@mmu.ac.uk.

Travel expenses will be paid for those who are involved.

…………………………………………………………………………………

Research for gay, bisexual and queer men

Luke Sewell is a history undergraduate at Durham University.

His research project Is titled: “What was Princess Diana’s impact on LGBT+ men’s attitude to monarchy?”

He would like to survey and/or interview participants to gather their insights on Princess Diana and the monarchy.

Please see poster which includes a QR code. Alternatively, follow this link: https://forms.office.com/e/AZy15K1YGQ

Transcestry: 10 years of the Museum of Transology

Exhibition: 11 March – 11 May 2025

Lethaby Gallery, 1 Granary Square, London N1C 4AA

Wednesday to Friday, 11.00am – 6.00pm
Saturday & Sunday, 12.00 noon – 5.00pm

Transcestry celebrates the Museum of Transology’s first ten years of community collecting. The exhibition is the largest display of its kind to date, showcasing over 1,000 objects and stories donated by more than 1,000 members of the community celebrating trans, non-binary, and intersex lives.

Transcestry amplifies underrepresented, and often forgotten, stories from the trans community, and celebrates resilience, identity and creativity.

Transcestry is led by E-J Scott, Founder of the Museum of Transology and Senior Lecturer, BA (Hons) Culture, Criticism & Curation. Central Saint Martins students and staff are actively involved, developing accessibility features and exploring innovative curatorial practices and queer gallery design methodologies.

This programme is generously funded by Art Fund and The National Lottery Heritage Fund.

Hope Mill is 200

As part of Hope Mill’s 200 Heritage project, they researched the local LGBTQIA+ history. In this video, join Stewart for a tour of the area:

Transcript:

Thanks to the National Lottery Heritage Fund and National Lottery players, Hope Mill Theatre have spent the past year uncovering the history and heritage of our building and the surrounding areas.

Here at Hope Mill, we are very proud to be an LGBTQIA+ led organisation. So of course we wanted to explore the lives of the queer community that came before us.

I’m outside Hope Mill Theatre at the site of what used to be Star Music Hall. In the 1870s and 80s this was a popular venue hosting a variety of entertainment acts. One of the acts that performed here quite frequently was Toots Minstrels a group of actors, comedians and musicians that toured nationwide and abroad.

Ernest Parkinson was a member of this company and listed as a harpist although he was also known as a female impersonator. Ernest was one of the men who were arrested at the Hulme Drag Ball of 1880. The Hulme Drag Ball was a widely publicised event where police raided a private party taking place at the Temperance Hall in Hulme, Manchester.

Police had suspicions about the immoral character of the event. It was officially booked as the Porn Broker’s Assistants Association Annual Ball but organisers are taken care to cover all the windows of the building raising suspicions even further.

Police burst in and arrested 47 men, 19 of whom were dressed in female clothing, Ernest Parkinson amongst them. It’s incredible to think that this place right opposite our building was not only a theatre but showcased incredible men like Ernest Parkinson who lived their lives with a constant fear of persecution.

We’re here on Every Street at the site of what used to be the Manchester University Settlement about a two-minute walk away from Hope Mill Theatre. The Manchester University Settlement was founded in Ancoats in 1895 with the aim of bringing education and culture to poor communities.

Two extraordinary women associated with the Settlement were Esther Roper and Eva Gore Booth. Esther Roper was born in Chorley, Lancashire in 1858. She was one of the first women to study for a degree at Owen’s College, Manchester and in 1895 she helped establish the Settlement.

In 1896 Esther went on holiday to Italy to recover from exhaustion. Whilst recuperating, she met Eva Gore Booth an Irish poet. The two fell in love and were soon living together in Rusholme, Manchester even declaring themselves joint heads of the household in the 1901 census, a bold move for two women of that time.

During their lifetime Eva and Esther fought tirelessly for women’s rights. They organised protests to protect female dominated professions such as barmaids and flower sellers from damaging legislation. They founded a quarterly publication Women’s Labour News and both were very involved in the suffrage movement advocating for working class women to get the vote.

After Eva’s death in 1926, Esther commissioned a stained glass window to celebrate Eva’s life and preserve her memory. It was part of the roundhouse building here on Every Street but sadly the building was demolished in 1986. These two incredible pioneering women are buried side by side in Hampstead, London with a quote from Sappho on their gravestone.

In May 1861 a man called Thomas Green appeared at Salford Police Court accused of failing to pay his debts. This was not the first time Green had been charged with this offence, and it was his reluctance to pay what he owed to a tailor for a suit of clothes that led to his arrest. He was committed to the New Bailey and after being forced to take a bath it was revealed that he’d been assigned female at birth. The newspaper coverage doesn’t have many details of how he lived as a man but we do know is that at a young age he was dressed as a page whilst in the service of a wealthy lady. At the time of the newspaper article, he was reported to be between 30 to 40 years old and had been living as a man all that time.

We don’t have much more information about Thomas except that he worked as a stitcher and hooker in a mill and was married to a woman. We’re very pleased to report that the marriage was described by his neighbours as a very happy one.

