The Last Nazi Secret - Gays in the Third Reich on TV

Discussions on every day life in the Weimar Republic, pre-anschluss Austria, Third Reich and the occupied territories. Hosted by Vikki.
User avatar
MadJim
Member
Posts: 272
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 20:00
Location: The Old Line State USA

homo blackmail

#16

Post by MadJim » 19 May 2002, 09:14

It was a mis-identifacation. Frisch was mistaken for someone else with a similar name and looks - but of a lesser rank. The poofter black mailer was liquidated for his trouble :P

One of the reasons for the Night of the Long Knives was to purge the poofs.

One General remarked: "Rearmament was much to serious to be left in the hands of homosexuals, street brawlers and drunkards"

(I might have the exact words wrong) :P

User avatar
Richard Murphy
Member
Posts: 753
Joined: 09 Mar 2002, 20:24
Location: Bletchley, England

#17

Post by Richard Murphy » 19 May 2002, 10:34

As I said on the other thread discussing this subject (Hans Ment...);

Röhm wasn't killed because he was gay, his organisation was seen by German conservative's and, particularly, the Army as a threat because they wanted to continue the "National Socialist" revolution and make the SA the formal armed forces of the State.
Hitler needed the support of both the Army and major industrialists to remain in power, and could not to be seen to be weak in the face of potential opposition, hence his ruthlessness in dealing with it, and his reluctance to treat one of his most loyal lieutenants the same way.
Whether it was Himmler, Blomberg or someone else that persuaded him that the Hydra would not die unless he cut off all its heads will probably never be known.

Regards from the Park,

Rich


Yedith
Member
Posts: 39
Joined: 26 Apr 2002, 23:32
Location: Chicago

why ignore lesbians?

#18

Post by Yedith » 19 May 2002, 14:47

If I understand it correctly(and there is a good chance I'm not), lesbians were pretty much tolerated. If the purpose of women was to bear children for Germany (and please correct me if I'm wrong on this, too...), then weren't lesbians problematic since they weren't churning out little Aryans?

User avatar
Richard Murphy
Member
Posts: 753
Joined: 09 Mar 2002, 20:24
Location: Bletchley, England

If I recall correctly

#19

Post by Richard Murphy » 19 May 2002, 15:35

One interviewee said that Lesbians were tolerated partially because the senior leadership didn't believe they existed (Queen Victoria was of a simililar opinion, which is why UK legislated against male but not female single sex relationships.), but, even if they did, they could still be impregnated (By force if nessecary.), where as males not having sex with females would deny the continuation of "good" aryan lines.

Regards,

Rich

Relay
Member
Posts: 8
Joined: 18 May 2002, 22:06
Location: Sweden

Main point

#20

Post by Relay » 19 May 2002, 15:44

Main point lost

User avatar
Richard Murphy
Member
Posts: 753
Joined: 09 Mar 2002, 20:24
Location: Bletchley, England

Er??

#21

Post by Richard Murphy » 19 May 2002, 16:05

Relay,
So what was the main point?

With the exception of an openly gay Belgian traitor, and Ernst Röhm (Which I think just about everyone knew about.), the program failed to produce one case of homosexuality in the Wehrmacht. Even if they had, it would hardly come as a suprise that if you put 3 million odd men together, some would be gay. I dare say the proportion would be about the same in any Army.

As for the "Homo-erotic" theory: So the Nazi's, in the pursuit of the "Aryan" ideal, used half dressed atheletes to make the point of physical fitness. So what?
Some (Especially those who need yet another stick to beat the Nazis over the head with.) may consider it "Homo-erotic". Some don't seriously think it makes any difference.

Regards from the Park,

Rich

Timo
Member
Posts: 3869
Joined: 09 Mar 2002, 23:09
Location: Europe

Re: Er??

