Supporting Migrant Refugee Community Organisations to Support Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans

D4 270313 Learning From Practice Paper Equality for All Refugees

Supporting Migrant & Refugee Community Organisations to Support lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex (LGBTI) refugees within the communities they serve.

Key lessons

Talking works

 There is no need to be afraid of talking about LGBTI equality with migrant and refugee organisation leaders. Refugee and migrant leaders and activists are willing to debate LGBTI equality, though they need language, time, confidence and space to work out how to engage their networks in the ways they think best.  It is essential to work sensitively in initial interactions with leaders, but by listening and respecting people’s concerns about provoking shock or hostility, dialogue builds up quite easily, over time.  It is very important that the relationship between project staff and individual leaders is based on trust and mutual respect.

Find ways to start talking and keep talking

 The ‘compliance and carrot’ combination of the Equality Act + funders’ / commissioners’ equality requirements is a valuable asset in opening up discussion about LGBT equality.  Even the possibility of a very small amount of money provokes a great deal of valuable interaction and discussion about LGBT equality.  Well-informed activists must tolerate other people’s ignorance as they start out on a long path towards greater openness. Noone should feel under pressure to put up with offensive behaviour, but where individual migrants and refugees want to improve the situation, but do not understand all the issues or language around LGBT equality, their ignorance should not be allowed to prevent

REAP Project Team and Board of Trustees would like very sincerely to thank members and contributors to the Project Steering Group: Marso Abdi, Daryeel, John Bosco, S. Chelvan, No5 Chambers, Rani Nagulendram, Tamil Community Centre, Joan Neary, Tim Aldcroft, centred (Prev. Kairos in Soho), Oleg Pasitchnyi, Ukrainian Migrants Network, Erin Power, UKLGIG, Hari Rajaledchumy, Tamil Community Centre, Alasdair Stuart, MBARC / Double Jeopardy, Shirley Wiggins, Y2:L Education for Empowerment, (Trustee Observer : Emad El-Hamandani, H&F Refugee Forum) thanks

2 1.0 INTRODUCTION

Can any issue demonstrate more clearly that equality matters than the fact that every year, every day, people have to flee for their lives because of inequality, persecution and aggressive discrimination? To give up everything, live in limbo and terrifying insecurity for months or years, and eventually build a new life from nothing in a new country miles from familiarity, family and everything they once had? Often to face humiliation and hostility and find they must survive abject impoverishment in the process to add further losses to what they have already had taken from them by intolerant societies and the failure of states to protect their citizens from abuse?

Noone wants to face discrimination, and no country can afford to ignore discrimination if it wants a healthy society in which people can fulfill their potential. There are still 6 countries where they have the death penalty for homosexuality and more than 30 where lesbians, gay men, bisexuals or transgender people are legally discriminated against. The Human Rights Act and the Equality Act in the UK have reinforced the potential for a strong integrated country, but they only work if equality is seen to be a priority for all people and made a reality by a whole society. As society of that sort must surely also ensure that those who have sought refuge from discrimination and persecution elsewhere, not only find equality here, but play their part in building an equal and just society.

1.1 Refugees’ and migrants’ own support strategies

As individuals rebuild their lives in their new country, they usually build up a number of strategies, contacts and sources of support. Small, often identity-based community organisations are one of the strategies that migrants and refugees adopt to strengthen a positive sense of identity and benefit from peer and identity-based mutual support and potential to build and share knowledge and peer contacts. Even after the early days culturally-based groups can play an important role: a place and group of people amongst whom language, cultural references, expected behaviour and manners are shared and familiar. Organised activities, services, classes, events, provide a focus for relationships with a population that has or can build a shared identity.

As members and participants, or event service users and clients of community organisations, individuals can create and reinforce personal connections. These connections are the basis for informal, identity-based peer-support networks. Although MRCOs are not the only resource for migrants and refugees, those migrants who have a shared identity with an MRCO constituency, but are excluded from it, are excluded from a potentially valuable source of support. People who do not or cannot confirm to the dominant culture, or who are discriminated against under the social structures inherent in that culture, may find themselves excluded. Refugees and migrants often find themselves disadvantages and discriminated again – indirectly and institutionally, if not directly – in daily life. If a person is also facing discrimination in their daily life on the basis of their personal characteristics – gender, sexuality etc. – they, and excluded from identity-based

3 peer support networks and community organisations, they can find themselves with few places left to turn. There are many factors that might lead people to feel unable to approach culturally-based MRCOs: fear of criticism because of divorce, political views, being HIV positive, being lesbian, bay, bisexual, transgender. Earlier work by REAP showed that man non-migrant bodies, even specialist equalities groups, often assume a person can or should turn to ‘their community’ for help, but many migrants and refugees do not feel secure in relying on ‘their community’, and this is undoubtably the case for LGBTI migrants and refugees.

