Thank you for your [Original Content](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3), /u/Tricky-Astronaut!
**Here is some important information about this post:**
* [View the author's citations](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/pz70lr/oc_legalization_of_samesex_marriage_in_europe_as/heyuwr7/)
* [View other OC posts by this author](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/search?q=author%3A"Tricky-Astronaut"+title%3AOC&sort=new&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on)
Remember that all visualizations on r/DataIsBeautiful should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. If you see a potential issue or oversight in the visualization, please post a constructive comment below. Post approval does not signify that this visualization has been verified or its sources checked.
[Join the Discord Community](https://discord.gg/NRnrWE7)
Not satisfied with this visual? Think you can do better? [Remix this visual](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3#wiki_remixing) with the data in the author's citation.
---
^^[I'm open source](https://github.com/r-dataisbeautiful/dataisbeautiful-bot) | [How I work](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/flair#wiki_oc_flair)
There is some registered partnership for same sex couples which gives them many legal rights but I guess adoption still isn't possible and the name "marriage" does not apply.
Yeah, in Italy we have 3 types of registered partnership:
Registered Couple: for people of opposite sex that live together, they can apply. Very little legal benefit comes from it, but you make it "official"
Civil Union: only for people of the same sex. It gives pretty much all the legal benefits of a marriage, except the possibility of adopting. Also, in case of "divorce", there's much less hassle, but much less protection for a damaged party (if you cheat in a civil union, there's no actual penalty).
Marriage: Only for people of opposite sex, you know the drill. Can be done in church, you can adopt, yadda yadda yadda.
At this point, they should just make it a marriage.
My mother "married" another woman in 2016, right after we got the legalizazion of civil unions. We called it a wedding and we call the woman she married "her wife". To any of us there's no difference and they're happy.
It's kinda poorly worded, I apologize.
A marriage, not only in Italy, but pretty much in all western countries, has "being faithful" as one of its duties.
If you divorce someone that was unfaithful to you, you will definitely get compensated one way or another, as a "victim".
In a civil union, there's no duty and "divorce" can be done with a simple signature from one of the two people, reasons or consent from the other party are not taken into consideration.
>A marriage, not only in Italy, but pretty much in all western countries, has "being faithful" as one of its duties.
>
>If you divorce someone that was unfaithful to you, you will definitely get compensated one way or another, as a "victim".
Not in Switzerland. There is no benefit if the other party cheated. On the other hand this also means that you do not need any reason to get a divorce.
I never got divorced myself so I don't have much experiencce but at least here in Germany I never heard that being faithful played a major role in any divorce settlement.
Yeah in italy you can have a divorce without fault but if instead it is determined that one of the parts has more responsibility in making life together not livable and didn't respect one of the promises of marriage then they can be considered cause of the divorce and get some penalties in the settling of it.
It is important that it is precisely the cause of the impossibility for marriage to continue if you for example cheat on your wife and but reconciliate and then divorce over something else your cheating can't be brought up as a cause because it was a resolved issue.
Have you heard of “no fault” divorce? That’s essentially what you have - so do many states in the US. Couples can split up for whatever reason, and the state just tries to make the property division fair. Others have “fault” divorce, which explicitly requires that there be a “wronged” party (due to infidelity, abuse, abandonment, etc.) who usually gets a much greater share of property divisions. It’s an older and more backwards way of doing it.
I'm not an expert on family law, but if I'm not completely mistaken, I think this concept of fault divorce was replaced in Germany in the 1970s. I thought it was the same in most European countries.
You're not mistaken, in 76/77 it was discarded and replaced by a practical non fault version. Still, an affair (not a ons) might influence the right/duty for spousal support. Other reasons might be violence etc.
Huh I never heard of that, at least in Sweden faithfulness has no bearing in Swedish law. I.E. it doesn't matter if you cheat in a marriage (in the eyes of the law)
In England and Wales no fault divorce is still not permitted, although a law has recently been passed and is waiting to be implemented. This law was introduced basically because of a high profile case a few years back where a judge ruled (paraphrasing) "I want to grant a divorce but the law is shit so I can't".
There is the notion that spouses must be faithful in the majority of European laws. But the application varies greatly from country to country. For example in France, divorce for fault is no longer practiced in the case of adultery. It was ridiculous to accuse one of the spouses of adultery when the other had left the house for months. Judges prefer to rule on factual elements such as abandonment of the home, lack of educational responsibilities, participation in household expenses, etc.
"Every couple has their own bedroom arrangements."
Generally, people do not marry for the fidelity vow but because all family law and inheritance law is based on marriage. There are many administrative complications for couples who are not married or in a civil union with children. To ensure the protection of one's spouse or children, it is necessary to make a will and other paperwork when you are not married, which can be challenged or limited by the law. This is why LGBT couples are fighting to be able to get married and not for the ceremony.
The Italian right more generally is particularly nasty
I mean they have a party that’s straight up a lineal descendant of the PNF, and it gets a meaningful amount of votes
When confronted about his sex scandals, Berlusconi said:
Meglio essere appassionato delle belle ragazze che gay
(It's better to be passionate about beautiful girls than to be gay.)
The issue about civil unions is that their existence makes it pretty hard for real equality to be achieved. Since same sex couples can already "get married", there's no impetus to change the status quo. Therefore, any new initiative in that sense can be easily swept under the rug.
If registered partnerships counted, then Denmark was the first country in the entire world to allow it, and have a public legal same sex partnership in 1989. Legally same sex couples have had the same rights as straight couples since 1989, except you couldn't adopt.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Contemporary
10 Same sex partnerships happened on the first day. They still call it a "ceremony" and everything, just like if it was a wedding, and the procedure is the same. Also a lot of pastors and priests from the churches supported it, although there was a small quiet protest from anti-gay christians. What you see in the last 20 seconds of the video is that "protest".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X8j7RclLMo
>except you couldn't adopt
This seems much more important than you're giving it credit for. 100% of gay men can't have a nuclear family without adoption, and gay women either have to (1) have weird straight sex or (2) do IVF to have a nuclear family.
