Anti-gay 'vote Putin' video goes viral in Russia

[Machismo]

It is defined by State in modern Russia, and State says that the only union it accepts is one between man and woman.

As such any changes can only go through State legislature. And gays are still decades from winning that one.

Noone care what you do in your bedroom in Russia either.

So, you are making our case for us. It's anti-gay government, pushed by a society that is largely homophobic. Thanks for continuously agreeing with our assessment of specific posters on these threads, as well as the general consensus of Russian citizens, as well as the anti-gay stance of the Russian government.

[Shalcker]

"If gay people want us to stop oppressing them, they'll have to fight for it."

Just like black people in US had to fight for their oppression to be stopped.

Noone is going to change their view just because some Americans think they are outdated.

[Machismo]

Just like black people in US had to fight for their oppression to be stopped.

Noone is going to change their view just because some Americans think they are outdated.

And the white people who were oppressing them were racists, just like the Russians who are oppressing gay people are homophobes.

Seriously, you keep proving my point for me, thanks. I don't think for a second you and others are going to change, regressives fight change at all costs. Your refusal to change shows the homophobia.

[Deleted]

3 things

The video stars well-known screen actors but it was unclear who published it.
In one of them, the character sees a gay man sitting in his kitchen filing his nails and eating a banana suggestively.
Russian legislation makes it illegal to present homosexual relationships in a positive way to minors

Yeah.

Sorry, but your post doesn't make much sense Genn, but then just like Tennis you like to post random articles to cause controversy. You also didn't link to the video even.

[Machismo]

3 things



Yeah.

Sorry, but your post doesn't make much sense Genn, but then just like Tennis you like to post random articles to cause controversy. You also didn't link to the video even.

Have you seen the video? I managed to track it down... it was absurd. It's crazy how much people want to sell the fear of gays in Russia.

[Deleted]

Eh, I went and watched the video. Like the previous poster said, the main message in the video is promoting voting and trying to fight voter apathy. The idea is that if you don't vote, you'll get stuff forced on you that you don't want.

yeah, but see that's what Putin actually wants - He is going to win the election, what he wants is a lot people voting, it doesn't matter what they vote for, the results going to be the same, but it looks better if, say, 80% votes, but in elections who don't matter, people generally don't vote.

- - - Updated - - -

Largely because persistent efforts by the Russian government and Russian people in organising efforts at persecution of the LGBTQ community have been trending in media for a while, not so much Russia's racism.

Dude, Russia has been hardcore racist way longer than they have been homophobic.

[Shalcker]

And the white people who were oppressing them were racists, just like the Russians who are oppressing gay people are homophobes.

They didn't win by foreigners writing angry letters, however. But Soviets did cover their plight extensively in their propaganda!
Just like you extensively cover gays in yours now.

[Machismo]

They didn't win by foreigners writing angry letters, however. But Soviets did cover their plight extensively in their propaganda!
Just like you extensively cover gays in yours now.

Once again, all you are doing, is arguing in my favor. You are continuing to prove me right, time and time again. Everything you are saying, is backing up what I have already said about you.

I knew you were going to defend your homophobia. I knew you were going to try and deflect. I knew you were going to justify oppression. You aren't really that hard to figure out.

[Shalcker]

I'm not sure what you are arguing then; people oppose gay marriage in russia based on various reasons... tradition, religion, disgust. It will take years, provided there isn't an authoritarian in government, to change the law, and to do that gay people have to fight for it... which is a lot harder to do when it's against the law to spread "gay propaganda" like "being gay is ok".

But most (if not all - not going to check) current gay marriage laws were passed through legislature, not through popular referendum - that is, using authoritarian means. "Elites/Progressives know better".

Sometimes to the point where it gets immediately reversed by other branch, as happened recently in Bermudas.

And i'm not really convinced it is positive thing.

The point I was making... traditions, and laws change... the only reason they don't is if people continue to oppress change, based on some bias...

People always resist change. Always will.

Ideas that win at any point are not necessarily best, but society still gets built around them.

Great, that applies to gay marriage in the US as well. Two gay people getting married does not harm anyone else's marriage.

People getting married in Russia means multitude of government support programs; gays getting married means either laws being changed to exclude them (which would be more discrimination from your point of view) or less support for those to whom it was intended - "producers of future taxpayers".

[Shalcker]

In the US the ban was removed because it was found to be unconstitutional. It violated our founding principles, and amendments to them.

It was found to be unconstitutional only in 2013 and, as far as i see, only because US government refused to contest it. And before that, clearly, it was considered constitutional; moreover, Bush proposal to add amendment to Constitution that marriage should only be considered as union between man and woman didn't pass by just 49 votes out of 413 total in 2004 House vote.

Again, "Elites deciding" - and, in this case, Democrats pushing agenda set by their states in regard to gay marriage while they held power. And suddenly this particular decision is "truth for all times and entire world"? Come on.

