Transcript: Canada's Gay Purge | Oct 03, 2018

Steve sits in the studio. He's slim, clean-shaven, in his fifties, with short curly brown hair. He's wearing a gray suit, white shirt, and checked blue tie.

A caption on screen reads "Canada's gay purge. @spaikin, @theagenda."

Steve says FROM THE 1950S TO THE 1980S,
CANADA INVESTIGATED AND
DISMISSED THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN
THE MILITARY AND FEDERAL PUBLIC
SERVICE ON SUSPICION OF BEING
GAY.
A NEW TVO ORIGINAL DOCUMENTARY
CALLED "THE FRUIT MACHINE,"
TELLS THE STORY OF THAT GRIM
PERIOD IN OUR HISTORY.
JOINING US NOW FOR MORE:
IN THE NATION'S CAPITAL:
JOHN IBBITSON, WRITER AT LARGE,
THE GLOBE AND MAIL...

John is in his fifties, clean-shaven, with receding gray hair. He's wearing a gray suit and a blue shirt.

Steve continues AND HERE IN OUR STUDIO:
THE DIRECTOR AND WRITER OF THE
DOCUMENTARY "THE FRUIT MACHINE,"
SARAH FODEY...

Sarah is in her forties, with short blond hair. She's wearing glasses and a black shirt.

Steve continues AND PATTI GRAY, A VETERAN OF THE
CANADIAN ARMED FORCES WHO IS
AMONG THOSE FEATURED IN THE FILM.

Patti is in her sixties, with short blond hair. She's wearing glasses, a green sweater and a printed red scarf.

Steve continues AND WE ARE DELIGHTED TO WELCOME
YOU TWO HERE IN THE STUDIO.
JOHN, ALWAYS GREAT TO HAVE YOU
ON THE PROGRAM.
THANKS FOR BEING THERE FOR US IN
THE NATION'S CAPITAL.
LET US START AS WE OFTEN DO WHEN
WE DISCUSS DOCUMENTARIES ON THE
PROGRAM, WITH A CLIP.
IF YOU COULD, MR. DIRECTOR, PLEASE.

A clip plays on screen with the caption "The fruit machine."
In the clip, a newspaper headline reads "RCMP hoped 'Fruit machine' would identify homosexuals.

A woman in her fifties says IT COULDN'T BE.
IT WAS THE WORST THING THAT YOU COULD BE.

Another woman, in her fifties, says WOULD CALL ME YOU'RE SICK
IN THE HEAD, YOU'RE MENTAL.
YOU HAVE A MENTAL ILLNESS.
THIS IS NOT A NORMAL... THIS IS
NOT NORMAL.
YOU'RE NOT A NORMAL PERSON.

A balding man in his sixties says
OUR FIELD INVESTIGATION HAS
DETERMINED THAT YOU ARE A HOMOSEXUAL.
HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THIS CHARGE?

A blond woman in her fifties says
WE WERE INTERROGATED LIKE
PRISONERS OF WAR, YOU KNOW?
WE WERE THROWN IN THE BACK OF A
CAR, DRIVEN TO... INTERROGATED
FOR HOURS AND HOURS.

A curly-haired woman in her fifties says
MY WAR WAS WITHIN THE
MILITARY, THE CANADIAN ARMED FORCES.

A white-haired woman in her fifties says
AND I REMEMBER TELLING
THEM IN ONE OF THE INTERVIEWS, I
SAID YOU CAN'T DO THIS.
I SAID THIS IS CANADA.
I MEAN, LOOK ME IN THE EYE, AND
HE SAID WE'RE THE MILITARY.
WE CAN DO WHAT WE want.

The clip ends.

Steve says HMM.
SARAH, "THE FRUIT MACHINE."
REFERS TO WHAT?

The caption changes to "Sarah Fodey. Director, 'The fruit machine.'"
Then, it changes again to "A dark chapter in Canadian history."

Sarah says "THE FRUIT MACHINE," IN ITS
ESSENCE, WAS DEVISED AS A
SCIENTIFIC TOOL TO DETECT
HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE 1960S IN CANADA.

Steve says IT WAS A REAL THING, A
REAL SCIENTIFIC TOOL?

Sarah says I'M NOT SURE HOW SCIENTIFIC
IT WAS, BUT IT WAS REAL.

Steve says THE WORD "FRUIT."
OBVIOUSLY IS A DEROGATORY TERM
FOR GAY PEOPLE.
NO ISSUES ABOUT PUTTING THAT IN
THE TITLE OF THE MOVIE?

The caption changes to "'The fruit machine' tonight 9 PM and 12 AM. Also streaming on tvo.org/documentaries."

Sarah says NO, I'VE ALWAYS LOVED THE TITLE.
IT'S PROVOCATIVE TO ME.
I HOPE ON SOME LEVEL VIEWERS
WILL TAKE THAT IT'S A METAPHOR
FOR THE LARGER FOUR-DECADE
CAMPAIGN AS OPPOSED TO BEING
DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE
SCIENTIFIC DEVICE.

Steve says JUST LOOKING AT YOU,
I'M GOING TO TAKE A WILD STAB
HERE THAT YOU WERE NOT OLD
ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN
ALIVE WHEN ANY OF THIS HAPPENED.

Sarah says CORRECT.

