Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 5:19 pmby Lyttenburg
4years wrote:Lyttenburg wrote:Care to elaborate about this "women's social and sexual liberation", which were, supposedly, denied to the Soviet women.
The easy example would be Stalin's illegalization of abortion and homosexual activity, both of which were originally legalized under Lenin. Remember Soltz's formulation that women had no right to decline the (alleged) joys of motherhood?
That kind of thing was rampant in the Stalinist bureaucracy from the 1930s onward.
Stalin =/= the whole history of the USSR, as Napoleon Empre =/= the whole history of France. The Soviet Union was the first country in the wolrd that legalized abotions in 1920. They were illegal only from 1936 till 1955. So, no you are wrong.
Anything else? More meaningful, this time
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 5:32 pmby 4years
Lyttenburg wrote:4years wrote:The easy example would be Stalin's illegalization of abortion and homosexual activity, both of which were originally legalized under Lenin. Remember Soltz's formulation that women had no right to decline the (alleged) joys of motherhood?
That kind of thing was rampant in the Stalinist bureaucracy from the 1930s onward.
1. Stalin =/= the whole history of the USSR, as Napoleon Empre =/= the whole history of France. 2. The Soviet Union was the first country in the wolrd that legalized abotions in 1920. 3. They were illegal only from 1936 till 1955. 4.So, no you are wrong.
Anything else? More meaningful, this time
1. True but from the rise of Stalin onward the USSR remained qualitatively the same until its collapse.
2. I already pointed that out.
3. True but irrelevant. Also the ban on homosexuality continued throughout the entirety of the USSR's existence.
4. Not only am I right, but you have utterly failed to provide even the slightest rebuttal to my argument. Perhaps you should learn something about the USSR before you involved yourself in discussions about it.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 6:10 pmby Lyttenburg
4years wrote:1. True but from the rise of Stalin onward the USSR remained qualitatively the same until its collapse.
2. I already pointed that out.
3. True but irrelevant. Also the ban on homosexuality continued throughout the entirety of the USSR's existence.
4. Not only am I right, but you have utterly failed to provide even the slightest rebuttal to my argument. Perhaps you should learn something about the USSR before you involved yourself in discussions about it.
My original question was, and I have to self-quote:
Care to elaborate about this "women's social and sexual liberation", which were, supposedly, denied to the Soviet women.
Which was adressed to Olerand. Probably you should learn something about the reading, before involving yourself in any discussion. It is you, who are wrong with such generalisation as "from the rise of Stalin onward the USSR remained qualitatively the same until its collapse". Also, source for:
Remember Soltz's formulation that women had no right to decline the (alleged) joys of motherhood?
would be nice, before I had to do any rebuttals of randomly stated facts.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:09 pmby Gongnong
I would probably describe myself as a Leninist or a Trotskyist (although I find most Trotskyists annoying, I greatly admire Trotsky himself), however I think getting caught up in labels is destructive, but that's beside the point in this discussion. The main point is homosexuality and communism/socialism. I find the thought of 2 men having sexual intercourse, or seeing themselves embrace each other in public off-putting, but that's my issue, and my feelings towards it shouldn't play into their decision to do it, obviously there's a limit to how far it should go, but there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, and my being off-put by it is my problem to deal with, not theirs. If people want to have consensual sex, so long as there's not a direct blood relation with anyone involved, then they should do it. Same goes with marriage, and I fully support the gay rights movement, and I think more homosexuality ought to be portrayed as a common occorance in everyday media like various tv shows and movies. I think all communists and socialists from anarcho-syndicalists to Stalinists, must give their support to social liberalizations such as homosexual marriage, and realize that homophobia is incredibly reactionary, and remember that it was Lenin himself who decriminalized Homosexuality in Russia.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:43 pmby Sefard
There's nothing wrong with homosexuals. The problem comes when they start turning their lifestyle into an ideology. You like what you like, fine. It is something you do. Not something you are.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:03 pmby Othelos
Sefard wrote:There's nothing wrong with homosexuals. The problem comes when they start turning their lifestyle into an ideology. You like what you like, fine. It is something you do. Not something you are.
....not this again. Everyone has a sexual orientation, which is part of who they are.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:11 pmby Sefard
Othelos wrote:Sefard wrote:There's nothing wrong with homosexuals. The problem comes when they start turning their lifestyle into an ideology. You like what you like, fine. It is something you do. Not something you are.
....not this again. Everyone has a sexual orientation, which is part of who they are.
^This here is the problem.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:17 pmby Sefard
Othelos wrote:Sefard wrote:^This here is the problem.
What problem
You are a man or a woman. What you do from there is whatever. There is no need to politicize what you do. It only causes problems.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:19 pmby Othelos
Sefard wrote:Othelos wrote:What problem
You are a man or a woman. What you do from there is whatever. There is no need to politicize what you do. It only causes problems.
Drawing attention the the fact that some groups of people don't have equal rights is
not a problem. Society should be fair.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:26 pmby Othelos
Sefard wrote:Othelos wrote:Drawing attention the the fact that some groups of people don't have equal rights is
not a problem. Society should be fair.
