Russians Pass Ban On “Gay Propaganda” While Banning Gay Pride Parades in Capitol For 100 Years

The plight of homosexuals in Russia is getting worse under Vladimir Putin.  Gays and lesbians had their own Spring movement after the fall of the Soviet Union — coming out of the closet after decades of repression.  Then came Putin and his alliance with the Russian Orthodox Church. Putin’s government quickly used gays and lesbians as targets of political attacks. Those political attacks have now turned to actual attacks as thugs raid gay bars and clubs — beating down both men and women while the police do nothing.  The recent legislation banning “gay propaganda” (and a ban on parades for 100 years in Moscow) has triggered the increase in attacks as homophobes see official support for their violent campaigns.

Alyona Korolyova, 47, watched helplessly as her girlfriend was kicked in the head as part of an organized attack by masked men.

The attack came during a celebration of the internationally observed National Coming Out Day. The men clearly had prepared for the attack and the police did not intervene. She reported that “At around 9.30pm, a group of masked men ran by me, yelled: ‘This fight has been ordered’ and began overturning tables, throwing chairs and beating whomever fell under their hands.”

Eight Russian regions have banned “homosexual propaganda” in the past year – Arkhangelsk, Ryazan, Kostroma, Magadan, Novosibirsk, Krasnodar, Bashkortostan and St Petersburg. A national ban is now being prepared in the Duma.

It is all part of the regression of Russia under the authoritarian image of Putin.

The Russian Supreme Court vote to uphold the ban on “gay propaganda” in its review of the Arkhangelsk region’s ban. However, it ruled that gay pride parades and other demonstrations in support of gay rights are legal while banning direct appeals to children.

Gay and lesbians Russians have shown considerable courage in refusing to return to the closet and passivity. They continue to push for full rights, particularly free speech rights.

Source: Guardian

62 thoughts on “Russians Pass Ban On “Gay Propaganda” While Banning Gay Pride Parades in Capitol For 100 Years”

  1. I’m leaving it up for people to make up their own minds, why can’t you just breathe and let it go. I’m done. Say your last word and then go finish your paper route.

  2. You could just say, “Yeah. I guess in light of now knowing the proper terminology, Putin’s acts were more totalitarian than Communist.”

    Or you can continue to play with your . . . shovel.

  3. Deflection and non-responsive.

    You should be less concerned with what I am doing (which is supervising plumbers while thrashing you on my laptop) than with the fact you are losing this argument badly.

  4. I guess when you’re an underachiever this constitutes being “crazy busy.” When I was busy running my own agency I worked 80 hours a week. You are less busy than a govt. bureaucrat.

  5. Yep. I sure did.

    You should probably read what I just posted before digging your hole any deeper, nick.

  6. The thread where Gene took someone to task regarding talking about a dead relative was the Watering Down the 4th Amendment post @ 10:56a.

  7. “nick spinelli 1, October 31, 2012 at 11:49 am

    Wow!! Gene, SWM, and the callous, mean, horrible Nick Spinelli agreeing on KC bbq. [. . .]”

    An exchange made directly to me, to which I responded:

    “Gene H. 1, October 31, 2012 at 1:41 pm

    The funny thing about Hitler is that he loved his dog.”

    Which had nothing to do with your exchange with LK which I was not involved in. To which your response was:

    “nick spinelli 1, October 31, 2012 at 5:21 pm

    Gene, How classy!”