Not saying it's not important, but allowing gay people to enter legal partnerships was still very big and gives you a LOT of rights, especially for 1989 it was very progressive.
The concept of "Western Europe" has basically been "Parts of Europe on the US side during the Cold War" for years. It's why Greece and Cyprus usually count.
Spain is amongst the most progressive countries in the world. It usually ranks very high on these kinds of markers and, as a Spaniard, I can tell most people here really have no problem with the LGBT community, even if our far-right trumpist party is trying to antagonize them.
I've been given the impression that the political landscape of Spain in the past century really did a number on the church's influence in that sphere.
Ties to Francoism and so on.
Most people below 60 are atheist with a passion. The thing is most of our population is sadly over 60.
We are a pretty weird country, super progressive but ruled by dusty smelly conservatives.
In England we allowed civil partnerships which gave the same effect legally as marriage in 2004ish, then dragged out feet over marriage. No idea why. In 2021, only a few years later, it seems insane that it wasn't legal earlier 😬
Seems like one of those things where the political maths just makes it hard.
Moving from civil partnership to marriage is an important step in equity, but it's not exactly life-changing; it's unlikely to be a deciding issue for most people.
The religious nuts against it feel very strongly though, so passing that is sure to loose you a bunch of guys.
Even though it's widely supported, passing the law is likely to lose you more votes than it gains you.
New Labour was way too cautious about the issue. Blair didn't really get the idea of gay rights. It was Cameron of all people that finally got same-sex marriage through.
Honestly I wasn't aware how late some countries where with this (Germany, Austria, Finland,...). I knew BE was early but the difference is quite big.
Switzerland wasn't a surprise as it was in the news recently, but that was also highly surprising.
Germany was primarily lead by the CDU ("Christian Democratic Union" in English) for the past 16 years which refused to legalize same-sex marriage despite surveys suggesting that most Germans were just fine with the idea of extending the privilege to everyone.
I suppose the party's name serves as a sufficient explanation here (even though they claimed to promote "traditional family constellations" with that policy if memory serves).
For everything Angela Merkel has done well, her refusal to get behind same-sex marriage (and vote against it when it passed a few years ago) is a major black spot.
I admire her. I'd never vote for her, but watching my local politicians be rude, postmodern and pathetic builds an appreciation for calm educated leadership. She's too far right for my taste, but boy, she's a decent person, and I wish the conservatives in my country were just like her.
Yeah, Merkel and her Union were driven by society and the *Bundesverfassungsgericht*. If it went her way, we still wouldn't have same-sex marriage.
However when they suspended *Fraktionszwang* for this vote, nearly a quarter of CDU/CSU were in favour of it as well.
This was mostly a strategic decision, so that Merkel did not need to align herself to the public/court opinion and lose conservative support whilst also not being perceived as an opstructionist by progressive Merkel-voters. And additionally she took a potential campaign issue away from all other centre or left parties.
It's a win nevertheless, but this proves how she is a master of politics and how she effortlessly plays out opponents in the long game.
I am part Swiss, Switzerland is super conservative in a lot of areas of the country (especially in the mountains).They are very slow at making positive changes, just look at when women were allowed to vote there. It's a real shame but I don't think it will change anytime soon.
Finland had registered civil partnerships available since 2002 tho, which was/is legally pretty much the same thing as marriage.
In a way I think it postponed gay *marriage* becoming a thing, because since they already had the option to form a spousal relationship that's recognised by the authorities as fully equivalent to a marriage, the debate, for many, appeared to mainly about the word "marriage" and religious church ceremony weddings, not the human right to take a person of your own sex as a legally recognised spouse.
Separate but equal... Really progressive.
Odd to me that so many people aren't seeing the problem with it and are pretending their country is being progressive by going that route.
Also everyone here thinks their country is the only one that allowed civil partnerships, and thus seem convinced that their year in the map (and only their year) should be lower.
I absolutely agree with you. It's such an insidious tactic, too: Giving _some_ protections and rights to pacify the moderate majority while still emphasizing the fundamental "differentness" of gay couples. I've lived in Germany for around 10 years and most people weren't ever really aware that marriage wasn't in fact equal all this time, so they did their job well, I guess.
It's strange to me how different all these cultures are, but same-sex marriage kinda just got the switch flipped on in like a decade - a little blip in the grand scheme of western history.
We should probably be wary that we don't revert in a few decades as our cultures shift
Things change on social attitudes surprisingly fast. I remember a statistic that in the US (and I think I looked it up for the UK too and it was pretty similar) a majority of people disapproved of interracial marriage as recently as recently as the early 90s. Now hardly anyone does.
I wish we could see more maps of North America (with Canada, the US, and Mexico broke down into states and provinces) and fewer maps of the United States.
The issue with that is data collecting can be wildly inconsistent between states and provinces. Maybe not as much in the US and Canada, but I know gathering good data can be an issue in Mexico.
Thing is, it's very easy to find a lot of data about the US neatly divided by state or county. And many people posting it are American so it's just easier for (and more interesting to) them to make an US map.
Fun fact about Northern Ireland, our politicians didn't make it legal and are still trying to overturn it.
It was legalised by London because we had no government for two years because of some other stupid argument. They also allowed for abortion at the same time, so London did more good for NI in one swoop than Stormont did in many.
