My thoughts are with Gilad and his family.

When I was about 18, my friend Matt Belgrano (pictured above) handed down to me a faux zebra skin coat that he’d worn for one of his iconic photoshoots. It was a funny moment because I’m not really a flamboyant kind of guy, but what else can you do when someone gives you a big camp coat? I put it on and wandered down Acton High Street, noticing with interest the looks, taunts and other funny reactions from passers-by.

The sense of otherness I felt was exciting, and it made me wonder… what is it about human beings that leads us to generate, cling to and buck trends, moulding our own sense of identity as we change how we appear to others?

And how can we remain authentic while changing how we present ourselves to the world?

I explored this idea with youthful enthusiasm by applying some eyeliner (these days you’d call it guyliner) and getting my ears pierced. Then I threw out the eyeliner and shaved my head instead, noticing that I was suddenly considered one of the lads again. The people who’d taunted me for my zebra coat didn’t recognise me and thought I was a new person. It was fun!

I bought a suit and hired an office in Mayfair… and I was treated one way. I dressed scruffy and rode a bike… and I was treated another way.

It didn’t occur to me at the time but I was playing with something I now think is pretty powerful. I joined a group of chaos magicians recently and they said they’d only teach me a certain ritual if I agreed to grow a silly beard and keep it going for a year, whatever anyone else said about it. My laugh must have convinced them I’m already pretty detached from my outward appearance; I don’t need to grow the beard, and they agreed to teach me the ritual anyway.

It’s fun to keep playing though!

I dyed my hair purple a couple of years ago, just to see what would happen. I put on weight, then lost it. I wore glasses, and took them off.

It’s become one of my fascinations: projecting different edges into the world (or blending into invisibility) while remaining consistently, congruently and roundedly me.

What does your manner and appearance project into the world? Is it what you want?

If not, what’s the smallest change you can make today that will make the biggest difference?

If “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic” (Arthur C Clarke) then anything that doesn’t seem magical yet can probably be developed further.

What in your life isn’t magical?

Let’s push things forward.

They keep insisting that their view of him has nothing to do with his secret sexuality, but that’s exactly what it’s about.

Let’s be clear about this: if David had done what most people think he should have done, he would have cost the taxpayer substantially more money. By keeping his relationship private, he saved us money. So that makes it very simple: if you think he did something wrong, it cannot be because he was greedy with public funds – he clearly wasn’t – and it can only be because he chose to be secretive about his private life.

In case you don’t know, here are the facts in a nutshell. Members of Parliament have to spend some time in their constituency and some time in Westminster. Since these places are often hundreds of miles apart and it’s impossible to go back and forth each day, all MPs are allowed to claim back the cost of sometimes living away from their main home. Many of them abused that allowance by claiming for ridiculous extras, like their moat being cleaned. But David Laws has always claimed comparatively little – 410 of the 646 MPs sitting in 2009 cost us more than he did, and many of them also claimed further allowances for their partner to travel back and forth with them, which obviously David didn’t do.

The problem is that the rules changed in 2006. From then on it became forbidden to claim back your rent if your landlord is also your partner and if you’re living together “as spouses”. What does it mean to live “as spouses”? The rules don’t say. David and his partner kept their relationship extremely private, not even telling their friends. Their time together was completely separate from the rest of their lives – only between them, only in private. So it makes sense that they didn’t consider themselves to be living as “man and wife”.

That kind of relationship will seem rather odd to most of us, and that’s the point. Most people these days pride themselves on being modern, inclusive and “gay-friendly” – and it challenges them deeply that David didn’t mirror that back.

But was it unreasonable of him? I don’t think so.

Ben Bradshaw – the openly gay MP for Exeter – scoffed yesterday and suggested it’s nonsense for anyone to keep their sexuality private in this day and age. Ben Summerskill, the preening chair of gay rights group Stonewall, said pretty much the same. What utter arses.

It’s 43 years since homosexuality was decriminalised in England and things are very, very different to the way they were. Nonetheless, I know dozens of people who are very effective as political advisers and researchers but refuse to stand for elected office themselves because they don’t want their private lives to be critiqued and compared to the man next door. For all the progress we’ve made, only 3% of MPs are openly gay. In the House of Lords, less than 0.3% of peers are. Many good people hide parts of their life or stay in the back rooms of politics because being elected is tough and being gay is still a source of anti-rapport on the doorsteps of Britain. It’s possible to win as an openly gay candidate these days, but it’s an added hurdle to overcome. And whatever others say, I think it’s ok not to be a trailblazer.

