IBDP Extended Essay in History: Paragraph 175 of the German Criminal Code





Research Question:







To What Extent Did The Revision of Paragraph 175 of the German Criminal Code Allow for a Shift in Tolerance Towards Homosexual Behaviour from Hitler towards the Nazi Party and German Society?




Word Count: 3904





Abstract
Word Count: 273


The persecution of homosexuals during the Holocaust is an issue that has not been widely recognized until the rise of the gay and lesbian movement during the 1970s. One of the more prominent factors that contributed to the intensified attack against the gay community was the 1935 revision of Paragraph 175 of the German Criminal Code. To investigate an aspect that contributed to the ‘forgotten’ persecution of homosexuals during the Third Reich would shine more light on a topic rarely talked about. Therefore I have chosen to investigate the extent of the impact of the Paragraph 175’s revision on the shift in tolerance towards homosexual behavior from Hitler towards the Nazi party and German society.



This paper will explore the impact of the revision of Paragraph 175 in 1935 on the intensification of the persecution of homosexuals within Nazi Germany, as well as other factors that could contribute to the sudden change in toleration displayed by Hitler towards the party and society. This will be achieved by exploring a number of papers concerning the dissemination of sexuality, the intolerance of homosexuality, and primary sources from victims of the persecution to determine and analyze the overall impact of the article’s revision on the strengthened campaign attacks against homosexuals.



Although important in considering the intensified persecution of homosexuals, Paragraph 175 cannot be identified as the primary cause of a shift in tolerance displayed by Hitler towards the Nazi Party and German society. However, it is considered a tool that was essential in the maintenance and consolidation of power and ideological policies for Hitler and might have affected the already intolerant atmosphere in Germany towards homosexuals.





Introduction

In his pursuit to achieve the ‘Master Aryan Race’, Hitler pursued policies that persecuted citizens within the Third Reich that failed to meet the Fuhrer’s vision. The groups of persecuted citizens included the Jews, those with mental and physical disabilities, Gypsies, Soviet prisoners of war, and homosexuals[1]. Homosexuals belonged to a group of forgotten victims – those not widely acknowledged for many years[2]. It was not until the rise of the gay movement within the 1970s, that the persecution of homosexuals under the Third Reich was recognized. At the same time, historians acknowledged the sufferings and the vulgar nature of the vicious campaign waged against homosexuals.



The sufferings of the gay community had not halted after the end of the war. During the postwar period, members of the gay community experienced accusations that linked the Nazi movement and its origins to homosexuality, claims that connected homosexuality to the atrocities committed by the Nazis during the Second World War[3], as well as the consequences posed by the continuation of the implementation of Paragraph 175. Even after the postwar period, the West German Supreme Court upheld the revised version of Paragraph 175 of the German Criminal Code in 1975. The suffering of Germany’s homosexuals was largely caused by the Nazi revision of Paragraph 175 within the German Criminal Code.



Before the Nazi Regime in 1871, Paragraph 175 within the German Criminal Code had stipulated that, “A male who indulges in criminally indecent activities with another male or who allows himself to participate in such activities will be punished with jail.”[4] During this time, Paragraph 175 concentrated mainly and specifically targeted sodomy and anal intercourse. However, in the early period of the 20th century, as the gay and lesbian movement within the country continued to prosper, Paragraph 175 was not highly acknowledged and even seemed likely to be abolished[5].



 It was not until the rise of the Nazi Party, that the law would be revised and strongly implemented in order to achieve their goals of making way for the future Aryan race. In its time of revision, Himmler argued that homosexuality did not only prove to be a crime, but also a danger to the future of the Aryan race[6]. In 1935, the same year that the Nuremberg laws were implemented and issued, on June 28, Paragraph 175 was revised and strengthened. In its revision, any slight indication of possible homosexual behaviour would conclude in justification or prove as grounds for a citizen’s arrest. These suggestions of homosexual behaviour included acts that would appear intimate such as hugging or kissing another man. Even simple gossip could leave a person to be suspected and left for investigation under the grounds of homosexuality. With the revision of Paragraph 175, it had been made clear that there would be no room for homosexuals in the Nazi’s development of their ‘Master Aryan Race’.

