Thread: Sochi Olympics and the Law against Gays in Russia +

Originally Posted by Deborski

I don't think there is an actual "smear" campaign, but I do think there is a lot of concern and confusion in the West over whether the "propaganda" laws will be enforced during the Olympics in Sochi.

So they should use common sense just like when travelling anywhere a bit different, take the approach of "better safe than sorry".

I.e. cover up a bit in moslem countries, rather than running around in a tank top and shorts and complaining about being harassed. Don't "jaywalk" or drink alcohol in the street in the USA, don't bring up politics or religion in Northern Ireland and don't chew gum in Singapore.... Etc!

They should respect the sentiment of the majority in the country they visit, or else don't go. It's not even hard in Russia, since it's quite a diverse country with a near Western culture. All that the gay visitor needs to do is refrain from making a homosexual manifestation or coming on to kids, for two weeks while visiting the Olympic in Russia. How hard is that?

If a clean slate and flawlessness in the present, in terms of politics is required from all countries that host the Olympics is needed, then hardly no country would be worthy! Certainly not the ones that have hosted it recently, like China, the UK, the United States, Australia etc. Judge not, lest ye be judged! I'm sure the rest of the world could have dug up lots of good reasons to boycott each one of the previous and future Olympic hosts.

Originally Posted by Hanna

So they should use common sense just like when travelling anywhere a bit different, take the approach of "better safe than sorry".

I.e. cover up a bit in moslem countries, rather than running around in a tank top and shorts and complaining about being harassed. Don't "jaywalk" or drink alcohol in the street in the USA, don't bring up politics or religion in Northern Ireland and don't chew gum in Singapore.... Etc!

They should respect the sentiment of the majority in the country they visit, or else don't go. It's not even hard in Russia, since it's quite a diverse country with a near Western culture. All that the gay visitor needs to do is refrain from making a homosexual manifestation or coming on to kids, for two weeks while visiting the Olympic in Russia. How hard is that?

If a clean slate and flawlessness in the present, in terms of politics is required from all countries that host the Olympics is needed, then hardly no country would be worthy! Certainly not the ones that have hosted it recently, like China, the UK, the United States, Australia etc. Judge not, lest ye be judged! I'm sure the rest of the world could have dug up lots of good reasons to boycott each one of the previous and future Olympic hosts.

The difference between chewing gum in Singapore, or talking about politics in Northern Ireland, or not wearing a burkha in a Muslim country versus not "making a homosexual manifestation in Russia" - is that the first three examples are behaviors which one can choose to refrain from. Being gay is not a behavior, it is an identity. Yes, I understand that people on this forum will disagree. But since Throbert has already covered the behavior versus genetic aspects of gay life, I suggest rereading his post again. They can certainly try to live in a closet, but it's almost impossible. Could you pretend to be a man while visiting another country? That would be a more exact comparison than the other ones.

Additionally, the comment about "not coming on to children" reveals that you are confusing homosexuality with pedophilia. I already covered this point, above. Gay people do not have any interest in "coming on to children."

I have traveled to many countries and I have always respected the laws there. I worked on an archeological dig in Syria, in 48-C heat and covered my neck, wrists and arms so as not to offend the sensibilities of my Muslim co-workers. I was not even allowed to mention Israel while I was there, so we referred to it as "Disneyland" lest we offend the religious sensibilities of Muslim people. But they did not force me to change what I am. That is a big difference.

To be honest, traveling to Russia frightens even me right now, and I love Russia. But even I cannot promise that I might not mention the fact that I have close friends who are gay, or say something equally factual and even though it is not intended as a provocation, it could be taken that way. It isn't only the laws I am worried about, it's the angry skinheads and neonazis like the ones who attacked me after I commented on the video. I did not say anything that deserved the level of hatred and hostility and threats directed at me. I have encountered this same hostility right here at MR, on other threads. It is very sad to me. The Russia I remember was never this brutal and people were not so cruel.

