Gays, Putin, and Skiing! Olympics Megathread: THE POLITICS

[Gallup]

Yeah, a truly horrible and un-democratic thing to say.

PS

Also. Much quoted Putin's pharse that "West endorses pedofilia"

According to BBC News a Dutch political party Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) since at lest 2006 strives to lover an ege of consent from 16 to 12 (both in regards of voting and having sex) and want legalise zooophilia and child pornography.

An 80 year old should fuck a 15 year old, if they both consent, no matter what society says; y u no support human rights? /sarcasm

Vlad, my man, better practice what you preach.

Mere kissing of same gender has always been allowed in Russia, at least as far back as I can remember.

For the love of christ someone tell me this is satire.

Please.

Nope. Gallup actually supported Putin, prior to Putin offering amnesty to Snowden. But Gallup's smart enough to realize that going "Russia ebul for not going after Snowden" won't actually matter to NSGers, so he's going after Putin for Human Rights. Same old tactic really, that's been reduced, reused and recycled.

So, news is coming out that the Russian Duma has passed a law banning information on Homosexuality...

Yes! A move in the right direction.

Please tell me how it feels to have Russia and Putin on your side...

Not very good but I will take what I get.

Then Snowden gets asylum, and suddenly Gallup starts caring about Human Rights in Russia. Also, ever since I mistakenly started debating with Gravlen, and ended up placing him on my ignore list, for what I thought was him making very annoying posts and not being very informative, his count in Putin posts jumped. For instance, if you do a search about Putin on Gravlen's post history, you will find that he's had 2 posts on that in 2009, a post relating to Snowden, a string of responses directed at me in 2013, and from then it was on. It's like Gravlen suddenly discovered Putin. Amusing really. Maybe I should apply the Gravlen method to the Gallup flip-flop, and see how many times I can mention Iran-Contra, HUD Rigging, Lobbying Scandal, EPA Scandal, Inslaw Affair, Savings & Loan Crisis, etc.

As soon as I found out what that atrocious law truly does, I became heavily critical of it, Ris can attest to that. But with such flip flopping, one must indeed wonder how many of those going after Russia for Human Rights, are doing it for other reasons, be it Snowden, or something else. The problem with such "ardent" critics, is that in an arena where it actually matters, not simply an online forum, but an actual PR battle, the Kremlin PR lobby can attack on at least three grounds:

1. Flip-flopping after the Snowden case
2. Going after Human Rights in Russia, but not in Saudi Arabia, where the violations are much more atrocious
3. Having their own personal vendettas/agendas/etc.

The Kremlin cannot win this debate on Gay Rights alone, but such flip-flopping does give the Kremlin plenty of ammunition to sidetrack it. Maybe you will even get a thank you card, but probably not, since I doubt the Kremlin knows about your existence.

I supported it because I had no idea of the extent of it.

[Shofercia]

An 80 year old should fuck a 15 year old, if they both consent, no matter what society says; y u no support human rights? /sarcasm




Mere kissing of same gender has always been allowed in Russia, at least as far back as I can remember.




Nope. Gallup actually supported Putin, prior to Putin offering amnesty to Snowden. But Gallup's smart enough to realize that going "Russia ebul for not going after Snowden" won't actually matter to NSGers, so he's going after Putin for Human Rights. Same old tactic really, that's been reduced, reused and recycled.






Then Snowden gets asylum, and suddenly Gallup starts caring about Human Rights in Russia. Also, ever since I mistakenly started debating with Gravlen, and ended up placing him on my ignore list, for what I thought was him making very annoying posts and not being very informative, his count in Putin posts jumped. For instance, if you do a search about Putin on Gravlen's post history, you will find that he's had 2 posts on that in 2009, a post relating to Snowden, a string of responses directed at me in 2013, and from then it was on. It's like Gravlen suddenly discovered Putin. Amusing really. Maybe I should apply the Gravlen method to the Gallup flip-flop, and see how many times I can mention Iran-Contra, HUD Rigging, Lobbying Scandal, EPA Scandal, Inslaw Affair, Savings & Loan Crisis, etc.

