The Sochi Olympics and gay rights

[Bubble181]

You're all probably well aware of the controverse surrounding the Sochi Winter Olympics: there are some fairly restrictive laws against being openly gay in Russia, and they're affecting the Games - some countries are holding a boycott, some are only sending athletes, and what have you.
Now, a comment made me think/ Mindo Worden of human Rights Watch posited at the Huffington Post (due to accidentally discovering a new way of closing windows in Win 8, I don't have the link anymore, but it's there ) that "if any of the big sponsors, like Coke, McDonalds or Proctor & Gamble had spoken out, [these anti-gay laws] wouldn't have been signed into effect. Therefore, these companies condone or accept the anti-gay stance of the Russian government (and therefore, she says, they should be boycotted).
For clarity's sake, I'm all in favor of all gay rights you can think of. Marriage, adoption, public displays of affection, whatever. As long as it's not quite literally soft porn, you're welcome to smooch your SO in front of my babies all you want. Enjoy.
This got me thinking though - here we have HRW actively demanding political lobbying by big corporations because it'd be in their favor. A recent study, brought on by these legal changes, found that a vast majority of Russians agreed with these new laws (which, to be pedantic, don't make it illegal to *be* gay, only to make propaganda for it in the presence of children. Technically, there are parts of the Southern US with very similar laws against homosexuality in public school sex ed - but the Russian version is being used and interpreted by police and law professionals as being a blanket ban on anything that can be perceived as "gay" in any public space - so, depending on where you are, you can get arrested for holding hands while walking down a street.).
Yes, I'm aware that a lot of this support comes from being badly informed - homosexuality and pedophilia are still regarded as "much the same" by many in Russia (hence the whole "protect the children!" schtick) - and from being scared by the media (regular stories about gays "turning" children gay by forcing themselves on them and such).
Still, it's Human Rights Watch, advocating corporate lobbying for a law, against the population's own opinion/interests. I feel conflicted about this. I'd wish for all the world to be open and accepting towards homosexuals, but I don't feel forcing the laws to change by MegaCorp Inc. without having convinced anyone is the right way to go about it - quite the opposite. Educating people, convincing them, changing their minds - sure. And yes, that'll take a (couple of) generation(s) - there's still plenty of work left in the US and Europe on that front as well. Forcing law changes through can easily spark resistance to foreign intrusion and further cement opinions.

And if we do accept this sort of intervention - where do we draw the line? McDonalds (say) pushing for this sort of thing in Russia is one thing - how about HRW interfering for big corporations to lobby for banning land mines, or drones, or cluster missiles, in the US (all banned for European military because of the Geneva Convention and its appendices)? How about China using their clout to influence lawmaking in the US or Europe?

 

[Covar]

When were these laws put in place? Before or after the 2014 site was chosen?

Either way the number of leaps made to blame corporations is absurd.

 

[PatrThom]

if we do accept this sort of intervention - where do we draw the line?

The friendly people at Wal~Mart would like a word with you.

--Patrick

 

[Frank]

These are the people making those laws.

 

[Espy]

Whoa Frank. Thats horrific.

 

[Chad Sexington]

The Human Rights Watch is not exactly the moral authority I'd choose to rely on. They act in the name of international human rights, but are very selective about what they highlight, and do not seem to mind railroading other human rights activists (Peter Tatchell, for instance, was branded a 'racist' and 'Islamophobe' when he criticised Iran for hanging two gay teens) if it better serves their pet projects.

That's not to say they don't do good things or have valid points (racism and Islamophobia are generally bad after all), but they seem to me to very "ends justify the means." Rely on Coca-Cola, a company guilty of harming people in various parts of the world, to change the laws in Russia? Two wrongs, etc.

I do not think it is an endorsement of Russia's laws to go to the Olympics; in some ways I think it is the right thing to do. The Olympics still hold some symbolism of the fact that despite international conflicts, we can stop, come together, compete, and all our myriad cultures and values are shared, watched, exchanged, more understood, shaped... The only way you can convince someone to change is by including them; if you leave them alone, isolate them, then they will do as they like; why shouldn't they? We don't want that. We want the dialogue as agonising, long, and frustrating as it might be.

 

[Bubble181]

It absolutely is horrible.

Don't think for a second a very similar video couldn't be made in some parts of the USA, though. Difference being Russia has their Tea Party in power, and with the masses mostly un- or badly educated and informed, they also have public support.

