Chapter V, Section I (General Review) of the Wolfenden Report

Question 1

What is the Wolfenden Committee’s general stance on existing laws regarding homosexual behavior between men?

Answer 1

They largely agree with the majority of existing provisions, particularly those protecting minors and those with mental defects. They believe the law should protect vulnerable individuals.

Question 2

What is the Committee’s view on men who commit offenses against minors or those with mental defects?

Answer 2

Such men should be treated as criminal offenders. The law holds them responsible for their actions, regardless of the causes of their disposition, except in cases of recognized exemptions from accountability. This is especially true for those in positions of trust.

Question 3

What specific point does the report make about the initiation of offenses with minors?

Answer 3

Even if a minor initiates the act, it does not absolve the adult male from responsibility.

Question 4

What other function of the law does the Committee emphasize in relation to homosexual behavior?

Answer 4

Preserving public order and decency. Homosexual behavior in public should remain a criminal offense.

Question 5

What are the two categories of homosexual offenses the Committee mentions before focusing on the third?

Answer 5

1. Offenses committed by adults with juveniles (minors). 2. Offenses committed in public places.

Question 6

What is the third category of offense that the Committee gives “long and careful consideration”?

Answer 6

Homosexual acts committed between consenting adults in private. This is the main focus of their review and recommendations for change.

Question 7

What were the approximate statistics for men over 21 convicted of private homosexual offenses with consenting adult partners in England and Wales between 1953 and 1956?

Answer 7

Approximately 480 men. However, a significant portion of these also had convictions or admissions related to public offenses or offenses with minors.

Question 8

What were the statistics for similar offenses in Scotland during the same period?

Answer 8

9 men. Similar to England and Wales, some of these also had other related offenses.

Question 9

What was the final number of men in both England and Wales and Scotland who were convicted only of private offenses with consenting adult partners?

Answer 9

307 (300 in England and Wales, 7 in Scotland).

Question 10

What is the Committee’s central argument for decriminalizing private homosexual acts between consenting adults?

Answer 10

The law should not concern itself with what a man does in private unless it can be shown to be contrary to the public good. They argue that private consensual acts do not meet this criterion.

Question 11

What key question does the Committee pose about the law’s role in relation to individual sexual behavior?

Answer 11

Does the law’s concern properly extend to the sexual behavior of the individual citizen, and to what extent should it apply its sanctions?

Question 12

What are the three main arguments against decriminalization of private homosexual acts that the Committee addresses?

Answer 12

1. It menaces the health of society. 2. It has damaging effects on family life. 3. Men who engage in these practices may turn their attention to boys.

Question 13

What is the first argument against decriminalization addressed by the Wolfenden Committee, and how is it framed?

Answer 13

The argument claims that homosexual conduct causes the demoralization and decay of civilizations. Proponents suggest that to prevent national degeneration, such conduct must be stopped by all possible means.

Question 14

How does the Committee respond to the claim that homosexuality causes societal decay?

Answer 14

They state they found no evidence to support this view and find it inappropriate to base contemporary laws on hypothetical explanations of historical events from vastly different times and circumstances.

Question 15

What does the Committee identify as the underlying basis of the “menace to society” argument?

Answer 15

Often, it’s simply an expression of revulsion against what is perceived as unnatural, sinful, or disgusting. While acknowledging that many people hold these feelings, the Committee emphasizes that these feelings alone, however strong, are not a valid basis for criminalizing private sexual behavior.

Question 16

What is the “security risk” sub-argument within the “menace to society” claim, and how does the Committee address it?

Answer 16

The sub-argument suggests that homosexual men in certain professions or public service roles are vulnerable to blackmail and coercion, making them security risks. The Committee acknowledges this risk but points out that similar risks exist for other groups (e.g., drunkards, gamblers, those in heterosexual compromising situations). While this may be a reason for excluding individuals from certain employment, it doesn’t justify criminalizing their private sexual behavior.

Question 17

What is the second argument against decriminalization, and how does the Committee acknowledge its validity?

