Big Bad Bears - Russia and Putin

[DannyInvincible]

However I fully support his policies in that regard, as do most Russians.

Just to be clear, you fully support the discrimination of LGBT groups and individuals (a direct and inevitable consequence of the law against the display and dissemination of material and gestures perceived to be promoting "non-traditional" families, relationships and values)? Why exactly?

America doesn't push for coups. What America demands is that people are able to air their voices on whatever given issue in an open, free country.

That's nice... Sounds like something straight out of a CIA propaganda manual though. Shady US involvement in numerous attempted and successful coups around the world since the end of the Second World War is both well-documented and self-admitted. The US has been directly or indirectly involved on a very frequent basis in the destabilisation and overthrow of multiple foreign governments, some even democratically-elected, down through the years where it has had absolutely no legal mandate whatsoever to be involved.

It's exceptionally naive (or intentionally pig-headed) to assume, think or claim that a driving motivation of US foreign policy might be the charitable and humanitarian. When such concerns are raised by the US, they serve to act as a facade or necessary illusion to conceal and justify via the manufacturing of public consent the pursuance of the real interests, which are so often played down or not explicitly mentioned at all. In fact, the US hasn't had any qualms with helping install or consolidate the power of despots, fascists, drug lords and paramilitary groups either from time to time - its interference has aided the rise of plenty - so talk of transparency and freedom has long worn thin. When the US purports to care about the plight of those in foreign countries, it is because purporting to be concerned about the plight of such people will prove beneficial to the grubby interests of the US.

[Spudulika]

Just to be clear, you fully support the discrimination of LGBT groups and individuals (a direct and inevitable consequence of the law against the display and dissemination of material and gestures perceived to be promoting "non-traditional" families, relationships and values)? Why exactly?

Danny, I think you're being a little unfair. It is not as simple as that and people are allowed to feel as they wish - otherwise it is as bad or worse than the thought/feeling controlled states that we all abhor. Mypost is very correct that the ovewhleming majority here do not wish to have such legal additions as same sex marriage etc, instead there has traditionally been a toleration of the old school style and a very active gay community. However with the external foment of "rights for all", the gay community has been pushed more underground and allowed for opportunists (like the great hero Navalny) to jump into the space and create fear. Navalny is completely opposed to lgbt rights, yet the liberal west hailed him as a hero. He is also overtly racist (Russia for Russians) and opposed to Caucasians, yet he received support from twits in the west, despite him being KGB/FSB and on the government payroll. So it is not a simple situation, however people should be free to live their lives as they choose without fear of idiots chasing them in the streets.

Actually, one funny point is the subliminally gay attitude in Russian culture (especially amongst the Caucasians). Now that the New Year pukefest is launching on our tv screens, we will be treated to endless hours of flamboyant performers in scenes that even Little Britain couldn't dream up. You have big local stars who are beyond doubt gay (Filip Kirkorov, Dima Bilan) but in fine George Michael, Ricky Martin style are kept in the closet so that they continue selling records.



That's nice... Sounds like something straight out of a CIA propaganda manual though. Shady US involvement in numerous attempted and successful coups around the world since the end of the Second World War is both well-documented and self-admitted. The US has been directly or indirectly involved on a very frequent basis in the destabilisation and overthrow of multiple foreign governments, some even democratically-elected, down through the years where it has had absolutely no legal mandate whatsoever to be involved.

It's exceptionally naive (or intentionally pig-headed) to assume, think or claim that a driving motivation of US foreign policy might be the charitable and humanitarian. When such concerns are raised by the US, they serve to act as a facade or necessary illusion to conceal and justify via the manufacturing of public consent the pursuance of the real interests, which are so often played down or not explicitly mentioned at all. In fact, the US hasn't had any qualms with helping install or consolidate the power of despots, fascists, drug lords and paramilitary groups either from time to time - its interference has aided the rise of plenty - so talk of transparency and freedom has long worn thin. When the US purports to care about the plight of those in foreign countries, it is because purporting to be concerned about the plight of such people will prove beneficial to the grubby interests of the US.[/QUOTE]

We're experiencing the legacy of the Bush II regime with billions sent into Ukraine to "bring them closer to Europe". What I think is missed out with what happened in Ukraine, is that it was a coup. The legally elected government was chased out of office and now in its place is something as corrupt.

