Czech Republic | Gay Pride | News

Czech President Won't Condemn Aide's Remarks That Gays Destroy Society, Family, Elevate Deviation to a Virtue

Czech President Vaclav Klaus is standing by his deputy chancellor Petr Hajek, who condemned the mayor of Prague for his support of a Gay Pride parade there, the AP reports.

Hajek Said Hajek, according to Ceske Noviny:

"The homosexuals' pressure action that will take place under the 'pretty Czech name' gay parade in Prague is not any innocent entertainment...It is a serious demonstration of a certain vision of the values in the world. It is a world in which traditional family plays no role...In this world, the monster of multiculturalism devours deep national traditions and cultural roots...It is a world in which sexual or any other deviation is elevated to a virtue, abnormality to a norm, the destruction of society to holy progress...A white man, heterosexual and Christian [is typically the endangered species in the world the participants in the event advocate]."

Klaus The AP reports that Klaus has defended his aide's remarks, despite calls from the Social Democrats and Public Affairs party for an apology: "Klaus refused to distance himself from Hajek's words and said he was not 'proud' of the event. The Aug. 13 parade is part of the first Prague gay pride festival that begins Wednesday."

Ceske Noviny adds:

Klaus writes in his statement released on his website that the carnival is not a manifestation of homosexuality but "homosexual-ism" which he fears similarly like any other modern "-isms." ... According to Klaus, Hajek is not protesting against the march alone but against the fact that this event is held under the auspices of the mayor, and possibly some political entities in the country. "One thing is to tolerate it, but to express public support on behalf of a significant institution is something completely different," Klaus writes. It is a mere quibble to demur at Hajek´s use of the word "deviation" in connection with homosexuals, Klaus notes, adding that he considers the word deviation neutral. "In any case, homosexuality is a considerably minority phenomenon, and it deserves our protection as such, but not necessarily our apotheosis," Klaus writes.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. wow... flashback, much?

    these people are scary.

    Posted by: Pete n SFO | Aug 5, 2011 12:01:19 PM

  2. "A white man, heterosexual and Christian".

    Well I think that pretty much sums it up.

    And this is the Czechs folks.

    Yeah, yeah I know 'don't lump people together/don't stereotype' - but...come on.

    Posted by: Leo | Aug 5, 2011 12:05:49 PM

  3. And all this from the President of the LEAST religious country in the world. The Czech Republic was recently found to be one of only four or five countries in the world who were becoming MORE homophobic and less tolerant of gays.

    Very worrying and very sad.

    Posted by: TampaZeke | Aug 5, 2011 12:10:17 PM

  4. I was going to reference that very thing, Tampazeke. Czech Republic is one of the few countries seeing an increase in homophobic attitudes. And now we see why. But, is it surprising? No. Eastern/Central Europe by and large is extremely homophobic.

    I'm glad the mayor of Prague has come out in support of the pride event, but this is horrible to read that the Czech president and deputy chancellor believe such things and the validation being made of the homophobic comments by Mr. Hajek by President Klaus is deplorable.

    These guys literally see gay people as a threat and admit FEAR towards us. We don't deserve support because they're threatened by our existences. Entirely pathetic.

    Is the Czech Republic part of the EU? If so, I hope they step in and sternly condemn these comments and make it known that their behavior is completely unacceptable.

    Posted by: Francis | Aug 5, 2011 12:28:12 PM

  5. What's also obvious, with the rise in hate crimes, the straight pride in Brazil, the religious and political leaders in several countries more or less calling gay people scourges, is just how intense this backlash against us is and will be. Now that we're gaining momentum, gaining rights, and more open and accepted than before, worldwide, we as a community have to be stronger than ever. We're under attack as a group. Hopefully the Czech gays and straight supporters stand tall and proud in defiance of these hateful things said against them.

    Posted by: Francis | Aug 5, 2011 12:34:28 PM

  6. Steven Leong · Honolulu, Hawaii
    Sometimes words flow so smoothly, we forget the amount of hurt, and sadness they transfer to others. Klaus rides the political horse, trying to be tolerant, while discriminating, condemning and cruscifying a group of people born differently from himself. What one sows, so shall they reap.

    I am Gay, and don't really know why we have Gay "pride" parades, rather then "all inclusive, celebration" parades, that could be sponsored by Gays.

    Posted by: Steven Leong | Aug 5, 2011 12:45:40 PM

  7. @STEVEN LEONG, how old are you? I guess you have to remember the "worse old days" to understand why Pride Parades were started and why we still have them.

    Do you also not understand why there are Black/Latino Pride Parades and St. Patrick's Day Parades or do you think all of these parades should be "all inclusive celebration parades" sponsored by traditionally oppressed minority groups?

    Posted by: TampaZeke | Aug 5, 2011 12:56:35 PM

  8. All I know is 'apotheosis' is an awfully big word for a man with such a small mind to be bandying about.

    Posted by: Leroy Laflamme | Aug 5, 2011 1:10:34 PM

  9. @Francis You are right, a backlash is coming. And we had better be prepared for it. We are going to be scrutinized in a way that we never were when we were still at the social margins and our movement was not all that influential.

    And that is precisely why we need to clean up our act. We can no longer afford flamboyant displays of the sort that one normally sees at Pride, nor can we afford to align ourselves with transvestites and the like (who are, in many cases, not even gay to begin with). We cannot clamor for marriage rights and then fail to exercise them, at the risk of appearing insincere. We cannot ask to be treated as equals in the military and then try to engage in non-conformity in an organization in which conformity is built into its very essence.

    We are at a critical juncture and are going to have to prove to the mainstream that having now been given an opportunity to join it, we are willing to embrace the responsibilities that entails.

    If we fail at that, then all we have fought for could be lost.

    Posted by: Rick | Aug 5, 2011 1:20:56 PM

  10. I am a sexual deviate and am learning to embrace my god-given deviancy!

    Posted by: will | Aug 5, 2011 1:26:07 PM

  11. Interestingly, in western Europe the right has taken to aligning itself with gay rights (with dubious sincerity) as a protest against some of the same "multiculturalism threats" the homophobe is talking about here. In these more progressive countries gay rights have become so mainstream that homophobia rather than homosexuality is seen as the imported threat to nationalistic values. Of course gay tourist dollars have benefitted Prague for years now, and I imagine they aren't viewed with the same disdain by the white-het-xtian Supremecist.

    @Rick: You make a mistake common to those suffering from naïveté and/or internalized homophobia in thinking that if only we behave our bad selves and act "normal" enough (gender-conforming, trans-excluding, straight-acting etc.) those lovely homophobes will embrace us and say welcome in. They won't. Anyone who justifies their homophobia due to Pride celebrations and the perceived deviancy of the gay community won't like you no matter how straight you think you're acting.

    Posted by: Ernie | Aug 5, 2011 1:53:34 PM

  12. @Ernie I am not making any mistake. The Oprah Winfreys and the Barack Obamas have been accepted and been successful largely because they embraced the social contrast, African-Americans who have failed to do so and instead rejected such "conformity" as a form of "acting white" have been failures and remain at the social margins and at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder as a consequence.

    The gay people who have succeeded and been accepted into the mainstream are, for the most part, those who have, likewise, conformed to societal norms--there is a reason that non-effeminate men like Anderson Cooper, Shep Smith, and Don Lemon are in the positions they are in, positions in which you would never find a lisping, effeminate, Cher-worshiping queen....and you would find the same pattern in Corporate America or in any other segment of society.

    The bottom line is that society is willing to accept homosexuality AS LONG AS it is not attached to some radical gender-bending/feminist ideology or generalized anarchy or generalized non-conformity or generalized flamboyant behavior or some other such mindset that has NOTHING AT ALL to do with sexuality, per se.

    There is no question that those who do not apply that lesson in their own lives will suffer the consequences as individuals--and they should; I just hope that there are enough of us who do apply it to make those who don't so outnumbered that they become outcasts even within the gay community, thereby ensuring our acceptance as a group in society at large.

    Posted by: Rick | Aug 5, 2011 2:19:11 PM

  13. A "white man, heterosexual and Christian" is Pat Buchanan's shtick. His comment on the recent massacre in Norway was that "Anders Breivik does have a point."

    He lamented in his latest book that Hispanic women in this country were having babies at a faster clip than white women and that our culture and heritage will be destroyed unless white women start having lots of babies.

    The white, heterosexual and Christian tag perfectly describes the New Republican Tea Party that controls the government by controlling the Republicans in the House of Representatives.

    Posted by: Ninong | Aug 5, 2011 2:30:41 PM

  14. Apparently Klaus made the comment first in English in Australia on July 28: "We may respect homosexuality, but not homosexualism."

    Presumably homosexualism means not being cowed into the closet or acting straight? Not being an internalized homophobe a la Rick? It's certainly the first time I've ever seen that contrast, and I read a lot of Slavic homophobes!

    Posted by: KevinVT | Aug 5, 2011 2:41:38 PM

  15. I'm guessing he means "the gay lifestyle", Kevin. I respect who you are, but not what you do. Basically another spin on the love the sinner, hate the sin BS line homophobes use.

    And I'm ignoring the let's all conform and act like "the straights" belief being promoted by a certain delusional poster, as it doesn't warrant a response.