Answer 17

The argument is that male homosexual behavior damages family life. The Committee acknowledges that this can be true, citing evidence of marriages broken up by a husband’s homosexual behavior and instances where men with weaker homosexual components choose homosexual outlets over marriage

Question 18

While acknowledging the potential harm to families, how does the Committee contextualize the impact of male homosexual behavior compared to other behaviors?

Answer 18

They point out that marriages can also be broken by female homosexual behavior, adultery, and fornication. They find no evidence suggesting that male homosexual behavior inflicts greater damage than these other behaviors.

Question 19

What is the Committee’s conclusion regarding the argument from damage to family life?

Answer 19

While they don’t condone or approve of male homosexual behavior, they argue that since adultery, fornication, and lesbian behavior are not criminal offenses, there’s no valid reason to criminalize male homosexual behavior based solely on this argument.

Question 20

What additional point does the Committee make about the interaction between homosexuality and marriage?

Answer 20

They recognize that the mere existence of homosexuality in one partner can lead to an unsatisfactory marriage. They caution that a homosexual person marrying solely for conformity or in hopes of a “cure” may lead to disaster.

Question 21

What is the third argument against decriminalization, and what is the Committee’s stance on it?

Answer 21

The argument is that men who engage in homosexual acts with other men may then turn their attention to boys (pedophilia). The Committee strongly emphasizes that they do not want any recommendation that would increase offenses against minors.

Question 22

What is the Committee’s critical condition for any change in the law?

Answer 22

If they believed that any recommendation for change would increase the danger to minors, they would not make that recommendation. This demonstrates their prioritization of child protection.

Question 23

What crucial distinction did the Wolfenden Committee’s expert witnesses emphasize regarding male homosexual behavior?

Answer 23

They emphasized two distinct groups: (1) men who are exclusively attracted to adult male partners (adult homosexuals), and (2) men who are attracted to boys (pedophiles). They are not the same.

Question 24

What did the police reports and other evidence reveal about men convicted of offenses against boys?

Answer 24

A significant portion of these men were also diagnosed as being homosexuals on reception into prison. However, this does not mean all homosexual men are a risk to boys.

Question 25

What statistics were cited regarding men convicted of offenses against boys and their reported attractions?

Answer 25

Of those convicted, 43% were attracted to adults, 27.7% were attracted to boys, and 5.3% were attracted to both. This highlights that many offenders were not exclusively attracted to boys. A further study of 200 such individuals revealed similar findings.

Question 26

What is the “slippery slope” argument presented against decriminalization in this context?

Answer 26

The argument suggests that if homosexual relations between adult males are no longer illegal, it would somehow encourage or lead men who are primarily interested in adults to then turn their attention to boys.

Question 27

How does the Committee directly address the “slippery slope” argument?

Answer 27

They state they find no evidence to support this claim. They believe that men who prefer adult partners would continue to seek adult partners.

Question 28

What counter-argument does the Committee offer regarding the potential impact of legalizing adult homosexual acts on offenses against boys?

Answer 28

They suggest that if the law continues to prohibit adult homosexual acts, some men who prefer adults might be driven to seek younger partners due to the lack of legal adult options and the risk of blackmail if they sought adult partners. Decriminalization might reduce such instances.

Question 29

What point does the Committee make about the current legal situation and its potential to encourage offenses against minors?

Answer 29

The law as it stands may lead some individuals who would prefer adult partners to turn to minors because they lack legal adult options and face blackmail if they pursue adult relationships.

Question 30

What evidence does the Committee cite from other countries regarding the relationship between legalizing adult homosexual acts and offenses against boys?

Answer 30

Information from the Netherlands suggests that decriminalizing homosexual behavior has not led to an increase in offenses against boys. This supports their position.

Question 31

What is the Committee’s overall conclusion regarding the argument that decriminalizing adult homosexual acts would lead to more offenses against boys?

