Quote
beepee2
That's what I said... the Parliament (ie. not Putin, for a start) doesn't homosexuality to be promoted in the street. That's very different from "making homosexuality a crime", words have a very specific meaning, especially in laws...

There is no legal definition in the Russian law of what constitutes ‘propaganda of homosexuality’ and the law could be interpreted very loosely.T his law further stigmatizes and alienates people, including children, and will deprive them of information that could be crucial to their health.

It perversely presumes that the moral, spiritual and psychological development of children is best served by denying them access to support and information that can help them make informed, autonomous and responsible decisions. This is an unjust law.

Besides, this law will deny all the gay equality before the law by curtailing the activities of gay activists, some of whom have already been harassed and assaulted. Gay people are no threat to anybody; they do not instigate hate or violence. People in democratic countries have a right exercising their basic human rights to freedom of expression of their feelings towards one another. Gay people are entitled to this right and protection from violence as everyone else,

I know that you rather spend your Christmas with right wingers while lot of others are fighting for human rights. And the fact that you support and speak for the anti-gay homophobic government speaks volumes of your values as a human being.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-24 20:45 by seitan.

Quote
seitan
Being young and stupid is not a crime. Actually..if you read the bible, Jesus was furious when holy temple was turned into business place too. Jesus talked about forgiveness - so where is the forgiveness to Pussy Riot for being young and stupid and furious at Kirill ??

Yes, they could be forgiven. I really did not expect such severe sentence for them, especially as religious hatred is also a kind of quite loose concept. But I do not want performances like this to happen again. Do you recall a prick painted on a bridge in St.Petersburg? This is not funny at all and I would rather see the participants of that "artistic" action in jail for a couple of years for spoiling my home city.

Quote
AP

Quote
seitan
Being young and stupid is not a crime. Actually..if you read the bible, Jesus was furious when holy temple was turned into business place too. Jesus talked about forgiveness - so where is the forgiveness to Pussy Riot for being young and stupid and furious at Kirill ??

Yes, they could be forgiven. I really did not expect such severe sentence for them, especially as religious hatred is also a kind of quite loose concept. But I do not want performances like this to happen again. Do you recall a prick painted on a bridge in St.Petersburg? This is not funny at all and I would rather see the participants of that "artistic" action in jail for a couple of years for spoiling my home city.

Yeah, well..if I would go to church and scream and yell (Pussy Riot didnt break anything, they just danced and screamed - in fact they lip synced their song) - but if I would do the same in my country, I would get arrested and I would have to pay a fine - no prison, no - not for something silly as this.

Screaming in a wrong place, really isn't worth a jail sentence. And legal system would take into consideration if I had children at home, throwing teenage mothers in prison for screaming isnt really a serious crime, now is it. ( unless the dictator is worried about what they are saying)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-24 21:56 by seitan.

Quote
seitan
There is no legal definition in the Russian law of what constitutes ‘propaganda of homosexuality’ and the law could be interpreted very loosely.

Well this is definitely true as with most of the laws created by recent Parliament. Everything is very loose and could be interpreted based on the political will.

However, homosexuality is not a kind of thing which is generally approved in Russia. Many people here actually despise gays, so it's not a problem with Parliament, but with the people themselves. E.g. it's quite common to say here that work was done by faggots if it was not done properly. So gay word by itself could be abusive here. And this started well before Putin's era.

To sum up, the society in Russia is just not ready to accept gay equality.

Quote
seitan


The way Putin runs Russia, including making homosexuality crime - I would endorse anyone who wants to have non-violent protest against his government, and if they had non-violent protest during Ramada or Christmas, I really wouldnt give damn as long as nobody get's hurt. Hows that for an answer...

I didn't ask the question but will say that it's a pretty good answer but could be viewed as a bit incomplete...

Assuming that it is non-violent, would you support the rights of Putin's supporters to hold a celebration in honor of his administration? THAT would be a great example of defending the right to free speech.

I understand that you think it's amazing and wonderful that a bunch of international celebrities are seemingly supporting your point of view in a case that's important to you. If I were in your shoes and shared your beliefs, I don’t doubt that I would be happy to have the support of just about anyone who was willing to lend their voice to my cause.

That being said, can you understand (and accept) that there are people here (myself included) who don't think this specific case is "one of the most important free speech cases on the planet”? Some (myself included) see these celebrities jumping on a media-created bandwagon of easy opportunity and think it reeks of hypocrisy. Show me a celebrity who is defending freedom of speech when it’s not in line with the media’s popular opinion agenda and, even if I don’t have a personal interest in the case, I’m going to be far more apt to get interested about it.
To use a bit of a recent Stones discussion as an example, I think what we’ve got here is a case of one side being happy that Mick Jagger is allowing some rarely played songs into the Stones show and others wishing that he was changing up the entire setlist every night. I know that’s not a great or totally accurate example but it’s the best I could do on short notice.