Steve says I WANT TO KNOW HOW YOU
HEARD ABOUT IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Sarah says I WAS FOLLOWING A LEAD ON
ANOTHER STORY THAT I THOUGHT
MIGHT BE INTERESTING.
I HAD READ IN THE OTTAWA CITIZEN
ABOUT WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE
FIRST LGTB RETIREMENT HOME AT
THE TIME, AND THIS WAS ABOUT 15
OR 16 YEARS AGO, AND I WENT AND
SPOKE TO THE GENTLEMAN WHO WAS
BEHIND THAT PROJECT, GEORGE
HARTSGROVE, WHO IS STILL BASED
IN OTTAWA, AND THROUGH THAT
CONVERSATION HE TOLD ME THAT HE
WAS AFRAID THAT HIS BUSINESS
VENTURE WAS GOING TO FAIL
BECAUSE THE SAME COHORT OF MEN
AND WOMEN THAT HE WAS MARKETING
TO WERE THE SAME MEN AND WOMEN
WHO HAD THEIR SEXUALITY DRIVEN
UNDERGROUND DURING THE FRUIT
MACHINE ERA, AND I HAD NEVER
HEARD THAT TERM BEFORE, SO WE
TALKED FOR ANOTHER HOUR AND HAD
ANOTHER COFFEE, AND I JUST
BECAME COMPLETELY COMMITTED TO
THE STORY.
I WAS WONDERING, YOU KNOW, WHERE
ALL OF THESE MEN AND WOMEN WERE,
WHAT HAPPENED TO THEIR LIVES,
AND I WAS JUST COMMITTED TO
GETTING THIS FILM MADE.

Steve says JOHN, I MUST CONFESS
THAT I HAD NOT HEARD ABOUT THIS
STORY UNTIL I READ ABOUT IT IN
THE PAGES OF The Globe and Mail
THANKS TO YOU.
HOW WELL KNOWN WAS IT BEFORE YOU
STARTED WRITING ABOUT IT?

The caption changes to "John Ibbitson. The Globe and Mail."

John says WELL, IT WASN'T KNOWN TO ME AT ALL.
THAT'S FOR SURE.
I DON'T THINK IT WAS ALL THAT
WELL KNOWN AT ALL, NOR WAS IT
THE CASE OF... CLIFFORD WHICH
ACTUALLY GOT US FROM A TO B.
I HAD STUMBLED ACROSS THE
CLIFFORD CASE... PEOPLE WHO KNOW
LGTB ISSUES WELL, ESPECIALLY THE
HISTORY OF LGTB ISSUES, WOULD
KNOW ABOUT CLIFFORD, BUT I
HADN'T.
HE WAS SENTENCED TO LIFE IN
PRISON IN THE 1960S, AND THE
SUPREME COURT UPHELD THAT LIFE
SENTENCE, SIMPLY BECAUSE HE WAS
GAY, FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN
THAT.
AND IT WAS THE CONTROVERSY OVER
CLIFFORD THAT CAUSED PIERRE
ELLIOTT TRUDEAU TO SAY THE STATE
HAS NO PLACE IN THE BEDROOMS OF
THE NATION.
I BECAME FASCINATED BY CLIFFORD
AND WANTED TO TELL HIS LIFE
STORY AND WHAT HAPPENED AND HOW
HE MANAGED TO GET HIMSELF
SENTENCED TO LIFE IN PRISON.
ONCE WE DID THAT, AND IT BECAME
CLEAR THAT THERE WERE OTHER
ISSUES INVOLVED AS WELL, COULD
WE GET A PARDON, A POSTHUMOUS
PARDON FOR CLIFFORD.
COULD WE GET A PARDON FOR ALL OF
THE MEN WHO HAD BEEN CONVICTED
OF FELONIES JUST BECAUSE THEY
WERE GAY UP UNTIL LEGALIZATION
IN 1969.
WAS THE PARDON EVEN RIGHT?
NO, IT SHOULDN'T BE A PARDON.
IT SHOULD BE EXPUNGEMENT.
THERE'S NOTHING TO PARDON.
AND THEN THAT KIND OF MOVED,
WELL, WHAT ELSE WAS GOING ON AT
THE TIME?
OH, MY GOD, LOOK AT ALL THE
PEOPLE... AND THERE WAS A
WELL-DOCUMENTED CAMPAIGN TO
DISMISS PEOPLE FROM THE PUBLIC
SERVICE, FROM THE MILITARY.
I KEPT WALKING INTO MY EDITOR'S
OFFICE AND SAY YOU'RE NOT GOING
TO BELIEVE THIS, BUT HERE IS
WHAT THEY WERE DOING.
IN A WAY, FOR SHAME ON THE GLOBE
AND MAIL AND FOR SHAME ON ME
THAT IT TOOK US SO LONG TO
REALIZE WHAT WAS GOING ON AROUND
US, ESPECIALLY BACK IN THOSE
DAYS, BUT FINALLY WE SORT OF
STUMBLED ON TO IT AND BEGAN
WRITING STORIES ABOUT IT.

Steve says WELL, MAYBE YOU COULD
HELP US WITH WHAT SEEMS LIKE AN
OBVIOUS QUESTION.
WHY DID THE CANADIAN MILITARY
AND-OR GOVERNMENT CONSIDER
HOMOSEXUALITY TO BE A SECURITY
THREAT BACK THEN?

John says THE OSTENSIBLE REASON WAS
THAT THEY WERE AT RISK OF BEING
BLACKMAILED BY THE RUSSIANS.
SO AFTER THE SECOND WORLD WAR,
THE COLD WAR LAUNCHED, THERE WAS
A FEAR THAT PEOPLE IN THE
MILITARY, IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE,
ESPECIALLY IN FOREIGN AFFAIRS,
WOULD BE COMPROMISED, WOULD BE
BLACKMAILED AND GIVE UP SECRETS.
I DON'T BELIEVE ANY OF THAT WAS
A REAL MOTIVATION.
I BELIEVE IT WAS A WITCH HUNT
AND NOTHING BUT A WITCH HUNT.
BUT THAT WAS THE OSTENSIBLE
REASON FOR IT.