1.2 Working through leaders and activists

REAP bases its communication activities on a distinct model of MRCOs. Migrants and refugees build their organisations drawing on forms of social organisation that they learned as they grew up in other cultures, often using familiar notions of relationships, power, decision-making, goals etc. These have to be adapted to meet the rise and fall of British funders’ expectations and resources and the support available at any one time from capacity-builders and local authorities. Where organisations are based on a community of identity, interaction and personal relationships, informal modes of communication and legitimacy amongst the constituents are crucial. Leaders and activists are usually crucial in all these processes and leaders who can organise groups or activities successfully, especially when translated into forms that British funders recognise, often bring extensive organising, negotiating and diplomacy experience and sometimes prestige from activities and careers they had before arriving in the UK. Different organisations come and go, but the individuals involved continue building contacts and reputation in community networking activities over time, though adopting different formats for community groups or activities according to what is feasible at any one time. Starting from this view of MRCOs, REAP has focussed recently on engaging directly with individual leaders, and supporting them in their efforts to raise awareness of LGBTI issues and engage their members, peers and constituents in debate, in other words a concept of MRCO as a mesh of personal relationships and networking built around key individuals, rather than as a formal structure of rules, agreed goals and roles and enforceable policies.

2.0 WHY RAISE LGBTI EQUALITY WITH MIGRANT AND REFUGEE LEADERS?

Knowledge REAP had gained from previous work under the title silence is ‘Refugees for Equalities’(EHRC) and from other equalities unacceptable, specialists, particularly ‘Schools Out’ whom we met through West and invisibility London LGBTI/Outwest activities, provided an underlying principle is dangerous that silence is unacceptable, and invisibility is dangerous.

Experience had also taught us that any conversation opens up potential for greater and more meaningful future communication and awareness. Raising a subject has the power of ‘reflexivity’, which is to say just talking changes people’s understanding, awareness and perceptions just talking changes people’s both of the subject and of how they relate to it and it understanding, awareness and perceptions of the subject, of how they relate to 4 it and how it relates to them relates to them – even if it doesn’t change their underlying opinions. ‘Refugees for Equalities’ had indicated to us that even occasional discussions with a number of individuals over a period of 2 years had completely changed the depth of their knowledge and ability to articulate their views – though it did not necessarily change their underlying opinions. Even occasional discussions spread months apart reduced their fear of engaging in talking about LGBTI issues and equality; reduced areas of doubt, uncertainty, confusion that had left people speechless and alienated. Interaction, discussion had enabled people to articulate their views and in the process distinguish issues, justify their positions, explore inconsistencies in their ethics. They became more aware of the UK legal and social environment - attitudes, law - and gained the vocabulary and information to debate. In the process our own multi-ethnic team exchanged concepts and knowledge from cultures and histories across the world, and learnt a lot about how migrants think British and Western cultures’ perceive them. Assumptions were made visible and challenged on all fronts.

In the process, opening discussion creates space for those people who already want to bring about greater equality. space for those Those people’s chances of bringing about change for the better people who is increased if they, too, are recognised, allowed a voice, their already want to efforts reinforced with some sense of respect and even bring about solidarity, reassurance to boost confidence and willingness to greater equality take risks. Exchanges and debate can provide them with a vocabulary, experience of expressing views and new ideas and peer support for ways to engage other people.

From these three starting points, any level of ongoing discussion with MRCOs increases the chance that eventually all people will be accepted and treated as equals, and provided with equal or even equitable support.

Nb This project does not aim to survey RCO attitudes LGBTI issues, but aims purely to use relationships developed with a small number of RCO leaders to explore methods of and their effectiveness in shifting RCO leaders’ and their members’ perceptions and willingness to engage more or less openly in discussions on LGBTI issues.

2.1 Why don’t people talk about LGBTI equality with MRCOs?

There seems an ever-present wariness amongst British voluntary and statutory sector professionals about raising issues around sexuality and sexual identity when working with migrants or refugees. Many of REAP’s stakeholders and other contacts – migrant and born British, professional contacts and members - who had always supported us to raise equality as an issue were intrigued, surprised, concerned about us taking up the specific issue of LGBTI equality with MRCOs.