@Covar: after, actually. They technically go against the Olympic ideals, and similar laws have kept other locations out of the running before (though that's always up for debate. 1936 Munich wasn't exactly pro-gay either and the Olympics went through, they didn't make much of it...Though of course, historical context and all that - those are the Hitler-vs-Owens games, after all)

My point, though, is that, although I think these laws are idiotic and barbaric, I'm still hesitant to say Coca Cola or McDonalds should go in and try to have these laws repealed, against popular (Russian) opinion. It's cultural imperialism, and not in a good way - instead of exporting democracy and freedom, it's exporting corporate lobbying and "shut up and listen to us, enlightened ones". In this case, for a good cause, but....egh.

That is, I'm not trying to have a discussion about gay rights and how bad these laws are - we've had that debate plenty of times - but about how warped our perception can be and that sort of thing.

 

[strawman]

When google went to china they were lambasted because they were seen as implicitly supporting china's poor human rights record.

They are still there and nobody cares.

People have a short memory, and there's a lot of money to be made. Trying to convince corporations of what you believe is their moral imperative isn't going to change them much, but it may bring you a little publicity.

On a different tack:

When we are invited to someone else's home, or nation, to partake in a game meant to cement international cooperation and unity, then just like in China when the games were there, we agree implicitly to accept some of their rules, traditions, etc, even if we disagree with them.

If we disallow the games to take place in any nation that has human rights issues according to amnesty international or nearly any other human rights organization, we will have no place to go. Even the US suffers significant human rights issues that elsewhere in the world are seen as obvious, yet we don't think of them that way. Capital punishment? You mean you still kill people? As a nation?

Using the Olympics as an opportunity to enter someone else's home and push your agenda and personal beliefs on them is really poor behavior. Not that this is going to stop people from beating the drums, but it's no different than countries or people boycotting the US games because we still have capital punishment, or jail people for drug use, or don't allow prostitution, or have less than comprehensive social programs for the poor, or, or, or.

The games are meant to bring people with varying ideas and beliefs together.

 

[Chad Sexington]

Don't think for a second a very similar video couldn't be made in some parts of the USA, though. Difference being Russia has their Tea Party in power, and with the masses mostly un- or badly educated and informed, they also have public support.

This is... not true.

No. The fact that in America you can say anti-homosexual things, that you can take a stance against a social norm, is what the difference is. In America, I can get up and say "GOD HATES FAGS!" and you can stand up and say "I AM A MAN AND SUCKING PENISES IS GREAT" or "YOU'RE A FUCKING CRAZY RELIGIOUS ZEALOT WHO USES HIS BIBLE AND MEDIEVAL IMAGINARY FRIEND TO HATE AND OPPRESS OTHERS" and that's totally okay. In Russia, you can do the former, and definitely not the latter two.

I mean, yes, you could probably find someone who would say similar things about homosexuals in the United States any country anywhere, but don't equate the Tea Party with the KGB-leftover-Remember-How-Great-Stalinism-Was Party. The Tea Party may oppose gay marriage but don't confuse that with a group of people who turn a blind eye to the violent assaults or murders of homosexual persons. The Tea Party, as an organisation, probably would not even endorse the cessation of public displays of homosexuality.

The difference is Russia is not a democracy, and the polls, assuming they're honest, which is a hell of an assumption, don't reflect an uneducated populace as much as a populace that is specifically educated, and their ability to educate themselves and do critical research is very limited.

This fellow, Bill Whatcott is a self-described social conservative, who has run for mayor in my hometown on more than one occasion. He hates Muslims, gays, immigrants, pro-choice activists... I can go on. He has a website: http://www.freenorthamerica.ca/ I could go interview that guy, and it would not be dissimilar to the one with Stephen Fry and Deputy Milonov. Is the difference between Edmonton and Sochi that Sochi's Bill Whatcott is in power?

 

[AshburnerX]

I just think it's kind of interesting that an event inspired by an ancient Greek tradition in which naked men would compete against each other, doing things like wrestling each other while oiled up, is now willing to throw away human rights just to get a show out.

 

[strawman]

...an event... is now willing to throw away human rights just to get a show out.

When has the Olympic commission ever paid attention to human rights? You can't throw away something you never had.

 

[sixpackshaker]

I never understood the pressure that is being put on gay athletes to boycott the games. You go, you win, you kiss the silver medalist.

Just imagine if Jesse Owens stayed home because the Nazis were racist.

 

[AshburnerX]

I never understood the pressure that is being put on gay athletes to boycott the games. You go, you win, you kiss the silver medalist.

Just imagine if Jesse Owens stayed home because the Nazis were racist.

I think the very real concern here is that Putin is more like Stalin than Gorbachev, in that he doesn't care about public perception and is more than willing to arrest and imprison a couple of athletes just to prove his dominance over another country. It's not like the US is going to break out some athletes when they haven't been able to get Snowden yet.