Steve says SARAH, HOW MUCH OF THE
PUBLIC SERVICE WAS, IN FACT,
UNDER OBSERVATION ON THESE CRITERIA?

Sarah says IT WAS FAR SWEEPING.
EVERY DEPARTMENT WAS UNDER SCRUTINY.

Steve says SO WE KNOW THE MILITARY.
IF YOU WORKED FOR THE CIVIL
SERVICE IN OTTAWA?

Sarah says ABSOLUTELY.

Steve says EVEN BEYOND?

Sarah says CERTAINLY OTTAWA WAS THE
NUCLEUS OF THE CAMPAIGN.

Steve says BUT IF YOU'RE A
UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR, FOR
EXAMPLE, BACK THEN, WOULD
THEY...

The caption changes to "Sarah Fodey, @sarahfodey."

Sarah says I'M NOT SURE IT EXTENDED TO
UNIVERSITIES, BUT IT CERTAINLY
EXTENDED TO OTHER
GOVERNMENT-FUNDED AGENCIES,
CROWN CORPORATIONS, THE CBC, THE SC.

Steve says GOTCHA.
WELL, PATTI, WE KNOW THIS
EXTENDED TO YOUR LIFE BECAUSE WE
JUST SAW YOU IN THAT CLIP THERE.
LET'S TELL A BIT OF YOUR STORY
HERE.
WHEN DID YOU JOIN THE CANADIAN
FORCES?

The caption changes to "Connect with us: Twitter: @theagenda; Facebook, agendaconnect@tvo.org, Instagram."
Then, it changes again to "Patti Gray. Canadian Armed Forces Veteran."

Patti says I WENT IN... I WAS ACTUALLY
IN THE NAVAL RESERVES THE SUMMER
AFTER HIGH SCHOOL, SO 1977.
IN 1979 I DECIDED TO GO IN AND
GO FULL-TIME.
I HAD DONE WELL IN THE RESERVES,
DECIDED TO GIVE IT A GO.
AND I WENT IN IN SEPTEMBER OF
'79.

Steve says HOW FAR DID YOU GO?

Patti says WELL, LET'S SEE.
AFTER... WELL, THEY STARTED... I
WAS CALLED IN THE FIRST TIME
AFTER I WAS... I'D BEEN SENT TO
CHATHAM, NEW BRUNSWICK, AND THE
FIRST TIME I WAS CALLED IN BY
THE SIU WAS IN JULY OF 1980.

Steve says WHAT'S SIU?

Patti says IT'S THE SPECIAL
INVESTIGATION UNIT OF THE
MILITARY POLICE.

Steve says AND THEY CALLED YOU IN
AND SAID WHAT?

Patti says STARTED ASKING A LOT OF VERY
PERSONAL QUESTIONS.
MY INVOLVEMENT WITH ANOTHER
PERSON ON THE BASE.

Steve says WAS THAT AGAINST THE RULES?

Patti says WELL, IN MY VIEW MORAL
COMPASS, YES, VERY MUCH SO.
IT WAS VERY PERSONAL.

Steve says NO, I MEAN, WAS YOUR
RELATIONSHIP WITH SOMEBODY ELSE
ON THE BASE SOMEHOW AGAINST THE
PROTOCOL OF THE DAY?

Patti says YES, IT WAS SOMETHING THAT
YOU HAD TO KEEP HIDDEN.
AND WE KNEW THAT.
WE WERE OUTED BY SOMEBODY WHO
HAD PRETENDED... SHE CAME TO US
AS A FRIEND AND WAS ACTUALLY...
CAME TO MY KNOWLEDGE BY
SOMETHING SHE SAID TO ME IN
PASSING THAT SHE WAS ACTUALLY AN
INFORMANT AND HAD BEEN THE ONE
THAT TOLD ON THOSE OF US ON OUR
BASE.

Steve says WAS SHE ACTUALLY A FRIEND?

Patti says I KNEW HER AS A CIVILIAN WHEN
I WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL.
SHE WAS A FRIEND OF A GIRL THAT
I PLAYED BASKETBALL WITH.

Steve says AND SHE SNITCHED ON YOU?

Patti says YES.
AND I HAD BEEN WARNED WHEN I
FIRST GOT THERE... THE FIRST
NIGHT THERE, I SAW HER.
I WAS HAPPY, SOMEBODY I KNEW.
BRAND NEW TO THE BASE, AND I
WENT OUT FOR DRINKS WITH HER
THAT NIGHT, WENT TO THE MESS
HALL, AND THE NEXT DAY AT WORK
ONE OF THE MASTER CORPORALS CAME
UP TO ME AND ADVISED ME TO KEEP
MY DISTANCE FROM HER, THAT SHE
WAS BAD NEWS.
AND THEN THE IRONY ON THAT, A
FEW MONTHS LATER, THE SAME MAN
WHO WARNED ME TO STAY AWAY FROM
HER STOPPED TALKING TO ME WHEN
WORD GOT OUT.

Steve says WHEN YOU GOT PULLED
ASIDE FOR INTERROGATION, A MAN
OR A WOMAN DOING IT?

Patti says IT WAS TWO.

Steve says TWO MEN?

Patti says IT WAS A MAN AND A WOMAN.

Steve says OH, A MAN AND A WOMAN.

Patti says YES.

Steve says HOW LONG DID IT LAST?

Patti says OH, GOD.
I CAN'T REALLY IMAGINE... I
DON'T REMEMBER TOO MUCH DETAILS.
IT WAS PROBABLY AT LEAST TWO OR
THREE HOURS.

Steve says CAN I GUESS IT WASN'T
TOO MUCH FUN?

