logo
Berlin LGBTQ refuge carries ‘psychological burden' as homophobic attacks rise

Berlin LGBTQ refuge carries ‘psychological burden' as homophobic attacks rise

Irish Times23-07-2025
With its large windows, exposed brick walls and long wooden tables,
Berlin's
Cafe Hoven is a welcoming place with a familiar aesthetic.
In the last 18 months, though, the
queer
cafe-bar has been attacked, staff threatened, fire extinguishers sprayed in the door, homophobic insults smeared on the windows and Nazi slogans sprayed on the walls.
'People should be safe here,' said owner Danjel Zarte. 'So it's a huge psychological burden that I have to worry that something will happen to someone.'
Between Hoven and two other queer bars he owns, Zarte has filed 45 police complaints in the last 18 months, all linked to homophobic violence. After 15 years in Berlin, viewing his adoptive home a gay-friendly refuge, he senses something dramatic is happening.
READ MORE
Official statistics agree with him, suggesting a quadrupling in the last decade of violence based on sexual orientation/ identity/ diversity.
Across Berlin, attacks on queer people and property are now a daily occurrence, says Berlin's Maneo project against homophobic violence. It logs two to three cases daily, but estimates that 80 per cent of victims never come forward.
Some see the shift as part of rising social anxiety, part of a pushback against all minorities – Jews, Muslims, foreign nationals – that is reflected in the rise of the far right
Alternative for Germany
(AfD).
Danjel Zarte, who owns the queer Cafe Hoven, has been the target of regular attacks in the last 18 months
One of its leaders,
Alice Weidel
, lives with a woman, yet party politicians regularly frame non-heterosexual people as perverts, paedophiles and a danger to children.
Some see Germany's ruling
Christian Democratic Union
(CDU), just three points ahead of the AfD in polls, engaging in dog whistle politics at the expense of LGBT campaigners.
CDU Bundestag president Julia Klöckner ended the practice of flying the rainbow flag during Pride season over the Reichstag federal parliament building.
'The black-red-gold flag already flying over our parliament can't be beaten,' said Ms Klöckner. 'It stands for freedom and individuality, including sexual identity.'
Citing the neutrality obligation of the state, Klöckner has banned parliamentary staffers from marching in Berlin's pride parade on Saturday.
CDU chancellor Friedrich Merz backed her flag decision, arguing 'the Bundestag is not a circle tent'.
His federal government's own queer commissioner Sophie Koch, from the centre-left
Social Democratic Party
(SPD), hit back, saying: 'If the rainbow flag is the flag of a circus, then what are queer people?'
[
As summer heats up, the controversy over one teacher's claims of homophobia is boiling over
Opens in new window
]
Organisers of Saturday's CSD parade hope the shocks over the flag and rising violence can repoliticise a queer community more used to tolerance and progress.
'For the first time since the second World War we are not fighting for new rights but to preserve the ones we have,' said Thomas Hoffmann, a board member of Berlin's pride parade.
Berlin's problems pale next to an alarming spike in violence towards regional LGBTQI+ organisations, people and parades. Last year the Amadeu Antonio Foundation – which engages against far right extremism, racism and anti-Semitism – logged 55 separate attacks on pride parades around Germany.
As the tensions build from without, fault lines are growing, too, within the community. The decision of some LGBTQI+ groups to join forces with Gaza solidarity groups has others uncomfortable with what they see as damaging links to more extreme Palestinian groups and people.
Another crack opened up when Kevin Kühnert, a former SPD politician, spoke of his experience of 'aggressive homophobia' in his Berlin neighbourhood, which he saw as driven by strict conservative role models and religious fundamentalism.
'In my experience, it is from men I would perceive as Muslim that you are more likely to get a homophobic remark than would otherwise be the case,' he told Der Spiegel.
While the majority of the local Muslim population were not homophobic, he added, 'those who are restrict my freedom and have no right to that – and I will not be silent about this for tactical reasons".
The blowback was immediate from Alfonso Pantisano, SPD queer liaison officer for Berlin's city-state government. He urged a differentiated view of homophobia as a broad phenomenon with many perpetrator groups from far right extremists to religious fundamentalists.
'I simply don't understand why we always pick out Muslims as a singular phenomenon,' he said.
That in turn has prompted critical pushback from Maneo and others on the front lines of the rise in homophobic hate crime. For them, the readiness to identify perpetrator groups is key to effective prevention programmes.
'We have to call things out as they are and, in Berlin, we have a problem on this front,' said Bastian Finke, head of the Maneo anti-violence group. 'But if this is not taken seriously then we cannot have a [positive] effect.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Verona Murphy attends Swiss conference alongside sanctioned Russian politician
Verona Murphy attends Swiss conference alongside sanctioned Russian politician