Thus, the revision of Paragraph 175 allowed for an intensified attack towards the homosexual community but not necessarily a shift in tolerance towards their behaviour. Moreover, Hitler’s intolerance towards the homosexual community found in both the Nazi Party and German Society was innate as it coherently fit with Nazi ideology and his belief in Social Darwinist theories. Through the revision of Paragraph 175, Hitler was able to demonstrate this imminent intolerance at an intensified level.

Tolerance for Sexuality and the Usefulness of Notable Leading Figures in the Nazi Party



Ernst Rohm, a leading and notable figure within the SA[7], was known to be an open homosexual. His influential status and position within the party provided a light of optimism for the gay community, posing as existing evidence for toleration of homosexuals to an extent. He was seen as a symbol to gays within Germany, hoping for protection. Rohm’s massacre during ‘The Night of the Long Knives’ in 1934 was seen as a major turning point in the tolerance that Hitler displayed for any figure/person within the homosexual community. Simultaneously, Rohm’s massacre can be used as an example of how Hitler’s tolerance for homosexual behaviour was only present during a period of necessity in his rise to power. However, it is most commonly noted that Rohm’s homosexuality was used as justification for the Night of the Long Knives[8]. With a consolidation of the power of the Nazi Party and the Fuhrer, Rohm and the SA only proved to exist as a threat, thus sparking their purge and elimination.

There was a clear admiration for Rohm from the Fuhrer during the period of Hitler’s rise to power, as Rohm proved to be a figure that was necessary for the consolidation, maintenance, and rise of the Nazi Party. It is noted that the Fuhrer’s need for Rohm proved to be so great that he steadily ignored reports concerning Rohm and his homosexual activities[9]. Hitler’s admiration and necessity for Rohm was evident in his statement:

“Some people expect SA commanders…to take decisions on these matters, which belong purely to the private domain. I reject this presumption categorically…[The SA] is not an institute for the moral education of genteel young ladies, but a formation of seasoned fighters. The sole purpose of any inquiry must be to ascertain whether or not the SA officer…is performing his official duties…His private life cannot be an object of scrutiny unless it conflicts with the basic principles of National Socialist ideology.”[10]

It was not until there was suspicion of Rohm’s motivations and an alleged plot to kill Hitler, that the Fuhrer considered the notable SA leader a threat. Existing to be simply a threat to the Fuhrer and the Nazi party, Rohm’s necessity and importance to the regime no longer prevailed.

Rohm’s homosexuality was used as justification for his release and expulsion. His sexuality became an easy target for Hitler to use and manipulate, even after his massacre to ensure and reinforce the standards that were expected of the future Aryan race. It is stated that homosexuality within the SA was used by Hitler as a ploy so that he could pose as the moral leader of the Nazi Party and the Reich[11]. As an example of Hitler’s manipulation in order to reinforce Nazi ideology, Rohm was used as an example in Nazi propaganda to portray elements of what was considered to be morally degenerate.



Ernst Rohm is used as a popular example for Hitler’s degradation of the homosexuals within the Nazi Party. However, the persecution of homosexual leading figures within the party extends to just beyond the SA. Many of the leaders within the Hitler Youth, also SA officers, were known to be homosexuals[12]. Another admired figure noted to be influential yet homosexual within the party was Rossbach, a prominent hero of the nationalistic German youth. Homosexuality proved not only to be prevalent within the SA, but also within the Hitler Youth. Persecution and open intolerance for homosexual behaviour within the party was not as prominent or as common as it was after the elimination of Rohm in 1934. However, active persecution against the homosexuals was already put into practice by 1933 along with the rise of Hitler and the Nazi Party.