Thank you for taking the time to watch and find out more about the history of the LGBTQIA+ community in Ancoats and Manchester.

Please have a look at our website for more information.

International Transgender Day of Visibility

Each year on 31 March, we honour International Transgender Day of Visibility. We celebrate the joy and resilience of trans and non-binary people everywhere by elevating voices and experiences from these communities.

If you are frustrated with the “erasure of trans history” and continued anti-trans narratives and constantly having to remind opponents that trans people have always been here, read this (rather long) article by Dr Laurie Marhoefer from the University of Washington:

In July 2022, Marie-Luise Vollbrecht, a biology graduate student at Humboldt University in Berlin, got into a debate about history on Twitter. The thirty-two-year-old Vollbrecht had already gained national attention in Germany for her anti-trans, “gender-critical” feminism. She was no stranger to heated exchanges on the social media platform. On this occasion, the debate was about the history of the Holocaust. In a series of tweets, Vollbrecht disputed that the Nazis had persecuted transgender people. To describe trans people as victims of the Nazi state “mocks the true victims of the Nazi crimes,” she wrote.

Vollbrecht’s opponents on Twitter responded, arguing that this was not the case. The debate escalated. Vollbrecht’s critics began to use the hashtag “#MarieLeugnetNS-Verbrechen” (“Marie denies Nazi crimes”). This was a serious accusation. Vollbrecht later asserted that it amounted to saying that she was denying the Holocaust. She responded by filing a lawsuit, in which she alleged that the use of the hashtag violated her rights.

In fall 2022, I was asked by a transgender NGO to write an expert statement (Gutachten) on this case for the court in Cologne (Landgericht Köln). The NGO is the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Transidentität und Intersexualität e.V. (DGTI) (German Society for Trans Identity and Intersexuality), founded in 1998 as a self-support group for and by trans people. DGTI’s mission is to promote social acceptance of trans people. A Twitter account that DGTI helped to run had used the #MarieLeugnetNS-Verbrechen hashtag, and they were one of the parties that Vollbrecht sued. Other historians also wrote expert opinions in this case. Bodie Ashton of the University of Erfurt wrote on behalf of the DGTI. Alexander Zinn of the Fritz Bauer Institute wrote in support of Vollbrecht.

The crux of the lawsuit was whether it was accurate to say that Vollbrecht lied about Nazi crimes against trans people. That is, were transgender people victims of the Nazi state? As it turned out, historians did not agree. The case thus became one of those rare – and sometimes critically important – lawsuits in which a court ruled on the facts of history.

In November 2022, the court in Cologne ruled against Vollbrecht. To my knowledge, this is the first time that a German court has recognised transgender people as victims of the Nazi state.

What follows is the expert statement I wrote for the case. I offer it here with some caution – my work is ongoing and my findings are somewhat preliminary. At the same time, the lawsuit is national news in Germany. The public has a right to know what the state of research on this issue is – even more so since the question of whether the Nazis persecuted transgender people is coming up more and more often, on Twitter and elsewhere.

There is a pernicious assumption that sometimes creeps into this debate: that we can only recognize the humanity of trans people if they suffered horribly at the hands of the Nazis. I reject that. Everyone must recognise the humanity of trans people, regardless of this debate. Moreover, we do not commonly base our ethical principles on what the Nazis did or did not do. Nor should we.

At the same time, historians ought to answer the question. At the moment, we have not done so. The peer-reviewed scholarship on transgender people in Nazi Germany is small. Some of it is fundamentally flawed, as I discuss in the expert statement.

Vollbrecht asserted that to discuss trans victims of Nazism is to “mock” other (that is, cisgender) victims of Nazi violence. She used the term mock, which I take to be a gesture toward the old anti-trans trope of trans people as ridiculous, objects of scornful laughter. Trans people, Vollbrecht suggested in her tweet, are ridiculous. Thus one cannot speak of them in the context of the Holocaust because we cannot laugh about the Holocaust. Here is the flaw in this argument: trans people are not ridiculous, nor was their suffering under the Nazi state. In order to show that, it seems important to publish the statement I provided to a lawyer in the case.

***

Expert statement (Privatgutachten) Dr Laurie Marhoefer, Jon Bridgman Endowed Professor of History, University of Washington, Seattle, USA. Report on the Situation of Trans People during the Nazi Period. 10 October 2022.

The first scholarly publications on transgender people under National Socialism argued that they were not persecuted. To be more specific, one foundational essay argued that they were not persecuted, and another argued that some trans women were, but only insofar as officials mistakenly believed them to be cisgender gay men. This, however, is not accurate. Newer research shows a more complex and more violent situation. The newer scholarship also makes the case that racial status and other factors mattered when trans people ran into trouble with the Nazi state. Trans people were at risk. The risks they ran varied according to other things in their lives. Not all trans people suffered violence. Yet there is a pattern of state hostility and police harassment of trans people, particularly trans women. In some cases, it ended in murder. This change in the literature is due to the growing number of scholars working on the topic, to changes in how we conceptualise Nazi violence more broadly, and to changes in how scholars conceptualise transgender people. It also owes to the digitisation of archival records, which has made police files easier to find.