    Lastly, the victimization act is what all of these bigots are using, solely because their way of thinking is being shown the door. They hate it and are growing more hostile and therefore speaking and acting out those frustrations. It's a result of living your whole life thinking you're above others solely for your skin tone, sexuality or religious/political beliefs. The undeserved sense of self-entitlement is disgusting.

    Posted by: Francis | Aug 5, 2011 2:54:38 PM

  16. Rick, you definitely makes some good points. It is not just for acceptance but also for general education that it is important for heterosexuals to know that gay people are not in some way insecure in the gender or different in their values. As long as heterosexual people understand that we (gay people) are just as likely to be Christian, just as (if not more so) proud of our gender and gender roles, just as (if not more so) devoted to our families, and just as moral as they are, their prejudice will fade. I completely agree we should never associate the transgender community in any way with the gay community. The single biggest lie of homophobes is that gay men are somehow less masculine or not 'real men' (and the inverse stereotype for gay women).

    Posted by: DB | Aug 5, 2011 2:56:11 PM

  17. "The Oprah Winfreys and the Barack Obamas have been accepted and been successful largely because they embraced the social contrast, African-Americans who have failed to do so and instead rejected such "conformity" as a form of "acting white" have been failures and remain at the social margins and at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder as a consequence"

    Oprah and Barack? Those are not just examples of successful Black Americans. Those are examples of over achieving (and lucky) Black celebrities. Michele Obama's parents are a more realistic picture of successful Black Americans.

    Black folks in the working class and middle-class shouldn't need to be accepted by anybody but themselves. That's the way it was 100 years ago--it ought to stay that way.

    No, the majority of Black folks who've entered the middle-class do not take on characteristics, speech sound, values that are much different than the much smaller Black middle-class that existed since before the Civil War...maybe a lot less church oriented, but that may be a good thing.

    This applies especially to Southern Black folks who've achieved middle-class status. There is nothing "white acting" or "conforming to the mainstream" about most Southern Black middle-class Americans--especially the beautiful way they speak the English language.

    This was a bad comparison, Rick.

    Rick, I remember reading something about a guy in ancient Rome complaining about the "effeminate behavior of the catamites". When you look up catamite it says something about victims of pedophilia, but in Rome it was also a word used for what we now call "queens" or "sissies". My point is that there have always been feminine males who refused to conform to masculine gender role norms throughout history--probably in ALL cultures.

    Rick, if you haven't won this argument about "conforming to the norm" in 2,000 years--isn't it time to give it up?

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Aug 5, 2011 2:59:32 PM

  18. @KEVINVT What exactly does "acting straight" mean? Not being effeminate? In other words, in your worldview, being gay and being effeminate are one and the same? And having this view, you suggest that I am the one with internalized homophobia?

    You see, the problem with people like you is that you want to believe that your homosexuality is the cause of your lack of masculinity, when, in fact, that lack of masculinity is due to your having bought into the societal notion that being homosexual and being masculine are mutually exclusive.

    And so you resent others who have rejcted that notion (and who, being part of the mainstream because of it are successful and accepted in a way that you cannot be) and try desperately to drag them down to your level with outbursts of the sort you just offered.

    That may get you some sympathy from other bitter, self-hating queens on a website like this, but it will never, ever bring you either self-acceptance or self-esteem, let alone a place in the social mainstream.

    Of course, if you are content to spend the rest of your life dressing women's hair or arranging their flowers, I guess that is fine--just stay out of the way of the rest of us and don't expect us to claim you or have any sympathy for you.....

    Posted by: Rick | Aug 5, 2011 2:59:54 PM

  19. Rick, Exactly. 'Straight-acting' means being able to be attracted to or fall in love with someone of the opposite sex. 'Gay-acting' means being able to be attracted to or falling in love with someone of the same sex. Nothing more. If there are any gay people who think that 'straight-acting' means something else, then they are buying into the ridiculous lies of the homophobes. I know some heterosexuals might be confused about this, but I would hope all openly gay people would understand that sexual orientation does not affect which sports you play, your mannerisms, your hobbies and interests, your occupation, or the music to which you listen.

    Posted by: DB | Aug 5, 2011 3:17:39 PM

  20. "My point is that there have always been feminine males who refused to conform to masculine gender role norms throughout history--probably in ALL cultures."

    Yes, Derrick, and they have always been the butt of ridicule and contempt and relegated to the social margins.

    Men who are homosexual, on the other hand--but NOT effeminate--(the two are not the same, as desperately as some of you want to make them the same)--HAVE been respected and admired in many historical eras......thus, in the Roman era--to build on your example--Julius Caesar held the ultimate power position in part because of his masculinity (a masculinity that was not diminished by his known predilection to have sex with attractive young males)......while the effeminate types you referred to were at the bottom of the social ladder......