#22

Post by Timo » 19 May 2002, 16:11

Richard Murphy wrote:As for the "Homo-erotic" theory: So the Nazi's, in the pursuit of the "Aryan" ideal, used half dressed atheletes to make the point of physical fitness. So what?
Some (Especially those who need yet another stick to beat the Nazis over the head with.) may consider it "Homo-erotic". Some don't seriously think it makes any difference.
Well the makers of the documentary consider it "Homo-erotic". Maybe this tells us more about them instead of about the Nazis.

Dan
Member
Posts: 8429
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:06
Location: California

Re: If I recall correctly

#23

Post by Dan » 19 May 2002, 16:11

Richard Murphy wrote:One interviewee said that Lesbians were tolerated partially because the senior leadership didn't believe they existed (Queen Victoria was of a simililar opinion, which is why UK legislated against male but not female single sex relationships.), but, even if they did, they could still be impregnated (By force if nessecary.), where as males not having sex with females would deny the continuation of "good" aryan lines.

Regards,

Rich
Rich, I think it was not legislated against because of old common law practice which was partically based on the Bible. There isn't any penalty for lesbianism in the Bible, only Homosexuality in males.

Dan

User avatar
Kaiser
Member
Posts: 122
Joined: 27 Mar 2002, 10:38
Location: Fifth Circle of Hell

#24

Post by Kaiser » 19 May 2002, 19:24

Now its becoming clearer why uncle adolph always carreid around that tube of Astroglide :lol:

User avatar
MadJim
Member
Posts: 272
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 20:00
Location: The Old Line State USA

Re: Er??

#25

Post by MadJim » 20 May 2002, 01:28

Well the makers of the documentary consider it "Homo-erotic". Maybe this tells us more about them instead of about the Nazis.
You said a volumes, brother. :monkee:

User avatar
Birgitte Heuschkel
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 18 Mar 2002, 09:07
Location: Fredericia, Denmark
Contact:

Re: why ignore lesbians?

#26

Post by Birgitte Heuschkel » 20 May 2002, 16:30

Yedith wrote:If I understand it correctly(and there is a good chance I'm not), lesbians were pretty much tolerated. If the purpose of women was to bear children for Germany (and please correct me if I'm wrong on this, too...), then weren't lesbians problematic since they weren't churning out little Aryans?
One could possibly rationalize that whilst having their fun with each other, lesbians can still technically churn out those little soldiers to be -- just takes a bit of closing the eyes and thinking about the Vaterland once a year or so.

If one pursues this thought a little further, you could even reach the conclusion that lesbians would be preferable to straight women for the procreation process: One Aryan stud could impregnate hundreds of women a year, and if he were to do that, rather than marry one... And they weren't griping because they'd rather have each other...

User avatar
HaEn
In memoriam
Posts: 1911
Joined: 13 Mar 2002, 01:58
Location: Portland OR U.S.A.

super race

#27

Post by HaEn » 20 May 2002, 23:21

Birgitte; That's an intersting point. I knew indeed a young woman who professed to be lesbian, but "did her duty" for the fatherland. After which she went back to live with her friend. The baby did not go to foster parents though; she brought it up herself. Nothing new under the sun I think. HN.

User avatar
Birgitte Heuschkel
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 18 Mar 2002, 09:07
Location: Fredericia, Denmark
Contact:

Re: super race

#28

Post by Birgitte Heuschkel » 20 May 2002, 23:55

HaEn wrote:Birgitte; That's an intersting point. I knew indeed a young woman who professed to be lesbian, but "did her duty" for the fatherland. After which she went back to live with her friend. The baby did not go to foster parents though; she brought it up herself. Nothing new under the sun I think. HN.
Probably not -- I don't see why gay people wouldn't want to have children too, I know enough in this millennium who find... ways... to handle this problem. The smarter ones don't pick up men in bars.

Creete
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 24 May 2002, 15:18
Location: Athens, Greece

#29

Post by Creete » 24 May 2002, 16:15

Was it a British documentary?

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: why ignore lesbians?