I am at present engaged in a large research project on transgender people under the Nazi state, part of a broader project on sex and gender “crimes,” funded by the Stroum Center for Jewish Studies at the University of Washington and the Holocaust Education Foundation at Northwestern University. From my years of research and from the published literature, I have knowledge of about twenty-seven cases of transgender men and women in the Nazi period. To my knowledge this is the largest number of cases ever discussed at once. Most scholarship deals with a much smaller number.

Often when one sees the term “persecution (Verfolgung)” in the context of the Nazi state, one thinks foremost of the persecution of Jewish Europeans. The Nazi state systematically rounded up whole communities of Jews and Roma – gay as well as straight, cisgender as well as transgender – deported them, and murdered them. This did not happen to “Aryans.” It did not happen to “Aryans” even if they were accused of “crimes” having to do with sex and gender, such as male-male sex (§175) or “public indecency (Erregung öffentlichen Ärgernisses)” (§183), a charge made against trans people. Without ever losing sight of the Holocaust, we should, however, allow that a group could be “persecuted” even if its members did not face highly organised violence like what Jews and Roma faced. So, for example, we correctly recognise gay men (regardless of racial designation) as a persecuted group. We do so despite the fact that Nazi authorities treated “Aryan” gay men and Jewish gay men in very different ways. “Aryan” men accused of breaking §175 could usually retain a lawyer. They often had a trial before a judge. They were not always found guilty. Most men convicted under §175 served their sentences in prisons, not concentration camps. Some were murdered in the camp system. Some were sent to the camps without trial. That did not happen in all cases. The majority of the approximately 50,000 men convicted under §175 in the Nazi period were “Aryans” who survived the Nazi regime. Alexander Zinn writes in his 2017 book on gay men under the Nazi state:

It is time for a paradigm shift. The reduction of the situation of homosexuals in the “Third Reich” to a history of victims, the focus on an allegedly all-powerful apparatus of persecution and a supposedly deeply homophobic population that used denunciation to help the state exclude homosexual men from the “Volksgemeinschaft” – all of this obstructs one’s view of the considerably more complex picture that emerges when one reads the sources against the grain.

Zinn also argues that “in practice, the National Socialist persecution of homosexuals was certainly considerably less consistent and goal-oriented” than a lot of people believe. Indeed, it is very possible that only a minority of the cisgender men who had sex with men in Nazi Germany ran into trouble with the police, though doubtless all feared the police. Many decades ago, people who opposed recognising gay victims might have asserted that gay men simply had to stop going to bars or having relationships and that then they would be safe, so long as they were “Aryan.” A gay man in Nazi Germany who wanted to be absolutely safe from the police would, indeed, be well advised to avoid bars and relationships. But to move from that reality to a claim that gay men were not victims is nonsensical because we recognize being gay as a fundamental part of a person, one denied only at an unacceptable cost. The same is true of gender identity.

Like “Aryan” gay men, if trans people had “Aryan” status, they were not subjected to a systematic round-up such as what the Nazi state carried out against German Jews. They did, however, face state hostility, harassment, and violence because they were transgender.

Nazi officials generally had negative views of transgender people. In what may be the only Nazi-era book on the topic, the 1938 Ein Beitrag zum Problem des Transvestitismus (Marburg: Hermann Bauer), Hermann Ferdinand Voss writes: “Their asocial mindset, which is often paired with criminal activity, justifies draconian measures by the state.” Prior to the Nazi “seizure of power,” not enough could be done about trans people, he wrote, but happily now, “There is the possibility of putting the people in question in protective custody or possibly having them castrated or, via temporary ‘appropriate detention (entsprechende Internierung)’ to impress upon them that they must put their inclination on hold.” In 1933, Hamburg officials wrote, “Police officials are requested to observe the transvestites, in particular, and as required to send them to concentration camps.” (Historians now recognise that the category “transvestite” corresponded very closely to our modern concept of “transgender.”)

At the time, many countries had anti-cross-dressing laws. Often, these were written to cover other “crimes” as well and used language about “public decency” or similar. They were, however, always intended to police cross-dressing. Between 1848 and the First World War, forty-four American cities passed such laws. So although the Nazi-era penal code does not explicitly refer to “cross-dressing,” it contained two laws that we can now see were intended to suppress it. Police and prosecutors used §183 and, less often, §360 (public nuisance, grober Unfug) against persons who wore clothing that did not correspond to their birth-assigned sex. For example, in the winter of 1944, a Berlin court tried Bruno Erfurth under §183 because Erfurth allegedly went out in public in a woman’s blouse and an “artificial lady’s bust” as well as other pieces of women’s clothing and thereby “caused a public outcry.” There was no allegation of homosexuality recorded in this file. It was purely a cross-dressing case. (Erfurth was found not guilty.)