Patti says NO, YOU WERE TERRIFIED.
AND THE LONGER THE QUESTIONING
WENT ON, THE ANGRIER I GOT
BECAUSE I JUST KNEW IT WAS
WRONG.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'D SAID.
IT'S CANADA.
THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN IN CANADA.
WE'RE NOT A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY.
WE'VE ALWAYS KNOWN FOR BEING
MORE ADVANCED, MORE OPEN MINDED,
AND IT JUST... IT SHOCKED ME TO
MY CORE THAT THIS WAS EVEN
OCCURRING, THAT IT SHOULD EVEN
MATTER.
BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT WERE
BEING CALLED IN, AND I FOUND OUT
LATER BECAUSE I MET SO MANY
THROUGH THIS FILM, THE VAST
MAJORITY OF US WERE UP FOR
ACCELERATED PROMOTION.
WE WERE ACTUALLY DOING
EXCEEDINGLY WELL, EACH OF US IN
OUR CAREER PATHS.

Steve says JOHN, YOU'VE HEARD
PATTI'S STORY.
HOW COMMON OR NOT WAS THIS KIND
OF OCCURRENCE?

The caption changes to "Investigate, expose, dismiss."

John says VERY COMMON.
THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WERE
INVESTIGATED DURING THE 1950S,
'60S, '70S, RIGHT UP UNTIL THE
LATE 1980S.
AND DISMISSED FOR
DISADVANTAGEOUSLY EMPLOYABLE DUE
TO HOMOSEXUALITY, I BELIEVE IS
THE CLAUSE THAT WAS USED.
IT WAS A COMMON OCCURRENCE IN
THE PUBLIC SERVICE, IN THE
MILITARY, AND INDEED THE
LEGALIZATION OF SAME-SEX ACTS IN
1969 ALMOST SEEMED TO SPUR THEM
ON TO RENEWED PROSECUTORIAL
EFFORTS.
THERE WAS AN ETHOS THAT
HOMOSEXUALS WERE A THREAT.
THEY WEREN'T PROPER TO THE
SERVICE.
THEY WERE BAD FOR MORALE, AND IT
WAS BEST IF WE HAD NOTHING TO DO
WITH THEM.
THIS WAS THE ATTITUDE OF THE
GOVERNMENT TO HOMOSEXUALS
THROUGHOUT THE CANADIAN
GOVERNMENT AND THE PUBLIC
SERVICE RIGHT UP UNTIL I
BELIEVE... AND SARAH CAN CORRECT
ME.
I BELIEVE THE LAST MEMBER OF THE
MILITARY WHO WAS FIRED WAS IN 1989.

Steve says 1989?

Sarah says THAT'S RIGHT.

Steve says THAT'S NOT THAT LONG
AGO IN THE GREATER SCHEME OF
THINGS.

Sarah says RECENT HISTORY.

Steve says IT IS RECENT HISTORY.
JOHN, ONE QUICK FOLLOW-UP ON
THAT, HOW DISADVANTAGED WERE
PEOPLE'S CAREERS AFTER THEY WERE
DRUMMED OUT OF THE PUBLIC
SERVICE BY DOING THIS?
IN OTHER WORDS, WERE THEY ABLE
TO SOMEHOW MAKE A COMEBACK IN
THEIR CAREERS IN SOME OTHER
AVENUE OR DID THIS TRULY DERAIL
MANY LIVES?

The caption changes to "John Ibbitson, @JohnIbbitson."

John says WELL, I TALKED TO A FAIR
NUMBER OF PEOPLE, AND IT
DEPENDED ON THE INDIVIDUAL.
SOME PEOPLE SIMPLY PICKED
THEMSELVES UP AND DUSTED
THEMSELVES OFF AND WENT ON WITH
THEIR CAREER IN OTHER FIELDS.
SOME PEOPLE WERE TRAUMATIZED BY
IT.
AND THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, THERE
WAS DEEP PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM
DONE, AND THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO
ARE... YOU KNOW, WHO ARE
STRUGGLING TO THIS DAY WITH
RELATIONSHIPS.
THERE WERE PEOPLE WHO HAD
SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUES.
BUT EVEN THOSE WHO WERE NOT
OVERTLY AFFECTED, I TALKED TO
ONE FELLOW WHO IN THE EARLY
1960S WAS DRUMMED OUT OF THE...
WHAT WAS THEN THE DEPARTMENT OF
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS.
HE WAS FUNNY.
HE GOT A GOOD JOB AND A GOOD
CAREER, AND OUTWARDLY THERE
SEEMED TO BE NO REAL LASTING
HARM, BUT WHEN I TALKED TO HIM,
HE WAS STILL ANGRY BECAUSE HE'D
WANTED TO BE A DIPLOMAT.
HE'D WANTED TO BE AN AMBASSADOR.
HE WANTED TO SERVE HIS COUNTRY,
AND HIS COUNTRY HAD SAID TO HIM
IN THE 1960S, YOU ARE
DISGUSTING.
WE WANT NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU.
YOU CAN'T SERVE US.
IN FACT, YOU ARE A DISGRACE TO
US, AND WE... AND YOU'RE OUT OF
HERE.
YOU'RE GONE.
AND ALL THOSE DECADES LATER,
ONCE WE BROUGHT IT BACK UP AND
BEGAN TALKING ABOUT IT AGAIN, HE
WAS CLEARLY ANGRY ABOUT WHAT HAS
BEEN DONE TO HIM.

