Berlin to mark Nazis' gay victims

[michael mills]

R M Schultz wrote:

Secondly, not only did the Nazis made the penalties under Section 175 much more severe, but they also made prosecution easier by including not only oral and genital play, but mere licentiousness (e.g. provocative speech, the possession of homoerotic pornography, etc.) as grounds for prosecution. As a result, prosecutions went up dramatically and harsher sentences were handed out.

That is not really the point. Male homosexually had been criminalised well before Hitler came to power. The National Socialist Government merely extended the scope of the law and increased the penalties, which may not have been so much an expression of National Socialist ideology as of a general trend in Western society to crack down on sexual crimes.

We will have noted how over the past quarter-century prosecution of all sorts of sexual crimes, eg rape, has been made easier and punishment has been made more draconian. For example, here in Australia it is now routine for persons convicted of non-fatal sexual crimes to be receive much longer sentences than persons convicted of murder (eg 50 years for rape, 20 years for wilful murder), which will result in rapists being more inclined to kill their victims.

The scope of the law has also been increased, such that acts previously not considered criminal or only mildly so are now includied within the definition of sexual crimes. Thus, a convicted pedophile permanently listed on a pedophile index might be a person who brutally raped a child, or at the other extreme a person who merely possessed a photograph of a naked child not his own.

Thus, exactly the same sort of toughening of the law has occurred in our own society as occurred in National Socialist Germany, except that homosexual acts per se are no longer included in the list of sexual crimes. And that toughening has occurred in the absence of anything remotely resembling a National Socialist regime; inflamed public opinion has been quite sufficient to bring about the changes.

This too is disingenuous as the harsher sentences required by the Nazi revision of Section 175 made conviction a de facto sentence to the concentration camps. Also, any SS men found engaging in homoerotic activities were sent directly to concentration camps.

Once again R M Schultz has missed the point. The agreement providing for convicts with sentences over a certain length to be transferred to concentration camps only came in in 1943, ie 10 years after Hitler came to power. I do not know when the homosexual laws were made more severe, but I dare say it was several years before 1943.

Therefore, the longer sentences for homosexual offences were not introduced to enable the convicted men to be sent to concentration camps; they served their longer sentences in civilian prisons.

I understand that even before the war, the police often re-arrested certain classes of convict after they had completed their sentences and sent them to concentration camps. But that principle of preventive detention is not unknown in our own day; for example, here in Australia State governments can keep a person convicted of a sexual crime in prison indefinitely after he has completed his sentence, if they consider that person to be a danger to society.

[Peter H]

A Himmler speech on homosexuality 1937;ideology and concerns for 'breeding' also played its part:

If you further take into account the facts I have not yet mentioned, namely that with a static number of women, we have two million men too few on account of those who fell in the war, then you can well imagine how this imbalance of two million homosexuals and two million war dead, or in other words a lack of about four million men capable of having sex, has upset the sexual balance sheet of Germany, and will result in a catastrophe.

I would like to develop a couple of ideas for you on the question of homosexuality. There are those homosexuals who take the view: what I do is my business, a purely private matter. However, all things, which take place in the sexual sphere are not the private affair of the individual, but signify the life and death of the nation, signify world power or "swissification". The people which has many children has the candidature for world power and world domination. A people of good race which has too few children has a one-way ticket to the grave, for insignificance in fifty or a hundred years, for burial in two hundred and fifty years...

Therefore we must be absolutely clear that if we continue to have this burden in Germany, without being able to fight it, then that is the end of Germany, and the end of the Germanic world. Unfortunately, we don't have it as easy as our forefathers. The homosexual, whom one called "Urning", was drowned in a swamp. The professional gentlemen who find these corpses in the peat-bogs are certainly unaware that in ninety out of a hundred cases, they have a homosexual before them, who was drowned in a swamp, clothes and all. That wasn't a punishment, but simply the extinguishing of abnormal life. It had to be got rid of, just as we pull out weeds, throw them on a heap, and burn them. It was not a feeling of revenge, simply that those affected had to go... In the SS, today, we still have about one case of homosexuality a month. In a whole year, about eight to ten cases occur in the entire SS. I have now decided upon the following: in each case, these people will naturally be publicly degraded, expelled, and handed over to the courts. Following completion of the punishment imposed by the courts, they will be sent, by my order, to a concentration camp, and they will be shot in the concentration camp, while attempting to escape. I will make that known by order to the unit to which the person so affected belonged. Thereby, I hope finally to have done with persons of this type in the SS, so that at least the good blood, which we have in the SS, and the increasingly healthy blood, which we are cultivating for Germany, will be kept pure.

