Russian Anti-gay laws and violence, and the Olympic (Winter) Games.

[Papewaio]

Not to disagree that there are huge problems for LGBT population in Russia, but the bottom line is, there's not a single country in the world where alternative sexualities are 100% accepted.

Those competitions need a venue and it's not the first time the venue isn't 100% perfect in all ways. But, since it's Russia in this case (as it was with Beijing 2010) it's so cool to point it out.

In other news, the sky is blue, water is wet and the Earth keeps spinning.

Because legalized gay marriage in some countries is equivalent to being tortured by countrymen, persecuted by the state or jailed for being gay in other countries.

Of course some might argue in the same fashion that water boarding is college pranks and that marriage is torture.

A sports event is an entertainment venue. I do not think we should celebrate such a backwards country just because a corrupt Olympic committe got a few extra back handers to select it.

[Sarmatian]

Marriage is torture, that's an axiom. :)

On a serious note, I don't disagree that situation is bad in that regard in Russia. What I despise, though, is selective outrage over it.

South Africa is many, many times worse than Russia when it comes LGBT rights. Where was the outrage back then?

[Kralizec]

South Africa is a hostile environment for LGBT people due to bad law enforcement. Russia has the same problem but has opted to enshrine this bigotry into law by making "homosexual propaganda" a criminal offense. Pretty big difference.

[rvg]

South Africa is a hostile environment for LGBT people due to bad law enforcement. Russia has the same problem but has opted to enshrine this bigotry into law by making "homosexual propaganda" a criminal offense. Pretty big difference.

Since you bring up enforcement, what makes you think that this law will be dutifully enforced in Russia?

[Kralizec]

Presumably the athletes will be asked to be discreet about it. And if a gay athlete kisses his partner in front of the cameras I expect that it would be censored, but that would probably be the end of it.

I expect that Putin & Co don't want to enforce them on the athletes (or high-profile foreigners in general) because they don't want the diplomatic mess it would cause. Supposedly they even assured the IOC that they wouldn't do so. In the end it's about wether or not it's ethical to hold an event like this in an autocratic craphole like Russia, to stipulate for exceptions for your own privileged people while the residents of the country are subject to harsh treatment.

Problem is, under that line of thought the pool of countries where you can olympic games becomes rather limited, while the whole premise of the event is that it's for all nations and all people. Some people argue that countries like Russia and China use these events as propaganda tools. But unless I missed something, the IOC is not a missionary organisation that aims to promote democracy and other good stuff, even though a lot of people expect it to be.

[rvg]

... But unless I missed something, the IOC is not a missionary organisation that aims to promote democracy and other good stuff, even though a lot of people expect it to be.

Precisely.

[Sarmatian]

Presumably the athletes will be asked to be discreet about it. And if a gay athlete kisses his partner in front of the cameras I expect that it would be censored, but that would probably be the end of it.

Two Russian girls actually kissed on the mouth during the world championship in athletics in Moscow after they received their medals. They were both cute and it was hot :). I don't know what was the reaction to it. I'll google it.

EDIT: I was too far away. Only the right one is kinda cute, and I'm not sure it was full on the mouth but close enough.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...rs_podium.html

EDIT 2: This was the photo I've seen originally. Here they both look cute and kiss full on the mouth. Now, if they were only to put on nurse uniforms... :)

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/natio...220105411.html

Problem is, under that line of thought the pool of countries where you can olympic games becomes rather limited, while the whole premise of the event is that it's for all nations and all people. Some people argue that countries like Russia and China use these events as propaganda tools. But unless I missed something, the IOC is not a missionary organisation that aims to promote democracy and other good stuff, even though a lot of people expect it to be.

Give the man a cigar!!!

But, only Russia and China? Don't you think that placing a WTC flag along national flags of participant nations during Salt Lake City Olympic games was using the event as a propaganda tool???

[Montmorency]

Just to oblige with a rag on the former Russian Empire, I'd like to drop a story:

A guy I know bought an apartment in Ukraine for cheap after its owner died.