Irish Times

time7 minutes ago

  • Irish Times

Verona Murphy attends Swiss conference alongside sanctioned Russian politician

Ceann Comhairle Verona Murphy attended a Swiss conference earlier this week alongside a sanctioned Russian politician. The conference, which was held in Geneva, brought together women speakers and presidents of parliaments around the world, including Ms Murphy. Programme materials show the 15th Summit of Women Speakers of Parliament was also addressed by Valentina Matviyenko, speaker of the council of the federation of the Russian federal assembly. Ms Matviyenko, who has been described as an ally of Russian president Vladimir Putin , was first elected to this office in 2011 and again in 2014, 2019 and 2024, according to Russian government websites. READ MORE The Times newspaper reported on Tuesday that she has been described as 'the most powerful woman in Russia'. [ Opinion: We must be honest about who Vladimir Putin is. His goal is not peace, but empire Opens in new window ] In a statement on Monday, the Ukrainian ministry of foreign affairs said Ms Matviyenko's attendance at the conference 'is disgraceful and should never have happened'. Publicly available records of individuals sanctioned arising from the Russian invasion of Ukraine show Ms Matviyenko is subject to sanctions in the United States and the UK. Her name also appears on a French registry of asset-freezing measures. The gathering attended by Ms Murphy and Ms Matviyenko was organised as part of the Sixth World Conference of Speakers of Parliament, organised by the Inter-Parliamentary Union. Its website says it was organised in 'close collaboration with the United Nations'. In response to questions, a spokeswoman for the Houses of the Oireachtas said the Ceann Comhairle was invited to attend the summit of women speakers, which 'focuses on the advancement of women in politics in the context of the geopolitical challenges that women face'. The statement did not directly address whether the Russian speaker's presence at the event was known to the Irish side before Ms Murphy travelled. 'Ireland is a long-standing and active member of the Inter-Parliamentary Union and regularly sends all-party delegations to attend its meetings and conferences.' The spokeswoman added: 'The summit is for women speakers only and the host nation, Switzerland, are obliged under the rules to facilitate attendance by all members of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, which operates on the same basis as the United Nations. 'As the first female speaker of Dáil Éireann , the Ceann Comhairle was proud that Dáil Éireann could finally be represented at and available to contribute to the summit of women speakers. It should also be noted that in its final declaration the women speakers voiced their solidarity with all women and girls living in conflict zones and raised concerns about the disproportionate risks they face during wars.'

Overseas deployment of Irish troops should require independent legal advice, committee advises
Overseas deployment of Irish troops should require independent legal advice, committee advises

Irish Times

timean hour ago

  • Irish Times

Overseas deployment of Irish troops should require independent legal advice, committee advises

Independent legal advice should be commissioned in advance of any overseas mission by Irish troops if the Government proceeds with plans to modify the 'triple lock' method of sanctioning deployment, an Oireachtas committee has found. A report from the Joint Committee on Defence and National Security argues for a strengthening of legal and Oireachtas oversight of Defence Forces activities abroad. It contends that the Oireachtas should have to vote on a regular basis to renew the mandate for deployment. The Defence (Amendment) Bill 2025, which is undergoing pre-legislative scrutiny, removes the requirement for a United Nations mandate when deploying a contingent of 12 or more troops outside the State as part of an international force. UN Security Council approval is one aspect of the 'triple lock' consent mechanism, which also requires a Dáil vote and government decision. The matter has become a topic of heated debate within the political system, with the Opposition arguing removal of UN Security Council endorsement represents a dilution of Irish neutrality. Opposition parties have accused the Government of wanting to step away from the traditional policy and towards a more liberal approach of sending troops overseas. READ MORE The Government argues the current system allows for an effective veto by the council's permanent members, such as Russia and China. No new peacekeeping mandate has been approved by the council since 2014. The legislation would also allow for the deployment of up to 50 troops without a supporting Dáil resolution. The Oireachtas committee, which was undertaking pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill, will publish its report on Wednesday afternoon. It recommends that 'at minimum, there be a formal legal review of any proposed deployment, undertaken by an independent body'. At regular intervals during a deployment the government should need a 'renewed mandate' for the mission via a majority Dáil and government vote, and another formal legal review, it says. Within 12 months of a deployment, a Dáil resolution should be sought for it to continue, it advises. The legislation should also allow the Dáil, Seanad or the Oireachtas defence committee to request an 'urgent review' of deployments. [ Sinn Féin wants 111 changes to Bill reforming 'triple lock' Irish troop deployment Opens in new window ] Opposition sources are claiming as a victory the lack of a recommendation within the report to remove the triple lock. However, neither does it contain a recommendation to retain it in its current form. In her foreword to the report, committee chair Rose Conway-Walsh, of Sinn Féin, said nothing within the triple lock 'deters the Irish government from addressing the legacy of neglect of our Defence Forces'. She said Opposition members, several witnesses and 'hundreds of submissions' from the public were 'deeply concerned that this proposed legislation would present a threat to our neutrality', while Government members and other witnesses said it would have no impact. The report outlines that evidence on this aspect of the Bill 'has been extensive but also often contradictory'. The legislation contains provisions regarding the management of Defence Forces members charged with or convicted of serious criminal offences. These include options for their suspension from duty and new procedures to be followed during suspensions.

