'Gay’ Graphics Unbearable? (Press, 15 May 1985)
This is a Generative AI summary of this newspaper article. It may contain errors or omissions. Please note that the language in the summary is reflective of the original article and the societal attitudes of the time in which it was written.
Summary: 'Gay’ Graphics Unbearable? (Press, 15 May 1985)
In May 1985, toy manufacturers and wholesalers in Auckland expressed concern over a pamphlet created by the Aids Support Network, which depicted teddy bears engaging in homosexual acts. The pamphlet was intended to inform homosexual men about precautions to prevent the spread of AIDS. Mr John Prowse, a teddy bear manufacturer, anticipated a negative impact on sales due to the pamphlet's contents. Similarly, Mrs Lynnis Burson, the owner of The House of Toys, felt that the link between teddy bears and homosexuality would fade within a couple of weeks but questioned the need to involve children's toys in such discussions. Opponents of the Homosexual Law Reform Bill, including Mr Barry Redd, condemned the pamphlet, calling it disrespectful to bears. He expressed disbelief that such images would be associated with real bears, implying a loss of innocence. In contrast, Ms Kate Leslie, the chairperson of the Aids Support Network Trust Board, defended the pamphlet, noting that it contained a warning about graphic material and was designed to address the subject sensitively. She believed using teddy bears in the graphics did not carry inappropriate connotations. However, during a meeting held by those opposing the reform bill, members voted in favour of calling on the Government to retract its recent $100,000 grant to the Aids Support Network, stating that the pamphlet promoted illegal behaviours. Mr Norman Jones, the National MP for Invercargill, who spoke at the meeting, conveyed the sentiment that a significant majority of New Zealanders disapproved of legalising sodomy. He suggested that the concerns of a minority should not impose on the values of the majority. The meeting was marked by heated discussions between supporters and opponents of the bill, underscoring the divisive nature of the debate surrounding the pamphlet and the broader issue of homosexual law reform in New Zealand at the time.
Important Information
The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact
The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand