….By Speaking Truth. Journalist James Kirchick, a friend of this forum, appeared on Russia’s international English-language propaganda channel “RT” and expressed himself about Russia’s anti-gay laws and the Putin government’s violence-promoting crackdown against gay Russians.
And via the Wall Street Journal:
With more and more people speaking out, one wonders what to expect at Sochi. Given the high profile and success of gay activism in the last few years, it’s doubtful the Russians will be able to stage the kind of uplifting spectacle most of us have come to expect from the Olympic games. We may be in for an altogether different kind of fireworks.
More. The Communist Roots of Russian Homophobia:
While it is among the most evil manifestations, Russia’s homophobia is just one symptom of its collectivist and tyrannous history. It acts as a reminder that tolerance does not require secularity so much as a free society where all individuals, regardless of their religion, political beliefs, gender identity or sexual orientation, are allowed to live their lives in peace without state interference.
Furthermore. Sadly, according to many accounts, Putin’s anti-gay campaign has increased his popularity within Russia. Via Hot Air:
[Putin] needed an enemy on which to focus the public’s attention and so he chose gays, partly because he could portray them popularly as a threat to the Russian Orthodox Church and partly because it would allow him to draw a contrast with how gays are treated in the feared and loathed west. Why he didn’t choose Jews as the designated scapegoat instead, as many Russian leaders before him have, I don’t know. Could be that global awareness of anti-semitism as a tool of oppression is now such that no “respectable” fascist outside the Middle East will practice it too overtly. Better to beat on the gays instead, he probably figures, since he can still get international backing from some world leaders on that in public.
24 Comments for “Shaming Russia…”
posted by Tom Jefferson III on
It is good to raise awareness about LGBT rights in Russia or elsewhere. Their are some groups dedicated to LGBT rights from an international perspective, as well as groups within Amnesty International and the Human Rights Watch.
The challenge is that I am not terribly sure how much Russia — and by ‘Russia’ I mean the not-so-nice people running the country — care about what the international community, or NGOs think about Russia’s record with respects to democracy and human rights.
People have vocalized opposition to the increased control and centralization of the Russia media, but I am not sure that the not-so-nice people really cared too much and I doubt that their is much of a free, independent press in Russia.
By all means, generate more international attention and awareness about LGBT rights in Russia, but I am skeptical about the prospect of that changing the laws or attitudes within Russia itself.
posted by Mike in Houston on
This isn’t about changing attitudes in Russia — it’s about changing behaviors.
Change the behavior — don’t hit, don’t discriminate, etc. — and the attitudes will follow.
Our best course is to continue to shame Putin and his cohorts. Ridicule on the international stage coupled with actions that directly impact the power elite (like the EU not waiving visa requirements for Russian travelers or isolating them on the world stage) may be enough pressure for them to relent — or at least to confine this type of odious law within their borders.
Sochi is now the gay games — like it or not Mr. Putin.
posted by Houndentenor on
It’s not a Putin problem. I don’t like him either, but the anti-gay laws have broad public support. They can’t be blamed on a single individual.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
It’s not a Putin problem. I don’t like him either, but the anti-gay laws have broad public support. They can’t be blamed on a single individual.
Nonsense. While Russia has a long and deep history of exploitable xenophobia (targeting, over the centuries, Jews, gays, and others — read your Russia history), President Putin chose to put match to fire, and chose to target gays and lesbians (as opposed to one or more of the other groups), and he did so cynically and knowingly to shore up his internal political bulwarks. President Putin could have chosen other means to shore up his political situation. He did not.
posted by Tom Jefferson III on
—This isn’t about changing attitudes in Russia — it’s about changing behaviors.
With all due respect I think that the status of LGBT people in Russia is reflected BOTH by attitudes (prevailing) as well as public policy and internal political struggles.
Yes, changing the behavior would be great and something to look forward to. However, if prevailing attitudes are still deeply homophobia (sexist, xenophobic, anti-Semitic), then how seriously are people going to take any sort of civil rights protections?
The main reason that Putin chose to pander to homophobia — as opposed to anti-Jewish bias — is probably because he thought that he could get away with it, more then if he had passed a similar law against Jews or even the liberal political opposition.
Granted, much of the organized political opposition in Russia has not expressed much support for gay rights and its anyone’s guess how better they would be at generally respecting civil and political rights.
Putin probably thought that pandering to homophobia would play well in Russia (and further discredit any political opposition) and that the world might complain, but nothing terribly organized, broad based and serious.
