BORDERS OF FREEDOM AND CHOICE: HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

Skopje, 2002

Research team Professor Mirjana Najcevska, Ph.D. Ninoslav Mladenovik, M.Sc. Zarko Trajanoski, M.Sc. Maja Cvetanovska Safet Balazi Gordana Trpcevska Vesna Mihajlovska Dragan Jankovski

1. Introduction to the significance of the right to choice of sexual orientation and experiences of other countries

There are few countries in the world where there isnt intense discussion about sexual equality, the regulation of sexuality and the future of the family. And where there isnt open debate, this is mostly because it is actively repressed by authoritarian 1 governments or fundamentalist groups.

After the decriminalization of homosexuality in 1996, despite the obligations of the state as a Council of Europe member (as well as a candidate for accession in the EU), the Republic of Macedonia still did not took any positive steps towards fighting homophobia and discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation. Borders of freedom and choice: Homosexuality in the Republic of Macedonia is a project that emerged from the urgency for addressing the needs of homosexuals (as the most vulnerable group of non-heterosexuals) in the course of their struggle for human rights (struggle for sexual freedom, sexual equality and social inclusion). The first part of the project (providing of empirically verified data about the attitudes and opinions towards homosexuality) was a necessary precondition for: a) opening up of a public debate about sexual equality, the regulation of sexuality and the future of the family; b) detecting the basic sources of social exclusion of non-heterosexuals; c) setting up the priorities in the struggle against homophobia and social exclusion of non-heterosexuals; d) establishing a long-term and short-term strategies for righting the sexuality-based human wrongs by means of human rights (through the current standards of protection of international human rights norms as well as by invoking the principles already set forth in the UDHR). Obligations of the Republic of Macedonia as a Council of Europe member state and as a candidate for accession in the EU Decriminalization of homosexuality was and is one of the obligations of the Republic of Macedonia as a Council of Europe member state. As a signer of the ECHR, the Republic of Macedonia must adjust its legislation according to the recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. Domestic law and practice must be constantly kept under review to ensure best standards and practice. In addition, the state must take positive steps for overcoming a) the discrimination and violence against homosexuals; b) the differentiated treatment of homosexuals under the law and in practice; and c) contemptuous or intolerant attitudes towards them. Furthermore, the state must adopt measures in the areas of education and professional training to combat homophobic attitudes in certain specific circles besides the expected powerful cultural reactions in some societies or sectors. As the Committee of Ministers has explicitly stated (in the reply to Recommendation 1474 (2000) on the situation of lesbians and gays in Council of Europe member states), expected powerful cultural reactions in some societies or sectors are not a valid reason for governments or parliaments to remain
1

Giddens, Anthony. Runaway World. New York: Routledge, 2000, p. 70. 3

passive. The Committee of Ministers emphasized further that this fact only underlines the need to promote greater tolerance in matters of sexual orientation. As a candidate for accession in the EU, the Republic of Macedonia, like any new member of the EU, must fulfil the Copenhagen Political Criteria, which sets out respect for fundamental rights as a priority. Sexual orientation is explicitly stated as a ground for discrimination in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Article 21, 1). In that respect, the Republic of Macedonia should benefit from the positive and negative experiences of the accession countries in their attempts to combat sexual orientation discrimination. Combating sexual orientation discrimination requires new set of legislations providing protection against sexual orientation discrimination and political commitment to change as well as specific plans and actions by government or political parties to tackle discrimination. The state must also establish cooperation with lesbian and gay NGOs which are not visible in the Macedonian NGO field at the moment. Strategies for coping with homophobia and heterosexism On one hand, the field research on the opinions and attitudes towards homosexuality in the Republic of Macedonia provided data necessary for accessing the situation of lesbians and gays, for detecting the most vital problems, for identifying actual and potential threats, and for setting up the priorities for human rights action. On the other hand, the main chalenge is how to apply these data taking into consideration the primary objective of the project; that is, opening up the possibilities for using human rights in the struggle for sexual freedom, sexual equality and social inclusion of sexualy despised human beings. Human rights could be used at least in two ways: first, human rights could be used as legal instruments for protection; second, as moral principles for justifying action. 1. Human rights as legal instruments for protection The struggle for meaningfulness of the famous sentence All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights requires not only fight for sexual freedom but fight for sexual equality as well. Invoking the right to privacy (the right to respect for private life in the ECHR) is just one of the available means in the struggle for sexual freedom. The right to privacy was initially affirmed in the Article 122 of UDHR and subsequently confirmed in the Article 173 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Although ICCPR commentators are still trying to find a compromise definition4 of the right to privacy, the practice of interpretation
UDHR, Article 12: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. 3 ICCPR, Article 17: 1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation. 2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. 4 See The International Covenant On Civil and Political Rights : Cases, Materials, and Commentary ed. by Joseph, Sarah.; Schultz, Jenny.; Castan, Melissa. New York: Oxford University Press (UK), 2000, pp. 348-349: A compromise definition could be that a right to privacy comprises 'freedom from unwarranted / and 4
2

already recognized several specific aspects of privacy: family and home, correspondence, searches, honour and reputation, data protection and, what is the most important for us here, sexual privacy. The commentators already indicated that previous practices of interpretation revealed that the article 17 guarantees rights of autonomy over one's own body, prohibits interferences with privacy which are 'unlawful' and 'arbitrary', allows expression of personal identity5 and, yet, according to one minority opinion, protects the 'right to be different and live accordingly'.6 Inseparability of the principles of freedom and equality could be illustrated through account of three different, but complementary strategies for coping with sexual inequality: 1. fight against discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation (by using and extending current standards in the already existing human rights protection mechanisms); 2. fight for sexual minorities rights (by extending current standards in the international law on minorities); 3. fight for social inclusion of sexually despised human beings (fight for recognition organized by the identity-based and post identity-based social movements against sexuality-based social exclusions). 2. Human rights as moral principles for justifying social action The struggle against the social injustice towards homosexuals is a struggle against cultural domination as a mode of cultural (or symbolic) injustice frequently interrelated with non-recognition and disrespect. The social injustice towards homosexuals is principally a mode of cultural injustice, taking into account that the socio-cultural attitudes towards homosexuality as despised sexuality are rooted in the cultural-valuational structure of society (in the social patterns of representation, interpretation, and communication). The social patterns of representation, interpretation, and communication create hostility and alienation (associated with cultural domination), invisibility (associated with non-recognition), and marginalization (associated with disrespect). The data provided by our field reserarch reveal that the main source of social injustice is the social discrimination of homosexuals, reflected primarily as a constant threat for social exclusion from the family, workplace, and various social groups. Therefore, the struggle against homophobia (the cultural devaluation of homosexuality) and heterosexism (the

unreasonable intrusions into activities that society recognises as belonging to the realm of individual autonomy'. The 'sphere of individual autonomy' has been described as 'the field of action [that] does not touch upon the liberty of others', where one may withdraw from others, to 'shape one's life according to one's own (egocentric) wishes and expectations'. 5 Cf. COERIEL and AURIK v THE NETHERLANDS (453/91): The Committee considers that the notion of privacy refers to the sphere of a person's life in which he or she can freely express his or her identity, be it by entering into relationships with others or alone. 6 Cf: The International Covenant On Civil and Political Rights : Cases, Materials, and Commentary ed. by Joseph, Sarah.; Schultz, Jenny.; Castan, Melissa. New York: Oxford University Press (UK), 2000 p. 365-366: Regulation of sexual behaviour that takes place in private may be an interference with privacy. In this regard, one may note the minority opinion in / Hertzberg et al. v Finland (61/79), when it was stated that article 17 protects the 'right to be different and live accordingly'.
,