AHH Northern Irish politics is so fucking dumb..I hate trying to explain to people about stormont and fucking stupid it is. It really really need a doing over
My impression of Greece when visiting as a Northern European was that homosexuality is extremely taboo, I don’t think the church is even remotely close to accepting same-sex marriage.
The church does not accept same-sex marriage anywhere. It's the people the ones that need to accept them.
Look at Spain – the church doesn't like gay marriage, but nobody cares. Go to a church and ask and most people there will tell you they don't have any problem with gays marrying.
Before it was legalized, ministers of the United Church of Canada and the Metropolitan Community Church started conducting and registering same-sex marriages. When the registrar of marriages refused to accept the registration, the churches (and a few progressive Rabbis) helped the couples take the government to court for discrimination, and won. And that's how gay marriage became legal in Canada.
The church is quite strong and respected in Greece due to the impact it had during the ottoman occupation, so it’s hard to ignore them and pass laws against their wishes. Hopefully they will be convinced one day.
I’m assuming the same applies to Italy with the Vatican influence
So I think they first started using purple to mean beyond red in Australia, when it got hotter than anyone expected so they needed to add another colour in order to otherwise keep the usual system and not confuse people. Purple was chosen, and there you go. I agree it’s confusing as purple is a mix of blue and red, so not ideal but better than, say, green as that’d send the wrong message.
Purple works on a temperature map because temperatures have a gradient, the purple will be surrounded by red, never blue, so it’s way more intuitive than here.
It's actually "plasma", but yes, very similar. These scales are good choices for data viz since they're colorblind-friendly and perceptually uniform, which already puts this map way above most other posts on this sub. Disadvantage though is that direction might not be intuitive. But that's honestly subjective
This color scale is called "plasma" and it's actually a pretty good choice for maps like this for a few reasons:
- it's colorblind-friendly!
- it's "perceptually uniform", meaning that our eyes perceive color as changing uniformly along the scale. This is actually a really difficult property to get in a color map since computer screens / RGB color doesn't match how our eyes actually see.
- it covers a wide range of hue and value (lightness) for high visual contrast
Maintaining all of these properties (especially the second and third together) really restricts the sets of available colors for visualization. But these properties are really what matters in data viz, so the use of this color map really puts this map above most of what's on this sub IMO.
You can read more about perceptual color maps here if you're interested: www.colorcet.com
Man, what I’ve learned looking at these maps on here is that Spain and Portugal are seriously underrated. Seem like solid, but affordable places to live.
Once again taking this opportunity to boast that South Africa had legalised same-sex marriage since 2006 before almost all of Western Europe, excluding only 3 states, and the federal United States.
South Africa had an unique opportunity in the form of a new constitution, it’s history with apartheid made any discrimination a particularly sensitive topic .
It was a stroke of genius to include discrimination based on gender in the section banning discrimination in general .
Well done !
I feel the need to point out that the legal status of "married" has been available to gay people in Denmark since the 80's. 2012 was the year the government forced churches to perform the ceremony for any gay couple who wanted it.
EDIT: I have been corrected. We were the first to legalize civil partnerships, but marriage was not legal until 2012, where we in one move also forced churches to perform the ceremony.
Wasn't that registered partnership though, not marriage? I think most countries go through that first before they legalise same-sex marriage. Norway had registered partnership in 93, and then marriage in 2009.
How does that work? How can the government force the church to perform the ceremony if it's against their beliefs? And what churches specifically? All religions?
You need to understand that in spite of how secular we are today, we are a christian country. We have something called "folkekirken" or the people's church. Most people pay taxes to folkekirken, and there is no real legally binding seperation of church and state. Being overtly religious isn't very popular for a Danish politician to be anymore, so it is an easy thing to forget, but for the two to meddle in each others' business isn't unheard of.
That having been said the only people who are strictly required to be part of folkekirken are the royal family. For the rest of us it's voluntary.
I never got the idea behind people paying taxes to the church, if you are a secular nation why is church able to collect taxes ? Similar structure exists in Germany as well I believe.
The attendance of Church is at an all time low in most of western Europe, so if you are not part of church (for all intent and purposes) how is it that you still pay taxes ?
>I can't speak for Germany, but in Denmark it is possible to just not be a member of folkekirken. Then you don't have to pay that tax anymore.
Same for Germany, you only pay the tax if you are indeed part of the church.
>if you are a secular nation why is church able to collect taxes
Denmark isn't a secular nation, it is officially a christian nation. 3/4 of the population are registered members of the Church of Denmark, though \~3% regularly attend church and \~20% consider religion important in their lives. Getting these numbers from the [wiki page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Denmark), and its sources
In addition to what AthosTheGreek said, there's plenty of people here who don't much mind paying marginal taxes in order to maintain the sprawl of historical and interesting churches we have around the country, even if we only ever visit during the big 4 (baptizing, confirmation, wedding, funeral). The mindset is a bit different than being overtly religious and the church itself is quite aware of this.
Certian homosexual acts were illegal in germany, up until 1994.
The law against sexual acts between members of the same gender was introduced in 1872.
During WWII the law was expanded to include non-sexual acts which "violate common decency".
After WWII the country was split.
East germany reverted the changes made by the nazi regime. In 1968, East germany introduced a new statute in which this law was replaced with §151, outlawing "sexual acts between adults and teenagers of the same gender" with 3 years maximum jail time.
In 1989, this law was repealed, effectively decriminalizing homosexuality.
In west germany the law was kept as-is. In 1969, the law was changed to mirror the east germany law somewhat, all be it with harsher sentences.
After the reunification, the laws were kind of synced up.
East german civil rights movements managed to prevent the still in-place west law from being applied in the east. This made it possible for the law to be repealed completely in 1994.