What is unequal?
most states in the US still bar same sex marriage and adoption. that's only one of the many issues currently, but I want to stay on topic.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:29 pmby Avenio
Sefard wrote:You are a man or a woman. What you do from there is whatever.
Considering that the entire point of Marxism, and by extent socialism and communism, is that 'what you do from there'
vis a vis society, class issues, gender issues and the like is
entirely the name of the game, mayhaps you're in the wrong ideological camp?
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:29 pmby Sefard
Othelos wrote:Sefard wrote:What is unequal?
most states in the US still bar same sex marriage and adoption. that's only one of the many issues currently, but I want to stay on topic.
I will stay on topic. Though if you wish to TG me, this would be fine.
The issue is not a matter of what people do, it is a matter of how much noise they make about doing it. A society operates best when there is little noise. This does not mean that progress cannot be made. It simply means that there is a functioning system, reforms can be made, and should be done so without great turbulence. As for homosexuals specifically, there is not really a need to change the system to cater to them. Just do what you do, and be done.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:32 pmby Othelos
Sefard wrote:Othelos wrote:most states in the US still bar same sex marriage and adoption. that's only one of the many issues currently, but I want to stay on topic.
I will stay on topic. Though if you wish to TG me, this would be fine.
The issue is not a matter of what people do, it is a matter of how much noise they make about doing it. A society operates best when there is little noise. This does not mean that progress cannot be made. It simply means that there is a functioning system, reforms can be made, and should be done so without great turbulence. As for homosexuals specifically, there is not really a need to change the system to cater to them. Just do what you do, and be done.
What? The only reason progress has been made on lgbt rights is because a lot of people drew attention to the issue.
And how is equal rights 'catering' to lgbt people? A right is a right, not a special privilege.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:32 pmby Gongnong
I also forgot to mention the fact to further prove that homosexuality and communism can work together that there are some rumors that the Greek Communist Guerrilla Aris Velouchiotis was either homosexual or bisexual himself
Now this is a guy the gay rights movement should use, he was a badass.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:36 pmby Sefard
Othelos wrote:Sefard wrote:I will stay on topic. Though if you wish to TG me, this would be fine.
The issue is not a matter of what people do, it is a matter of how much noise they make about doing it. A society operates best when there is little noise. This does not mean that progress cannot be made. It simply means that there is a functioning system, reforms can be made, and should be done so without great turbulence. As for homosexuals specifically, there is not really a need to change the system to cater to them. Just do what you do, and be done.
What? The only reason progress has been made on lgbt rights is because a lot of people drew attention to the issue.
And how is equal rights 'catering' to lgbt people? A right is a right, not a special privilege.
You are meaning the right for these "LGBT" people to marry? In other words, you want them to be able to enjoy the same financial benefits. This has already been done.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:37 pmby Glorious ReBublic of Alevstan
They should have the same rights as everyone else.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:37 pmby District XIV
Sefard wrote:Othelos wrote:What? The only reason progress has been made on lgbt rights is because a lot of people drew attention to the issue.
And how is equal rights 'catering' to lgbt people? A right is a right, not a special privilege.
You are meaning the right for these "LGBT" people to marry? In other words, you want them to be able to enjoy the same financial benefits. This has already been done.
Why do you quote LGBT as if you're questioning it?
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:39 pmby Othelos
Sefard wrote:Othelos wrote:What? The only reason progress has been made on lgbt rights is because a lot of people drew attention to the issue.
And how is equal rights 'catering' to lgbt people? A right is a right, not a special privilege.
You are meaning the right for these "LGBT" people to marry? In other words, you want them to be able to enjoy the same financial benefits. This has already been done.
Why did you put quotes around lgbt?
And yes, but not everywhere. That's the point. And there are many rights, not just benefits, that also come along with marriage, such as visiting your spouse in the hospital.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:44 pmby Sefard
Othelos wrote:Sefard wrote:You are meaning the right for these "LGBT" people to marry? In other words, you want them to be able to enjoy the same financial benefits. This has already been done.
Why did you put quotes around lgbt?
And yes, but not everywhere. That's the point. And there are many rights, not just benefits, that also come along with marriage, such as visiting your spouse in the hospital.
1. As I said before, you are a man or a woman, not a lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transsexual.
2. Yes, everywhere. A clause in the DOMA guaranteed federal marriage benefits for "LGBT" couples.
3. Spouses are often subject to the same visiting hours as everyone else.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:47 pmby Tmutarakhan
Sefard wrote:Othelos wrote:What? The only reason progress has been made on lgbt rights is because a lot of people drew attention to the issue.
And how is equal rights 'catering' to lgbt people? A right is a right, not a special privilege.
You are meaning the right for these "LGBT" people to marry? In other words, you want them to be able to enjoy the same financial benefits. This has already been done.
No, it has not been done except in certain places, and that much would not have happened without people making a lot of that "noise" you don't care for.
Posted:
Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:50 pmby Farnhamia
Tmutarakhan wrote:Sefard wrote:You are meaning the right for these "LGBT" people to marry? In other words, you want them to be able to enjoy the same financial benefits. This has already been done.
No, it has not been done except in certain places, and that much would not have happened without people making a lot of that "noise" you don't care for.
Right, but let's get back to the topic, which is the view of Socialists and Communists on homosexuals.