Was Keir Starmer pushed on Palestinian statehood or did he wait for right moment?
Was Keir Starmer pushed on Palestinian statehood or did he wait for right moment?

Irish Times

time3 hours ago

  • Irish Times

Was Keir Starmer pushed on Palestinian statehood or did he wait for right moment?

In the end, Keir Starmer acted. After an emergency cabinet meeting lasting about 90 minutes on Tuesday, the British prime minister put the UK on an path to recognising Palestine as a state, probably as soon as September. For Labour MPs and cabinet ministers who have lobbied Starmer to take this decisive diplomatic step for months, there was huge relief, coupled with frustration that it had taken so long. 'He was pushed,' one senior Labour MP said. That is strongly denied by Starmer's allies, who insisted the prime minister was just waiting for the moment when recognition of a Palestinian state would have the most impact. 'It was always when, not if,' one said. Starmer has frustrated many in the Labour Party – not just left-wingers – over his handling of the Gaza crisis and what some MPs have seen as a lack of urgency in his response to the grim scenes unfolding there. READ MORE When French president Emmanuel Macron announced last week he would recognise Palestinian statehood at the United Nations General Assembly in September, that frustration with Starmer turned to anger. 'Number 10 had loads of incoming fire over the weekend,' one minister said. More than 130 Labour MPs signed a letter calling on Starmer to move now to Palestinian state recognition. Starmer's aides insisted the end result of Tuesday's cabinet meeting was '100 per cent unity' behind a position that is most likely to see Britain recognise a Palestinian state around the time of the UN General Assembly. 'One way or another you get to Palestinian recognition,' one Starmer ally said, after the prime minister set out a 'UK plan' for a stable peace between Israelis and Palestinians, which he hopes will win wide international support. Under Starmer's plan, Britain will recognise a Palestinian state in September unless Israel takes 'substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza', agrees to a ceasefire and commits to a long-term, sustainable peace based on a two-state solution. Emily Thornberry, Labour chair of the House of Commons foreign affairs committee, said bluntly: 'That's not going to happen.' She said the only way it could conceivably happen would be if Israel changed its government before September. But even in the extremely unlikely event that Binyamin Netanyahu , Israel's prime minister, agreed with Starmer's 'conditions', that would still create a pathway for Britain recognising Palestine as part of a two-state solution. Starmer has been advised throughout by Jonathan Powell, his national security adviser, who has stressed the importance of holding back recognition until it might make some difference. He notes that more than 140 countries have already recognised a Palestinian state to little effect. Powell, an architect of the Northern Ireland peace process, wanted Britain to act with other allies, but Macron's surprise decision to announce the French position last week left Starmer looking like he was being buffeted by events. Starmer has been suspected by some inside the Labour Party of being too soft on Netanyahu ever since an LBC interview in October 2023, when he was asked whether Israel's right to self defence extended to cutting off power and water to Gaza. 'I think that Israel does have that right,' Starmer replied. He subsequently claimed he was answering a previous question and was not backing the cutting off of crucial supplies to Gaza, but the perception stuck. YouGov polling found that of those Labour voters in 2024 who had subsequently switched their support to the Greens, some 25 per cent named the ruling party's stance on Gaza as a reason. A new party set up by Jeremy Corbyn , the former leftwing Labour leader, will be mining the same seam of voters. Ministers as well as Labour MPs have been frustrated with Starmer. After Macron announced his stance on Palestinian statehood, one minister said: 'The block is Keir himself as well as his senior advisers and their desire to stay close to the US.' Downing Street officials admitted the United States might react negatively to Starmer's ultimatum to Netanyahu. Marco Rubio , US secretary of state, said last week that Macron's move was 'a reckless decision that only serves Hamas propaganda'. Donald Trump was less hostile to the idea during his meetings with Starmer in Scotland this week, suggesting that he would not be too upset if the UK went down the same route as France. The US president's comments on scenes of 'real starvation' in Gaza also changed the mood. On the way back from Scotland aboard Air Force One, Trump said he had 'no view on that' when asked about the UK's announcement – claiming Starmer had barely raised the matter of Palestinian statehood – while also appearing to question the case for pressuring Israel. Starmer hopes his plan will garner support from allies – he is due to speak shortly to Canada's Mark Carney – and that he can answer his Labour critics by putting himself at the forefront of a fresh push for peace. But Trump is wary of the UK plan, while Germany's Friedrich Merz is unlikely to back a Palestinian state any time soon. Nor is there any sign that Netanyahu will change his approach to Gaza and endorse a peace process based on a two-state solution for fear of Britain and France formally recognising a Palestinian state in September. However, Starmer's plan was backed by the British public in a poll by YouGov released on Tuesday, which showed that 45 per cent of people supported recognition of a Palestinian state, with only 14 per cent opposed. Starmer, who is also trying to galvanise an international aid effort, has belatedly aligned himself with his party and the public on Palestinian statehood. Many Labour figures wish it had just happened sooner. – Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2025

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store