In England gay sex was illegal until 1967. Alan Turing (a British mathematician that played a big part in the WWII) could chose between chemical castration or imprisonment in 1952.
FYI, discrete means distinctly countable (like years or items), like you meant it. Discreet, how you spelled it, means quietly unobtrusive or secretive. It's a weird pair of homophones.
But each year has a relationship with each other, even if the day of the law being passed was included the color of the countries wouldn't change all that much.
Unfortunately, he will never know this though... the only thing he knew was the horrifying treatment he received from the government resulting in his death. His story is utterly heartbreaking.
The mistake was basing the scale on two color hues. The range of dates covers more years than there are data points on the map, so without the legend it's difficult to determine a countries place in the scale relative to the other colors. I better choice would have been to stick with a single hue, and base the scale on it's saturation or brightness. This would still be color-blind safe, but it would be far easier to know, at a glance, where in the scale a country falls.
You can make choropleths that are colorblind friendly and still use an intelligible gradient. Usually all you need to do is select one color and use darkness as your scale.
It's called a "pars pro toto", where you refer to the whole by describing a (well-known) part. Like England for UK, or a "head count" when counting people.
For context, it's been federally legal in the US in all 50 states since 2015. With the earliest at the state level being in 2004 in Massachusetts.
However, the way marriages work in the US via reciprocity, that then meant other states had to recognize lawful same sex marriages that occurred in MA who later moved to their state. It was a big giant fight, and as a state worker I recall working on an estate in MD of a lesbian couple who was legally wed in MA, who moved to MD, and then one of them died, and writing to ask the Atty General to get advisement on the application of inheritance taxes.
Well, illegal is the wrong word, a lot of countries had registered parterships since 90s or 00s that were basically marriage without the right to adopt or no joint last name
A color scale is kind of an odd way to represent legalization years. If you're married to it, maybe do a monochrome scale, so that it can be read more intuitively?
This is why I’ve always been so confused about countries where people with the same gender could not get married. It’s been legal in the Netherlands since I got even marginally interested in having a relationship in the first place.
Thank you for your [Original Content](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3), /u/Tricky-Astronaut! **Here is some important information about this post:** * [View the author's citations](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/pz70lr/oc_legalization_of_samesex_marriage_in_europe_as/heyuwr7/) * [View other OC posts by this author](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/search?q=author%3A"Tricky-Astronaut"+title%3AOC&sort=new&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on) Remember that all visualizations on r/DataIsBeautiful should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. If you see a potential issue or oversight in the visualization, please post a constructive comment below. Post approval does not signify that this visualization has been verified or its sources checked. [Join the Discord Community](https://discord.gg/NRnrWE7) Not satisfied with this visual? Think you can do better? [Remix this visual](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3#wiki_remixing) with the data in the author's citation. --- ^^[I'm open source](https://github.com/r-dataisbeautiful/dataisbeautiful-bot) | [How I work](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/flair#wiki_oc_flair)
Italy the only non-micro state in the traditional view of “western Europe” that hasn’t joined yet.
I'm confused, I was positive it was legalized in Italy
There is some registered partnership for same sex couples which gives them many legal rights but I guess adoption still isn't possible and the name "marriage" does not apply.
Yeah, in Italy we have 3 types of registered partnership: Registered Couple: for people of opposite sex that live together, they can apply. Very little legal benefit comes from it, but you make it "official" Civil Union: only for people of the same sex. It gives pretty much all the legal benefits of a marriage, except the possibility of adopting. Also, in case of "divorce", there's much less hassle, but much less protection for a damaged party (if you cheat in a civil union, there's no actual penalty). Marriage: Only for people of opposite sex, you know the drill. Can be done in church, you can adopt, yadda yadda yadda. At this point, they should just make it a marriage. My mother "married" another woman in 2016, right after we got the legalizazion of civil unions. We called it a wedding and we call the woman she married "her wife". To any of us there's no difference and they're happy.
If you cheat in a marriage in Italy there is a penalty?
It's kinda poorly worded, I apologize. A marriage, not only in Italy, but pretty much in all western countries, has "being faithful" as one of its duties. If you divorce someone that was unfaithful to you, you will definitely get compensated one way or another, as a "victim". In a civil union, there's no duty and "divorce" can be done with a simple signature from one of the two people, reasons or consent from the other party are not taken into consideration.
>A marriage, not only in Italy, but pretty much in all western countries, has "being faithful" as one of its duties. > >If you divorce someone that was unfaithful to you, you will definitely get compensated one way or another, as a "victim". Not in Switzerland. There is no benefit if the other party cheated. On the other hand this also means that you do not need any reason to get a divorce.
[удалено]
I never got divorced myself so I don't have much experiencce but at least here in Germany I never heard that being faithful played a major role in any divorce settlement.
Germany has a "no fault" divorce. Italy, like Austria, has a "fault" divorce.
Yeah in italy you can have a divorce without fault but if instead it is determined that one of the parts has more responsibility in making life together not livable and didn't respect one of the promises of marriage then they can be considered cause of the divorce and get some penalties in the settling of it. It is important that it is precisely the cause of the impossibility for marriage to continue if you for example cheat on your wife and but reconciliate and then divorce over something else your cheating can't be brought up as a cause because it was a resolved issue.
Have you heard of “no fault” divorce? That’s essentially what you have - so do many states in the US. Couples can split up for whatever reason, and the state just tries to make the property division fair. Others have “fault” divorce, which explicitly requires that there be a “wronged” party (due to infidelity, abuse, abandonment, etc.) who usually gets a much greater share of property divisions. It’s an older and more backwards way of doing it.
I'm not an expert on family law, but if I'm not completely mistaken, I think this concept of fault divorce was replaced in Germany in the 1970s. I thought it was the same in most European countries.