As soon as I found out what that atrocious law truly does, I became heavily critical of it, Ris can attest to that. But with such flip flopping, one must indeed wonder how many of those going after Russia for Human Rights, are doing it for other reasons, be it Snowden, or something else. The problem with such "ardent" critics, is that in an arena where it actually matters, not simply an online forum, but an actual PR battle, the Kremlin PR lobby can attack on at least three grounds:

1. Flip-flopping after the Snowden case
2. Going after Human Rights in Russia, but not in Saudi Arabia, where the violations are much more atrocious
3. Having their own personal vendettas/agendas/etc.

The Kremlin cannot win this debate on Gay Rights alone, but such flip-flopping does give the Kremlin plenty of ammunition to sidetrack it. Maybe you will even get a thank you card, but probably not, since I doubt the Kremlin knows about your existence.

I supported it because I had no idea of the extent of it.

Really? Is that why Snowden is mentioned 21 times in this thread? Let's see here, the first time he's mentioned is by none other than Gallup!

Ah, the Olympics. It one of the few sporting events I like. Who doesn't? The world watches as people from around the world compete for the gold. However, this year is... Different. It's in a volatile region of a tyrannical country that oppresses gays and harbors criminals like like Snowden who should face trial. If you were in charge of any team, would you boycott them? If so, why?

Trying to get Snowden in by association, eh? And when numerous others posters go "lolwut", you persist:

For instance, let's take Tekania's post:

The Putin and gay thing I take issue with.

Them "harboring" Snowden, not so much. i certainly think he should be tried, yes. But I see nothing wrong with another country allowing assylum for someone like Snowden. The US has "harbored" plenty of people who have been wanted for crime in their home country before. The Snowden deal is not really any different.

Or perhaps Multifarity's?

Evil, hardened, bastards like... Snowden.

Oh no! He revealed the nature of a controversial government policy, which even if you agree with it works regardless of whether people know it's happening or not!
He's enabled people to review something without compromising it... Nooooooooo!

Haafingar's?

Is it me, or is it completely ironic that someone who blast tyrannical government is also calling champions of freedom like Snowden a criminal?

You did get support on Snowden from Fris, and that's about it, and even his post was a response to a response to you. Yet you persisted:

Snowden is still a criminal. He broke the law.

And, you know, the person who actually broke the law, Snowden.

Again, the extreme majority of people here don't care about Russia "hiding" Snowden, and out of those who do care, more people support it, than oppose it. Much like Benghazi, it's an unpopular talking point. Now you can claim that you created this thread and threw in Snowden with Gay Rights for any number of reasons. Nevertheless, it looks like you tried to link Snowden getting asylum in Russia, a reasonable act by any country with a decent amount of power, to an atrocious anti-LGBT law, and utterly failed to do so.

Out of the 21 posts partially about Snowden, 8 were by you, 11 were responses to you, mostly along the "u srs?" line, 1 dealt with moderation, and 1 was Fris' response to a response to you. This came after you probably had knowledge about NSG being very livid about the atrocious anti-LGBT law, and not quite so livid about Snowden, so by linking them together... I'll let NSG figure out the rest.

[Arkiasis]

The Jamaican Bobsled team is back!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1927933-jamaican-bobsled-team-qualifies-for-2014-sochi-winter-olympics?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=programming-national

[The Genoese Cromanatum]

Putin is in the right there, actually. I am from Virginia, and it is within this state's law that all forms of "sodomy" are illegal.

And if you do a basic Google search, you find this:

On June 26, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision in Lawrence v. Texas struck down the Texas same-sex sodomy law, ruling that this private sexual conduct is protected by the liberty rights implicit in the due process clause of the United States Constitution. This decision invalidated all state sodomy laws insofar as they applied to noncommercial conduct in private between consenting civilians and reversed the Court's 1986 ruling in Bowers v. Hardwick that upheld Georgia's sodomy law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States

The Virginia Supreme Court unanimously ruled on January 14, 2005, that the Virginia fornication law violated the Fourteenth Amendment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_v._Ziherl

Google is still your friend. And Google shows us that Virginia's sodomy law and the fornication law both have been struck down.

Oh, interesting. I honestly haven't paid mind to the existance of the law for some years now.