Considering that Rohm’s execution and the persecution of homosexuals within the SA occurred during 1934, a year before the revision of Paragraph 175, it can be said that the revision of the sodomy law had no effect on the determination of the fate of the SA leader and his companions. Instead, it can be said that the execution of Rohm and fellow homosexuals allowed for and inspired harsher treatment for the gay community under the Third Reich. It can also be noted that the treatment of homosexuals became harsher after the elimination of Rohm and the Night of the Long Knives purge. The elimination of Rohm and his companions triggered a period of heightened persecution for the gay community within the country, including the revision of Paragraph 175 and the continuous arrests of suspected homosexuals falling victim to the Nazi regime. This ultimately demonstrates how Hitler’s intolerance towards the homosexual community fell back on the promotion of Nazi ideology and his ultimate goal – to fulfill the ‘Master Aryan Race’.



Social Implications of Paragraph 175 on the Gay Community



The level of persecution of the homosexuals including the police raids and mass arrests became increasingly common by the end of 1934, even before the revision of Paragraph 175. The arrest of a suspected homosexual would most likely lead to expulsion to the first established concentration camps. Throughout the course of the Nazi Regime, homosexuals were tortured and exterminated along with all other members of society that Hitler found to be unfit and posed a threat to the future Aryan race. Within this duration, there are an estimated number of 15,000 homosexuals killed due to overwork in these concentration camps[13].

The Nazi revision of Paragraph 175 included the lowering of the age of consent for homosexuals to eighteen[14]. Its revision broadened the range of ‘lewd and lascivious’ behaviour that could be constituted as homosexual behaviour, enough for charges and persecution. It is noted that throughout the Nazi Regime, Paragraph 175 was used as a tool to justify the regime’s internment of homosexual men[15]. Simultaneously, the arrest and persecution of the homosexuals fit well within Nazi ideology and Hitler’s Social Darwinist beliefs, hence justifying their elimination in order to rid of any threat that would disturb the success and fruition of the future Aryan race. Not only was Paragraph 175 a tool in Hitler’s social engineering policies, it was also an instrument in dealing with and disciplining political opponents. The Fuhrer and the party utilized this law in order to consolidate and maintain their power and positions. In this sense, the revision of Paragraph 175 during the Nazi era was essential, ideologically and politically. Moreover, the revision of Paragraph 175 proved the increasing intolerance towards homosexual behaviour to be an imminent political strategy, justified by Nazi ideology. Thus, with the revision of Paragraph 175 came a rapidly increasing number of arrests and raids[16].



Between the period of 1933 to 1944, before and after the revision of Paragraph 175, there are an estimated number of 50,000 to 63,000 men that were convicted under the charges of homosexuality. Out of these men, an estimated 10,000 to 12,000 homosexuals were imprisoned in concentration camps[17]. The torture and suffering of the homosexual community was displayed the most within concentration camps and the branding of the Pink Triangle.

The Pink Triangle became a symbol invented by the Nazis, concentrating on the homosexuals imprisoned in concentration camps. The symbol of the pink triangle triggered and meant harsher treatment within these camps. This icon also symbolized a continuum of legal persecution for the Nazi era to the eruption of the gay movement in the 1970s[18]. It is noted that gay men suffered a higher mortality rate in comparison to other small victim groups. There is a suggested pattern of specialized brutality during police raids towards these homosexuals who were simultaneously, Jewish[19]. The hatred brewed for the homosexuals at these concentration camps was intensified as the pursuit for the ‘Master Aryan Race’ continued and the extermination of those who threaten the future of the Aryan race. The attitude towards the homosexual community in the concentration camps was consistently harsh. As Himmler once said, “The homosexuals must be entirely eliminated.”[20] In order to maintain this attitude, soldiers and even fellow prisoners demonstrated and targeted a concentrated amount vulgarity and brutality towards the homosexual community within these concentration camps. Such brutality against the homosexual community was demonstrated during the Olympic games of 1936 where persecution had been stepped up in mass bar raids in order to present visiting athletes and journalists with a ‘morally clean’ Germany[21].