The Nazi state made transgender lives difficult in another way: by revoking the limited gains won under the Weimar Republic. Even under the Kaiser’s regime before 1914, some police jurisdictions gave permits to “cross-dress” known as “transvestite passports” or more accurately “transvestite certificates” (“Transvestitenscheine”). In the Weimar period (1918-1933) some transgender people legally changed their names. Also in the Weimar period, a very small but vibrant transgender public sphere grew. Transgender people had their own magazines and organisations. Magnus Hirschfeld and his Institute for Sexual Science helped transgender people with legal name changes and police permits and medical treatments. Much of this was destroyed by the Nazis. Hirschfeld was driven into exile and his Institute for Sexual Science was dismantled. Transvestite magazines were shut, as were nightclubs like the Eldorado (Berlin) that showcased trans performers. Because the transvestite certificates had always been locally administered, what to do about them after 1933 seems largely to have been a decision for local officials. Overwhelmingly, police did not honour them after 1933. Not infrequently, they explicitly revoked them, such as in the case of “R” of Berlin, who was directed to stop living as woman, though she had done so for years.

There are a very few known cases where transvestite certificates were reissued under the Nazi state or where a person was allowed a legal name change. They are the exception rather than the rule. By chance, some of these cases came to the attention of historians early on, leading to conclusions that I now question. More and more, historians who work on other aspects of the Nazi state are noticing inconsistencies, even in Nazi racial policy – indeed, as Nunn cogently points out, inconsistency is a feature of modern states. As Zinn notes in the previous quotation, we see complexity in cases of cisgender gay men, too. Indeed, inconsistency in policing, as well as police and prosecutor discretion in enforcing law, are features of modern states. Moreover, even in these cases where trans people got certificates reissued or changed their names under the Nazi state, there are signs of violence. For example, a trans man in Berlin had his permit renewed, but only after he spent months in a concentration camp. Perhaps most importantly, these cases do not tell the whole story. In the large majority of the cases I have seen, permits were revoked and police forced people to stop living as their self-confirmed sex. This caused trans people extreme distress. At least one person seems to have been driven to suicide. In her comments on Twitter, Vollbrecht pointed to the “transvestite certificates” as evidence that trans people were not persecuted by the Nazi state. Looking at the historical record, however, the frequent revocation of these certificates helps to show us the pattern of anti-trans state actions, though that pattern also displays some inconsistencies.

It is the case that some transgender men and women were able to escape violence. For example, in one case, a police search of a person’s apartment found an “artificial lady’s bust.” The accused person said they only wore women’s clothing at home, never in public. Police let this person go but made the person promise to stop wearing the garments in private. In another case that Jane Caplan first brought to light, that of Gerd Kubbe of Berlin, police at first reacted harshly but later showed surprising leniency. Kubbe’s transvestite permit was revoked in 1933. Accused of wearing men’s clothing in public, he was sent to a concentration camp in 1938. Some months later, however, he was released and granted permission to wear men’s clothing and to use the first name “Gerd.” I referred to this case previously as one that demonstrates both violence and state accommodation of transness. It is difficult to know what to make of it. I am not sure that I do yet. I can say, however, that it is unusual. It was, unfortunately, one of the first cases to be published and set a flawed paradigm.

In terms of assessing how often trans people escaped violence, we are at a bit of a loss because the bulk of our evidence is police files. We know about people who ran into trouble with police but have a more limited ability to examine cases where people did not run into trouble with police. Police and prosecutors were ready to resort to violence with relatively little provocation in enough cases that I am comfortable asserting that trans people ran a general risk and were well advised to avoid police.

The Nazi state reserved its worst violence for trans women. In particular, women who came to the attention of police as they continued to live publicly as women after 1933 were in danger. So were transgender women who sold sex. These trans women kept living as women because the alternative – being forced to live as a man – was unbearable, something Nunn shows in R.’s case. One such woman was H. Bode of Hamburg, who often went out in public dressed as a woman, dated men, and had previously held a transvestite certificate. Over the Nazi period, she racked up convictions under §360 and §175. Hamburg officials finally sent her to Buchenwald, where she died in 1943. (I believe Dr. Zinn refers to this case in his Gutachten. Bode was arrested after a night out in Hamburg with her aunt. I want to note that Dr. Zinn does not report the outcome. Bode was murdered. It is clear from the file that her “transvestitism” played a large role in that murder. On this see also Herrn, who reports her death.)

In 1933, Essen police withdrew Toni Simon’s permit and told her to stop wearing women’s clothing. She fled town. Later, she came back, and repeatedly got into trouble – insulting police officers, cavorting with known homosexuals, and breaking a law against anti-regime statements (the Heimtückegesetz), for which she served a year in prison. The final document in her file recommends sending her to a concentration camp. Though police had many reasons to deem Simon a threat to Nazi society, the fact that she was a “pronounced transvestite” was among the central ones.

Liddy Bacroff of Hamburg got a transvestite pass in 1928. She made her living selling sex to male clients. They understood her to be a woman. After 1933, she repeatedly ran into trouble with police. According to what police wrote in her file, she was “fundamentally a transvestite.” That, along with sex work, made her a “morals criminal of the worst sort” who “must therefore be ausgeschaltet (eliminated) from the Volksgemeinschaft (people’s community).” Bacroff was sent to Mauthausten and died there in 1943.