Many activists and MRCO leaders we have spoken with feel equality is a crucial principle and were not against discussing LGBTI equality in principle. But most expressed concern about raising such issues with their membership or in open fora. Most simply, people express embarassment about discussing a topic that they assume will involve talking about

5 or at least referring to sex acts. They are fearful of provoking shock, disapproval; fearful that people who had supported their activities will reject them, that people who had encourage their children or spouses to participate in the group will make them leave and that would not only be the end of the group but of any potential the leader had to work with and for their community in future. Noone expressed concern that raising the issue of LGBTI equality might lead others to assume that they were themselves lesbian or gay but they were concerned about being criticised personally for raising the subject of sexuality and LGBTI equality. Leaders are fearful of polarising opinions in loose networks of diverse individuals that only survive because there is more to connect them than to separate them.

Given this perception of risk, some leaders who are supportive of equality for all in principle, feel that on balance it is not in the greater good to start a debate about LGBTI equality in their MRCOs. Arguments used to back up this view include: the topic has been largely invisible for years so why bother raising it now? LGBTI equality would be seen as unimportant by their membership because few people are affected, and some constituents see discuss of LGBTI equality as primarily a Western concept and so irrelevant to organisations based in non-Western cultures where there are different ideas of gender and sexual identity and power relationships.

Concerns about raising LGBTI equality as a topic in MRCOs (Workshop, 11th Sept 2012) How to work it, how to present? Pressure on other members/young Language? Often don’t know what the people from parents not even to words mean (though different range of engage/discuss concepts exist in different Individual presentation of own image languages/cultures) Discrimination amongst organisation’s Female and Male have different willingness staff to discuss intimate issues privately or Engaging youth/children – parental openly. relationship Sexuality just isn’t a topic discussed - not Physical reaction - people get kicked to say people aren’t sexual it is just so out hidden even boyfriends, girlfriends, There is denial relationships between husband and wife, Superficial tolerance but not if tested. how to start? Invisibility It’s a personal thing

3.0 OPENING UP DISCUSSIONS

REAP staff found it nerve-wracking at times to raise the subject of LGBTI start equality with individual leaders, but over time we found ways and talking, and excuses to start talking, and keep talking. keep talking 3.1 Arguments – useful points to start from

Certain points helped start conversations:

6 1. People are often very supportive of the principles of equality and many migrants and refugees feel they have faced racism and other forms of discrimination. Asking whether equality is for everyone, or just for some people, and then talking through the list of ‘protected characteristics’ and highlighting LGBTI equality was an effective starting point. To this, participating leaders often added discussion about humanity, about the ideal of reducing the suffering all people face when faced by exclusion, isolation, stigma.

2. ‘Compliance and Carrot’ The Equality Act: there is broad awareness and curiosity about the Equality Act. This has two sides: leaders wishing to understand Equality Law so they can use it to gain equality for themselves and others they care about: leaders’ fear of breaking the law by failing to comply with the Equality Act, whether personally or as an organisation. In addition to that funders and commissioners are putting increasing pressure on funded organisations to show they are inclusive and pro-equality and to comply with the Equality Act if they want to access funds. This is partly because the Public Sector Equality Duty in the Equality Act requires them to ensure any activities they support or fund are non-discriminatory and work towards equality. However, we have worked with several statutory staff who are delighted that the Equality Act has given them an opportunity to push more strongly for equality for all.

3. Many we have worked with have a thirst for knowledge and value opportunities to gain knowledge. Opportunities to discuss new topics and learn ideas, vocabulary, facts and laws are seen as valuable in themselves, and also in understanding their new society and being prepared for whatever it might bring you. Parents also express concern about being prepared for issues that their children will need to deal with as they grow up in the UK. There is a good deal of curiosity about sexual identity and sexuality, as long as it can be discussed in a way that does not compromise a person’s social status.

3.2 Ways to talk and keep talking a) Constant background chat

As a background strategy, REAP has started to raise equality for all, ie including LGBTI refugees, at any activity we run involving refugees and/or MRCOs; eg. Interpreters’ training, General Members’ Code of Conduct, Refugee Children’s Network meetings, Trustees’ meetings. We have ensured equality issues, and over the past year issues of LGBT equality are included as themes in all events eg. Women and Girl Refugees, June 2012, REAP AGM Oct 2012. This ongoing attention to LGBT equality means that people that we have built up regular contact with are constantly reminded of the issue, see that it can be raised in open forum etc. to reinforce direct interaction we are having with them at the same time.