--------

While not wanting to hijack your thread, something you said to me got me thinking that a new thread might be in order. You said “rebellion against government has always been important part of rock n roll”. As I read that statement, I questioned the accuracy of it, and the more I think about it, I think you’re actually wrong in that statement. Although much of the press and media at the time hyped what was viewed as teenage rebellion in association with rock & roll music in its infancy, the early rock & roll artists themselves, to my knowledge, almost always denied this connection. I’ve listened to and read MANY interviews from that period and, from what I can remember, Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Buddy Holley, Chuck Berry all seemed to DENY any association with rebellion against the government or society at large. Later, after the protest/folk singers started to electrify and start playing rock & roll, it seems that the protest movements adopted pop & rock music as a medium to get their views to that target audience. As time went on more and more artists also decided to use their music as a medium to preach their beliefs as well. A statement along the lines of “rock & roll and other forms of popular music have become important tools in rebellious movements against government” I would have a hard time disagreeing with. Your statement seems to ignore the first 5-10 years of Rock & Roll depending on when you give it credit for starting. Could make for an interesting conversation though I don’t know how you’d defend your point when the biggest star of the time (and possibly all time) willingly served in the US Army after being drafted into service.

All the best to you seitan. Regardless of my feelings on the Pussy Riot case, even though I’m sitting here in the USA, I assure you that, although not everything that happens in Russia has an impact on my country as you said it does yours, some of it most definitely impacts us here as well. You have my partial agreement that it’s “sad to say but that’s the case”. Many times I find the impact to be positive.

Peace,
Mr DJA

Quote
AP
To sum up, the society in Russia is just not ready to accept gay equality.

hmm, gays and heterosexuals in Russia are equal, have the same rights, can do the same jobs, etc...

Well "Rockman", would ya?

Quote
mr_dja

Quote
seitan


The way Putin runs Russia, including making homosexuality crime - I would endorse anyone who wants to have non-violent protest against his government, and if they had non-violent protest during Ramada or Christmas, I really wouldnt give damn as long as nobody get's hurt. Hows that for an answer...

I didn't ask the question but will say that it's a pretty good answer but could be viewed as a bit incomplete...

Assuming that it is non-violent, would you support the rights of Putin's supporters to hold a celebration in honor of his administration? THAT would be a great example of defending the right to free speech.

I understand that you think it's amazing and wonderful that a bunch of international celebrities are seemingly supporting your point of view in a case that's important to you. If I were in your shoes and shared your beliefs, I don’t doubt that I would be happy to have the support of just about anyone who was willing to lend their voice to my cause.

That being said, can you understand (and accept) that there are people here (myself included) who don't think this specific case is "one of the most important free speech cases on the planet”? Some (myself included) see these celebrities jumping on a media-created bandwagon of easy opportunity and think it reeks of hypocrisy. Show me a celebrity who is defending freedom of speech when it’s not in line with the media’s popular opinion agenda and, even if I don’t have a personal interest in the case, I’m going to be far more apt to get interested about it.
To use a bit of a recent Stones discussion as an example, I think what we’ve got here is a case of one side being happy that Mick Jagger is allowing some rarely played songs into the Stones show and others wishing that he was changing up the entire setlist every night. I know that’s not a great or totally accurate example but it’s the best I could do on short notice.

--------

While not wanting to hijack your thread, something you said to me got me thinking that a new thread might be in order. You said “rebellion against government has always been important part of rock n roll”. As I read that statement, I questioned the accuracy of it, and the more I think about it, I think you’re actually wrong in that statement. Although much of the press and media at the time hyped what was viewed as teenage rebellion in association with rock & roll music in its infancy, the early rock & roll artists themselves, to my knowledge, almost always denied this connection. I’ve listened to and read MANY interviews from that period and, from what I can remember, Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Buddy Holley, Chuck Berry all seemed to DENY any association with rebellion against the government or society at large. Later, after the protest/folk singers started to electrify and start playing rock & roll, it seems that the protest movements adopted pop & rock music as a medium to get their views to that target audience. As time went on more and more artists also decided to use their music as a medium to preach their beliefs as well. A statement along the lines of “rock & roll and other forms of popular music have become important tools in rebellious movements against government” I would have a hard time disagreeing with. Your statement seems to ignore the first 5-10 years of Rock & Roll depending on when you give it credit for starting. Could make for an interesting conversation though I don’t know how you’d defend your point when the biggest star of the time (and possibly all time) willingly served in the US Army after being drafted into service.