Problem is, the former owner-man had taken out a mortgage off the books, which no one knew about until after the property was sold to New Guy, so now the bank who 'owns' the mortgage is suing New Guy.

Apparently, in the Ukraine mortgages are attached not to the borrower, but to the property itself*; thus, the bank can demand that New Guy pay up on this mature loan - which the previous owner had deferred or skipped out on somehow.

Again, let me emphasize that the original loan was off the books and that Ukrainian mortgages are linked not to the borrower but to the property. Also, the interest rate is like 15% or something.

...

I hope the poor fellow can settle out of court or else find some kind of loophole.

*

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

And this isn't how it works in the US, right? I haven't yet taken out a mortgage, and I only know a few basic generalities, but surely in the US the estate of the deceased borrower would be expected to honor the loan, or else whoever manages the property or appropriates it (and why not the bank itself, there...) - right? I can't recall who exactly New Guy bought the property from, but whoever sold it ought to be repaying any outstanding loans, right? That makes a little more sense, right?

How the hell can it make sense to transfer the mortgage to the buyer?! What a back-asswards system. In fact, I wonder if this is really even how it works in the Ukraine and whether the New Guy, as a foreigner, is getting scammed by this bank...

[Sarmatian]

Just to oblige with a rag on the former Russian Empire, I'd like to drop a story:

A guy I know bought an apartment in Ukraine for cheap after its owner died.

Problem is, the former owner-man had taken out a mortgage off the books, which no one knew about until after the property was sold to New Guy, so now the bank who 'owns' the mortgage is suing New Guy.

Apparently, in the Ukraine mortgages are attached not to the borrower, but to the property itself*; thus, the bank can demand that New Guy pay up on this mature loan - which the previous owner had deferred or skipped out on somehow.

Again, let me emphasize that the original loan was off the books and that Ukrainian mortgages are linked not to the borrower but to the property. Also, the interest rate is like 15% or something.

...

I hope the poor fellow can settle out of court or else find some kind of loophole.

*

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

And this isn't how it works in the US, right? I haven't yet taken out a mortgage, and I only know a few basic generalities, but surely in the US the estate of the deceased borrower would be expected to honor the loan, or else whoever manages the property or appropriates it (and why not the bank itself, there...) - right? I can't recall who exactly New Guy bought the property from, but whoever sold it ought to be repaying any outstanding loans, right? That makes a little more sense, right?

How the hell can it make sense to transfer the mortgage to the buyer?! What a back-asswards system. In fact, I wonder if this is really even how it works in the Ukraine and whether the New Guy, as a foreigner, is getting scammed by this bank...

Mortgages are always tied to the property. That's why they're called mortgages and not credits. The deal is that you shouldn't be able to transfer ownership unless the bank okays it.

[rvg]

Mortgages are always tied to the property. That's why they're called mortgages and not credits. The deal is that you shouldn't be able to transfer ownership unless the bank okays it.

Note to self: do not by any real estate in Eastern Europe.

[Montmorency]

To clarify, this is how I meant "tied":

1.a. Mortgages are tied to properties in that properties are used as collateral while they are being paid for.

1.b. Mortgages are tied to the owner in that the owner has legal-contractual responsibility for paying off the loan to the lender. If the lender sells his property while the mortgage is still outstanding, the bank collects from the proceeds however much is necessary to satisfy the mortgage. If the borrower dies, then his estate or whoever the property passes on to is henceforth responsible for the mortgage, unless there is a foreclosure following the death. See also: Due-on-sale clauses.

This is what is familiar/expected by me.

2.a. Mortgages are tied to properties in that properties are used as collateral while they are being paid for.

2.b. Mortgages are tied to the property in that if the borrower sells the property, the borrower is no longer responsible for the mortgage; the responsibility is passed on to the new owners of the property. Whoever owns a property at a given time is responsible for paying off the mortgage attached to the property.

This is what had me confused.

The deal is that you shouldn't be able to transfer ownership unless the bank okays it.

Well, the bank for putting up an off-the-books mortgage that no one knew about until the lawyers came barging in.

