Paris gets memorial for gay victims of persecution
The three-ton installation was erected near the Bastille in central Paris to mark International Day against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia.
"Recognition means to say 'this happened' and to say 'we don't want this to happen again'," Hidalgo said.
"We must fight against denial and trivialisation," she said, adding: "Today there are powerful and extremely dangerous headwinds that would like to deny this kind of diversity."
The monument, by artist Jean-Luc Verna, consists of an large star-shaped structure made of steel.
Unlike cities like Sydney, Barcelona or Amsterdam, Paris rejected incorporating the yellow star that Nazis made Jews wear in the installation.
This, officials said, was to allow current victims of persecution to be included in the tribute.
"It is important that this memorial be not just a simple symbolic tribute, but a transmission tool, a public act of recognition and a space for questions about past discriminations but also those that continue today," said Jean-Baptiste Trieu, president of the "Les Oublie.es de la mémoire" association that fights against discrimination of LGBTQ+ people.
"Rights are never won forever," he said.
Artist Verna said that downward facing black side of the star represents "the burned bodies, the mourning but also the shadow, warning us that these things can happen again".
The upward side, mirroring the sky, "represents the present, with the colours of passing time and the sky over Paris that changes as quickly as public opinion can turn", he said.
According to historians' estimates, between 5,000 and 15,000 people in Europe were sent to concentration camps during World War II by the Nazi government for being homosexual.
Figures for France alone range from around 60 to around 200.
After decades of near-silence surrounding such persecutions in wartime France, former prime minister Lionel Jospin publicly addressed the issue in 2001, launching a process of recognition that was continued by former president Jacques Chirac.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
2 days ago
- Daily Maverick
Elmo's X account gets hacked, posts antisemitic and racist messages
The Sunday posts, which have been deleted, called for violence against Jews, insulted President Donald Trump and demanded the release of government files on accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and his alleged clientele. Elmo, a cheerful red Muppet, has more than 650,000 followers on X. 'Elmo's X account was briefly compromised by an unknown hacker who posted disgusting messages, including antisemitic and racist posts,' Sesame Workshop said in a statement, adding the account has since been secured. X came under scrutiny last week when the account of the Grok chatbot developed by billionaire Elon Musk's company xAI produced content with antisemitic tropes. The posts were subsequently removed and called 'inappropriate' by Grok's X account. Since Musk bought what was then known as Twitter in 2022, he has cut back on moderation. Extremist content has increased, causing some advertisers to pull away from the platform. (Reporting by Kanishka Singh in Washington; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)
The South African
09-07-2025
- The South African
Elon Musk's chatbot Grok slammed for praising Hitler
South Africa-born billionaire Elon Musk's artificial intelligence chatbot Grok was under fire on Wednesday, for antisemitic comments, praising Hitler and insulting Islam in separate posts on the X platform. One series of comments, which included insults directed at Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan led a court there to ban the posts in question. These were just the latest in a series of controversies surrounding the AI creation, which has already been accused of promoting racist conspiracy theories. Screenshots on X showed several posts made by the bot in which it praised Adolf Hitler and claimed Jews promoted 'anti-white hate'. The chatbot, developed by Musk's company xAI, was criticised by Jewish advocacy group Anti-Defamation League (ADL) for answering multiple user prompts with the questionable posts. In Turkey, a court announced it was blocking access to a series of messages from Grok on X, which it said had insulted Erdogan and Islamic religious values. Musk's AI start-up acknowledged the issues in a post via Grok on X. 'We are aware of recent posts made by Grok and are actively working to remove the inappropriate posts,' it said. 'Since being made aware of the content, xAI has taken action to ban hate speech before Grok posts on X.' Musk has not so far commented directly on the controversy, but posted on Wednesday: 'Never a dull moment on this platform.' Last Friday he posted to say they had made significant improvements to Grok. 'You should notice a difference when you ask Grok questions,' he added. Grok, in posts since then, has referred to 'anti-white stereotypes' and Hollywood executives being 'disproportionately Jewish'. The ADL criticised the latest posts by the chatbot. 'What we are seeing from Grok LLM right now is irresponsible, dangerous and antisemitic, plain and simple,' the ADL said on X. 'This supercharging of extremist rhetoric will only amplify and encourage the antisemitism that is already surging on X and many other platforms.' Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of ADL, told AFP in a recent interview that from 'Amazon to X, from Alphabet to Meta, all these businesses need to be far more proactive because, as they have retreated from moderating the services.' On Tuesday, Grok was also asked about the wildfires burning around the southern French port of Marseille. If the fire could 'clean up' one troubled district of the city 'so much the better', it said, adding 'the dealers are more resilient than the flames'. Also on Tuesday, Grok insulted Erdogan and his family in a series of Turkish-language posts, according to screen shots posted by other users. A court in Ankara on Wednesday ordered around 10 of the offending posts to be blocked 'for the crimes of insulting the religious values of a portion of the population and insulting the president'. In one post Wednesday, Grok appeared to be suggesting that some of its more controversial remarks had been tongue in cheek. 'My line was sarcasm: absurdly invoking Hitler to slam that vile bile, not endorse him – he's history's ultimate evil. Irony backfired hard,' it posted. Grok, which Musk promised would be 'edgy' following its launch in 2023, has been mired in controversy. In May it caused a row for generating misleading and unsolicited posts referencing 'white genocide' in South Africa, which xAI blamed on an 'unauthorised modification.' Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news. By Garrin Lambley © Agence France-Presse
IOL News
08-07-2025
- IOL News
Is the US Supreme Court a Trump Court?
