7 ms·

X.Org's XDC2020 May Abandon Poland Conference to Find More Welcoming Location

k2k9k10 7y ago
I find it funny considering the fact that Gdańsk is on of the most pro-lgbt(and anti current-gov)cities in Poland (yes,I'm polish)
norswap 7y ago
I'd understand avoiding a city that has these policies, but avoiding the whole country because of bigoted decisions in other municipalities strikes me as strange thinking. It's not like every Polish person is in support. If you live in Poland and some municipalities (not even yours) passes discriminating rules, what can you do? Move? Are we suddenly implicitly supporting every dumb shit done by people that are in some way or other similar to us? It's absurd.
- marcinzm 7y ago
  You can vote for national politicians who make laws to make such municipal decisions illegal. Welcome to democratic society.
- rsynnott 7y ago
  They’re supported by the national ruling party. As a gay person I wouldn’t currently be particularly enthusiastic about going to Poland. I’ve also heard of gay married couples from EU countries (ie having an effective automatic right of admission) having trouble at airport border control.
  - llukas 7y ago
    There is no border control within Schengen zone.
    - djsumdog 7y ago
      They said airport, so they probably flew in from outside the Schengen zone (US, UK, Asia, etc.)
      - klez 7y ago
        > from EU countries Not really.
        seba_dos1 7y ago
        There are EU countries that are not in Schengen (although the most notable one is about to leave).
        klez 7y ago
        TIL four EU countries (plus three micro-states, but they have open borders) are outside the Schengen area. So I stand corrected. But I see that they are all expected to enter the agreement. Does anyone know how long this will take? Romania and Bulgaria have been members for close to 13 years. What's taking so long?
        rsynnott 7y ago
        Ireland and the UK have indefinite opt outs. Historically the common travel area with the UK made it impractical for Ireland to join unless the UK did too. It’s plausible that Ireland will join in the future, depending on what happens with Northern Ireland post Brexit.
    - Polyisoprene 7y ago
      Sure there is. They have checked my id on about half of the arrivals the last years.
      - tialaramex 7y ago
        Participating countries are allowed to check your identity documents at a Schengen border in order to confirm that you are entitled to cross it without any other steps. They're even allowed to record that you crossed, using the ID to track who you were (and Poland does), though they aren't allowed to record that on a passport or similar travel document. Having confirmed you're an EU citizen who isn't subject to an arrest warrant you're entitled to cross the border and there are no other checks permitted. They aren't entitled to ask you to explain where you're going or why or anything like that. There's a similar internal border not far from me at the local airport. There's a painted line and it has a nice sign which explains that they don't actually have any officials present at the border, but if you don't have documentation allowing you to cross or if you've arrived with products that are prohibited you can phone them, they'll send somebody over in a few hours to interrogate and if necessary arrest you. There's a phone provided, it looks pretty dusty. I guess it's possible that people decide not to call?
  - belorn 7y ago
    XDC2017 was located in the US which has an infamous situation in regard it its airport border control, with people being denied entry or detailed without explanations. I also know people who in 2017 (and still are) refusing to travel to the US because of those issues. With the demands for unlocking encrypted computers, password to social media accounts, secret black lists, and profiling, there is a lot of to be worried about. Maybe they should just do as fosdem and always have it in Belgium.
- 0xcde4c3db 7y ago
  I've only skimmed a few articles about the issue, but it seems like this isn't just a matter of a handful of municipalities acting independently, but rather those declarations are tied into a broader push by the national ruling party to make LGBT people its political bogeyman du jour. Politicians have made a bunch of statements to the effect that LGBT is a foreign ideology that seeks to sexualize children and represents a threat to Polish identity.
  - jacekm 7y ago
    Polish person here. Yes, the ruling party caters to ultra-catholic, right-winged people. While there are many people in Poland who don't understand LGBT and are therefore scared of it, they are a minority. We have a trans woman in parliament and a gay guy running for presidency. It's not that bad really. Moreover, Gdańsk, where the conference was supposed to take place is actually one of the most tolerant and liberal cities in Poland with very open-minded people. It would be a shame to punish them for actions of the government and municipalities that are literally on the other side of the country.
    - ginko 7y ago
      It also seems exactly like what these ultra-conservatives would want: Keep LGBT people outside of Poland.
    - djsumdog 7y ago