    Resulting in the following exchange:

    “Gene H. 1, October 31, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    Hitler did love his dog, nick. That’s a historical fact. The point, which obviously went over your head, is that liking something good does not make you a good person. It simply means you like something good. You liking something good that I happen to like does not give us anything but the most superficial of common ground and does not mitigate you previously putting your foot in your mouth in any form. It is still more deflection on your part. Innocence by association works no better than guilt by association if you don’t know how to use the rhetorical tools properly. However, if you want to talk about class, how about starting the discussion with how uncouth one must be to minimize those rightly concerned with a life threatening storm. That’s a far more robust way to address the subject. It shows a remarkable insensitivity for not only their situation but their rightful assessments of concern in the face of danger because they don’t meet up to some ridiculous macho preening posturing ideal. Doesn’t it, buttercup? But who knows if it is classy or not? No one. Classy is not an objective standard, but a subjective one. No one said what you said was classy or not. The criticism was directly to the callous nature of your comments. Personally, I think people who say things about how classy something is or isn’t are usually devoid of any substantive praise or criticism other than a weak appeal to their own preferences. Classiness and dictating what is and isn’t is not only a weak subjective concept, it is inherently elitist in begging the question that you the speaker are the arbiter of class. Weak ego-centrist opinion wrapped in condescension. Your opinion of classiness has no more value than any other opinion unsubstantiated by an objective standard of some sort like logic or evidence. And like any unsubstantiated opinion, it is as ephemeral as smoke.

    For example, contrast your pronouncement of classiness with my reasoned critique of the idea of classiness. Mine was reason based in quantitative terms and logic dissecting the uselessness of such pronouncements by showing them in the conceptual context of what they are. Yours was simply expressing your opinion over a point you completely missed in the first place. The later has instructive and analytical value, the former not so much.

    I know subtly isn’t your strong suit, but do try to keep up.

    Carry on.
    nick spinelli 1, October 31, 2012 at 7:14 pm

    Gene, I would say you were raised by wolves in Johnson County but there are no reports of wolves there for over a century. Plus, wolves have a social structure and skills. Are you giving out candy today, or just lecturing kids on the need to revere logic? Stop digging your own hole. I was talking to SWM about my deceased sister and food. Why did you feel compelled to inject your hate? It wasn’t logical for someone w/ a soul.

    It’s cocktail hour on the west coast so I predict this will get even nastier. Why don’t you say your last hateful words. Why not compare me to Pol Pot and Stalin while you drink your Ketel One? And then move on. You’re an embarassment.
    Gene H. 1, October 31, 2012 at 7:38 pm

    Once again, you succeed in completely missing the point, nick. I wasn’t comparing you to anyone. Did I say you were Hitler? No. I was pointing to his loving his dog as an example of a relationship. I was making a statement about one liking something good and the relationship it has to one being a good person or not – namely that it has none. Hate has nothing to do with it either. You again value yourself too highly if you think I’d go to the effort to hate you. Hate is work. Hate is for mortal enemies. You? You’re a very minor annoyance at best so do try to keep things in proper perspective. I know, I know, proper perspective is not your strong suit either, but do muddle along.

    If you’re embarrassed though? That would be your problem and an actually appropriate reaction for your earlier statements about those concerned with the storm. Personally, I’m not embarrassed nor is anyone of any consequence to me so unless you were talking about your reaction, I don’t know what you’re talking about. Then again, neither do you quite often so I don’t feel bad about that either.

    And thanks for the compliment. Wolves rock.”
    So given that exchange in its totality, it is apparent by the evidence that you are conflating insult to your sister to manufacture some sort of attempt at sympathetic righteous indignation to deflect that once again you said something wrong and someone challenged you on it.


    You’ll have to do better than that to prove I’m a hypocrite.

    You, however and as alluded to on that thread, did a fine job at illustrating you are a hypocrite by claiming to be some sort of empathetic humanist and yet minimizing the concerns and the people who rightly held them in the encroaching face of Hurricane Sandy.

    About now, a smart person would know they should walk away instead of further looking to exacerbate the situation, nick.

    Shall I pull up your own words and the admonishments of many to prove that point concerning you and Hurricane Sandy beyond reasonable doubt or do you want to cut your losses now? Hoisting you further on your own petard only amuses me, but I will if you wish to insist.

    Let’s see how smart you are.