In Russia our constitutional court said that should or shouldn't anything but union of man and women be called marriage is decided by legislators, not by constitutional court. And we don't have neither "pro-gay states" (the most "progressive" one is Moscow either way) nor someone who can (potentially) take power and help gay agenda (even if by simply not hindering the efforts), as it happened in US.

So it is going to be quite a struggle.

I agree, forcing change on a nation does not work, which is why it has to come out from it organically. But for that to happen people have to be free to debate, express, and speak. You don't have that in Russia for gay people. The "gay propaganda" law prevents that.

I don't exactly see how forbidding propaganda to minors stops freedom of debate (because that is all law actually covers); maybe if you think that making impression on them with aim to the future is easier then getting legislator who could push your vision through proper channels now.

Ressisting just to resist, or just due to tradition is illogical. You are free to do it, but many won't respect it because it is objectively "wrong" due to it being illogical.

It is illogical to change just because in some set of countries political struggles led to acceptance of certain views - especially is such struggles are absent in your own country.

True. But ideas that harm people, or restrict freedoms, and make "victimless crimes" are also "not best" in a society. Because people will eventually rise up and change them. A lot of famous Russian authors wrote about that during the various revolutions... as a Russian you should know about them.

And at the very least threat of such uprising is the only way for "ruling party" to budge; and then you got to be powerful enough that they cannot just shut you up by force.

There are no shortcuts - it's a lot of work most people are unwilling to do for such small group as gays.

This is because having children has become incentivised due to the low birth rate in Russia... why not do what the US does... if you have a child you get certain tax breaks... getting married then just becomes a legal document saying you share a household and your assets have "merged" and nothing more.

Because existing programs actually work, and everyone adapted to them as well as considers them when planning for future.

And because most taxes in Russia are paid by employers, not by employees - and poor might not even pay any taxes, so tax break isn't really exciting proposition for most families.

There are direct money for kids (to be used for their education or for housing loan down-payments), there are land grants, and other programs.

[Tackhisis]

those "unalienable" rights are discovered as more people fight for equality.

Marriage, property, inheritance, etc. are not inalienable rights. Those are privileges given by the state. As long as every citizen has the same privileges, no "rights" are infringed. If the state defines the marriage as a union of a woman and a man, there is no reason to claim it is against gay "rights". Gays have no specific rights, as they are not a social group. People can have rights as species, rights as citizens, rights as a social class members, but there are no rights for the blondes, the Buddhists, or homosexuals.

[Moralgy]

Are there people here really saying "gays are fine in Russia", or have I misread the pace of this thread.

[Machismo]

Marriage, property, inheritance, etc. are not inalienable rights. Those are privileges given by the state. As long as every citizen has the same privileges, no "rights" are infringed. If the state defines the marriage as a union of a woman and a man, there is no reason to claim it is against gay "rights". Gays have no specific rights, as they are not a social group. People can have rights as species, rights as citizens, rights as a social class members, but there are no rights for the blondes, the Buddhists, or homosexuals.

That's simply not the case in the United States. Loving v. Virginia rules that marriage is a right, and the SCOTUS ruled that a ban on gay marriage is an infringement upon the 14th Amendment rights of Americans.

[GreenGoldSharpie]

Are there people here really saying "gays are fine in Russia", or have I misread the pace of this thread.

That's the gist of what I'm getting.

Also that LGBT rights always end up back on marriage when there's quite a bit more to it.

[Moralgy]

That's the gist of what I'm getting.

Also that LGBT rights always end up back on marriage when there's quite a bit more to it.

Welp, stay woke mmo-champ, stay woke. rofl

[GreenGoldSharpie]

Welp, stay woke mmo-champ, stay woke. rofl

I definitely don't come here looking for anything insightful.

[Shalcker]

That is not how you pass a constitutional amendment... even if it passed the vote in the senate, it would have to be voted by every state, then three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.

The reason it "died" is because Bush knew he could not pass it.

Still, ~ 4 out of 9 supported the idea.

As the people and the nation evolves those "unalienable" rights are discovered as more people fight for equality.

In Russia it seems to be the opposite... if the government gives you your rights, it can just as easily take them away.

Looking at later posts, it seems that you had sleight of hand performed... first your courts decided that marriage is human right, then because your Constitution protects human rights by another court decision it became protected by Constitution rather then federal law.

When same thing was tried in Russian Constitutional Court (because it's not like noone was watching what was happening in US - and it is our equivalent of Supreme Court), it said that no, in Russia it isn't right, it is privilege given by law (as Takhisis notes), with legislators deciding who is or isn't eligible for it - and currently that is only offered to union of man and woman.

Because the "minors" part is used to mean any "public" channel... because minors "might" see it. Debate happens in colleges, and in government but if no one sees it? Who cares really... it's intellectuals preaching to the choir.

Well, law was created in the first place because that actually happened - homosexual activists came to school and preached to teenagers. Parents got a word about it, complained to legislators, and local legislators banned the practice in Saint-Petersburg specifically.