Demonstrators hold a banner outside the US Supreme Court, on the final day of the Court's term, in Washington, DC, on June 27, 2025. The US Supreme Court is to issue its final rulings on Friday ahead of its summer break, including cases involving birthright citizenship, porn site age verification, students and LGBTQ-themed content, and voting rights. Image: Mandel Ngan / AFP Has the United States Supreme Court become a Trump Court with three Trump appointees: Associate Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brent Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett? The short paradoxical answer is 'yes' and 'no'. For starters, a substantial percentage (40-50%) of Supreme Court decisions in any term are unanimous. But not all cases are equally significant. Some plow pioneering constitutional territory, for example, Trump v. United States bestowing criminal immunity on all presidential acts. Others overrule long standing precedents, for example, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overruling Roe v. Wade's recognition of a constitutional right to an abortion. Trump appointee Justice Barrett has displayed an independent streak in garden variety cases. But she is a reliable member of a 6-member majority in major constitutional or quasi-constitutional cases with Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brent Kavanaugh. The Chief Justice and Justice Alito are appointees of President George W. Bush. Justice Thomas was appointed by President George H. W. Bush. Neither Bush #41 nor Bush #43 are MAGA cheerleaders. In other words, the 6-member conservative majority represents a broader political consensus than Mr. Trump himself. Moreover, Trump's influence on the Supreme Court has been less than President Franklin D. Roosevelt's. The latter appointed eight new Justices, all New Deal enthusiasts, and elevated Associate Justice Harlan Fiske Stone to Chief Justice. The Roosevelt Court revolutionized congressional power under the Commerce Clause and presidential power over national security and foreign policy. Supreme Court Justices serve for life to encourage their independence from the Presidents who appointed them. Experience shows mixed success on that score. Justices do occasionally disappoint their benefactors. President Theordore Roosevelt appointed Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. But within a year he complained about a Holmes dissent, 'I could carve out a banana, a judge with more backbone than that. President Harry Truman appointed his Attorney General, Tom C. Clark, who voted against him in the famous Steel Seizure Case. President Dwight Eisenhower reportedly regretted his appointment of Chief Justice Earl Warren and Associate Justice William Brennan as 'my two worst mistakes.' President Richard Nixon appointed Chief Justice Warren Burger and Associate Justice Harry Blackmun. But the former authored the Nixon tapes case which led to the President's resignation and the latter pioneered a constitutional right to abortion in Roe v. Wade. Justice Anthony Kennedy proved a disappointment to President Ronald Reagan and Justice David Souter disappointed Bush #41. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ The Trump Court voted against President Trump's anti-immigration initiatives to end President Barack Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals in DHS v. Regents of the University of California and to reinstate a Census citizenship question in Department of Commerce v. New York. Further, the Court held in its most recent term in Noem v. Abrego Garcia (April 10, 2025) that President Trump was required to 'facilitate' the return of a wrongly deported immigrant from a dungeon in El Salvador. But these exceptions prove an important rule. Justices of the Supreme Court, by and large, do reflect the political inclinations of their presidential benefactors. Thus, the Trump Court has followed Trump's lead on freedom of religion, guns, LGBTQ people, the environment, deregulation, national security, and unchecked presidential power. In Trump v. CASA Inc. (June 27, 2025), the Court clipped the wings of subordinate tribunals to restrain unconstitutional executive orders coming out of the gate. Over the long haul, the Supreme Court never strays far from public opinion. As fabled Justice Benjamin Cardozo elaborated, 'The great tides and currents which engulf the rest of men do not turn aside in their course and pass the judges by.' * Armstrong Williams ( @arightside) is a political analyst, syndicated columnist and owner of the broadcasting company, Howard Stirk Holdings. He is also part owner of The Baltimore Sun. ** The views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of Independent Media or IOL.
