Talk:Noel Pemberton Billing

Homophobia cat

I'm removing the Category:Homophobia for two reasons. First, homophobia doesn't seem to define Billing and his notability in the same way as other people in that category, like Jerry Fallwell or Fred Phelps. And secondly, if homophobia is central to Billing, it needs to be discussed in the article. At the moment it's not even mentioned. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I beg your pardon? Have you read the article? Of course it is mentioned. Homophobia is one of the two things he is now best known for. He's known essentially for his activities as an aviator/promotor of air power and for his activity as an anti-homosexual activist. There has been a great deal written about this, notably Hoare's book Oscar Wilde's Last Stand [1], Michael Kettle's Salome's Last Veil: The Libel Case of the Century (1977) and Jodie Medd's "The Cult of the Clitoris": Anatomy of a National Scandal. Paul B (talk) 16:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Terribly sorry - I honestly don't know how I missed that.

I still feel the article doesn't justify the category "Homophobia". The people listed in that cat are either known solely for their homophobia or are known very strongly for their homophobia. As it stands, only about a quarter of Billing's article is devoted to his view of homosexuality, with substantial parts being about his inventions and about his views on the war/aviation. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see him matching up with Anita Bryant or Fred Phelps - he seems more like Strom Thurmond - someone with strongly homophobic views, but it's not all they were or were known for. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I really cannot understand your argument. The other categories included here are, for example, "Royal Navy personnel of World War I | English businesspeople | English aviators | Members of the United Kingdom Parliament for English constituencies". How much of the article is devoted to his activity as a member of the Royal Navy in WW1? How much is devoted to his aviation? How much to his business activity? In most cases it is about the same or less than the space devoted to his anti-homosexual campaigning. Should we delete all these categories because "it's not all he is or was known for"? In any case, the literal amount of space devoted to a subject in this article now should not determine whether a category is included, given that several whole books have been written on the subject. Length is this case depends on how much particular contributors want to devote to a topic. Categories are supposed to be there to help people to find relevant information. If you cut down the category to only a tiny number of very very obvious members, I would suggest that you undermine the whole point of a category. Paul B (talk) 08:21, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the difference is that "Homophobia" is such a wide topic, so members of that category should be strong ones. For instance, Billing is in the cat Category:Royal Navy personnel of World War I, but would you put him in Category:Royal Navy? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I think this individual is a very strong candidate for membership of the category. Adding, say, any politician who voted against equalising ages of consent (or some similar issue) would be pointless, but adding someone who initiated and pursued a campaign against homosexuality which involved some famous figures in LGTB history, and who epitomises the concept of homophobia is rather different! Paul B (talk) 12:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I think some sort of homophobia category is probably appropriate for Billing. Similar to Satyr's Navy categories comment though, I wonder if we need a subcat for homophobic people. As this is a broader question than just Billing, I have asked it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies#Homophobic people category. Aleta ^Sing 14:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Paul B, since I really know next to nothing about Billing, do you really feel he's the English equivalent to Fred Phelps or Anita Bryant? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, of course. In his day he was hugely significant. Obviously now he is largely unknown to most people, but that's just because he's historical. I doubt that Freddy P will very well remembered in a hundred years. Paul B (talk) 15:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I hope not! =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

BTW, there's some discussion at the LGBT wikiproject about sub-catting "Category:Anti-LGBT right supporters" or something like that. In case you're interested - but don't feel you need to :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

There should be a better term than the wishy-washy "homophobic" to describe the pioneering anti-fag efforts of these brave people. Regardless, Billing's anti-fag crusade was still a minor effort when compared to the launching of Supermarine.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.129.40 (talk) 06:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Little did I imaagine that my request for some sort of LGBT tag would lead to such prompt debate! At least he is now on our radars.... BrainyBabe (talk) 06:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

being an anti-homo was probably just a hobby or past-time for Billing. It wasn't his main thing in life. People aren't usually defined by their hobbies or the weekend causes they get involved in. User:DD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.129.40 (talk) 01:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

This guy was surely one of the most infamous homophobes of the early 20th century!--feline1 (talk) 00:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