Steve says PATTI, AGAIN, I JUST
MET YOU, SO I DON'T KNOW, YOU'RE
GOING TO TELL ME, BUT THE
OUTWARD IMPRESSION THAT YOU
CONVEY IS THAT IN SPITE OF THAT
YOU HAVE NOT LET IT RUIN YOUR
LIFE.
YOU ARE STRONG AND PROUD AND
MOVING ON.
DO YOU WANT TO GO BEYOND THAT?

The caption changes to "Patti Gray, @laffin33."

Patti says YES.
YES.
I HAVE MOVED ON BECAUSE I HAD
TO.
YOU... BUT WHEN I CAME OUT, I
WAS SO ANGRY, ANGRY, AND I HELD
ON TO THAT FOR MONTHS BECAUSE IT
WAS... I KNEW IT WAS A GREAT
INJUSTICE, AND I FELT POWERLESS
TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
BUT I DID MOVE ON.
AFTER GOING THROUGH A
DEPRESSION, AND AT THAT TIME I
DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE WHAT A
DEPRESSION WAS, AND I REALIZED
YEARS LATER THAT'S WHAT IT WAS,
AND I'M SURE IT WAS BECAUSE OF
THE ANGER.
BECAUSE OF THE TRAUMA I DID GO
THROUGH.
BUT I DID MOVE ON, AND I...

Steve says MOVE ON TO WHAT?

Patti says MOVE ON TO BELL CANADA WHERE
I WORK... THEY HIRED ME A TOTAL
OF THREE TIMES.
I HAD WORKED THERE BEFORE I
JOINED THE MILITARY.
THEY HIRED ME RIGHT BACK WHEN I
CAME BACK, AND UPON MY MOVE TO
HAMILTON THEY HIRED ME THERE
AGAIN.

Steve says HMM.
DO YOU FEEL, THOUGH, THAT THE
CAREER THAT YOU HAD ORIGINALLY
WANTED AND PRESUMABLY HAD, YOU
KNOW, INVESTED MUCH OF YOURSELF
INTO, WAS DENIED YOU?

Patti says I THINK I COULD HAVE REALLY
EXCELLED IN THE MILITARY.
IT WAS... I WAS WELL SUITED TO IT.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WHEN THIS
ALL... WHEN THIS STARTED, I HAD
A GOOD LOOK AT MY FUTURE.
I WAS 20 YEARS OLD.
I HAD A GOOD LOOK AT MY FUTURE.
I REALIZED I WAS PROBABLY GOING
TO GO DEEP, DEEP INTO THE CLOSET
OR I WAS GOING TO HAVE TO FIND A
NICE GAY MAN TO MARRY AND PLAY A
GAME AND LOOK OVER MY SHOULDER
FOR THE REST OF MY CAREER, AND I
WASN'T SURE I WAS UP TO THAT.
SO WHEN THE CHOICE CAME DOWN, I
ADMITTED TO THEM THAT I WAS A
LESBIAN.
I TOOK ALL THE BLAME IN THE
RELATIONSHIP AND I SAVED HER
CAREER, AND SHE RETIRED FROM THE
MILITARY.
AND I... GIVEN THE CHANCE, I
WOULD DO IT AGAIN.

Steve says WHAT KINDS OF... WE
HEARD ABOUT THE TWO TO
THREE-HOUR INTERROGATION THAT
PATTI UNDERWENT.
WHAT OTHER KINDS OF TACTICS DID
AUTHORITIES OF THE DAY USE IN
ORDER TO DRUM PEOPLE OUT OF THE
PUBLIC SERVICE?

Sarah says WELL, BASICALLY ANYTHING YOU
COULD IMAGINE... NETWORK WOULD
EMPLOY.
INTERROGATION WAS CERTAINLY AT
ITS CENTRE, BUT WIRETAPPING, LIE
DETECTION DEVICES, MANIPULATION
WAS ALSO VERY PRONOUNCED.
SO THE SIU OFFICERS WOULD OFTEN
SAY TO THE SUSPECTED
HOMOSEXUALS, IF YOU TELL US THE
TRUTH, WE WILL KEEP YOU IN THE
MILITARY.
WHICH WAS NOT THE CASE.

Steve says SO NO...

Sarah says MANIPULATION TACTICS.

Steve says IF YOU FESS UP YOU'RE
GAY, WE KEEP YOU.
BUT THEN THEY TURFED YOU.

Patti says THEY WANTED NAMES, SO THEY
WOULD FOLLOW YOU AS WELL.
I WAS FOLLOWED FOR EIGHT MONTHS,
AND THEY DEFERRED MY RELEASE
DATE THREE TIMES BEFORE THEY
FINALLY LET ME GO BECAUSE I
WOULDN'T GIVE THEM UP.

Patti says YES.

Steve says JOHN, THIS SOUNDS... I
MEAN, THIS SOUNDS LIKE STASSI
KGB TREATMENT IN CANADA, FOR
GOODNESS' SAKES.
WE DON'T EXPECT THIS IN CANADA.

