Google shows support for LGBT Olympians • Hacker News Board

Re: Google shows support for LGBT Olympians

#101

Post by devilshaircut » Fri, Feb 07, 2014, 2:01 AM UTC

pyrocat wrote: post #100

justinzollars wrote: post #15

I'm proud the tech community is so solidly behind LGBT issues.

LGB at least. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BKgdvjmFK4c/TwN5PxXVH1I/AAAAAAAAAr...

Just LG I think many people would say, actually.

I've come to the point where I think the acronym is silly. I think right now we are up to "LGBTQIAPK". I may be a little out of date on that.

The fact is, some of the issues between the groups in the acronym are shared and some aren't. At one point in time, banding together for them was probably useful if not necessary. Today I think each group would be better going it alone, as they all have very unique concerns.

Re: Google shows support for LGBT Olympians

#102

Post by jkrems » Fri, Feb 07, 2014, 2:03 AM UTC

boyter wrote: post #61

seivan wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you really not expected to get down voted for being completely ignorant about the problems there? You might want to do some reading up - starting with this 5 series VICE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZ_aSl3ktjg

I expected to get voted down. Not because what I posted didn't add value, but because this is the sort of topic I avoid in day to day conversation because it causes fights. There is too much emotion involved. I am not saying there are not problems. I am saying that the media coverage of it is overblown, and because of that any rational thought or discussion about it is impossible. I provided a link to a document whic…

No, it's not emotion in this case. The paper you linked begins with 100 repetitions of "did you know that the law actually is about children?". To which I have to answer: yes. And more importantly: yes, of course. That (hiding anti-gay legislation behind supposedly anti-pedophilia legislation) is a known strategy. It's actually one of the most disgusting things about this kind of legislation because it sends a message of "the state approves of using gay and pedophile interchangeably". Also the article seems to suggest that everyones afraid of all gay people getting arrested in Russia now. That's not at all the issue. What people (afaik) are afraid of is citizen-on-citizen violence against gay people getting an official stamp of approval. Because hunting pedophiles is protecting children. Please read the following section a couple of times:

> Public actions designed to promote pedophilia, sexual relations with minors,pederasty, lesbianism and bisexuality shall be prohibited.

You see what is missing? Gay. Lesbian? Bisexual? In there. Gay not. Why? The subtext is: it's implied by either pedophilia or pederasty. Yes, those are techniques you find also among American conservatives fighting gay rights. But you know what? Those images and stereotypes can be found all over the world, for centuries at least. But making laws that turn those stereotypes official? Yeah, that's a problem. Not the people being convicted by those laws. The precedence such laws create.

Re: Google shows support for LGBT Olympians

#103

Post by devilshaircut » Fri, Feb 07, 2014, 2:10 AM UTC

seivan wrote: post #99

boyter wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expected to get voted down. Not because what I posted didn't add value, but because this is the sort of topic I avoid in day to day conversation because it causes fights. There is too much emotion involved. I am not saying there are not problems. I am saying that the media coverage of it is overblown, and because of that any rational thought or discussion about it is impossible. I provided a link to a document whic…

Reasonable discussion? Nothing you said or listed was reasonable. Read up http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201402/being-gay-...

I agree with you and I want to add that in my view, the idea of something which is so clearly a front-and-center human rights issue, cannot easily be "overblown". Violence against people, discrimination, hate-based crimes - these are all things which rate fairly high on the "worth covering" scale of news media.

Re: Google shows support for LGBT Olympians

#104

Post by magicalist » Fri, Feb 07, 2014, 2:20 AM UTC

magicalist wrote: post #96

boyter wrote: post #5

The LGBT Russia thing is totally blown out of proportion. http://www.scribd.com/doc/203382931/Russian-Lgbt-Law-White-P... Before you decide to down-vote me into oblivion and accuse me of hating minority groups please read the white paper linked above. Note I am not affiliated with the person who wrote it or scribd. I just want people to see both sides of the argument. EDIT - And what a surprise down-voted. Seriously…

Still reading, but impressions on the intro and first chapter: what a totally bizarre paper. It's a "white paper", but it's written as an autobiographical narrative of his research process. And usually "Executive Summary" does not refer to a top 10 list. It's very obviously written for the purposes of advocacy, despite protestations that it's not. The defense of this law seems to be: 1) It's not that bad. It doesn't…

"Would the US government and news media (all owned by multinational conglomerates) implement a enormous propaganda campaign demanding the repeal of Russian Federation Federal Law No. 135-FZ because of the potential revenue loss a company in violation could incur with a 90 day suspension resulting in lower than projected revenues leading to a negative impact on the company’s stock price and ultimately causing a negative impact on key US economic indicators?"

"With all that in mind, we can conclude that the only accurate, fact-based, logical answer to the question is YES"

Wow, just wow.

This guy is a nutjob. He argues with a straight face that the Russian law isn't targeting the LGBT community, just non-traditional sexual relationships. He's either a liar about his long involvement in the LGBT community or he's learned absolutely nothing from it, as it's classic couching of terms as cover.

He even brings up the (unenforceable) anti-sodomy laws in US states, discussing how the majority of them are actually written to outlaw sodomy (non-vaginal intercourse) between any two people, not just same-sex couples, but they were used as tools to specifically target homosexual long after they were no longer (or rarely) enforced against heterosexual people. And yet he can't seem to connect the dots.

In any case, this goes from infuriating to fucking stupid pretty quickly. Check out the pages culminating in the conclusion I quoted above on page 70.

