Earlier this month, Gordon Brown rightfully made an official public apology on behalf of the British government for the horrendously inhumane treatment of the great scientist and war hero Alan Turing. I find it impossible to comprehend that a government could subject one of their leading scientists to barbaric hormone treatment which ultimately lead to his tragic suicide, but this was the Britain that my parents grew up in.

On the day it was announced, I was pondering just how much things have changed and how lucky I am to have grown up in the 90s as I walked through a town in the north east to catch a train. Just as I was reassuring myself that nothing like that could ever happen again in Britain, I passed one of the town’s few gay bars and noticed that the windows had been bashed in. This sight served as a timely slap across the face, scolding me for my naivety and complacency.

Although I can’t be sure that the damage caused to the pub window was motivated by homophobia, or indeed that the damage was deliberate, it did offer a stark reminder to me that while growing up as a gay boy or girl in big multicultural cities like London is perhaps much easier than it once was, homophobia is still rife in our society.

Go into one of our faith schools and you’ll see teachers – many of whom are the only positive role models young people have – trying to indoctrinate students using ancient and largely irrelevant anti-gay scriptures in place of text books. Many schools have no policy in place to deal with homophobic bullying. Or go to a bar in Oldham, Burnley or Middlesbrough or any working class northern town and see gay and lesbian couples afraid to show affection to each other for fear of being attacked. Or, why not pay a visit to your local football stadium and listen to vile homophobic chants about gays dying of AIDS?

I recently heard one gay man in his forties sprouting nonsense about how easy young gays have it “now that it has become fashionable to be gay”.

I was furious at hearing a gay man reiterate this pathetic cliché, which was invented by the gay-hating, intellectually stunted, “political correctness gone mad” brigade led by the cretinous and unfunny Richard Littlejohn. I proceeded to suggest that he speak to some of the gay youngsters helped by organisations like the Albert Kennedy Trust, many of whom have had to leave school due to the bullying and lack of institutional support and have been made homeless by their uncaring parents.

The Labour Party was elected in 1997 on a platform of fairness and social equality which brought with it huge expectations from the gay community. After five years of working in parliament on the inside, so to speak (or at least the outside of the inside), I ultimately became disillusioned with the New Labour project and with Tony Blair in particular. Yet, whenever I criticise Blair for his lack of ambition and his failure to live up to his promise and take advantage of a huge majority I am always mindful of the great changes his government brought about for gay people. New Labour has undoubtedly been less than radical in many areas and has more frequently followed public opinion than led it. The one exception to this is the equality agenda which Blair personally drove through the House of Commons, often against the tide of public opinion and to the horror of great swathes of the right-wing press.

The Labour Party has in this area been light years ahead the other main parties and has dragged public opinion with it. In fact, it has been so determined to eradicate homophobia (as it has been with religious intolerance) that measures, particularly incitement laws, have been introduced which I feel will be counter-productive and erode the freedom of speech. If I so choose, I reserve the right criticise religions for promoting prejudices which are justified on supernatural and unscientific grounds. On the same token though, people should be allowed to say whatever they like about gay lifestyles and rather than being slapped down by the law they should be defeated on the weakness of their argument.

While I do believe that the government’s equality agenda has undoubtedly made Britain a fairer and less hostile place for gays and lesbians, we must not be complacent. As I mentioned earlier, homophobia is still rife in certain parts of our society. The fact that gays are no longer discriminated against in law has brought about a societal change which will eventually trickle down into our schools, our football terraces and our smaller towns and villages.

Amongst gay activists, MPs, researchers and advisors in the Labour Party, the issue of how to campaign and appeal to gay voters approaching the next election is being debated hotly at the moment. Many of them point to the fact that every piece of legislation which discriminates against gays was introduced by the Tories and every bit of positive legislation was introduced by Labour. They also say that we should tell the gay voter to judge us on our record in government and look at the voting records of Cameron and his cronies before they took hold of the reins of the party. Cameron in particular accused the government of pursuing “a fringe agenda” by repealing Section 28 – perhaps the single piece of legislation which has caused the most damage to gay people and slowed the march towards equality since homosexuality was decriminalised in 1968.