When I read comments like "This guy was surely one of the most infamous homophobes of the early 20th century!" I am reminded of the Daily Express' description of Rogue Trader that 'It's Wall Street on acid!'. Why did Pemberton Billing make the (singular) Maud Allan case? If it was because he was "homophobic" one would expect there to be multiple examples of that, if he was homophobic one would expect it to re-occur throughout his writing and life - curiously no one has provided any evidence to substantiate such claim. As User:DD says "It wasn't his main thing in life". It is by not considering why he did it that people have jumped to the conclusion of homophobia. --JHumphries (talk) 20:26, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

M'bret or M'prit

HOwever it is transliterated, what is it? BrainyBabe (talk) 06:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

You mean you don't know!? It's Albanian for King. See King of Albania. Billing is referring to William, Prince of Albania, who was kicked out of Albania following a coup in 1914 and went to Germany to join the German army under an assumed name. I changed the spelling because Hoare's book uses that spelling. If in the original text it was really spelled M'Prit it should be changed back, but I can't at the moment find any evidence of that. Paul B (talk) 09:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Alas, my education is sorely lacking. I thought Albanian kings were zogs, as Egyptian ones were pharoahs. COuld you gloss it in the article please? BrainyBabe (talk) 12:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, I've linked it. Zog was the name of the guy who eventually replaced William, until he was overthrown too. Paul B (talk) 12:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The timing of his beliefs

I removed "in WWI" and it was reinstated. The lede says "He was known during the First World War for his negative stance against homosexuality" but this also is not strictly correct. His worries were heightened becasue of the war, but a lot of the activitiy for which he is known happened just after the war (the trial, e.g.) and clearly his beliefs spanned decades -- did he ever renounce them? So I don't think that the time-limiting phrase is helpful to readers. How could this be better explained? BrainyBabe (talk) 16:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure he continued to think that homosexuality was immoral. Most people probably thought that at the time, so there's nothing unusual about that in itself. But what he is remembered for is the campaign during the war. It was all about the war since it was linked specifically to claims of German blackmail and enticement. Not including the WWI phrase makes that difficult to decipher. Paul B (talk) 16:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I see your point, but it's more than immorality. He thought homosexuality dangerous to the nation and worthy of campaigning about. So "negative stnace" is too weak. HOw about "He was known for his campaigning against homosexuality, especially during WWI"? BrainyBabe (talk) 17:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The expresssion "known" refers to someone being "known" by the general public for something, during a time. Examples: "the limits of the known world"; "a musician known throughout the world"; "a known criminal". While his political positions were being presented by the public media, he was "known" (by the public). Later, as the conflicts died down and he eventually became elderly, he ceased being generally "known". The fact that he remained known to homosexuals and war historians doesn't mean that he was "known" by the world. Thus, the original version ("He was known during the First World War for his negative stance against homosexuality") is more accurate than the revision. Bushcutter (talk) 01:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Pemberton Billing never actually 'campaigned against homosexuality'. --JHumphries (talk) 14:05, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Hyphen Vandals

Hang them all. When is the hyphen vandalism going to stop????? Pemberton-Billing was his name, YESINCLUDING THE S***ING HYPHEN. This is not the only case opf hyphen vandalism I have come across. It is far too widespread and nmust be stopped!!!!!!!!!! Hyphens in nouns should not be removed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Petebutt (talk) 11:13, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

DO NOT make changes like this without discussing on Talk. What evidence do you have that his name was hyphenated? Often hyphens are inaccurately used in names that were not hypenated. His name appears unhyphenated in many sources, including the Dictionary of National Biography [2] [3] For example William Holman Hunt, whose name is not William Holman-Hunt. His daughter included his middle name as her surname, so she is Diana Holman-Hunt. There are many cases like this leading to confusion and misplacing of hyphens. It is more like "vandalism" to unilaterally change an article without discussing it and without evidence. Leave the article in the form in which it was stable, then raise the issue for discussion. Paul B (talk) 11:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Paul - the second of your references admits that "Pemberton-Billing" rather than just "Billing" is "very often seen"! I believe I have seen both forms in different texts - for me the D.N.B. is the clincher. What about reverting to the state it was before Petebutt made his (no doubt good faith) changes, while making sure we have a redirect from the (quite common) hyphenated form? Unless we get a contrary consensus in the next day or two I will do this, if no one else does.--Soundofmusicals (talk) 12:33, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure they were good faith, but the hysterical tone of his comments and accusations of vandalism were not appropriate. I know the hyphenated version is often seen. It is with Holman Hunt too. That's why I checked this whole issue out before I created the article. The problem is that anyone who hasn't bothered to make a proper check can just move a page without a by-your-leave but it may now be a real hassle to move it back. Paul B (talk) 12:50, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, I've moved it back. I thought there already was a redirect from the hyphenated version, but it turns out that the redirect was Pemberton-Billing not Noel Pemberton-Billing. I'll also add the alternative spelling. Paul B (talk) 14:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