What is it that was said by a US lawmaker - "he may be an s.o.b. but he's our s.o.b."

If we're being honest, we haven't a clue what is really going on. I was listening a little earlier to a clown on the George Hook variety hour (some professor from London), spouting on about Russia being dangerous etc and the Germans being bad. He claimed that Putin and Russia were responsible for the destabilisation off Eastern Europe and Europe. That it is worse than islamist terrorism. Almost dropped my mug of tea. He mentioned the Saudi's only in relation to oil, but nothing about their promotion of terrorism from Palestine to the UK to Canada to Australia. Nothing about the relationship of UK illegal ventures into the MIddle East as destabilising the World. Seems that the agenda needs only certain "facts".

[DannyInvincible]

Danny, I think you're being a little unfair. It is not as simple as that and people are allowed to feel as they wish - otherwise it is as bad or worse than the thought/feeling controlled states that we all abhor.

I agree completely; he's entitled to his view, appears willing to express it (which is a good thing in a free and open society, even if I disagree with it in substance) and so he/we can discuss it without fear of suppression, which is why I invited him to clarify his position and offered him the opportunity to explain why he feels that way, if he indeed wishes to do so. I'd be interested in hearing a rational defence of what I think is a discriminatory law. Would anyone argue that it isn't discriminatory in nature?

instead there has traditionally been a toleration of the old school style and a very active gay community.

What is the old-school style exactly? Do you mean the school of "traditional family values"? If so, why would there traditionally be a tolerance of a very active gay community along with this, or do you mean that there are these old-school values and then there is a very active gay community separate from those and in direct political conflict with those who possess these values?

[Spudulika]

It is both easy and hard to explain. So I'll do it so that I can understand it myself.
1. There are no gays in Russia - it's a foreign thing.
2. Those lads who act a bit "queer" on the telly are just gas.
3. That unmarried male/female relative who loves their Mammy just is, well, different.

I am being entirely flippant during this season of goodwill, but it is so in Russia. I pointed out to my ex that her female friend's "boyfriend" was most definitely gay, and that his friends were also gay. She was in shock when her friend told her I was correct and that later, at a house party at which I was the only straight male, there was a very active and influential group of gay men from all walks of life. Some of these guys were married but said that in their cases they had to do so to keep their families happy.

So what I mean by old school, is that it is like the UK or Ireland from the 1960's-70's, and that society tolerates (a terrible word) or accepts (a better word) it as long as it's not shoved in their faces.

The confusion between gay-paedo and gay = bad parent, and gay = unmasculine, comes out in the word used to describe gays/lesbians in Russia - "unnatural". Once there was a build up of pressure from outside Russia on this situation, the society quickly rallied around to the idea that their values (or whatever they are) is under attack. Which made life more difficult for the gay community in Russia.

I will conclude with this - Putin goes around striking massively gay poses, in ways that a Western male leader would never think of doing - yet here it is manly. Go figure.

[mypost]

The constant promotion of non-traditional relationships via our media means that it is more socially tolerable to the public, as long as it doesn't actually involve themselves. No matter how tolerant they claim to be, every parent wants their adult offspring to form traditional relationships and would be deeply outraged and upset if they were told it was not possible. Putin has implemented family friendly legislation so that people can form traditional relationships in the future and so not endure a lifetime of public comment and discrimination.

Russia is a wonderful, yet complex country that most Westerners don't understand, but many western countries, Ireland included, should take a good look in the mirror when attacking Putin over what is a mild rule in a conservative country with far more serious issues on it's hands.

America wanted a pro-western government in Kiev. Nothing wrong with that. It was the people in Kiev though who had to go and get one, at a very heavy cost.

