Frigide Barjot: the strange figurehead of White Catholic Homophobic France

Have a nice trip Frigide? (screen shot)

She has been variously described as being a fun person, a freak, refreshingly honest, mentally unstable, inspirational, a MILF, a talented debater, dangerous, and she has a penchant for the sort of mini-skirt-fishnet-stockings-and-high-heels outfits that would not look out of place on one of those ladies of the night one sees in the dingy side streets near railway stations.

But call her what you will, Frigide Barjot - 'barjot' is French for 'crazy', or 'a nutcase' - certainly knows how to manipulate the media. That's normal however when you look at her Curriculum Vitae. Born as Virginie Merle, her mother was a music professor at the Conservatoire here in Lyon, her father was a senior administrator in a clinic, she studied law in a prestigious university, and she began her professional life in the communications section of the right-of-centre RPR party (now dissolved).

Her real vocation in life however was not to communicate the words and actions of others. She wanted to hit the headlines in her own right. And so it was that she became a journalist in mondain and socialite affairs, a humorist, a pop singer, a bit-part actress and a TV personality. It was in this context that she was famously filmed in 2008 tripping over something and falling down whilst on her way to a sumptuous dinner at the Paris Opera.

Then she discovered god and the Catholic church, and everything changed. Barjot was transformed from the bubbly life-and-soul-of-the-party airhead she was known as into a vociferous defender of the Pope's backward views on contraception, AIDS, homosexuality, gay marriage, and she signed a petition which aimed to combat the assimilation of priests with pedophilia during the pedophile priests scandal which rocked (and is still rocking) the Catholic church.

Next came an autobiography - 'Confessions of a Hip and Trendy Catholic' - in which she related her conversion to Catholicism and its values, but her real moment of glory had to wait until mid-2012, when President Hollande and his government announced their intention to legalise gay marriage.

She hasn't been out of the headlines since.

She has been present at almost all the large demonstrations against gay marriage that have taken place since, culminating in yesterday's demo in Paris which was attended by 350,000 or 800,000 people, depending on whether you believe the police figures or those of the organisers.

Camera-hungry and ever-willing to speak to journalists, she has embraced the diatribe of the more extremist end of the anti-gay spectrum and has a knack for providing juicy sound-bites which the press and TV have been lapping up greedily.

Barjot believes that gay marriage is a threat to humanity and her pernicious scare-mongering tactics include outright lying. She has falsely claimed that the government intends to replace the words 'mother' and 'father' with 'parent 1' and parent 2', she falsely claims that the interest of children is a legal argument against gay marriage (it isn't, because if it were, we'd be using the principles of Eugenics to legally prevent adults with criminal records, communists and extreme right-wingers, drinkers, and a host of others, from having children), and she denied recently, despite filmed evidence to the contrary, that she liaises with extremist and reactionary Catholic organisations.

The most disturbing aspect of her activities however is her fundamental role in the anti-gay movement, and evidence is emerging that she has reached an agreement with the Catholic church whereby she has been confided the status of unofficially declared spokeswoman for the church's views.

This arrangement suits both the church and Barjot seeing as the church can continue to claim that it is not behind or directly involved in the anti-gay movement's actions, thereby avoiding accusations of interfering in the state's affairs, and Barjot gets the publicity she craves. It's a very convenient deal.

Frigide Barjot has become a willing puppet in the hands of the Catholic church, a front for its obscurantist, medieval attitudes and a warrior in the fight against social progress and the democratic wishes of the French people, who voted Hollande into power knowing that he would legalise gay marriage. Moreover polls show that a large majority of people still support this legislation.

But does her mediagenic presence represent a real and long term threat to the gay marriage project? This question is being asked right now by many commentators but I do not believe that her star shall remain in the media firmament for long.

The first reason for this is that Hollande and his government have made firm statements since yesterday which make it clear that the government will not be swayed from implementing this democratically-founded measure by pressure from the street.

And the second is that, by its shameful behaviour, the Catholic church has driven yet another nail into the coffin of its power over French affairs. Congregations have fallen disastrously, half of those Catholics interviewed in polls do not approve of their church's stance, and the public is waking up to the danger represented by its fundamentalist views.