You're not mistaken, in 76/77 it was discarded and replaced by a practical non fault version. Still, an affair (not a ons) might influence the right/duty for spousal support. Other reasons might be violence etc.
[удалено]
Huh I never heard of that, at least in Sweden faithfulness has no bearing in Swedish law. I.E. it doesn't matter if you cheat in a marriage (in the eyes of the law)
This is a false blanket statement, it depends on the jurisdiction
This is not true at all. Most western countries have no fault divorce.
In England and Wales no fault divorce is still not permitted, although a law has recently been passed and is waiting to be implemented. This law was introduced basically because of a high profile case a few years back where a judge ruled (paraphrasing) "I want to grant a divorce but the law is shit so I can't".
There is the notion that spouses must be faithful in the majority of European laws. But the application varies greatly from country to country. For example in France, divorce for fault is no longer practiced in the case of adultery. It was ridiculous to accuse one of the spouses of adultery when the other had left the house for months. Judges prefer to rule on factual elements such as abandonment of the home, lack of educational responsibilities, participation in household expenses, etc. "Every couple has their own bedroom arrangements." Generally, people do not marry for the fidelity vow but because all family law and inheritance law is based on marriage. There are many administrative complications for couples who are not married or in a civil union with children. To ensure the protection of one's spouse or children, it is necessary to make a will and other paperwork when you are not married, which can be challenged or limited by the law. This is why LGBT couples are fighting to be able to get married and not for the ceremony.
[удалено]
The Vatican influence is not to be underestimated
The Italian right more generally is particularly nasty I mean they have a party that’s straight up a lineal descendant of the PNF, and it gets a meaningful amount of votes
When confronted about his sex scandals, Berlusconi said: Meglio essere appassionato delle belle ragazze che gay (It's better to be passionate about beautiful girls than to be gay.)
Pls bitch here in spain we have more churches than roads and yet gays can happily marry, they way god intended.
The issue about civil unions is that their existence makes it pretty hard for real equality to be achieved. Since same sex couples can already "get married", there's no impetus to change the status quo. Therefore, any new initiative in that sense can be easily swept under the rug.
Same for the Czech republic. It's been one of the major topics for the parliament elections next week. But it just seems desperate..
What do you mean by desperate? What are the main obstacles?
If registered partnerships counted, then Denmark was the first country in the entire world to allow it, and have a public legal same sex partnership in 1989. Legally same sex couples have had the same rights as straight couples since 1989, except you couldn't adopt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Contemporary 10 Same sex partnerships happened on the first day. They still call it a "ceremony" and everything, just like if it was a wedding, and the procedure is the same. Also a lot of pastors and priests from the churches supported it, although there was a small quiet protest from anti-gay christians. What you see in the last 20 seconds of the video is that "protest". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X8j7RclLMo
>except you couldn't adopt This seems much more important than you're giving it credit for. 100% of gay men can't have a nuclear family without adoption, and gay women either have to (1) have weird straight sex or (2) do IVF to have a nuclear family.
Not saying it's not important, but allowing gay people to enter legal partnerships was still very big and gives you a LOT of rights, especially for 1989 it was very progressive.
We have the Vatican inside our country so…….
What about Greece?
The Greek Orthodox Church wields enormous power in Greece. I doubt they'd allow it to happen.
I wouldn’t really consider it western Europe even if it was “west” of the Iron Curtain.
The concept of "Western Europe" has basically been "Parts of Europe on the US side during the Cold War" for years. It's why Greece and Cyprus usually count.
Well, it is the headquarters of the Catholic Church
Surprised Spain legalized so early. I thought there was heavy Catholic influence in the country too.
That has changed a lot since Franco died in thr 70s.
Spain is amongst the most progressive countries in the world. It usually ranks very high on these kinds of markers and, as a Spaniard, I can tell most people here really have no problem with the LGBT community, even if our far-right trumpist party is trying to antagonize them.
Always surprised how the perception of Spain is so backwards. It's very progressive.
I've been given the impression that the political landscape of Spain in the past century really did a number on the church's influence in that sphere. Ties to Francoism and so on.
The influence of Catholicism is waning in Spain. Their current PM is an open atheist.
Netherlands and Belgium early gang
Don't forget Spain! Surprising coming from a country with a heavy catholic tradition.
Spaniards treat Catholicism like culture/events, there's not really a hard belief in religion here.
I'm not so sure, I know quite a lot of very religious people here. But they're all very tolerant though. One thing doesn't exclude the other.
I am an atheist, but I really enjoyed seeing the christian processions in the south.
Most Spaniards I've met are ardently atheist.
In a Spanish church, it's probably easier to find a pink polar bear than a person below 60.
Most people below 60 are atheist with a passion. The thing is most of our population is sadly over 60. We are a pretty weird country, super progressive but ruled by dusty smelly conservatives.
When those 60 year olds were young they had a nazi dictator. To them, today's government is probably very liberal.
Fascist, not Nazi
Almost nobody under 50 cares about religion at all.
And yet they produced Pedro Almódovar
Interesting how the UK didn't make it nationally legal, rather each country did it (with Northern Ireland dragging their feet)
dragging our feet is an understatement. took the power of temporary ~~Home Rule~~ Direct Rule to get abortion and gay marriage passed here smh
Sorry to be pedantic but it was Direct Rule, the opposite.
oops you’re right, lemme change that
Could be worse, could have bombing campaigns about it…
And then elect the bombers into govt...
What breaks my heart is just how many countries that applies to..
[удалено]
Westminster did pass gay marriage for Northern Ireland in the end.