Originally Posted by Deborski

The difference between chewing gum in Singapore, or talking about politics in Northern Ireland, or not wearing a burkha in a Muslim country versus not "making a homosexual manifestation in Russia" - is that the first three examples are behaviors which one can choose to refrain from. Being gay is not a behavior, it is an identity. Yes, I understand that people on this forum will disagree. But since Throbert has already covered the behavior versus genetic aspects of gay life, I suggest rereading his post again. They can certainly try to live in a closet, but it's almost impossible. Could you pretend to be a man while visiting another country? That would be a more exact comparison than the other ones.

Additionally, the comment about "not coming on to children" reveals that you are confusing homosexuality with pedophilia. I already covered this point, above. Gay people do not have any interest in "coming on to children."

I have traveled to many countries and I have always respected the laws there. I worked on an archeological dig in Syria, in 48-C heat and covered my neck, wrists and arms so as not to offend the sensibilities of my Muslim co-workers. I was not even allowed to mention Israel while I was there, so we referred to it as "Disneyland" lest we offend the religious sensibilities of Muslim people. But they did not force me to change what I am. That is a big difference.

To be honest, traveling to Russia frightens even me right now, and I love Russia. But even I cannot promise that I might not mention the fact that I have close friends who are gay, or say something equally factual and even though it is not intended as a provocation, it could be taken that way. It isn't only the laws I am worried about, it's the angry skinheads and neonazis like the ones who attacked me after I commented on the video. I did not say anything that deserved the level of hatred and hostility and threats directed at me. I have encountered this same hostility right here at MR, on other threads. It is very sad to me. The Russia I remember was never this brutal and people were not so cruel.

I'd say it's still even more than that; no one should have any possible right to tell others whether or not to chew gum, or what clothes to wear (or do anything else of that kind, that is trying to affect someone else's way of life); places where the majority doesn't realize this have serious problems, and one of the world community's priority tasks is to do anything possible to reduce the numbers of such places.

Originally Posted by Deborski

The difference between chewing gum in Singapore, or talking about politics in Northern Ireland, or not wearing a burkha in a Muslim country versus not "making a homosexual manifestation in Russia" - is that the first three examples are behaviors which one can choose to refrain from. Being gay is not a behavior, it is an identity.

Yes, but haven't you checked what the law is about?
It's NOT outlawing actually BEING homosexual, having homosexual relations or going to gay bars..

It's some specific acts that it is referring to, that anybody gay or straight, could refrain from doing.

Just like I can go to Lebanon and refrain from wearing shorts and a tank top, or go to Germany and refrain from constantly bring up the war. Or in the case of Russia; refrain from making a gay manifestation even if I happened to be gay.

A Swedish female athlete competed in Russia today and had a rainbow manicure which she showed off after she jumped. Nothing, of course, happened.

However Elena Isinbayeva, the Russian gold medalist said it was insensitive and showing a lack of respect for her country.

I agree that if it was illegal to actually BE gay, then that would be wrong, since gay people for the most part cannot change.

The article goes on to explain that Rusisan lawmakers essentially don't care about foreign views on this as they are trying to please their own "deeply conservative" public about this, and the law is reflecting public opinion in Russia.

So why would we respect public opinion when we visit North Africa, Northern Ireland and lots of other countries that have quirks.... but not Russia?

Take the example of Saudi Arabia where all women visting or working there (my sister did, for example) are forced to wrap themselves up in full moslem gear. She didn't like it, but she had chosen to work there and was aware that any other form of dress would have been offensive and against the law. That is a much more radical example of a country that is very rarely critisized. The Russian law is not forcing people to wear special clothing or anything dramatic like that; nor is it meddling in people's private lives, only in how they behave in public.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Yes, but haven't you checked what the law is about?
It's NOT outlawing actually BEING homosexual, having homosexual relations or going to gay bars..

It's some specific acts that it is referring to, that anybody gay or straight, could refrain from doing.