However, this does not represent a solution to the problem for the whole of Germany. One must not have any illusions about the following. When I bring a homosexual before the courts and have him locked up, the matter is not settled, because the homosexual comes out of prison just as homosexual as before he went in. Therefore the whole question is not clarified. It is clarified in the sense that this burden has been identified, in contrast to the years before the seizure of power.

http://www.history-of-the-holocaust.org ... lWipB.html

[michael mills]

If Himmler's concern that the "two million" homosexual men in Germany were not producing children, and thereby contributing to the numerical decline of the German people, then putting them in prison or killing them would not help matters, since that would not reverse the decline in numbers.

Perhaps that is what Himmler was hinting at in the last paragraph of the passage quoted by Moulded, where he says that locking up the homosexual does not solve the problem, since he comes out of prison just as homosexual as before. Presumably what Himmler means is that the homosexual man would continue to fail in his reproductive duty for the German people.

Was it Himmler's aim to somehow "cure" homosexual men rather than to punish them, to render them capable of fulfilling their reproductive duty? That seems to be implicit in what Himmler is saying.

One thing is certain; Himmler's attitude toward male homosexuals is not a moralistic one. He is not calling them evil degenerates who deserve to be punished; he calls them a "burden", meaning that they are supported by the German people without contributing to its reproduction. Since the elimination of the "two million" homosexuals (if there really were that many) would still not help the German reproductive effort, his aim must be to convert them to heterosexual reproductive behaviour.

It is noteworthy that Himmler specifically says that the shooting of the small number of SS men convicted of homosexual acts was meant only as an example to the SS itself, and was not to be a model for the treatment of homosexual men generally.

I recall reading in a book about German medical research in National Socialist Germany ( Benno Müller-Hill, "Murderous Science") about a crazy Danish scientist who carried out experiments on homosexual concentration camp prisoners in an attempt to "convert" them to heterosexuality. His method was to implant slow-release male hormones in their bodies. According to his notes, which are preserved, the implants induced gigantic erections in the men (although whether they were "converted" is not stated).

Just imagine! If Germany had won the war we might all be walking around the streets with gigantic erections! We might all be as potent as some members of the forum claim to be.

[R.M. Schultz]

Male homosexually had been criminalised well before Hitler came to power. The National Socialist Government merely extended the scope of the law and increased the penalties, which may not have been so much an expression of National Socialist ideology as of a general trend in Western society to crack down on sexual crimes.

We will have noted how over the past quarter-century prosecution of all sorts of sexual crimes, eg rape, has been made easier and punishment has been made more draconian. …

Don't you see something wrong with equating crimes of violence with consensual acts between mature adults? This is not just a matter of disproportional punishment, this is a matter of punishing people who aren't criminals to begin with!

If Himmler's concern that the "two million" homosexual men in Germany were not producing children, and thereby contributing to the numerical decline of the German people, then putting them in prison or killing them would not help matters, since that would not reverse the decline in numbers. …

The Nazis took the view that homosexuality was voluntary. The idea behind locking them up was to keep them from recruiting men who would otherwise marry and have children. In light of the examples of homosexuals known to Himmler, this makes sense. Röhm had been completely heterosexual before his initiation into homoeroticism in the early 1920's. The closet cases known to Himmler (e.g. Frank and von Schirach) had children, and his Berlin police chief, Helldorf, was a bi-sexual with children. Given Himmler's experience with homosexuality, this program of isolating the contagion makes sense.

[Rob S.]

Ahh, this reminds me of an old topic I started. Homosexuals were not persecuted in the holocaust. Why? For every grand theory there has to be logical steps leading up to it. How would the Germans go about finding homosexuals? Jews had organizations, shops, synogogues, last names, and racial appearances. Almost all of these could be found in federal archives. Homosexuals didn't have any of those. I'm more than certain homosexuality was a miscellaneous propaganda label for trouble makers who didn't fit any other specific category.

[Rob S.]

The Nazis took the view that homosexuality was voluntary.

