Right, let me start by saying I abhor intolerance and violence towards ANY group of people. (Except terrorists). So reports of mob violence at a Gay Pride parade in Belgrade are concerning – as would be the case if they were happening to any lawful parade, anywhere. But I was surprised at this comment by by BBC reporter Mark Lowen in Belgrade;
This is not the image Serbia wants the world to see. A successful gay parade was supposed to be an indication of how far this country has come from the ultranationalism and violence of the 1990s.
Really? Is the acceptance of gay parades now the marker of a civilised society? Is tolerance of public expression of a particular sexual lifestyle proof of a move away from “ultranationalism”? I missed that memo – maybe it is instilled into BBC reporters when they are young but it seems to me that seeking to equate an tolerance of gay activists in the public square with a sophisticated modern Nation is, at least, somewhat peculiar. Mark seems quite interested in this topic area, having filed a story about Albania “approving gay marriage” I must admit that I had not realised the centrality of the gay issue to these emerging societies, so thank goodness for Mark.
Lowen is not entirely wrong here. Serbia wants to show itself as a modern country, living up to the best standards the EU countries. Serbian society was never particularly tolerant so a move to this would have been seen as productive.
I don’t neccesarily confuse this with ultra nationalism, unless it is based on a inferred conformity to a masculine national stereotype, otherwise don’t see the connection per se.
Yes funny that as I’d suggest tolerance to other points of view say being able to draw cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed (may unmanned drones be upon him) without fellow citizens wanting to hack your head off is probably a better indication of a good democracy.
Serbs have not been a particular tolerant cutlure, historically. But what the hell does nationalism have to do with sexual orientation? Yes, of course there’s an obvious connection between social conservatism and nationalism in practice, but nationalism itself has nothing to do with sexuality. Poor choice of words there.
But I suppose it’s really just another case of the BBC using “nationalism” as a pejorative, and in their minds one unapproved thought is connected to all others. The audience is naturally expected to understand this line of thinking.
Yesterday, Saturday, 20,000 people, mainly families and religious pleaded at a public meeting in Belgrad that the proposed parade not take place. The issue has been running for months.
The organisers decided to go ahead not withstanding.
Serbia is torn. The Kossovo issue. The traumas of many in the civil war. Any commentator would say that a ‘gay parade’ would not be wise at this stage.
I’m not a fan of exhibitionism, particularly of a sexualised nature and can’t for the life of me see what the fun is wondering about in a g-string in a city full of children. I still believe firmly in public decorum and can understand the bewilderment of the Serbs.
There is no excuse for the violence of the antis.
A wise decision would have been to resist the temptation to shock in a society in transition that 15 years ago was in a vicious civil war.
One things for sure. There won’t be a pride in Pristina or Turkey. Perhaps a Pride should be set as an EU acession condition? (tongue in cheek)
Homosexuals flaunting their perversion in public is bound to be provocative in any civilised society. I’m sure though that those inflicting the violence are the usual thugs who welcome any excuse. They deserve to have the book thrown at them.
The sign of a civilised society is that the law is upheld and people’s democratic rights are respected.
Convicting a preacher for a public order offence after he was physically assaulted by homosexual bigots for expressing his Christian view that homosexuality is an abomination is the sign of a collapsing civilisation heading towards tyranny.
please do not go along with the use of “pride” in this context…gay pride is the term…… having claimed the word ‘gay’ for their exclusive use the homosexualists now lay seige to the word ‘pride’ to make it their own.
They also are claiming use of that symbol, much loved by children everywhere,…the rainbow. Leave it to the children please homosexualists everywhere, use a chocolate starfish if you need a symbol. We do not want to be reminded of your perversion every time we see a rainbow
RGH: There won’t be a pride in Pristina or Turkey. Perhaps a Pride should be set as an EU acession condition? (tongue in cheek)
====================
I read that a couple of times, wondering what a pride or a Pride is when it is not a group of lions, which presumably it is not. Haven’t come across the expression before.
Ultranationalism, whatever that is, is obviously meant to be taken as A Bad Thing. Presumably it is akin to nationalism.
Love of and pride in one’s nation is not appoved of but pride of another kind is worth public marching and cavorting. Hm…Who decreed this and why?
coming next year
gay pride march in mecca
later that day-mass beheadings and stonings of homosexuals in city square
wonder how al-beeb would take that headline?
They would say that the antagonism engendered by colonialism/racism/George Bush/America/Israel and climate change had rendered the Meccans deserving of a gay-panic defence.
Is the acceptance of gay parades now the marker of a civilised society?
In many ways, tolerance of viewpoints and lifestyles one abhors is the marker of a civilised society. Gay parades accompanied by decriminalisation of sexual acts between consenting adults in private (I have no idea what is the Serb legal position) are a reasonable way to start.
Legal in private (gay anal from 18) otherwise 14, but no civil partnerships.
It’s is tolerated in the main (as it is by most people who have other pressing concerns) but display is bad taste and approval is seen as condoning.
Serbia (Eastern Europe) oerates a don’t ask, don’t tell morality.
That is clearly not enough for the lobby who invite confrontation to ‘raise profile’
Main ‘World’ headline for gay shift at BBC-NUJ is about its hostility to an anti-gay protest in Belgrade.
Would that BBC-NUJ were as hostile to UAF in Leicester.
I think homosexuality is perverse. I hate how it is promoted on telly. Does that mean that I will end up going to jail or a reeducation camp?
I’m not sure that even saying that isn’t a “hate crime”. I think that people have been reported to police or even arrested for expressing unapproved thoughts and opinions.
I think we will soon see the day when we go back to the mindset of the ‘ducking stool test’ once used to test witches. If they were immersed in water and drowned they weren’t witches, if they didn’t they were burnt at the stake. With homosexuality, if someone is suspected of ‘homophobia’, they will have to submit themselves to buggery to prove they’re not, and if they refuse, they’ll be sodomised anyway as punishment for their ‘homophobia’.
“On Saturday, several thousand people had protested against the march. Right-wing groups say that homosexuality is contrary to Serbian religious and family values.
The Serbian Orthodox Church condemned the parade on Friday but also warned against violence against participants.
The BBC’s Mark Lowen says homosexuality is still largely a taboo in Serbia, a conservative and religious nation.”
Amazing how when it’s Christianity the BBC will always make the connection, but when it comes to Muslims, it seems to be nothing to do with religion.
But look at this article by the Daily Mail and you get a different picture;
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1319310/Riot-Serbia-far-right-thugs-protest-Belgrade-gay-pride-march.html
For me the emphasis is that these are Nazi groups, the photos reinforce this (they hardly look like regular church goers!) but the BBC has TOTALLY missed out this point.. Strange that.