Gay Bars versus Apps

I randomly came across this video (click on link above to hear the discussion from Rise and Fall of “Men of the Den” on YouTube). You make good points.

As a disabled and queer person, I do not see gay bars in quite such a rosy light. I live in the suburbs of Manchester, England, which has its own gay Village. For me the vast majority of the venues and in some cases the actual streets are inaccessible to me.

When I have visited, prices are high - too high! And the area is inundated with groups of young wimmin, supposedly seeking safer spaces. Many LGBTI folk have deserted the Village and prefer to mix with straights in the less expensive, boho Northern Quarter. From my perspective, this area is far more disabled-accessible and thus disabled-friendly.

Living in the suburbs, there is a dearth of gay bars. However, I am fortunate to reside in an affluent and tolerant community. Nonetheless, it is very often difficult to know who is queer or straight these days for various reasons. So, for myself and others, using apps helps us make friends and acquaintances, folk with whom we chat online about art, politics and so forth. In my case, my housemate & I also have been introduced to queer neighbours and arranged a meet-up in our local pub. I have also used apps to make friends with folk in foreign lands prior to visiting on holidays.

Apps usually do not discriminate against disabled queers; bars often do discriminate due to lack of accessibility. For me there is no real-world gay community; there is however a very real online one.

%)

In/accessible Europe (5): Glasgow Gay Nightscene

Last year I blogged on disabled in/accessibilty in Manchester's Gay Village. Manchester City Council are not interested in determining what venues in Manchester are accessible, whether for its own residents or for (potential) tourists. Manchester's main LGBTI organisation, The Lesbian & Gay Foundation, is similarly disinterested, although they have given me the opportunity to write about the issue for them. With one in eight folk in the UK being disabled, one can but assume in the absence of any research that one in eight of Manchester's population, that one in eight queer folk are also disabled. Businesses and thus taxpayers are losing out on a mainly untapped market. Disabled folk's lives are diminished by not being able to fully participate. And this is despite it being eighteen years since the original Disability Discrimination Act was introduced in 1995.

The following is a reblog with permission from the author Rob McDowall of LGBT Network. It highlights related issues in Glasgow's LGBT service industries.

[Image description: gay rainbow flag background; international disabled symbol on top.]

Is being LGBT and disabled: The final taboo?

You may have heard of the story of Robert and Nathan Gale who were refused access to Glasgow’s Polo Lounge on 14th June due to Robert being in a wheelchair. The couple decided to attend the gay club to celebrate after winning an award at the Scottish Charity Awards for their work on the Scottish marriage equality campaign and soon discovered the door staff and manager had other ideas.

Glasgow’s gay scene is dominated by one organisation with the lion’s share of the most well-known and well attended gay bars being owned by millionaire businessman Stefan King’s G1 Group. Aside from the usual consideration of lack of competition some believe there can be positives in marketplace domination which can result in cheaper prices for the customer due to the stronger buying power the establishment wields. Having lived and socialised in Glasgow for the last twelve years I have noticed the increasing grip that G1 has on Glasgow’s gay scene and have seen the prices rise, choices reduced and the ‘shut up or stay out’ attitude flourish. Gone are the days when complaints are seen to provide an opportunity for improvement and when the business will take great care and attention to ensure the customer is happy. In Glasgow many gay people are only too aware of the hasty sanctions dished out by G1 managers for daring to write a letter or email of complaint.

As someone who lives in chronic pain following a horse-riding accident as a child, I use a crutch most of the time and can find it very difficult on a bad day to ascend and descend stairs. It is equally difficult to try and squeeze into a small cubicle while keeping my foot against the door due to the broken or absent locks within the Polo Lounge toilets. I refuse to stand at the urinal due to the two-way mirror to the right of the urinals which would give anyone walking into the toilet clear sight down the line of urinals. Happy to report however that the growing disgust over the two-mirrors in the female toilets of G1’s Shimmy club has led to the two-way mirror in Polo Lounge’s male toilets being covered up with a black vinyl and gold material—not very fetching, but it serves its purpose

In my capacity as Chair of the LGBT Network, I was contacted by three disabled patrons in April who reported similar entry refusals at Polo and I put pen to paper and sent a complaint letter to Polo Lounge and G1’s head office. Needless to say I am still awaiting a substantive reply. In what I have come to expect typical G1 standard operations my follow up emails, letter and telephone calls have failed to raise any reply at all, let alone a satisfactory one. G1 are no strangers to controversy; as mentioned above the Shimmy Club attracted widespread repulsion at the revelation that men could hire out a room which featured a two-way mirror facing into the women’s toilets and since the news broke Glasgow City Council have imposed a week long closure order by suspending the club’s liquor license for putting women and teenagers at risk from “predatory behaviour”. In April 2010 a blind musician was told she wouldn’t be allowed into G1’s Underground nightclub in Dundee because the club’s insurance “did not cover blind people” and her cane was “too dangerous” for other patrons.

