The interview with the Evening Standard comes a day after it was confirmed that David Cameron will raise the issue of the Russian law banning the promotion of “non-traditional relationships”, with Russian President Vladimir Putin, when he travels to St Petersburg for the G20 this week.*
Mr Hague said that Britain had “moved the dial”, on other human rights issues such as sexual violence in conflict areas, and on Russia, said: “It is important to us. Britain cannot have a foreign policy without a conscience and I don’t believe it is ultimately in the nature of British people to act without a conscience. I wrote a book about William Wilberforce and the abolition of the slave trade, which was not in the self-interest of Britain, but was right.”
Pink News.
Err, this is the same William "Let's bomb Syria!" Hague who famously was opposed to the repeal of Section 28 - the act that inspired the new Russian law - and was against gay adoption - like what they don't have in Russia now - yes?
Similarly laudatory moronic article on Gay Star News - no surprises there.
It is not clear from the Evening Standard interview if the noted judo-wrestling and hotel room-sharing politician even mentioned The Gays.
I increasingly feel Fagburn has turned into Ed Reardon and am now resigned to my fate of fuming that much of the gay news media is written by politically illiterate 12 year-olds.
Oh the despair...
* This hasn't been confirmed yet, some MEP tweeted it. But if you believe everything you read on Twitter, then Nelson Mandela died twelve times last week.
Posts
You as Ed Reardon ... that picture's not leaving me head ...
ReplyDelete"Section 28 - the act that inspired the new Russian law" - source?
Admittedly there were several similar local laws in the wonderful US that preceded our own Section 28...
DeleteScott Lively claims authorship of the Russian law. I don't think he mentions S28 ...
DeleteSee - it's all AMERIKKA'S fault! x
DeleteActually, that may well have a grain of truth to it. You saw how the suit against Lively by Ugandans has advanced in US legal system?
Deleteyeah but fortunately there is you x
ReplyDeleteIf you're not being sarcastic - thank you!
Deletex
...or, in the case of Pink News, dyed-in-the-wool Tory ones.
ReplyDeleteTheir reader comments are so depressing...
DeleteDing!
ReplyDeleteYou're not Ed Reardon but the guy who rings up Gary Bellamy repeating "what's the point?"
He says; "what is point?"
DeleteWHAT IS POINT????
Ding!
DeleteDong!
Delete"Section 28 - the act that inspired the new Russian law"
ReplyDeleteYou're not aware, then, that between 1933 and 1993 homosexuality was illegal in your beloved Soviet Russia?
Your weary, not-suffering-fools-gladly act doesn't work so well when you demonstrate by silly statements like the above that you are either being ignorant or flat dishonest about the subject.
Can you remind me when homosexuality stopped being illegal in England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the US - I thought the latter only made it legal in 2003.
Deletehttp://www.glapn.org/sodomylaws/usa/usa.htm
Thanks!
It's definitely an echo of Section 28. The exact same use of the word "promotion" is extremely duplicitous: it appeals to the idea of trying to turn kids into gayers, but it encompasses all expressions of homosexuality. After all, any outward display or discussion can be interpreted as such.
DeleteI was in school from the mid-'80s to the late-'90s and homosexuality was only mentioned once by a teacher in all that time, during a discussion of Shakespeare and he quickly brushed over it, clearly either embarrassed or scared and then moved on. It bred a fear amongst teachers of even talking about the issue and I believe in many cases even intervening in the bullying or harassment of gay pupils.
The vagueness of the term "promotion" was precisely the point.
Let's also not forget that the Tory party of the 1980s used homophobic posters as part of their campaigns and even after Section 28 was done away with and well into the 2000s they were still going against the tide on this issue - as we saw in the recent equal marriage debate; they're still homophobic.
And I believe prosecution and state persecution of gay people still continued even after the sex of gay sex was legalised.
@ Richard
ReplyDelete"Can you remind me when homosexuality stopped being illegal in England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the US - I thought the latter only made it legal in 2003."
Ah... whataboutery and goalpost moving.
1. The US has nothing to do with Section 28, so I am not sure why you are bringing in the sodomy legislation.
2. Re the laws in the UK, 1967 in England and Wales, 1981 and 1982 in Scotland and Northern Ireland. As I expect you already knew.
None of that has any bearing on the situation for LGBT people in Russia now, or the Russian state's own long history of homophobic legislation. Pointing at previous injustice in the UK is of no value whatseover re Russia in 2013.
Whereas in the US, UK and many other countries, LGBT rights have been gradually improving over the decades, even if not perfect, in Russia unfortunately the trend is currently in the opposite direction.
I would like to know what point you really think you are making and whther it has any real useful value. If it's about 'hypocrisy', then in the first place it doesn't stand up at all well - it would if Hague is arguing against laws in Russia which he supports having here, but he is not. But even if it did, making that point has no practical value.
It amounts to saying to LGBT Russians, "It's not so bad for you in Russia today when you think that we used to have discrimination here too (mostly before I was born)".
BK
"It's definitely an echo of Section 28."
No it is not. It only appears to be 'definitely an echo of Section 28' if you are ignorant of Russian history and have a narrow UK-centric frame of reference, as you and Richard appear to have.