      Thanks for that insight. It seems sad to be fearful of an entire country because of a few municipalities; especially when you say there are minorities represented in government. All over Europe, there are a lot of people who have varying opinions about immigration, refugees, LGBT-rights, Brexit, climate change and other controversial subjects. Rejecting an entire nation as a conference location because some percentage of the population has gotten some press for their controversial opinion seems very reactionary.
    - youdontknowtho 7y ago
      Right, but the loss of revenue from conference attendees is something that can be used as leverage against the politicians. The same thing was done in the US to push back on anti-lgbt laws. It has had some successes. It's not perfect but it has its purposes.
- _red 7y ago
  This is why many of us were concerned about the whole effort of every project to try to be more woke than the next through increasing CoC signaling. Purity spirals are the inevitable outcome.
peterkelly 7y ago
If you avoid any country that has bad laws/policies, you're going to be left with a pretty short list.
- marcinzm 7y ago
  So? Seems to me that encouraging people to visit and spend money in countries that have done the right thing isn't a bad policy.
  - jacekm 7y ago
    True, but can you name a country that has all their policies right?
    - mcraiha 7y ago
      Netherlands, Iceland, Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Norway.
      - 9c8675a8 7y ago
        Norway is horrid and corrupt. They where one of the biggest bombers of Libya; in my opinion the country is even downright evil. Their child "protetion" services are currently getting smashed in EU court for breaching basic human rights. I was born there; I don't support "my" country at all. edit: Oh, and the salmon produced in Norway is poison -- and the government is trying to hide it. The government workers (many from the same family) own huge amounts of stock in these companies. There is an endless list of corrupt, evil madness going on in Norway. I've left the country for good and moved to a low tax country as I want no part in supporting or funding (the taxation and fee levels are also evil) such a place and such people. Here's what Norway and similar countries will do tho: they will force Norwegians to pay a shit ton of taxes then give the money away to rich corps who hire people for pennies in Poland etc.. Pretty funny, huh?
      - pfortuny 7y ago
        Well, assuming you support euthanasia (NL), or like visiting a country which let the Wermacht pass through it into Russia (SW) and speaks about its “200 years of peace”, one that makes simple possession of drugs illegal (DEN), one in which surprisingly there is 0% incidence of Down’s syndrome (ICE), and too tired to look for something in FIN.
rossdavidh 7y ago
So, as I understand it, the objectionable policies: 1) are not enforced, or enforeable 2) are not at the national level 3) are not in Gdansk, the proposed location Uh, huh? That seems like an oddly bigoted "all Polish are homophobes because those other Polish are homophobes" kind of response, to register disapproval of bigotry, if that's really the true story. Couldn't you use the same logic to say that it shouldn't be in Europe at all, because some European municipalities passed homophobic resolutions?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- ealexhudson 7y ago
  Given that the conference is in the future and they could well enact more of these zones, it feels perfectly reasonable to me that some organisers might feel that's not worth the risk.
  - abjKT26nO8 7y ago
    "I saw a black guy assault a man once. I better stay clear of black guys then. It's not worth the risk." Your reasoning isn't too different from the above. Gdańsk is a liberally-governed city.
    - youdontknowtho 7y ago
      That's not a reasonable response. Even if Gdansk is liberally run it sends a signal to legislators that policies effect revenue and gives them a reason to push back that avoids moral arguments. That being said, I think it cedes the moral argument to the opposition, but any fight like this has multiple fronts. The reasoning is very different from what you wrote. Surely, you see the difference.
    - tensor 7y ago
      There is a big difference between an individual doing something bad and a government (no matter the level) doing something bad.
Jerry2 7y ago
'Cancel Culture' strikes again.
DangerousPie 7y ago
Seems an odd choice to avoid a whole country just because some municipalities far away from the conference venue passed some bad laws. By the same reasoning you could also arguing for avoiding the whole of the EU since those municipalities are also in the EU.
- phoe-krk 7y ago
  > just because some municipalities far away from the conference venue passed some bad laws ...while being widely supported by the ruling party that follows the same world view, you forgot to add. It's not just "some municipalities"; it's the current political direction of Polish leaders and therefore Poland as a country.
mrweasel 7y ago
It would help to know what they’re looking for in terms of capacity and resources.
praptak 7y ago
The ruling party picked LGBT community as their campaign boogeyman and they won the election. The zones are just a side effect of that: https://www.politico.eu/article/lgbt-poland-politics-pis-ruling-party-wrong-fight/ https://www.politico.eu/article/lgbt-poland-politics-pis-rul...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