Just like I can go to Lebanon and refrain from wearing shorts and a tank top, or go to Germany and refrain from constantly bring up the war. Or in the case of Russia; refrain from making a gay manifestation even if I happened to be gay.

A Swedish female athlete competed in Russia today and had a rainbow manicure which she showed off after she jumped. Nothing, of course, happened.

However Elena Isinbayeva, the Russian gold medalist said it was insensitive and showing a lack of respect for her country.

I agree that if it was illegal to actually BE gay, then that would be wrong, since gay people for the most part cannot change.

Yes, I saw Alex's post about the law. It's a semantics game, Hanna.

It's like saying that it's not illegal for you to be a woman. But if you use tampons, or maxipads, or if you wear dresses or makeup or if you speak about women's rights, you are spreading "propaganda" and should be arrested. In other words, you can be female, but don't let anyone know you are female or we will arrest you.

It's similar to the "don't ask don't tell" policy America's military used to have. It wasn't a crime to be gay, but telling anyone you were gay was a crime.

In some ways, this new law is even worse than the old Soviet law which simply made it a crime to be gay, because it is extremely ambiguous. Painting rainbows on someone's fingernails shouldn't matter, shouldn't offend anyone, and certainly shouldn't be interpreted as "propaganda" - and yet, it can be. It all depends on who is doing the interpreting. Is it the prosecutor, as Throbert asked? Or is it the responsibility of the "suspect" to prove it is not propaganda?

And anyway, beyond the ambiguous wording of the law, there is an undeniable hostility towards gay people right now, as exemplified by all of the articles and pictures already posted in this thread. The Orthodox Church appears to gives tacit, but unspoken, approval of the persecution of gays, much as churches in America give passive support of individuals who bomb abortion clinics and murder gynecologists.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Yes, but haven't you checked what the law is about?
It's NOT outlawing actually BEING homosexual, having homosexual relations or going to gay bars..

It's some specific acts that it is referring to, that anybody gay or straight, could refrain from doing.

Just like I can go to Lebanon and refrain from wearing shorts and a tank top, or go to Germany and refrain from constantly bring up the war. Or in the case of Russia; refrain from making a gay manifestation even if I happened to be gay.

A Swedish female athlete competed in Russia today and had a rainbow manicure which she showed off after she jumped. Nothing, of course, happened.

However Elena Isinbayeva, the Russian gold medalist said it was insensitive and showing a lack of respect for her country.

I agree that if it was illegal to actually BE gay, then that would be wrong, since gay people for the most part cannot change.

Thank you for agreeing and understanding that gay people cannot change. (Most of them at some point would wish they could).
Their problem though, interestingly enough, is that sometimes gay people are not difficult to recognize even without any gay manifestion.

Originally Posted by Lampada

Thank you for agreeing and understanding that gay people cannot change. (Most of them at some point would wish they could).
Their problem though, interestingly enough, is that sometimes gay people are not difficult to recognize even without any gay manifestion.

That is so true, Lampada. A close friend of mine is a lesbian and she has told me all about her life and how hard it has been. She often wished she did not have to be gay. She was in the closet for many years and even married a man and had two sons, then later came out of the closet and admitted she was only sexually attracted to women. It took her years to get to the place where she finally found the courage to be honest about who she was. Her sons, by the way, are good kids! One of them is a skydiving instructor. The other one works for a company in Germany. Despite all that their family went through, they stuck together and supported each other.

Forcing people to hid who they are creates more problems than it solves, in my opinion. There are stories in the US media almost every day about some famous conservative politician who has a wife and kids and makes a ton of money, who turns out to be gay.

I could understand if Russia had passed laws against public expressions of pornography (gay or otherwise), or if they had had passed laws against public indecency, running around naked in public, or publicly displaying sexual toys like dildos, etc. But instead, the laws are about "пропаганда нетрадиционных сексуальных отношений".... what does that even mean, "non-traditional"....? Is a live-in arrangement where the couple is not formally married "non-traditional"? It's just so ambiguous.