After World War II, as in Hungary, the installation of Stalinist
communism
in Czechoslovakia maintained the criminal, social, and moral repression of homosexuality. In 1962, the law prohibiting homosexual acts between consenting adults was abrogated, though accompanied by discriminatory legislation on the age of consent. However, contrary to Hungary, it would not be until the 1980s that the first explicitly gay establishments appeared in Prague.
Since 1990, the situation has evolved quite favorably in the Czech Republic, although less so in Slovakia, independent of each other since 1993. The separate age of consent for homosexuals was abrogated in 1990, to the effect that according to the law, both nations currently make no distinction between homosexuality and heterosexuality.
Today Prague, along with a few other smaller Czech cities, has numerous gay and lesbian establishments as well as active organizations. Many political groups, including the large Social Democratic Party, as well as high-level politicians, such as former president Vaclav Havel, support gays and lesbians in the form of equal rights and anti-discriminatory measures. In 2001, the Czech parliament adopted a new article in the labor code explicitly prohibiting discrimination “by reason of a person’s sexual orientation.” As far as prevailing attitudes are concerned, a 2006 Angus Reid poll found that approximately 52% of the Czech Republic’s population favored same-sex marriage, above the European average.
The evolution of gay rights in Slovakia has been more mixed. There have been many attempts to lay the groundwork for a gay and lesbian community, and while there are over ten gay and lesbian establishments in the capital of Bratislava, politicians are on the whole apathetic if not explicitly opposed to the advancement of gay rights. The Christian Democratic Movement is the most virulently homophobic political party, asserting the will of the Catholic Church, which retains a strong influence over the whole of Slovakian society.
In Austria, section 129 of the 1852 penal code prohibiting male and female homosexuality between consenting adults was not challenged in the period between the two world wars, and there were numerous convictions. The punishment, as in Germany prior to the Nazis, was relatively moderate—a prison sentence of one to five years. However, with Germany’s annexation of Austria in 1938 (becoming the Anschluss), the Nazi policy dedicated to the “eradication of homosexuality” that had been in effect in Germany since 1933 was extended to Austria. Raids increased, and punishments were brought in line with those of the Reich. From 1938 to 1945, the fate of Austrian homosexuals in prisons and in concentration camps mirrored that of German homosexuals.
As in Germany, the end of World War II resulted in only semi-liberation for homosexuals in Austria. The mortal peril of the camps had disappeared, but not section 129, nor the legacy of Nazi ideology. In fact, Austrian society, its police, and its judges equated homosexuals with
criminals
more than ever. Anti-gay laws were enforced with more zeal than at the turn of the century or during the 1920s. Further, homosexual survivors of the camps, in Austria as in Germany, were not viewed as victims of Nazism, and thus were excluded from reparations or pensions.
Among Europe’s democratic countries, Austria was one of the last to decriminalize homosexuality, in 1971. But in return for their compliance, the Catholic Church and the country’s conservative parties were appeased by the introduction of many new discriminatory laws: the criminalization of male homosexual prostitution (Paragraph 210, removed in 1989); of all forms of enticement to debauchery with a person of the same sex (Paragraphs 220 and 221, removed in 1996), and last but not least, the establishment of a separate age of consent for homosexuals (eighteen, compared to fourteen for heterosexuals) (Paragraph 209).
Paragraph 209 remained in effect until 2002, despite contradicting many Austrian legal and constitutional acts, as well as resolutions of the European Parliament and the Council of Europe. Both of these institutions have called upon Austria on many occasions, but always in vain, to align its
laws
with the rest of Europe, but any attempts at abrogation have always been obstructed by opponents on the far right. This intransigence is not just symbolic: the number of convictions, which had fallen to less than fifteen per year during the early 1990s, rose to an annual average of thirty-five by the end of the decade. More than a third of those charged were between eighteen and twenty years of age, and three-quarters were under forty. The removal of Paragraph 209 in 2002 was not the result of an act of parliament, but rather through an invalidation by the Constitutional Court of Austria, which determined that the law violated the principle of equal treatment of citizens.