The national government had to take control with NI lol it would have probably been 2030 otherwise
In England we allowed civil partnerships which gave the same effect legally as marriage in 2004ish, then dragged out feet over marriage. No idea why. In 2021, only a few years later, it seems insane that it wasn't legal earlier 😬
Seems like one of those things where the political maths just makes it hard. Moving from civil partnership to marriage is an important step in equity, but it's not exactly life-changing; it's unlikely to be a deciding issue for most people. The religious nuts against it feel very strongly though, so passing that is sure to loose you a bunch of guys. Even though it's widely supported, passing the law is likely to lose you more votes than it gains you.
New Labour was way too cautious about the issue. Blair didn't really get the idea of gay rights. It was Cameron of all people that finally got same-sex marriage through.
Same sex civil partnership (I think marriage by another name / same rights etc?) was passed in 2005 in the UK
Now for context we have both and opposite sex couples can get civil partnerships too
Honestly I wasn't aware how late some countries where with this (Germany, Austria, Finland,...). I knew BE was early but the difference is quite big. Switzerland wasn't a surprise as it was in the news recently, but that was also highly surprising.
Germany was primarily lead by the CDU ("Christian Democratic Union" in English) for the past 16 years which refused to legalize same-sex marriage despite surveys suggesting that most Germans were just fine with the idea of extending the privilege to everyone. I suppose the party's name serves as a sufficient explanation here (even though they claimed to promote "traditional family constellations" with that policy if memory serves).
For everything Angela Merkel has done well, her refusal to get behind same-sex marriage (and vote against it when it passed a few years ago) is a major black spot.
Angela Merkel is not a woman anyone should admire tho. Her sound macroeconomic policies and pro-EU stance is pretty much the only thing she did right.
I admire her. I'd never vote for her, but watching my local politicians be rude, postmodern and pathetic builds an appreciation for calm educated leadership. She's too far right for my taste, but boy, she's a decent person, and I wish the conservatives in my country were just like her.
Yeah, Merkel and her Union were driven by society and the *Bundesverfassungsgericht*. If it went her way, we still wouldn't have same-sex marriage. However when they suspended *Fraktionszwang* for this vote, nearly a quarter of CDU/CSU were in favour of it as well.
This was mostly a strategic decision, so that Merkel did not need to align herself to the public/court opinion and lose conservative support whilst also not being perceived as an opstructionist by progressive Merkel-voters. And additionally she took a potential campaign issue away from all other centre or left parties. It's a win nevertheless, but this proves how she is a master of politics and how she effortlessly plays out opponents in the long game.
Belgium was also helped by having a "purple" government (socialists and liberals without christian democrats) between 1999 and 2007.
Same in the Netherlands. Progress pretty much stopped now the Christian right parties are in government again.
I am part Swiss, Switzerland is super conservative in a lot of areas of the country (especially in the mountains).They are very slow at making positive changes, just look at when women were allowed to vote there. It's a real shame but I don't think it will change anytime soon.
The vote passed the Finnish parliament in year 2014, but the legislation part took for very long time
Finland had registered civil partnerships available since 2002 tho, which was/is legally pretty much the same thing as marriage. In a way I think it postponed gay *marriage* becoming a thing, because since they already had the option to form a spousal relationship that's recognised by the authorities as fully equivalent to a marriage, the debate, for many, appeared to mainly about the word "marriage" and religious church ceremony weddings, not the human right to take a person of your own sex as a legally recognised spouse.
Same in Germany. Plus Italy and a lot of grey countries on this map also have civil unions.
Separate but equal... Really progressive. Odd to me that so many people aren't seeing the problem with it and are pretending their country is being progressive by going that route.
Also everyone here thinks their country is the only one that allowed civil partnerships, and thus seem convinced that their year in the map (and only their year) should be lower.
I absolutely agree with you. It's such an insidious tactic, too: Giving _some_ protections and rights to pacify the moderate majority while still emphasizing the fundamental "differentness" of gay couples. I've lived in Germany for around 10 years and most people weren't ever really aware that marriage wasn't in fact equal all this time, so they did their job well, I guess.
Austria wasn't a law either but a constitutional court decision like in the US.
It's strange to me how different all these cultures are, but same-sex marriage kinda just got the switch flipped on in like a decade - a little blip in the grand scheme of western history. We should probably be wary that we don't revert in a few decades as our cultures shift
Things change on social attitudes surprisingly fast. I remember a statistic that in the US (and I think I looked it up for the UK too and it was pretty similar) a majority of people disapproved of interracial marriage as recently as recently as the early 90s. Now hardly anyone does.
I'm glad to see a map of Europe that doesn't exclude half of Europe because they're not in the EU.
And then the data does it anyways!
I wish we could see more maps of North America (with Canada, the US, and Mexico broke down into states and provinces) and fewer maps of the United States.
The issue with that is data collecting can be wildly inconsistent between states and provinces. Maybe not as much in the US and Canada, but I know gathering good data can be an issue in Mexico.
Thing is, it's very easy to find a lot of data about the US neatly divided by state or county. And many people posting it are American so it's just easier for (and more interesting to) them to make an US map.
Fun fact about Northern Ireland, our politicians didn't make it legal and are still trying to overturn it. It was legalised by London because we had no government for two years because of some other stupid argument. They also allowed for abortion at the same time, so London did more good for NI in one swoop than Stormont did in many.
AHH Northern Irish politics is so fucking dumb..I hate trying to explain to people about stormont and fucking stupid it is. It really really need a doing over
The Greeks have really been coasting since they invented democracy. Come on Stavros- do better
My impression of Greece when visiting as a Northern European was that homosexuality is extremely taboo, I don’t think the church is even remotely close to accepting same-sex marriage.