NPB is hyphenless in CF Andrews and E B Morgan Supermarine Aircraft since 1914 London:Putnam, 1987. ISBN 0 85177 800 3, and in this 1913 article in Flight and this 1916 report of a parliamentary debate, but he seems to have referred to himself with a hyphen by 1940 as shown here and here. Nigel Ish (talk) 18:01, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, he seems to have liked adding the hyphen. I guess he thought it made him look more distinguished. It was quite a common affectation in those days to seem more aristocratic. But his actual surname was certainly "Billing", and that's how he appears in official documents. Paul B (talk) 18:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

far-right category / fascism navboxes

Does NPB really qualify as a member of the far-right, and hence warrent the Far-Right politics category and the Far Right in the United Kingdom and Fascism navboxes? He was a vitriolic homophobe and outspoken in other matters (such as his public dislike and hounding of the Royal Aircraft Factory, but does that fully correspond to extreme right wing or fascist politics, particularly given the times in which he lived? Are there WP:RS's that refer to him as far-right or fascist?Nigel Ish (talk) 20:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

IMHO, the extent of his homophobia, extreme anti-socialism and general political paranoia - all carried well past the point of screaming hysteria, make him "far right" in any context. To be fair, I am not sure if he was actually a fascist in the contemporary German (as opposed to Italian or Spanish) sense - but then that's far from the only kind of "far right". --Soundofmusicals (talk) 00:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

After reading this article and his entry in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, I cannot find any evidence of fascism or far-right views. I've been bold and removed the offending boxes.--Britannicus (talk) 20:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Disagree very strongly - this bloke had all manner of far-right views, although I suppose this may seem relative. I am nearly as far "left" as Billing was "right", so he looks more "far-right" to me I suppose, than he might to someone who more or less shares his views. But from the most objective point of view, Billing was every bit as down on homosexual people as Franco was on atheists, or Hitler was on Jews. His (largely successful) efforts to privatise what was officially a branch of the army, or have it suppressed, basically because to him it was morally wrong that the profits of defence contracters might be minimalised, is just one other example. I've been and gone and put the navboxes back again - and I suggest we need a proper discussion here and a definitative decision. Frankly, if Billing doesn't meet the criterea I can't think who might, and the navboxes themselves need to be suppressed. Just because he's from a (quite recent, but) past era and most young people haven't heard of him.... --Soundofmusicals (talk) 20:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Your claim that his homophobia is evidence of far-right views is mistaken, as a contemporary of Billing, Henry Labouchère, was the person responsible for introducing the amendment to the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 that criminalised all male homosexual activity for the first time, and Labouchère was a Liberal. All parties at that time were homophobic and no prominent politician was calling for decriminalisation. Therefore if Billing is to be retroactively deemed a fascist for his homophobia, then surely it must apply to Labouchère who actually criminalised homosexuality? But then I don't think homophobia at this time in history is evidence of any particularly extreme views. I notice that Billing was still living in the 1930s and the Second World War which witnessed the rise of fascism; if he was far-right or a fascist then this is exactly the time when one would expect him to embrace fascism. But I see no evidence of this, only that he designed a new type of plane with which to bomb Nazi Germany with. Therefore you could objectively say he was an anti-fascist. This view certainly has more evidence than the claim that he is a fascist.--Britannicus (talk) 23:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