If I may address one final point – some earlier histories asserted that people like H. Bode, Toni Simon, and Liddy Bacroff were only sent to concentration camps because police believed they were gay men. It is the case that Nazi officials denied the gender identification of transgender people. For example, they claimed that Liddy Bacroff was a man even though she lived as a woman and many people whose words are recorded in her file thought she was a woman (including men who had sex with her). Police referred to her as a man although she told them, “My sense of my gender is fully and completely that of a woman.” When trans people gave true accounts of their gender, Nazi police refused to listen. We should not. Trans people were a distinct community of people. They are distinguished by their quests to live as their self-confirmed sex. Determining whether they suffered persecution has nothing to do with the question of why Nazi officials believed they ought to be persecuted.

Moreover, Nazi officials did not simply think trans women were gay men. They recognized trans women as different from gay men in ways that mattered. Nazi officials had a concept of “transvestitism” as distinct from, though related to, homosexuality. To quote Voss’s 1938 book: “By transvestites we generally mean those persons who have the wish to primarily wear the clothing of the other sex and to act more or less as the opposite sex.” In all of the cases I have examined, state officials refer to the accused people as “transvestites,” even when they also identified them as homosexual (which they did not always do). Officials often claimed that transvestitism was an aggravating factor, something that made the case more dire, the accused person more deserving of a heavier sentence. In general, transgender people who could distance themselves from homosexuality were more likely to get off with a warning from police. Yet I have seen cases in which transgender people whom police deemed “heterosexual” nevertheless suffered. One such case is R.’s – police forced her to detransition and she spent time in a concentration camp.

To conclude: though there is a bit of variation and disorganisation, and race matters, we see a pattern of state violence and oppression here, motivated by a hostility specific to transgender people.

North West Computer Museum

Architects Bradshaw, Gass & Hope based in Bolton were the masterminds behind some of the most incredible buildings in the north west during the Industrial Revolution. These included Manchester’s Stock Exchange (1904-06) and the Royal Exchange (1914-21) alongside Leigh Spinners Mill, an iconic Grade II* listed building residing within a large eight acre site.

We visited Mill 2, which was built in 1925. It’s an iconic landmark in Leigh and now 100 years later is a community hub, housing a number of tenants including the North West Computer Museum on the 4^th floor. Luckily, the lift was working!

Whilst there we had a coding taster session on BBC Micro 32K computers which dated back to the 1980s. Liz, our tutor, gave some examples of coding. It’s amazing how computers have changed in such a relatively short period of time.

There was so much to see with hands on exhibits, dating from the 1970s to the present day, including retro arcade games and an internet café.

Tony was tasked with writing down everyone’s lunch orders in the café and was rewarded with a free cup of coffee!

More photos can be seen here.

State of Ageing Report 2025

This year’s State of Ageing report paints a picture of the older population in England, using a variety of national data sources.

The Centre for Ageing Better’s new analysis shows that quite simply, where you are born in England determines how long you live and how well you age.

Living in the poorest parts of England can cost you almost five years of your life. Men living in the poorest areas of the country can expect to live 4.4 fewer years on average than those living in the wealthiest areas of England.

All of us deserve the best possible lives as we grow older, and our whole society reaps the rewards when people can age well. The Centre for Ageing Better’s new analysis of the state of ageing in England in 2025 reveals millions more of us are living into our seventies, eighties, nineties and beyond, in good health, working for longer and supporting our communities through volunteering and caring. 

But this report also highlights that this rosy, positive picture of ageing is unobtainable for many, such as those who are living in poor housing, in poverty and poor health, and who are isolated from their communities and society. The report shows the impact of regional inequalities that determine the quality of people’s later life. Quite simply, where you are born in England determines how you live and how well you age.

This summary report and the accompanying chapters draw attention to the disparities in resources, opportunities and outcomes that exist between different geographic areas – whether regions or local authorities. Inequalities between places in things such as access to decent and affordable housing, access to jobs (and good jobs), and the extent to which these places provide and maintain infrastructure such as transport and public services, give rise to inequalities in outcomes for people, including life expectancy and health.

We need the government and others to take inequalities in ageing seriously and address the lack of political focus that has meant chronic underinvestment in helping people to age well. We also need to address the pervasive ageism in society that produces negative and distorted views of ageing and older people. By doing this, we can properly value and benefit from the contributions of older people to our society.

Download the report here.

Lawrie Roberts, Pride in Ageing Manager at the LGBT Foundation, will be speaking today (27 March 2025) about LGBTQ+ communities at the Age Friendly Futures Summit on a panel titled “Understanding differing experiences of ageing”.

Queer Treasures at the Manchester Central Library – 5

‘A History of Penal Methods: Criminals, Witches, Lunatics’ by George Ives

This is the fifth in a series of articles about queer treasures that are currently found in the Archives held at Manchester Central Library.

