Russia will enforce anti-gay propaganda law at Sochi Olympics, govt says

[NanLaew]

^^ My oversight. Links to Stephen Fry's open letter are to the same letter, just the OTT page 1 and the more sober page 2.

[rubin]

I think you should stop making parallels between Putin and Hitler here. Come back to earth.

[Jingthing]

I think you should stop making parallels between Putin and Hitler here. Come back to earth.

It's legit in this case except if you're saying Stephen Fry, Harvey Fierstein, Dan Savage and others are not earthlings. I would agree there is no reason to make the issue on whether it is legit or not to compare Berlin to Sochi the main focus of the discussion about persecution of gays in Russia, and what's going to happen at Sochi, etc. It's kind of a tangential discussion. The scapegoating of gays by Putin in Russia can certainly stand on its own as an international issue.

[rubin]

Believe me or not, there won't be any law cases or persecutions to the gay people on this international sports event, please don't take it too closely to your hearts, don't exaggerate. There are more important issues on the international arena these days then these stupid gay laws implicated in Russia (hopefully they will be revised some day), so please don't overreact and start all this Russia-bashing rhetoric which actually leads to nothing.

[Jingthing]

Believe me or not, there won't be any law cases or persecutions to the gay people on this international sports event, please don't take it too closely to your hearts, don't exaggerate. There are more important issues on the international arena these days then these stupid gay laws implicated in Russia (hopefully they will be revised some day), so please don't overreact and start all this Russia-bashing rhetoric which actually leads to nothing.

Who are you? A high Russian official? No, I don't believe you and there is no reason to believe. The most recent word from Russian officials is their anti-gay laws WILL be enforced at Sochi and also the IOC is insisting that these laws be respected and even interpreting their own rules to mean even no Rainbow pins. Also, be clear, Sochi is a big international stage yes, but the real story is Russian scapegoating of gays across their nation (before, during, and after Sochi) including yes the violent Nazi attacks which have increased since the new law.

I agree there are more important issues in the world right now such as Egypt. But here we are talking about Sochi, Russia, and persecution of gays. here. I hope that is OK with you.

It is a known fact Russian is a severely homophobic country and recently it has gotten much worse. It's not about bashing Russia. It's about Russia bashing gays. Are these Russian gays not Russians? They have the power to do that but they don't have the power anymore for the world not to take notice and they don't have the power to prevent protests against their human rights violations at the international level. By that I mean they can shut down domestic protests but they can't prevent international protests including increased media scrutiny.

On the topic of possible protests at Sochi, here is a new idea. Not sure I agree with it as it seems highly probable some of these people will get beaten up for doing this, but for those who choose to take the risk, they will find much international support for their acts of civil disobedience at Sochi:

http://pridehouseinternational.wordpress.com/2013/08/14/pride-house-international-launches-same-sex-hand-holding-campaign-for-sochi-olympics/

Today, Pride House International announced their Same-Sex Hand-Holding Initiative, a campaign that is part of the group’s response to the International Olympic Committee’s choice of Russia as host nation for the 2014 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Pride House International, an LGBT equality group focusing on sports, is calling for attendees at the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, to protest the nation’s new antigay law by taking “every opportunity to hold hands with a person of the same sex.

http://www.advocate.com/politics/2013/08/16/protest-antigay-russian-law-holding-hands-says-rights-group

BTW, you seem to be taking this a bit personally. Are you Russian? It would be good to have some actual Russians enter the discussion here.

[rubin]

2Jingthing. Yes,I am Russian and I am not feeling very happy reading some Russia bashing posts in this thread. However, I understand your feelings. I can confirm that homosexuality is not supported by the majority of the population living in Russia and not only Russians, but also by the hundreds of other small minority groups living in Russia. That's true. You might believe it or not. You can put Russia in the list together with the America's big friend Saudi Arabia or Pakistan (where gays also don't have big support). I think that Russian people have rights to make their own decisions without "help" from the West, don't they?

[Jingthing]

2Jingthing. Yes,I am Russian and I am not feeling very happy reading some Russia bashing posts in this thread. However, I understand your feelings. I can confirm that homosexuality is not supported by the majority of the population living in Russia and not only Russians, but also by the hundreds of other small minority groups living in Russia. That's true. You might believe it or not. You can put Russia in the list together with the America's big friend Saudi Arabia or Pakistan (where gays also don't have big support). I think that Russian people have rights to make their own decisions without "help" from the West, don't they?