John says NO, BUT TIME HAS PASSED.
THIS WASN'T JUST CANADA.
THIS WAS COMMON PRACTICE IN THE
UNITED STATES, IN GREAT BRITAIN.
IT WAS PART OF A LEGACY OF A
TIME THAT EVEN THOUGH SOME OF US
ARE A GREAT AGE, LIVED THROUGH
IT, WE TEND TO HAVE FORGOTTEN
ABOUT IT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I
DISCOVERED AS I BEGAN
INVESTIGATING AND WRITING THESE
STORIES FOR THE GLOBE WAS HOW
MUCH OF THIS PAST I HAD MYSELF
FORGOTTEN.
WHAT IT WAS LIKE IN THE 1980S,
DURING THE AIDS CRISIS, THE AIDS
EPIDEMIC.
THE STIGMA THAT WAS ATTACHED.
YOU DIDN'T... IF YOU WERE IN
JOURNALISM, FOR EXAMPLE, COME
OUT OF THE CLOSET.
YOU DIDN'T GO AROUND IN
NEWSROOMS TELLING PEOPLE YOU
WERE GAY.
IT WAS DAMAGING TO YOUR CAREER.
I REMEMBER IN THE COURSE OF THE
RESEARCH COMING ACROSS AN
EDITORIAL FROM THE FREDERICTON
GLEANER, I THINK IT WAS IN 1989,
1990, AND THE EDITORIAL IN THE
FREDERICTON GLEANER SAID THAT
HOMOSEXUALITY WAS A PERVERSION,
A THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH, AND
THAT PEOPLE WHO HAD ACQUIRED
AIDS SHOULD BE PLACED IN WHAT
WERE EFFECTIVELY CONCENTRATION
CAMPS.
THEY SHOULD BE QUARANTINED FROM
THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND NOT
ALLOWED SO THE THREAT COULD BE
MINIMIZED.
THAT'S A POSITION THAT A
RESPECTABLE METROPOLITAN
NEWSPAPER WAS TAKING IN CANADA
IN 1990S.
YES, 15 YEARS LATER WE HAD
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE.
THINGS CAME TOGETHER OR FELL
APART, DEPENDING HOW YOU LOOK AT
IT, VERY, VERY QUICKLY.
BUT THAT'S THE SITUATION THAT
WAS THERE AT THE TIME.

Steve says AND JOHN, JUST TO SORT
OF CLARIFY ON THE HISTORY OF
THIS, WHEN PIERRE ELLIOTT
TRUDEAU DID COME OUT AND MAKE
HIS COMMENT ABOUT THE STATE
HAVING NO BUSINESS IN THE
BEDROOMS OF THE NATION AND
DECRIMINALIZED HOMOSEXUALITY IN
1969, HOW MUCH OF THIS TREATMENT STOPPED?

John says OH, I DON'T THINK IT... NO,
NOT ONLY DID IT NOT STOP, IT ACCELERATED.
THERE'S GOOD EVIDENCE THAT NOW
THAT IT WAS TECHNICALLY LEGAL,
NOT ONLY DID THE MILITARY AND
THE PUBLIC SERVICE AND THE RCMP
AND THE INVESTIGATING AGENCIES
NOT LAY OFF, THEY WOULD DOUBLE
THEIR EFFORTS TO TRY TO FIND
PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE AND
EXPEL THEM.
IT WAS ALMOST LIKE IT WAS A GOAD
FOR THEM.

Steve says HMM.
WELL, WE KNOW, OF COURSE, THAT
THE PRIME MINISTER OF THAT DAY,
HIS SON IS NOW THE PRIME
MINISTER TODAY, AND HE
APOLOGIZED LAST YEAR FOR THIS
PURGE.
LET'S PLAY A SNIPPET OF THAT.
SHELDON, GO.

A clip plays on screen with the caption "November 28, 2017. Statement."
In the clip, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks at the House of Commons.

He says IT IS WITH SHAME AND SORROW
AND DEEP REGRET FOR THE THINGS
THAT WE HAVE DONE THAT I STAND
HERE TODAY AND SAY WE WERE
WRONG, WE APOLOGIZE.
I AM SORRY.
WE ARE SORRY.

Everybody in the room rises in a standing ovation.

[Applause]

The clip ends.

Steve says JOHN, HOW IMPORTANT WAS THAT?

The caption changes to "Public apology."

John says I THINK FOR A LOT OF US IT
WAS TREMENDOUSLY IMPORTANT.
I WAS THERE IN THE HOUSE WHEN
THE PRIME MINISTER SAID THOSE
WORDS, AND THERE WERE A LOT OF
EYES THAT WERE NOT DRY, BOTH ON
THE FLOOR OF THE COMMONS AND IN
THE GALLERY AS WELL, AND IN THE
PRESS GALLERY TOO, TO BE HONEST.
BUT MORE IMPORTANT, THAT APOLOGY
CAME WITH LEGISLATION THAT
EXPUNGES THE CRIMINAL RECORD OF
PEOPLE WHO WERE CONVICTED OF
SIMPLY HAVING... OF SIMPLY BEING
GAY, OF HAVING SAME-SEX ACTS
BEFORE DECRIMINALIZATION.
AND IT CAME WITH THE SETTLEMENT
OF A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT, THE
LARGEST IN THE WORLD OF ITS
KIND, THAT OFFERED REDRESS TO
PEOPLE WHO HAD BEEN EXPELLED
FROM THE MILITARY AND THE PUBLIC
SERVICE.
REMEMBER, THEY DIDN'T JUST LOSE
THEIR CAREERS, THEY LOST THEIR
PENSION OPPORTUNITIES.
THEY LOST FUTURE EMPLOYMENT, AND
SO THOSE TWO THINGS, THE
LEGISLATION AND THE SETTLEMENT
OF THE CLASS ACTION LED BY
LAWYER DOUGLAS ELIOTT, COUPLED
WITH THE APOLOGY ITSELF, I THINK
BROUGHT NOT COMPLETE BY SOME
MEASURE OF CLOSURE FOR A LOT OF
PEOPLE.

Steve says AND WAS THIS, JOHN,
THE FIRST TIME THAT ANY
GOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTION IN THE
NATION'S CAPITAL ACKNOWLEDGED
WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED?