Answer 31

They find no evidence to support this claim and believe it is more likely that such a change would have little to no effect or possibly even a slight positive effect (reduction) on offenses against boys.

Question 32

What other argument does the Committee briefly mention in favor of retaining the criminalization of adult homosexual acts?

Answer 32

The argument that a change in the law would offend a certain degree of toleration by the legislature of homosexual behavior and that such a change would have effects they expect.

Question 33

How does the Committee respond to the argument about public tolerance and expected effects?

Answer 33

They state that this expectation seems to be to exaggerate the effect of the law and that the present law deters from homosexual acts some who would otherwise commit them.

Question 34

What does the Committee say about the law’s effectiveness as a deterrent against homosexual behavior?

Answer 34

They suggest the law likely has little effect on the amount of homosexual behavior that actually occurs. Strong social forces already oppose such behavior, regardless of the law.

Question 35

What is the Committee’s reasoning regarding the potential impact of decriminalization on those who find homosexual behavior repugnant?

Answer 35

They argue that those who find homosexual behavior repugnant would not find it any less so simply because the law permitted it in certain circumstances.

Question 36

How does the Committee address the concern that decriminalization might lead to increased proselytization (conversion to homosexuality)?

Answer 36

Even if homosexuals tend to proselytize, the Committee sees no reason to believe that a change in the law would lead to a significant number of “conversions.”

Question 37

What does the Committee observe about the legal status of homosexual behavior in other European countries?

Answer 37

In very few European countries does the criminal law recognize homosexual behavior between consenting adults in private.

Question 38

Why is it difficult to make statistical comparisons between countries with different legal approaches to homosexual behavior?

Answer 38

In countries where such behavior is tolerated, the acts are not reflected in criminal statistics, making direct comparison impossible.

Question 39

What specific example does the Committee investigate regarding the impact of decriminalization?

Answer 39

They inquired about the situation in Sweden, where homosexual acts between consenting adults in private ceased to be criminal offenses in 1944.

Question 40

What did the Swedish authorities report regarding the impact of the 1944 law change on the prevalence of homosexual practices?

Answer 40

They reported that very little was known about the prevalence of such practices either before or after the change in the law.

Question 41

What conclusion does the Committee draw from the Swedish example?

Answer 41

They assume that if the change in the law had produced any significant increase in homosexual behavior or large-scale proselytizing, it would have become apparent to the authorities.

Question 42

What does the Committee acknowledge about changing a long-standing law?

Answer 42

They recognize that reversing a long-standing tradition is a serious matter and should not be suggested lightly.

Question 43

How does the Committee define its task in relation to the existing law?

Answer 43

Their task is to state what they regard as a just and equitable law. They believe considerations of the present law, much of which derives from obscure traditions, should not unduly influence their judgment.

Question 44

What does the Committee identify as the decisive counter-argument in favor of decriminalization?

Answer 44

The importance that society and the law ought to give to individual freedom of choice and action in matters of private morality.

Question 45

What distinction does the Committee draw between crime and sin?

Answer 45

Unless society, through the law, deliberately equates the sphere of crime with that of sin, there must remain a realm of private morality and immorality that is not the law’s business.

Question 46

What does the Committee emphasize regarding personal morality and responsibility?

Answer 46

Emphasizing the personal and private nature of moral conduct emphasizes the individual’s responsibility for their own actions—a responsibility a mature person should carry without the threat of legal punishment.

Question 47

What is the Wolfenden Committee’s central recommendation regarding homosexual behavior?

Answer 47

They recommend that homosexual behavior between consenting adults in private should no longer be a criminal offense.

Question 48

How does the Committee suggest “consent” should be determined in cases of homosexual acts?

Answer 48

Using the same criteria that apply to heterosexual acts between adults.

Question 49

What specific examples does the Committee give of situations where consent would not be considered valid?

Answer 49

Consent obtained by fraud, threats of violence, the use of drugs rendering a partner incapable of consenting, or where the partner is incapable due to mental defect or other reasons.