Yet, although all these points are both powerful and true, it would be ridiculous to assume that gay people vote on one issue, especially now we have legal equality. On the contrary, like everyone else, they will take into account other areas like the economy, the health service and taxes. Rather like Churchill being swiftly rejected by the electorate after the Second World War despite his efforts as war leader, it will be easy for minorities to say to Labour “you’ve given us equality, thank you very much. Now I’m not discriminated against in the workplace and overlooked for promotion because of my sexuality I will vote Tory because my civil partner and I want to pay lower taxes.” It is true that people tend to vote less retrospectively and now that the Tories are making some of the right noises and accepting the equality Labour has introduced, there doesn’t seem to be an obvious element of risk for gay people voting Tory as there always was previously.

I don’t agree that the Tories will reintroduce Section 28 or repeal the Civil Partnerships Act under Cameron because there will be no public demand for it. Yet proactive state intervention is needed for the completion of the societal change Labour ignited and for the subtle changes required to eke out the pockets of discrimination in those hard-to-reach areas like schools.

If Labour is replaced by a Tory government who will be, at best, indifferent to equality then the opportunity to continue making our society a better place for gay people may be missed. In our schools in particular, state action is required to undo the damage caused by Section 28.

Teachers are still scared to talk about homosexuality and don’t feel equipped to do so. The Tories will undoubtedly attempt to roll back the state and allow the third sector to plug the gaps. The problem with this is that a huge proportion of third sector organisations who provide services are religious. As we have seen with the Catholic adoption agencies, they do not provide an equal service to gay people. We should also not overlook how crucial the tone a government sets is and the implications it has for society.

The cruel, selfish tone of Thatcherism undoubtedly changed the mood of Britain for the worse and created a hostile climate for gay people. If we are to see through the progress made in the last 12 years then it may crucial that we have a government which continues to bang the drum for equality and sets a progressive tone.

Consider these remarks from Peter Tatchell, who rightly points out that equality should not be taken for granted: “In 1930, Berlin was the gay capital of the World. There were gay bars and clubs, publications and organisations and the future looked bright. Three years later the Nazis came to power and all that changed. Thousands were carted off to concentration camps where they died. We should never take our rights and freedoms for granted and to quote the old adage, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”

Alex Bryce is a Labour Party researcher and a former parliamentary candidate.

“I’d put entertainer,” Rikki Beadle-Blair says with a grin, when I ask him what he puts down as his occupation when he fills in official forms.

The reason for my question is that Rikki seems to be good at everything. He wrote his first play at the age of seven and started directing at eleven.

He has enjoyed success as an actor, director, screenwriter, playwright, singer and songwriter; and in his spare time, if he gets any, he teaches aerobics and dance.

One of his most successful and famous projects was the hilarious, fast-paced, loud and proud Channel 4 series Metrosexuality.

As well as creating the series, he wrote and directed every episode, performed and wrote all the songs, including the theme music, and even designed the costumes and sets.

Oh, and I forgot to mention that he also played the lead role.

So, when asked by Stonewall and queerupnorth to write a play tackling homophobia to be performed in schools, he took up the challenge willingly.

The play, called Fit, has been performed across the country in schools which put themselves forward to be included in the programme.

“I saw the project as a really exciting challenge and it has been really rewarding,” he says when I ask him how and why he got involved.

“Homophobia in schools is rife.

“We saw around 10,000 kids in total and while we were touring, I would ask the kids how many people thought homosexuality was wrong and in every single school the vast majority, about 80%, would put their hands up.”

The recent research on the subject of homophobia in schools supports Rikki’s assessment.

According to Stonewall’s Education For All campaign, more than 65% of young gay and lesbian pupils experience homophobic bullying in their schools and this figure rises to 75% in faith schools; yet only 23% have been told homophobic bullying is wrong by teachers.

This proves that while attitudes in Britain have changed, the ghost of section 28 still haunts our schools and playgrounds.

What is particularly interesting, and somewhat reassuring, is that the report found that in those schools where pupils have been told that it is wrong to bully people on the grounds of their sexuality, gay pupils are 60% less likely to be bullied.

In short, intervention actually works. That’s why a project like Fit could really change attitudes and, in turn, change lives.

It would be impossible to talk about homophobia in schools without mentioning Section 28.

When I suggest to Rikki that Section 28 is at least partly responsible for homophobia still being so deeply ingrained in our schools, he concurs.