timwaagh 7y ago
If it had been Grozny you'd have a point. But as far as I know the safety of lbgtq people is not under threat in Poland, despite the issue being heavily politicised.
msk1 7y ago
I am Polish and it looks to me as this is decision is based on politics. No one is prosecuting gay people in Poland but indeed there are people/organizations who are against LGBT ideology (and I do believe that the same can be said about other Western countries). Polish fought for decades to have a right to express freely and openly their ideas and toughs and I hope that pressure from any organization will not change our attitude to freedom of speech and thought.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- rsynnott 7y ago
  Polish people have the right to be bigoted if they wish to. Whether they have the right to make bigoted legal ‘declarations’ is a matter for their own courts and the ECJ and ECHR. However, organisations absolutely have the right to take note of such laws and plan their conferences accordingly. As a terrifying gay, Poland wouldn’t be high on my list of places to visit right now, and I doubt I’m the only one.
pndy 7y ago
So what this conference supposed to be about? X.Org and related projects development or how sexual life and preferences is affecting it? Seems that people downvoting in reddit fashion are failing to see the absurdity of this decision which is clearly caused by mixing professional and private life by the interested party.
krychu 7y ago
From reading a bit more on the issue those zones are defined as free of LGBT _ideology_. Poles seem to make distinction between homosexuality and LGBT movement, which is valuable insight. But media portrays it as zones where homosexual people are not welcome. That’s not right. It’s concerning how much pressure there is to accept LGBT ideals.
- rsynnott 7y ago
  What is this sinister ideology you presume us scary gays to have, precisely? I mean, I would have thought “please don’t treat us as second class citizens” about sums it up.
  - thu2111 7y ago
    You're right that there is no such thing as "gay ideology". Unfortunately though, the discussion isn't about that but rather "LGBT ideology", which isn't really well defined but my guess is the Poles mean something like "minority-oriented identity politics", perhaps combined with "non-child producing relationships are great and to be celebrated rather than merely tolerated". Consider that LGBT contains trans-sexuality which isn't the same thing as homosexuality, but it all gets grouped together. As for being treated as second class citizens, well, it's worth studying why that happened to ensure there's no repeat of it. Historically speaking there's a correlation between homophobia and societies wealth, that is, wealthier societies have less of it and poorer societies have more of it. Or more accurately it's related to the size of the state. This is easy to understand in the context of how to support the elderly: in a poor country with a small state, the family unit is essential for social stability as people without children have no real way to support themselves in old age. Without any welfare state they become a burden on their neighbours. So the social pressure to have children in poorer countries with weak welfare systems is understandably very large. About 10% of men are homosexual so a completely free and open gay-tolerant culture effectively requires villages and towns to support 10% of a childless male population in old age or sickness, something that's completely impossible without a large, sophisticated and consensually-based welfare state. Which of course most parts of the world didn't have for a very long time and many places still don't have. Social pressure on gay men to find a wife and have children despite their orientation was thus the only tool available. Ex-Soviet states in particular are full of people who watched as a government that provided a lavish welfare state ended up collapsing completely, impoverishing millions. It's not a huge surprise that we see a lot of family-oriented conservatism there as a consequence. They have direct experience of the opposite approach failing them. This sort of analysis matters because it suggests there might be a problem in future if we don't find ways to make society much more wealthy, due to the financial viability problems facing many pension schemes, large government deficits in many countries etc. Are the current levels of welfare state spending viable? I think they certainly can be, as there are countries with strong safety nets and balanced budgets. But in many western countries they're currently on borrowed time. At the moment politicians are trying to solve this via mass immigration to ensure the young population can still support the old, but that's increasingly facing pushback in Europe and America. If at some point the welfare state stops delivering on its promises and governments start slashing pension rights, as happened during the collapse of the USSR, then social pressure to have children will return and we might see anti-gay sentiment flare up again. I don't like where this analysis leads, but fortunately I don't see any fundamental barriers to increasing productivity by a large amount and thus balancing the welfare books. As long as the welfare state is strong, LGBT people will be able to live in peace.