In both countries, December 25 is a normal working day. Their christmas is in the new year. Putin has cancelled his cabinet's holiday plans though, in solidarity with the people in light of the growing economic crisis. If only it happened over here, we might not have had the extent of the economic crisis we did have. But you can't cancel an Irish minister's holidays. A Dail TDs christmas holidays last 3-4 weeks while the rest of us try to put food on the table.

[osarusan]

Putin has implemented family friendly legislation so that people can form traditional relationships in the future and so not endure a lifetime of public comment and discrimination.

What discrimination would people forming traditional relationships endure in the future?

[peadar1987]

The constant promotion of non-traditional relationships via our media means that it is more socially tolerable to the public, as long as it doesn't actually involve themselves. No matter how tolerant they claim to be, every parent wants their adult offspring to form traditional relationships and would be deeply outraged and upset if they were told it was not possible. Putin has implemented family friendly legislation so that people can form traditional relationships in the future and so not endure a lifetime of public comment and discrimination.

Bullsh*t. Don't presume to speak for everyone. Perhaps some people get a little upset at the prospect of not having grandkids, but if we're going down that road, you're going to have to make laws against straight people who can't find a nice wife, or those who aren't interested in children.

Saying that straight couples will face discrimination if gay people are allowed to hold hands in public is homophobic paranoid delusion of the highest order.

[DannyInvincible]

What discrimination would people forming traditional relationships endure in the future?

Maybe I'm misreading him, but I think he means that, instead of getting into same-sex relationships, homosexual people, guided by the "family friendly" legislation, can form happy "traditional" relationships in order to avoid a life of hardship and ridicule for being gay. So, really, Putin is looking out for these poor misguided folks who need to be protected from themselves and their potential homosexual desires... Pretty insulting nonsense whichever way it's to be interpreted.

[peadar1987]

Maybe I'm misreading him, but I think he means that, instead of getting into same-sex relationships, homosexual people, guided by the "family friendly" legislation, can form happy "traditional" relationships in order to avoid a life of hardship and ridicule for being gay. So, really, Putin is looking out for these poor misguided folks who need to be protected from themselves and their potential homosexual desires... Pretty insulting nonsense whichever way it's to be interpreted.

Ah, I see, because gays are happiest when shamed into the closet. Good thing they have Putin looking out for them so!

[jinxy lilywhite]

The constant promotion of non-traditional relationships via our media means that it is more socially tolerable to the public, as long as it doesn't actually involve themselves. No matter how tolerant they claim to be, every parent wants their adult offspring to form traditional relationships and would be deeply outraged and upset if they were told it was not possible. Putin has implemented family friendly legislation so that people can form traditional relationships in the future and so not endure a lifetime of public comment and discrimination.

Russia is a wonderful, yet complex country that most Westerners don't understand, but many western countries, Ireland included, should take a good look in the mirror when attacking Putin over what is a mild rule in a conservative country with far more serious issues on it's hands.

America wanted a pro-western government in Kiev. Nothing wrong with that. It was the people in Kiev though who had to go and get one, at a very heavy cost.

In both countries, December 25 is a normal working day. Their christmas is in the new year. Putin has cancelled his cabinet's holiday plans though, in solidarity with the people in light of the growing economic crisis. If only it happened over here, we might not have had the extent of the economic crisis we did have. But you can't cancel an Irish minister's holidays. A Dail TDs christmas holidays last 3-4 weeks while the rest of us try to put food on the table.

The orthodox christian Christmas differs from the Roman Catholic one.

What is a traditional family though? Who gets to decide that? Should the state be that heavily involved in dictating what a family should be.

Homosexuality is as much about life choice as the choice of the color of your skin.

[Charlie Darwin]

No matter how tolerant they claim to be, every parent wants their adult offspring to form traditional relationships and would be deeply outraged and upset if they were told it was not possible.