The intensification of the persecution of homosexuals eventually led to an increase in the population of homosexual concentration camp inmates. Persecution and vulgarity against the homosexuals became more common, thus allowing sexual repression to be loudly proclaimed and justifying the programs that exterminated and punished the gay community.


The increasing severity of discrimination towards the homosexual community could seem like a shift towards growing intolerance for homosexual behaviour. However, the intensification of the persecution of homosexuals demonstrated necessity to rid those that threatened the authority and strength of the Aryan race and the Nazi Party. In this sense, the increasing severity of discrimination towards the homosexual community is a demonstration of Hitler’s approach towards implementing policies that related to his Social Darwinist beliefs. Simultaneously, it demonstrates the Fuhrer’s desire to fulfil Nazi Ideology. Hitler’s desire to breed the superior Aryan race needed the strength, national dedication and traditional outlook of men. As quoted by Alfred Rosenburg, the chief ideologue of Nazism:



“The emancipation of women from the women’s emancipation movement is the first demand of a female generation trying to rescue nation and race, the eternally unconscious, the foundation of all civilization, from decline…but one thing must be made clear: Only a man must be and remain judge, soldier and politician.”[22]



The revision of Paragraph 175 was not only an illustration of clear intolerance for homosexual behaviour due to the need for the traditional man, but was also a representation of the Fuhrer’s rigid, narrow, and patriarchal sexual views. In this sense, sexual emancipation remained an aspect that provoked fury and thus, intolerance.

Its revision of Paragraph 175 represents a methodology that allowed for an intensification of policies in order to achieve Hitler’s preached ideological objectives. As Robert Plant[23], had concluded, the persecution and attempted extermination of homosexuals represents but one part of the exhaustive crusade the Nazis laughed…to create an Aryan elite that would dominate Europe, and, finally, the world.[24]


In order to demonstrate the Nazi belief that was associated with sexual conservatism and its connection to Nazi ideology the following has been stated and suggested by Dagmar Herzog:

“So successful was this imposition of sexual conservatism that the next generation saw it as much older than it was. Linking sexual repression to fascism rather than to a post-war effort to come to terms with it, student radicals considered sexual liberation necessary to overcome the “fascistic” tendencies of their families of origin and West German state and society.”[25]



The quote demonstrates the rebellion against sexual conservatism as if to overcome the traditional fascistic ideals that were associated with the repression of sexuality.


Simultaneously, homosexuality was seen as a disease or an infection that would spread amongst the youth of Germany. Hence, it was seen as logical to rid of the disease or the infection[26], along with all other elements that posed threatening towards the superiority and strength of the Aryan race.



The connection between Hitler’s Social Darwinist beliefs and intolerance for homosexuality was concentrated on the concept of weakness, emasculation, and moral degeneration. Hitler’s National Socialist Party had said:

“…Anything that emasculates our people and that makes us fair game for our enemies we reject…Therefore we reject all immorality, especially love between men, because it deprives us of our last chance to free our people from the chains of slavery which are keeping it fettered today.”[27]



Ultimately, the revision of Paragraph 175 served as the justification necessary to implement policies that were well connected with the conservatism of Nazi ideology and the protection of the Aryan race as outlined in Hitler’s Social Darwinist beliefs.



Nazi Ideology and the Treatment of the Homosexual Community Post-1935

Nazi Ideology greatly affected the treatment of the homosexual community, thus enhancing the necessity and justification for the strengthened revision of Paragraph 175. Aspects of Nazi ideology including policies affecting the role of women and the definition of the Aryan man and woman in society, most particularly concentrating on gender and reproductive politics.

The role of the woman within Nazi society was primarily associated with her children, the kitchen, and the church (Kinder, Küche, Kirche). The traditional views that defined an Aryan woman concerned fertility and the breeding of strong Aryans for the strengthening of the nation. Homosexuality was seen to interfere with the traditional roles and relationships associated with the Aryan man and woman. The roles of the Aryan man and woman focused on serving their country.