Of course we have a lon and unfortuante history of homophobia in the UK, and of course we still have homophobes. Meanwhile Russia has a long and unfortunate history of homophobia that it all its own, and it was not whisked up and invented by Mrs Thatcher.
How the increasing homophobia in Russia today is best dealt with - i.e. that it actually helps LGBT people in Russia, and by whom, are not easy questions to answer. For instance, Richard was recently quoting approvingly Alexeyev as the leader of Russia's LGBT community, but has since (understandably) declared him persona non grata after his anti-semitic meltdown.
But one distraction that is of no value or comfort to any LGBT person in Russia is talking about homophobia elsewhere, especially elsehwere and in the past. It is about as much help as a first responder telling a badly injured person that they once broke their leg and it hurt a great deal.
For what it's worth, I think the emphasis has to be on doing what LGBT in Russia indicate will help them most. Everything else is secondary, be that unfocussed moral outrage (Tatchell) or narcissistic moral relativism ("it happened to us too and we still have homophobes here!")
With respect, you started talking about homophobia in Russia in the past...
DeleteSincerely, thanks for your post - I agree on the fundamentals.
BK
Delete"It's definitely an echo of Section 28."
No it is not. It only appears to be 'definitely an echo of Section 28' if you are ignorant of Russian history and have a narrow UK-centric frame of reference, as you and Richard appear to have.
Of course we have a lon and unfortuante history of homophobia in the UK, and of course we still have homophobes. Meanwhile Russia has a long and unfortunate history of homophobia that it all its own, and it was not whisked up and invented by Mrs Thatcher.
I never said Russian homophobia was "whisked up and invented by 'Mrs Thatcher'"
We were talking about the current Russian law against "promoting" homosexuality - and that is very much identical in many ways, and certainly identical in the way it is cynically worded, with the Thatcher government's Section 28 (only one of many ways that government and the Tory party cynically exploited gay people as a scapegoat).
As far as histories of homophobia go, Russia, the US and the UK all have a lot to answer for on that score.
But make no mistake about it - the current Russian law is very much modelled in word and intention on the Thatcher government's shameful Section 28.
A law, as Fagburn rightly points out, Hague along with most of his party were still in favour of well into the 2000s.
"But make no mistake about it - the current Russian law is very much modelled in word and intention on the Thatcher government's shameful Section 28."
ReplyDeleteNo it is no modelled on it, and you have made the big mistake in assuming that it is. There is no evidence whatsoever that those who draughted it knew of the Thatcher government law. On the contrary, one of the Americans who claims to have helped encourage it says he had never heard of Section 28. You are taking your own awareness of Section 28 and projecting it on to Russian lawmakers. They have plenty of their laws from the past that didn't just criminalise homosexuality but also the discussion about it.
But you wouldn't know that because you seem to think everything Russian homophobia originated in Thatcher's Britain. Well that says plenty about your parochialism but nothing of any accuracy about the provenance of this law.
"A law, as Fagburn rightly points out, Hague along with most of his party were still in favour of well into the 2000s."
Absolutely, and it was fucking disgrace and Hague should still be burning with shame about that.
Now:
1. Would you prefer that Hague and co showed 'consistency' by reverting to their old ways - perhaps scrapping the gay marriage legislation and re-introducing section 28? Would that make you feel happier? Personally I'd rather they didn't.
2. Either way, all that still has no bearing on or benefit for LGBT people in Russia in 2013. None. Zero. It's utterly irrelevant to them. It's no help to them. It may be therepeutic for you, but that's about it.
"Thatcher government's Section 28 (only one of many ways that government and the Tory party cynically exploited gay people as a scapegoat)."
This is the sort of comment on this subject that is utterly pointless. Firstly I know fully well about being a gay man in 1980s Thatcher's Britain, so I really don't need a bracketed reminder from anyone. Secondly, I don't live in 1980's Thatcher's Britain, I live in 2013 where there are different problems and different opportunities. If you want to remain stuck in the past, go ahead, but it's of no practical value to anyone.
On the contrary, one of the Americans who claims to have helped encourage it says he had never heard of Section 28.
DeleteAnd we should in no-way disbelieve something a homophobic shitbag says.
I agree - ignore all the glaring parallels between the Russian and Thatcher government's laws and believe a homophobic shitbag when he says the homophobic law he helped encourage was in no way influenced by an almost identical homophobic law drafted in the UK in the 1980s.
If you want to remain stuck in the past, go ahead, but it's of no practical value to anyone.
You're the one who brought the history of Russia into the discussion, distinguishing it from our own history. That's why our history was brought into the discussion.
Which by extension means I'm "living in the past"?
Cast iron logic, there.
"But you wouldn't know that because you seem to think everything Russian homophobia originated in Thatcher's Britain."
You've said that already and I answered you once already: I never said Russian homophobia was "whisked up and invented by 'Mrs Thatcher'"
We were talking about the current Russian law against "promoting" homosexuality not the entire fucking history of homophobia in Russia, nor homophobia in general in that country or any country...
PS - if you think Tory homophobia is "in the past", then you're living on another planet.
And what the fuck does "I live in 2013" mean, anyway? Jesus fucking Christ, can language get any more meaningless and inane?