Aha! Following the roaring success of his spaceship fleet, mypost has moved into the business of mind-reading. Classic foot.ie.

[Spudulika]

Before we all hammer mypost, I'll speak a little on his behalf, and as a parent of 2 (girl and boy) I'm going to be brutally honest. When my eldest was about to be born I wondered "What if she has some disability." After a moment I realised, I don't give a hoot, she's my girl and that's that. With my wee lad I thought, what if he chooses to be gay, and I thought of my daughter - if she decides to be lesbian. What was my reaction? Worry. That the world would be tough for them. That they might not find a good partner. That they might not find happiness. Not once did I think of grandkids, or what others would think of me. And then i realised - what would face them is the same as is they were straight. But no matter what they are my kids and I would defend them to the last.

In some societies (including our own), something like sexuality, or TB, or TV, or Downs - is seen as an inherent weakness in the gene pool. Can anyone say they haven't heard of tales from the TB times? The sufferer shunted down the garden to the coalshed and the family keeping it a secret in case the neighbours found out? Now remember that in Russia you have 99% of the population still in this mode. We can count ourselves lucky that we can discuss it.

For the legislation, we have all bought into the slam Russia (as they're not flavour of the year) propaganda. The law that was passed was far more wideranging and far more useful that 1 small clause. The full law was to protect youth from undue influence and it borrowed from EU, US and WTO guidelines. It removed advertising of alcohol from public areas, websites, newspapers, tv and radio. It reinforced the law preventing alcohol sales from kiosks (a major source of underage drinking). It reinforced an amendment for age appropriate warnings on advertisements, shows and movies. It further strengthened age appropriate ratings on news articles (something that was decried in the liberal world - because native advertising would be decimated). Western companies, especially video/net game producers, alcohol producers and media suppliers (especially the big US and German syndicates) went mental. They paid local PR companies to campaign against this law, and the nail they hammered - the prevention of promoting alternative lifestyles. It was the only one that flew as if the full facts were known, I think many countries, bar Ireland, would be less exercised.

Putin is only one of a large group, but some of what he does makes sense. A little, but it does.

[mypost]

Perhaps some people get a little upset at the prospect of not having grandkids, but if we're going down that road, you're going to have to make laws against straight people who can find a nice wife, or those who aren't interested in children.

Saying that straight couples will face discrimination if gay people are allowed to hold hands in public is homophobic paranoid delusion of the highest order.

That's not what I said at all.

But that "some" you speak of is in the billions. As I said before, the issue is simply taboo in most of the world. In extreme cases, marriages are arranged by parents. They are all in traditional format. I don't see the outrage by the west towards countries where such a practice is rife. Just pick on Russia.

What is a traditional family though? Should the state be that heavily involved in dictating what a family should be.

In this country, it is. Marriage is part of the Irish Constitution. We're a catholic nation, and our religion is deeply conservative on marriage.

Homosexuality is as much about life choice as the choice of the color of your skin.

Your skin colour is determined by your parents ethnicity. In order to keep the human race going, men and women are naturally attracted to each other, so if you choose a different path, you have to be prepared for the consequences as a result.

I''m going to be brutally honest. When my eldest was about to be born I wondered "What if she has some disability." After a moment I realised, I don't give a hoot, she's my girl and that's that. With my wee lad I thought, what if he chooses to be gay, and I thought of my daughter - if she decides to be lesbian. What was my reaction? Worry. That the world would be tough for them. That they might not find a good partner. That they might not find happiness. Not once did I think of grandkids, or what others would think of me. And then i realised - what would face them is the same as is they were straight. But no matter what they are my kids and I would defend them to the last.

Yes you would defend them and in a very conservative society, you would have a lot of defending to do. If they follow the natural path they're designed to, your life and theirs would be much easier.