As did St. Paul

The idea behind locking them up was to keep them from recruiting men who would otherwise marry and have children. In light of the examples of homosexuals known to Himmler, this makes sense. Röhm had been completely heterosexual before his initiation into homoeroticism in the early 1920's.

So it wasn't Röhm's revolution rhetoric?

[Beppo Schmidt]

I think Beppo means that Germany has bent over backwards to give reparations to the Jews but not paid as much attention as they should to other groups who suffered during the Nazi regime, like the homosexuals. Am I right, Beppo?

Yes, that is what I meant.

[Rob S.]

think Beppo means that Germany has bent over backwards to give reparations to the Jews but not paid as much attention as they should to other groups who suffered during the Nazi regime, like the homosexuals. Am I right, Beppo?

I think whoever is representative of the homosexual community has to first prove that actual homosexuals were persecuted, as opposed to just blanket accusations and general anti-gay rhetoric.

[michael mills]

Quote:
I think Beppo means that Germany has bent over backwards to give reparations to the Jews but not paid as much attention as they should to other groups who suffered during the Nazi regime, like the homosexuals. Am I right, Beppo?


Yes, that is what I meant.

If Germany bent over backwards to give reparations to the Jews, will accommodating the homosexuals require it to bend over forwards?

[Eistir]

This is littlebit too much.There is already that ugly holocaust memorial near of Brandenburg gates,enough is enough.

[David Thompson]

Please stay on topic here.

[Dan]

Just imagine! If Germany had won the war we might all be walking around the streets with gigantic erections! We might all be as potent as some members of the forum claim to be.

Those were the days...

[R.M. Schultz]

How would the Germans go about finding homosexuals?

One word — entrapment. Vice squads around the world used this tactic successfully for decades.

… I'm more than certain homosexuality was a miscellaneous propaganda label for trouble makers who didn't fit any other specific category.

Civilian violations of Section 175 were well documented, as were expulsions from the SS for homoeroticism. The record is clear. Furthermore, the Nazis did not hesitate to arrest political opponents for just that reason. They needed no "excuse" to send someone off to their death.

The Nazis took the view that homosexuality was voluntary.

As did St. Paul :)

So do I.

The idea behind locking them up was to keep them from recruiting men who would otherwise marry and have children. In light of the examples of homosexuals known to Himmler, this makes sense. Röhm had been completely heterosexual before his initiation into homoeroticism in the early 1920's.

So it wasn't Röhm's revolution rhetoric?

Factions within the NSDAP are a complex matter. Hitler staged the Blood Purge because he wished an alliance with the industrialists and Reichswehr (both right-wing groups) so he had to purge the left wing of the party to appease them. So, yes, the whole "Second Revolution" crowd had to be cleared out. Himmler, however, was personally alienated from Röhm because of his revulsion at Röhm's homosexuality, an objection that he had made time and again to Röhm's face.

I think whoever is representative of the homosexual community has to first prove that actual homosexuals were persecuted, as opposed to just blanket accusations and general anti-gay rhetoric.

The case has been proven quite well. Please see:

The Nazi Extermination of Homosexuals, by Frank Rector, Stein and Day, New York City, 1981

Hidden From History, Swastika, Pink Triangle, And Yellow Star: The Destruction Of Sexology And The Persecution Of Homosexuals In Nazi Germany, by Erwin J. Haeberle, Meridian, New York, 1989.

This is littlebit too much.There is already that ugly holocaust memorial near of Brandenburg gates,enough is enough.

Yes absolutely! Remembering the dead is simply in bad taste! And while we're at it, let's bulldoze all those SS cemeteries as well!

If Germany bent over backwards to give reparations to the Jews, will accommodating the homosexuals require it to bend over forwards?

Ha! Ha! Nothing like a genocide joke to show how truly heart-less we are!

[Rob S.]

One word — entrapment. Vice squads around the world used this tactic successfully for decades.

I doubt it. If Imperial Germany and the Weimar Republic had the laws earlier stated outlawing homosexuality; then legal and social barriers would have still existed; which they did. How do you know who to entrap? Did they go around seducing random people? Remember accused homosexuals are not necessarily homosexuals. I sincerely doubt there were 10,000 gays caught in the act.

[Dan]

Ha! Ha! Nothing like a genocide joke to show how truly heart-less we are!

I thought what happened to gays was democide, and thus better than genocide, because as you say sexual preference is a personal choice.