I am aware of the reality of Russian homophobia, it's history, and how widespread it is. We aren't talking about Saudi or Pakistan here and now. Just Russia.

Majority support for persecution of an unpopular majority can indeed make it legal, but it doesn't make it moral or ethical. Even genocide can be made legal.

Of course all countries have the right to make their own sovereign laws.

However in this modern age of internet communications, human rights violations can easily be broadcast to the world, and the world also has the "right" to protest about them in their own way. Personally I support that Russian diplomats be harassed about their anti-gay laws everywhere they go in the world that cares about human rights. I am especially disgusted by the implicit support of Putin for the Nazi attacks. I understand he doesn't control these Nazis DIRECTLY but as the dictator of Russia he has to power to strongly denounce them and crack down on them, but he doesn't. He claims to want to protect the children, but clearly he does nothing to protect Russia's GAY children. I'm also concerned that the suicide rate among Russian youth will likely spike dramatically under such social conditions; gay youth are already vulnerable to high suicide rates in any level of homophobic society (most).

Russia doesn't need the west's help but in my view Russia's gay people need all the support and attention they can get as they face the terror of being scapegoated.

So it's true, the world can't be the boss of Russia, but also Russia can't be the boss of how the world responds to Russia.

What you call bashing, I call protest and criticism ... DESERVED criticism. Gay rights are HUMAN rights and gays are humans ...

On a personal note, I have nothing against the Russian PEOPLE per se, but this is about severe homophobia happening now in Putin's Russia.

[LeCharivari]

"Don't make a fuss and the people who hate us will let us be." Extraordinary.

Stay at the back of the bus Rosa!

The NAACP's handling of the Montgomery bus issue after the Browder vs Gale ruling is particularly relevant to both Russia's anti-gay propaganda law and any action taken over the Sochi Olympics, and there's a lot we can and should learn from it.

As far as I am aware it is one of the best examples of how activism done in the RIGHT WAY and at the RIGHT TIME can achieve positive results.

1. Nothing was done in haste or to "rush" things counter-productively. The bus boycott was nearly ten years after the first NAACP-sponsored bus segregation case (Irene Morgan vs Commonwealth of Virginia).

2. They picked what particular individual or case to support and who to pass over, regardless of the merits of their particular case or their affiliation with the NAACP (Rosa Parks after and over Claudette Colvin, even though both were actively involved in the NAACP - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/26/books/26colvin.html?_r=2&hp& )

3. They kept it a human rights/civil liberties issue, separate from party political issues.

4. They pursued legal cases exhaustively and extensively to the highest courts available as well as "direct action".

5. Most importantly, they had very broad based support, not only of their own group ("CP") but of others, and unquestionably represented the people they were campaigning for.

I will NOT enter into any discussion of the "blame game" here as it is not relevant and this post is NOT about that, but evidently activism CAN work and CAN achieve positive results IF it is done in the right way and it can also lead to disasters if it is done in the wrong way. Before anyone makes their mind up about what action should be taken at Sochi (or against the laws, or anywhere else) it could be a good idea to think about what has worked in the past and why.

You describe a highly disciplined, organized and systematic campaign conceived and implemented by a determined people who, because of their color were readily identifiable and who were united and believed their time had come to assert themselves against prejudice, discrimination, hate.

Yes, a highly organized well conceived and implemented campaign can be effective. Of course. But not every time or in every place or in every circumstance. So if you might be suggesting that Russian gays undertake to imitate the U.S. Civil Rights Movement of 60 years ago, you would be both out of place and out of time, at a minimum.

For one thing, Russia doesn't have the Bill of Rights to its Constitution, which of course includes the First Amendment right of freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, i.e., the right to protest and to demonstrate. The Russian law is an "anti-propaganda" law which would never get past a U.S. District Court Judge but which flourishes in Russia.

If you are suggesting gays globally and in general adopt this approach then you'd be talking about trying to herd cats.

If you might be suggesting gay athletes and their supporters who go to the Sochi Olympics undertake such an effort you'd be out of step, inconsistent to their primary purpose and mission over the past several years - they are Olympians going to an Olympic Games focused on competing and to win medals.

The post is an excellent summary of the principles, methods, techniques of the U.S. Civil Rights Movement of 60 years ago. Beyond that, it exists in a vacuum because you haven't tried to apply it to anything else, anywhere else, in any other time or circumstance. That of course includes the present.