authoritative construction of norms that privilege heterosexuality7) should be the first step in the struggle for social inclusion of sexually despised human beings. Human rights can be effectively used in the process of developing context-sensitive strategies for coping with homophobia and heterosexism. The language of sexual minorities is particularly appealing for those who want to apply the principles of equal protection and non-discrimination as a panacea for stigmatization and social exclusion on the basis of sexuality of a person. Human rights are rights that belong to everyone solely by virtue of being human. Therefore, within a human rights field, we must fight against the continued exclusion of gay men, lesbians, and other sexual minorities from the full protection of international human rights norms. Without a doubt, one has to fight for human rights, if s/he wants their universal recognition and implementation since human rights are neither self-fulfilling prophecies nor self-fulfilling desiderata. As campaigning for human rights of gays and lesbians pointed out, the struggle against exclusion of gays and lesbians from the protection of universal human rights is a struggle for equal right to life, equal freedom from arbitrary arrest, equal freedom from torture and ill-treatment, equal freedom of expression and association etc. What the data from our field research clearly suggest8 is that sexual education as well as human rights education9 are urgent needs that must be addressed by the state as soon as possible. Sexuality-sensitive curriculla10 have to be developed devoid of homophobic and heterosexist taboos: taboos against sexual diversity and alternative family forms. At the same time, a wider public debate about sexuality and human rights must be opened supported by public campaign for human rights of non-heterosexuals. As long as the social conditions for the full development of sexuality are privileging only one type of sexual conduct and identity, the respect for distinctive sexuality of a person must be protected by the instruments of international human rights law. For, the societies unwilling to create equal conditions for free satisfaction of basic human needs such as the desire for contact, intimacy, emotional expression, pleasure, tenderness and love11 will always remain unjust societies 2. Basic information about Macedonia, development and current legislation, why the project, the position within the human rights concept, methodology used and technical research parameters a) Research base Until 1996 homosexuality12 in the Republic of Macedonia was a criminal offence punished with prison sentence. The greatest insult that one could tell a man is that he is
Fraser, Nancy. From Redistribution to Recognition? Dilemmas of Justice in a 'Post-Socialist' Age in Feminism and Politics ed. by Anne Phillips. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press (UK), 1998, p. 438. 8 67,5% of the people agree or strongly agree that sexual education has to be introduced into public schools. 9 Although homosexuality is decriminalized, in some sities people who disagree or strongly disagree that homosexuality should be criminalized are less than half. 10 The curricula that will not reproducing the sexual prejudicies and stereotypes of the heterosexual hegemonistic lifestyle; the curricula that will reflect the multiplicity of subaltern sexual languages. 11 World Association of Sexology (WAS) - Declaration of Sexual Rights, http://www.siecus.org/inter/inte0006.html 12 In order to simplify the text for the needs of this study we use the term homosexuality in the sense that it implies a seal orientation in which the subject is oriented towards representative of his/her gender, without making a difference between gay and lesbians. 6
7

homosexual (or in the every day jargon: queer). After six years of the abolishment of this Article of the Criminal Code, the "queer word is still the greatest and most used insult. This practice is confirmed with the mocking gratifies and messages written on walls during the preelection period for the 2002 elections. Most of them are sexually based, i.e. some of the mentioned persons are called queers. 13 In the period that followed, there have been no campaigns, informing via the media or any wider spread form of informing of the population that this Article has been abolished. There have been even lesser attempts to develop a different approach towards homosexuality. In the still predominantly patriarchal and traditional environment in the Republic of Macedonia, neither sexuality nor sexual orientation are discussed, analyzed or explained. The context and the relation to human rights, the right to choice and protection of the personal and private life remain outside the interest of any social circle. No non-governmental organization established in this period incorporates or mentions homosexuality as part of their program commitments. The first organization that has program commitments related exactly to the sexual rights is the Center for Civil and Human Rights established in March 2002. Homosexuality is not manifested in public, homosexuals are ridiculed or there are even sentiments of animosity towards them, homosexuals move in closed circles at special places far from the eyes of the public, while the little education material about sexuality intended for the general education system treats homosexuality as in illness and deformation. 14 Thus far there has not been a research conducted in the Republic of Macedonia to gather information about the attitudes of population towards homosexuality, based on which there could be relevant conclusions drawn about possible further activities in terms of understanding of the basic human rights to choice, both as a right to choice of ones sexual orientation, while its limitation as a violation of the basic human rights and freedoms. The lack of research of this character disables locating the basic obstacles in understanding the right to choice in the field of sexuality as well, then it prevents identification of possible target groups to which relevant information should be directed, as well as the type and the form of offered information. The lack of any information in this field makes it difficult to predict the behavior of various groups and structures of the population in respect of homosexuality in a situation of a more open campaign and in situations of public manifestation of the sexual orientation. The lack of appropriate analysis and an environment in which it would be possible to raise the issue of homosexuality prevents registering of possible discrimination in everyday life, employment, and use of services, performance of certain professions and protection of people in cases of discrimination. A research of this type is especially important as part of the global democratization of relations in the Republic of Macedonia, as well as in respect of the intentions to implementation of the human rights concept and international standards both in legislation and in the practice, i.e. in every day life.

See Annex I of the text with pictures of gratifies shots taken ion Skopje in the period form 1 to 15 September 2002. Archive of the Helsinki committee for human rights of the republic of Macedonia. 14 According to Blagoj Popadinov, in human relation between genders, handbook for educators, teachers and parents, Stip, 1997, homosexuality is gender deformation, and gender deformed people are ill people (p. 390. characteristics of passive homosexuals: soft curly hair, soft skin and womanly hips (p. 41). an advice to visit a doctor wit experience in psychology is given. since according to their nature perversions are psychological they require psychological treatment (p. 47). 7

13

b) Research methodology and activities Therefore, a research has been initiated which is to give a general picture of the situation in the Republic of Macedonia, (both in terms of the legislation and) in terms of the general environment and views of citizens. The research was conducted by the Center for Human Rights and Conflict Resolution (at the Institute for Sociological and Political-Legal Research) and the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights of the Republic of Macedonia in cooperation with the Center for Civil and Human rights. The Norwegian Helsinki Committee and the Open Society Foundation in the Republic of Macedonia financially supported the research. The research encompasses: collection of literature related to the subject matter; researches on this issue, analysis of the positive legislation of the Republic of Macedonia, focus group work, and survey of citizens of the Republic of Macedonia. In the course of project activities appropriate literature and research material was collected (the bibliographical units are enclosed with this report) which are available and can be used for other researches of this type (Annex II). In the analysis of the legislation a review was made of the applicable laws of the Republic of Macedonia from the perspective of existence of discriminating or affirmative norms related to homosexuals. The analysis is part of the research report. There were three sessions of focus groups (two with heterosexuals and one with homosexuals). 15 Based on the information gathered in the focus groups a questionnaire was prepared for the positions and views of citizens (Annex IV). The survey was conducted in four cities (Skopje, Bitola, Gostivar and Stip), located in various regions of the country. The survey covered 1600 persons (which is a representative sample of the population of the Republic of Macedonia.) The survey encompassed representatives of the four largest ethnic communities in the republic of Macedonia (Macedonian, Albanian, Turkish and Roma), with approximately equal number of men and women and equal representation of four age groups (18-25; 26-37; 38-50 and over 50). The education structure of surveyed persons largely corresponds to the education structure of the overall population in the Republic of Macedonia. 16 3. Normative framework and experiences in the practical implementation of the laws and international instruments According to the available information, neither the Constitution nor any law, bylaw, political party platform, NGO platform nor any written documents does discriminate on grounds of gender from the formal-legal viewpoint. Ever since the abolition of Article 10117 of the Criminal Code in 1996, sexual orientation is not mentioned in written form. In general
The report of the focus group work is enclosed (See Annex III). The information about the structure of the surveyed persons is annexed to the report. 17 Criminal Code of the Republic of Macedonia, 1993, Article 101, paragraph 1: The person who by use of force or threats directly attacks the life or body or the life and body of close person and shall force to unnatural debauchery shall be sentenced to a prison sentence of 1 to 10 years. paragraph 2: The person shall be punished with up to one-year prison sentence for unnatural debauchery between persons of the male gender.
16 15

terms discrimination on any grounds is prohibited, however sexual orientation as possible grounds for discrimination has not be singled out. In the period after 1996, in the jurisprudence of the national courts or in the practice of the National Ombudsman of the Republic of Macedonia (ever since the establishment of this institution) there have been no cases instituted against discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation. In the same period no non-governmental organization has been registered that would relate its mandate primarily to the sexual equality and freedom. The only nongovernmental organization, which aspires to such commitments in its work, was registered in March 2002. The program of this organization concretely mentions struggle against discrimination on grounds of belonging to the lesbian, homosexual, bisexual or transvestite groups The education programs do not contain separate educative units in the field of sexual education. Hence homosexuality is not mentioned in any subject taught. Informal education materials18 very often contain data are contrary to the treatment of sexual orientation as part of the concept of human rights and freedoms and as forms of freedom, choice and part of ones personal life.

