By Aimilios Polygenis
A report by the Spanish newspaper El País features a proposal by Lina Gálvez to open a discussion about European subsidies to the Monastic State of Mount Athos.
The issue of European funding for Mount Athos, in connection with the preservation of the prohibition on the entry of women (what is known as the "avaton"), is highlighted in a report by the Spanish newspaper El País, which presents positions questioning the compatibility of the Athonite tradition with the principles of the European Union.
In an article entitled “Mount Athos, the fiefdom of Europe’s monks that prohibits the entry of women,” the Spanish newspaper makes its approach clear from the outset.
The main interest of the report, however, lies in the proposal by Spanish MEP Lina Gálvez that the funding of Mount Athos be brought up for discussion, on the grounds that the European Union should not subsidize places where fundamental values are violated.
Gálvez, whom the article presents as chair of the European Parliament’s Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, argues that the prohibition on women’s entry is incompatible with equality and the prohibition of discrimination.
“Obviously, it is not compatible,” she states, going so far as to argue that the prohibition on entry amounts to an admission that all women are “impure.”
Nevertheless, Gálvez acknowledges that European intervention to change the status of Mount Athos would be difficult because of the exception that, according to her, was recognized when Greece joined the European Union.
Within this framework, she proposes opening a discussion about subsidies, although the newspaper does not report any relevant decision or official European initiative concerning the matter.
MEP Ana Miranda of the Galician Nationalist Bloc takes a similar position, referring to the situation as “gender apartheid.”
According to her, representatives of the European institutions have a responsibility to denounce the prohibition and to open a dialogue on lifting restrictions that affect half of the EU’s population.
The connection between the ban on women’s entry and European funding runs throughout the report from its opening lines.
The description of the morning prayer at the Holy Monastery of Gregoriou is accompanied by references to the noise of generators and to infrastructure projects financed by Greece and the European Union.
El País thus contrasts technological modernization with the continued prohibition on the entry of women, writing at the same time that electric cars or food-delivery drones may eventually circulate on Mount Athos, but women will probably not appear there.
The article also cites the position of Greek journalist Stavros Tzimas, whom the Spanish newspaper presents as one of the foremost experts on Mount Athos and as one of the few Greeks to speak publicly against the ban on women’s entry.
At the same time, he points out that the faithful regard this tradition as one of the reasons why Mount Athos retains its attraction in the outside world.
A different dimension is offered by PASOK MEP Sakis Arnaoutoglou, who emphasizes that the issue cannot be reduced to gender equality.
“It is also a matter of history, faith, culture, and the way in which Europe deals with unique historical realities that have existed here for centuries,” Mr. Arnaoutoglou states characteristically.
He further reminds readers that the historical reality of Mount Athos long predates the European Union itself and that Europe is also built upon respect for diversity.
The contrasting views are also reflected in the testimonies of women who have visited the surrounding area. One Spanish mother expresses her strong disapproval of the prohibition on women’s entry, using the word “aberración”—“ridiculous.”
Her daughter, however, supports its preservation, although she regrets that she does not have access to the treasures of the monasteries, while other women state that they respect the rules and the religious character of the place.
“If you go to someone’s home, you have to respect their rules,” says filmmaker Alice Peterson.
Of particular interest is the testimony of Litsa Amanatidou, who in 2008 violated the ban on women’s entry together with five other women as part of a protest over a territorial dispute.
As she explains, the purpose of that action was to draw attention to the protest and not to challenge the thousand-year-old tradition.
She believes that if the prohibition were abolished, Mount Athos could be transformed into yet another coastal destination overrun by tourists.
Despite presenting different voices, the report lacks a detailed position from the Holy Community that would explain the prohibition from the perspective of the Athonite experience itself.
The discussion develops primarily around exclusion from access, European values, and funding.
As it appears, El País chooses to conclude with the image of a prohibition that continues to enjoy political, social, and economic protection “as strong as the walls of the monasteries.”
Between the “fiefdom” of the title and the “walls” of the conclusion, the monastic tradition is presented primarily as a system that withstands challenge.
And the proposal to reconsider subsidies now transfers that challenge into the sphere of the economic support of the Monastic State of Mount Athos.
Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos.