For the legislation, we have all bought into the slam Russia (as they're not flavour of the year) propaganda. The law that was passed was far more wideranging and far more useful that 1 small clause. The full law was to protect youth from undue influence and it borrowed from EU, US and WTO guidelines. It removed advertising of alcohol from public areas, websites, newspapers, tv and radio. It reinforced the law preventing alcohol sales from kiosks (a major source of underage drinking). It reinforced an amendment for age appropriate warnings on advertisements, shows and movies. It further strengthened age appropriate ratings on news articles (something that was decried in the liberal world - because native advertising would be decimated). Western companies, especially video/net game producers, alcohol producers and media suppliers (especially the big US and German syndicates) went mental. They paid local PR companies to campaign against this law, and the nail they hammered - the prevention of promoting alternative lifestyles. It was the only one that flew as if the full facts were known, I think many countries, bar Ireland, would be less exercised.

Putin is only one of a large group, but some of what he does makes sense. A little, but it does.

And amidst his economic issues, his Ukraine issues, his geopolitical issues, where people are literally dying by/from his influence/actions, it's his homo policy that our media are most bothered about.

Occasionally our broadcast media produce what initially look like credible documentaries on Russian life and culture. Russia is the biggest country in the world with incredible contrasts in people, lifestyles, cultures and fantastic attractions from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok. However many docs are almost exclusively an unchallenged pro-homo propaganda parade, and it's just ruined. Putin will be re-elected just before the next World Cup, and like the build up to Sochi, all the western media discussion before it will be about one issue. And it won't be about people losing their lives and loved ones by the thousands in Ukraine, as it should be.

Priorities priorities.

[osarusan]

so if you choose a different path


If they follow the natural path they're designed to, your life and theirs would be much easier.

Homosexuality is a choice?

Homosexuality is unnatural?



Just when we thought you couldn't get any worse...

[Spudulika]

Homosexuality is a choice?

Homosexuality is unnatural?



Just when we thought you couldn't get any worse...

Osarusan, I believe that homosexuality is a choice, albeit one brought about by many, many influences. I do not believe that people are "born this way", that is until a DNA code is produced to prove me wrong. However, like God and Santa (until age 11) I will believe in what is unseen as it cannot be explained away by science. However, I do believe it is a choice and I do not believe or feel it is wrong. And by science/nature, we are designed to procreate, at least supposed to. So this is a natural choice. But...in the 1970's the natural choice was for me to be forced to choose between Liverpool, Arsenal or (maybe at a stretch) Leeds or Arsenal. But I chose Dundalk (by family influence) and West Ham (through fate). Nothing wrong with any of that.

On a choice point - I have a perfect example. A well known tennis player was abused by a male coach at a very young age (11-15), at 16 she was approached at a tournament by an older female player/coach who (apologies) "turned" her. From 16 to retirement she was an avowed lesbian. Then on retirement promptly married, a man, and told me to my face "It was more convenient being lesbian when I was on the tour." I can name 4 players who did the same, including a double gold winner from the USA (90's). I do not discriminate against her as she had a right to do what she wanted. I do have issues with her still coaching former male coach and the predatorial older pro, who is still coaching.

And Mypost is right, the world will forget about the trouble in Ukraine, the murderous regime in Saudi, the Chinese slave labour camps and the Mexican murderfest while there is something more fun and sexy to write about.

[bennocelt]

In this country, it is. Marriage is part of the Irish Constitution. We're a catholic nation, and our religion is deeply conservative on marriage.


.

So if we are not catholic or deeply religious we have to follow the dictates of the state or the people?
They can f off

[Spudulika]

So if we are not catholic or deeply religious we have to follow the dictates of the state or the people?
They can f off

Now you will get an agreement. :-) Though our dear leader claims to be spiritual, most lizard people are!

[peadar1987]

That's not what I said at all.

But that "some" you speak of is in the billions. As I said before, the issue is simply taboo in most of the world. In extreme cases, marriages are arranged by parents. They are all in traditional format. I don't see the outrage by the west towards countries where such a practice is rife. Just pick on Russia.

Argumentum ad populum fallacy. Billions of people are wrong, and have no right to have their opinion forced on others.