The Women and Girl Refugees workshop (29th June 2912) was attended by RCO leaders and LGBTI specialists and created many initial points of collaboration from panel speakers, questions and discussion from the floor and 3 workshops with 10 – 20 people in each. The event was not publicised as an LGBTI-themed event and the sole focus was not on LGBTI issues, but it had a strong theme on issues faced by refugee girls and women 7 who love other women. Erin Power, the Coordinator of UKLGIG was a key note speaker at the event. Each of the three group workshops at the event (Vulnerability to Violence, Girls into Women and Women and Girl Refugees’ Integration) raised discussions around LGBTI issues and had a specialist LGBTI worker/ activist involved. b) Direct discussion

The project worker used direct, one to one discussion to raise LGBT equality directly, often as part of a wider discussion about equality training and funding. It provided in depth responses and led leaders to articulate their position and concerns about raising LGBT equality with their networks. Contacts before and leading up to this ‘semi-interview’ were also part of the strategy, as it would sometimes take several conversations by phone and face to face with individual leaders before they would arrange a time to talk.

8 c) Events, training, SG,

Events played a useful role for reasons that might not be expected. Events create multiple opportunities for contact and conversation: advertising, invitations, contacting leaders about objectives and content, reminders, follow up calls are opportunities to keep conversations going. This applies to training sessions, other related events such as the ‘Women and Girl Refugees’ workshop, invitations to join the Steering Group or observe at meetings etc. The importance, time and the effort required to get RCO leaders ‘through the door’ for a workshop focused on LGBTI issues is considerable but the regular contact and repeated conversations that it requires are an asset in themselves in breaking taboos and raising awareness and willingness to engage.

By bringing several MRCO leaders together who were willing to discuss in a closed environment, the workshops enabled leaders to start sharing and creating ideas on ways to open up discussion. Those present in two workshops held in 2012 wanted to find a way to start discussion, but in such a way that they felt they could avoid the worst case reactions they were conscious could exist amongst their constituents and members.

The attraction of potential resources was useful in gaining attendance at workshops – attending a workshop was made into a pre-requisite for applying for the ‘Start-Up’ fund and representatives from funders (eg. Trust for London) and commissioners (eg. Hillingdon CCG, LBHillingdon) added to the attraction.

Events such as the project workshop on 11th September also involved several activists who were gay who interacted energetically and enthusiastically with RCO participants, answering questions from all sides, including some questions which might have given offence in other circumstances but in this context where it was obvious that people were starting the first steps on a long path to awareness, there was only tension at one point and that was quickly diffused. However, it was clear that one of the challenges for LGBTI activists when interacting with MRCO leaders will be the willingness and patience of activists to engage with people who have very little understanding of gay rights view points, and also struggle with language and unfamiliar cultural concepts that might not have equivalents in their countries of origin.

One out, gay activist was invited by a leader to co-facilitate a workshop with Afghan women. The reason the leader was keen for the activist to co-facilitate the workshop was because they had met and enjoyed talking at an event. Direct interaction created a one to one relationship that made the leader feel safer about taking what she saw as a risk by introducing LGBT issues as a topic for discussion with her group. A relationship of trust, created by personal contact, was the key. d) Start up funds

With Esmee Fairbairn Foundations’ support we had the potential to offer small Start Up awards to group leaders who were willing to take up some kind of activity to raise awareness of LGBT issues and equality with their organisation. The offer proved its value

9 in achieving engagement very quickly. In the end only 6 small awards were offered, but they generated hours of discussions between REAP staff and leaders, and between fellow leaders from within organisations/networks, and between leaders and members.

Many of the application forms submitted were poorly completed, but discussions before and since indicate that the activities planned by RCO leaders were reasonably well thought through, with ongoing input from the project worker. The issues were better understood by leaders than their paper applications indicate. This is a well known difficulty for RCO leaders, usually working in second language and unfamiliar bureacractic systems and needs to be taken into account if the idea of ‘start up’ awards is developed further.

One MRCO leader was considering putting an article in his newsletter on LGBTI issues in order to get the award (and thus pay for printing a longer, full colour edition). Eventually he decided not to, on the grounds that the amount available was too small for the effort, but in the process leading up to this he had discussed the idea with the Chair of the organisation and others on his committee.