David Laws undoubtedly made an error of judgement. He should have realised that many London-based media types have a more progressive attitude to homosexuality than he does himself, and it’s important to those people – as part of their own identity – that they are inclusive and recognise his gay partner as a fully-fledged spouse, even if he himself doesn’t. By shunning their new norms and just wanting his private life to be left alone, David reminds us at a critical time that being gay is still an uncomfortable issue for some people, and that doesn’t even change when you’re one of the most powerful men in the country. That was his downfall. When he was born, this kind of relationship was illegal. Not everyone is comfortable being open, even now. But it’s very un-PC to remind us of that. And that’s why he had to go.

Remember that he could have claimed for a whole house and let his partner live there rent free – that would have been within the rules. He could have charged for his partner to travel back and forth to Yeovil with him, and all kinds of other things too. In fact, he cost us very little. So this isn’t really about the money; it’s about us facing the fact that, collectively, we haven’t progressed as far as we like to think we have. That’s the awkward truth that David Laws represents.

What a thing to lose your job over. I don’t know how anyone can feel anything other than a lot of sadness for the guy, whatever you think of his politics.

There is more to do, of course. Please support the UN-led campaign to change the law in Malawi so this cannot happen to another couple. One thing I will do today is write to Ban Ki-moon to thank him for his critical intervention. You can contact him too, via the UN website.

Original post:

Please do something to support Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga. They are a couple in Malawi and have just been sentenced to 14 years hard labour. Their crime? They declared their love for each other publicly. And they are both men.

These guys are not criminals by any civilised definition, yet they look sure to die in terrible prison conditions unless the international community steps up.

They were arrested in December after holding an engagement party. Homosexuality is illegal in Malawi.

Amnesty International has adopted the couple as prisoners of conscience and called for their immediate and unconditional release.

Michelle Kagari, deputy Africa programme director at Amnesty, says: “Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga should never have been arrested or prosecuted. That they have been sentenced to 14 years of hard labour is an outrage.”

The defendants have reportedly been subjected to torture and other ill-treatment. They told their lawyers that they were beaten by police while in custody.

You can join the protest this Saturday 29th May outside the Malawi High Commission in London or the United Nations in New York. Check Facebook for the latest details.

The remainder of this post is given over to Peter Tatchell who has some more practical things you can do to help, if you want to.

These are four ways you can help:

FIRST

Send a letter or postcard of support to Steven and Tiwonge. In this difficult time, they need to know that people around the world love and support them. Get all your friends to do the same. Lots of letters will send a powerful signal to the government of Malawi that the couple have international support.

Write to:
Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza, Prisoners, Chichiri Prison,
P.O.Box 30117, Chichiri, Blantyre 3, Malawi

SECOND

Sign Madonna’s petition which condemns the jailing of Steven and Tiwonge and which calls for equality and human rights:

http://www.raisingmalawi.org/AddYourName

THIRD

Write a letter to your elected political representative. Urge him or her to write a letter of protest to Malawian President and to the Malawian Ambassador in your country.

If you live in the UK:
Email your MP and all your MEPs via this website:  http://www.writetothem.com

Ask your MP and MEPs to protest to the Malawian President and to the Malawi High Commission in London.

FOURTH

Make a donation by post or BACS electronic transfer to the Malawi Defence Campaign, organised by the UK-based LGBT organisation OutRage!.

OutRage! will use all money donated to support Tiwonge and Steven with food parcels, medicine, clothes, blankets etc. and to help fund the campaign for their release.

By BACS electronic transfer:
Account name: Outrage
Bank: Alliance and Leicester Commercial Bank, Bootle, Merseyside, GIR
0AA, England, UK
Account number: 77809302
Sort code: 72-00-01
For electronic transfers from overseas (outside the UK), please
ADDITIONALLY quote these codes:
BIC: ALEIGB22
IBAN: GB65ALE1720001778093 02

By cheque:
Write a cheque payable to “OutRage!” and send to OutRage!, PO Box 17816, London SW14 8WT. Enclose a note giving your name and address and stating that your donation is for the Malawi Defence campaign.

Thanks for your concern and commitment to justice for Tiwonge and Steven.

I sometimes wonder about the people who organise this kind of thing. Do they think that Jews have dreamed for generations of building a fence like this? Did generations go to bed as children praying that one day there would be a massive fence through their country, and everyone – Jews and Arabs alike – would have to cross checkpoints as they drove from one area to another?

The security fence is there because terrorist Palestinian suicide bombers used to get dressed up in garments of mass murder, travel into heavily-populated areas and then detonate themselves. I know we don’t like to think about it but that’s what happened, for years. They specifically targeted areas packed with children and tourists. There are countless reports of bomb-ladened terrorists not getting on a half-empty bus and waiting instead for one packed with school kids. It was a terrorist campaign that systematically killed thousands of innocent people, harmed many thousands more and made an impact on every person living in Israel. Terrorism is a crime against humanity and Israel doesn’t only have the right to protect its citizens, it has a moral duty that it takes seriously.