Just as Frigide Barjot's days in the limelight shall soon end, so shall those of the Catholic church, and so much the better.

Hollande invents the law of the land which you only obey if you feel like it

A recent photo of French president François Hollande

A stupefied France is today debating what will surely go down as one of the most bizarre and baffling presidential U-turns in this country's history.

François Hollande's election campaign included the promise, supported by a large majority of French citizens, that he would legalise same-sex marriage, and indeed he kept his word. Or at least he seemed to have done so until yesterday. The law had been drafted and was waiting for what would have been a formality of an approval vote.

However, last weekend witnessed large demonstrations in many French cities and towns (see this photoblog) by anti-gay marriage associations, one of which turned violent, and many people were surprised by the high turnout. So, it would seem, was Hollande, and he finally emerged from his silence on the issue yesterday evening during a speech at a meeting of French mayors in Paris to make this confusing and astonishing, statement, which was clearly designed to appease the many mayors around the country who have said that they would not apply a gay-marriage law;

"(If the law is voted) I recognise the freedom of conscience of mayors who would refuse to celebrate marriages between people of the same sex.... The possibility of delegations (i.e; of mayoral delegation of powers and duties) exists, and they can be enlarged.... There are moments in the life of a nation, and it is the role of the president, where we have to make choices and reflect the evolutions in society. It appears problematic and then the time comes that (the choices) are accepted by all, even those who are against a law proposal. The law of the land applies to all but it mast also respect freedom of conscience"

In other words, he quite simply offered mayors the possibility of refusing to marry homosexual couples if they felt like it, despite the fact that the law would guarantee that homosexuals would have the right to marry. Or in even simpler terms than that, he is buying mayors off by allowing them to break his own law, thus going back on his earlier declarations which insisted that no mayor would be allowed to refuse to marry gay couples.

Dumbfounded pro-gay marriage associations and politicians all over the country could hardly believe their ears. An Inter-LGBT spokesman said that he "couldn't undestand how anyone can justify a law which is not applied in the same way all over French territory." "We are stupefied", commented Elisabeth Ronzier from SOS Homophobie, adding that the president had "backed down."

Vincent Fleury, a regional leader for centrist party the Modem declared that freedom of conscience for mayors means that they may resign if they do not wish to apply the laws of the Republic, but that they may not remain in office and exempt themselves from them. Another centrist, Chantal Jouanno, reminded the president that he had opened up "an extremely dangerous breach" in the rule of law and "that freedom of conscience exists for voting in parliament is only right but it cannot be used to refuse to obey the law."

A baffled Noël Mamère of the EELV party denounced "a retreat, a submission and fudging.... By giving in to the most ultra (i.e. right-wing) mayors he has shown an inexplicable weakness." Mamère is also a mayor and he explained that Hollande's speech means that mayors would be able to delegate their duty whilst simultaneously imposing strict limits on what the person who is mandated to apply the law may do. He said that it would now be possible to refuse to delegate and even to delegate that only traditional marriages could be celebrated on their territory.

Others emphasised the danger that mayors would be able to extend the freedom of conscience clause to refuse to marry blacks, Arabs or anyone else they didn't like and, by extension, even refuse other rights.

In a more light-hearted vein, France's Twitterati is busy posting irreverent tweets asking if it's now okay to rob a bank or kill their noisy neighbour as long as they use freedom of conscience as a defence.

Meanwhile, anti-gay marriage supporters are celebrating what they clearly see as a major victory over the government saying that their pressure was beginning to pay off and that it is now time for Hollande to abandon the idea of legalising homosexual marriage.

With this astounding announcement François Hollande and his government have made it obvious to all - as if it were not already obvious - that they are there to be U-turned by anone who wishes to make them do so.

Hollande has now watered down, U-turned on or put off almost every major election promise he made, including on issues such as Europe, the right of foreign nationals to vote, the 'cumul des mandats' which permits multi-office holding by politicians, the national debt, legalised euthanasia, tax breaks for the rich and many more.

But his decision on freedom of conscience is the most cowardly retreat of all.