And you're seeing what you want to see. There is plenty of outrage about arranged marriage and persecution of homosexuals (and other groups) all over the world. You're choosing to ignore it just now because it doesn't fit your current narrative of those against the Russian laws being some sort of hypocrites. And even if we were hypocrites, and only cared about the Russian laws while ignoring places like Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan, it still wouldn't make the Russian position right.

In this country, it is. Marriage is part of the Irish Constitution. We're a catholic nation, and our religion is deeply conservative on marriage.

It's not my religion, and Ireland is not a "catholic nation". This is a weak argument used by religious conservatives. Ireland is a secular republic, and there is separation of church and state. Laws are not, and should not, be decided on the basis of religion.

Your skin colour is determined by your parents ethnicity. In order to keep the human race going, men and women are naturally attracted to each other, so if you choose a different path, you have to be prepared for the consequences as a result.

That argument would be a better one if we didn't have 7 billion humans and counting. We're not in danger of running out of babies on account of a few homosexuals.

And homosexuality is not a choice for most people. Of course you're going to hear of people who successfully repressed their sexuality, or who were bisexual. Their testimony is irrelevant to any case except their own. As you ans Spud have said, life is difficult for gay people. Why would you choose that life if it was as easy as people make out? Can you choose who you are attracted to? I know if I had the choice, I would make myself immensely attracted to overweight, ugly people. It would really expand my dating pool. Being attracted to slim, beautiful women tends to limit your options.

Yes you would defend them and in a very conservative society, you would have a lot of defending to do. If they follow the natural path they're designed to, your life and theirs would be much easier.

If you're concerned about making people's lives easier, having an official state policy of discrimination is not the best way to go about it.

What really gets me is that the people who are most against homosexuality are the very same people who think that if you let a little bit of the gay into a country, it will be so fabulous that before long everyone will be into musical theatre and rimming.

[jinxy lilywhite]

I reckon millions of homosexuals would love their sexual tendencies to be a choice. I am sure they majority of us here never choose the one we love. It just happened

Pigment in your skin also determines what color your are. There are plenty of albino blacks around the world. Though some tribes in Africa do kill them.

I have a 15 month old and yes I do worry about almost every life threatening disease and disability although I have never thought of what if she's a lesbian. Tbh I really couldn't care less once she is true to herself and her partner. I am always of the opinion that the truth will always set you free. To keep your sexual identity locked up in the closet is the worst case scenario.

Before folk start harping on about Ireland being a catholic country, the church have little or no influence in Irish society anymore. The catholic church may have a mention in the constitution but doesn't the constitution recognize all religions and the freedom to practice your religion.

[Spudulika]

Peadar, there is no discrimination in law against homosexuals in Russia - unlike in the other countries you mentioned. There are a select number of high profile people who are out, but others (especially in sport and showbusiness) stay hidden as it would be financial suicide to come out - the same as in Ireland, UK, USA, Germany etc. Like the question in football, it is not the abuse from terraces, or from other pros, but the potential loss of earnings. Ricky Martin was every girl's dream, but when he had no market left, he came out. As in the USA, there is no official state policy of discrimination should Dima Bilan want to come out in Russia), but it would mean losing a lot of fans and money.

Jinxy, I don't think anyone wakes up gay, nor do they wake up liking the colour red, nor wake up bisexual, or lesbian, or any other non-gentically coded disposition. If it is the case, that people are "born gay", and it is encoded in DNA, the next superbillionaire is the person who patents that gene and it's removal (I'm not science oriented, so that soudns odd to me). How many parents, if told they could have a simple gene therapy to remove a certain list of things from their DNA, would they be so liberal as to allow a gay gene slip through? I cannot answer as I cannot even contemplate the choice.

In other news, oil is back under $60 a barrel, I saw a grandmother and grandfather lugging a Gorenje fridge along the street. People are spending big in case of a devaluation. Our regional Toyota has no cars left in their showroom, ditto Opel, Skoda, but the Chinese showroom is fully stocked!