4. General distribution of attitudes Based on crossing of four independent parameters: place of living, age, education, gender and ethnic affiliation, there can be general conclusions drawn about the position of various groups of the population towards the issue of free sexual orientation, and especially towards issues related to homosexuality and homosexuals. These parameters can be further used to measure the homophobia of certain groups of the population in the Republic of Macedonia. Elements characteristic for the replies to all questions (i.e. offered claims) are the following; In terms of numbers there is more expressed negative position towards homosexuality, homosexuals and towards sexual freedoms in general with citizens of provincial cities (Bitola, Gostivar, Stip) then with citizens of the capital (Skopje); In statistical terms the following groups are significantly more homophobic: persons over 38 years of age (especially those over 50); persons with incomplete primary and persons with completed primary education; women belonging to the Albanian, Turkish and Roma ethnic comminutes (who at the same time are primarily of Muslim religion). Discrepancies from this global distribution model are very rare and insignificant.

5. Analysis of positions and views The analysis of positions and views of surveyed citizens is summed up in several units in order to facilitate the representation of the global picture of the position towards homosexuality and homosexuals in the Republic of Macedonia. General perceptions of homosexuality 25,4% of surveyed citizens consider that homosexuality is something normal, 11.8% are not certain while all other consider homosexuality as something outside the normal.
Such a the book of Blagoj Popadinov human Relations between genders handbook for educator, teachers and parents, Stip, 1997. 9
18

1. Graph - Homosexuality is something normal

35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6

I completely agree I agree 18. Homosexuality is something normal I am not certain I do not agree I disagree no reply

8.30% 17.10% 11.80% 30.50% 31.90% 0.40%

According to the survey result a very large number of citizens of the Republic of Macedonia consider that homosexuality is an illness or a type of psychological disturbance. 64% of surveyed citizen share this view. 17% of the surveyed citizens are not certain whether it is a matter of an illness, while 19% are completely or greatly certain that homosexuality is an illness. This wide spread starting position is per se opposed to the idea of free choice of sexual orientation and greatly impacts all further positions, relations and conduct of people.

Graph 2- Homosexuality is an illness or a psychological disturbance

40.00% 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6

10

1. I completely agree 2. I agree 2. Homosexuality is an illness or a psychological disturbance 3. I am not certain 4. I disagree 5. I completely disagree 6. no reply

24.40% 39.70% 16.80% 11.00% 8.00% 0.10%

This attitude is mostly spread among persons belonging to the Roma ethnic group (80%) and it basically follows the general model of distribution of attitudes (homosexuality is perceived as an illness mostly by people of lower education and those over 38 years of age). 19 A slightly smaller percentage of surveyed citizens consider that homosexuality is something immoral (59%). Persons belonging to the Albania ethnic community much more often perceive homosexuality as immoral as compared to persons belonging to the Macedonian or other ethnic communities20. Larger number of those who consider homosexuality as something immoral; also consider it to be an illness or a psychological disturbance21. This one of many incredible contradictoriness in the perception of homosexuality which makes part of the traditional attitude and positions of citizens. The concept of an immoral illness makes homosexuality more terrifying, contagious (something like a cancer of society and of the human race), but also something that we can and should fight against22. It is interesting that about 40% of the surveyed persons consider that in Macedonia there are fewer homosexuals than in other countries. This can be correlated to the wide spread attitude that it is a matter of an illness or a disturbance (which is gradually imported in our environment) and that we are still a healthy society that has still not succumbed to this illness. Most surveyed persons belonging to the Albanian ethnic community have this attitude (48%), and out of the persons belonging to the Macedonian ethnic community smallest number has this opinion (28%). 36% of the surveyed persons think that homosexuality cannot be cured, while 34% are not certain about this issue. 30% of the surveyed persons correlate homosexuality to the special inclinations of certain ethnic groups.23 This position is spread to a somewhat greater extend with persons belonging to the Albanian ethnic community (36%) and persons belonging to the Turkish ethnic community (33%). The sum of these negative perceptions of homosexuality also encompasses the position that homosexuals have an imposing attitude towards others. Citizens most often imply by this aggressive conduct in the quest for a sexual partner (offering one self), imposing homosexuality as a sexual orientation, or too open manifestation of ones homosexuality (without any shame). 38.79% of the surveyed person share this view (over 40% of the citizens
77% of citizens with incomplete and complete primary education and 70% of the citizens of over 38 years of age take this position. 20 68% a compared to 43% of the surveyed person belonging to the Macedonian ethnic community. this is one of the rare questions in respect of which there is such a drastic difference among person belonging to different ethnic groups 21 795 of the surveyed persons who consider that homosexuality is immoral completely agree that it is a matter of an illness. 22 41,60% of the surveyed persons are not certain whether in Macedonia homosexuals as compared to other countries. 23 more than 415 of the surveyed could not give an answer to this question 11
19

of more than 38 years of age and more than 50% of those with primary education and much more persons belonging to the Turkish and Roma ethnic communities). There is the rather confusing data that 38% of those who claim that they have never met a homosexual think that homosexuals have an imposing attitude; there is a similar percentage of those who consider that homosexuality should be punished by law (34%). This is the second incredible construction related to the perception of homosexuality, which should be paid attention to. Namely, most probably this is one of the rare illnesses against which, according to the conviction of 34% of the surveyed persons, we can fight with legal measures. This is confirmed by the fact that 55% of those who think that homosexuality is an illness also thinks that it should be punished by law. Graph No. 3 Homosexuality should be punished by law
30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6

I completely agree I agree 12. Homosexuality should be punished by law I am not certain I disagree I completely disagree no reply

17.30% 16.90% 13.60% 27.00% 24.70% 0.60%

24.6% of the surveyed person with higher education share this position, as opposed to 68% of the surveyed persons with incomplete primary education. There is also a significant difference in respect of persons belonging to different ethnic communities (12.30% of Macedonians compared to 45% Albanians). The most usual position of people in their contacts with homosexuals can be summed up by the phrase What a waste. More than 59% of the surveyed person share this view. Such a position sums up the entire opposition to and non-acceptance of homosexuality as part of the freedom of choice. Pity that the man is ill, pity for the loss that society thus suffers, pity for the good material lost for nothing are expressions that can be very often heard in relation to this position. This is one of the rare questions in respect of which persons belonging to the Macedonian ethnic community are equal with the persons belonging to other ethnic communities in their replies.
12

Conclusion: according to the results of the survey major part of Macedonian citizens consider that homosexuality is an illness of immoral character which is not easily cured. Some of the citizens think that people suffering from this illness should be punished by law.