Remember that these murders happened after the Camp David Summit when the then Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak proposed to give up all of the Gaza Strip, 91% of the West Bank and make Eastern Jerusalem the capital of a new Palestinian state, under Palestinian rule. Amazingly, this offer was rejected by Yasser Arafat and he wouldn’t decommission a single weapon. His own people rioted in protest. Pretty much everyone involved at that time realised that Arafat didn’t want peace, because ongoing war was far more profitable for him. “I am a failure”, US president Bill Clinton told Arafat as Arafat refused to negotiate. “And you made me one.”

It’s against this backdrop that the Israeli people asked their government to take action that would protect them.

And the fence works. More than 90% of attacks have been thwarted. Men, women and children are alive today because of that fence.

I know the issue is complicated of course, but it’s less complicated than some people make it out to be. We can always map across from our own experiences. When London was attacked by suicide bombers in 2005, we heightened our security because we felt the threat. London was attacked four times in one day and the impact still resonates. I remember having to wait a long time to get a tube across town on 7th July, and we all agreed it was better to wait safely than be blown to pieces.

Racist violence rose sharply in London after 7th July. The police shot an innocent man in Brixton because they thought he was a threat to many others. We didn’t cope very well, even when the attacks lasted only for one day.

Israel was recognised as a legal, democratic country by the United Nations in 1948. Its hostile neighbours declared war immediately, and now Israel has been under attack every day of its existence. This isn’t a war about land or resources; it’s about power and ideology. Palestinians leaders have consistently rejected all opportunities for statehood because they will not accept any solution that leaves Israel in existence. They don’t actually want to talk to you or look at your art. As Hezbollah’s leader Hasan Nasrallah told the Western protesters who marched through London in support of Palestinian people: “We don’t want anything from you. We want to eliminate you.”

Martin Amis put it best: these demonstrators are “up the arse of the people who want them dead”.

Maybe we should sit with the idea that a security fence that saves hundreds of lives every year is not such a bad thing.

I used to give 10% of my annual income to Amnesty International. It was their dossier on Robert Mugabe that persuaded me to risk my own life in 2003 when, with three friends, I confronted Mugabe in London and called for him to be arrested under the United Nations Convention on Torture – an act that Amnesty supported and later built upon. I also welcomed their campaign this month to free Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga, currently imprisoned in Malawi.

But I think Amnesty is recklessly irresponsible in its treatment of Israel. Stirring up anti-Israel feelings with quasi-jingoistic hate talk (”Bring on the Cultural Intifada!”) is not the role of a human rights movement. Perhaps the organisers should hop on a flight to Gaza and see what it’s really like there. Then they could paint a picture that really means something.

PS – I told you we’d have a hung Parliament

PPS – My next prediction is that the ghastly Clegg will get a seat at the cabinet table, but hopefully I’m just feeling paranoid…

It’s actually madness.

Gordon Brown won’t do himself any favours at all. He did well on Piers Morgan’s show because he prepared a lot, rehearsed a lot and kept it very light and tight. He knows Piers well and I thought Piers was very kind in the way he managed the show – they both came out of it looking good, and we saw a different side to them both. But in a podium debate, Brown’s best hope will be to appear statesmanlike next to two rookies, and I doubt he’ll be able to pull that off effectively. He’s too tired and feels too hard done by. His best hope is to be tight on detail while the other two gloss on ideology… but I really think Brown is shooting himself by agreeing to do this at all.

David Cameron has everything to lose. He’s already thought to be slick at presentation and people will have very high expectations of him going into the debate. If he delivers, he’ll seem shallow. If he doesn’t, he’ll seem weak. The only way he can win is to renew his newness, and I doubt he can do that because…

Nick Clegg is in the best position and could do really well. I’ll be upfront: I think Clegg is a wanker. He has about as much substance as my rumbling tummy right now. But he’s in a good position because this election will be about change. The Tories had their turn in the 80s and 90s, and then we voted for change. Now Labour has had a good run too, and we want change again. We crave newness in this country. And that will be the thrust of Clegg’s pitch tomorrow night; it’s time for a new kind of politics, where you – yes, you – get to be part of it. It’s perfect for the format. He’ll energise young people, connect with the disaffected and politically naive – and my guess is he’ll end up in a coalition government.

But it’s not too late. Cameron and Brown will both lose support if they go ahead with this mad idea and plenty of people will be telling them that today. Either of them could have pulled out by tomorrow and the whole thing will be scuppered. It’ll look bad in the short term of course, but ultimately it might save their career… especially in Brown’s case.

Imagine they’d told us this ten years ago: you can choose almost any song you want, press a couple of imaginary buttons – and then the music will fly through the air into your hard drive… it’s amazing what we can do. And it’s amazing what else we can do too. What will be normal in another ten years?