If St Petersburg Outlaws "GAY" will Atlantis still go?

[shepp]

The law(as I've read it)states that it is illegal to promote gay lifestyles to minors. It doesn't outlaw gay people.

 

Well, to quote the New York Times: "The law defines propaganda of homosexuality as 'the targeted and uncontrolled dissemination of generally accessible information capable of harming the health and moral and spiritual development of minors,' particularly that which could create 'a distorted impression' of 'marital relations.'"

 

This leaves a legal hole so large you could drive the proverbial truck through it. What, exactly, is "targeted and uncontrolled" - on the face of it an oxymoron, anyway? Targeted to minors? Or to whom? Uncontrolled? What the hell does that mean? And "generally accessible?" Given the overall situation, it's not hard to imagine that this will be used to ban any public pro-queer utterances that might, just might, be seen as harming the "spiritual development" of minors. It's newspeak at its finest.

[Retty2Go]

Actually, your flippant, uninformed remarks, and attempting to marginalize the issue speaks volumes about your bona fides. Yes, to each his own. There is nothing compelling you to take a stand against hatred and bigotry, or to even have empathy for those affected. By all means, go and take your chances.

 

My point was that, if I had the chance to go to St. Petersburg, I'd go and take my chances. Acts of gay bashing and racially-based violence are known to occur with some frequency in the United States, but it's not apparent from your posts that you're anxious to move to another country.

 

One's sexual preference may or may not be at the absolute center of that person's sense of identity - to each his or her own. As for my being an apologist, I don't need to prove my bona fides to strangers on a message board.

[keithm]

Well, to quote the New York Times: "The law defines propaganda of homosexuality as 'the targeted and uncontrolled dissemination of generally accessible information capable of harming the health and moral and spiritual development of minors,' particularly that which could create 'a distorted impression' of 'marital relations.'"

 

This leaves a legal hole so large you could drive the proverbial truck through it. What, exactly, is "targeted and uncontrolled" - on the face of it an oxymoron, anyway? Targeted to minors? Or to whom? Uncontrolled? What the hell does that mean? And "generally accessible?" Given the overall situation, it's not hard to imagine that this will be used to ban any public pro-queer utterances that might, just might, be seen as harming the "spiritual development" of minors. It's newspeak at its finest.

As I said, it probably will be used as a basis for further homophobia. I wonder if the gay charters will skip the port now that it became law. That decision will show wheter they truly care about us or the money.(I'll bet on the money)

[keithm]

Actually, the most frightening travel experience I've had was in the world's largest democracy, India, being stuck in Delhi during the riots following Indira Gandhi's assassination. Couldn't get out of the city, much less the country. But because I wasn't a Sikh, I wasn't a target. I also, back in the days when the Middle East was less fraught, spent a few weeks in Daddy Assad's Syria. Horribly repressive state, but because there was no way of identifying me as Jewish, once again, not a target. Same in Burma. I didn't hand out leaflets in support of Aung San Suu Kyi, therefore not a target.

 

St. Petersburg? Um....

 

When I was in Vietnam this past winter, my partner had a medical emergency in Ho Chi Minh City. We went to a clinic and a hospital as a couple, and I identified myself as his partner. No problem whatsoever, not even a teensy bit of attitude. I'm glad something similar didn't happen in St. Petersburg...where we are, manifestly, a target.

My partner is Chinese. Being gay is not such a big deal there, as in other places. We still don't really do PDA'S in any of our cruises.Just don't need the potential problems(especially the Caribbean)

[shepp]

http://www.queerty.com/canada-to-gay-travelers-enter-saint-petersburg-at-your-own-peril-20120319/

 

I wonder how much longer Atlantis will advertise "Our all-new 2012 cruise includes an overnight in fascinating St. Petersburg."

[SakeDad]

So for all those folks that thought my bringing up the thought of boycotting St Petersburg was "off" take a look at this. GLBT Russian activists are asking other countries to DENY the politicians responsible for the law from entering other countries! http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2012/03/19/Russian_Activists_Seek_Travel_Ban_for_Antigay_Law_Backers/

[Retty2Go]

You were spot on. Have you seen this call for a boycott? "I think it’s one of the most beautiful cities on earth. I have many friends who live there. And I am asking you, please, do not visit it..."

 

<http://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/protest-st-petersburgs-homosexual-propaganda-law-by-boycotting-the-city/>?

 

So for all those folks that thought my bringing up the thought of boycotting St Petersburg was "off" take a look at this. GLBT Russian activists are asking other countries to DENY the politicians responsible for the law from entering other countries! http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2012/03/19/Russian_Activists_Seek_Travel_Ban_for_Antigay_Law_Backers/

[keithm]

So for all those folks that thought my bringing up the thought of boycotting St Petersburg was "off" take a look at this. GLBT Russian activists are asking other countries to DENY the politicians responsible for the law from entering other countries! http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2012/03/19/Russian_Activists_Seek_Travel_Ban_for_Antigay_Law_Backers/

I think that is an outstanding idea.