Acceptance of the external manifestation More than half of the surveyed citizens consider that homosexuals should not publicly demonstrate their orientation (56%). Even those who have replied that they consider homosexuality as something normal, in 35% of the cases consider that homosexuals should not publicly show their orientation. The situation is even more drastic among citizens who have replied that homosexuality is not a threat to the moral and family values. In 42% of the cases they are not prepared to accept public manifestation of the homosexual orientation. Such a view may be interpreted in various manners (declarative acceptance of the freedom of choice of one's sexual orientation without any real grounds in the every day relationships and genuine positions; such a high level of stereotypes which prompts discomfort in the presence of open manifestation of homosexuality; lack of readiness for open opposition to the traditional model of views on sexuality and similar.). However, the fact remains that a very small percentage of citizens are prepared to accept open manifestation of the homosexuality in every day life. The acceptance of the freedom of choice of ones sexual orientation ends at the level of tolerance of something that we do not see, which exists but not here around us and which is not part of our own environment. Graph 4 Homosexuals should not publicly show their orientation
30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6

I completely agree I agree 1. Homosexuals should not publicly show their orientation I am not certain I disagree I completely disagree No reply

27.00% 29.50% 13.90% 18.10% 10.80% 0.70%

13

These replies follow the usual structure and differences on grounds of age, education, gender and ethnic affiliation (50,80% of persons at the age of 10-25, as opposed to 62.80% of persons of more than 50 years of age; 70% of persons with incomplete primary education as opposed to 53% of person with college and university degree; 53,7% of persons belonging to the Macedonian ethnic community as opposed to 67% of the persons belonging to the Roma ethnic community consider that homosexuals should not publicly show their sexual orientation. ) What surprises (regardless of presented differences) is the fact that the structures which usually have a positive attitude towards the acceptance of the freedom of choice of ones sexual orientation (such as younger people and people of higher education) show great resistance and limitation in respect of the public manifestation of sexual orientation. This could lead to the conclusion that people accept homosexuality but if it is not publicly manifested (which takes us back to the issues of morality and normality). The lack of a more drastic difference between the age groups could be interpreted as lack of actual changes in the sensibility towards homosexuality in the period of change of the social system and the increasing importance of the human rights concept. The percentage of person who share this views is a bit lesser when it comes to Skopje (46%), and is drastically higher in Bitola (65.7%). According to 55.5% of the surveyed citizens homosexuals should move and remain only within designated places. The intention of isolation and ghettoizing of homosexuals is very evenly present with all age and ethnic groups. There is an evident (if not significant) difference only is respect of the education and place of living. In light of the fact that most citizens think that there should be TV, radio programs and articles about homosexuality (60%) of the surveyed citizens, a question that can be posed is related to the desired or presumed contents of these programs and articles. Do citizen think that there should be more programs which would explain homosexuality as a specific illness, manners in which one could protect/cure himself/herself, or programs explaining homosexuality as a manifestation of the freedom of choice in terms of human rights? The position is especially indicative if it is taken into consideration that 53% of surveyed persons who perceive homosexuality as an illness consider that there should be more programs about this problem. A similar percentage of surveyed citizens (53%) think that homosexuals should not work in education and with children. The ratio among age and education groups follows the general line of differences (46% of surveyed citizens at the age of 18-25 have this view, as well as 63% of citizens of over 50 years of age, then 78% of persons with incomplete primary education, as opposed to 43.8% person with higher education). This is one of the questions in respect of which there is a significant difference among persons belonging to different ethnic groups. As different from other ethnicities (64% of the Roma, 62% of the Albanian and 52% of the Turkish ethnic communities), 36.2% of the persons belonging to the Macedonian ethnic community consider that homosexuals should not work in education and with children. 60% of persons who think homosexuality is something immoral share this position, (which could explain the need to protect children from the spreading of this immoral occurrence), as well as over 70% of those who see homosexuality as a threat to the moral and family values. It is interesting that 50% of those who consider that sexual education should be introduced in schools do not agree that homosexuals should work in education and with children. Such an attitude is again at the level of tolerance of homosexuality to the level of non-interference in the every day life, burdened by the dangerous influence or the contagious effect on the young generation. Hence the acceptance of homosexuality completely lacks its positioning within the freedom of choice as a basic human right.
14

46% of the surveyed persons consider that homosexuals should not practice the medical profession. Persons belonging to the Albanian ethnic community (63%) especially share this position. However, the percentage of 38.30% of surveyed persons who replied that they would not work with a homosexual coworker illustrates the fact that it is not only a mater of practicing of certain profession, but a general resistance to presence of homosexuals in every day life (in the working environment). A question related to this information is how would these persons react if their colleague publicly declares himself/herself as a homosexual? Would this imply request for dismissal, refusal to cooperate, negative assessments on his/her work? Perceiving homosexuality as immoral and abnormal conduct citizens find it very hard to allow the application of traditional family values in the relationships between homosexuals. 57% of the surveyed persons think that homosexuals should not have the right to establish permanent relationship and enter into marriage. Graph 5- homosexuals should not have the right to form permanent relationships and enter into marriage
35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6

I completely agree 15. Homosexuals should not have the right to form a permanent relationship and enter into marriage I agree I am not certain I disagree I completely disagree No reply

8.00% 17.10% 17.30% 26.10% 31.20% 0.40%

This position is shared by the vast majority of persons belonging to the Turkish and Roma ethnic communities, as well as by persons who consider homosexuality as behavior that threatens the moral and family values. Perhaps in this area we should be satisfied with the 25% positive replies in favor of possible forming permanent and marital relationships between homosexuals. Such a position is greatly opposed to the view that homosexuals should not publicly show their orientation and that it is a matter of an illness or psychological disturbance. This is another confirmation of the huge confusion in respect of homosexuality and the right to choice of ones sexual orientation in general.
15

Conclusion: Large number of citizens do not accept the external manifestation of the sexual orientation of homosexuals. They are not prepared to see homosexuals as part of their everyday life or working environment. The acceptance of homosexuality ends at the level of tolerance of their existence if they move within their closed circles and if they cover up in the best possible manner their sexual orientation. Communication and acceptance possibilities According to the replies to the questionnaire a large number of citizens have a problem communicating with homosexuals. 53% of surveyed citizens are uncomfortable in the presence of homosexuals. Graph 6 - I am uncomfortable in the presence of homosexuals
30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6

I complete agree I agree 17. I am uncomfortable in the presence of homosexuals I am not certain I disagree I completely disagree no reply

25.20% 28.20% 18.80% 13.80% 13.70% 0.40%

In respect of this view there is no great difference among citizens of various age gruops. Regardless of their declared views and readiness at least in words to accept homosexuality as something normal, younger people have not developed mechanisms for actual acceptance and enjoyment of the freedom of choice. 48.50% of surveyed person at the age of 18-25 are uncomfortable in the presence of homosexuals. On the other hand this is a view in respect of which there is the most visible difference between persons belonging to the Macedonian ethnic community and persons belonging to the Albanian, Roma and Turkish communities. The least percentage of Macedonians (32.30%) feel uncomfortable in the presence of homosexuals (as different from 51% of Albanians, 57% Turks and 73% Roma). There is a very high percentage (42%) of surveyed persons who would immediately interrupt the friendship with a person after they have learned of his/her homosexuality. This
16

is especially characteristic for all persons over 38 of age, persons of lower education level, persons belonging to the Turkish and Roma ethnic communities, as different from persons belonging to the Macedonian and Albanian ethnic communities. It is interesting that 20% of persons, who see homosexuality as something normal, would however interrupt the friendship with a friend after they have learned of his/her homosexuality. This can be further researched in terms of social pressure and following socially acceptable values even when we disagree with them. This is even more evident if it is taken into consideration that 36% of the surveyed citizens consider that one should not trust persons just because they are homosexual. Only 16% of the persons belonging to the Macedonian ethnic community represent this position, as opposed to the persons belonging to the Albanian (41.50%), Turks (32.20%), and Roma ethnic communities (54.60%). 28.90% of the surveyed persons are prepared to accept homosexuals as friends. The differences among ethnic communities are rather visible and statistically important. It is interesting that the percentage of surveyed citizens who are not certain and are not able to reply to the question is very evenly spread among all ethnic communities. Table 1- Would you accept homosexuals as friends?
Ethnic community Would you accept homosexuals as friends? Total Yes No I do not know Macedonian 48.20% 31.30% 20.60% 100.00% Albanian 18.50% 60.70% 20.70% 100.00% Turkish 27.10% 50.80% 22.10% 100.00% Roma 21.80% 60.00% 18.30% 100.00% Total 28.90% 50.70% 20.40% 100.00%

Citizens are much stricter when it comes to accepting homosexuality of a family member. Graph 7 - Would you accept homosexuality of a family member?