In other words, I don't know to whom you are speaking, why, where, when, or to what purpose. I don't know why I should give any serious consideration to your glittering generality. It just hangs out there.

I didn't raise the comparison nor have I done so before when it has been raised in similar circumstances - maybe you should be asking the poster who did why, when or to what purpose it was made and others why they (you) "liked" the comparison then but think so little of it now. It seems difficult to have it both ways.

[FDog]

With regard to athletes waving rainbow flags or wearing pins etc. It really has nothing to do with the Russian authorities.

It is simply against IOC rules to take part in any demonstration at any Olympic site.

So even if the Russkies did nothing, any athlete that decided to wander in waving a rainbow flag could well be sent home on the next available flight.

[Jingthing]

With regard to athletes waving rainbow flags or wearing pins etc. It really has nothing to do with the Russian authorities.

It is simply against IOC rules to take part in any demonstration at any Olympic site.

So even if the Russkies did nothing, any athlete that decided to wander in waving a rainbow flag could well be sent home on the next available flight.

Hold on there for a moment. Actually, this is more about how the IOC has decided to INTERPRET the rules in the wake up this gay Sochi controversy. They have chosen to take the stand you describe but they could just have easily decided that such things as rainbow pins WERE allowable. The wording of the rules and the nature of what rainbow pins are made that a possible call, so this was their CHOICE. So not only is Russia coming into heat from this, so is the IOC who is acting as an enforcer for the anti-gay Russian laws. This isn't over. It's still early.

[Jingthing]

I didn't raise the comparison nor have I done so before when it has been raised in similar circumstances - maybe you should be asking the poster who did why, when or to what purpose it was made and others why they (you) "liked" the comparison then but think so little of it now. It seems difficult to have it both ways.

Rosa Parks did a brave act of civil disobedience whether she had become famous for it or not.

I reckon there will be a number of such brave acts of civil disobedience at Sochi and mostly from people who will not become famous for it.

You made this into a big academic essay that wasn't relevant to the core point -- in the face of oppression things don't just change magically if you do NOTHING.

[rgs2001uk]

^^^^^^, look forward to reading your on the spot reporting from Sochi about what YOU are doing about it.

[Jingthing]

^^^^^^, look forward to reading your on the spot reporting from Sochi about what YOU are doing about it.

I am not going. I don't love winter sports and I don't have that kind of money to burn. I did go to one Summer Olympics. Munich. (Uh oh.) If you know what happened there, maybe it's best I don't go, could be a curse.

I never implied that I am going. That isn't the point. But I DO support any people, crowd or athletes, Russian and foreign, who decide to risk arrest or beatings in protest at Sochi. I think it's important NOT to be silent as in Berlin.

[LeCharivari]

...

In other words, I don't know to whom you are speaking, why, where, when, or to what purpose. I don't know why I should give any serious consideration to your glittering generality. It just hangs out there.

Indeed!

My take on that essay is that if protests against Russian homophobia can't be like that, and they CAN'T, then better to do NOTHING. In summary, an overblown apologia for doing NOTHING.

Your "take", as usual, has nothing to do with what I wrote which I thought was clear in the conclusion: "evidently activism CAN work and CAN achieve positive results IF it is done in the right way and it can also lead to disasters if it is done in the wrong way. Before anyone makes their mind up about what action should be taken at Sochi (or against the laws, or anywhere else) it could be a good idea to think about what has worked in the past and why."

I don't see anything there that says "to do NOTHING".

What I am saying, to use the NAACP/Rosa parks incident as an allegory since you are so fond of it, is that any action should be decided by the people who use the bus - not by those who have never been on the bus so they have no idea what it's like or who don't need to use the bus. Maybe they think that sitting at the back of the bus is better than being thrown off it completely? Maybe they'd sooner sit at the back than be run over by it? Maybe they think there is a better time?

There are right ways and wrong ways - not just ONE way. What was already tried by a lone Russian activist supported by a few foreign activist was a disaster, however much or how little responsibility you apportion to them (and I am NOT going to discuss that here).