George Cecil Ives (1867-1950) was an English writer of Uranian poetry and an early campaigner for homosexual law reform. Whilst at University at Magdalene College in Cambridge, he became interested in penal reform, and being gay himself, was particularly concerned with the way that the state dealt with those minorities whose lives involved transvestism and homosexuality. He was also a successful cricketer, briefly playing for the Marylebone Cricket Club.

In 1892 he met Oscar Wilde and endeavoured to recruit him to ‘the Cause’, which Ives defined as the ending of the legal and social oppression of homosexual love. The following year he also met Lord Alfred Douglas, with whom he had a brief affair.

By 1897, Ives had founded the Order of Chaeronea, a secret organisation for homosexuals, whose members occasionally gathered together and talked about their own lives and about how positive legal and social changes for homosexuals could be effected. Ives was also a friend of Edward Carpenter and, in 1913, he, together with Carpenter, Magnus Hirschfeld, Laurence Houseman and others, founded the British Society for the Study of Sex Psychology, which aimed to bring about progressive social change by promoting and supporting the scientific study of sex. Ives visited prisons across Europe, took part in international conferences on penal reform and wrote books and articles to promote his ideas.

Out of this study of, and engagement with, prison reform, came his 1914 work, on ‘A History of Penal Methods’. After looking at a variety of criminal behaviours and, in particular, the treatment meted out historically towards those who do not conform to rigid social norms, such as witches and the mentally ill, he turned his attention to homosexuals, pleading for a radical legal transformation in society’s approach to the whole issue. In his writings his employment of language can be seen to reflect the vocabulary of his age, by his use of the terms ‘sexual inverts’ and ‘homogenic attraction’ to refer to LGBT men and women.

Ives chided the fact that there was limited general understanding about sexuality, as the subject was often deemed unsuitable for public discussion. He argued however, that ‘if the legislator makes one theory of the psychology of sex the basis for passing a law which sends citizens to penal servitude, it is impossible to shut out such a theory from public discussion’ (p291). He was determined to argue the case for the reform of laws that constrained LGBT people, which he did for the rest of his life.

Ives posited same-sex attraction as ‘an innate instinct’ (p294) and that –

The sexual inverts may be compared to the left-handed. They are indeed always a minority in every population, but an eternal minority which neither laws nor even religious systems have ever altogether swept away … the names of some of them are written for all time in the world’s history. (p292)

He maintained that sexual inversion was ‘A deep inevitable impulse’ which ‘could never … be penalised out of existence’ (p295) but that legislators had refused to listen and so, ‘hopelessly, the unfortunate inverts have been left to policemen.’

In his book, Ives reviews the theories of progressive contemporary British and Continental sexologists to suggest a ‘latent bisexuality in each sex’ (p299) but that ‘Custom, education, costume and maternity have all tended to accentuate the difference and obliterate the likeness of the two sexes …’ (p299).  Human variety had not however been totally eradicated and ‘thus among the infinite kinds of combination we also find the homogenic union’ (p300).

Ives points towards continental criminal codes (France, Italy etc) where ‘an age of consent is allowed for homosexuality to both sexes above which the law refrains from interference’ (p361) and urges that this be applied to other penal codes. Sadly English ‘inverts’ had to wait almost 100 years later, until 2001, for an equal age of consent to become a reality.

Generally less well-known than Edward Carpenter or Magnus Hirschfeld, Ives was nevertheless at the forefront of campaigning for the equal treatment of queer people before the law in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries. He, and other reformers who worked energetically for what were, then, unpopular causes, laid much of the groundwork for the rights we enjoy today.

Arthur Martland © 2025

International Women’s Month

This year, the theme of International Women’s Day was “Accelerate Action.” The theme emphasises the importance of taking swift and decisive steps to achieve gender equality.

Every March, Women’s History Month seeks to raise awareness of the social and historical contributions and achievements of women. This year’s theme is “Moving Forward Together! Women Educating & Inspiring Generations”.

In light of that, we decided to look at LGBT+ women from history who took bold, brave steps to live their lives as they wanted to, refusing to let prejudice or misogyny prevent them from being themselves. From 17th century sword-slingers to 20th century movie stars and activists, here are some favourite trailblazers.

1. Julie d’Aubigny (1670 – 1707)

Where to start with Julie? Better known as Mademoiselle Maupin or La Maupin, this 17th century sword-slinger and opera singer became involved with a young woman, whose parents later put her in a convent.

In order to get her lover back, she entered the convent, stole the body of a dead nun, placed it in her lover’s bed and set the room on fire so that they could escape together.

What a woman!

2. The Ladies of Llangollen (1739 – 1829, 1755 – 1831)

The Ladies of Llangollen, Eleanor Butler and Sarah Ponsonby, were two upper-class Irish women who lived together in Llangollen, Wales, and whose relationship scandalised and fascinated their contemporaries.

Some consider Butler and Ponsonby’s relationship to be a Boston marriage, or a romantic relationship between two women who chose to live together and have “marriage-like relationships”.

