The positive goal...is the revival of Hellenic chivalry and its recognition by society. By chivalric love we mean in particular close friendships between youths and even more particularly the bonds between men of unequal ages (B. Friedlander:259).
According to James Steakley in The Homosexual Emancipation Movement in Germany:
The Community looked to ancient Greece and Renaissance Italy as model civilizations and argued that Christian asceticism was responsible for the demise of homosexual relations. Friedlander, who was married, advocated pedophile relations combined with family life, and Brand contrasted his journal with Hirschfeld‘s Jahrbuch by saying he wanted to show “more of the Hellenic side of things” (Steakley:43).
In Homosexuality and Male Bonding in Pre-Nazi Germany , Oosterhuis and Kennedy write that “Kuppfer stated in a letter of 25 December 1925 to Brand that the word ‘homosexual’ was repugnant to him, because it reminded him of the ‘fairies’ in Hirschfeld's Committee, and he requested Brand never to mention his name in such a context” (Oosterhuis and Kennedy:34).
Friedlander described heterosexuals and effeminate homosexuals as Kummerlings (puny beings). The Ulrichs-Hirschfeld school believed that both homosexuality and heterosexuality were equal and legitimate forms of sexual love. However, the Brand-Friedlander school believed that eros (sexual love) had a rising scale of worth, with heterosexuality at the bottom and pederasty at the top. Steakley writes, “For the Community, however, heterosexual relations were relegated to purely procreative ends and the esthetic superiority of pedophile relations was asserted” (Steakley:46). In other words, heterosexuals were valued only as “breeders.”
***
Like the environmental movement, which was also Nazi in origin, the homosexual rights movement and its aggressive anti-Christian attitude is also Nazi in origin.