#30

Post by Scott Smith » 31 May 2002, 03:06

Birgitte Heuschkel wrote:
Yedith wrote:If I understand it correctly(and there is a good chance I'm not), lesbians were pretty much tolerated. If the purpose of women was to bear children for Germany (and please correct me if I'm wrong on this, too...), then weren't lesbians problematic since they weren't churning out little Aryans?
One could possibly rationalize that whilst having their fun with each other, lesbians can still technically churn out those little soldiers to be -- just takes a bit of closing the eyes and thinking about the Vaterland once a year or so.

If one pursues this thought a little further, you could even reach the conclusion that lesbians would be preferable to straight women for the procreation process: One Aryan stud could impregnate hundreds of women a year, and if he were to do that, rather than marry one... And they weren't griping because they'd rather have each other...
Prior to Freud, homosexuality was not thought of the way it is today as a fundamental sexual preference. Male sodomy was simply a vice or sometimes a weird indulgence. So the Nazi campaign against homosexuals was really only enforcing (in consequence to their law-and-order proclivities) of preexisting laws against male sodomy. They particularly tried to enforce laws against vagrancy and prostitution for both sexes, and therefore male homosexuals.

As far as lesbians, there was no such thing recognized before the Freudian revolution. "Boston Marriages" were not considered sexual, even if they really may have been, just two spinsters sharing accomodations. So, as Dan correctly notes, lesbians were almost invisible; and besides, female sexuality has always been considered "passive" in society, especially as far as the interests (usually pronatalist) of the Church and State go. In the 19th century, the French Republic tried everything to try to raise the birthrate, even encouraging "Republican Mothers" to use the rhythm-method of birth control (in the expectation that it would regularly fail). :wink:

If memory serves, Austria passed some laws before the Anschluss against lesbian sex, but it would have obviously been difficult to enforce. This had nothing to do with the Nazi Party and was initiated by the Roman Catholic Church. I don't believe that any other laws were passed during the Nazi era, especially since the Nazis tended to have traditional pre-Fruedian views on sexuality. They were not Victorians, however, and may have been pronatalist but not moralist. Abortion was illegal, for example, but illegitimacy was not necessarily taboo if the Party had its say over the Churches.

If anything, Hitler tended to be much more tolerant about gays than mainstream German society of the time. The anti-gay laws predated the Nazis and were, if anything, only enforced a little more by the Nazis. Also, remember that during the war the Nazis wanted to gain as much free forced-labor as possible for the concentration camps, so this undoubtedly encouraged more vigilance in law-enforcement against vice, not necessarily against homosexuals as a class.

In addition, the German military had very strict rules about homosexuality--and this is still the case in most countires. Germany during the Third Reich was no different because sodomy was illegal everywhere. Arizona repealed its sodomy laws only last year. These laws were seldom enforced, and technically not directed against gays, per se, but the point is that fascist governments don't believe in unenforced laws. They either enforce the Blue Laws or they repeal them.

In Idaho, for example, sodomy or "infamous crime against nature," either homosexual or heterosexual, can carry as much as life imprisonment (or so the last I remember). Obviously, that has never been vigilantly enforced. It seems to me that most legal professionals like to have a wide menu of charges to choose from that can be made willy-nilly against unpopular individuals (the Usual Suspects, so to speak) and then the attorneys can plea-bargain them down. That doesn't serve the cause of justice either, IMHO.

Nowadays the fear and hatred that was once directed against homosexuals is directed (sometimes hysterically) toward the supposed "sexual preference" of some adults for children, with the effective statutory ages of minority being effectively raised as much as possible in accordance with modern bourgeois values (career before marriage) and a moral counterreaction to the sixties "sexual revolution" from the introduction of the birth-control pill. Or, in other words, law-enforcement wants to brand the TYPE of criminal, not necessarily the type of vice that is the focus of sexual criminology. Interesting. An exception would be the celibate preisthood, where all sexual things unrelated to marriage sacraments are still viewed as indulgences or vices, even if actually crimes with real victims.

All this comes from many Women's Studies courses!
:wink:

Hope that answers the question...
:)

Post Reply

Return to “Life in the Third Reich & Weimar Republic”