  8. Eeyore, Blue collar, ethnic gentlemen do, that’s my background and I’m damn proud of it. Generally, ballbusting is quite prevalent amongst most men in the east. I learned in the midwest it can be perceived like you apparently do. When I sense someone can’t handle ballbusting I stop..that’s what a gentleman does. Blouise is tougher than most of the men here.

  9. Yeah, nick. They sure can. And unlike you, most of them can process what was said better than you.

  10. People can read the exchange on the 10/3012 post “Still Virginia Bound”. At 1:11p I end a series of comments w/ SWM about my deceased sister. Then Gene makes his Hitler/dog comment. I’ll let folks make up their own mind about how appropriate your comment was. Then followed w/ your admonition yesterday to someone regarding commenting about dead relatives. I forget the thread, maybe you remember. Folks can make up their own minds.

  11. Malisha: “Look at Putin. Do YOU think he is strictly heterosexual? Gee, where’s that gaydar article when you really need it?”

    LOL, word.

    My only reservation is that he was head of the KGB, his thing is control and any attendant pain is not an issue with him. Unlike others here I don’t think he has any political affinity, you don’t get to be the head of the KGB by being an ideolog, you get there by being a murderous sociopath. Any party affiliation was simply a matter of pragmatic convenience. He would have done as well as a Fascist; it’s about him, not a party.

    Like W I have looked in his eyes (in any number of photos) and all I saw was shark’s eyes, no humanity there at all. Actually, it makes me feel bad for sharks to use that analogy; I respect sharks.

  12. I didn’t know you were short. Most people can rationalize more succintly than you just did. I was done awhile back, read the transcript.

  13. Whatever you want to think, nick. You’re the one with the tough guy complex whenever someone challenges what you say. But thanks for the veiled “I could kick your ass”. That always makes me laugh. The bottom line is you might be able to kick my ass, nick, who knows, but you’d be going to the ER and wearing at least one cast home for your efforts. I’m a big fairly well trained guy and I play a mean defense. I’m just not so dumb as to play the tough guy. It really rankles your feathers that I’m not intimidated by you in the slightest though, mentally or physically. Also you supposition about my childhood is laughable. Like all lil’ boys, I won some, I lost some, but unlike most lil’ boys, I was the kid who got sent home on a regular basis for thrashing the bullies picking on the disabled kids.

    As far as hypocrisy goes? Using yet another word you don’t understand. Hypocrisy is the practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case. My standards and beliefs are just as I have stated. If you think you can prove otherwise? Knock yourself out. As I have stated, I don’t suffer fools gladly. That I find you a fool is another matter.

    You also still totally managed to miss the point of the Hitler example even though I explained it to you in such simple detail a child could understand it and it had nothing to do with you and your sister. The point was about you and BBQ and that liking something good in common with another person does not make you de facto good or have anything substantive in common. It merely means you like something good. If you choose to be insulted at this point, that is is your choice. However, any false equivalences about your sister are not from me comparing her to a dog but rather you mistaking her for BBQ because you can’t properly process example by analogy with that mediocre mind of yours. I’m sure she was a lovely person and I’m sorry for your loss, but really, your outrage over this imagined slight is just imaginary. I’m not going to apologize for your misconception, especially after I explained in detail what I meant.


    Are you done?

  14. And here’s an opinion of Ryazan dweller. I have a friend who’s a lesbian. That’s what she told me about the parades: ” I enloy living with my friend and we do not wish to turn our happy life into political circus, because parades in Moscow are political circus”. And that’s what it is.

  15. BF, I will take you @ your word. If you didn’t direct that comment about ad hominen attacks @ me, or solely @ me, then I’m sorry. I’m a gentleman, raised by a gentleman.

  16. No. A formal debate has a judge(s). No judge is needed or prescribed to deliberate a topic du jour.

    You know that, Dredd.

    Is “classy” up for debate? Are you judging?

    Folks come here by choice, as well. No one is forced to subject themselves to the haranguing, bullying comments section, as far as I’ve observed.

Comments are closed.