What I am saying, and have said repeatedly, is that the views of the several million Russian gays who are the ones on the receiving end need to be paramount - not the views of some foreigners or some anti-Putin activists who are using this for their own political agendas which have little or nothing to do with gay rights. If you take the time to look at the open letter from 23 Russian "gay activists", for example, which has been made much of as a rallying point for foreign gay activists, many of the signatories are simply anti-Putin activists who happen to be gay and who are making the most of an opportunity to get the West's help for their own political ends, such as the Solidarity Movement which has NEVER previously made any sort of statement about LGBT rights at all (and, as far as I am aware, still hasn't).

The whole anti-gay issue in Russia has simply been hijacked by anti-Putin political activists for their own ends. Gay rights are irrelevant to those doing the bashing - they are simply concerned with "Putin the dictator". The posts here are, sadly, a reflection of that.

[Jingthing]

I'd rather come across as a person calling Putin out as a dictator, which he is, than as an APOLOGIST for the man, especially his despicable scapegoating of gays. Politics is part of life, can't be helped. Rational people don't even try. Gay people in Russia are not living in a political vacuum, just as any people living anywhere aren't. Expecting purity of message from human beings without any taint of politics is patently unrealistic.

OK, maybe there IS one country that is an exception to this:

[rubin]

To Jingthing. "I am especially disgusted by the implicit support of Putin for the Nazi attacks." Could you please show me proof of you words about Putin supporting Nazi attacks.

I can tell this. Even during Soviet times, gays could openly meet together at places like "PLEVNA" (this is one kilometer from the Red Square) and Gay beach in Strogino district of Moscow, gay clubs "Shans", gay magazine "Queer" and others and nobody was hurting or harrasing them. The problem was in the gays themselves, like Mr Alexeev, a provocateur who discredited the gay movement in Russia by his deeds.

[LeCharivari]

Maybe they will take steps to ensure nothing discriminatory happens just before and during the Olympics so that they won't lose further face or take criticism BUT what about, for example, after the Olympics ?!

Don't you care about human rights ?! I guess you probably don't because you seem to be a Putin supporter.

Russia under Putin has become a semi-dictatorial state with fascist tendencies. I am sure you have read about the high number of racist attacks that have happened in the last decade or so, by an increasing number of Neo-Nazi and similar thugs in Russia.

You may be reading some of the unfounded abuse that is being said about me rather than what I have actually written here and elsewhere.

I don't want to stray off topic so I'll simply answer your question.

Yes, I do care about human rights - I just don't see human rights in Russia as of more importance than human rights anywhere else and bad though it may be in comparison to other countries Russia is nowhere near the top of the list. I am aware that this thread is about Russia so will not look at other countries specifically, but I can't help wondering why so many "activists" (particularly American activists) have decided to ignore those countries and to focus their attention on Russia and, more specifically, on Putin - so much so that gay rights are taking second place to Putin bashing (and I am referring to statements in the media as well as posts here).

That isn't what human rights is about - or at least it shouldn't be.

No, I am not a Putin supporter; I don't know enough about him one way or the other to become involved in a political debate and, in any case, that would be irrelevant here. On the other hand, knowledge is always comparative.

[LeCharivari]

I'd rather come across as a person calling Putin out as a dictator, which he is, than as an APOLOGIST for the man, especially his despicable scapegoating of gays. Politics is part of life, can't be helped. Rational people don't even try. Gay people in Russia are not living in a political vacuum, just as any people living anywhere aren't. Expecting purity of message from human beings without any taint of politics is patently unrealistic.

OK, maybe there IS one country that is an exception to this:

ccl.jpg

I'd rather come across as someone who is honest about gay rights than as someone who is using them to forward their own political agenda .

[LeCharivari]

(edited) There are indeed parallels between Hitler's treatment of Jews at that stage and Putin's treatment of gays NOW. ...

Name them.

At that stage (1936) the Nuremberg laws defined a Jew as someone with one Jewish grandparent subject to the following legislation:

They were deprived of German citizenship and banned from having sexual relations with Germans and from taking any part in German civic life, including voting or holding any public office, joining the DAF or the military, or representing their country in any way.

They could not be employed as lawyers, doctors, tax consultants, vets or journalists or use public parks, libraries or beaches.

They could not use state hospitals or attend state high schools.

Jews were forbidden to display the Reich or the national flag or colours, but were allowed to display their own.

The SA and particularly the AK were directly responsible for assaults and attacks on Jews.

Penalties for breaking the laws went up to and included the death penalty.