He wasn't a "fascist" as such - certainly not a member of the BUF or other such organisations, and of course technically there was no such thing as a "fascist" in WWI. He has been called a "a demagogic proto-Fascist" (by Richard Davenport-Hines). But we don't use that language, just say that he had extremely right wing views, which by any normal usage he did. I think its fair to say that his anti-gay views in the context of the time are not necessarily right wing - it was a common belief that homosexuality was morally and/or medically deviant - and you can find that view expressed by communists as well as fascists. Paul B (talk) 22:00, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The point is that even in a context where being more or less homophobic was pretty much mainstream his hysterical conviction that almost everything that went wrong with anything was due to the activities of gays was on the outer fringes of right wing lunacy - in fact it was eventually counter-productive (from his point of view) as this aspect, at least, of Billing's writings became a bit of a joke, and not just to the sexually tolerant. An aircraft designer with a total disregard for either the basic laws of physics or the practicalities of good design (neither right or left in that of course, just incompetent) his reaction that the reason why his designs didn't attract massive government orders was the existence of the Royal Aircraft Factory clearly the display the rejection of reality and hysterical anti-socialism of many on the fringes of the right today. He was certainly a proto-fascist, and later an admirer, if not an associate, of Moseley. The very idea of building great fleets of bombers to wipe out the Germans, men, women and children also has fascist overtones, to put it very mildly. I honestly think that even those who admire the man would have to admit that he was a right wing extremist.--Soundofmusicals (talk) 22:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

You seem to have an extreme prejudice against Billing and an axe to grind. I wonder if you are really looking at the evidence dispassionately rather than through your own political views? You seem to believe everyone to the left of you is far-right/fascist. I also find it amusing that you believe Billing's advocacy of a more vigorous prosecution of the war to destroy Nazi Germany is evidence of fascist sympathies! To put it mildly, I do not believe your arguments make sense. Advocacy of civilian bombing is not evidence of fascism; the British under Arthur Harris and the Americans and the Soviets all supported the bombing of civilians.--Britannicus (talk) 00:44, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

To be honest I don't like Billing much - very little time for him as a person, and of course the fact that his politics and mine are so different puts us a bit at odds. I wouldn't call this antipathy "prejudice" however, I'm certainly not judging him because of any irrelevant factors, or out of ignorance about what he was really like. I don't have any axes to grind either - just that the "far-right" category might as well not be there if such a perfect example of a "far right person" is excluded.

BUT, and I am keeping my fingers off the caps lock key here with some difficulty - none of this has any relevance whatever. This isn't an article about me (or you), but about Billing himself, my own politics don't come into it. I make no judgements whatever about your politics, because they are every bit as irrelevant to our argument as mine. I might just as well accuse you of having an axe to grind for wanting to take him off the "far-right" list (and it would be just as silly an argument, of course).

The far right in Britain was in Billing's time often very anti-German. (See this British Empire Union if you don't believe me). As I might have said before, fascists often hate each other much more deeply and sincerely than they hate their favoured "target group of the month", anyway. Other people advocated stern proscecution of the war - but I very much doubt if Billing would have thought of it as a war against fascism as such, just his hated Germans, who he wanted systematically exterminated (remind you of anyone?). Equating this with the desire of Harris to defeat the Nazi regime by any means available is grotesque. And I don't know why you keep mentioning Stalin. The Stalin who was admired by people as left-wing as Bernard Shaw was of course a creature of fiction. The real Stalin was not just as bad as Hitler but pretty much his twin brother, politically. The Russians themselves, at least since Khrushchev, and to this day, refer to Stalin as a "rightist" (even a "fascist") dictator - they called the end of the Soviet regime a "leftish" revolution, believe it or not.

