Today, I’m going to answer a question that I’ve been asked a surprising number of times: did Victoria prevent the criminalization of lesbianism because she didn’t believe that lesbians existed?
According to the myth, the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 originally contained provisions criminalizing homosexual activity between women as well as men, but Victoria refused to sign the bill until the provisions relating to women were removed, arguing that “women do not do such things.”
From a constitutional standpoint, the story is impossible. It seems to assume that the British monarch had a line-item veto similar to that found in the US, but this has never been the case. Not even Henry VIII could cherry-pick provisions from a bill and veto them—legislation must be approved or rejected in toto. In fact, the Sovereign doesn’t even see the final text of a bill. Instead, the Lord Chancellor submits the necessary Letters Patent accompanied by a list of all the bills that have completed their parliamentary journey.
In theory, Victoria could have vetoed the entire bill, but no Sovereign has done that since Anne vetoed the Scottish Militia Bill in 1707. Victoria may have tested the bounds of constitutional propriety from time to time, but blocking legislation passed by Parliament would have been a step too far.
The Criminal Law Amendment Act didn’t mention homosexual activity at all until a Liberal MP named Henry Labouchère successfully moved an amendment to the bill. It allowed the courts to punish ‘gross indecency’ between two men with a prison sentence of up to a year, with or without hard labor. A glance at Hansard reveals that lesbian activity was never part of Labouchère’s amendment, so there would have been no provisions for Victoria to object to.
Needless to say, this myth is busted.
 The text can be found at HC Deb, 6 August 1885, col. 1397.