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007459

Now Russian laws prohibit the promotion of "non-traditional sexual relations to minors", with penalties for individuals ranging between $60 and $135. These laws were turned down by a major defeat in the Duma in 2009, with only 90 out of 450 supporting them.

I am not defending the anti-gay laws or pretending that they are there to "protect" minors - they aren't. They are targeted very clearly at gays, they are homophobic and they are unpleasant and serve no constructive purpose (in my view).

What they are NOT in any way are a parallel to Berlin in 1936 and to represent them as such is, as one poster put it "an insult to the Jewish faith", albeit an understandable one from self-hating Jews like Stephen Fry.

"There are indeed parallels" - name them.

[Jingthing]

To Jingthing. "I am especially disgusted by the implicit support of Putin for the Nazi attacks." Could you please show me proof of you words about Putin supporting Nazi attacks.

I can tell this. Even during Soviet times, gays could openly meet together at places like "PLEVNA" (this is one kilometer from the Red Square) and Gay beach in Strogino district of Moscow, gay clubs "Shans", gay magazine "Queer" and others and nobody was hurting or harrasing them. The problem was in the gays themselves, like Mr Alexeev, a provocateur who discredited the gay movement in Russia by his deeds.

First: look up the word IMPLICIT. That's your answer. If he didn't tolerate these attacks, being the dictator of Russia, he would STOP them. He would loudly publicly DENOUNCE them, He does not.

Never said there weren't gay clubs in Soviet times? SO WHAT if there were? This proves what? Are you implying gay people could safely be "out" in Soviet times? You're confusing possible access to SEX in big cities to gay PEOPLE having the chance to live their lives OPENLY and in dignity and without fear. Not likely in Soviet times and not likely now.

About the Soviet past:

Russia has never been a safe haven for the gay community. Under Stalin’s Soviet rule homosexual relations were made to be illegal. Stalin had said “these scoundrels must receive exemplary punishment,” and that is what they received: a law enacted in 1934 set the punishment for homosexual relations at two to five years in prison. However, in 1993, it was once again made legal. Meaning this latest passage by the lower house of parliament could mean an ugly step towards Russia’s bleak Soviet past.

http://www.gayrva.com/news-views/russias-recent-anti-gay-push-harkens-back-to-soviet-era-intolerance/

[Jingthing]

I'd rather come across as a person calling Putin out as a dictator, which he is, than as an APOLOGIST for the man, especially his despicable scapegoating of gays. Politics is part of life, can't be helped. Rational people don't even try. Gay people in Russia are not living in a political vacuum, just as any people living anywhere aren't. Expecting purity of message from human beings without any taint of politics is patently unrealistic.

OK, maybe there IS one country that is an exception to this:

ccl.jpg

I'd rather come across as someone who is honest about gay rights than as someone who is using them to forward their own political agenda .

If Russians love having a dictator, that's their business. I don't have a political agenda for Russia. I am talking only about the SCAPEGOATING of gays.

[Jingthing]

"There are indeed parallels" - name them.

Hey there, Senor Literal, this has been covered before.

1. General scapegoating of a hated minority for political purposes by a dictator through specifically targeted laws and policies

2. An Olympics occurring during the earlier stages of said scapegoating

Nobody ever said they were exactly the same so don't even bother going there.

The world has the choice now to do NOTHING and cave to the hateful dictator as happened in Berlin, OR ... make a statement.

I vote for making a statement. You can vote another way. Doesn't matter, there will be visible resistance at Sochi.

[Jingthing]

...

Now Russian laws prohibit the promotion of "non-traditional sexual relations to minors", with penalties for individuals ranging between $60 and $135.

...

You have for whatever spin motivation people can only imagine left out the more severe penalties possible from these laws. Mentioning ONLY the more minor ones.

I don't think that is fair to the readers here to give such a misleading impression that the potential penalties are so minor.

So let's correct that impression now, shall we?

As you can see the fines for ORGANIZATIONS are very very HIGH. So they're are basically trying to KILL any potential gay civil rights movement in Russia. You NEED organizations to make any progress. Individuals aren't enough of course.