[GaNavy]

I really, really can't believe you don't understand a basic distinction at play here.

 

Yes, there are hate crimes in the USA. Yes, it took years for DADT to be repealed and DOMA's still there. And yes, thanks to the GOP, there are not uniform anti-discrimination and hate crime laws that apply nationwide. But antigay oppression of the sort seen in Russia is simply not a matter of federal policy; it looks like even Tennessee won't pass "Don't Say Gay." Even in the days immediately following Stonewall, queer parades and demonstrations took place across the US, unlike the bans in Moscow and St. Petersburg. There was never comparable muzzling of speech under the law. And American police, whose history with the queer community has been sometimes spotty, don't just stand around watching queers being beaten, then arrest the gays.

 

There's simply no parity.

 

The sort of state-sponsored anti-gay repression in Russia hasn't been seen in this country since the witch-hunt days of the 1950s. I kinda hate to put it this way, but back in 1938, there was widespread anti-Semitism in the USA, too. Get it?

 

I'm somewhat disturbed by the level of self-centeredness expressed in this thread. Yes, you would probably be safe in St. Petersburg, and able to head back home to DC and a life privileged enough to allow you to cruise. The queers of Russia don't have that freedom. They're muzzled, attacked, and stuck. You're not being asked to do anything positive at all - not donate money, go to a demo, sign a petition. All you're being asked to do, in solidarity with suffering people, is not go somewhere. Big deal. You don't have even that amount of fellow feeling?

 

I hate to keep sounding like a semantic scold, but there is a difference between "sexual orientation" and "sexual preference" (a phrase with overtones of choice and rarely used in gay political discourse by anyone who's been keeping up with the past 30 years of the GLBT movement.) And while my sexual orientation may or may not be at the "absolute center" of my life, being a tourist is really, really, really far from that theoretical center.

 

And, with all due respect, if you don't want to be challenged on message boards, you can always stick to lurking.

 

Yep, a member with over a thousand posts is lurking....riiiiiiight.

 

There are a lot of ways of expressing one's objection to the status quo. To me, just staying away from a place doesn't seem to make much of a statement. But for all who feel differently, we're good - there are lots of ways to make one's feelings known.

 

The fact that I would go to St. Petersburg says nothing about how I feel about the oppression of gay people there or what I am doing to try to change their situation or that of other groups in their shoes. Like I said, I don't need to prove my bona fides to you.

[GaNavy]

So for all those folks that thought my bringing up the thought of boycotting St Petersburg was "off" take a look at this. GLBT Russian activists are asking other countries to DENY the politicians responsible for the law from entering other countries! http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2012/03/19/Russian_Activists_Seek_Travel_Ban_for_Antigay_Law_Backers/

 

This is a great idea - thanks for sending the link. You can tell from my posts I'm not a big believer in boycotts (just ask shepp :)) but some good old-fashioned civil disobedience is another matter altogether....

[shepp]

To me, just staying away from a place doesn't seem to make much of a statement.

 

As part of an organized boycott - which is now being proposed, if you check out Retty2Go's post - it does. And that proposal ("The international community should take a step further. Do not go to St. Petersburg.") is coming from a Moscow-based journalist, who presumably understands the situation at least as well as you or I.

 

I agree that there are other pressures that can be applied besides a boycott. But no one has yet answered this question: if someone does at this point show up in St. Petersburg as a tourist (as opposed to visiting as an activist like Dan Choi), what beneficial effect on the situation will that have? By all means, be specific. I mean it - you arrive in St. Petersburg, where even saying "I'm OK with being gay" in public is now a probable cause for legal action, and what "statement" do you propose will be made by your presence? "Nobody stops me from being a tourist?"

 

Sorry, I misunderstood you to say that you'd been reading this thread but not participating, therefore the "lurking" comment.

[ONT-CA]

One should realize that it’s the application of an unjust law that is offensive. I do not understand the boycott approach. We are currently visiting California with no qualms about Prop 8. It will be defeated but not by we staying away. The boycott of St. Petersburg by our community would be a drop in the bucket in relation to the number of tourists who visit that grand city. The average straight person is not going to give that up for our cause. But we could make a significant dent in the tourist numbers if the local authorities applied their law to we gay visitors. By being ourselves in every sense of the word while in St. Petersburg and causing a reaction by the authorities because of who we are would gain international attention that would be heard around the globe. The application of the unjust law must be seen to be believed. Then and only then would the homophobes realize just what they are doing to themselves.

[bdjam]

So if you're still questioning whether it would be a good idea to go to a place where homosexuality is all but outlawed...