To get back to what we're on about, anyway - the article itself is I think fair and gives Billing's talents and achievements due credit, and doesn't dwell unduly on the negative side. It certainly doesn't need any of my negative POV injected into it. All I am saying is, leave the far-right category (at least) alone. I'm sure you'd agree that being far-right is in some resepcts a fairly neutral thing anyway. Many people, sane and mad, principled and unprincipled, even "good" and "evil", have held extremely conservative views, when all is said and done. You could of course say just the same about the people at the other end of the spectrum. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 08:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I "don't keep mentioning Stalin". In fact I haven't mentioned him once. I made one passing reference to "the Soviets". (Stalin is listed in the category "anti-fascists" as well as various communist and Marxist categories.) Also, the far-right in Billing's time were not anti-German. Going through the far-right navigation box which you are so keen on, I keep seeing in the pre-1945 section many pro-Germans: Mary Sophia Allen, John Amery, Henry Hamilton Beamish, Hastings Russell, 12th Duke of Bedford, Thomas Haller Cooper, Roy Courlander, Barry Domvile, Reginald Goodall, Robert Gordon-Canning, J. F. C. Fuller, William Joyce, Arnold Leese, Diana Mitford, Unity Mitford, Oswald Mosley, Gerard Wallop, 9th Earl of Portsmouth, Arthur Wellesley, 5th Duke of Wellington, and Henry Williamson. You could say being pro-German was a characteristic of the far-right in Billing's time, which would be natural of course because Germany was the foremost far-right country in the world and therefore their far-right views led them to supporting a victory for Nazi Germany. Billing supported the war to destroy Nazi Germany so he does fit this category. Looking at the evidence I see his homophobia, which of course was not an extreme viewpoint at this time period, and I see his advocacy of civilian bombing to defeat Nazi Germany. Neither of these are evidence of far-right sympathies and on the last point it is actual evidence of anti-fascist activity. Therefore to categorise Billing as far-right/fascist is nonsensical and not borne out by the evidence.--Britannicus (talk) 13:51, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

This article currently claims he had "extreme right-wing views" - can any one give any actual examples of those, or indeed of any right-wing views, extreme or otherwise? One User above says he had "extreme anti-socialism" views when in actual fact at one point in describing his own views Pemberton Billing declared "... I am a Socialist!" (The Imperialist no 48). A User above says "this bloke had all manner of far-right views" - name them. A User above says that he had the "hysterical conviction that almost everything that went wrong with anything was due to the activities of gays" - such a claim is not substantiated by the actual evidence. --JHumphries (talk) 19:56, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

I have replaced the unsubstantiated "extreme right-wing views" with the term populist to reflect his anti-elitist viewpoint.--JHumphries (talk) 22:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

When did he stand down?

When did he stand down as an MP? One source says 1923, but most information says 1921. Note that there was a general election in 1922. PatGallacher (talk) 13:23, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

The current source is just a webpage, albeit a basically reliable one. But if there are better sources that are consistent in saying 1921 we can just change it. But we need the sources. Paul B (talk) 13:39, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

See [4], also Hertford by-election, 1921. The article on Hertford (UK Parliament constituency) refers to Craig's parliamentary results, a reliable source, I will consult it when I get the chance. PatGallacher (talk) 14:50, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

There are several on google books [5] [6] The Parliamentary Gazette for 1921 says "HERTFORD. AW Rear-Admiral M. F.C Sueter 12,329 CoU Sir Hildred Carlile ... 5,553 Majority 6,776 (June 16, 1921, in the place of Mr. Pemberton Billing, resigned)". Paul B (talk) 15:18, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I have added the reason given for him standing down.--JHumphries (talk) 18:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Unsigned Interjection

Someone interjected this apparent (unsigned) request for information onto this page - unfortuneately overwriting a good deal old text in the process -

CAN anyone shed any light on this please. It is an unusual name and I wonder if there is a connection with the subject of this article. Around about 1958 to 1960, in Scarborough, UK, Stephen Joseph, the actor and director, had a housekeeper called "Mrs Pemberton Billing (I don't know about the hypen, whether or not). She was known as "PB". She made cakes for the interval refreshments which were sold during performances.

Sorry I forgot to log in. I am alien-corn.

I have restored the old version of the page - but append this (without comment). --Soundofmusicals (talk) 00:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

2018 re-edit

Unfortunately this article suffered from a reliance on later perceptions and political categorization rather than actual statements about the subject.

I have removed the falsifications that he 'campaigned against homosexuality' because he did not.

Likewise insinuations that he was anti-semitic are again unsubstantiated - he did for a very short time make use of two individuals who would be noted for such views and I have added that in for clarity.

I suspect he will be stuck with the term 'right wing' because of his expressions of patriotism but he does not appear to have any ideological tenets that fit the category of being exclusively right wing, nor did he associate in any meaningful way with right wing groups or individuals throughout his life, he was clearly an outsider.

If it were not for the re-discovery of the Maud Allan libel case, he would, at best, be merely a footnote in the history of British (military) aviation. --JHumphries (talk) 14:25, 5 August 2018 (UTC)