So what? I mean...

I think for Derek also, he didn't buy the mainstream LGBT plus agenda, which was about equality, mere equality within the status quo.

He wanted to go beyond the status quo.

He didn't want LGBT plus people to assimilate, to accommodate, to compromise.

So for him, the use of the word queer was a defiant affirmation that he had a vision of something bigger and better.

which would not only benefit LGBT plus people, but also straight people as well.

So his idea of queer was beyond equality, equality plus, a transformation of society rather than a fitting in to it.

Do you agree with it, with these thoughts?

Mm

... repeat a- assaults and threats and violence.

And the psychologists and so on, they, they say they've never, ever met anyone who's experienced such sustained violence over so many years.

And you know, they've said to me, "It's, it's amazing you haven't committed suicide.

You know, it's ama- amazing that you haven't had a mental breakdown." But I've gotta say, there have been moments when I've been, have been on the edge.

I've also, of course, it's, you know, abuse and threats and, you know, insults from the far right are like water off a duck's back.

Mm-hmm

... like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Russia, and so on.

Peter Tatchell arrived at a very different approach to dealing with religious opposition.

Well, when George Carey was appointed the new Archbishop of Canterbury in 1990, he made it very clear that he thought homosexuality was inferior to heterosexuality and therefore it followed that the law should discriminate against against LGBT plus people in certain circumstances.

So we obviously, in outrage, we don't always go for direct action first.

We tried to have a dialogue with him.

We wrote to him and requested a meeting.

We kept on writing, phoning Lambeth Palace.

No meeting.

And what was the kind of upshot of that? What do you think you achieved from that stunt?

And yet if they do come out on top, then Ben would argue that, well, the British public deserve to know that.

Well, yeah, at one level, I totally agree.

But I'm just saying we have to think about the potential consequences.

We're all familiar with the terrible, hysterical, vicious, violent riots that took place last summer when, based on false information, people sought to burn down asylum hostels and kill people, kill refugees in those hostels.

Um, that was profoundly shocking.

And that's the kind of thing that could result from the publication of these figures because surely they will be manipulated and used or abused by far-right extremists to further their political agenda.

And that would not be good for community relations.

So why do you think that the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, wants to do this? What do you th- what do you think is her motivation for doing this?