A major difference between Austria and countries in the Eastern Bloc can be seen in its freedom of expression and association that has permitted a highly organized and very active gay and lesbian movement since the 1970s. Homosexual activists have forced many politicians to become more progressive, and today they can count on the support of the Green Party and the Social Democrats. Austrian society has also changed considerably. The traditional homophobia, fed by remnants of Nazi ideology and the strong influence of the Catholic Church, has lessened considerably, particularly in the younger generation. But a portion of the population continues to maintain a violently homophobic stance, which in turn is exacerbated by politicians of the populist right and far right. In a 1991 poll, 27% of Austrians declared themselves in favor of the strict pre-1971 laws against homosexuality.
Romania
In Romania, homosexuality was not specifically criminalized until 1936, under the influence of the Fascist Iron Guard, whose goal was to restore moral discipline over the populace. Strictly speaking, the law did not forbid homosexual acts, but rather the “public indecency” resulting from them. As defined, only a handful of people needed to be aware of a homosexual act in order for it to constitute an offense.
The fall of Romanian Fascism did not bring about any softening of the law. On the contrary, a law prohibiting homosexual relations (both male and female) was adopted in 1948. Unlike other communist countries such as Hungary, Czechoslovakia, or East Germany— which abolished this kind of wholesale interdiction in the 1960s and tolerated (especially in the 1980s) a discreet gay social life in its major cities—the Romanian regime under autocratic leader Nicolae Ceaucescu carried out a systematic repression of homosexuals until it dissolved in 1989. This tactic became part of the general evolution of the Romanian dictatorship, which did not soften at all during the 1970s.
Post-communist Romania is by far the most homophobic country in eastern Europe. Homosexuality was not decriminalized until 1996, in favor of a return to the more general legislation of offenses against public decency from the period of 1936–48. Article 200 of the Romanian penal code, which was not repealed until June 2001, provided for the punishment of any act between persons of the same sex if it was “committed in public or caused a public scandal.” With regard to what constitutes “public,”
jurisprudence
is particularly severe: for acts taking place in private, the offense occurs as soon as more than two people have knowledge of the act (neighbors, for example). Article 200 also penalized any inducement of homosexual relations, including any “propaganda, association, and
proselytism
.” This constituted a real obstacle to the dissemination of information on homosexuality, and severely limited the freedom of gay and lesbian associations, who were forced to dance around the law in order to simply exist.
The complete decriminalization of homosexuality, fiercely fought by many politicians and by the Orthodox Church, was, as in the Baltic countries, merely a concession to European demands. Pressure from the Council of Europe, the European Parliament, human rights associations, and the ILGA helped to bring about the abrogation of Article 200 and all other discriminatory measures against homosexuals.
Homosexuality is becoming ever more visible in Romania, and is gradually incurring some measures of political support. There are now several gay clubs in Bucharest, as well as other cities. As well, Bucharest celebrated its first Gay Pride day, or GayFest, in 2004, with financial support from some sections of government. And while civil partnerships or same-sex marriages are not permitted in Romania, the debate surrounding these issues is becoming more open.
—Michel Celse
ACCEPT Romania.
http://www.accept-romania.ro
(accessed March 3, 2008).
Adam, Barry D., Jan Willem Duyvendak, and André Krouwel, eds.
The Global Emergence of Gay and Lesbian Politics: National Imprints of a Worldwide Movement
. Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press, 1999.
Bucharest Acceptance Group (ACCEPT).
Sexual Orientation Discrimination in Romania: A Survey of Violence, Harassment and Discrimination against Romania’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community
. Bucharest, 2001.
Clapham, Andrew, and Kees Waaldijk, eds.
Homosexuality: A European Community Issue. Essays on Lesbian and Gays Rights in European Law and Policy
. Dordrecht/Boston/ London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1993.
Durandin, Catherine.
Roumanie, un piège ?
St-Claude-de-Diray, France: Ed. Hesse, 2000.
Grau, Günter, ed.
Homosexualität in der NS-Zeit
. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Fischer, 1993. [Published in the US as
Hidden Holocaust?: Gay and Lesbian Persecution in Germany, 1933–45
. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn, 1995.]