John says OTHER GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE
WORLD HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED AND
APOLOGIZED FOR WHAT THEY DID TO
THEIR MILITARY AND PUBLIC
SERVANTS.
GERMANY HAS DONE SO.
NEW ZEALAND, SOME STATES OF
AUSTRALIA.
THERE'S BEEN A LIMITED APOLOGY
IN THE CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN,
BUT NO GOVERNMENT HAS COME
ANYWHERE CLOSE TO CANADA IN A
COMPREHENSIVE APOLOGY, IN A
COMPREHENSIVE EXPUNGEMENT OF
CRIMINAL RECORDS, AND ESPECIALLY
IN THE SETTLEMENT OF FINANCIAL
COMPENSATION FOR THOSE WHO HAD
BEEN PERSECUTED.

Steve says PATTI, WHAT DID THAT
APOLOGY MEAN TO YOU?

Patti says IT GAVE ME CLOSURE, CLOSURE
THAT I DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE THAT
I STILL NEEDED.
I THOUGHT IT WAS QUITE FITTING.
AS PIERRE TRUDEAU WAS THE PRIME
MINISTER WHEN I WAS LET GO, AND
I THOUGHT IT WAS QUITE FITTING
THAT HIS SON WOULD GIVE THE
APOLOGY.
AND IT GAVE ME VALIDATION TO
KNOW THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT,
YES, WHAT YOU DID WAS VERY
WRONG.

Steve says PARLIAMENT, FROM TIME
TO TIME, APOLOGIZES FOR PREVIOUS
MISDEEDS, AND THERE ARE SOME
PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT'S THE
WRONG THING TO DO, THAT IT'S
REALLY NOT THE BUSINESS OF
TODAY'S POLITICIANS TO APOLOGIZE
FOR THE SINS OF THEIR FATHERS
AND GRANDFATHERS.
WHAT'S YOUR VIEW ON THAT?

Patti says I THINK IT'S JUST TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT WAS WRONG
AND, YES, YOU CAN'T CHANGE WHAT
HAPPENED IN THE PAST, BUT TALK
ABOUT IT.
AND TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT IT
DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.

Steve says DID YOU GET SOME
COMPENSATION?

Patti says NOT YET.
IT'S YET TO BE DECIDED WHAT THE
FINAL FINANCIAL DISTRIBUTION
WILL BE.
THAT, TO ME, IS JUST KIND OF A
CHERRY ON TOP OF THE CAKE, REALLY.

Steve says THE PEOPLE, SARAH, IN
YOUR FILM, ARE THEY UNANIMOUS IN
THEIR VIEW OF THE SIGNIFICANCE
OF THAT APOLOGY?

Sarah says NO.
AND THAT SURPRISED ME.
FOR MANY IT WAS VERY WELCOMED
AND A LONG TIME COMING.
FOR SOME, UP TO 40 YEARS.
BUT FOR SOME OTHERS, NO, IT WAS
A LITTLE TOO LATE.
THEY WEREN'T SO MUCH INTERESTED
IN THE APOLOGY.

Steve says HMM.
WHAT DID THEY... GO AHEAD, JOHN,
YEAH.

John says WE SHOULD ALSO ADD THAT THERE
ARE THOSE WHO BELIEVE THAT THE
APOLOGY NEEDS TO BE EXTENDED,
AND I AGREE WITH THEM.
THERE WERE PEOPLE WHO WERE
CALLED FOUND-INS WHO WERE...
POLICE WOULD RAID BATHHOUSES AND
CHARGE MEN AND IN AT LEAST ONE
CASE WOMEN WITH BEING FOUND IN A
COMMON BAWDY HOUSE.
THE COURTS LATER RULED THAT
BATHHOUSES WERE NOT BODY HOUSES
AND THAT NO CRIME HAD BEEN
COMMITTED AND THOSE CHARGES
SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN LAID.
THERE HAVE BEEN APOLOGIES FROM
THE POLICE, BUT THERE'S NEVER
BEEN... THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S
APOLOGY DOES NOT YET EXTEND TO
THOSE PEOPLE.
THERE'S NO OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE
PEOPLE TO HAVE THEIR CRIMINAL
RECORDS EXPUNGED.
AND THE LIBERALS SAY IT'S A
MATTER OF ADMINISTRATION.
TRUST US, WE'LL LOOK AFTER IT,
BUT YOU KNOW, ON THIS ISSUE, FOR
SOME PEOPLE THERE'S NOT A WHOLE
LOT OF TRUST.

Steve says WELL, LET ME GET PER
SNIKETTY WITH YOU, JOHN.
SOME OF THOSE INCIDENTS, AND I
DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE THINKING OF
THE RAID ON YONGE STREET, 35, 36
YEARS AGO ON THE GAY BATHHOUSES
ON YONGE STREET, THAT WOULD HAVE
BEEN SOMETHING THAT THE PROVINCE
WOULD HAVE BEEN IN CHARGE OF
AND, THEREFORE, IS IT INCUMBENT
UPON THE PROVINCE TO OFFER AN
APOLOGY IF THEY SEE FIT TO UNDER
THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES?

John says BUT THE CHARGES ARE CRIMINAL
CHARGES, AND THEREFORE IT'S AN
AREA OF FEDERAL JURISDICTION.

Steve says OKAY.

John says SO, SURE, THE TORONTO POLICE
MIGHT HAVE DONE IT, AND THEY MAY
HAVE BEEN ENCOURAGED BY THE
ONTARIO GOVERNMENT AT THE TIME,
BUT IT WAS A FEDERAL CRIMINAL
CHARGE, SO IT'S PROPERLY WITHIN
FEDERAL JURISDICTION.

Steve says GOTCHA.
GOOD CLARIFICATION.
SARAH, PEOPLE PUT THEIR HEART
AND SOUL INTO MAKING A MOVIE
BECAUSE THEY OBVIOUSLY WANT TO
CHANGE THE WORLD.
I WANT TO KNOW HOW YOU WANT THE
WORLD TO BE DIFFERENT AFTER
PEOPLE SEE YOUR FILM.