He probably would have been correct had he done this, say, five or ten years ago. Heck, many governments do far worse things to their gays and they generally get ignored.
But the international community has begun to take LGBT rights more seriously, more straight people know someone who is gay and are more likely to see LGBT rights as legitimate human rights issue.
posted by Houndentenor on
I hope people are aware that we are at the beginning of what is going to be a long and frustrating fight. It took years of intense pressure from the outside world to get South Africa to drop Apartheid, and I think this is going to be at least as long a fight and take at least as much pressure.
posted by Jorge on
Well, he made a good try at it. It’s hard to improve much on it even from an armchair
(Those suspenders! I wish I enjoyed wearing bow ties so I could twirl one of those rainbows at work.)
I hope people are aware that we are at the beginning of what is going to be a long and frustrating fight. It took years of intense pressure from the outside world to get South Africa to drop Apartheid, and I think this is going to be at least as long a fight and take at least as much pressure.
A good dramatic movie or two might help. Of course waiting that long has a price.
The problem is that it’s too many men controlling the conversation. This needs an old woman’s touch. You don’t hear about them beating and killing all that many people. (They cannibalize their own children.)
posted by Don on
Am I the only one that noticed Stephen linked the behavior to fascism? I’m just enjoying the schadenfreude of social conservatives and Putin being 100% on the same page.
posted by Houndentenor on
There is a long history of blaming all of your society’s problems on a minority group without the power to defend themselves. It’s easier to blame your problems on someone else. Russia is a mess and Putin has done nothing to make it better. Throwing all that hate on the gays is an unhealthy distraction. What concerns me is how successful such tactics have been so many times in the past and what it has led to.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
There is a long history of blaming all of your society’s problems on a minority group without the power to defend themselves. It’s easier to blame your problems on someone else. … What concerns me is how successful such tactics have been so many times in the past and what it has led to.
Which is why it is a good idea to keep both eyes open around social conservatives in our own country, and fight them tooth and nail.
posted by Jorge on
Am I the only one that noticed Stephen linked the behavior to fascism? I’m just enjoying the schadenfreude of social conservatives and Putin being 100% on the same page.
I rather doubt social conservatives would stand for ignoring the violence.
Anyway, it’s not an original idea. Dan Savage in an interview defending the vodka boycott compared the situation in Russia now to the situation in Germany for the Jews–amending that he doesn’t mean the situation for Jews in 1943, he means the environment in Germany for the Jews in 1933.
You can count me out of any effort to fight social conservatives in this country. I have bigger fish to fry.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
You can count me out of any effort to fight social conservatives in this country. I have bigger fish to fry.
No doubt. But I’ll wager that if you were old enough to have actually experienced what it was like to be gay in the 1950’s and 1960’s (the world that the social conservatives want us to return to) you’d have a different attitude.
posted by Jorge on
You don’t know me very well.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
Sadly, according to many accounts, Putin’s anti-gay campaign has increased his popularity within Russia.
That was the intended result — exploiting Russia’s historical homophobia and the religious opposition of the Russian Orthodox Church for his own political gain — and it worked.
We saw a similar (not equivalent, Houndentenor, but similar) tactic deployed in our own country a decade ago. It produced a temporary boost for the politicians involved, and set us back, but exploiting fear and loathing about homosexuals and leveraging religious opposition didn’t prevail over wider cultural trends toward increasing acceptance in the long run.
The question is whether and how quickly Russian culture can be changed. Russia is far behind where the United States was in 2003 — Russia is stuck, culturally, about where the United States was in the 1950’s, in terms of societal opposition to homosexuality — but social media and other forces outside the control of the government (including pressure from outside the country) may well move Russia’s culture forward more quickly than happened in the United States.
We might see Russian culture move toward tolerance within a decade or two, instead of 40-50 years, which is what it took in our country.
posted by Tom Jefferson III on
Stephen and company;
Yes, historically speaking Marxist theories did tend to be rather prudish and reactionary about sexuality. Although, the folks that were running things before the Soviets (in Russia) or Castro (in Cuba) also tended to be pretty prudish and reactionary about sexuality.
This was one of the major splits between the Communists and the Socialist. Communists were only suppose to care about class oppression and everything else was, at best, a distraction and, at worst, decadent. This has changed — some what — as post-Cold War Communism has imbedded with ideas in favor of liberal democracy, ecology and feminism.