“Yes, it was certainly damaging. Teachers are still scared to this day of talking about being gay. There’s also the fear of parents complaining.”

I ask him if he was aware of any negative response from parents about Fit.

“No, but one boy did say that his dad had told him that morning that if two boys kiss in the play he should leave the room.”

When I laugh at the absurdity of this, Rikki adds, “I know. What did he think would happen to his son if he stayed in the room?”

As we were talking about Section 28, a high school memory of my own flashed through my mind.

I was in the throes of puberty, with my hormones in overdrive and I was starting to develop an awareness of my sexuality.

As my own feelings were not explained or even mentioned in the sex education lessons, for the first time in my life, I began to feel different.

After one particular PSE lesson I plucked up the courage to stay behind after class to talk to my teacher. At an age when fitting-in means everything and homosexuality simply wasn’t discussed in schools I was taking quite a risk.

I remember packing away my things slowly and carefully choosing my words.

“Miss, what do men who are attracted to men do in bed?” I asked.

The teacher looked slightly concerned by my question. “I really would like to talk to you about this, but I’m legally obliged not to,” she said with genuine regret.

I was utterly perplexed that a committed and genuinely caring professional felt that she wasn’t permitted to talk to and support one of her pupils.

This was my own personal encounter with Section 28. What could have been a turning point for me, allowing me to feel accepted and ‘normal’ left me isolated and confused at a time when I was particularly vulnerable.

I don’t recall homosexuality ever being mentioned by teachers when I was at school and when it is mentioned in high schools today it tends to be a passing reference in sex education.

The reason why Fit strikes a chord with teenagers is that it manages to realistically depict their feelings and the ways in which they relate to each other without being inappropriate for schools.

That was partly down to Rikki’s writing.

“Usually I can just write what I like, but with Fit there were certain things I couldn’t do,” he says when I raise the issue of finding the appropriate language.

“No swearing for example. It was quite a challenge writing the language so that it was raw and realistic without using some of the words which they use to each other.

“Also, conveying the homophobia was difficult with the limits on the language and violence I could use. But I think we found a way around it.

“It was the most difficult play I’ve ever had to write because it had to hit so many bullet points.

“As well as the language I was also expected to portray positive gay characters.

“In a weird way, though I have written hundreds and hundreds of positive gay characters in the past, it did make it more difficult.

“Obviously in real life gay people come in all shapes and sizes, they are normal. In the end, I think I was able to make them quite complex.

“I wanted to focus on was sexual confusion, which would reflect some of the feelings the kids seeing the play might have.”

The story focuses on six high school kids and their teacher, played by Rikki himself.

As the quiet, sensitive one, Tegs is an easy target for bullies and in particular his tougher, more confident classmates Ryan and Isaac.

Tegs’ best friend, Jordan, is popular and sporty but because they spend so much time together they are the subject of all the gossip.

There are also two feisty girls, Lee and Carmel who, like the boys, have issues surrounding their sexuality. Most of the action takes place as they are stuck together on a bus heading their way up the M1 for a college dance contest.

There is a degree of ambiguity in the sexualities of some of the characters which seems to more accurately reflect the experience of adolescents than the rigid gay/straight divide.

I ask Rikki if this was intentional. “Yes,” he says.

“I consciously didn’t want to portray a big gay/straight divide to give the impression that this divide was being created by them and that in reality there is no need for it.”

At one point in the play the girls kiss (by kiss, I mean a peck on the lips) and, according to Rikki, this is usually met with howls of disapproval by both girls and boys.

This is no surprise given that, as I mentioned earlier, when asked before the performance what they thought of homosexuality the vast majority of the kids said they disagreed with it.

After performing the play the cast, lead by Rikki himself, would hold a discussion with the school audience where their attitudes to homophobia would be debated openly.

This – what Rikki refers to as the “conversation part” – is where he is able to really use the play to challenge and question the kids’ prejudices.

In person, Rikki is hugely entertaining and engaging and despite his confidence as a performer and his commanding stage presence, he is utterly unassuming and seems genuinely interested in my opinions.

With his worldly intelligence and sharp wit, I can imagine the kids in the schools looking up to him and listening to his words of wisdom as they would with a ‘cool’ older brother.