Gay.lt. Lithuania.
http://www.gay.lt
(accessed March 3, 2008).
Graupner, Helmut.
Homosexualität und Strafrecht in Osterreich: eine Übersicht
. Vienna: Rechtskomitee Lambda, 2001.
Háttér Society for Gays and Lesbians in Hungary, Labrisz Lesbian Association.
Report on the Discrimination of Lesbians, Gay Men and Bisexuals in Hungary
. Budapest, 2001.
Homosexuelle Initiative (HOSI) Wien.
Rosa Liebe unterm roten Stern
. Kiel, Germany: Frühlings Erwachen, 1984.
———.Vienna, Austria.
http://www.hosiwien.at
(accessed March 3, 2008).
International Lesbian and Gay Association-Europe.
http://www.ilga-europe.org
(accessed March 3, 2008).
http://lambdawa.gejowo.pl/pozostale/english.html
[Poland] (site now discontinued).
Human Rights Watch and the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission.
Public Scandals: Sexual Orientation and Criminal Law in Romania
. New York: Human Rights Watch, 1998.
ILGA-Europe.
L’après Amsterdam: l’Union européenne et l’orientation sexuelle
. Brussels, 1999.
Lambda Warszawa Association.
Report on discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in Poland
. Warsaw, 2001.
Levin, Eve.
Sex and Society in the World of the Orthodox Slavs 900–1700
. Ithaca, New York: Cornell Univ. Press, 1989.
Rechtskomitee LAMBDA (RKL). Austria.
http://www.rklambda.at
(accessed March 3, 2008).
Steakley, James. “Sodomy in Enlightenment Prussia: From Execution to Suicide.” In
The Pursuit of Sodomy: Male Homosexuality in Renaissance and Enlightment Europe
. Edited by Gerard Kent and Hekma Gert. New York: Harrington Park Press, 1989.
Wolff, Larry.
Inventing Eastern Europe
. Standford, CA: Standford Univ. Press, 1994.
—Balkans, the; Communism; Europe, Northern; European Law; Fascism; Germany; Russia.
EUROPE, NORTHERN
With good reason, the countries of northern Europe today have a reputation for
tolerance
of gays and lesbians, and some (Denmark and the Netherlands, in particular) have even been pioneers in gay rights issues, such as protection from
discrimination
, the legal recognition of same-sex couples, and the right to
adopt
. Of course, this does not mean that discrimination and other forms of hostile behavior against homosexuals have disappeared entirely from northern Europe. However, the adoption of laws upholding the rights of gays and lesbians in northern Europe reflects an evolution in social attitudes the region, demonstrating that the majority of the population has accepted the idea that homosexuality is a “normal” variant of sexuality, and that it deserves to be legally recognized as such. As well, these laws serve to help fight against prejudice and homophobic attitudes by insisting on respect for sexual orientation as a social norm.
Historically, this evolution represents a reversal of values over the course of the last thirty years. Previously, it was certainly true that northern European countries had a much less severe tradition of repression, particularly in Scandinavia, and even a liberal tradition in the Benelux (the economic union representing Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg); however, there were never any positive views of homosexuality or of the idea that homosexuals should be accepted into mainstream society. As in all Western countries in general, the turning point took place during what is known as the “sexual liberation” of the 1960s and 70s, marked by the development of a strong homosexual movement whose visibility and activism played a major role in helping to change society’s attitudes as well as instigate new legislation.
The Long Process of Decriminalizing Homosexuality
The penal codes of the Benelux nations had long differed from those in the Nordic countries, the direct result of the French Revolution’s influence. In 1792– 95, occupation of territories that today correspond to Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg by French revolutionary armies led to the straightforward abrogation, as in France, of the medieval and religious sodomy laws. The concept of sodomy covered not only the practice of anal penetration but more generally any non-procreative sexual practice; laws forbidding it punished any relations between individuals of the same sex, male or female. The Napoleonic rule that followed the revolutionary period saw the decriminalization of homosexuality written into law, with the adoption of a penal code that made no distinction between homosexuality and heterosexuality.