Basically, homosexuality was (in the eyes of old school Communists) seen as a holdover from decadent capitalism. Ironically, folks on the political right over saw homosexuality as part of a Communist plot. The oppression was not particularly nice either way, but the justifications used changed a bit.
Socialists — in contrast — tended to believe that all forms of oppression — including sexuality — needed to be attacked and addressed. Some of the early supporters of gay rights (especially in Germany) were Socialists or, to be a bit more clear, Socialist-Libertarians (BTW, which were the original Libertarians).
Fascists were opposed to gay rights, as were more conservatives (especially with Church ties) and a fair number of mainstream, upper-middle class liberals.
Yes, the Socialists were not perfect proponents of gay rights, but they (and a handful of upper-middle class liberals) were the only ones willing to publicly oppose the criminal law and suggest that society needed a more scientific-broad view on gender and sexuality.
When post-Soviet Russia became more capitalistic — although its more mafia-istic — it only got rid of the anti-gay criminal law because the European governments put pressure on them.
Things have improved — gradually — in Cuba for gay people mainly because of the work that Castro’s grand daughter has done with her institute for sexual health/research.
Things have improved in Communist China for gay people, also because of people publishing more research about gender roles and a more comprehensive view of sexuality.
Yes, Communism — as its traditionally practiced — is not a good way to run a government (if you care about gay rights). Either is a theocracy, military dictatorship or a mafia-cracy.
posted by Throbert McGee on
Sorry for the late response to this thread, but I’ve been following Russian reactions closely for the last several weeks, (I can read the language with pretty good fluency), and I just wanted to ditto what Tom Scharbach said:
Very well said! Indeed, comparisons with Nazi Germany, the Spanish Inquisition, or the Salem witch trials seem needlessly sensationalized — because, indeed, on LGBT issues Russia is basically in the Eisenhower era, except that they’ve got high-speed Internet.
Related to this, I would also say that Russian homophobia runs more or less exactly the same gamut we see here — from the condescending “they’re more to be pitied than censured” to obscene Fred Phelpsian rants, and everything in between.
The main thing that’s distinctive about Russian-style homophobia is that to some degree it’s interwoven with their love/hate relationship towards the West in general and “Pindostan” in particular — combined with a fervent belief that it is Russia’s manifest destiny to be a light unto the nations and a shining city on the hill, etc. Which means that to whatever extent Russians eventually come around on LGBT rights, they will probably insist that their LGBT Community is an improvement over the Western model. (Or, to quote a famous line, “To be or not to be sounds much better in the original Klingon…”)
PS. Why are Americans called pindosy in Russian slang? Basically, it’s a phonetic replacement for a much “saltier” term — a bit like saying “feather-mucking cork-soakers” in English!
posted by Throbert McGee on
To put it another way: Conditions for LGBT Russians today would have seemed fairly “normal” to the vast majority of their American counterparts in the pre-Stonewall era.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
To put it another way: Conditions for LGBT Russians today would have seemed fairly “normal” to the vast majority of their American counterparts in the pre-Stonewall era.
Exactly. And those of us who are old enough to have come of age pre-Stonewall remember the bitter taste of legal/cultural oppression.
I notice today that a number of anti-equality groups have signed a proclamation supporting Russia’s “gay propaganda ban”. The anti-equality forces in this country would like to return us to that era, and it isn’t going to happen.
posted by Houndentenor on
Yes and no. I don’t know of anyone who went to jail for advocating for gay rights (even if they weren’t gay themselves). Yes, things were bad here for gay people for a long time but in Russia they don’t even have free speech rights that would allow gays or allies to make a case for why the law is bad.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
Houndentenor, yes and no. I’ll grant you that the US doesn’t have a history of direct attempts to criminalize LGBT advocacy.
But indirect attempts to suppress LGBT advocacy have been common.
The first SCOTUS case ruling in favor of gays and lesbians (One, Inc. v. Olesen (1958)) involved suppression of LGBT advocacy. The USPS and FBI declared “One: The Homosexual Magazine” obscene, illegal to mail. The owners brought suit, lost at both the District Court and Appellate Court levels, but finally prevailed at the Supreme Court.
And the police frequently cracked down on gay and lesbian “visibility” (involving bars, public meetings, demonstrations and so on) on public indecency and other similar grounds, which, although not directly suppressing speech, were designed to have a chilling effect on speech.
It continues. We’ve since seen a lot of situations (mostly involving schools, admittedly) in which the government attempted to suppress freedom of expression (t-shirts, “Don’t Say Gay”, etc.).