Dude, this is a HUMAN RIGHTS matter and it is a great thing that international people concerned about human rights in Russia are protesting LOUDLY against these horrific anti-gay Russian policies.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/58649/russia-s-anti-gay-law-spelled-out-in-plain-english

If you’re Russian. Individuals engaging in such propaganda can be fined 4,000 to 5,000 rubles (120-150 USD), public officials are subject to fines of 40,000 to 50,000 rubles (1,200-1,500 USD), and registered organizations can be either fined (800,000-1,000,000 rubles or 24,000-30,000 USD) or sanctioned to stop operations for 90 days. If you engage in the said propaganda in the media or on the internet, the sliding scale of fines shifts: for individuals, 50,000 to 100,000 rubles; for public officials, 100,000 to 200,000 rubles, and for organizations, from one million rubles or a 90-day suspension.

If you’re an alien. Foreign citizens or stateless persons engaging in propaganda are subject to a fine of 4,000 to 5,000 rubles, or they can be deported from the Russian Federation and/or serve 15 days in jail. If a foreigner uses the media or the internet to engage in propaganda, the fines increase to 50,000-100,000 rubles or a 15-day detention with subsequent deportation from Russia.

...

On February 20, 2006, then-Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Zhukov (currently serving as a Deputy Speaker of the State Duma and the President of Russia's Olympic Committee), submitted an official recall to a tabled antigay bill, arguing that the legislation contradicted Russia's criminal code that doesn’t allow to criminalize the propaganda of noncriminal behavior, contains “a row of mistakes and judicial-technical inexactitudes,” and relies on definitions that do not allow to clearly formulate corpus delicti. The May 20, 2004, rebuttal from Mr. Zhukov was even more forthcoming, pointing out that the bill “contradicts article 29 of the Russian Constitution, as well as articles 8, 10, and 14 of the European Convention on human rights.”

I couldn’t put it better than Zhukov. Unfortunately, his resistance to the anti-gay bills of 2004 & 2006 came at a time when the Kremlin cared about Russia’s international reputation. Now it appears to care only about nontraditional sex.

[LeCharivari]

...

Now Russian laws prohibit the promotion of "non-traditional sexual relations to minors", with penalties for individuals ranging between $60 and $135.

...

You have for whatever spin motivation people can only imagine left out the more severe penalties possible from these laws. Mentioning ONLY the more minor ones.

I don't think that is fair to the readers here to give such a misleading impression that the potential penalties are so minor.

So let's correct that impression now, shall we?

As you can see the fines for ORGANIZATIONS are very very HIGH. So they're are basically trying to KILL any potential gay civil rights movement in Russia. You NEED organizations to make any progress. Individuals aren't enough of course.

Dude, this is a HUMAN RIGHTS matter and it is a great thing that international people concerned about human rights in Russia are protesting LOUDLY against these horrific anti-gay Russian policies.

Actually, dude, I COVERED THE PENALTIES IN DETAIL A WEEK AGO when I wrote:

"Individuals can be fined between $60 and $150 and foreigners can be deported and denied re-entry.

If they are running a company doing so they can be fined between $3,000 and $30,000 if they are Russian and fined $3,000 and sentenced to 15 days imprisonment then deported if they are foreigners."

so let's correct the misleading impression that I am putting any "spin motivation" on this, shall we?

[LeCharivari]

With regard to athletes waving rainbow flags or wearing pins etc. It really has nothing to do with the Russian authorities.

It is simply against IOC rules to take part in any demonstration at any Olympic site.

So even if the Russkies did nothing, any athlete that decided to wander in waving a rainbow flag could well be sent home on the next available flight.

Hold on there for a moment. Actually, this is more about how the IOC has decided to INTERPRET the rules in the wake up this gay Sochi controversy. They have chosen to take the stand you describe but they could just have easily decided that such things as rainbow pins WERE allowable. The wording of the rules and the nature of what rainbow pins are made that a possible call, so this was their CHOICE. So not only is Russia coming into heat from this, so is the IOC who is acting as an enforcer for the anti-gay Russian laws. This isn't over. It's still early.

Hold on there for a moment.

Where does this IOC "rule" come from banning rainbow pins?

What "stand" are you talking about?

Why are you so sure this is how "the IOC has decided to INTERPRET the rules"? What was "their CHOICE"?

What do you know that nobody else knows? How do you know so much that none of the rest of us can validate?

As far as I am aware the ONLY statement by the IOC was that " the IOC has a clear rule laid out in the Olympic Charter (Rule 50) which states that the venues of the Olympic Games are not a place for proactive political or religious demonstration. This rule has been in place for many years and applied when necessary. In any case, the IOC would treat each case individually and take a sensible approach depending on what was said or done."