[Quebec and Atlantic Canada]

Yeah, a truly horrible and un-democratic thing to say.

PS

Also. Much quoted Putin's pharse that "West endorses pedofilia"

According to BBC News a Dutch political party Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) since at lest 2006 strives to lover an ege of consent from 16 to 12 (both in regards of voting and having sex) and want legalise zooophilia and child pornography.

I don't really see the connection here. What does the existence of a party which existed for four years, had a grand total of three members and participated in no elections have to do with accusing the West of endorsing pedophilia?

""

That's literally it, he wants to make a dumb point and feel good about it.

[Baltenstein]

Mere kissing of same gender has always been allowed in Russia, at least as far back as I can remember.

Well, an adult man lifting a random unknown pre-adolescent boy's shirt to kiss him on the belly strikes me as kinda creepy, and I'm pretty sure it's not a typical Russian custom.

At the very least, it's hypocritical to talk about how "homosexuals should leave children alone", seeing how the overwhelming majority of homosexuals has never approached children in such an intimate manner.

[Libertarian California]

Ice hockey and free style skiing all the way.

USA! USA! USA!

[Shofercia]

Mere kissing of same gender has always been allowed in Russia, at least as far back as I can remember.

Well, an adult man lifting a random unknown pre-adolescent boy's shirt to kiss him on the belly strikes me as kinda creepy, and I'm pretty sure it's not a typical Russian custom.

At the very least, it's hypocritical to talk about how "homosexuals should leave children alone", seeing how the overwhelming majority of homosexuals has never approached children in such an intimate manner.

Celebrities, and Putin's a bit of a celebrity, have. So have friends. Things like this are really not a big deal in Russia:

I just want to post something here, to show how epically Russians can troll: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/olympics- ... 30018.html

On Saturday, Kseniya Ryzhova and Yulia Guschina won gold medals as part of the 4x400m relay team at the IAAF track championships in Moscow. While wearing their medals and holding their victory laurels, the two openly kissed. The immediate and widespread speculation at the time was that the kiss was in protest of Russia's new anti-gay propaganda laws.

Now, three days later, Ryzhova is saying there was no such statement intended. "There was no hidden political motive," she said, and then blamed the Western media for creating and spreading an inaccurate story. "Instead of congratulating the athletes, they decided to insult not only Yulia but the whole (Russian) athletics federation." Instead, the kiss, a common practice among Russian women, came from celebration, not protest. "For eight years we have not won a gold medal. You can't even imagine what it was like ... when we understood that we'd won," Ryzhova said. "It was a wave of unbelievable feelings and if somehow, completely by chance, while we were congratulating each other, our lips touched ... whoever fantasizes about that is sick."

You're welcome to read the rest via the link. Why I love this:

1. Trolls the creators of the law, by showing how hard it is to enforce the law (whoopsie )
2. Trolls the Western Media's ignorance of Russian Culture, (kisses after a Gold Medal Victory are common, and this one just happened to be on the lips, so what? )
3. Let's the trolls get away with it. Who the fuck is going to harshly critique two Gold Medal Winners for celebrating?

Pretty awesome, eh?

*For those of view who question my knowledge of Russian Culture, please review the Russian 2008 Hockey Celebration: what does Ovechkin do to Kovalchuk? Exactly.

This troll is hereby Shof Approved!

You too can approve this troll! How, you ask? The Awesome Quotes Thread is nearby. Just saying

Ice hockey and free style skiing all the way.

USA! USA! USA!

Who are your fave freestyle skiers?

The Jamaican Bobsled team is back!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1927933-jamaican-bobsled-team-qualifies-for-2014-sochi-winter-olympics?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=programming-national

Nice! I hope they get the funding, it's certainly an exciting event, and a well written article, thank you for that

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

An 80 year old should fuck a 15 year old, if they both consent, no matter what society says; y u no support human rights? /sarcasm

It's actually legal in my country... I mean, a 15-year-old in such a sexualized culture with widespread sex education in both public and private schools surely knows what the hell is rape...