Historians have acknowledged that ‘social benefits helped to bind racially and politically approved Germans to the National Socialist state, whilst simultaneously recognizing that the welfare state developed along highly gendered lines, delineating benefits for (male) soldiers and workers on the one hand, dependents (women and children) on the other.’[28] Therefore there was an obvious need to maintain the social conservative nature of the Nazi Party making it necessary to tame sexual liberation, justifying the persecution of Germany’s homosexuals in order to further the nation’s development.



The propagation and the promotion of these traditional ideals emphasized the need to rid Germany of the homosexuals, thus allowing for the intensification of their persecution and the justification necessary for the consequences and arrests made due to the strengthening of the revised Paragraph 175. As ideology and the party dictated, there was no room for tolerance of any aspect in society that would prove detrimental to the success and superiority of the Aryan race. In terms of gender and reproductive politics, homosexuality proved to be a threatening element to the achievements of society.



In such cases, to promote heterosexual behaviour and fertility, awards were given to women who were capable of breeding many children such as the “German Mother’s Cross of Honour”. These propaganda efforts illustrated the desire of Hitler to outbreed the ‘inferior races’ and to provide soldiers for future Nazi conquests[29].  The constant promotion of the traditional roles that the Aryan woman must take on left society with a mindset of no tolerance for homosexual behaviour.



The atmosphere created by the constant definition of what the Aryan man and woman is, and what roles they must play within society perpetuated an attitude of intolerance towards homosexual behaviour. Homophobia was encouraged as it was seen to be detrimental to the successes of their society.



In such a case, the revision of Paragraph 175 served as a tool that supported the promotion of Nazi ideology in an atmosphere that already propagated intolerance towards homosexual behaviour. The consequences of Paragraph 175 and the intensified persecution of the gay community also promoted and maintained intolerance towards homosexuals, as a promotion of the party’s sexual conservatism and its policy of sexual repression. Thus, in this manner the revision of Paragraph 175 to support the gender and reproductive policies that reinforced Nazi ideology was a reflection of Hitler’s narrow, traditional, and conservative views concerning sexuality.



Hitler’s adamant belief in Social Darwinist theories made intolerance towards the homosexual community imminent. Any shift or change in the Fuhrer’s demonstration of intolerance towards the gay community was indicative of a step towards implementing the party’s ideological policies, an attempt at furthering the success for a future Aryan race, or the prevention of any threat to his authority and the accomplishments of the Third Reich. As stated, the so-called Third Reich had no use for reason, compassion, or moderation[30]. In a similar manner, there is a reiteration that there is no room for tolerance towards any detrimental element to the party and a fruitful Aryan society.









Conclusion
The revision of Paragraph 175 of the German Criminal Code allowed for the intensification and persistent persecution of Germany’s homosexual community. The persecution of these citizens often and mostly led to death in the concentration camps from over-work, maltreatment, disease, and the gas chambers. This article did not only represent the death and suffering of thousands of people – of whose persecution was not widely acknowledged until the late 20th century – but also the intolerant atmosphere that seemed imminent within the Nazi Party and German society during the Nazi Regime. Simultaneously, Paragraph 175 was a tool in Hitler’s social engineering policies and his pursuit to achieve and breed the superior Aryan race. The lives of more than thousands of men and women were taken in order to utilize this tool in order to illuminate Nazi ideology and the elements of Hitler’s Social Darwinist beliefs that were being applied to German society in order to outbreed other European races.
There is no question that the ramifications that resulted because of the revision of Paragraph 175 under the Nazi regime were grand in scale and need international acknowledgement as it took the lives of many who have been forgotten. The question however lies in the role of Paragraph 175 and its impact on the sudden intensification of attacks in the Nazi Party’s campaign against homosexuals after the 1935 revision. Was the revision of the article the trigger that shifted the level of tolerance that Hitler had for homosexual behaviour within the Nazi Party and German society? In considering this question, one must also consider the role that the revision of Paragraph 175 played in the persecution of thousands of Germany’s citizens. Although the persecution of homosexuals was already in practice by 1933, it was not until the revision of Paragraph 175 in 1935 that strengthened and demonstrated true dedication and commitment to pursuing the success of a future superior Aryan race. Hitler was also capable of controlling and promoting ideological policies, most specifically concerning gender and reproductive policies, in his attempt to unite and consolidate the success of the future for the ‘Master Aryan Race’. The revision of the article appeared to be a necessity in order to maintain and consolidate authority over German society, the Nazi Party, and the Fuhrer’s position. It remained a tool that was crucial in perpetuating party ideology. Ultimately, it was through the alterations in the article that allowed Hitler to demonstrate this imminent intolerance at such an intensified level, only to accomplish what he deemed to be necessary and essential for the success of German society and the Nazi party.