And because that came as nation-wide scandal (as activists pushed it to front pages of country-wide media in attempt to promote progressive agenda), and polls were quite certain in what was public sentiment, Russian Duma legislators decided to enshrine it as general law for political points.

That's how political change works in Russia - you push things to forefront, you get consequences - sometimes more then you bargained for.

Logic is based on propositions. And those are usually based as measured against some other ideas. Since I spoke about "harm", that is what I meant. Gay people harm no one. Creating laws to ban something that causes no harm is illogical. Because laws are usually created to protect someone from some form of harm.

And this specific law was created because parents have shown obvious and well-proven distress when their children were exposed to propaganda - which led to law banning the practice to protect them.

Just like we can differ in definitions of what is and isn't "human right", so can we differ in which situations are or aren't considered harm.

As far as i see, by same logic considering marriage to only be a thing between man and woman harms noone too. It's just a law, a fact of life, a privilege given to specific case like thousands of others - like support of people in poverty, or veterans.

In fact you don't actually know how many gay people live in russia, so saying "small group" is not verifiable. But rights, and right and wrong should not be based on "number". If someone is wronged, they are wronged. You can either have a nation that values people no matter how small of a population they are, or not.

We have plenty of more numerous groups that could (and occasionally do) ask for special treatment; they mostly don't get it.

So just treat it the same way. If they have kids give them grants, if not don't.

Those are entertwined.

[Machismo]

Still, ~ 4 out of 9 supported the idea.

Looking at later posts, it seems that you had sleight of hand performed... first your courts decided that marriage is human right, then because your Constitution protects human rights by another court decision it became protected by Constitution rather then federal law.

When same thing was tried in Russian Constitutional Court (because it's not like noone was watching what was happening in US - and it is our equivalent of Supreme Court), it said that no, in Russia it isn't right, it is privilege given by law (as Takhisis notes), with legislators deciding who is or isn't eligible for it - and currently that is only offered to union of man and woman.

Well, law was created in the first place because that actually happened - homosexual activists came to school and preached to teenagers. Parents got a word about it, complained to legislators, and local legislators banned the practice in Saint-Petersburg specifically.

And because that came as nation-wide scandal (as activists pushed it to front pages of country-wide media in attempt to promote progressive agenda), and polls were quite certain in what was public sentiment, Russian Duma legislators decided to enshrine it as general law for political points.

That's how political change works in Russia - you push things to forefront, you get consequences - sometimes more then you bargained for.

And this specific law was created because parents have shown obvious and well-proven distress when their children were exposed to propaganda - which led to law banning the practice to protect them.

Just like we can differ in definitions of what is and isn't "human right", so can we differ in which situations are or aren't considered harm.

As far as i see, by same logic considering marriage to only be a thing between man and woman harms noone too. It's just a law, a fact of life, a privilege given to specific case like thousands of others - like support of people in poverty, or veterans.

We have plenty of more numerous groups that could (and occasionally do) ask for special treatment; they mostly don't get it.

Those are entertwined.

You do realize that the Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of laws, right? Let that one sink in for a minute.

The most hilarious part of all of this, is that you are making our cases for us. You are demonstrating not only your own homophobia, but also the homophobia of the Russian populace and government.

Here's the thing, we don't expect Russia to legalize gay marriage. It's a country filled with homophobes. We think of you like Iran in that aspect, you hate gay people to your core, so you are going to restrict their freedoms. The more alarming thing about it, is that your beliefs seem largely dependent on American values... only in reverse. It's like the Russian identity is based solely on doing the opposite of America. Honestly, it's pathetic. You seem to think we are still in this great competition, and you want to try and "beat" us at everything. If America suddenly stopped smoking, because smoking is bad, you guys would smoke more out of spite. I hate to break it to you, but Americans have no desire to compete with Russians, we don't think about the average Russian person at all. We don't hate you, we don't want to fight you. We nothing you. The competition ended a very long time ago, and Russia didn't win.

At some point, you are going to have to accept that Russia is not great. Sure, Russian people can be great, but the country as a whole is found to be wanting in many regards. This is not mean as an insult, I believe the same about the supposedly-vaunted status of the United States. Your patriotism and blind devotion to your country is not endearing, it's a handicap. More than anything, I feel sorry for you. You (personally) are like the self-conscious teenager who makes up lies to get attention. What you don't realize, is that everyone sees through your lies, and thinks less of you for them.

[Tackhisis]

That argument failed the Supreme Court. Homosexuality is a class of people, as it’s a trait. Like gender, or race.

Gender or race do not give any rights. (Gender does actually give some limited rights to women due to their unique anatomy).

It is also unclear why anyone outside the USA should pay any attention to its Supreme Court.

...so you are going to restrict their freedoms.

No freedoms of "gay people" are restricted in Russia. Less propaganda, please.

[PosPosPos]

No freedoms of "gay people" are restricted in Russia. Less propaganda, please.

Reality denial from the alt-right as usual.