According to Rikki, the responses in the discussion are varied, but one main theme always dominates the discussion.

“They always ask us if we are gay,” he says with a laugh. “That’s the thing everyone wants to know.

“It is a great opener especially if they have been quite homophobic during the show. Then I ask them why we should discuss our sexuality with them.

“The basic message is, ‘if you’ve responded in a homophobic way to the show, why should I tell you about my sexuality and risk having your homophobia directed towards me.’”

When I ask Rikki if he thinks they naturally assume that the cast are all gay he says, “It is an interesting thing that the kids wonder why you would ally yourself with this subject matter if you were not gay yourself.

“The idea that a straight person could be involved in this is really curious to them. It [homosexuality] is seen as a taint, a stain or a disease.

“I always tell them that some of the kids in this room are gay. They sometimes point at each other and say, ‘yes, he’s gay,’ and start bullying each other there and then.

“Then I say, ‘it’s not about them, it’s about you. Can the gay people in here trust you with the knowledge that they are gay?’

“This makes them realise that their homophobia has consequences. It makes them a bad friend or a bad classmate.

“Whatever the discussion, they always come back to ‘are you gay? Is he gay?’” he says, putting on comical childlike voices.

“I have to keep reminding them that they haven’t made us feel safe enough to share that information with them.

“Hopefully that means they move towards trying to win our trust.”

According to Rikki, this encourages them to start questioning their homophobia. “Once they realise that by being homophobic you’re not a good friend or school mate they really want to change.

“And they also want to win out trust. Our aim is to shift the temperature in the room from ‘homophobic is cool’ to ‘tolerance is cool.’

“Sometimes they would say ‘why can’t people be brave and be open about it?’ In response to this, I would say, ‘why should they be brave when you could just be nice?’ They were like, ‘whoa, I completely didn’t get that, but I do now.’”

The characters in the play are designed specifically to challenge some of the stereotypes which are common among young people.

Tegs, the quiet character who often finds himself the victim of his classmates’ homophobic bulling is the object of the affections of his popular, sporty, best friend Jordan.

According to Rikki, “they were fascinated about the idea that a cool, black guy who is good at football could be gay.

“This gave me the opportunity to talk to them about how damaging stereotypes can be. I would turn the stereotyping back on them by saying, ‘well, what about the stereotypes about black people or Muslims? Are they true?’ They would all answer ‘no.’

“So I would say, ‘if you’ve experienced stereotyping which you know is not true, then why would the stereotypes about other groups be true?’

“I do that with northern kids, black kids and even posh white kids.

“They enjoyed thinking about it in that way and benefited from it.

“The characters in the play allowed me to explore these ideas with them. Just like real people they didn’t fit easily into the mould. That’s why I called it Fit.”

As well as effectively using the word ‘fit’ and its different interpretations, the play also explores the use of the word ‘gay’ which has become a common insult in our schools and playgrounds.

Although its use is often not intended to be homophobic, Rikki feels that it can lead to offence and should be stamped out.

“I ask kids who use the word in that way and they always say, ‘well, that’s not what we mean.’

But when I replace it with other words and say, ‘that’s so Muslim, or that’s so black, or that’s so northern,’ they really didn’t like it and sometimes got quite angry with me.”

I find myself laughing out loud every time I conjure up the image of Rikki, a southerner, wearing a bright pink tracksuit (all the characters in the play wear tracksuits, but Rikki’s happens to be bright pink) standing in front of a hundred angry teenagers in Salford using the term ‘northern’ to describe something that’s bad. He’s a brave man.

For a significant part of the discussion the actors stay in character and the children questions them.

“They nearly always ask the homophobic character, ‘why are you so homophobic? You should stick by your friends,’ and sometimes he would leave the room,” says Rikki.

“Usually a kid would ask ‘can I go and get him?’ Often that would be the one who had been most aggressively homophobic.”

When I ask him why he thinks this is, he says, “Because they see themselves in the homophobic character and are seizing the opportunity to be other person, the caring one.”

When I tell Rikki how impressed I am that he gets this sort of positive response from high school children he grins modestly.

“On the whole, the positive response was absolutely overwhelming. The kids always asked us to come back to their school, and some of the more homophobic ones apologised to us.