Question 50

What does the Committee acknowledge about the varying quality of consent?

Answer 50

They acknowledge that consent can range from eager response to grudging submission and that money, gifts, or hospitality can sometimes be used to induce consent.

Question 51

How does the Committee address the use of inducements (money, gifts, etc.) in relation to consent?

Answer 51

They point out that these considerations apply equally to heterosexual relationships and do not provide grounds for differentiating between homosexual and heterosexual relationships in this regard.

Question 52

Does the Committee intend to provide a strict legal definition of “in private”?

Answer 52

No. They intend for the same criteria used for heterosexual acts to apply to homosexual acts.

Question 53

What is the Committee’s intention regarding public decency and homosexual acts?

Answer 53

They intend for the law to continue regarding as criminal any indecent act committed in a place where members of the public may be likely to see and be offended by it

Question 54

Where does the Committee believe the line should be drawn regarding the purview of the criminal law and homosexual acts?

Answer 54

Where there is no possibility of public offense, the matter becomes a private responsibility of the persons concerned and is outside the proper purview of the criminal law.

Question 55

Who does the Committee suggest should decide whether public decency has been outraged in cases of doubt?

Answer 55

The courts. They see no greater difficulty in this for homosexual acts than for heterosexual acts.

Question 56

What does the Committee identify as the most difficult question related to their recommendation?

Answer 56

Defining the age at which a man is to be considered an “adult” for the purposes of this recommendation.

Question 57

What range of ages was suggested to the Committee by witnesses?

Answer 57

From 16 (on the analogy of heterosexual behavior) to as high as 30. The most frequently suggested ages were 18 and 21.

Question 58

What four sets of considerations does the Committee believe should govern the decision on the age of adulthood in this context?

Answer 58

1. The need to protect young and immature persons. 2. The age at which a man’s sexual development can be said to be fixed. 3. The meaning of “adult” in the sense of being “responsible for his own actions.” 4. The consequences that would follow from fixing any particular age.

Question 59

What does the Committee observe about these four considerations?

Answer 59

They acknowledge that these considerations may not all lead to the same answer.

Question 60

What does the Committee emphasize throughout their report regarding young and immature persons?

Answer 60

The need for protecting them.

Question 61

What qualification does the Committee make regarding the need for protection?

Answer 61

This need can be pressed too far. There comes a time when a young man can be expected to “stand on his own feet” in this as in other matters.

Question 62

What comparison does the Committee make regarding the protection of young men and young women?

Answer 62

They find it hard to believe that young men need to be protected from would-be seducers more carefully than young women do.

Question 63

How does the Committee address the argument for protecting the young and immature in the context of homosexual acts?

Answer 63

They acknowledge the need for protection but argue that this argument can be taken too far. They believe there’s an age when a young man should be expected to be responsible for his own actions.

Question 64

What point does the Committee make about the relative physical maturity of young men and young women?

Answer 64

They suggest that physically, young men are generally better able to look after themselves than young women. This could support a lower age of consent.

Question 65

What legal precedent does the Committee mention regarding the age of consent for heterosexual intercourse?

Answer 65

Sexual intercourse with a willing girl of 16 is not unlawful, providing some ground for making 16 the age of “adulthood” for homosexual acts as well.

Question 66

What is the Committee’s concern regarding the legalisation of homosexual behavior and its potential impact on young men’s sexual development?

Answer 66

They don’t want to legalise behavior that might lead a young man towards a permanent habit of homosexual behavior if he would otherwise develop a heterosexual preference.

Question 67

What did the medical witnesses agree on regarding the fixation of sexual patterns?

Answer 67

They unanimously agreed that the main sexual pattern is laid down in the early years of life.

Question 68

What was the majority view of the medical witnesses regarding the age at which sexual patterns are fixed?

Answer 68

The majority held that the main outlines of the sexual pattern are usually fixed by the age of 16, with many believing it is fixed much earlier. This again suggests 16 as a possible age of consent.

