We tend to think of 'closets' and attendant secrecy and disclosure as distinctive elements of lesbian and gay life. Well, not any more... Before the rise of urban, industrialised societies, it tended to be the case that same-sex interactions took place in same-sex only environments, so there may well have been abundant amounts of lesbian nuns and gay monks. However, they didn't see themselves as such, given that the frame of reference was 'sodomy', a bizarre portmanteau phantasmagoria of gay sex, non-procreative heterosexuality, bestiality, incest and pedophilia. Outside the monasteries and nunneries, distinctive same-sex only identities were restricted largely to the monarchies and higher aristocracy. With the rise of urbanisation and industrial capitalism, cities grew and so did nooks and crannies where discrete same-sex social networks could be conducted under constant police scrutiny, usually in pubs or in saunas or Turkish baths for men. Women socialised in the nascent women's suffrage movement and some of them had same-sex relationships, although the rise of mass lesbian social networks really took off in the wake of the barrier and pill contraceptive revolutions of the twentieth century. At long last, lesbians and gay men were able to lead lives centred on their own sexual practices and desires, which formed into distinctive social identities. After the development of gender reassignment surgery, so did the transgender communities. Problem was, in a heterosexist society, the normative assumption was that everyone was straight. Before the advent of decriminalisation and anti-discrimination laws, involuntary disclosure of sexual identity could mean violence, homelessness, unemployment or imprisonment, or blackmail or suicide. Finally, from the sixties onward, that situation changed, as decriminalisation and anti-discrimination laws provided for increased opportunities for social space and interaction, as well as the rise of a pink economy. As time went on, the age of identity recognition has crept steadily back, so we now have lesbian and gay youth support groups at high schools. Indeed, it is almost redundant to use the term 'coming out' in this context- some LGBT adolescents were never 'in!' This has led to some realisation that we aren't the only ones that experience the secrecy, disclosure and identity affirmation or denigration routine. It has become increasingly common for conservative Christians to conceal their straight or gay extramarital or unmarried dalliances, only to be disclosed as adulterers or engaged in gay sex 'on the side' and then 'outed'. Richard Worth, Ted Haggard, US Senator Larry Craig, former Democratic Unionist Party candidate Paul Berry, former Democratic Unionist Party MP Iris Robinson, (not so) "exgay" psychologist George Rekers, Californian Senator Roy Ashburn, Jim Bakker- the list is almost endless and amusing when it comes to those who pontificate about consensual adult gay sex and then turn out to either be hypocrites or quite "robust" heterosexuals (...). Mind you, is outing justifiable when it occurs through the malicious agency of possible homophobes, against those who have done us no harm, such as former NSW State Transport Minister David Campbell and newly appointed UK Treasury Minister David Laws? No. On the other hand, what if the outing doesn't involve sexual identity, and the secrecy, disclosure and identification sequence involves financial transactions or improper business conduct or relationships while in public office? In those contexts, disclosure and identification is in the public interest, especially if criminality is involved. At the recent British general election, another phenomenon emerged, not unknown here. What happens if someone turns out to have bizarre or eccentric fundamentalist religious views? Such seemed to be the case with UK Tory candidate Philippa Stroud, although she has subsequently denied that she once or ever believed that lesbians and gay men were 'demonically possessed' when she ran a Pentecostal homelessness and alcohol and drug addiction treatment charity, the Kings Arms Trust. It is not unknown in New Zealand, either. More serious, though, is the question of concealed, disclosed and historical child sexual abuse. In this context, victims of child sexual abuse, be it pedophilia or incest, suffer from trauma, self-mutilation, attempted or completed suicide, mental illness, relationship disruption and substance abuse in later life. As with financial transaction questions, it is most certainly in the public interest for this to be disclosed, actively and transparently investigated and the perpetrator/s should be brought to justice, punished and imprisoned. Graham Capill is a pivotal New Zealand figure in this context, but one could also add the vast numbers of Catholic clergy child rapists and denial, concealment or obstruction of independent investigation of their depravations from the Catholic hierarchy, including Pope Benedict XVI himself. In this case, the church hierarchy has come in for scathing criticism from progressive Catholics as well as horrified secular and independent feminist child sexual abuse intervention sources, who have demanded an independent and thorough audit of church abuse prevention protocols, procedures, policies and practices occur at every level. It certainly isn't helped by clericist conservative Catholics who try to mitigate, downplay or even attack the victims of abuse and deny its true, hideous scale. It seems that we aren't the only ones who partially dwell in closets before emerging and affirming ourselves. Problem is, some of the contents of those other closets are truly horrific and should be involuntarily exposed. Closetry, outing and disclosure isn't solely a lesbian, gay or transgender issue any more. Craig Young - 9th June 2010