 

[strawman]

The olympic commision has very strict rules for athletes, that includes disallowing political or social activism during their stay in their host country:

The IOC is finalizing a letter to Olympic athletes reminding them to refrain from demonstrations or political gestures during the Winter Games in Sochi, including any protests against Russia's law banning gay ''propaganda.''

As long as an athlete follows these rules, the Olympic commision is dedicated to protecting their rights and freedom:

International Olympics Committee President Thomas Bach explicitly said on Monday that the Olympic Charter will do everything it can to protect and embrace the LGBT community during the Sochi Winter Olympic Games.

Beyond that it becomes a diplomatic issue between the home country of the athlete and the host country.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/-o...otests-sochi-olympics-russia-anti-gay-law.ap/

http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/ioc-says-lgbt-community-must-be-protected

I expect that within the olympic village and olympic venues there will be no issues for those that do not protest openly. Those that choose not to follow the laws of the country, though, and choose to do so outside the olympic village and venues may end up being charged.

But if, as an athlete, you aren't sure you can follow the laws of the country that is hosting you, you probably should stay home.

 

[Bowielee]

If the US were to boycott the olympics in Russia, it wouldn't be the first time for either country.

That being said, I haven't read a single thing about an actual plan to boycott the Sochi olympics as a nation. This spurrious article mentioned is calling private citizens to boycott companies that, by some weird association, they percieve to be supporting Russian policy on gay rights (actually, even worse, they're saying that companies should levi politcal power in a foreign country, which I find distasteful on multiple levels).

It has nothing to do with boycotting the games as a whole. If this makes you feel like you want to stop buying Coke products or what have you, it's your right.

I may not LIKE the laws in Russia, but that doesn't mean that the wheels of diplomacy grind to a halt when another country does something we don't like. If they want to effect real change, these US organizations should focus more on supporting the actual Russian orangizations fighting this.

Basically, as it stands, it sounds very infantile in a "take my ball and go home" sort of way.

Also, Putin has given assurances (take them for what you will) that participants in the Olympics will not necessarily be subject to comply with these laws. Whether that's true or not will remain to be seen.

 

[Krisken]

Also, Putin has given assurances (take them for what you will) that participants in the Olympics will not necessarily be subject to comply with these laws. Whether that's true or not will remain to be seen.

I wouldn't be worried about it. There would be a huge uprising from western countries if they attempted to hold any Olympians because of their anti-gay laws. Putin is crazy, but I don't think he wants to start a war over this issue.

 

[PatrThom]

Putin is crazy, but I don't think he wants to start a war over this issue.

A war with whom, exactly?

--Patrick

 

[Krisken]

A war with whom, exactly?

--Patrick

Whomever? You don't think there would be an outrage if Putin had American Olympians jailed? British? Canadian? French? Etc, etc, etc.

 

[PatrThom]

Whomever? You don't think there would be an outrage if Putin had American Olympians jailed? British? Canadian? French? Etc, etc, etc.

Oh, I think there would be outrage, but since it's such a sensitive subject, whatever nation(s) decided to take that stand against them would no doubt be labeled "The Land of Queer and Homo Sympathizers" by the Russian public/media/whatever, just by association, and I don't know if any nation wants that connotation just yet.

--Patrick

 

[Krisken]

Yeah, I wasn't exactly meaning a literal war filled with tanks and planes and stuff. I'd think there would be actions taken by countries which would lead to the release of the athletes.

 

[CrimsonSoul]

Oh, I think there would be outrage, but since it's such a sensitive subject, whatever nation(s) decided to take that stand against them would no doubt be labeled "The Land of Queer and Homo Sympathizers" by the Russian public/media/whatever, just by association, and I don't know if any nation wants that connotation just yet.

--Patrick

 

[Bubble181]

Really jailed? Sure. Athletes? Okay.

But what about, say, a Peruvian sports commentator that gets a fine or gets deported? How about some Australian tourists who get jailed for a few hours/days over a "misunderstanding", or get put on the first plane back? Perhaps an Uzbeki athlete gets "held up" and misses her qualifications for some small event because of a search in this context? When or where will we say the line has been crossed?
When it's an American? When it's an important medal contender? When someone innocent gets beaten/aggressively searched?
Hey, Hitler didn't say Jesse Owens couldn't have his medal - he just didn't hand it over himself, or watched during his events. We still consider it an iconic and defining moment. Sooo....

 

[AshburnerX]

It's a bit irrelevant at this point. Athletes are backing out of the competition after seeing how incomplete and/or dangerous the courses are. If the best aren't competing, we aren't having a real competition.