All the best to you seitan. Regardless of my feelings on the Pussy Riot case, even though I’m sitting here in the USA, I assure you that, although not everything that happens in Russia has an impact on my country as you said it does yours, some of it most definitely impacts us here as well. You have my partial agreement that it’s “sad to say but that’s the case”. Many times I find the impact to be positive.

Peace,
Mr DJA

Good post ! - Thanks.

Yes, I know Putin's supporters have every right to hold a celebration in honor of his administration and so should everyone who hates him and his political views. Sure - in democracy there should be open discussion and press should have every right to publish whatever they want, - I think Russian people will learn that democracy and freedom of speech is not an alien, scary thing; it's not a western invention - it's something that belongs to everyone regardless of politicial view. Including your opinions too.


Celebrities jumping on a bandwagon - is totally trivial question in my opinion. Lot of times we need celebrities to get attention to important causes. It's better to do something than staying home and complaining, being cynical is not being smart - being cynical dont help anything, it's not smart individuality, cause falling back to apathy just makes people useless.

And yes, I do think Pussy Riot is important case - when one of the most powerful countries on the planet starts fall back on Stalin era dictatorship, it becomes important, - there should not be any homophobic laws in 2013 and freedom of speech is a basic human right, it belongs to everyone. Whatever happens in Russia has a massive impact on neighborhood countries like Finland. ( For example - I'm against Putins opinions on nuclear power - how could I not - living here in Finland,- I do recall Chernobyl)

A celebrity who is defending freedom of speech when it’s not in line with the media’s popular opinion agenda - well, late Christopher Hitchens is the first one that comes to my mind, and most people in the western civilization didnt really support Salman Rushdie at the time of the Satanic Verses scandal, most people in the media were worried about offending Muslims, when in fact - it was a freedom of speech issue - so I will give credit to Bono for stickin to his guns and supporting Rushdie at the time.

I think playing black music in say..Alabama - was real rebellion during the 50's for early days of rock n roll. Think of Little Richard - gay, black, wearing make up and screaming his lungs out on stage...in front of white audience.. That broke every social norm back in the 50's - so I do consider Little Richard truly rebellious against society...or Screamin Jay Hawkins - bringin snakes and coffins on stage back in the 50's was rebellion against social norms, dont you think ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-25 00:00 by seitan.

Quote
beepee2

Quote
AP
To sum up, the society in Russia is just not ready to accept gay equality.

hmm, gays and heterosexuals in Russia are equal, have the same rights, can do the same jobs, etc...

yes, if they hide their sexual orientation and wont talk about it. So - no - youre full of shit, sorry.
Are heterosexuals getting arrested for being heterosexuals ?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-24 23:25 by seitan.

Quote
beepee2


hmm, gays and heterosexuals in Russia are equal, have the same rights, can do the same jobs, etc...

where and why do you come up with this crap

There are no laws protecting against discrimination or harassment on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in Russia
Many local legislatures have passed laws prohibiting information about homosexuality - so you cant even talk about it -
and in 2013, Russia's government adopted a federal bill banning the distribution of "propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations". The law imposes heavy fines for using the media or internet to promote "non-traditional relations"... so you cant even talk about it in public without the fear of getting into trouble - and you call this equal rights.

Quote
seitan

Quote
mr_dja

Quote
seitan


The way Putin runs Russia, including making homosexuality crime - I would endorse anyone who wants to have non-violent protest against his government, and if they had non-violent protest during Ramada or Christmas, I really wouldnt give damn as long as nobody get's hurt. Hows that for an answer...

I didn't ask the question but will say that it's a pretty good answer but could be viewed as a bit incomplete...

Assuming that it is non-violent, would you support the rights of Putin's supporters to hold a celebration in honor of his administration? THAT would be a great example of defending the right to free speech.

I understand that you think it's amazing and wonderful that a bunch of international celebrities are seemingly supporting your point of view in a case that's important to you. If I were in your shoes and shared your beliefs, I don’t doubt that I would be happy to have the support of just about anyone who was willing to lend their voice to my cause.