Question 69

What is the third set of considerations the Committee examines regarding the age of consent?

Answer 69

The age at which a person can be regarded as sufficiently adult to take decisions about their private conduct and carry the responsibility for the consequences.

Question 70

What age does the law recognize in other areas of behavior as appropriate for important decisions and responsibilities?

Answer 70

21 (e.g., entering into legal contracts, including marriage in England and Wales).

Question 71

What does the Committee believe is the commonly accepted meaning of “adult”?

Answer 71

Broadly speaking, “of the age of twenty-one or more.”

Question 72

What conclusion does the Committee draw from common usage and common sense regarding the age of responsibility?

Answer 72

They believe it’s reasonable to accept 21 as designating the age at which a man is regarded as maturely responsible for his actions.

Question 73

What difficulty does the Committee acknowledge regarding setting any specific age limit?

Answer 73

It inevitably creates a situation where an action is illegal just below that age and legal just above it.

Question 74

What specific difficulty arises from setting the age at 21 (or any age above 17)?

Answer 74

It would mean prosecuting a young man of almost 21 for actions that would be legal in a few days’ time.

Question 75

How does the Committee compare the difficulty of setting the age at 18 versus 21?

Answer 75

They argue that the difficulty is less acute at 18. While the problem exists at any age, it’s less problematic to consider a youth under 18 for “care or protection” under the Children and Young Persons Acts than someone nearly 21.

Question 76

What is the Committee’s implied preference regarding the age of consent?

Answer 76

18, as it balances the need for protection with the recognition of increasing maturity and presents fewer practical difficulties than 21.

Question 77

What criterion does the Committee consider “the best” for defining adulthood in this context?

Answer 77

The legal age of contractual responsibility.

Question 78

While acknowledging arguments for a lower age (16), what does the Committee emphasize about a 16-year-old’s judgment?

Answer 78

A 16-year-old is incapable of forming a mature judgment about actions that could set him apart from society, regardless of physical or psycho-sexual maturity.

Question 79

How does the Committee characterize the maturity of young men between 18 and 21?

Answer 79

They are expected to be more mature than 16-year-olds in this respect.

Question 80

What specific vulnerability of young men around 18 does the Committee highlight?

Answer 80

Many young men leave home around 18 for employment, education, or national service, making them particularly vulnerable to advances from older men, especially through gifts or hospitality.

Question 81

What is the main reason the majority of the Committee prefers 21 as the age of consent?

Answer 81

To protect vulnerable young men between 18 and 21 from undesirable attention and pressures, not because they believe an 18-year-old would be more likely to engage in homosexual practices.

Question 82

What is the Committee’s final recommendation regarding the age of consent for homosexual acts?

Answer 82

21.

Question 83

What is the legal status of any indecent homosexual act committed by a person under 21 if the Committee’s recommendation is accepted?

Answer 83

It will continue to be an offense, regardless of where or with whom it is committed.

Question 84

Does the Committee recommend criminal proceedings for every detected homosexual offense committed by someone under 21?

Answer 84

No

Question 85

In what situations does the Committee believe criminal proceedings should continue to be taken against those under 21?

Answer 85

1. When the offender violates public decency or causes a public nuisance (e.g., persistent importuning). 2. When the behavior constitutes indecent assault (i.e., lack of consent or partner incapable of giving consent).

Question 86

Beyond public decency violations and indecent assault, under what other circumstances does the Committee believe proceedings should be taken against those under 21?

Answer 86

When the behavior is accompanied by conduct of a patently criminal or vicious nature, such as bullying at school, abuse of position by a superior in the services, or involvement in prostitution or blackmail.

Question 87

What does the Committee hope regarding the handling of cases involving young men under 21 who have committed homosexual offenses not involving the above circumstances?

Answer 87

They hope that authorities, parents, and others responsible for the young man’s care will distinguish between serious offenses requiring legal action and less serious instances that might be handled differently.

Question 88

What does the Committee recommend to ensure uniformity of practice in prosecuting homosexual offenses involving those under 21?