60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 1 2 3

Yes 30. Would you accept homosexuality of a family member? No I do not know

20.50% 54.60% 24.90%

17

Only 20% would accept homosexuality of a family member (39.60% persons belonging to the Macedonian, 16.30% to the Albanian, 11.80% to the Turkish and 13.80% to the Roma ethnic comminutes). This should also be further researched exactly terms of social pressure, traditional family and values of patriarchal structured community. There is a drastic data that only 11% of the surveyed persons would accept (support) homosexuality of their children. 59% of the surveyed persons at the age of 18-25 would not accept homosexuality of their children. This clearly illustrates the fact that even the declarative understanding of homosexuality, the declared commitment to respecting the freedom of choice of sexual orientation and the declared tolerance of difference, does not find solid grounds in the convictions and in the value system of the younger generations. When it comes to what happens in my home the declared principles disappear and old moralizing positions of the traditional behavior take over. Graph 8 - Would you accept and support the homosexual orientation of your child?

70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 1 2 3

yes 33. Would you accept and support the homosexual orientation of your child? No I do not know

11.30% 65.10% 23.60%

Persons who consider that sex and sexual orientations should not be discussed at all would not support homosexuality of their children (over 75%). This position is shared also by 80% of those who think that sexual education should not be introduced in the schools. Conclusion: citizens of Macedonia are very little prepared to communicate with persons of homosexual orientation. They especially do not accept homosexuality in their close environment (friends, relatives, children). There are no significant differences in the positions when it comes to the younger generations. Persons belonging to the Macedonian ethnic community show an evidently more liberal position in respect of these issues as different from all other ethnic communities.

18

Already established personal contacts with a homosexual 44.30% of the surveyed persons claim that they have never (in a given situation) met a homosexual. It is interesting that this is claimed by 40% of surveyed persons who are not prepared to talk about sex and sexual orientations. Table 2 - Have you even met a homosexual?
Age 18-25 years 55.60% 36.90% 7.60% 26-37 years 51.80% 41.60% 6.50% 38-50 years 39.60% 52.10% 8.40% over 50 years 29.80% 60.20% 10.00% Total 44.30% 47.60% 8.10%

26. Have you ever met a homosexual?

Yes No I do not know

A significantly lesser percentage of surveyed persons claim to know places where homosexuals meet. Graph 9 - Do you know places where homosexuals meet?

80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 1 2 3

Based on the survey a conclusion can be drawn about the grounds on which surveyed persons determine the sexual orientation of a certain person. It can be assumed that recognition is done based on rumors or definite signs of recognition which are part of the traditional value and moral complex. This is confirmed by the fact that over 54% if the surveyed persons think that homosexuals can be immediately recognized (according to external looks or conduct). Those who do not talk about sex and sexual orientation (70%) especially easily recognize homosexuals, as well as those who think that homosexuality is something immoral (65%), and those who consider homosexuality as a threat to the moral and family values (70%). Conclusion: prejudices about the external recognition and clear external signs of homosexuality are still predominating in the views of citizens. The fact that exactly the
19

greatest opponents to acceptance of homosexuality as an expression of the freedom of choice are those who most easily can recognize homosexuality of other people confirms that it is a mater of prejudices. General attitudes about sex and sexuality Closely related to the issue of position towards homosexuality and homosexuals is the issue of the general attitude of citizens towards sex and sexuality i.e. taking these issues outside the taboo areas. 40% of the surveyed persons think that sex and sexual orientations should not be talked about, while 11% are not certain. Graph 10- Sex and sexual orientations should not be discussed
35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6

I completely agree I agree 5. Sex and sexual orientations should not be discussed I am not certain I disagree I completely disagree No reply

16.00% 23.90% 11.50% 31.10% 17.00% 0.50%

Homosexuality is even less and rarely discussed. 71.30% of surveyed persons stated that they have never discussed about this issue with their parents. 61.40% of surveyed persons who have never discussed with their parents about homosexuality are at the age of 18-25 years. Along with other data this leads to the conclusion that sex and sexual orientations are not accepted or experienced as part of the human rights complex. One only whispers about sex, secretly shares opinions, makes jokes, spreads semi-truths and untruths, but it all remains outside the issues talked about between parents and children. This does not mean that homosexuality and sexual orientations in the wider context are not issue of interest. 67% of the surveyed person state that they have talked about homosexuality with friends and colleagues. It is interesting that even 66% of those who consider that sex and sexuality should not be discussed, then 70% of those who think that homosexuality is immoral and 64% of those who consider homosexuality as threat to moral and family values have discussed homosexuality with their friends. 40.30% of surveyed persons have been interested in a TV,
20

radio program or a newspaper article on the issue of homosexuality. This points to the fact that in one way or another citizens begin showing interest and more openly discus about sex and sexual orientations. It is very important that at the moment of opening of citizens towards this issue there should be as much as possible relevant and valid information, arguments and explanations of this type of freedom of choice. It is especially important to place the entire issue and debate in the context of human rights and freedoms. It is evident that at the formal and declarative level citizens are to a great extend prepared to accept some to the new values. 75% of the surveyed persons agree that each person should freely choose his/her sexual orientation. Graph 11- Each person should freely choose his/her sexual orientation
40.00% 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 1 2 3 4 5 6

I completely agree I agree 6. Each person should freely choose his/her sexual orientation I am not certain I disagree I completely disagree No reply

39.60% 35.50% 9.10% 9.30% 6.20% 0.30%

The explanation could be found in the understanding of people of the meaning of the possibility to choose, what to choose from and what are the results of the choice. Obviously a smaller number of surveyed citizens consider that homosexuality is part of the elements to choose from. For larger part of surveyed citizens this is an illness, immoral and abnormal one and it is not at all a subject of choice. However, this formally open approach to the question of sexual orientation should be used and should be given new meaning, which will incorporate the elements of possibility of actual choice. The data that 67% of surveyed persons think that sexual education should be introduced in schools could be interpreted in this context. This position is shared by even 35% of the surveyed person who think that sex should not be discussed. Conclusion: Sex and sexuality, hence sexual orientation are still issues that are rarely discussed, or are discussed without sufficient knowledge and information, usually
21

within closed circles. Young people still do not have the opportunity of getting appropriate knowledge in this area and the issue is closed for the closest family circle (this belongs to the shameful things). Freedom of choice is something that is understood at the declarative level, however it disguises many prejudices, pressures and traditional values Sensibility to discrimination 46% of surveyed person think that homosexuals in Macedonia are discriminated. A specific feature of this attitude is the large percentage (38%) of citizens who are not certain as to whether they agree or disagree with these positions. There is the impression that large number of citizens are aware of the different treatment, the humiliating attitude and nonacceptance of homosexuals in every day life. It is significant that even 39% of surveyed persons who consider homosexuality as something immoral and the same percentage of those who consider homosexuality a threat to the moral and family values share the opinion that homosexuals are discriminated. This confusing data could be part of the contradictory mosaic of traditional convictions and new values, which feature the attitudes of most people in the Republic of Macedonia. The terms - freedom, choice, and nondiscrimination - are terms that are becoming part of the everyday language of citizens. These are terms which citizens find hard to correlate to sexuality and sexual orientation. However, their everyday presence contributes to creating of a new perspective of considering and accepting issues, which are still within the forbidden area of taboos. The contradictoriness and confusion in the understanding of discrimination based on sexual orientation (i.e. homosexuality) is very obvious, if one looks at the positions of citizens in respect of the claim that homosexuals should establish an association for the protection of their rights. Even as much as 35% of surveyed persons consider tat homosexuals do not have the right to establish their association to protect their rights, but at the same time there is the not so small number of those considering homosexuality as something immoral, who consider that homosexuals should have the opportunity to establish their associations. Conclusion: the lack of appropriate information, discussions and public debates contribute to the creation of a total confusion in the understanding and positions of citizens towards homosexuality and sexual freedoms in general. They are not certain as to whether they should fight against homosexuality or they should enable homosexuals to protect their rights and freedoms. CONCLUSIONS Current situation According to the received information most citizens of the Republic of Macedonia consider homosexuality as an illness or psychological disturbance. Homosexuality is seen as something immoral and a threat to the family values. Citizens of the Republic of Macedonia do not have an actively discriminating attitude, however only a limited number of citizens are prepared to accept homosexuals as friends, coworkers or part of their closest environment. At the moment, citizens are prepared to accept tolerance of homosexuality if it is not visibly
22