That being said, can you understand (and accept) that there are people here (myself included) who don't think this specific case is "one of the most important free speech cases on the planet”? Some (myself included) see these celebrities jumping on a media-created bandwagon of easy opportunity and think it reeks of hypocrisy. Show me a celebrity who is defending freedom of speech when it’s not in line with the media’s popular opinion agenda and, even if I don’t have a personal interest in the case, I’m going to be far more apt to get interested about it.
To use a bit of a recent Stones discussion as an example, I think what we’ve got here is a case of one side being happy that Mick Jagger is allowing some rarely played songs into the Stones show and others wishing that he was changing up the entire setlist every night. I know that’s not a great or totally accurate example but it’s the best I could do on short notice.

--------

While not wanting to hijack your thread, something you said to me got me thinking that a new thread might be in order. You said “rebellion against government has always been important part of rock n roll”. As I read that statement, I questioned the accuracy of it, and the more I think about it, I think you’re actually wrong in that statement. Although much of the press and media at the time hyped what was viewed as teenage rebellion in association with rock & roll music in its infancy, the early rock & roll artists themselves, to my knowledge, almost always denied this connection. I’ve listened to and read MANY interviews from that period and, from what I can remember, Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Buddy Holley, Chuck Berry all seemed to DENY any association with rebellion against the government or society at large. Later, after the protest/folk singers started to electrify and start playing rock & roll, it seems that the protest movements adopted pop & rock music as a medium to get their views to that target audience. As time went on more and more artists also decided to use their music as a medium to preach their beliefs as well. A statement along the lines of “rock & roll and other forms of popular music have become important tools in rebellious movements against government” I would have a hard time disagreeing with. Your statement seems to ignore the first 5-10 years of Rock & Roll depending on when you give it credit for starting. Could make for an interesting conversation though I don’t know how you’d defend your point when the biggest star of the time (and possibly all time) willingly served in the US Army after being drafted into service.

All the best to you seitan. Regardless of my feelings on the Pussy Riot case, even though I’m sitting here in the USA, I assure you that, although not everything that happens in Russia has an impact on my country as you said it does yours, some of it most definitely impacts us here as well. You have my partial agreement that it’s “sad to say but that’s the case”. Many times I find the impact to be positive.

Peace,
Mr DJA

Good post ! - Thanks.

Yes, I know Putin's supporters have every right to hold a celebration in honor of his administration and so should everyone who hates him and his political views. Sure - in democracy there should be open discussion and press should have every right to publish whatever they want, - I think Russian people will learn that democracy and freedom of speech is not an alien, scary thing; it's not a western invention - it's something that belongs to everyone regardless of politicial view. Including your opinions too.


Celebrities jumping on a bandwagon - is totally trivial question in my opinion. Lot of times we need celebrities to get attention to important causes. It's better to do something than staying home and complaining, being cynical is not being smart - being cynical dont help anything, it's not smart individuality, cause falling back to apathy just makes people useless.

And yes, I do think Pussy Riot is important case - when one of the most powerful countries on the planet starts fall back on Stalin era dictatorship, it becomes important, - there should not be any homophobic laws in 2013 and freedom of speech is a basic human right, it belongs to everyone. Whatever happens in Russia has a massive impact on neighborhood countries like Finland. ( For example - I'm against Putins opinions on nuclear power - how could I not - living here in Finland,- I do recall Chernobyl)

A celebrity who is defending freedom of speech when it’s not in line with the media’s popular opinion agenda - well, late Christopher Hitchens is the first one that comes to my mind, and most people in the western civilization didnt really support Salman Rushdie at the time of the Satanic Verses scandal, most people in the media were worried about offending Muslims, when in fact - it was a freedom of speech issue - so I will give credit to Bono for stickin to his guns and supporting Rushdie at the time.

I think playing black music in say..Alabama - was real rebellion during the 50's for early days of rock n roll. Think of Little Richard - gay, black, wearing make up and screaming his lungs out on stage...in front of white audience.. That broke every social norm back in the 50's - so I do consider Little Richard truly rebellious against society...or Screamin Jay Hawkins - bringin snakes and coffins on stage back in the 50's was rebellion against social norms, dont you think ?

You're welcome! While I'm not a fan of online argumements, debates and discussions I'm all for even if I don't always have an interest in the specifics...

Regarding Little Richard & Screamin' Jay Hawkins (and many other black artists we probably never heard of) I'd be hard pressed to argue that they weren't breaking or rebelling against social norms in their performances, it was more the "rebellion against the government" comment that I was taking exception to in your post.

Regarding Richard specifically, although he was performing in make-up in the 50's (before rock & roll he was in a drag show) it was considered at that time to be "part of the act" and even he is on record as saying that the makeup actually made it easier for him to be accepted by white audiences. Although from our 2013 prespective we know that he was gay 1950's, at the time, he most certainly wasn't performing as an out of the closet, openly gay musician.

