Origins Of Sexual Reform - Why Then? Why There?

[LeCharivari]

Indeed, first time I've about Karl Ulrichs, too. I actually thought the word "Urnings" was coined by Magnus Hirschfeld. Little did I know.

Ulrichs is recognised as Hirschfeld's greatest influence and main reference in the field of sexual reform and sexual orientation, where they were both undoubtedly pioneers in unexplored/unquestioned territory. My only reservation about their ideas today is that both would probably have been considered as transexuals rather than "gay", as they considered that they (and gays generally, although Ulrichs later modified his views) were anima muliebris virili corpore inclusa (females born in a male body). This was at odds with Karl-Maria Kertbeny's view, of much the same time, who coined the terms heterosexual and homosexual, which was that gays were not by nature effeminate.

All of them, as well as the other German/Austrian/Prussian "activists" of the time, agreed that homosexuality was inborn rather than a choice, which was considered revolutionary at the time (and is still refuted by some even one hundred and fifty years later). What I find curious is that although homosexuality was recognised (and criminalised) elsewhere any political activism at that time seems to have been concentrated exclusively in Germany/Austria/Prussia while elsewhere it was more "social" of the Oscar Wilde variety, and that it then faded away from view almost completely from the 1920's until the early 60's. Any ideas why?

As the thread on Karl Ulrichs has degenerated into personal abuse I have taken the liberty of copying a post from there and starting a new thread.

Prior to that thread I had never realised quite how much both the movement to de-criminalise homosexuality and the subject of sexual orientation had been concentrated not only in one area (Germany/Austria/Prussia) but at one time (1870's to 1920s), followed by a virtual lack of any further progress or interest for nearly five decades until the 70's.

I realise that those decades included the Depression of the 30's and WWII and that the rise of the Nazi Party put an end to any progress in Germany in the 30's, but I can't help being surprised that the acceptance of gays in the "Roaring Twenties" disappeared so quickly, so universally, and for so long.

Any ideas why?

(and obviously this topic is only concerned with pre-70's activities, so can it please be kept that way)

[catmac]

Interesting topic, LeC.

Though I was only a young lad at the time , I was led to believe that in early post-WW2 Britain there was a definite feeling that the legal pressure on gays was easing up. Maybe the realisation of the horrors of the persecution of anyone who was even slightly outside the perfect by the Nazi regime made people a little more tolerant - I don't know. It was not until the early 50's and the fall of the Labour government that the persecution of gays restarted with a vengeance under the new Conservative Home Secretary Maxwell Fyfe. I'm sure the political significance of this has been the strong link between gay rights and left wing politics for the following decades, indeed it was not until the re-election of a Labour government in 1963 that the first steps to law reform were made, encouraged by the new Home Secretary Roy Jenkins - a politician I greatly admire for actually doing what he said he would do!

As a footnote, both Roy Jenkins and MP Leo Abse were in my opinion the real heroes of gay law reform, they took on the bigots for a cause that they believed was just and right and not for personal gain. They make the likes of Peter Tatchel look like the infantile trouble making fools that they are.

[LeCharivari]

All well before my time, hence the curiosity - my mother just made it in as a "flapper" in the 20's and she still showed that level of tolerance and love of life 80 years later, so I just wondered why it disappeared for so long.

I was also surprised to note, along with the posts on outing "gay but anti-gay" politicians, that this was also started by the same people in Germany and Prussia in the second half of the 18th century. I can understand why it came to a grinding halt there, but I still wonder why it and the sexual reform movement failed to take off elsewhere for so long.

[LeCharivari]

I was, again, surprised to learn by following up Tom's post in the "Outing" thread that Austria is so advanced in the acceptance and integration of gays, to the extent that being gay is "largely politely ignored or deemed not newsworthy" even where the most controversial of politicians is concerned - even if their legislation is not particularly progressive.

Haider never said he was gay, nor denied it and Austrians’ reaction to this is interesting. They don’t really care. Whether true or not, this speculation was largely politely ignored or deemed not newsworthy.

Overall the Austrian press abides by the unwritten rule that private lives should only be written about when made an issue by the politician themselves, or has an effect on public policy.

”If Haider was gay or bi or whatever, so what?” writes Marco Schreuder,, an openly gay member of the Vienna regional assembly. ”In our society, diverse sexual tendencies should be an accepted as a fact by enlightened, 21st century people…Drinkdriving is life-threatening. But visiting a gay bar doesn’t

threaten your own life or anyone else’s”.

Haider’s political parties — far-right Freedom before 2005 and later the splinter group Alliance for Austria’s Future, did not pursue anti-gay policies.

Question marks over Haider’s sexuality were not a political issue and are not new. Should we care nevertheless?

I had always assumed (before I started to take my current interest) that the Dutch led the way and that the Austrians were some way behind in accepting gays. It just goes to show that legislation and acceptance do not always go hand-in-hand.

*: http://blogs.reuters...ia-doesnt-care/