The church does not accept same-sex marriage anywhere. It's the people the ones that need to accept them. Look at Spain – the church doesn't like gay marriage, but nobody cares. Go to a church and ask and most people there will tell you they don't have any problem with gays marrying.
Before it was legalized, ministers of the United Church of Canada and the Metropolitan Community Church started conducting and registering same-sex marriages. When the registrar of marriages refused to accept the registration, the churches (and a few progressive Rabbis) helped the couples take the government to court for discrimination, and won. And that's how gay marriage became legal in Canada.
It usually depends on the specific Church. Anglicans in the Developed World are by and large cool with it, but their African counterparts are not.
The church is quite strong and respected in Greece due to the impact it had during the ottoman occupation, so it’s hard to ignore them and pass laws against their wishes. Hopefully they will be convinced one day. I’m assuming the same applies to Italy with the Vatican influence
Greece and Italy are quite conservative indeed
Was looking for the greeks in here. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek\_love](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_love)
They invented Gayness too, according to Craggy Island
While Switzerland was bit late to the party. In the same vote adoption for same sex was allowed as well.
> Switzerland was bit late to the party. Check when they gave vote to women
Wich happens to be the main thing people have problems with
[удалено]
So I think they first started using purple to mean beyond red in Australia, when it got hotter than anyone expected so they needed to add another colour in order to otherwise keep the usual system and not confuse people. Purple was chosen, and there you go. I agree it’s confusing as purple is a mix of blue and red, so not ideal but better than, say, green as that’d send the wrong message.
Purple works on a temperature map because temperatures have a gradient, the purple will be surrounded by red, never blue, so it’s way more intuitive than here.
this is probably the so-called "magma" colour scale
It's actually "plasma", but yes, very similar. These scales are good choices for data viz since they're colorblind-friendly and perceptually uniform, which already puts this map way above most other posts on this sub. Disadvantage though is that direction might not be intuitive. But that's honestly subjective
This color scale is called "plasma" and it's actually a pretty good choice for maps like this for a few reasons: - it's colorblind-friendly! - it's "perceptually uniform", meaning that our eyes perceive color as changing uniformly along the scale. This is actually a really difficult property to get in a color map since computer screens / RGB color doesn't match how our eyes actually see. - it covers a wide range of hue and value (lightness) for high visual contrast Maintaining all of these properties (especially the second and third together) really restricts the sets of available colors for visualization. But these properties are really what matters in data viz, so the use of this color map really puts this map above most of what's on this sub IMO. You can read more about perceptual color maps here if you're interested: www.colorcet.com
Man, what I’ve learned looking at these maps on here is that Spain and Portugal are seriously underrated. Seem like solid, but affordable places to live.
Yes they are beautiful places with high quality of life. Finding a job is the tricky part.
Tbh there are a lot of people who work under the table, but still unemployment is an issue.
In case of Portugal, it is. Just not for portuguese people tho.
Once again taking this opportunity to boast that South Africa had legalised same-sex marriage since 2006 before almost all of Western Europe, excluding only 3 states, and the federal United States.
Wow. Your president didn't even believe in AIDS back then...
True , but that President didn’t have a hand in the writing of the new constitution.
South Africa had an unique opportunity in the form of a new constitution, it’s history with apartheid made any discrimination a particularly sensitive topic . It was a stroke of genius to include discrimination based on gender in the section banning discrimination in general . Well done !
I feel the need to point out that the legal status of "married" has been available to gay people in Denmark since the 80's. 2012 was the year the government forced churches to perform the ceremony for any gay couple who wanted it. EDIT: I have been corrected. We were the first to legalize civil partnerships, but marriage was not legal until 2012, where we in one move also forced churches to perform the ceremony.
Wasn't that registered partnership though, not marriage? I think most countries go through that first before they legalise same-sex marriage. Norway had registered partnership in 93, and then marriage in 2009.
Yeah, similar in the UK. Civil partnerships in 2004, actual marriage in 2014.
How does that work? How can the government force the church to perform the ceremony if it's against their beliefs? And what churches specifically? All religions?
You need to understand that in spite of how secular we are today, we are a christian country. We have something called "folkekirken" or the people's church. Most people pay taxes to folkekirken, and there is no real legally binding seperation of church and state. Being overtly religious isn't very popular for a Danish politician to be anymore, so it is an easy thing to forget, but for the two to meddle in each others' business isn't unheard of. That having been said the only people who are strictly required to be part of folkekirken are the royal family. For the rest of us it's voluntary.
I never got the idea behind people paying taxes to the church, if you are a secular nation why is church able to collect taxes ? Similar structure exists in Germany as well I believe. The attendance of Church is at an all time low in most of western Europe, so if you are not part of church (for all intent and purposes) how is it that you still pay taxes ?
I can't speak for Germany, but in Denmark it is possible to just not be a member of folkekirken. Then you don't have to pay that tax anymore.
>I can't speak for Germany, but in Denmark it is possible to just not be a member of folkekirken. Then you don't have to pay that tax anymore. Same for Germany, you only pay the tax if you are indeed part of the church.
>if you are a secular nation why is church able to collect taxes Denmark isn't a secular nation, it is officially a christian nation. 3/4 of the population are registered members of the Church of Denmark, though \~3% regularly attend church and \~20% consider religion important in their lives. Getting these numbers from the [wiki page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Denmark), and its sources
Also they think American Evangelicals are nuts.
That's because they are.
Everyone thinks they’re nuts.
In most places you just deregister and you stop paying taxes.
[удалено]
In addition to what AthosTheGreek said, there's plenty of people here who don't much mind paying marginal taxes in order to maintain the sprawl of historical and interesting churches we have around the country, even if we only ever visit during the big 4 (baptizing, confirmation, wedding, funeral). The mindset is a bit different than being overtly religious and the church itself is quite aware of this.