Thus, through an examination of policies pursued during the Nazi regime related to a promotion of Nazi ideology within gender and reproductive politics, the significance of the Rohm Affair, and the social implications and consequences of its revision, Paragraph 175 allowed for an intensified attack towards the homosexual community. However, intensification in the campaign against Germany’s homosexuals does not necessarily call for a shift in the toleration towards homosexual behaviour. An atmosphere of intolerance for homosexuality was already and had always been present in German society. It is recognized that the Nazis merely continued and intensified what had long been in practice[31]. The intensification in the intolerance for homosexual behaviour was not directly triggered by the revision of Paragraph 175, neither did the article allow for the intensification in the attack against the gay community. The revised version of Paragraph 175 was simply a tool for Hitler to utilize in order to promote party ideology and the importance of the superior Aryan race through propaganda. Intolerance for homosexuality was based on the Fuhrer’s necessity to propagate ideological policies and a need to protect the position of the Fuhrer, the Party, the Aryan race, and the nation. Simultaneously, this intolerance represented the conservative nature of party ideology and the Fuhrer’s own outlook towards sexuality and the importance of sexual repression. Furthermore, Hitler’s imminent intolerance towards the gay community as illustrated through purges in the Nazi Party and policies condemning homosexuality within German society proved to be innate as it coherently fit with the ideologies preached by the Nazi Party as well as Hitler’s own beliefs in Social Darwinist theories.











































Works Cited

http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/



Heger, H. (1980). The men with the pink triangle. New York: Alyson Books.





Jensen, E. N. (2002). The pink triangle and political consciousness: Gays, lesbians, and the memory of Nazi persecution. Journal of the History of Sexuality, Vol. 11, No. 1/2, Special Issue: Sexuality and German Fascism (Jan. - Apr., 2002, 319-349. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3704560.



Plant, R. (1986). The pink triangle. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.



(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.gaynazis.com/



Holocaust teacher resource center. (2007). Retrieved from http://www.holocaust-trc.org/homosx.htm



Studds, G. E. (1993, April 21). Remembering gay victims of the holocaust: willed arondeus--hero of the resistance . Retrieved from http://www.pink-triangle.org/ptps/studds.html



Rector Norton (Ed.), "One day they were simply gone": The Nazi Persecution of Homosexuals. 21 Dec. 1999, updated 10 August 2010 .



Haeberle, E. J. (1981). Swastika, pink triangle and yellow star: The destruction of sexology and the persecution of homosexuals in Nazi Germany. The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 17, No. 3, History and Sexuality (Aug., 1981), 270-287. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3812563.



Appendix

PARAGRAPH 175

175. A male who commits lewd and lascivious acts with another male or permits himself to be so abused for lewd and lascivious acts, shall be punished by imprisonment. In a case of a participant /under 21 years of age at the time of the commission of the act, the court may, in especially slight cases, refrain from punishment.


175a. Confinement in a penitentiary not to exceed ten years and, under extenuating circumstances, imprisonment for not less than three months shall be imposed:

1. Upon a male who, with force or with threat of imminent danger to life and limb, compels another male to commit lewd and lascivious acts with him or compels the other party to submit to abuse for lewd and lascivious acts;

2. Upon a male who, by abuse of a relationship of dependence upon him, in consequence of service, employment, or subordination, induces another male to commit lewd and lascivious acts with him or to submit to being abused for such, acts;

3. Upon a male who being Over 21 years of age induces another male under 21 years of age to commit lewd and lascivious acts with him or to submit to being abused for such acts;

4. Upon a male who professionally engages in lewd and lascivious acts with other men, or submits to such abuse by other men, or offers himself for lewd and lascivious acts with other men.