[Jingthing]

...

so let's correct the misleading impression that I am putting any "spin motivation" on this, shall we?

No, I won't do that, because your most recent post mentioning fines in an essay illustrating how trivial the Russian laws are compared to the Nazis ... to support your point you included ONLY the most minor fine example.

Also in my last post I detailed the possible penalties and JAIL TIME for foreigners as well.

Back to the macro truth of this: Putin is trying to KILL any chance of a gay civil rights movement in Russia from having any chance of growing, or even EXISTING. Again, this is a human rights matter.

[Jingthing]

...

Maybe they just DREAM OF BEING LEFT ALONE and the "good old days" of the late 90's before being gay became a political issue.

I think that's your PROJECTION onto the Russian gays. Yes, that would be better than now. But now is now. Now what? Nothing?

[Jingthing]

With regard to athletes waving rainbow flags or wearing pins etc. It really has nothing to do with the Russian authorities.

It is simply against IOC rules to take part in any demonstration at any Olympic site.

So even if the Russkies did nothing, any athlete that decided to wander in waving a rainbow flag could well be sent home on the next available flight.

Hold on there for a moment. Actually, this is more about how the IOC has decided to INTERPRET the rules in the wake up this gay Sochi controversy. They have chosen to take the stand you describe but they could just have easily decided that such things as rainbow pins WERE allowable. The wording of the rules and the nature of what rainbow pins are made that a possible call, so this was their CHOICE. So not only is Russia coming into heat from this, so is the IOC who is acting as an enforcer for the anti-gay Russian laws. This isn't over. It's still early.

Hold on there for a moment.

Where does this IOC "rule" come from banning rainbow pins?

What "stand" are you talking about?

Why are you so sure this is how "the IOC has decided to INTERPRET the rules"? What was "their CHOICE"?

What do you know that nobody else knows? How do you know so much that none of the rest of us can validate?

As far as I am aware the ONLY statement by the IOC was that " the IOC has a clear rule laid out in the Olympic Charter (Rule 50) which states that the venues of the Olympic Games are not a place for proactive political or religious demonstration. This rule has been in place for many years and applied when necessary. In any case, the IOC would treat each case individually and take a sensible approach depending on what was said or done."

Oy vey, dude! I posted about this before. The controversy about this is all over the internet. If you are only aware of the IOC spiel, some increased awareness would be in order. OBVIOUSLY the IOC has leeway in how they interpret the rules at a specific level on rainbow pins or no rainbow pins as actually being a political display under the rules. If a Jew wears a Star of David, is that a political display as well? Yes, Virginia, I am indeed referring again to the Berlin 1936 Olympics.

This is same kind of total cooperation the Olympic officials gave towards Hitler at Berlin in 1936. Today's IOC is repeating that kind of shameful history. But it's not too late. MASSIVE PRESSURE can still be applied to the IOC.

Here is one link. You could find a number of others:

According to an article in Gay Star News (available here), the IOC has done the unthinkable; announcing it will discipline athletes at the Olympics who attempt to stand up for human rights by wearing a rainbow pin, waving a rainbow flag, etc. The IOC is quoting a rule in the Olympic Charter, saying that such a display would be considered a ‘political display’ and is not allowed.

Perhaps they haven’t stopped to consider that they themselves are violating the Olympic Charter in their lackadaisical approach to opposing Russia’s hateful laws.

http://goldmedalmessage.wordpress.com/2013/08/12/calling-all-international-sports-federations/

[Publicus]

"Don't make a fuss and the people who hate us will let us be." Extraordinary.

Stay at the back of the bus Rosa!

The NAACP's handling of the Montgomery bus issue after the Browder vs Gale ruling is particularly relevant to both Russia's anti-gay propaganda law and any action taken over the Sochi Olympics, and there's a lot we can and should learn from it.

As far as I am aware it is one of the best examples of how activism done in the RIGHT WAY and at the RIGHT TIME can achieve positive results.

1. Nothing was done in haste or to "rush" things counter-productively. The bus boycott was nearly ten years after the first NAACP-sponsored bus segregation case (Irene Morgan vs Commonwealth of Virginia).