manifested and if it is limited to closed and socially invisible circles. Sex and sexuality are still very little discussed and they are part of the taboo issues prohibited in the value construction of the traditionally patriarchal communication. Based on the structuring of the replies it can be concluded that there is circle within which a process of liberation of the views has commenced, but this process is at the declarative level and at the stage of possible reversibility. Possible activities According to the information of the research in the Republic of Macedonia there are the elementary conditions to commence discussions and more open actions for understanding the sexual rights in the context of the human rights complex and in the context of the rights of sexual minorities (especially representatives of the LHBT community)24Due to the low level of previous knowledge, it is necessary to commence spreading information of elementary character and in an indirect manner. Art exhibitions, concerts, films and film festivals, theatre plays, books and literary debates, websites should precede any form of direct action, open discussions or more aggressive information campaigns and open manifestations. By applying the step by step approach one could avoid the establishment of a homogenous group, which opposes as well as open resistance and active reaction to these activities. It is recommended that activities start in several centers on the territory of the Republic of Macedonia (in order to avoid the source of evil syndrome and to break the ice where it is the hardest). The introduction of sexual education in secondary school could be a good basis to further activities of this type (especially in light of the fact that a large percentage of interested citizens (67%) agree that some type of education is necessary. Possible obstacles The general distribution of positions allows drawing several initial conclusions in respect of the possible obstacles to the future activities and campaigns. Discrimination based on sexual orientation, as well as the freedom of choice of ones sexual orientation are very likely and more present in smaller places where the traditional patriarchal model of living is still the predominant model. persons over 50 years of age could not be seen as target group for activities aimed at developing a positive attitude towards the freedom of sexual choice as lager obstacles could be expected from them, as well as negative reactions to eventual campaigns related to these issues; People of Islamic religion are expected to be greatly opposed; The absence of certain groups of the population from higher level education processes could limit the action in the education institutions; by minimizing this problem and placing this issue low at the priority list, the state can limit the areas and volume of taken actions; In conditions of open and public manifestation (at work, at public places and in every day communications) ore active discrimination could be expected.

24

Lesbian, homosexual, bisexual and travestite community 23

Target groups The initial target group should be young people at the age of 18-25. According to the received information they are at least declaratively most open to these issues and could easily appear as part of the initial side activities (art performances of works that treat the issue of sexual rights and rights to persons belonging to the sexual minorities). The next target group should be students. Education is an area where an organized campaign could be conducted, or distribute appropriate information and organize debates moderated by experts. The relevant issue could be part of various education contents within the school subjects - literature, social and civic education, philosophy), or part of the extracurricular activities (debates, lectures etc). A separate target group should be teachers and professors at various levels of education. In conditions of absence of a separate subject and developed program for sexual education, each educator becomes possible source of information and misinformation based on which the young people form their positions and their behavior. A separate target group should be representatives of the media. Taking into consideration that a significant number of surveyed persons state that there should be TV and radio programs or articles on the issue of homosexuality (58%), that at a given moment they were interested by a program on this subject (49%) and that they do not mind free declaration of homosexuality by public personalities (40%)- the manner in which this complex issue will be presented gains an especially important dimension.

24

Annex I- Selection of gratifies characteristic for the pre-election period in 2002

25

26

Annex II - available literature at the Center for Human Rights and Conflict Resolution. 1. SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS The United States Constitution, the European Convention, and The Canadian Charter Robert Wintemute School of Law King`s College London CLARENDON PRESS-OXFORD 1995 2. Sexual Orientation and the Human Rights Mechanisms of the United Nations Examples and Approaches This paper was compiled and written in 1999 by Scott Long, Policy Director of IGLHRC, and presented to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. 3. Jack Donnelly, "Non -Discrimination and Sexual Orientation: Making a Place for Sexual Minorities in the Global Human Rights Regime", (appeared in print in Peter Baehr, Cees Flinterman, and Mignon Sender(eds.), Innovation and Inspiration: Fifty Years of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Amsterdam:Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and sciences, 1999,pp 93-110.

4. Diane Richardson, "Critical Social Policy", Constructing sexual citizenship: theorizing sexual rights University of Newcastle Copyright 2000 Critical Social Policy SAGE Publications -(London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi), vol.20(1)105135;0011439

27

Annex III Questions for the heterosexual focus groups 1. What is homosexuality? 2. What is a homosexual/lesbian for you? 3. Do you personally know a homosexual/lesbian? 4. If you do, what is he/she like? 5. Are there any special characteristics that differ them from other people? 6. Would you accept for a friend a person that you know is homosexual/lesbian? 7. Is it possible to be friends with a homosexual/lesbian? 8. Is there any pressure from the environment in respect of such friendships? 9. Should they publicly declare their homosexuality? 10. Should they publicly show their sexual orientation? 11. How would you treat a member of your closest family for whom you know is lesbian/homosexual? 12. How would you treat a member of your family for whom you think or there are rumors that he/she is homosexual/lesbian? 13. Do you consider that it is necessary to introduce in primary education a subject that would teach pupils about sex and sexual orientation (sexual education)? 14. How should sexual orientations should be treated (as equal or should they be differently assessed)? 15. When have you heard for the first time about homosexuals/lesbians? how? Who from? 16. Have you ever discussed about homosexuals/lesbians with your parents? If not what would be the general attitude within your family in respect of homosexuality - positive or negative? 17. Have you ever discussed with your friends and your close ones about homosexuals/lesbians? 18. Do you consider that parents should openly discuss with their children about sex and homosexuality? 19. As parents have you openly discussed with your children about sex and homosexuality? 20. Would you accept/support your child if he/she declares that he/she is homosexual/lesbian? How would you feel? 21. Have you at any stage in your life attracted a person of the same gender? 22. How do you react to works of art in which the main characters are homosexuals/lesbians? 23. Have you ever been interested in a TV or radio program or an article on issue of homosexuality? 24. Do you consider that if public personalities are homosexuals/lesbians they should publicly declare themselves as such? 25. Do you think that there are homosexuals/lesbians in Macedonia? 26. Are any of the ethnic groups more prone to homosexuality? 27. Do you know where homosexuals/lesbians gather and contact? 28. Would you visit those places? 29. What do you think how is it like to be a homosexual/lesbian in Macedonia? 30. Do you think homosexuality is inherent or acquired?
28