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1598927

 

One could argue that St. Petersburg is a little more evolved in social thinking that Dominica...but if the authorities want to hang someone, they will.

[Retty2Go]

OMG! I agree with Joe. What is the "sexual activity," and where were they "performing" it? Do the local authorities have jurisdiction over what happens on the ship in port? But to me, the overarching questions are why does Atlantis do Caribbean cruises and subject their passengers to such homophobic whims, and why do the passengers blindly go where they are hated?

 

So if you're still questioning whether it would be a good idea to go to a place where homosexuality is all but outlawed...

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1598927

 

One could argue that St. Petersburg is a little more evolved in social thinking that Dominica...but if the authorities want to hang someone, they will.

[shepp]

We are currently visiting California with no qualms about Prop 8. By being ourselves in every sense of the word while in St. Petersburg and causing a reaction by the authorities because of who we are would gain international attention that would be heard around the globe.

 

False equivalence. Once again...California is hardly Russia. Not even close. The government doesn't ban LGBT parades and demos; there are domestic partnership and hate crime laws; antigay attacks are prosecuted by the police, not countenanced by them; wearing a T-shirt with a pro-queer slogan doesn't place you in legal jeopardy.

 

Degree matters. After all, in 1938 there was anti-Semitism in the U.S.A., too.

 

So it sounds like you're willing to go to Russia and be beaten by neo-fascists and thrown in a Russian jail to make a point? Hey, I salute you!

[keithm]

False equivalence. Once again...California is hardly Russia. Not even close. The government doesn't ban LGBT parades and demos; there are domestic partnership and hate crime laws; antigay attacks are prosecuted by the police, not countenanced by them; wearing a T-shirt with a pro-queer slogan doesn't place you in legal jeopardy.

 

Degree matters. After all, in 1938 there was anti-Semitism in the U.S.A., too.

 

So it sounds like you're willing to go to Russia and be beaten by neo-fascists and thrown in a Russian jail to make a point? Hey, I salute you!

1938? It goes way beyond that. On our cruises, we know enough to maintain a level of decorum(please don't try to read into that)We choose cruiseship sponsored excursions. That way, THEY are responsible for our wellfare. I've heard of real issues, but so far we've not had any. I know of some problems in St. Kitts, but again being with a sponsored excursion, I feel we're(at least)somewhat safer. We've never had issues, but that being said, we tend to be pretty aware of our surroundings.

[keithm]

False equivalence. Once again...California is hardly Russia. Not even close. The government doesn't ban LGBT parades and demos; there are domestic partnership and hate crime laws; antigay attacks are prosecuted by the police, not countenanced by them; wearing a T-shirt with a pro-queer slogan doesn't place you in legal jeopardy.

 

Degree matters. After all, in 1938 there was anti-Semitism in the U.S.A., too.

 

So it sounds like you're willing to go to Russia and be beaten by neo-fascists and thrown in a Russian jail to make a point? Hey, I salute you!

I guess that 15 minutes of fame can really be fun. I'm SURE(yeah, right) that I could count on our good ol' state dept. to come to my rescue whilest sitting in a Russian jail.

[jamessemaj]

shepp, I must say, you are too kind to the state of things in the USA.

 

For all of the parades, the t-shirts, prosecution of assault (gay or not), it all comes down to a matter of acceptance and dignity, and it exists no more in our beloved country than it does in St. Petersburg, in my experience, less so.

 

Talk about false equivalence.

 

I see there is another outrage thread about Dominica. That should be interesting.

[shepp]

shepp, I must say, you are too kind to the state of things in the USA.

 

For all of the parades, the t-shirts, prosecution of assault (gay or not), it all comes down to a matter of acceptance and dignity, and it exists no more in our beloved country than it does in St. Petersburg, in my experience, less so.

 

Talk about false equivalence.

 

Less acceptance in the USA than Russia? James, that seems simply unbelievable. You really should get the hell out of Texas.

 

However, I'm willing to be convinced. I (really) would be interested in your experiences with Russian gay activists. Yes, my opinions are based on others' reporting. So, specifically, what are you talking about? I'll grant that you know more about Russia than I do. Do you know, e.g., how many openly gay elected officials there are in the country? How many LGBT magazines and newspapers? What sort of legal protections against orientation-based discrimination are in place? (By the way, I did find out that gays can form domestic partnerships in Russia.)

 

Or are you solely considering attitudes rather than actions? I suspect that public opinion polls cut no ice with you, but let's have a look.

 

According to Gallup, a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage, 90% think we should have job protection, and over 2/3 think we should be in the military. Meanwhile in Russia, Levada Center polling found 14% in favor of same-sex marriage, just 15% finding homosexuality on a par with heterosexuality, and 39% believing we should be forced into treatment or isolated from society. Only 8% would permit gay pride marches. Seventy-four percent said we were “morally dissolute or mentally defective persons.” So what sort of "acceptance" are we talking about, and by whom?