Another leader was very engaged with several activities and lively discussions throughout the project, and discussed ways of engaging members using an award. However, when she discussed it with the Chair of the organisation, the Chair felt LGBTI equality was too sensitive an issue for their membership. They did not go ahead with the application at that point, but the discussion continues internally and between REAP and that leader. e) Project Worker

The perception of, role and relationships of the project worker were key in building dialogue and encouraging leaders to take up activities with their MRCOs. Many – but not all - of the relationships were built on longer term interaction the project worker had had with these groups through earlier projects, e g. fund-raising, Equality Act training, capacity-building. The fact the project worker had an in depth understanding of equality issues, the Equality Act and all protected characteristics including LGBT equality, plus knowledge of the day to day realities of many MRCOs, current contacts with potential funders and commissioners and ideas for activities that leaders could adopt, made her valuable to MRCO leaders, helping attract attention, credibility, respect and word of mouth recommendations from RCO leaders.

4.0 LEADERS’ EXPERIENCES OF DISCUSSING LGBTI EQUALITY WITH MEMBERS

10 Afghan Women’s Group (AWG) The Afghan Women’s group experimented with an interesting approach to raising the issue of LGBT equality, following long and intense relationship between REAP and the AWG leader, which included her participation in early Refugees for Equality activities in 2008-2010 and this project’s workshop in Sept 2011. The key was when she felt she had enough confidence to overcome her anxiety that participants and especially their husbands would reject her and her group activities if any subject relating to sex or sexuality was raised, and they would stop coming or in husband’s case, prevent their wives from coming. The offer of £150 definitely helped as this group has no funding at all and relies entirely on good will from the local Children’s Centre and PCT. Another key factor was a very supportive specialist Health Visitor who was, however, not especially supportive of raising this issue which she saw as risky, a low priority, and best left hidden. The leader though, after 2 years of steadily growing curiosity and confidence, was willing to explore her own personal ideology of acceptance and building love between people. She was also deeply moved by the sense of love frustrated by LGBT people who are not able to live in open, loving relationships with the person they love.

The approach the group leader chose was to address parenting and trust between child and mother, in a session led by the trusted Health Visitor. In the session they started talking about how essential it is that children can talk to a parent, particularly a mother about anything. This is especially so as they grow up in a new country and culture, as if parents fail to build a trusting relationship there is a strong concern that children will drift away from the family as they mature. The Health Visitor raised a number of issues that children must be able to raise with their parent – trouble at school, getting into fights, feeling for another child and then raised the question of whether children could talk to their parents about sexuality, first in the sense of knowing someone else was LGBT, or if someone LGBT expressed a liking for them. One of the women raised the question about what would each do if a daughter or son of theirs wanted to talk about feelings she or he had towards someone the same sex.

Although some members of the discussion were clearly startled, and one was evidently uncomfortable and found the topic difficult, noone refused to talk about the issue, and the concern about children being able to talk to them about anything in this new and unfamiliar culture gave emotional force to the discussion.

Asian Women’s Group The leader is a strongly connected, well informed woman who has good local respect. Her personal philosophy is to bring greater tolerance, acceptance, support to everyone. She is deeply concerned about the mistreatment of women, and of children by powerful family figures, especially men who have no control and use ‘culture’ as an excuse for abuse. Her group is many years old and well established and provides a wide range of practical support and training, and she follows through individually and quietly behind the scenes on case work. She was keen to address the topic of LGBT equality – believing equality must be for everyone. Her main concern was the reactions of members, including males in the family and mothers-in-law. She arranged for a workshop on the Equality Act and implications of equality law and arranged with the trainer (former project worker on this project) to use multiple examples from LGBT cases, and use LGBT equality as a way to promote discussion. The session went well, with people from other groups attending too, though the people from outside the HAWG were a little dominant at times. Noone was shocked or unhappy to discuss LGBT equality in this case, though several expressed views that LGBT equality activists might have criticised. The issue of transgender people seemed to fascinate people, who spoke repeatedly about comparison with some people ‘s lives in

11 India, and how Western conceps of sexuality and gender are different and should start to recognise the concepts that already exist in other cultures and languages.

RESOURCES AND CONTACTS

2011: Equality Act 2010: a briefing for refugee and migrant community organisations http://www.reap.org.uk/documents/EqualityAct2010_abriefingforrefugeeandmigrantcommunityorga nisations.pdf 2010: One plus One: Supporting frontline organizations to work effectively with refugees http://www.reap.org.uk/documents/OnePlusOne.pdf 2009: “Refugees for Equalities” Draft Report 2009 http://www.reap.org.uk/documents/REAPRefugeesforEqualititesReport2009.pdf

12 APPENDICES

Glossary of Acronyms RCO Leaders, members of organisations / groups providing support to refugees within structures constituted around linguistic / cultural commonalities. LGBTI Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Transgender, Intersex BME&R Black, Minority Ethnic & Refugee EDF Equality and Diversity Forum GLA Greater London Authority CVS Council for Voluntary Services