31. Is homosexuality ground for any sexual deviations? 32. Do you consider that our public discusses homosexuality? 33. To what extend this issue should be publicly debated? Why? 34. Would you visit a doctor who is homosexual/lesbian? 35. Do you consider that there are professions predetermined for homosexuals/lesbians? 36. Do you consider that there are professions, which are not for homosexuals/lesbians/ 37. Do you think that today homosexuality is in fact a fashion? 38. Do you consider that today there are more homosexuals/lesbians that before? 39. Do you consider that homosexuals/lesbians should be isolated from other people? Why? 40. Do you consider that the public in Macedonia pays sufficient attention to the issue of homosexuality? In what direction? 41. Do you think that homosexuality is something to be ashamed of, run away from, hide and not talk about? 42. Do you know how homosexuals/lesbians live in Macedonia? 43. Do you know a family in which one of the parents is inclined to the same gender? 44. Would you support marriage or a permanent community between people of the same gender? 45. Do you think that spouses should openly discuss sex and their sexual affiliations? 46. Do you consider that AIDS is an illness of homosexuals? 47. Do you think that homosexuals/lesbians should have the right to adopt a child? 48. What problems could the child have in such a community? 49. What causes a given sexual orientation of people? 50. Is sexual orientation a matter of choice? 51. Can sexual orientation be changed by therapy? 52. Can homosexuals/lesbians be good parents? 53. Are there stereotypes and prejudices about homosexuals/lesbians? Give some examples. 54. What can be done to overcome prejudices and discrimination of homosexuals/lesbians? 55. Is it important that society (people) is educated about homosexuality? Why? 56. Is it necessary that heterosexuals are active in the struggle against discrimination of homosexuality? Why? 57. Are there any stereotypes and prejudices related to homosexuals/lesbians? 58. Should homosexuals/lesbians establish an association to protect their rights? 59. Should laws be amended in favor of homosexuals/lesbians? 60. Can the media be held responsible for creating certain attitudes towards homosexuality? In which respect? What should their impact be? Questions for the homosexual focus group 1. What is homosexuality? 2. What does it mean to be homosexual/lesbian? 3. Do you think that you should publicly declare your sexual orientation? Why? 4. Do you think that you should publicly show your sexual orientation? Why? 5. What causes a given sexual orientation of people? 6. Is sexual orientation a matter of choice? 7. How do members of your closest family treat your sexual orientation? 8. Do you have close friend of the same gender who are heterosexuals?
29

9. Is it possible to be friends with a heterosexual? 10. Is there any pressure from the environment on such friendships? 11. Do you consider that it is necessary to introduce in primary education a subject that would teach pupils about sex and sexual orientation (sexual education)? 12. How should sexual orientations be treated (as equal or should they be differently assessed)? 13. When have you heard for the first time about homosexuals/lesbians? How? Who form? 14. Have you ever discussed with your parents about your sexual orientation? If not what would be the general attitude within your family in respect of homosexuality - positive or negative? 15. have you ever discussed with your friends and your close ones about homosexuals/lesbians in general and about your sexual orientation? 16. Do you consider that parents should openly discuss with their children about sex and homosexuality? 17. As parents (would you discuss) have you openly discussed with your children about sex and homosexuality? 18. Would you accept/support your child if he/she is homosexual/lesbian? 19. Do you think works of art should be exhibited in which the main characters are homosexuals/lesbians? Why? 20. Do you consider that if public personalities are homosexuals/lesbians they should publicly declare themselves as such? Why? 21. Are any of the ethnic groups more prone to homosexuality? 22. What is it like to be a homosexual/lesbian in Macedonia? Are there any difficulties and what are they? 23. Do you think homosexuality is inherent or acquired? 24. Is homosexuality ground for any sexual deviations? 25. Do you consider that our public discusses homosexuality? 26. To what extend this issue should be publicly debated? Why? 27. Do homosexuals/lesbians in Macedonia have any difficulties in the field of health protection? 28. Do you consider that there are professions predetermined for homosexuals/lesbians? 29. Do you consider that there are professions, which are not for homosexuals/lesbians? 30. Do you think that today homosexuality is in fact a fashion? 31. Do you consider that today there are more homosexuals/lesbians than before? 32. Do you consider that the public in Macedonia pays sufficient attention to the issue of homosexuality? In what direction? 33. Do you think that homosexuality is something to be ashamed of, run away from, hide and not talk about? 34. Do you think that marriage or a permanent community between people of the same gender should be legally supported? 35. Do you think that spouses should openly discuss sex and their sexual affiliations? 36. Do you consider that AIDS is an illness of homosexuals? 37. Do you think that homosexuals/lesbians should have the right to adopt a child? 38. What kind of parents homosexuals/lesbians would be (are)? 39. Would the child have any difficulties living with two parents of the same gender? 40. Can sexual orientation be changed by therapy? Is it necessary to apply such a therapy?
30

41. Are there stereotypes and prejudices about homosexuals/lesbians? Give some examples. 42. What can be done to overcome prejudices and discrimination of homosexuals/lesbians? 43. Is it important that society (people) is educated about homosexuality? Why? 44. Is it necessary that heterosexuals are active in the struggle against discrimination of homosexuality? 45. Should homosexuals/lesbians establish an association to protect their rights? 46. Should laws be amended in favor of homosexuals/lesbians? What should be regulated by law? 47. Can the media be held responsible for creating certain attitudes towards homosexuality? In which respect? What should their impact be?

31

Report about the focus group meeting (group of homosexuals) on the topic of homosexuality(held on 21.08.2002) Opening question: What we, as sexual minority, would say on the topic of homosexuality? First responses: Are we really a minority? Is it possible to establish a political party that will represent us? Is it possible to have political representatives in the parliament? However, after a brief deliberation, majority of the group concluded that it is still early to think about these issues bearing in mind the absence of organized movement in Macedonia, the lack of registered gay and lesbian organizations as well as the urgent need for a secure social spaces where gays and lesbians could freely share their spare time. The issue of coming out was considered as the main problem, expressed by the question Why we still can not come out as homosexuals in the public? Several possible reasons were identified: due to public stigma, expected professional difficulties, because of the economic dependence and possible exclusion from the home. However, a minority opinion was presented that coming out in the media could contribute for improving of the personal situation. Coming out was a recurrent topic of the discussion. It was emphasized that coming out should happen first within the family, that coming out in the public is often conditioned by the family. Only few participants confirmed that they already expressed their sexual orientation within the family. Nevertheless, nearly all of them believe that their parents, and other members of the extended family, the most probably are aware about their sexual orientation. One of the reasons why they ignore this fact is the fear that they could become victims of the public denunciation and a topic of gossiping. Concerning the issue of discrimination, the most of the participants stated that they feel more discriminated by the public than by the law, more by the individuals then by the state factors. The fear from the police was reported mainly by the gays who are forced to share insecure meeting places with people involved with prostitution and other illegal activities. Much of the discussion was focused on the topic how to change the public opinion as a precondition for effective changes in the legal rules and their implementation. First education, then a new law, was the most endorsed answer. The need for sexual education in the schools was underscored where homosexuality would be treated not as a deviation, perversion, or disorder, not in the context of pedophilia, prostitution or HIV/AIDS protection) but as one of the three varieties of intimate relations with others (side by side with heterosexuality and bisexuality). All participants agreed that media should be used for changing the stereotypes, that a powerful and wide campaigning is necessary, the campaigning that will be supported by local celebrities. It was mentioned that the eminent gay and lesbian organizations are not active in Macedonia, and that their support will be needed in such campaigning. The idea for a public lecture on the topic of homosexuality was welcomed, but only if such a lecture will be included as a part of a conference or a seminar dealing with related issues. The most sensitive topics were the need for social acceptance and the fear of social exclusion. The idea of the affirmative action law was not accepted because it could provoke a further ghettoization. The laws, in general, were considered as the highest degree of
32

implementation of their rights and that was the reason why the legal issues of homosexual marriage, adoption, social rights etc. were treated rather as a topics for the future than as goals that could be accomplished in the present. The attitudes of the group towards the social marginalizing of the homosexual community and the public ignoring of the needs of homosexuals were expressed by the following sentences: We should not wait for someone to make something for us, The world will not know about our problems if we did not disclose them, The main problem is our incapacity to organize ourselves etc. The efforts for establishing GLBT NGO were carefully thought about and various possible activities were suggested: a gay parade (or a love parade), a gay march to Vodno mountain, a poster campaign, establishing a gay syndicate (the future for the homosexuals in Macedonia), creating a new ways for communication and new open spaces for socialization, creating a new web-page as a support of IRC-gay-Internet channel etc.