Re: Google shows support for LGBT Olympians

#105

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Feb 07, 2014, 2:21 AM UTC

throwaway_yy2Di wrote: post #76

[deleted] wrote: post #65

[deleted]

Text editors are very opinionated. Emacs ships with tons of propaganda, including the complete text of rms' political manifesto; and Vim advocates for a charity in Uganda. edit to add: It's the GNU Manifesto, which is an appendix in emacs' Info node. https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Ma... On Vim it's the startup splash screen: ~ Help poor children in Uganda! ~ type :help iccf for information…

[deleted]

Re: Google shows support for LGBT Olympians

#106

Post by barking » Fri, Feb 07, 2014, 2:23 AM UTC

cromwellian wrote: post #85

barking wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disturbing. I'll be keeping a close eye on you for signs of megalomania from now on. :-)

I'm trying to reclaim the name for positive associations. Many people don't even know how Oliver Cromwell was, I've even encountered British people who didn't know the history. Anyway, there's actor James Cromwell. We need to band together and overcome the negative association with the good ole' Lord Protector. (My grandfather used to tell me that he traced our ancestry and supposedly we are closely/directly descende…

He was held responsible for a massacre 5 miles from where I was born. I did a school project on it and stood in a stone tower room where local women and children had gone for refuge but were discovered and slaughtered. Even closer to home was a spot where as Cromwell's army passed a man stood looking at them. His behaviour was viewed as impudent and he was summarily hanged. As a small kid he was the devil incarnate to me. Since then my view has become a lot less black and white but it's hard to shake off childhood associations entirely.

Re: Google shows support for LGBT Olympians

#107

Post by osipov » Fri, Feb 07, 2014, 2:41 AM UTC

sethbannon wrote: post #17

For those unfamiliar with the issue of gay rights abuses in Russia, this article offers a fine history: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/12/gay-ri...

Here's a different perspective which is far more unfavorable to US in comparison: http://www.blacklistednews.com/The_Olympics_of_Hate_in_a_Nat...

Re: Google shows support for LGBT Olympians

#108

Post by osipov » Fri, Feb 07, 2014, 2:42 AM UTC

aray wrote: post #71

vidoc wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't Utah get the winter Olympics a few years ago ? :)

Utah, while prohibiting gay marriage, nevertheless still let gay people meet (gatherings), distribute information, and speak publicly about the topic.

Russia allows these things too except for the part of getting minors involved.

EDIT: The Wikipedia article is full of hedging on this topic, e.g.

- "According to _some commentators_..." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Russia#Bans_on_....

- "Under the statute it is _effectively illegal_", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Russia#National_...

Since when did journalists become legal scholars? Shouldn't we evaluate laws based on legal outcomes, not on a journalist's speculation?

Re: Google shows support for LGBT Olympians

#109

Post by devilshaircut » Fri, Feb 07, 2014, 2:42 AM UTC

spaceborn wrote: post #63

devilshaircut wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Both sides of the argument." That Russia has a reasonable political platform regarding its LGBT citizens? I am not sure that it is possible to 'blow out of proportion' what is most certainly a human rights issue. This was your own assertion, not that of the paper's. The topic was the Google Doodle showing support for LGBT people and your first impulse is to imply that the situation in Russia is in fact a non-issue.…

> That Russia has a reasonable political platform regarding its LGBT citizens? Are you saying that this position can simply be disregarded out of hand? That strikes me as disrespectful and self-important. If nothing else it is non-conducive to any actual discussion on the matter - unless all you want is an echo chamber to reaffirm your preexisting positions on the matter. > The topic was the Google Doodle showing sup…

Absolutely I am. I don't need to share the evidence with you because, as a thinking and contributing member to these forums, I am sure you have accessed it yourself. Is there any reason I wouldn't discard an argument in favor of institutionalized racism? Or, more mildly, that institutionalized racism is a topic that is capable of being overblown?

The commenter called it "The LGBT Russia thing" and if that does not aptly sum up how trivial s/he perceives the topic to be, I don't know what does. "That human rights violation thing". Sorry, it doesn't fly with me.

I am not saying Russian laws are not a part of the topic. What I am saying is that characterizing the topic as being "overblown" by citing that paper is absolutely ludicrous.

EDIT: Wanted to add in this: How do you have 'rational discourse' when one side of the discussion is demonstrably pursuing nothing less than a human rights violation? It is like saying the Catholic church's sex scandal was 'overblown', or slavery, or any other human rights topic you can imagine. Where is the rational discourse there? How can "human rights violations" ever be an "overblown" topic?

Re: Google shows support for LGBT Olympians

#110

Post by osipov » Fri, Feb 07, 2014, 2:46 AM UTC

mmanfrin wrote: post #32

ck2 wrote: post #19

I realize the difference with Russia is that it is practically illegal for LGBT to exist but let's talk about the USA for a moment where 33 states refuse to consider legalizing gay marriage and a few are even testing of the idea of emergency suspending ALL marriages just so people who are gay cannot marry if they cannot be excluded separately. There are still plenty of places in the USA where you could be killed for…

the difference is not by the state but by individuals. And therein lies the distinction. We still have a long way to go, but our laws are structured and being structured in a way that protects those rights. Even though some states might be trying to push back the tide of tolerance, the momentum is seriously in the direction of equal rights. Every country has idiots and bigots, but when a state sponsors such bigotry,…

Did you know that in Russia you can't get fired for being gay? At the same time it is perfectly legal to do so in United States. When did it become legal in United States for gays to have sex? Kinda like in 2003...except 13 states have not repealed sodomy laws. By the way, sodomy is perfectly legal in Russia since 1993.