Faced with a weekend of demonstrations by a motley and ugly band of fascists, racists, church organisations (this is supposed to be France, a secular country) and Catholic integrists, François Hollande has proved to be a weak-willed and spineless president whose term in office so far has almost entirely consisted of appeasing his opponents.

As things stand Hollande is France's modern-day peactime equivalent of Neville Chamberlain, and if he doesn't soon find the guts to govern the country correctly that epithet shall surely prove to be his political epitaph..

Charlie Hebdo cartoon enrages French Catholics and so much the better

Happy Family snapshot

Oh dear, the Catholic Church and its followers are NOT happy bunnies today, and it's all the fault of that nasty horrid little Charlie Hebdo who has been picking on them again.

The impudent French satirical mag has been a bad boy yet again by placing a truculent cartoon on the front page of its latest issue. It depicts 'The Father' with 'The Son' euhhh, 'behind' it, and "The Holy Ghost" sticking out of bringing up the rear. The caption reads "Cardinal Vingt-Trois has Three Fathers." It has been condemned by church leaders and followers alike and France's Catholic Twitterati has been working overtime with anger.

But why has Charlie Hebdo published the cartoon? Because leading French Catholics such as bishops and cardinals have been waging a viciously homophobic campaign against the government's plans to legalise same-sex marriage, that's why.

Cardinal Vingt-Trois ('vingt-trois means 23 in English) has been at the helm of the campaign, which has seen various church leaders assimilate homosexuality and same-sex marriage to incest, pedophilia, polygamy and other crimes. Not only are they infamous and deliberately inflammatory comparisons to make, they are dangerously wrong.

Cardinal 23 has said that same-sex marriage would represent "the marriage of a few imposed upon all." He is wrong. Nobody is imposing anything on anyone, the idea is to give people the freedom to live how they wish.

Cardinal 23 says that the church respects "the sexual reality of human existence." He, and the church, are wrong. The reality of human sexuality is that homosexuality has always existed and is thus a part of human reality.

Cardinal 23 says that "to impose within marriage and the family a vision of man without recognising sexual difference would be a deceptive sham which would shake the foundations of our society and impose discrimination between children." He is wrong. Again, society does recognise the existence of sexual difference and that's precisely why same-sex marriage is being envisaged. But - and ironically - he is right about children because given his views he evidently has no difficulty in discriminating between children and adults who are not what he thinks they should be. For him and others of his ilk some are good/saved and others are bad/lost.

Cardinal 23 bemoans the absence of a national debate on the matter. Wrong again. This issue has been debated by governments, the press and the people for at least 40 years and the result is that the majority of French citizens now support same-sex marriage, which has been a long-standing demand articulated by large sections of the public.

Cardinal 23 is not only anti-homosexual and same-sex marriage, he is anti-abortion, artificial insemination, stem cell research and more and calls them pagan, sectarian and atheist practices.

His list of accusations and condemnation is long and many other church leaders support him.

There is nothing wrong with the Cardinal expressing his point of view of course, that's his right. On the other hand he and his henchmen have sparked off an ugly public debate and the Catholic Church is de facto trying to influence a secular government. There's nothing wrong with that either. After all, all is fair in love and war.

What is wrong however is to expect the rest of society to refrain from riposting. The church has deliberately picked a fight with society and it is beginning to realise that society is fighting back, hence Charlie Hebdo's cartoon. There's nothing blasphemous about it, at least not in a free country. It insults religion? So what? He and his crew have spent centuries insulting the preferences of real human beings, not just a belief.

Besides, given the well-documented history of widespread pedophelia within the Catholic Church it should not be throwing stones from it's glass house and it has no lessons to give anyone.

The fact is that the Catholic Church is getting a well-deserved dose of its own medecine. Besides, Charlie Hebdo's cartoon is a very mild, almost placebo, criticism of the church compared to the church's own putrid and degenerate slander and slurs which, may I repeat, assimilate homosexuality and same-sex marriage to incest, pedophilia and polygamy.


The Catholic Church should be grateful that Charlie Hebdo has not printed a cartoon of a priest being fellated by a choirboy. That has happened before, and the church may now consider itself warned that if its despicable stigmatisation of people's sexual preferences continues it may well find itself being reminded yet again of its age-old rank hypocrisy and double standards in the matter.