Answer 88

Except for prosecutions by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), no prosecution for a private homosexual offense (other than indecent assault) against someone under 21 should be commenced in England and Wales without the Attorney-General’s sanction.

Question 89

What is the procedure in Scotland regarding prosecutions for homosexual offenses?

Answer 89

Prosecutions can only be commenced by the Procurator-Fiscal, acting in the public interest. The Committee believes this ensures sufficient uniformity.

Question 90

What legal framework does the Committee believe is sufficient for dealing with offenses by young persons under 17?

Answer 90

The provisions of the Children and Young Persons Acts.

Question 91

What principle should be the overriding consideration when deciding how to deal with an offense by a young person under 17?

Answer 91

The welfare of the young person concerned.

Question 92

How does the Committee expect authorities to handle cases involving young persons under 17 with no vicious or criminal intent?

Answer 92

They expect the authorities to deal with the offender under the “care or protection” provisions of the Acts rather than by charging them with a criminal offense, if it is necessary to bring them to court at all.

Question 93

What did the Committee consider regarding the “care or protection” provisions and those aged 17-21?

Answer 93

They considered adapting these provisions to cover individuals between 17 and 21.

Question 94

Why did the Committee decide against adapting the “care or protection” provisions for 17-21 year olds?

Answer 94

They deemed it impracticable and believed it more appropriate to handle these individuals as they suggested earlier (requiring Attorney General sanction for prosecution) where they cannot be dealt with by those with authority over them (e.g., parents).

Question 95

If the Children and Young Persons Committee raises the upper age limit for “care or protection,” how would this affect the recommendations of the Wolfenden Committee?

Answer 95

The higher age limit would automatically apply to the cases the Wolfenden Committee is considering.

Question 96

What comparison does the Committee make to the defense available in cases of heterosexual intercourse with a girl under 16?

Answer 96

In heterosexual cases, a man under 24 has a defense if he had reasonable cause to believe the girl was over 16. The Committee considered whether a similar defense should apply to homosexual acts with someone under 21.

Question 97

Why does the Committee reject a similar defense for homosexual acts involving those under 21?

Answer 97

The heterosexual defense applies only to a specific case and within a narrow age range without clear grounds. The Committee sees no valid reason to import this provision into the homosexual context.

Question 98

What does the Committee explicitly clarify about their recommendation to decriminalize private homosexual acts between consenting adults?

Answer 98

It is not intended to countenance any forms of behavior resembling the objectionable activities associated with female prostitution.

Question 99

What does the Committee expect will continue to be provided for by the law?

Answer 99

The preservation of public order and decency, in line with their definition of the functions of criminal law outlined earlier in the report (paragraph 13).

Question 100

What procedural safeguard does the Committee recommend for prosecutions of private homosexual offenses against individuals under 21 in England and Wales?

Answer 100

Except for prosecutions by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), no such prosecution should be commenced without the sanction of the Attorney-General. This aims to ensure uniformity and prevent inappropriate prosecutions.

Question 101

What does the Committee expect the law to continue to provide for?

Answer 101

The preservation of public order and decency, the protection of citizens from offensive or injurious conduct, and the suppression of the exploitation of weaker members of society.

Question 102

How will conduct approximating to “living on the earnings of prostitution” be addressed?

Answer 102

It will be covered to some extent by the recommendation that procuring or attempting to procure homosexual acts by third parties should remain an offense.

Question 103

What additional safeguard does the Committee recommend regarding “living on the earnings of prostitution”?

Answer 103

The law relating to living on the earnings of prostitution should be made to apply, as far as practicable, to the earnings of male prostitution as it does to female prostitution.

Question 104

What final recommendation does the Committee make regarding premises used for homosexual practices?

Answer 104

The law should be amended to make it explicit that the word “brothel” includes premises used for homosexual lewdness as well as those used for heterosexual lewdness.

Question 105

Official name of the report?

Answer 105

Report of the Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution in Great Britain