Last year, three
different bills were proposed to the Ukrainian Rada, all three in different ways
aiming at combat that year’s buzzword “propaganda of homosexuality.”
On October 2, 2012,
the Rada finally adopted one of these bills in the first reading. The bill
proposed to introduce amendments to the laws on public morality, on the press,
on television and radio, and on publishing. These amendments would make
“propaganda of homosexuality” an administrative offense punishable by fine (up
to Hr 5,000), and add homosexuality to the list of prohibited topics, along
with propaganda of violence and cruelty, in article 300 of the criminal code. Violation
of this article is punished by up to 5 years in prison. The law is now waiting
for a second reading.
Similarly, on 25
January 2013 a federal bill was adopted in the first reading in Russia. If signed
into law it would introduce new articles to Russia’s administrative code, making
“propaganda of homosexuality among minors” punishable by fines of up to 5,000
rubles ($155) for individuals and 500,000 rubles for legal entities. Such laws
already exist in over a dozen Russian regions but this is the first attempt to
introduce a federal ban. It is likely to pass.
Even though
neither bill has been signed into law yet, reports suggest many conservatives
in both countries are seeking to exploit a change in public attitudes. The
controversial National Commission on Morality Protection in Ukraine suggested the
Sponge Bob cartoon is corrupting Ukrainian children since, according to their research,
Sponge Bob is a homosexual. In Russia, the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics Pride
House has been banned by a local court under the excuse that “homosexuality
threatens national security and the territorial integrity of the state.”
LGBT demonstrations
in Kyiv, Moscow and other cities have been repeatedly attacked by the radical
right activists, some of whom are supported by the politicians. The recent March
for Equality on 25 May in Kyiv was met with violent counter-protesters; the
same day in Moscow LGBT demonstration was attacked with police who detained both
activists and attackers. In Kyiv the demonstration lasted for 30 minutes, in
Moscow just 10. Participants in Kyiv were evacuated by police on buses; in
Moscow – taken away in the police vans to local police stations.
Political discourse,
obviously, is just part of the problem. Social attitudes towards LGBT persons overall
have not been favorable ever since opinion polls have been conducted on this
issue. In 2007, approximately 20 per cent in both Ukraine and Russia said homosexuality
should be accepted by society. This is very low not just compared to Europe,
but also to more conservative regions like Latin America. But xenophobic political
discourse has played its part. More recent polls, like the one conducted by the
Levada Center in Russia, found attitudes towards LGBT persons further
deteriorated over the last two years, during which politicians have found a new
scapegoat embodied by “corrupt homosexuals.”
The role of
politicians in keeping homophobia strong is difficult to underestimate. Vociferous
defenders of “traditional values” have used diverse derogatory metaphors and
clichés to humiliate LGBT persons and depict them as obscene perverts. This
results, on the one hand, in an upsurge of homophobic hysteria not only in
Russia and Ukraine, but in many post-Soviet states. (One example is Georgia
where politicians also used such “propaganda” rhetoric). On the other hand,
popular fears and prejudices are manipulated and exacerbated by eloquent populists
who know how to trigger people’s emotions.
These emotions,
however, are often completely out of touch with reality. In a recent opinion
poll in Russia, 86 percent of respondents supported a national ban on
“propaganda,” something 92 percent claimed they never encountered. This shows
how irrational beliefs enter the public consciousness without any real basis to
support them.
There is no easy
or quick way to change social attitudes. But a strong and united resistance to populist
and xenophobic politicians is needed as of today. This resistance should come
from civil society groups that can challenge the laws in domestic and European
courts, and conduct international solidarity campaigns shaming those
responsible for the homophobic upsurge and violence.
The recent brutal
homophobic murder in Volgograd sent shock waves through Russia’s LGBT community,
which rightly accused the most openly homophobic parliamentarians of provoking
violence. But Russia’s government and parliamentarians are difficult to deal
with. Even the recent decision of the European Court of Human Rights on the gay
prides in Moscow was ignored by the Russian authorities. Therefore, the best
strategy would be to engage the relatively reasonable part of the political
spectrum and those in who do no approve of rampant homophobic campaigns, like
former President Dmitry Medvedev, who openly opposed the propaganda bill.
In Ukraine,
there are somewhat more opportunities to influence the course of events, before
it is too late. Even though the anti-discrimination law, a precondition for closer
cooperation with the European Union, failed to pass, the coming Eastern
Partnership Summit in November where the Association Agreement might be signed
provides a good window of opportunity to put additional pressure on Ukrainian authorities.
This way all political forces in Ukraine can preserve their image: radicals
would still fight their favorite specters and argue that Europe is promoting
its “homosexual agenda” while moderates could present it as minor but necessary
concession to Europe. This approach might seem cynical but it is one of very
few options that could ease tensions and prevent an escalation in official
homophobic rhetoric.
After all, the
aim of conservative politicians in both Russia and Ukraine is not the adoption
of homophobic bills per se, but rather mobilizing political support by making
up problems.
Evgeny Belyakov is a historian and LGBT rights activist who divides his time between Budapest, Dublin and Vladivostok.