Sarah says I THINK THAT IF THE FILM CAN
CONTRIBUTE TO THE NATIONAL
DIALOGUE AROUND DISCRIMINATION
OF THE LGTBQ PLUS COMMUNITY, I
WILL BE HAPPY.
I'VE OFTEN SAID THAT THE MEASURE
OF SUCCESS OF THIS FILM FOR ME
REALLY IS HOW THE SURVIVORS OF
THE FILM PERCEIVE IT, BECAUSE MY
GOAL WAS ALWAYS TO TELL A VERY
AUTHENTIC, VERY REAL CAPTURE OF
WHAT THEY WENT THROUGH.
SO IF THEY'RE HAPPY WITH WHAT
I'VE DONE, THEN I WILL BE HAPPY
AS WELL.

Steve says WELL, I SHOULD ASK ONE
SITTING RIGHT BESIDE YOU.
ARE YOU HAPPY WITH IT?

Patti says I AM.
SARAH AND HER CREW WERE SO
GENEROUS, SO KIND, VERY
EMPATHETIC, AND THEY HANDLED US
VERY GENTLY, GUIDED US THROUGH
THE PROCESS.
AND IT, AGAIN, WAS HEALING.
IT OPENED UP A LOT OF WOUNDS,
BUT AT THE SAME TIME IT WAS VERY
HEALING, AND TO SEE IT BROUGHT
TO LIFE AND TO HEAR THE OTHER
STORIES, WHAT I WENT THROUGH WAS
BAD ENOUGH, BUT TO HEAR THE
OTHER STORIES, IT WAS PRETTY
HORRIFIC.

Steve says DID YOU HAVE PEOPLE
THAT YOU APPROACHED THAT YOU
WANTED TO INCLUDE IN THE
DOCUMENTARY AND THEY JUST SAID
"CAN'T GO THERE, TOO PAINFUL,
NOT INTERESTED"?

Sarah says ABSOLUTELY.
BOTH ON THE SURVIVOR SIDE, BUT
ALSO ON THE MILITARY AND THE
RCMP SIDE AS WELL.
WE DID TRY TO INCLUDE THAT PART
OF THE STORY WITHIN THE
DOCUMENTARY, BUT NO ONE WOULD
COME FORWARD AND COMMIT TO
TELLING THE STORY ON CAMERA.

Steve says HMM.
DISAPPOINTED IN THAT?

Sarah says I WAS.
I WAS VERY CURIOUS.
I STILL AM.
I DO RESPECT THE FACT THAT THEY
WERE ALSO GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
YOU KNOW, TASKED WITH CARRYING
OUT THE CAMPAIGN, AND I'M VERY
CURIOUS HOW MANY OF THOSE
OFFICERS, HOW MANY OF THE SIU
OFFICERS IN THE MILITARY
ACTUALLY BELIEVED IN WHAT THEY
WERE DOING OR WHETHER THEY
SIMPLY WERE CARRYING OUT A JOB.

Steve says HMM.
JOHN, IN OUR LAST MINUTE, LET ME
GIVE IT TO YOU TO GIVE US A
SENSE ABOUT WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE
GAY IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE TODAY.
HOW DIFFERENT IS IT?
HOW MUCH LESS DISCRIMINATION, OR
IS THERE STILL DISCRIMINATION IN
THE PUBLIC SERVICE TODAY IF
YOU'RE LGTBQ?

The caption changes to "A new chapter."

John says WELL, CERTAINLY THERE'S NO
FORMAL DISCRIMINATION AT ALL,
AND MY COLLEAGUE LORI GALLOWAY
WROTE A STORY NOT THAT LONG AGO
ABOUT THE EFFORTS THAT THE
SENIOR RANKS OF THE MILITARY
MAKE NOW TO ENSURE THAT LGTBQ
PEOPLE ARE FULLY INTEGRATED INTO
THE SERVICE AND ARE NOT IN ANY
WAY DISCRIMINATED AGAINST
BECAUSE OF THEIR SEXUALITY.
THAT SAID, IT IS 2018, BUT THERE
ARE ALWAYS GOING TO BE PEOPLE
WHO DON'T WANT TO SERVE WITH
QUEERS, AND THAT'S JUST PART OF
LIFE, AND YOU HAVE TO LIVE WITH IT.

The caption changes to "Producer: Colin Ellis, @ColinEllis81."

Steve says UNDERSTOOD.
I WANT TO THANK ALL THREE OF YOU
FOR COMING ON THE PROGRAM
TONIGHT.
THERE'S JOHN IBBITSON IN THE
NATION'S CAPITAL.
HE IS THE WRITER AT LARGE FOR
THE GLOBE AND MAIL.
BROUGHT THIS STORY TO MUCH OF
THE NATION'S ATTENTION.
WE DID NOT KNOW IT BEFORE JOHN
STARTED WRITING, SO THANKS FOR
THAT, JOHN.
SARAH FODEY IS THE... ARE YOU
THE WRITER AND PRODUCER?
WRITER?
DIRECTOR?
PRODUCER?
DIRECTOR/PRODUCER?

Sarah says SURE.

The caption changes to "Producer: Chantal Braganza, @chantalbraganza."

Steve says ALL OF THE ABOVE FOR
"THE FRUIT MACHINE," A
DOCUMENTARY THAT IS MUST-SEE TV.
AND PATTI GRAY, A VETERAN WITH
THE CANADIAN ARMED FORCES, AND
WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR OUR
PARTICIPATION TONIGHT AS WELL,
PATTI. THANK YOU ALL.

Watch: Canada's Gay Purge