[Montmorency]

Encumbrance of the immovable property by mortgage shall be subject to state registration per

the legally established procedure. In case this condition is not observed, the mortgage agreement

shall be valid, but the mortgagee’s claim shall not acquire priority against the registered rights or

claims of the other persons in the immovable property transferred on mortgage.

Yeesh.

In the event of foreclosure on the subject of mortgage by the overlying mortgagee, the

underlying mortgagee shall be also entitled to foreclose, even if the main obligation to the

underlying mortgagee has not yet matured. If the underlying mortgagee did not use this right, the

underlying mortgage shall be valid until full satisfaction of the claim of underlying mortgagee

under the main obligation, the ownership right in the subject of mortgage shall pass to the new

owner along with the encumbrance of this property with the underlying mortgage.

Could this be what's screwing my fellow?

Article 17 Grounds for Mortgage Termination

Mortgage shall be terminated in the following cases:

- termination of the main obligation;

- sale of the subject of mortgage according to this Law;

Wait a -

In the event the ownership right (the right of full economic management) in the subject of

mortgage passes from the mortgagor to another person, including heritage or legal succession,

the mortgage shall remain effective for the acquirer of relevant immovable property even in the

event he/she was not notified of the property encumbrances with the mortgage.

Oh.

Welp, that's enough for now. if anyone wants to dig through the legislation, here's the link.

Though why would you, you weirdo.

[Papewaio]

Olympic Games have been boycotted in the past.

The encloypedia example of propaganda would come with a picture of the Olympic flag.

My personal opinion is we should allow any country that is improving its human rights record to hold it. Those in retrograde we should consider boycotting.

I for one can happily give up my bread and circuses for improving human rights.

[HoreTore]

Marriage is torture, that's an axiom. :)

On a serious note, I don't disagree that situation is bad in that regard in Russia. What I despise, though, is selective outrage over it.

South Africa is many, many times worse than Russia when it comes LGBT rights. Where was the outrage back then?

Where the outrage was? All over the place?

[Papewaio]

Apartheid South Africa got ostracised by the Commonwealth nations, trade bans and sports bans.

Not exactly the best one to pick as your defence.

"Your honour, where was the outrage about Nazi Germany in the early 40's" - Defendant
"Have you heard of WWII?" - Judge

[Sarmatian]

Where the outrage was? All over the place?

Yeah, but no one could hear it from the vuvuzelas, right? Got ya.

Apartheid South Africa got ostracised by the Commonwealth nations, trade bans and sports bans.

Not exactly the best one to pick as your defence.

"Your honour, where was the outrage about Nazi Germany in the early 40's" - Defendant
"Have you heard of WWII?" - Judge

I'm not talking about apartheid South Africa, I'm talking about "hell on earth for lgbt" current South Africa. And that South Africa hosted the world cup, the biggest sport event in the world by far.


So, you analogy doesn't really work. To work, it would have to go something like this"

"Your honour, where was the outrage about Nazi Germany" - Defendant
"Have you heard of Marshall's Plan?" - Judge

[Ironside]

I'm not talking about apartheid South Africa, I'm talking about "hell on earth for lgbt" current South Africa. And that South Africa hosted the world cup, the biggest sport event in the world by far.

Has South Africa done any legal changes on the matter recently? Or any clearly influential inofficial changes?

Changes creates reactions, that's the way things works. If you actually want to see protests in Africa on worsening the situation for lgbt, see Uganda.

What you're saying is that if you're aren't outspoken about a nasty status quo in any place of the world, you can't complain about a country making changes for the worse, as long as they're not as nasty. That's a common and incredibly paralysing and vile argument.

To follow that logic. Even while bombed, Serbia wasn't the worst place on earth. Unless the Serbian people did a particulary complaining about those places, they had no right to complain about getting bombed.

Fine, fine to correct it, it would be any actual protester in another country that hasn't that right.

[Sarmatian]

Has South Africa done any legal changes on the matter recently? Or any clearly influential inofficial changes?

Changes creates reactions, that's the way things works. If you actually want to see protests in Africa on worsening the situation for lgbt, see Uganda.