The LGBT community are marginalised enough in a hetero-normative society and many seek a safe and courageous space where they can be themselves without any pressure, we are told, to confirm or to adhere to societal ‘norms’. Gone are the days of the dark, dismal and shoddy clubs that only the regulars knew about with entrances at the bottom of alleyways replaced by glitzy and glamorous, ‘loud and proud’ establishments with glamorous promotions, street PR teams and pride flags standing proudly above doorways. One only has to look to Manchester or Soho to see the influence the LGBT community have had on the area in which they live and socialise. Parts of the Merchant City is to Glasgow what Canal Street is to Manchester; a collection of ‘gay’ or ‘gay friendly’ pubs and clubs within a well-defined area. Glasgow currently has nine licensed premises which define as ‘gay’ or ‘gay orientated’ with all of them being within a 10 minute walk of Glasgow Central and Queen Street stations. In addition to the main ‘gay’ nightspots a number of establishments dotted within most areas of the city are very non-specific and offer a welcoming and tolerant nightclubbing or beer swilling experience to heterosexual and the LGBT communities alike.

You may imagine that with the Stonewall riots etched into our memories and years of blatant homophobia, intolerance and hate that ‘gay’ pubs and clubs would throw open their doors and welcome the LGBT community, in all their shapes and forms, with open arms… well, you would be wrong! Image is everything and, regardless of the labels we wear, intolerance is all too rife within the LGBT community especially when it comes to socialising in an LGBT orientated nightspot and you happen to be disabled. Disability is a label which comes in all sizes and fonts and some people identify as disabled while others don’t. It is a label like all others and it’s one which in one respect may improve one’s life with regards the ability to secure the support, care and assistance one needs to play a full part in society but is one which all too often can be used to hit one over the head and create division and barriers to the enjoyment and living of life. Disability is a reality for someone living as a disabled person and disabilities come in all shapes and sizes… gone are the disability registers and Hello is the Equality Act with its very open and legalistic definition of a disability and who may be treated as a ‘disabled person’ in law. Accessibility, or in the cases highlighted above, the lack thereof, is a major point of consideration for any disabled person when choosing where to visit and when, and while where your friends prefer going is important, for a disabled person the existence or absence of a ramp, accessible bathroom and wider doorways for access and egress may be the deal breaker. After one too many beers or shots many of us may end up crawling at the end of the night but who would expect to start their night by having to demonstrate their ability to convey themselves from point A to point B while causing themselves pain, discomfort, and probable embarrassment by crawling across the floor like Robert Gale in the Scotsman article mentioned above. It isn’t my idea of fun and I’m pretty confident it wasn’t Robert’s or his doting partner’s either.
Prejudice exists in all factions in society and is class, race and gender blind and sprawls across all territories and countries throughout the world. The presentation of prejudice may change from one region or country to another but the premise is the same and the effects on the victim and society are comparable. I am not a crazy far-left liberal who wants to create an ‘adopt a disabled person’ day or mandate for the compulsory closing of non-accessible establishments, all I am asking for Is for planning, common sense and compassion when it comes to accessibility and making reasonable adjustments for disabled patrons. I feel it is perfectly reasonable for a multimillionaire businessman to make adaptations to the building at the Polo Lounge which actually houses three G1 ‘gay’ establishments (or four if you count the club within a club) with all but one of them sharing the same toilet facilities.

I raised Robert’s and Nathan’s experience with the Equality and Human Rights Commission in Scotland and their Head of Legal told me ‘There is a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people when providing goods, facilities or services. What can be considered “reasonable” will vary depending on the circumstances, but service providers must anticipate the needs of disabled people and ensure they meet the law. Every effort should be made to make the business/service as inclusive as possible.