“It shows how you can really develop their thinking if you talk to them and treat them as intelligent human beings.”

It is clear from his expression that he is profoundly touched at how positive the response was.

“One even asked me if I would get a job in the school with them and loads of them made pictures of me with my big dreadlocks sticking out at the side,” he adds smiling broadly.

So, given how positive the eventual response was, did he and the cast tell the audiences whether or not they were gay?

“At the he end when they persist with it I ask them ‘why should I tell you if I am gay?’ and do you know what the most common answer is?” I shake my head.

“They say ‘because you should be proud to be gay.’ So I ask the whole group ‘you are saying that we should be proud to be gay?’

“And they would all shout ‘Yes!’ Kids would come up afterwards and say quite openly ‘I walked into this room homophobic and will leave it a changed person.’”

I am eager to know if Rikki’s experience of talking to the 10,000 school children leaves him with hope? He is realistic in his response.

“If they change to being positive so quickly, then it is possible that they could easily change back to being negative, but it gave me so much hope that they can open their minds.”

That, in my view, is the key to tackling homophobia in schools.

Children are far more open-minded and willing to learn than adults and that is why it is absolutely crucial to challenge prejudices of all kinds in schools before they take root.

In the ten years since my unfortunate encounter with Section 28 our society has made giant leaps forward in tackling injustice and prejudice.

We now have a government which, rather than introducing legislation to discriminate against sexual minorities, is bringing in measures to protect them.

However, the ghost of Section 28 still haunts our schools and playgrounds.

Homosexual kids are still 3 times more likely to commit suicide than heterosexuals and up to 25% of young runaways in the UK are gay and lesbian.

That is why it is so crucial that we take action immediately. I know that Ed Balls, Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families has been pondering this issue for some time.

My advice to him would be to listen to Rikki and perhaps even support him in his ambition to produce an extended and adapted DVD version of Fit which would be made available to schools nationwide.

If I had been lucky enough to have had Rikki Beadle-Blair and his play Fit in my school then perhaps coming to terms with my sexuality would have been much easier.

The reason for my question is that Rikki seems to be good at everything. He wrote his first play at the age of seven and started directing at eleven.

He has enjoyed success as an actor, director, screenwriter, playwright, singer and songwriter; and in his spare time, if he gets any, he teaches aerobics and dance.

One of his most successful and famous projects was the hilarious, fast-paced, loud and proud Channel 4 series Metrosexuality.

As well as creating the series, he wrote and directed every episode, performed and wrote all the songs, including the theme music, and even designed the costumes and sets.

Oh, and I forgot to mention that he also played the lead role.

So, when asked by Stonewall and queerupnorth to write a play tackling homophobia to be performed in schools, he took up the challenge willingly.

The play, called Fit, has been performed across the country in schools which put themselves forward to be included in the programme.

“I saw the project as a really exciting challenge and it has been really rewarding,” he says when I ask him how and why he got involved.

“Homophobia in schools is rife.

“We saw around 10,000 kids in total and while we were touring, I would ask the kids how many people thought homosexuality was wrong and in every single school the vast majority, about 80%, would put their hands up.”

The recent research on the subject of homophobia in schools supports Rikki’s assessment.

According to Stonewall’s Education For All campaign, more than 65% of young gay and lesbian pupils experience homophobic bullying in their schools and this figure rises to 75% in faith schools; yet only 23% have been told homophobic bullying is wrong by teachers.

This proves that while attitudes in Britain have changed, the ghost of section 28 still haunts our schools and playgrounds.

What is particularly interesting, and somewhat reassuring, is that the report found that in those schools where pupils have been told that it is wrong to bully people on the grounds of their sexuality, gay pupils are 60% less likely to be bullied.

In short, intervention actually works. That’s why a project like Fit could really change attitudes and, in turn, change lives.

It would be impossible to talk about homophobia in schools without mentioning Section 28.

When I suggest to Rikki that Section 28 is at least partly responsible for homophobia still being so deeply ingrained in our schools, he concurs.

“Yes, it was certainly damaging. Teachers are still scared to this day of talking about being gay. There’s also the fear of parents complaining.”

I ask him if he was aware of any negative response from parents about Fit.

“No, but one boy did say that his dad had told him that morning that if two boys kiss in the play he should leave the room.”