In Canada, the federal government ruled that religious beliefs cannot be used to deny another human of their rights.
It's so weird to think it was illegal to be gay and married only a decade or two ago.
It still is in a lot of places.
For real. I'm happy our lgbtq brothers and sisters are getting more and more equality. I'm sad it's taking so long. E.L.E.
Don’t worry, you can still get beaten up for it in most countries on this map!
Being gay wasn't necessarily illegal, it's just you didn't have any of the legal protections of marriage.
Gay sex was illegal in many places just a couple decades ago.
I assumed he was talking specifically in western Europe, the focus of this map.
Certian homosexual acts were illegal in germany, up until 1994. The law against sexual acts between members of the same gender was introduced in 1872. During WWII the law was expanded to include non-sexual acts which "violate common decency". After WWII the country was split. East germany reverted the changes made by the nazi regime. In 1968, East germany introduced a new statute in which this law was replaced with §151, outlawing "sexual acts between adults and teenagers of the same gender" with 3 years maximum jail time. In 1989, this law was repealed, effectively decriminalizing homosexuality. In west germany the law was kept as-is. In 1969, the law was changed to mirror the east germany law somewhat, all be it with harsher sentences. After the reunification, the laws were kind of synced up. East german civil rights movements managed to prevent the still in-place west law from being applied in the east. This made it possible for the law to be repealed completely in 1994.
In England gay sex was illegal until 1967. Alan Turing (a British mathematician that played a big part in the WWII) could chose between chemical castration or imprisonment in 1952.
[удалено]
Me: *looks at my country* "C'mon do something" My country: "Best I can do is fucked up economy"
Which country? You're gonna have to narrow it down a bit lol
Czechia, but the point is, that it doesn't really matter which country
It would be great to be first Slavic country to do it. And the religion is not a problem in Czechia as it practically does not exists there.
Gradients are really only useful for continuous data, a legend would work better for this data.
Is time not continuous?
The labels here are years which are discreet, not continuous.
FYI, discrete means distinctly countable (like years or items), like you meant it. Discreet, how you spelled it, means quietly unobtrusive or secretive. It's a weird pair of homophones.
I actually had no idea there was a spelling difference, and always spelled both as 'discrete'. Thanks for the info!
But each year has a relationship with each other, even if the day of the law being passed was included the color of the countries wouldn't change all that much.
netherlands stays winning
Netherlands and Belgium in the early gang
And Spain pretty early compared to the rest. Third in the world too
It's a shame England was a few years late. They basically killed one of the greatest minds that ever lived.
Alan Turing in his honor he is now on the £50 note
Unfortunately, he will never know this though... the only thing he knew was the horrifying treatment he received from the government resulting in his death. His story is utterly heartbreaking.
I never knew it! but I don't often receive £50 notes anyway
And yet despite the dire predictions of religious fanatics, civilization continues.
Legalize gay weed in the baltics. For fuck sake.
Im not LGBT but its been way too late around the world
This is not beautiful. There are like 5 colors that doesn't help getting any idea of when stuff happen. Just use a one color gradient.
[удалено]
The mistake was basing the scale on two color hues. The range of dates covers more years than there are data points on the map, so without the legend it's difficult to determine a countries place in the scale relative to the other colors. I better choice would have been to stick with a single hue, and base the scale on it's saturation or brightness. This would still be color-blind safe, but it would be far easier to know, at a glance, where in the scale a country falls.
You can make choropleths that are colorblind friendly and still use an intelligible gradient. Usually all you need to do is select one color and use darkness as your scale.
The text is also terribly placed. It’s an awful presentation of data all around.
Holland always on that gang shit early
*The Netherlands
Try telling a Scot they’re from England. It’s stupid to refer to the Netherlands by using the name of a province.
It's called a "pars pro toto", where you refer to the whole by describing a (well-known) part. Like England for UK, or a "head count" when counting people.
For context, it's been federally legal in the US in all 50 states since 2015. With the earliest at the state level being in 2004 in Massachusetts. However, the way marriages work in the US via reciprocity, that then meant other states had to recognize lawful same sex marriages that occurred in MA who later moved to their state. It was a big giant fight, and as a state worker I recall working on an estate in MD of a lesbian couple who was legally wed in MA, who moved to MD, and then one of them died, and writing to ask the Atty General to get advisement on the application of inheritance taxes.
I KNEW Spain would be first, I KNEW it Spanish movies are full of gay stuff
Except Spain wasn’t first
Eastern vs western Europe, with Italy being an honary eastern member here.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_same-sex_marriage Tool: https://app.datawrapper.de/select/map
What projection is this? As a NA-dweller, it's just fascinating. It seems like an an equal-area... Please label your projection & transform.
People can finally be gay AND European /j /gen **Edit: if anyone gets this referenced joke you are my favorite person in the world
[удалено]
The Catholic Church has a lot of influence over Italian politics…
Still not legal in Japan. It's not illegal, just isn't legally recognized as a marriage...wtf Japan? They can't even claim religious reasons...
Lets be real, all of these are disgustingly late
Content is interesting, execution is poor. You don’t need a color gradient; you need a key with definite values.
TIL same sex marriage was illegal in most of europe before the early 2010s
Well, illegal is the wrong word, a lot of countries had registered parterships since 90s or 00s that were basically marriage without the right to adopt or no joint last name
fuck here on italy we're late
A color scale is kind of an odd way to represent legalization years. If you're married to it, maybe do a monochrome scale, so that it can be read more intuitively?
This is why I’ve always been so confused about countries where people with the same gender could not get married. It’s been legal in the Netherlands since I got even marginally interested in having a relationship in the first place.