175b. Lewd and lascivious acts contrary to nature between human beings and animals shall be punished by imprisonment; loss of civil rights may also be imposed.




1http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/
[2] Heger, H. (1980). The men with the pink triangle. New York: Alyson Books.
[3] Jensen, E. N. (2002). The pink triangle and political consciousness: Gays, lesbians, and the memory of Nazi persecution. Journal of the History of Sexuality, Vol. 11, No. 1/2, Special Issue: Sexuality and German Fascism (Jan. - Apr., 2002, 319-349. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3704560 .
[4] Plant, R. (1986). The pink triangle. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.
[5] Heger, H. (1980). The men with the pink triangle. New York: Alyson Books.
[6] Ibid
[7] Paramilitary organization of the Nazi Party. The SA was key in Hitler’s rise to power.
[8] Heger, H. (1980). The men with the pink triangle. New York: Alyson Books.
[9] Plant, R. (1986). The pink triangle. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.
[10] Ibid
[11] Ibid
[12] (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.gaynazis.com/
[13] Halsall, P. (1997). People with a history: An online guide to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans* history. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/pwh/index-eur2.asp
[14] Jensen, E. N. (2002). The pink triangle and political consciousness: Gays, lesbians, and the memory of Nazi persecution. Journal of the History of Sexuality, Vol. 11, No. 1/2, Special Issue: Sexuality and German Fascism (Jan. - Apr., 2002, 319-349. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3704560.
[15] Ibid
[16] Holocaust teacher resource center. (2007). Retrieved from http://www.holocaust-trc.org/homosx.htm
[17] Studds, G. E. (1993, April 21). Remembering gay victims of the holocaust: willem arondeus--hero of the resistance . Retrieved from http://www.pink-triangle.org/ptps/studds.html
[18] Jensen, E. N. (2002). The pink triangle and political consciousness: Gays, lesbians, and the memory of Nazi persecution. Journal of the History of Sexuality, Vol. 11, No. 1/2, Special Issue: Sexuality and German Fascism (Jan. - Apr., 2002, 319-349. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3704560 .
[19] Heger, H. (1980). The men with the pink triangle. New York: Alyson Books.
[20] Rector Norton (Ed.), "One day they were simply gone": The Nazi Persecution of Homosexuals. 21 Dec. 1999, updated 10 August 2010 .
[21] Haeberle, E. J. (1981). Swastika, pink triangle and yellow star: The destruction of sexology and the persecution of homosexuals in Nazi Germany. The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 17, No. 3, History and Sexuality (Aug., 1981), 270-287. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3812563.
[22] Ibid
[23] Author of “The Pink Triangle” – A book concerning the Nazi war against homosexuals
[24] Plant, R. (1986). The pink triangle. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.
[25] Heineman, E. (2005). Gender, sexuality, and coming to terms with the Nazi past. Central European History, Vol. 38, No. 1 (2005), 41-74. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4547497.
[26] http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/
[27] Haeberle, E. J. (1981). Swastika, pink triangle and yellow star: The destruction of sexology and the persecution of homosexuals in Nazi Germany. The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 17, No. 3, History and Sexuality (Aug., 1981), 270-287. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3812563.
[28] Heineman, E. (2005). Gender, sexuality, and coming to terms with the Nazi past. Central European History, Vol. 38, No. 1 (2005), 41-74. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4547497.
[29] Haeberle, E. J. (1981). Swastika, pink triangle and yellow star: The destruction of sexology and the persecution of homosexuals in Nazi Germany. The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 17, No. 3, History and Sexuality (Aug., 1981), 270-287. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3812563.
[30] Ibid
[31] Ibid