When I laugh at the absurdity of this, Rikki adds, “I know. What did he think would happen to his son if he stayed in the room?”

As we were talking about Section 28, a high school memory of my own flashed through my mind.

I was in the throes of puberty, with my hormones in overdrive and I was starting to develop an awareness of my sexuality.

As my own feelings were not explained or even mentioned in the sex education lessons, for the first time in my life, I began to feel different.

After one particular PSE lesson I plucked up the courage to stay behind after class to talk to my teacher. At an age when fitting-in means everything and homosexuality simply wasn’t discussed in schools I was taking quite a risk.

I remember packing away my things slowly and carefully choosing my words.

“Miss, what do men who are attracted to men do in bed?” I asked.

The teacher looked slightly concerned by my question. “I really would like to talk to you about this, but I’m legally obliged not to,” she said with genuine regret.

I was utterly perplexed that a committed and genuinely caring professional felt that she wasn’t permitted to talk to and support one of her pupils.

This was my own personal encounter with Section 28. What could have been a turning point for me, allowing me to feel accepted and ‘normal’ left me isolated and confused at a time when I was particularly vulnerable.

I don’t recall homosexuality ever being mentioned by teachers when I was at school and when it is mentioned in high schools today it tends to be a passing reference in sex education.

The reason why Fit strikes a chord with teenagers is that it manages to realistically depict their feelings and the ways in which they relate to each other without being inappropriate for schools.

That was partly down to Rikki’s writing.

“Usually I can just write what I like, but with Fit there were certain things I couldn’t do,” he says when I raise the issue of finding the appropriate language.

“No swearing for example. It was quite a challenge writing the language so that it was raw and realistic without using some of the words which they use to each other.

“Also, conveying the homophobia was difficult with the limits on the language and violence I could use. But I think we found a way around it.

“It was the most difficult play I’ve ever had to write because it had to hit so many bullet points.

“As well as the language I was also expected to portray positive gay characters.

“In a weird way, though I have written hundreds and hundreds of positive gay characters in the past, it did make it more difficult.

“Obviously in real life gay people come in all shapes and sizes, they are normal. In the end, I think I was able to make them quite complex.

“I wanted to focus on was sexual confusion, which would reflect some of the feelings the kids seeing the play might have.”

The story focuses on six high school kids and their teacher, played by Rikki himself.

As the quiet, sensitive one, Tegs is an easy target for bullies and in particular his tougher, more confident classmates Ryan and Isaac.

Tegs’ best friend, Jordan, is popular and sporty but because they spend so much time together they are the subject of all the gossip.

There are also two feisty girls, Lee and Carmel who, like the boys, have issues surrounding their sexuality. Most of the action takes place as they are stuck together on a bus heading their way up the M1 for a college dance contest.

There is a degree of ambiguity in the sexualities of some of the characters which seems to more accurately reflect the experience of adolescents than the rigid gay/straight divide.

I ask Rikki if this was intentional. “Yes,” he says.

“I consciously didn’t want to portray a big gay/straight divide to give the impression that this divide was being created by them and that in reality there is no need for it.”

At one point in the play the girls kiss (by kiss, I mean a peck on the lips) and, according to Rikki, this is usually met with howls of disapproval by both girls and boys.

This is no surprise given that, as I mentioned earlier, when asked before the performance what they thought of homosexuality the vast majority of the kids said they disagreed with it.

After performing the play the cast, lead by Rikki himself, would hold a discussion with the school audience where their attitudes to homophobia would be debated openly.

This – what Rikki refers to as the “conversation part” – is where he is able to really use the play to challenge and question the kids’ prejudices.

In person, Rikki is hugely entertaining and engaging and despite his confidence as a performer and his commanding stage presence, he is utterly unassuming and seems genuinely interested in my opinions.

With his worldly intelligence and sharp wit, I can imagine the kids in the schools looking up to him and listening to his words of wisdom as they would with a ‘cool’ older brother.

According to Rikki, the responses in the discussion are varied, but one main theme always dominates the discussion.

“They always ask us if we are gay,” he says with a laugh. “That’s the thing everyone wants to know.

“It is a great opener especially if they have been quite homophobic during the show. Then I ask them why we should discuss our sexuality with them.