2. They picked what particular individual or case to support and who to pass over, regardless of the merits of their particular case or their affiliation with the NAACP (Rosa Parks after and over Claudette Colvin, even though both were actively involved in the NAACP - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/26/books/26colvin.html?_r=2&hp& )

3. They kept it a human rights/civil liberties issue, separate from party political issues.

4. They pursued legal cases exhaustively and extensively to the highest courts available as well as "direct action".

5. Most importantly, they had very broad based support, not only of their own group ("CP") but of others, and unquestionably represented the people they were campaigning for.

I will NOT enter into any discussion of the "blame game" here as it is not relevant and this post is NOT about that, but evidently activism CAN work and CAN achieve positive results IF it is done in the right way and it can also lead to disasters if it is done in the wrong way. Before anyone makes their mind up about what action should be taken at Sochi (or against the laws, or anywhere else) it could be a good idea to think about what has worked in the past and why.

You describe a highly disciplined, organized and systematic campaign conceived and implemented by a determined people who, because of their color were readily identifiable and who were united and believed their time had come to assert themselves against prejudice, discrimination, hate.

Yes, a highly organized well conceived and implemented campaign can be effective. Of course. But not every time or in every place or in every circumstance. So if you might be suggesting that Russian gays undertake to imitate the U.S. Civil Rights Movement of 60 years ago, you would be both out of place and out of time, at a minimum.

For one thing, Russia doesn't have the Bill of Rights to its Constitution, which of course includes the First Amendment right of freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, i.e., the right to protest and to demonstrate. The Russian law is an "anti-propaganda" law which would never get past a U.S. District Court Judge but which flourishes in Russia.

If you are suggesting gays globally and in general adopt this approach then you'd be talking about trying to herd cats.

If you might be suggesting gay athletes and their supporters who go to the Sochi Olympics undertake such an effort you'd be out of step, inconsistent to their primary purpose and mission over the past several years - they are Olympians going to an Olympic Games focused on competing and to win medals.

The post is an excellent summary of the principles, methods, techniques of the U.S. Civil Rights Movement of 60 years ago. Beyond that, it exists in a vacuum because you haven't tried to apply it to anything else, anywhere else, in any other time or circumstance. That of course includes the present.

In other words, I don't know to whom you are speaking, why, where, when, or to what purpose. I don't know why I should give any serious consideration to your glittering generality. It just hangs out there.

I didn't raise the comparison nor have I done so before when it has been raised in similar circumstances - maybe you should be asking the poster who did why, when or to what purpose it was made and others why they (you) "liked" the comparison then but think so little of it now. It seems difficult to have it both ways.

The post is self explanatory.

Perhaps one or two readers missed the fact.

[Publicus]

I'd rather come across as a person calling Putin out as a dictator, which he is, than as an APOLOGIST for the man, especially his despicable scapegoating of gays. Politics is part of life, can't be helped. Rational people don't even try. Gay people in Russia are not living in a political vacuum, just as any people living anywhere aren't. Expecting purity of message from human beings without any taint of politics is patently unrealistic.

OK, maybe there IS one country that is an exception to this:

ccl.jpg

I'd rather come across as someone who is honest about gay rights than as someone who is using them to forward their own political agenda .

Gay bashing anywhere is a political agenda. Making a law - any law - is a political process involving politicians. Choosing which laws to make comes from a political agenda.

Opposing one political agenda with a contrasting political agenda is the nature of the beast.

Late in 2012 the U.S. Senate voted 85-13 to allow gays to serve in the military. As there are 100 senators, that's a big majority The point however is that the 100 senators are elected, two from each state, to legislate in Washington DC. The vote was a political vote by politicians who voted on a political agenda item.

In Russia the politicians voting their own political agenda for their own political purposes just did the opposite thing (not involving the military) concerning gay rights.

There's no escaping the politics of it.

(edited) ...

The Civil Rights Movement didn't get overly specific. The Constitution of the U.S. is not overly consumed with massive amounts of particulars or details. The U.S. Gay Rights Movement succeeded with only one encompassing statement, "Someone in your life is gay."

That changed the U.S. overnight.

That's all it took.

One true statement that affected everyone, whether they liked it or not. Most people came to accept and even to like recognizing the fact.

"The US Gay Rights Movement succeeded" ...

Maybe we could discuss your view of "success" in another topic, possibly in the Gay Forum as its so off topic here. That's one of the most amusing things I've read on here for a long time.

I know you can't say enough about these issues but, frankly, I've better things to do with my time and energies.