I find it funny considering the fact that Gdańsk is on of the most pro-lgbt(and anti current-gov)cities in Poland (yes,I'm polish)

norswap 7y ago

I'd understand avoiding a city that has these policies, but avoiding the whole country because of bigoted decisions in other municipalities strikes me as strange thinking. It's not like every Polish person is in support. If you live in Poland and some municipalities (not even yours) passes discriminating rules, what can you do? Move? Are we suddenly implicitly supporting every dumb shit done by people that are in some way or other similar to us? It's absurd.

marcinzm 7y ago
You can vote for national politicians who make laws to make such municipal decisions illegal. Welcome to democratic society.
rsynnott 7y ago
They’re supported by the national ruling party. As a gay person I wouldn’t currently be particularly enthusiastic about going to Poland. I’ve also heard of gay married couples from EU countries (ie having an effective automatic right of admission) having trouble at airport border control.
- llukas 7y ago
  There is no border control within Schengen zone.
  - djsumdog 7y ago
    They said airport, so they probably flew in from outside the Schengen zone (US, UK, Asia, etc.)
    - klez 7y ago
      > from EU countries Not really.
      - seba_dos1 7y ago
        There are EU countries that are not in Schengen (although the most notable one is about to leave).
        klez 7y ago
        TIL four EU countries (plus three micro-states, but they have open borders) are outside the Schengen area. So I stand corrected. But I see that they are all expected to enter the agreement. Does anyone know how long this will take? Romania and Bulgaria have been members for close to 13 years. What's taking so long?
        rsynnott 7y ago
        Ireland and the UK have indefinite opt outs. Historically the common travel area with the UK made it impractical for Ireland to join unless the UK did too. It’s plausible that Ireland will join in the future, depending on what happens with Northern Ireland post Brexit.
  - Polyisoprene 7y ago
    Sure there is. They have checked my id on about half of the arrivals the last years.
    - tialaramex 7y ago
      Participating countries are allowed to check your identity documents at a Schengen border in order to confirm that you are entitled to cross it without any other steps. They're even allowed to record that you crossed, using the ID to track who you were (and Poland does), though they aren't allowed to record that on a passport or similar travel document. Having confirmed you're an EU citizen who isn't subject to an arrest warrant you're entitled to cross the border and there are no other checks permitted. They aren't entitled to ask you to explain where you're going or why or anything like that. There's a similar internal border not far from me at the local airport. There's a painted line and it has a nice sign which explains that they don't actually have any officials present at the border, but if you don't have documentation allowing you to cross or if you've arrived with products that are prohibited you can phone them, they'll send somebody over in a few hours to interrogate and if necessary arrest you. There's a phone provided, it looks pretty dusty. I guess it's possible that people decide not to call?
- belorn 7y ago
  XDC2017 was located in the US which has an infamous situation in regard it its airport border control, with people being denied entry or detailed without explanations. I also know people who in 2017 (and still are) refusing to travel to the US because of those issues. With the demands for unlocking encrypted computers, password to social media accounts, secret black lists, and profiling, there is a lot of to be worried about. Maybe they should just do as fosdem and always have it in Belgium.
0xcde4c3db 7y ago
I've only skimmed a few articles about the issue, but it seems like this isn't just a matter of a handful of municipalities acting independently, but rather those declarations are tied into a broader push by the national ruling party to make LGBT people its political bogeyman du jour. Politicians have made a bunch of statements to the effect that LGBT is a foreign ideology that seeks to sexualize children and represents a threat to Polish identity.
- jacekm 7y ago
  Polish person here. Yes, the ruling party caters to ultra-catholic, right-winged people. While there are many people in Poland who don't understand LGBT and are therefore scared of it, they are a minority. We have a trans woman in parliament and a gay guy running for presidency. It's not that bad really. Moreover, Gdańsk, where the conference was supposed to take place is actually one of the most tolerant and liberal cities in Poland with very open-minded people. It would be a shame to punish them for actions of the government and municipalities that are literally on the other side of the country.
  - ginko 7y ago
    It also seems exactly like what these ultra-conservatives would want: Keep LGBT people outside of Poland.
  - djsumdog 7y ago
    Thanks for that insight. It seems sad to be fearful of an entire country because of a few municipalities; especially when you say there are minorities represented in government. All over Europe, there are a lot of people who have varying opinions about immigration, refugees, LGBT-rights, Brexit, climate change and other controversial subjects. Rejecting an entire nation as a conference location because some percentage of the population has gotten some press for their controversial opinion seems very reactionary.
  - youdontknowtho 7y ago
    Right, but the loss of revenue from conference attendees is something that can be used as leverage against the politicians. The same thing was done in the US to push back on anti-lgbt laws. It has had some successes. It's not perfect but it has its purposes.
_red 7y ago
This is why many of us were concerned about the whole effort of every project to try to be more woke than the next through increasing CoC signaling. Purity spirals are the inevitable outcome.