“The basic message is, ‘if you’ve responded in a homophobic way to the show, why should I tell you about my sexuality and risk having your homophobia directed towards me.’”

When I ask Rikki if he thinks they naturally assume that the cast are all gay he says, “It is an interesting thing that the kids wonder why you would ally yourself with this subject matter if you were not gay yourself.

“The idea that a straight person could be involved in this is really curious to them. It [homosexuality] is seen as a taint, a stain or a disease.

“I always tell them that some of the kids in this room are gay. They sometimes point at each other and say, ‘yes, he’s gay,’ and start bullying each other there and then.

“Then I say, ‘it’s not about them, it’s about you. Can the gay people in here trust you with the knowledge that they are gay?’

“This makes them realise that their homophobia has consequences. It makes them a bad friend or a bad classmate.

“Whatever the discussion, they always come back to ‘are you gay? Is he gay?’” he says, putting on comical childlike voices.

“I have to keep reminding them that they haven’t made us feel safe enough to share that information with them.

“Hopefully that means they move towards trying to win our trust.”

According to Rikki, this encourages them to start questioning their homophobia. “Once they realise that by being homophobic you’re not a good friend or school mate they really want to change.

“And they also want to win out trust. Our aim is to shift the temperature in the room from ‘homophobic is cool’ to ‘tolerance is cool.’

“Sometimes they would say ‘why can’t people be brave and be open about it?’ In response to this, I would say, ‘why should they be brave when you could just be nice?’ They were like, ‘whoa, I completely didn’t get that, but I do now.’”

The characters in the play are designed specifically to challenge some of the stereotypes which are common among young people.

Tegs, the quiet character who often finds himself the victim of his classmates’ homophobic bulling is the object of the affections of his popular, sporty, best friend Jordan.

According to Rikki, “they were fascinated about the idea that a cool, black guy who is good at football could be gay.

“This gave me the opportunity to talk to them about how damaging stereotypes can be. I would turn the stereotyping back on them by saying, ‘well, what about the stereotypes about black people or Muslims? Are they true?’ They would all answer ‘no.’

“So I would say, ‘if you’ve experienced stereotyping which you know is not true, then why would the stereotypes about other groups be true?’

“I do that with northern kids, black kids and even posh white kids.

“They enjoyed thinking about it in that way and benefited from it.

“The characters in the play allowed me to explore these ideas with them. Just like real people they didn’t fit easily into the mould. That’s why I called it Fit.“

As well as effectively using the word ‘fit’ and its different interpretations, the play also explores the use of the word ‘gay’ which has become a common insult in our schools and playgrounds.

Although its use is often not intended to be homophobic, Rikki feels that it can lead to offence and should be stamped out.

“I ask kids who use the word in that way and they always say, ‘well, that’s not what we mean.’

But when I replace it with other words and say, ‘that’s so Muslim, or that’s so black, or that’s so northern,’ they really didn’t like it and sometimes got quite angry with me.”

I find myself laughing out loud every time I conjure up the image of Rikki, a southerner, wearing a bright pink tracksuit (all the characters in the play wear tracksuits, but Rikki’s happens to be bright pink) standing in front of a hundred angry teenagers in Salford using the term ‘northern’ to describe something that’s bad. He’s a brave man.

For a significant part of the discussion the actors stay in character and the children questions them.

“They nearly always ask the homophobic character, ‘why are you so homophobic? You should stick by your friends,’ and sometimes he would leave the room,” says Rikki.

“Usually a kid would ask ‘can I go and get him?’ Often that would be the one who had been most aggressively homophobic.”

When I ask him why he thinks this is, he says, “Because they see themselves in the homophobic character and are seizing the opportunity to be other person, the caring one.”

When I tell Rikki how impressed I am that he gets this sort of positive response from high school children he grins modestly.

“On the whole, the positive response was absolutely overwhelming. The kids always asked us to come back to their school, and some of the more homophobic ones apologised to us.

“It shows how you can really develop their thinking if you talk to them and treat them as intelligent human beings.”

It is clear from his expression that he is profoundly touched at how positive the response was.

“One even asked me if I would get a job in the school with them and loads of them made pictures of me with my big dreadlocks sticking out at the side,” he adds smiling broadly.

So, given how positive the eventual response was, did he and the cast tell the audiences whether or not they were gay?