 

Anyway, since pics speak louder than words, I'll just attach photos of last year's gay marches in Austin and Moscow. I bet you'll have no problem figuring out which is which.

[jamessemaj]

shepp, you present very complicated and difficult questions for me. I don't know how to answer just now, and maybe later I might.

 

I would, however, note the adage that there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. I don't believe that such surveys are reliable across cultural lines. The perspectives of the Russians taking this survey are not the same as Americans.

 

But presented with this favorable response of Americans, I wonder why homosexuality remains a contentious issue, even in the presidential primaries.

 

I live in Austin, the Texas San Francisco, but I like all of Texas and don't care to go elsewhere.

 

I may or may not respond further after I think about it. I appreciate your stirring intelligent thought. Thanks.

[ONT-CA]

http://rt.com/art-and-culture/news/madonna-freedom-gay-rights-165/

[shepp]

http://rt.com/art-and-culture/news/madonna-freedom-gay-rights-165/

 

Absolutely. I think it's great that Madge will go over and give 'em hell.

 

But that's very different from any of us walking down the street on the way to see Fabergé eggs. She has a bully pulpit - we don't. She's not going to get arrested - at least probably not. And hey, openly gay tourists have been visiting Russia for years, yet according to the Levada poll, anti-gay attitudes have actually increased since their previous poll in 2005.

[GaNavy]

As part of an organized boycott - which is now being proposed, if you check out Retty2Go's post - it does. And that proposal ("The international community should take a step further. Do not go to St. Petersburg.") is coming from a Moscow-based journalist, who presumably understands the situation at least as well as you or I.

 

I agree that there are other pressures that can be applied besides a boycott. But no one has yet answered this question: if someone does at this point show up in St. Petersburg as a tourist (as opposed to visiting as an activist like Dan Choi), what beneficial effect on the situation will that have? By all means, be specific. I mean it - you arrive in St. Petersburg, where even saying "I'm OK with being gay" in public is now a probable cause for legal action, and what "statement" do you propose will be made by your presence? "Nobody stops me from being a tourist?"

 

Sorry, I misunderstood you to say that you'd been reading this thread but not participating, therefore the "lurking" comment.

 

Nope...in fact I hadn't encountered the thread at all until the day of my first post. No hard feelings.

 

Interesting point you make. Perhaps one's presence or absence, by itself, says nothing other than "I'm here" or "I'm not," such that there's no beneficial or detrimental effect either way. Organized boycotts can have an impact, but they work best at a more local level unless they're organized at a governmental level like economic sanctions against Iran. On an individual-citizen level, I'm not sure what an international organized boycott would look like....how would you know it was working? Indeed, how would you know it even existed except for someone telling you it did, which, at least initially, would prove nothing beyond the speaker's own belief?

[ONT-CA]

Absolutely. I think it's great that Madge will go over and give 'em hell.

 

But that's very different from any of us walking down the street on the way to see Fabergé eggs. She has a bully pulpit - we don't. She's not going to get arrested - at least probably not. And hey, openly gay tourists have been visiting Russia for years, yet according to the Levada poll, anti-gay attitudes have actually increased since their previous poll in 2005.

 

Apart from the obvious point that you are not into eggs, Faberge or otherwise have you ever seen them? A bully pulpit? Perhaps something akin to the very hostile position displayed clearly on these pages by someone who did not like what was said and in threatening to have them reported to the authorities?

[Retty2Go]

I don't know what to think about this, shepp.

 

On the one hand, you are right, she does have a platform, and can come and delivery a supportive speech without fear. But this could only steel the resolve of the governor, while many cynics (including myself) are sick of American celebrities and their savior complexes. After all, she, the city, the promoters, the venue, etc., will make big bucks with her visit, so, essentially, she will be profiting at the expense of those she is claiming she wants to help. Too bad it wasn't a tad earlier or she could really have profited from it by adding a song about it on her forthcoming "MDNA."

 

She was clearly asked not to come. If she said "I stand in solidarity with the gay men of St. Petersburg, and will not perform in a city that criminalizes the sexualities of its citizens," it would hit many people in the pocketbook, and inspire her fans around the world to boycott.

 

Her choice seems awfully contrived and disingenuous, to me. Madonna is a master of self-promotion and commercialization, and this rings more manipulative and hollow than some of her past antics. It bugs me, as her biggest fan, that she is still so grafty and faux-committed, even as she pushes 60.

 

Absolutely. I think it's great that Madge will go over and give 'em hell.

 

But that's very different from any of us walking down the street on the way to see Fabergé eggs. She has a bully pulpit - we don't. She's not going to get arrested - at least probably not. And hey, openly gay tourists have been visiting Russia for years, yet according to the Levada poll, anti-gay attitudes have actually increased since their previous poll in 2005.