[Gravlen]

And if you do a basic Google search, you find this:

On June 26, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision in Lawrence v. Texas struck down the Texas same-sex sodomy law, ruling that this private sexual conduct is protected by the liberty rights implicit in the due process clause of the United States Constitution. This decision invalidated all state sodomy laws insofar as they applied to noncommercial conduct in private between consenting civilians and reversed the Court's 1986 ruling in Bowers v. Hardwick that upheld Georgia's sodomy law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States

The Virginia Supreme Court unanimously ruled on January 14, 2005, that the Virginia fornication law violated the Fourteenth Amendment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_v._Ziherl

Google is still your friend. And Google shows us that Virginia's sodomy law and the fornication law both have been struck down.

Oh, interesting. I honestly haven't paid mind to the existance of the law for some years now.

It's always nice to learn of good news, isn't it

Now, to send these posts to Putin...

[Gallup]

I used to hate hockey, but I think it's dragging me back in.

[Shofercia]

An 80 year old should fuck a 15 year old, if they both consent, no matter what society says; y u no support human rights? /sarcasm

It's actually legal in my country... I mean, a 15-year-old in such a sexualized culture with widespread sex education in both public and private schools surely knows what the hell is rape...

Certainly, but don't you think it'd be harder for a 15 year old to report rape, than it would be for, say, someone who isn't dependent? I doubt patterns differ much by country, so here's America's: http://www.rainn.org/get-information/st ... -offenders

Approximately 2/3 of rapes were committed by someone known to the victim. 73% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger. 38% of rapists are a friend or acquaintance. 28% are an intimate. 7% are a relative.

Now if it's a relative, is a 15 year old more likely to report that, or someone who is dependent on said relative's income? I'm sure that a 13 year old also knows what rape is. The question isn't so much the lack of knowledge, as it is about the difficulty of reporting for those who are still dependent. On top of that, the earlier that someone starts having sex, (and let's face it, when you're having sex, you're not exactly thinking about condoms all the time, and accidents happen, people don't always properly store condoms, not everyone has the procedure on automatic, and people don't always have access to decent birth control pills,) the more likely the odds that it'll cause a pregnancy. The earlier she has a kid, the worse off it'll be for society. For instance, again, in America's case: http://www.drphil.com/articles/article/684

Teen pregnancy costs the U.S. at least $9 billion annually...Teen pregnancy is the number one reason why teen girls drop out of school. Only one-third of adolescent mothers will graduate high school, and only slightly over 1 percent of those will earn a college degree before they turn 30... Children of teen moms do worse in school than those born to older parents — with half failing a grade. Those same children are less likely to finish high school then those from older mothers and have a lower performance on standardized tests. Many children born to teen moms have behavioral problems, juvenile delinquency and conflict with authority. Two-thirds of families begun by a young unmarried mother are poor. More than half of all mothers on welfare had their first child as a teenager. Daughters of teen moms are three times more likely to become teenage mothers themselves. The sons of teen moms are two times more likely to end up in prison...Eight out of ten fathers in cases of teen pregnancy don't marry the mother of their child, and these absent fathers pay less than $800 annually for child support. Children who live apart from their fathers are also five times more likely to be poverty-stricken than children with both parents at home.

There's a reason why the age of consent is no longer 13 in Spain. While I accept the universal age of consent as 18, I don't believe that any country should be required to lower it. I'm all for certain kinds of exceptions, i.e. "I'm 15, she's 17, we've been dating for 3 years," but for me, 80 & 15 just sounds absurd, and no country should be forced to lower the age of consent below 18, as that's when the extreme majority graduate high school, and are ready to move on to college or join the work force, and post K-12 regulation is much harder to accomplish.

[Maineiacs]

The Jamaican Bobsled team is back!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1927933-jamaican-bobsled-team-qualifies-for-2014-sochi-winter-olympics?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=programming-national

Cool Runnings, Mon! Jamaica is back! Bobsled is worth watching again!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOM_W8m8sgA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swnle389UKM

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

-snip-

Sounds sane.

Feel free to not copy the country with the greatest number of yearly murders, illegal abortions going wrong, and teenage pregnancies (one in each five children).