LGBT advocacy is protected by the 1st Amendment, and that’s a difference between this country and Russia, admittedly. But we’ve had to fight indirect suppression of the exercise of that right all along the way.
It is worth remembering, particularly at a time when far-right social conservatives are falling all over themselves to praise the Russian laws.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
I notice, by the way, that a proposed bill in the Russian legislature would disqualify gay parents from being granted custody of their children, similar to how drug addicts and child abusers are disqualified.
That was a relatively common practice in divorce courts in many areas of our country until recently. In the 1960’s and 1970’s, it was it was common for gay and lesbian parents to be stripped of their parental rights altogether divorce cases. The seminal breakthrough was Nadler v. Superior Court, a case in which the California Court of Appeal reprimanded a trial court for ruling that a lesbian mother was presumptively unfit. That case led the way, little by slowly, to an evidence-based, good-of-the-child-centered approach for custody in most states. By the 1990’s most gays and lesbians were not automatically considered unfit for child custody.
But I would point out that it we still see cases in which gay or lesbian parents are stripped of custody in cases where they’ve partnered after divorce. I recall a case as recently as last year.
Obviously, gays and lesbians in our country live in a far better world — a world that we’ve fought hard to bring about — than gays and lesbians in Russia.
But I think it important to remember where we came from, and how hard it was to change things.
posted by Houndentenor on
I realize it used to be about as bad here as it is in Russia now. the difference is that Russian gays don’t have the first amendment and other rights they can use in courts to overturn these laws. I don’t know what they can do if there’s not pressure from outside the country. the comparison to South Africa is probably appropriate (even if the situation isn’t exactly the same…they never are).
posted by Tom Scharbach on
I don’t know what they can do if there’s not pressure from outside the country.
I agree. Russia might — might — change if enough pressure is applied. I think that there are several things our country can do to put on pressure.
First, as I’ve indicated in other comments, I think that our government should take formal measures — a resolution from Congress, statements from the President and State Department, and so on — to condemn the Russian laws.
Second, I think that our government should apply pressure through symbolic means (such as the President’s refusal to meet with Putin at the G-20 Summit while meeting with LGBT activists from that country while in Russia).
Third, I think that our government could take measures to streamline asylum applications from Russian gays and lesbians, as we did for anti-Communists during the Cold War.
Fourth, I think that the government can encourage US companies doing business in Russia, both in public and in private, to put pressure on the Russia government.
Fifth, I think that the government can work with other Western countries to devise methods to put the pressure on Russia, as we have on China and other countries.
Sixth, I think that pro-equality Americans of all political persuasions should push American companies to put pressure on the Russian government, writing and e-mailing, raising the issue at stockholder meetings, and so on. A lot of us divested ourselves of stock of US companies doing business with South Africa, and we ought to consider doing that with companies doing business with Russia, if it comes to that.
Seventh, I think that we should individually pressure on the US Olympic Committee, in particular, and other sports organizations, to in turn put pressure on Russia.
And, finally, I think that we should be calling out social conservatives who are aiding and abetting Russia.
Let’s face it. Many social conservatives have crossed an important line in the last few years, and are now exporting hate, using the wealth and cultural power of the United States to do so.
Social conservatives are actively working and funding anti-gay (I don’t just mean anti-equality, but anti-gay) politicians and laws in Russia, Kenya, Belize and other countries.
Social conservatives in our country are providing the intellectual justification for Russia’s laws. The politicians pushing the “no custody” law, for example, are using the the fraudulent Mark Regnerus study as justification.
And last but not least, a number of our country’s social conservative groups are loudly and proudly supporting the Russian government’s actions.
I think that all of us, from the President on down, should start calling these people out, as clearly and as vigorously as we can, using every avenue at our disposal.
I’m sure that there are lots of other ways in which outside pressure can be put on Russia.
posted by Kosh III on
“And the police frequently cracked down on gay and lesbian “visibility” (involving bars, public meetings, demonstrations and so on) on public indecency and other similar grounds,”
Yes, I am old enough to remember that cops routinely came into the bars, esp on weekend nights and the chill that always ran through the room. They allegedly were checking for underaged drinkers but it was just for the fun of harrassing us.
Once, when I attended a conference with my father and the Ins. Co he worked for(think a bureau with farmers) the question came up about what would happen if it became known that a gay person had a policy.
The response was that legal or not a way would be found somehow to cancel or deny that policy.