peterkelly 7y ago

If you avoid any country that has bad laws/policies, you're going to be left with a pretty short list.

marcinzm 7y ago
So? Seems to me that encouraging people to visit and spend money in countries that have done the right thing isn't a bad policy.
- jacekm 7y ago
  True, but can you name a country that has all their policies right?
  - mcraiha 7y ago
    Netherlands, Iceland, Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Norway.
    - 9c8675a8 7y ago
      Norway is horrid and corrupt. They where one of the biggest bombers of Libya; in my opinion the country is even downright evil. Their child "protetion" services are currently getting smashed in EU court for breaching basic human rights. I was born there; I don't support "my" country at all. edit: Oh, and the salmon produced in Norway is poison -- and the government is trying to hide it. The government workers (many from the same family) own huge amounts of stock in these companies. There is an endless list of corrupt, evil madness going on in Norway. I've left the country for good and moved to a low tax country as I want no part in supporting or funding (the taxation and fee levels are also evil) such a place and such people. Here's what Norway and similar countries will do tho: they will force Norwegians to pay a shit ton of taxes then give the money away to rich corps who hire people for pennies in Poland etc.. Pretty funny, huh?
    - pfortuny 7y ago
      Well, assuming you support euthanasia (NL), or like visiting a country which let the Wermacht pass through it into Russia (SW) and speaks about its “200 years of peace”, one that makes simple possession of drugs illegal (DEN), one in which surprisingly there is 0% incidence of Down’s syndrome (ICE), and too tired to look for something in FIN.

rossdavidh 7y ago

So, as I understand it, the objectionable policies: 1) are not enforced, or enforeable 2) are not at the national level 3) are not in Gdansk, the proposed location Uh, huh? That seems like an oddly bigoted "all Polish are homophobes because those other Polish are homophobes" kind of response, to register disapproval of bigotry, if that's really the true story. Couldn't you use the same logic to say that it shouldn't be in Europe at all, because some European municipalities passed homophobic resolutions?

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ealexhudson 7y ago
Given that the conference is in the future and they could well enact more of these zones, it feels perfectly reasonable to me that some organisers might feel that's not worth the risk.
- abjKT26nO8 7y ago
  "I saw a black guy assault a man once. I better stay clear of black guys then. It's not worth the risk." Your reasoning isn't too different from the above. Gdańsk is a liberally-governed city.
  - youdontknowtho 7y ago
    That's not a reasonable response. Even if Gdansk is liberally run it sends a signal to legislators that policies effect revenue and gives them a reason to push back that avoids moral arguments. That being said, I think it cedes the moral argument to the opposition, but any fight like this has multiple fronts. The reasoning is very different from what you wrote. Surely, you see the difference.
  - tensor 7y ago
    There is a big difference between an individual doing something bad and a government (no matter the level) doing something bad.

Jerry2 7y ago

'Cancel Culture' strikes again.

DangerousPie 7y ago

Seems an odd choice to avoid a whole country just because some municipalities far away from the conference venue passed some bad laws. By the same reasoning you could also arguing for avoiding the whole of the EU since those municipalities are also in the EU.

phoe-krk 7y ago
> just because some municipalities far away from the conference venue passed some bad laws ...while being widely supported by the ruling party that follows the same world view, you forgot to add. It's not just "some municipalities"; it's the current political direction of Polish leaders and therefore Poland as a country.

mrweasel 7y ago

It would help to know what they’re looking for in terms of capacity and resources.

praptak 7y ago

The ruling party picked LGBT community as their campaign boogeyman and they won the election. The zones are just a side effect of that: https://www.politico.eu/article/lgbt-poland-politics-pis-ruling-party-wrong-fight/ https://www.politico.eu/article/lgbt-poland-politics-pis-rul...