‘A disabled person should never be made to feel humiliated or disenfranchised by the behaviour of a service provider. Unfortunately the truth is that not all services or buildings are accessible to disabled people, but at the very least everyone should be afforded basic dignity and respect.’

The building housing the Polo Lounge at 84 Wilson Street, Glasgow is a Grade A listed building and while the Equality Act 2010 and its predecessor the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) does not override other legislative provisions in relation to making adaptations to listed buildings and those businesses occupying listed buildings are still required to make the necessary adaptations to comply with the Equality Act. Service providers are required to make the necessary application to the relevant local authority, in this case Glasgow City Council for consent to carry out the adaptations required to bring the facilities to a compliant standard. While G1 may assert that their occupation of a Grade A listed building would prevent them from making any substantial changes to the fabric of the building, this would be a defence of convenience and unless permission from the council has been sought and refused then the defence asserted becomes transparent.

I trust that with the media spotlight on G1 again, that Stefan King will take this opportunity to put things right and will properly engage with and listen to the often silent members of the disabled LGBT community most of whom it would appear from recent events and behaviours are not welcome in G1’s gay venues within Glasgow.

Robert and Nathan Gale setup a Facebook group which calls for people to boycott G1′s establishments and lists ways people can assist their campaign including writing to Glasgow City Council’s licensing board and attending a demonstration which is still to be planned. The couple has asked G1 for a written apology and compensation in addition to various pieces of information regarding disability access.

What do you think? Is the LGBT community accepting of disabilities? Do you have any experiences of G1 regarding access problems for disabled people?

*********

For Update see here.

In/accessible Europe (3): Manchester's Gay Village

For Blogging Against Disablism Day, BADD 2012, I wrote an article entitled “Sexual Eunuchs?” (q.v.) looking at what it can be like being both disabled and queer. In said article I referred to Manchester’s Gay Village quarter and stated that I never saw disabled folk out and about there, save for the deaf. I thought it time to gird my loins and check out some accessibility issues when I went to commemorate “Alan Turing - A Gay Hero” (q.v.). After doing so, I was in need of a drink and the toilet, in that order.

All the venues opposite the entrances to Sackville Park on Sackville Street had short flights of steps in order to enter (either outside or inside), so thus rendering them all inaccessible.

As it was almost empty on the lower side of Canal Street, I allowed myself to be pushed in my wheelchair along the road.

Bar Below was in a basement down a flight of stairs - inaccessible.

Villaggio was up a short flight of steps - inaccessible.

Eden was across a bridge and down a flight of stairs - inaccessible.

New Union Hotel has a step up - inaccessible without assistance.

Manto had flat access - accessible.

[Image description: the writer in his wheelchair outside the flat entrance to Manto.]

It had been more than a decade since I had last been to Manto. At that point I was still ambulant. Whilst sitting in my chair at the bar, I held a note of the realm in my hand, the bar-lass enquired of my companion as to our order. I promptly chirped up. And the lass apologised unsolicited, thus negating any ill-feeling.

[Inage description: the author enjoying a chat & a drink inside the bar.]

We took our drinks and settled down for a natter, but before leaving I wished to use the WC. I wheeled myself to the bar and enquired whether there was a disabled toilet. A gentleman disappeared behind a door and eventually re-appeared with a key. Unfortunately a fruit-machine and a cash-machine were located opposite a pillar, so it took me a multi-point manœuvre to navigate the obstacles. The chap opened the door and immediately vanished. Another twenty-odd-point turn was required. There was no handle on the inside of the door, so I had to twist (painfully) behind me and exert pressure near the hinge to get the door to gradually pull towards me. I managed to effect my ablutions, but was unable to wash my hands as there was no soap and nothing with or upon which to dry one’s hands. Then I had the difficult task of reversing out and turning in a very narrow gap. Thankfully a young lady came to my rescue otherwise I may have been there for some time.

Whilst I am thankful that Manto’s was accessible and had a disabled WC, as my account elucidates, the toilet was not really accessible without assistance.

This experience prompted me to see whether an internet search might suggest any useful information. I inputted “disabled Manchester” which gave me accessible hotels, but not bars and restaurants. Then I tried “wheelchair accessible Manchester”. This returned no useful data.