What you're saying is that if you're aren't outspoken about a nasty status quo in any place of the world, you can't complain about a country making changes for the worse, as long as they're not as nasty. That's a common and incredibly paralysing and vile argument.

To follow that logic. Even while bombed, Serbia wasn't the worst place on earth. Unless the Serbian people did a particulary complaining about those places, they had no right to complain about getting bombed.

Fine, fine to correct it, it would be any actual protester in another country that hasn't that right.

I'm not arguing against discussion of lgbt rights in Russia, but the thread's about whether international sport events in Russia should be boycotted because of it.

The elephant in the room that everybody is trying to ignore is South Africa which hosted a world cup a few years ago. Nobody called for boycot, and mainstream media largely ignored the issue.
Just because a situation is worsening in Russia, it's still light years ahead of South Africa.

it's the double standards that bother me, simple as that.

[Husar]

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/08/08...russia-so-far/

This link was posted here earlier and had a little surprise for me. I was surprised to read that the video in point 4 is just about one gay guy, the picture made me think otherwise. It reminded me of Lemur's thread of anti-gays who turn out to be gay after all.
I mean, it looks hilarious and I honestly thought the "sailor guys" (paratroopers, I know) were the gay ones there.

The South African problems were discussed here in the media throughout the World Cup btw. as are the Russian ones.
So in a way these events shine a brighter light onto the problems these countries have than is done usually. That is, even if the problems aren't the focus of media attention next to the sports coverage, they're still discussed far more than they usually are. And just the notion of maybe boycotting it, even if there is no boycott, intensifies the discussion of the problems.

Alternatively we could try to invade Russia and force them to accept gays, a historically proven method.

[Sarmatian]

It should be easier. You wouldn't have to transfer panzers south to take Kiev, you could save them all for one final push on Moskau :). Stalingrad doesn't exist anymore. Leningrad also. Actually, it would walk in the park.

[Husar]

I meant "we" as in the West. The whole Germany-Russia thing was a welcome side-joke but I have no doubt that our current army doesn't stand a chance regarding an invasion of Russia. We're constantly sizing it down ever since the Cold War ended. Did you know the Netherlands recently disbanded the last tank batallion they had?

[HoreTore]

I meant "we" as in the West. The whole Germany-Russia thing was a welcome side-joke but I have no doubt that our current army doesn't stand a chance regarding an invasion of Russia. We're constantly sizing it down ever since the Cold War ended. Did you know the Netherlands recently disbanded the last tank batallion they had?

Now that's a positive change. Bring the olympics to the Neds, I say!

[Fragony]

Now that's a positive change. Bring the olympics to the Neds, I say!

Just the Leopards, they are going to Indonesia, of course we are not unoficially putting them there because of China, and the Patriot systems that are stationed in Turkey have everything to do with protecting Turkey from Syria and absolutily nothing with Iran ;)

[Goofball]

What I would really like to see is during every podium ceremony, the gold medalist plants a solid French kiss on the silver medalist, right there in front of the cameras (sorry bronze medalist, you get left out; maybe try a little harder next time). Then the Russians would have to decide: march in the jackboots and defend their "glorious ideals" in full view of the world, or acknowledge the idiocy of their laws.

[Papewaio]

Pity it's the Winter Olympics ... The Netherlands Female Hockey team is both a very high chance of getting a gold and very good looking.

[HopAlongBunny]

I'm with Goofball on this.
I intend to watch every female podium exercise for explicit demonstrations of choice.

For Freedom!

[Sarmatian]

I'm with Goofball on this.
I intend to watch every female podium exercise for explicit demonstrations of choice.

For Freedom!

Only female, you homophobe?

[rvg]

Only female, you homophobe?

Of course, only female! Gah, just thinking about the alternative makes me wanna vomit.

[HopAlongBunny]

Only female, you homophobe?

Only so much time in the day...must prioritize! :)

[Rhyfelwyr]

Of course, only female! Gah, just thinking about the alternative makes me wanna vomit.

According to the internet, you are insecure in your sexuality. To demonstrate the security of your heterosexuality, you have to flirt with other male members and post homoerotic euphemisms at every opportunity.