    Look through history and you will find plenty of examples of homosexuality and bisexuality among men being sociall acceptable (which is the state of affairs we need to return to), but you will NEVER find an example of weakness and effeminacy in men being socially acceptable (nor will it ever be, for all kinds of legitimate reasons)

    Posted by: Rick | Aug 5, 2011 3:20:26 PM

  21. Ernie, Rick never stated that he thought gay people should be 'straight-acting'. On the contrary, he thinks we should be 'gay-acting' - i.e. exactly the same as heterosexuals except married to someone of the same sex. If you don't understand that, then you have no understanding of the definition or nature of sexual orientation.

    Posted by: DB | Aug 5, 2011 3:22:05 PM

  22. Why is there so much good gay porn from these Eastern European countries if they are so homophobic?
    I know the first thing I think of when I meet someone from there is "Oh yes, they produce really good gay porn there."

    Posted by: NoSleep4Sam | Aug 5, 2011 3:35:56 PM

  23. "Of course, if you are content to spend the rest of your life dressing women's hair or arranging their flowers,"

    Or going to work and paying your taxes, and learning how to keep your self-esteem in the face of people holding you in contempt--even within the Gay commun....I mean, homosexual world.

    Rick, do you really believe that bigots who use religious arguments against homosexuals will be more accepting if more homosexuals acted more masculine? I don't think so. I don't think they'll have any more respect for a homosexual man whether he acts like Truman Capote or J. Edgar Hoover. Hoover was masculine, wasn't he? Except when he played "dress up".

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Aug 5, 2011 4:04:00 PM

  24. DB - that's EXACTLY what's he's arguing.

    "exactly the same as heterosexuals except married to someone of the same sex."

    Can you clarify please?

    Rick -

    I've seen you spouting off your effeminophobia on about 16 stories on this site, so I really wanted to ask you a few questions.

    So you say being gay and being effeminate are not one in the same. Ok. are essentially saying the effeminate gay men are keeping us from accepted as a whole. How far do you take this argument to the point before you're espousing bigotry yourself?

    First question - how do you feel about women as breadwinners in a family that dictate chores to the father. By your definition, not okay, right?

    "but you will NEVER find an example of weakness and effeminacy in men being socially acceptable (nor will it ever be, for all kinds of legitimate reasons)"

    I really want to hear those legitimate reasons. All of them, and in detail. Its not that I disagree with you, I just think we'd all like to read it.

    A few questions...What exactly is your definition of effeminacy? Do you consider effeminacy in gay men to be nurture, not nature? Also...because I'm inferring from your argument that the effeminate gay male is 'dragging down the rest", should they be separated culturally? How do propose that happen? Should all the butch gay men band together to shun them and say to the straight world "oh don't worry - you don't need to accept THEM."

    So there's some 13 year old boy in the Midwest that prefers dolls to war trucks. He somehow manages to make it to a LGBT center dozens of miles away for guidance apart from abusive parents and the instructor at that center, a "BUTCH" gay man says to him - "Oh no, we only allow non-effeminate gay boys here - you're going to grow up to be someone that hampers our movement to be accepted into the masculine structure so therefore we can't accept you. Come back when you've tampered down your personality for the good ol' cause of system conformity."

    Effeminate gay men are not a walking protest against societal gender structure.

    Posted by: Leo | Aug 5, 2011 4:26:29 PM

  25. LOL@Rick and DB! You guys become more delusional with each post! Do you write for the onion in your time off?

    So Rick dear, you think you're gonna be more successful than me or that I'm doomed to be a hairdresser? Sorry, honey. Endowed chair and chair of a department at one of the top 10 colleges in the US and regularly elected to positions of power by my colleagues.

    Every gay man knows exactly what "acting straight" means, or it wouldn't be such a popular requirement on the dating sites.

    Derrick and Ernie are right. No amount of straight acting will get you the approval of the straight world you so desire. You guys have just bought into the heterosexual myth and have begun policing yourselves. It's sad, and those of us who are more evolved see that. But you can't raise everyone's consciousness. Too bad you can't read some Foucault, or you might get what it's about.

    @NOSLEEP4SAM There's a lot of porn from Czech Republic because after the fall of the wall people realized it was a good way to make big bucks and they didn't have hangups about using their bodies to make money. Mostly it was about economic imbalance between East and West, and Prague was closer to the West than most places (it's West of Vienna).

    Posted by: KevinVT | Aug 5, 2011 4:29:26 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Mark Wahlberg Warns Leonardo DiCaprio About Taylor Lautner's Bod, Good Looks« «