Disorder in the Court pp 12-32 | Cite as
A Public Offense against Decency: the Trial of the Count de Germiny and the “Moral Order” of the Third Republic
Abstract
Throughout the nineteenth century, France was one of the few countries in Europe which did not have a specific law against homosexual behaviour. It had abolished its medieval laws against sodomy in 1791 and had established a new criminal code in 1810. Its new laws prohibited sexual activities in public and sexual relations with minors, whether homosexual or heterosexual. As a result, it had a reputation for openness and toleration which contributed to the development of a male homosexual subculture in Paris. Yet despite this reputation, the very vagueness of the laws allowed the police to turn on homosexuals as scapegoats for the political, social, or economic problems of the times.1 The sensational trial of the Count de Germiny for “a public offense against decency” in 1876 is one such example of the authorities’ attack on homosexuality as a means of shoring up the social order.
Keywords
Public Offense Homosexual Behavior Municipal Council Vintage Book Prior ConvictionPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
NOTES
- Cited in Michel Rey, “Police and Sodomy in Eighteenth Century Paris: From Sin to Disorder,” in The Pursuit of Sodomy: Male Homosexuality in Renaissance and Enlightenment Europe, eds. Kent Gerard and Gert Hekma (New York: Harrington Park Press, 1989), 145.Google Scholar
- Jennifer Davis, “Urban Policing and its Objects: Comparative Themes in England and France in the Second Half of the Nineteenth Century,” in Policing Western Europe: Politics, Professionalism, and Public Order, 1850–1940, eds. Clive Emsley and Barbara Weinberger (New York: Greenwood Press, 1991), 1–17.Google Scholar
- T.J. Clark, The Painting of Modern Life: Paris in the Art of Manet and his Followers (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), 205–58.Google Scholar
- Eugen Weber, Peasants into Frenchmen: The Modernization of Rural France, 1870–1914 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1976).Google Scholar