3. Anne Lister (1791 – 1840)

Anne Lister was a landowner, diarist, mountaineer and traveller who kept diaries which chronicled her life, including her lesbian relationships.

However, the LGBT+ info was written in code, derived from a combination of algebra and Ancient Greek.

She had an affair with a wealthy heiress called Ann Walker, who she later married (without legal recognition), provoking uproar in polite society.

4. Jane Addams (1860 – 1935)

Jane Addams was a pioneering figure in the American suffrage movement. Also an activist, social worker, public philosopher and author, she was involved with several women throughout her lifetime.

Most significantly, Addams was in a relationship with Mary Rozet Smith, and according to historian Lilian Faderman, she addressed Mary as “My Ever Dear”, “Darling” and “Dearest One” in letters.

The couple were together for 40 years and wrote to each other constantly when apart. “I miss you dreadfully and am yours ‘til death,” read one letter from Addams to Smith.

5. Virginia Woolf (1882 – 1941)

Writer Virginia Woolf’s bisexuality is pretty hard to argue with. She had a relationship with fellow writer Vita Sackville-West in the early 1920s.

In a letter to Vita, Virginia described telling her sister Nessa about their affair, where she wrote: “I told Nessa the story of our passion in a chemist’s shop the other day. ‘But do you really like going to bed with women’ she said – taking her change. ‘And how’d you do it?’ and so she bought her pills to take abroad, talking as loud as a parrot.”

6. Eleanor Roosevelt (1884 – 1962)

Eleanor Roosevelt was known to have been allowed to have an affair by her straying husband – and she chose reporter Lorena ‘Hick’ Hickock.

Following Eleanor’s death, a series of letters were unearthed. Although most were destroyed by the Roosevelt family, one letter read: “I want to put my arms around you & kiss you at the corner of your mouth.”

In another 1933 letter, Eleanor wrote: “I want to put my arms around you. I ache to hold you close … Your ring is a great comfort to me. I look at it and think she does love me, or I wouldn’t be wearing it.”

7. Mercedes de Acosta (1893 – 1968)

An American poet, playwright and novelist, Mercedes de Acosta wasn’t famed for her writing, rather for her many lesbian affairs with Hollywood stars.

She’s possibly best-known for her long-term romance with Greta Garbo, and was also involved with Russian ballerina Tamara Karsavina.

8. Alla Nazimova (1879 – 1945)

Alla Nazimova, an actress, was credited with coming up with the phrase ‘sewing circle’ as a code name for her and her fellow lesbian or bisexual Hollywood actresses.

She openly had relationships with women, and her Sunset Boulevard mansion was believed to be the home of some pretty exciting parties.

9. Audre Lorde (1934 – 1992)

African-American writer Audre Lorde was also a civil rights activist who famously said: “Those of us who stand outside the circle of this society’s definition of acceptable women; those of us who have been forged in the crucibles of difference – those of us who are poor, who are lesbians, who are Black, who are older – know that survival is not an academic skill.

It is learning how to take our differences and make them strengths. For the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.

They may allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about genuine change. And this fact is only threatening to those women who still define the master’s house as their only source of support.”

10. Ruth Ellis (1899 – 2000)

Ruth Ellis was an African-American woman and LGBT+ rights activist who came out when she was just 16.

In the 1920s, she met her partner of 30 years, Ceciline ‘Babe’ Franklin, and their Detroit home became a refuge for African-American LGBT+ people.

11. Marion Barbara ‘Joe’ Carstairs (1900 – 1993)

A wealthy British power boat racer, Marion Barbara ‘Joe’ Carstairs often dressed as a man, had tattoos and loved adventure and speed.

She was openly gay and had many affairs with women, including Dolly Wilde (Oscar Wilde’s niece), Greta Garbo, Tallulah Bankhead and Marlene Dietrich.

12. Gladys Bentley (1907 – 1960)

Gladys Bentley was an American blues singer, pianist and entertainer during the Harlem Renaissance, and is a significant figure for the LGBT+ community and African-Americans.

She dressed in men’s clothes when she performed, backed up by a chorus line of drag queens, played piano and sang in a deep, growling voice while flirting with women in the audience.

Gladys Bentley, and all of the other women on this list, helped move things forward for women’s and LGBT+ rights just by being so unapologetically themselves, at a time when women were expected to conform to men’s expectations.

George House Trust celebrates 40 years of helping people with HIV

It’s 40 years since George House Trust was set up in a small office in central Manchester, starting as a once-a-week helpline run by volunteers.

Since then it is estimated to have helped over 100,000 people across the North West providing advice, support and information for those living with and affected by HIV.

It started in 1985 when six gay HIV activists set up Manchester AIDSline in response to the arrival of the HIV virus in Manchester. The City Council formed an ‘AIDS Working Party’ and the North Western Regional Health Authority began to support Manchester AIDSline financially. As support developed, they began providing more targeted and tailored services, such a befriending support and information resources for professionals. The AIDSline changed it’s name to George House Trust in 1990.

Anita Binns is one of those who’re grateful for their help.