Report on the heterosexual focus groups In order to pre-examine the attitudes towards homosexuality among different age and gender groups in the Republic of Macedonia, two meetings were held with two groups of 12 participants (24 in total). The participants were selected according to several criteria: Age diversity (20 over 60) Gender diversity Coming from different regions Belonging to heterosexual orientation. The discussion was developed around the following topics: What is homosexuality? How and when have you found out about the homosexuality for the first time? (1) What is the attitude towards the homosexuals and how are they treated within the society? (2) What do the heterosexuals think about the homosexuals? (3) Should the homosexuals have the right to marriage and adoption of children? (4) Should the homosexuals declare and show their sexual orientation in public? (5) What should be done concerning the rights of the homosexuals? Who should do that? (6) Is the AIDS disease of the homosexuals? (7) Should the sexual education be introduced in the education system, encompassing as well the homosexuality? (8) Is the homosexuality discussed in the media? Should it be discussed? How should it be discussed? (10) Does the homosexuality influence the development of the character of the person? Is it a basis for certain deviations in the personality? (11) Are there professions that are convenient for the homosexuals and those that are not? (12) Should the homosexuals serve in the army? The general impression of both meetings is that talking about homosexuality is provocative, interesting, actual and important. The feedback from the participants was that
33

there should be more opportunities like this to talk about topics that are taboo, and are usually avoided in the everyday communication and in the media. The people fell the need to discuss about such issues, which are related to their lives and to the lives of their close and significant persons. The discussion was provocative for most of the participants who took active role in it, regardless the age and gender. There were various opinions, often opposed to each other. It couldnt be identified apparent distinction in the attitudes among the participants of different ages, except for the impression that the males about 20 years old expressed more intensive resistance towards accepting the homosexuality as ones free choice that doesnt threaten the others. Here are some of the opinions and attitudes drawn from the discussions with the both groups, related to the previous described topics. (1) Most often, homosexuality is associated with the males. As reasons for the homosexual orientation are seen the genetic factors, the trauma in childhood or the curiosity. (2) The participants, who believe that the homosexuals are discriminated minority in the society, think that they have the right to choose their own sexual orientation. But, there was an immediate reaction of the others for restraining the freedom of choice until they harm the others. They think that the homosexuals are not accepted by the society, and they see the solution in the legal regulations first, and than in the changing of the attitudes of the people as well as changing the threatening behavior of the homosexuals towards the others. (3) Some of the participants were not sure if the homosexuality should exist at all. However, almost all of them agree that it is important not to express rejection towards the homosexuals. There was an idea that if the people are not let to be what they are, to choose their own sexual orientation, than the possibilities for deviations are more likely to happen. Therefore, we will protect ourselves if we let and support people to freely choose what they want. All consider that the homophobia exists in large degree in our society, due to the education in the family and in the schools. (4) Most of the participants think that the adoption of children by homosexuals in our society is science fiction because they are not even accepted as equal members of the society. Most of them are against that idea, arising the following questions: what about the rights of the child to choose to belong to family that is so different from the most of the other families? How will develop the child who lives with 2 homosexuals? Will he/she become a homosexual, too? Some suggested that there should be done researches on the development of the child personality living with 2 parents from the same sex. There were questions about the legal treatment of the homosexual couple living together for 1 year and more. What rights and obligations they have? Are they treated the same as a heterosexual couple? (5) Some consider that the homosexuals should publicly declare, but others think that the sexual orientation is an intimate issue. Most of them, the declaration in public associate with the consequences, for the homosexuals, that might occur concerning their job position and becoming jobless, as well as the social pressure and exclusion. The main concern about the showing in public (the homosexual contact) is that it could be a model (not desirable) for the young people. About the possibility to enlarge the number of homosexuals if it is publicly accepted, mainly the opinion is that it will happen, but only because then would appear the
34

real number and the latent homosexuals would be able to declare openly. The other idea is that nobody will become a homosexual only because of the fashion trend. (6) Different attitudes appeared concerning the question of what and who should do about the rights of the homosexuals. One position is that their rights are not endangered and there is no need for forming associations for their protection or promotion. Some think that only the homosexuals should organize themselves in order to protect their rights. There was third opinion - the homosexuals are minority and therefore the help of the majority is essential. But, there was a warning that a catastrophe could happen if a gay parade is organized now in Macedonia, because there is a lack of information. There is a need for education and information first, and then action. (7) It is not accepted that the AIDS is an exclusive disease of the homosexuals because of number of reasons (heterosexuals are also promiscuous; there are other groups under risk; the safe sex is important). (8) All agree that it is necessary to introduce the sexual education in the schools in which the sexual orientation would be presented as a personal choice. The most important aspect of the sexual education should be the education for safe sex. The other aims should be breaking the taboo topics and inclusion of the homosexuals in the society. (9) It is very important to transmit the information through the media in order to accept the homosexuality as a normal way of life. But all agree that, at present, the media is only strengthening the negative stereotypes about the homosexuals. (10) General opinion is that the homosexuality is not a basis for deviations in the personality. (11) More participants consider that the creative professions (arts, fashion, styling) are more convenient and more accepted for the homosexuals. The educators in kindergarten shouldnt be homosexuals. But others think that they could be if they do not abuse the children. (12) There is no reason for the homosexuals to be released from serving in the army.

35

Annex IV Questionnaire

Project: BORDERS OF FREEDOM OF CHOICE: HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

QUESTIONNAIRE

This research is conducted by the Center for Human Rights and Conflict Resolution and the Helsinki Committee for Human rights in the Republic of Macedonia in cooperation with the Center for Civil and Human Rights This research is financially supported by the Swedish Helsinki Committee and the Open Society Foundation in the Republic of Macedonia.

October 2002

36

For purposes of the research the term homosexual is used to cover people of gay and lesbian sexual orientation I. Data about the surveyed person 61. Age 1. 18-25 years 2. 26-37 years 3. 38-50 years 4. over 50 years 62. Education 1. without primary education 2. primary education 3. secondary education 4. higher education 63 Gender male female

64 Ethnic group a. Macedonian b. Albanian c. Turkish d. Roma e. Serbian f. Vlachs g. Bosniaks h. other ______________________

II Positions and views Please mark you position according to the following table 1. I completely agree 2. I agree 3. I am not certain 4. I disagree 5. I completely disagree

1 1. Homosexuals should not publicly show they orientation 2. Homosexuality is an illness or psychological disturbance

37

3. Homosexuality can be cured 4. Homosexuals are imposing

5. Homosexuals can be immediately recognized 6. Sex and sexual orientations should not be discussed 7. Each person should freely choose his/her sexual orientation

8. Homosexuals should not work in education and with children 9. In Macedonia there are less homosexuals than in other countries 10. Homosexuals should move and meet in determined placed 11. Some ethnic groups are more prone to homosexuality 12. Homosexuality should be punished by law 13. Homosexuality is something immoral 14. Homosexuals should not practice medicine 15. Homosexuals should have the right to establish permanent relationships or enter into marriage 16. Homosexuals should establish an association for the protection of their rights 17. I feel uncomfortable in the presence of homosexuals 18. I consider homosexuality to be something normal 19. If I learn that a fiend is a homosexual I will immediately interrupt the friendship 20. I think one could not trust a homosexual 21. When I see a homosexual I think what a pity 22. Sexual education should be introduced in schools 23. Homosexuals are discriminated in Macedonia 24. Homosexuals are a threat to the moral and family values 25. There should be TV, radio program or articles on the issue of homosexuality

26. Have you ever met a homosexual? a) Yes b) No c) I do not know 27. Would you accept homosexuals as friends? a) Yes
38

b) No c) I do not know 28. Do you know places where homosexuals meet? a) Yes b) No c) I do not know 29. Would you work with a homosexual coworker? a) Yes b) No c) I do not know 30. Would you accept a family member-homosexual? a) Yes b) No c) I do not know 31. Have you ever discussed homosexuality with your parents? a) Yes b) No c) I do not know 32. Have you ever discussed homosexuality with your friends and colleagues? a) Yes b) No c) I do not know 33. Would you accept and support homosexuality of your child? a) Yes b) No c) I do not know 34. Have you ever been interested in a TV, radio program or an article on the issue of homosexuality? a) Yes b) No c) I do not know 35. Do you consider that public personalities should freely declare themselves as homosexuals? a) Yes b) No c) I do not know

39