“At the he end when they persist with it I ask them ‘why should I tell you if I am gay?’ and do you know what the most common answer is?” I shake my head.

“They say ‘because you should be proud to be gay.’ So I ask the whole group ‘you are saying that we should be proud to be gay?’

“And they would all shout ‘Yes!’ Kids would come up afterwards and say quite openly ‘I walked into this room homophobic and will leave it a changed person.’”

I am eager to know if Rikki’s experience of talking to the 10,000 school children leaves him with hope? He is realistic in his response.

“If they change to being positive so quickly, then it is possible that they could easily change back to being negative, but it gave me so much hope that they can open their minds.”

That, in my view, is the key to tackling homophobia in schools.

Children are far more open-minded and willing to learn than adults and that is why it is absolutely crucial to challenge prejudices of all kinds in schools before they take root.

In the ten years since my unfortunate encounter with Section 28 our society has made giant leaps forward in tackling injustice and prejudice.

We now have a government which, rather than introducing legislation to discriminate against sexual minorities, is bringing in measures to protect them.

However, the ghost of Section 28 still haunts our schools and playgrounds.

Homosexual kids are still 3 times more likely to commit suicide than heterosexuals and up to 25% of young runaways in the UK are gay and lesbian.

That is why it is so crucial that we take action immediately. I know that Ed Balls, Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families has been pondering this issue for some time.

My advice to him would be to listen to Rikki and perhaps even support him in his ambition to produce an extended and adapted DVD version of Fit which would be made available to schools nationwide.

If I had been lucky enough to have had Rikki Beadle-Blair and his play Fit in my school then perhaps coming to terms with my sexuality would have been much easier.

Last week’s launch event at the Football Association headquarters in Soho Square was attended by the great and the good from the gay community and the football world.

Several Members of Parliament were there to lend their support along with gay rights activist Peter Tatchell, sporting a shiny black-eye after his recent trip to Moscow, former Boyzone singer Stephen Gately and football legend Sir Trevor Brooking.

Representatives from all of London’s gay football teams were also present, including current World Champions Stonewall FC and Leftfooters FC, who are hosting next year’s tournament.

The matches will take place in Regents Park between Sunday 24th and Saturday 30th August 2008 and the final will be held at Leyton Orient’s Matchroom Stadium in East London, which has a capacity of over 7,000.

As well as the support from leading football luminaries such as Sir Trevor, London Mayor Ken Livingstone, Minister for Sport Richard Caborn and even the Prime Minister himself all sent letters backing the championship and praising the gay teams for their success.

Mr. Blair said in his letter:

“Sport possesses an extraordinary capacity to dispel ignorance, challenge prejudice and break down barriers between all sections of the community.”

At the launch I managed to chat to openly gay MP Chris Bryant, who said that even though he can’t kick a football to save his life, he is delighted that the Championships are coming to London and that the FA have given their full backing.

“The human rights we often take for granted are denied many around the world and this is yet another way of showing the world the value of respecting the rights and lifestyles of all,” he said.

I also spoke to Clive Betts MP, who is the Chair of the Parliamentary Football Club.

Mr Betts is an influential voice in Parliament for football and has been a consistent friend of the gay footballing community.

He recently sponsored a motion in Parliament about homophobia in the game and last year playing in a match between MPs and Stonewall FC.

He said:

“Next year’s tournament is great news for football and also great news for equality.

“The fact that the FA have lent their support so strongly is absolutely crucial.

“In the last few years they have moved light years ahead of their previous position on gay rights and that deserves recognition.

“There is a long way to go to make football a more gay-friendly environment, but there are positive signs we are moving forward.”

Given all the criticism the football authorities have been subjected to over the levels of homophobia in the beautiful game, it was heartening to see the FA offering such unwavering support.

As well as lending their facilities for the launch and proving the esteemed guests with bottomless glasses of champagne, Simon Johnson, FA Director of Corporate Affairs, spoke eloquently about their support for the tournament.

Perhaps with the support of MPs, the London gay community and the FA, next year’s IGLFA World Championships will send out a serious message to the Football world that, contrary to the stereotypes, gays and lesbians are serious about football and have a role to play at all levels.

For more information on the London 2008 International Gay and Lesbian Football Association World Championships click here