Next I thought an enquiry or two on the official tourist information site for Manchester would surely throw up some positive results. Unfortunately www.visitmanchester.com has no specific disabled or accessible section. The exact same seven results were returned in a search using “disabled” and “disability”. The term “accessible” was so broad that it resulted in a large number of useless links.

Well, I thought, surely the Lesbian & Gay Foundation’s site, www.lgf.org.uk, would lead me to what I was after. Similar to Visit Manchester, there was no specific section and search results returned no useful data on accessible venues in the gay village. I have read through LGF’s “Promoting Equality” document (q.v.) and find no direct mention of sub groups of LGBT folk, such as the disabled, race, gender. However, I note that they intend to “Conduct an innovative programme of research to identify the needs of LGB(sic) people.” I do hope that includes finding ways to communicate with queer folk who cannot access the village.

All in all, I am quite saddened, frustrated and, to be honest, ashamed that Manchester does not have readily available and up-to-date information on disabled-accessible venues and preferably broken down into types, such as wheelchair-users, mobility-impaired, etc. If the information is there - somewhere - it needs to be more overt. Such information would be a boon to Mancunians as well as visitors and tourists.

Sexual Eunuchs?

[Image description: wheelchair user icon with another person sitting on wheelie's lap facing wheelie.]

I imagined having a photograph at the top of this article. It would have been of two naked men having sex. Nothing unusual in that one may consider. However, I wanted one of the chaps to be in a wheelchair or at least visibly physically disabled. Alas, I could not track one down.

To me this was rather surprising. Inputting 'gay disabled sex' into the Google search-engine returned 178,000 hits. Over the first six pages only three items were serious articles, the rest were links to porn sites. I clicked on a few, but none really seemed to offer what was on the label, but rather were simply channelling able-bodied pornography.

Perhaps I should not have felt so astonished at my inability to locate a photo. The issue of straight (heterosexual) disabled sex only really started being the focus of feminist writers in the 1980's. No doubt I just have not found them, but the only article I discovered that directly referred to men was T. Shakespeare's 1999 article "The sexual politics of disabled masculinity". No wonder I could not find items relating to gay/bisexual/queer disabled menfolk! (Actually, after a subsequent brain-wave, I did locate some academic research articles via Google Scholar (q.v.).)

We seem to be almost invisible, at least to the mainstream. Why is this? I rarely frequent Manchester's gay village as many of the venues are not accessible. Moreover its streets are uneven, and I am likely to fall when able to walk and I am too embarrassed/proud to be wheelchaired, as I prefer to be independent and wheel myself when needing to use my chair. I am not saying they do not exist, but I have never seen anyone in a wheelchair there. Nor anyone with dark glasses and a white cane. I have never seen an amputee. Nor someone physically mutated by pharmaceuticals. I have never seen an obvious burns victim. Never even seen someone else walking with a stick. The only visibly disabled folk I have observed in bars are the deaf, with their hearing-aids and signing.

Perhaps gay culture's obsession with the body beautiful is at fault? Or, perhaps it is we disabled folk's fault: for not asserting our right to participate, to be accepted; for not accepting ourselves in our physicality and sexuality; for not pursuing alternative eroticisms?

Research has demonstrated that most able-bodied pity we disabled or, worse, abuse us. We are objects for charity. Certainly not erotic objects of desire. Usually we are perceived as being child-like or asexual - 'sexual eunuchs' if you will.

Many factors militate against disabled minds and bodies being able to engage in sexual relations, including: accessibility; negative attitudes; transport; assistance; and, above all, trying to find that willing desirable someone. (All of these could be the germ of an article in themselves.)

Manchester has dozens of support groups for gay this, queer that; but I could unearth only one for disabled folk, the hearing-impaired. (Bless 'em!) However, there is nothing I could join. I once wrote to the main Mancunian LGBT support group enquiring whether they knew of any gay disabled groupings. They did not even bother to reply. (This particularly hurt because, when able-bodied, I used to do volunteer work on their behalf.)

I perceive myself as almost imperceptible: partly due to being mainly house-bound; partly because I do not feel able to fully express who I am. I'm not after sex three times a day, once a week, even once a month; but every now and then would be a great start. I still have needs and desires. My disability did not geld me.

I wish I could have found that image of queer wheelchair sex in the real world, not just in my head...


This article is part of "Blogging Against Disablism Day".