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

timwaagh 7y ago

If it had been Grozny you'd have a point. But as far as I know the safety of lbgtq people is not under threat in Poland, despite the issue being heavily politicised.

msk1 7y ago

I am Polish and it looks to me as this is decision is based on politics. No one is prosecuting gay people in Poland but indeed there are people/organizations who are against LGBT ideology (and I do believe that the same can be said about other Western countries). Polish fought for decades to have a right to express freely and openly their ideas and toughs and I hope that pressure from any organization will not change our attitude to freedom of speech and thought.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
rsynnott 7y ago
Polish people have the right to be bigoted if they wish to. Whether they have the right to make bigoted legal ‘declarations’ is a matter for their own courts and the ECJ and ECHR. However, organisations absolutely have the right to take note of such laws and plan their conferences accordingly. As a terrifying gay, Poland wouldn’t be high on my list of places to visit right now, and I doubt I’m the only one.

pndy 7y ago

So what this conference supposed to be about? X.Org and related projects development or how sexual life and preferences is affecting it? Seems that people downvoting in reddit fashion are failing to see the absurdity of this decision which is clearly caused by mixing professional and private life by the interested party.

krychu 7y ago

From reading a bit more on the issue those zones are defined as free of LGBT _ideology_. Poles seem to make distinction between homosexuality and LGBT movement, which is valuable insight. But media portrays it as zones where homosexual people are not welcome. That’s not right. It’s concerning how much pressure there is to accept LGBT ideals.

rsynnott 7y ago
What is this sinister ideology you presume us scary gays to have, precisely? I mean, I would have thought “please don’t treat us as second class citizens” about sums it up.
- thu2111 7y ago
  You're right that there is no such thing as "gay ideology". Unfortunately though, the discussion isn't about that but rather "LGBT ideology", which isn't really well defined but my guess is the Poles mean something like "minority-oriented identity politics", perhaps combined with "non-child producing relationships are great and to be celebrated rather than merely tolerated". Consider that LGBT contains trans-sexuality which isn't the same thing as homosexuality, but it all gets grouped together. As for being treated as second class citizens, well, it's worth studying why that happened to ensure there's no repeat of it. Historically speaking there's a correlation between homophobia and societies wealth, that is, wealthier societies have less of it and poorer societies have more of it. Or more accurately it's related to the size of the state. This is easy to understand in the context of how to support the elderly: in a poor country with a small state, the family unit is essential for social stability as people without children have no real way to support themselves in old age. Without any welfare state they become a burden on their neighbours. So the social pressure to have children in poorer countries with weak welfare systems is understandably very large. About 10% of men are homosexual so a completely free and open gay-tolerant culture effectively requires villages and towns to support 10% of a childless male population in old age or sickness, something that's completely impossible without a large, sophisticated and consensually-based welfare state. Which of course most parts of the world didn't have for a very long time and many places still don't have. Social pressure on gay men to find a wife and have children despite their orientation was thus the only tool available. Ex-Soviet states in particular are full of people who watched as a government that provided a lavish welfare state ended up collapsing completely, impoverishing millions. It's not a huge surprise that we see a lot of family-oriented conservatism there as a consequence. They have direct experience of the opposite approach failing them. This sort of analysis matters because it suggests there might be a problem in future if we don't find ways to make society much more wealthy, due to the financial viability problems facing many pension schemes, large government deficits in many countries etc. Are the current levels of welfare state spending viable? I think they certainly can be, as there are countries with strong safety nets and balanced budgets. But in many western countries they're currently on borrowed time. At the moment politicians are trying to solve this via mass immigration to ensure the young population can still support the old, but that's increasingly facing pushback in Europe and America. If at some point the welfare state stops delivering on its promises and governments start slashing pension rights, as happened during the collapse of the USSR, then social pressure to have children will return and we might see anti-gay sentiment flare up again. I don't like where this analysis leads, but fortunately I don't see any fundamental barriers to increasing productivity by a large amount and thus balancing the welfare books. As long as the welfare state is strong, LGBT people will be able to live in peace.