[Gallup]

The Jamaican Bobsled team is back!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1927933-jamaican-bobsled-team-qualifies-for-2014-sochi-winter-olympics?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=programming-national

Cool Runnings, Mon! Jamaica is back! Bobsled is worth watching again!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOM_W8m8sgA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swnle389UKM

The idea of a Jamaican bobsled team is hilarious.

[Sealand of America]

No boycott unlike todays indoctrinated children I was taught about national sovereignty. I see it in the night classes I take young college children eager to please professors with the right answer. Prove they are free thinkers by regurgitation of fact less opinions by lazy tenured aristocracy.

[Sjovenia]

At least Putin is a beast. Our (USA) President is a pushover. Also, how is the whistle blower the criminal, but not the Police State that has been caught spying on it's citizens?

Agree with him or not, he technically broke the law. He signed a non-disclosure agreement.

He also serves the government and upon serving in the government you usually say an oath and that oath is to uphold, defend, and follow the constitution. If something is deemed unconstitutional more than likely people will be exactly like snowden.

[Serrland]

I'm most looking forward to ice hockey (predicting another USA v Canada final, but I'm guessing that's a really common prediction), luge, skeleton, bobsled, and curling (rooting for Norway solely on the basis of their uniforms, which are always amazing).

[Cosmopoles]

No boycott unlike todays indoctrinated children I was taught about national sovereignty. I see it in the night classes I take young college children eager to please professors with the right answer. Prove they are free thinkers by regurgitation of fact less opinions by lazy tenured aristocracy.

I don't favour a boycott, but the idea that boycotting the Olympics over a political decision infringes on national sovereignty is ridiculous. No one is suggesting Russia shouldn't have the authority to make laws in its own territory, its the what those laws criminalise that people find distasteful.

[Liriena]

No boycott unlike todays indoctrinated children I was taught about national sovereignty. I see it in the night classes I take young college children eager to please professors with the right answer. Prove they are free thinkers by regurgitation of fact less opinions by lazy tenured aristocracy.

This post is not even wrong.

[Gallup]

No boycott unlike todays indoctrinated children I was taught about national sovereignty. I see it in the night classes I take young college children eager to please professors with the right answer. Prove they are free thinkers by regurgitation of fact less opinions by lazy tenured aristocracy.

This post is not even wrong.

What does that mean?

[Liriena]

This post is not even wrong.

What does that mean?

Poor grammar asides, it amounts to little more than an irrelevant insult against a rather broad group and a mispresentation of what constitutes national sovereignity. The user misses the mark by several light years throughout his entire post.

A boycott does not constitute a violation of national sovereignity. It is only a perfectly legitimate and legal refusal to purchase or sell products and services from a certain nation, something that the international market is within its right to do.

The user in question's perception of today's youth and education reeks of a broad generalization based on his/her/their own personal experience, and twisted by said user's personal preconceptions. It serves no purpose other than utterly dismiss everyone who doesn't agree with him as intellectual feeble ignoramuses indoctrinated by an aristocracy based on false claims and pseudo-science. It's as arrogant as it is irrelevant.

[Gallup]

What does that mean?

Poor grammar asides, it amounts to little more than an irrelevant insult against a rather broad group and a mispresentation of what constitutes national sovereignity. The user misses the mark by several light years throughout his entire post.

A boycott does not constitute a violation of national sovereignity. It is only a perfectly legitimate and legal refusal to purchase or sell products and services from a certain nation, something that the international market is within its right to do.

The user in question's perception of today's youth and education reeks of a broad generalization based on his/her/their own personal experience, and twisted by said user's personal preconceptions. It serves no purpose other than utterly dismiss everyone who doesn't agree with him as intellectual feeble ignoramuses indoctrinated by an aristocracy based on false claims and pseudo-science. It's as arrogant as it is irrelevant.

Ah, that makes more sense.

[Gallup]

I find it funny how some events start before the Olympic Ceremony.

[Shofercia]

I find it funny how some events start before the Olympic Ceremony.

A good chunk of Olympic money comes from TV revenue. Opening ceremony is usually on Friday, and yet Thursday is the most watched night, so they decided to move a few qualifiers and preliminaries before the opening ceremony starts. London did the same thing with football and archery. So did Beijing, but just with football, not archery.