In 1995, after giving blood, she found out she was HIV positive, along with her husband and young son. George House Trust helped her navigate a path through what was a very scary time for Anita, who was completely in the dark about living with the disease.

She said: “At the time there was no medication so we were literally given an aids diagnosis, we had to put our life in order to make sure our family would be looked after.”

“We didn’t know if we were going to live, would we be there for our children would we die before our children?”

They also supported her when she was discriminated against at work because of her diagnosis. “When you walked through the door they could answer your questions, if it wasn’t for George House Trust I wouldn’t be here” she told Granada Reports.

This year as it celebrates its 40th anniversary ,the charity will use a £150,000 grant from The National Lottery to tell the story of HIV across Greater Manchester and the associated activism, heroism, passion and loss.

The project manager Joseph Tanzer is working with Manchester Archives+ to appraise and catalogue George House Trust’s physical and digital archive material and preserve this by depositing it at Manchester Central Library.

At the end of the project in March 2026, people can learn about the history of HIV activism in Greater Manchester and this will lead to change in outdated perceptions and increased awareness about HIV and tackling HIV stigma.

Paul Fairweather, the co-founder of George House Trust said: “People are now so much more aware, we talk to a lot of young people and I think they are far more aware about the facts around HIV, but there are still many people whose physical health is fine but their mental health isn’t, they are isolated and have not told anyone about living with HIV”

To bring transmission rates down the Government has pledged £27 million for opt-out testing in emergency departments, something George House Trust is helping to deliver.

Dr Orla McQuillan is a consultant at the Northern Sexual Health and HIV Service, she said: “The most important thing is to get tested and get diagnosed because we know know that HIV is a different world and once you are diagnosed we can look after you and treatment is actually quite easy to take.”

Watch video via this link.

George House Trust wins GSK Impact Award

George House Trust has scooped one of this year’s GSK Impact Awards, a sought-after accolade for health care charities in the UK. 

The awards are widely seen as a mark of excellence in the charity health sector and are designed to recognise outstanding small and medium-sized charities working to improve people’s health and wellbeing in the UK. 

As an award winner, George House Trust will now receive £40,000 in unrestricted funding, as well as a place on a highly sought-after leadership development programme provided by The King’s Fund.

Amongst other services – destitution payments, formula milk donations, support groups – George House Trust has also played a vital role in reaching out to the fastest-growing, yet often underrepresented, demographic of people living with HIV – over 50s.

Naomi Sloyan, 58, a user of George House Trust who now works at the charity, said: “I went through a year of being desperately ill, often hospitalised. It was quite a traumatic experience, really, because it wasn’t picked up early.”

But Sloyan believes her story, as well as George House Trust’s Ageing Well programme, is breaking down the stereotypical image of someone living with HIV, meaning faster treatment and support for people in whom the disease may previously have gone undiagnosed.

The GSK Impact Award will further raise George House Trust’s profile, helping to achieve its aims of normalising, de-stigmatising, and combatting HIV throughout the Northwest.

Rainbow Lottery Super Draw!

Please support Out In The City by buying a Rainbow Lottery ticket or two (or more!)

With each Rainbow Lottery ticket, you are not just entering to win exciting prizes, you are also supporting our mission to support older LGBT+ people.

It’s a vital part of our fundraising as we receive 50p for every £1 spent and you have the chance to win cash prizes each week from £25 for three numbers up to a jackpot of £25,000 for six numbers – while helping us to achieve more for the LGBT+ communities over 50 years.

Buy tickets here.

In this weekend’s Super Draw (Saturday, 29 March) one lucky supporter will win an amazing Home Robot Bundle – or of course, a £1,000 cash alternative or the option to plant 1,000 trees with projects available all around the world! Put your feet up and relax, while your new Roomba Combo J5 takes care of all the floors in your home with its vacuuming AND mopping options, while outside, your Lawnmaster L12 Robot Mower is hard at work, keeping your lawn under control, all whilst you kick back with a cup of tea (and we’ll even throw in the teabags!)  Or as always, the winner can opt for the £1,000 cash alternative, and spend it your way or plant 1,000 trees if the main prize doesn’t appeal to you!

Play Now!

Come and Sing this Spring!

Join Manchester’s LGBTQ+ low-voice choir for an exciting project. No experience needed!

The Sunday Boys are giving you the chance to learn beautiful acappella pop songs, and perform in an informal concert.

Email: info@thesundayboys.com for more information and to register your interest.

Rehearsals dates and times

Sunday 30 March: 5.30pm – 7.45pm

Sunday 6 April: 5.30pm – 7.45pm

Sunday 13 April: 5.30pm – 7.45pm

Sunday 27 April: 4.30pm – 6.30pm

Venue

Halle St Michaels, 36-38 George Leigh Street, Ancoats, Manchester M4 5DG

Performance & Social

On Sunday 27 April at 7.00pm, we will share a relaxed, informal performance lasting about 20 – 30 minutes. It’s the perfect chance to showcase your wonderful voices to family and friends!

Get involved

The participation fee for the project is £40 (but the fee is negotiable).