I've got to run... Hope you have a good night/morning as I think it's MUCH later where you are than where I am!

Peace,
Mr DJA

Quote
seitan
More than 100 internationally renowned rockstars have joined a worldwide call for the Release of Pussy Riot

More than 100 internationally renowned musicians have joined a worldwide call for the release of the two jailed members of the Russian feminist punk group Pussy Riot ahead of their parole appeal hearings this week.

One of the signatories to an open letter, Yoko Ono, says: "I thank Pussy Riot for standing firmly in their belief for Freedom of Expression, and making all women of the world proud to be women."

“The Pussy Riot case has shocked musicians all over the world and we’ve had an incredible response to the call to sign this letter,” said Lucy Macnamara, Communications Manager for Art for Amnesty.

“Several musicians have told me that if you can’t sing a protest song without fear of arrest then something is badly wrong. Let’s hope the Russian authorities finally see sense and release Maria and Nadezhda.”

[www.amnesty.org]

The full list of artists includes:

..Coldplay,...Sir Elton John,...Sir Paul McCartney,...

Why are they calling for the release of Pussy Riot by signing a letter? If they're really serious why don't Coldplay, Sir Elton John, and Sir Paul McCartney storm into Westminster Abbey unannounced, take over the altar and announce their protest with some loud rock songs to the people who came there to quietly pray? Wouldn't that be a much more effective way for them to announce their protest, get publicity, and show their solidarity with Pussy Riot? Let's see how well that goes over.

Quote
beepee2

hmm, gays and heterosexuals in Russia are equal, have the same rights, can do the same jobs, etc...

I heard a recent story of two girls who started hugging and kissing in the subway here in St.Petersburg. Well this made certain passengers so angry that they reported this accident to the engine driver and forced girls to leave the vagon. Even the police was called as I heard, though no one was arrested.

So yes, all could have same jobs. There are legal gay clubs here and I do not think authorities have plans to close them. But public demonstration of "non-traditional sexual relations" could lead to problems. I strongly suspect that the majority of population is indeed against such relations at present time. Well, give it 20-30 years more and see then...

People often mix (intentionally or not) "rights of an individual", with "rights of a couple".

For instance, people against gay mariage in France were said to be against gay equality. Wrong, individual had the same rights, and gay had the right to marry... someone from the opposite sex, so they had the right to marry. And I, as an heterosexual, didn't have either the right to marry someone from the same sex.

What's true is that gay couples were not equal to heterosexual couples. Looks like Russia doesn't want to go down that route, which leads (this is already starting, the "Google baby"), to merchandizing of poor women's wombs in India or Africa, to inseminate them with sperm and eggs selected on the internet (blue eyes, tall, etc...), and given to rich gay couples in the West. I hope I die before this nightmare becomes mainstream.

I've followed this thread but haven't really felt qualified to comment.

What I would say is that, politics aside, the full acceptance of homosexuality as an alternative norm has to evolve with a changing society.

Even in what you might call mature liberal democracies, homophobic views and prejudices are still the norm in many [especially older] sections of society.

Change in attitudes is a gradual process and moves a little further with each generation.

The wrong politics might slow it down... but hopefully won't stop it happening.

Quote
beepee2
People often mix (intentionally or not) "rights of an individual", with "rights of a couple".

For instance, people against gay mariage in France were said to be against gay equality. Wrong, individual had the same rights, and gay had the right to marry... someone from the opposite sex, so they had the right to marry. And I, as an heterosexual, didn't have either the right to marry someone from the same sex.

What's true is that gay couples were not equal to heterosexual couples. Looks like Russia doesn't want to go down that route, which leads (this is already starting, the "Google baby"), to merchandizing of poor women's wombs in India or Africa, to inseminate them with sperm and eggs selected on the internet (blue eyes, tall, etc...), and given to rich gay couples in the West. I hope I die before this nightmare becomes mainstream.

Every adult should have a right to marry any loving adult they want - if you're against gay marriage you are against basic human rights of every grown adult. One of our basic human rights is a right to get married with same sex or the opposite sex - if we so want.

Quote
AP

Quote
beepee2

hmm, gays and heterosexuals in Russia are equal, have the same rights, can do the same jobs, etc...

I heard a recent story of two girls who started hugging and kissing in the subway here in St.Petersburg. Well this made certain passengers so angry that they reported this accident to the engine driver and forced girls to leave the vagon. Even the police was called as I heard, though no one was arrested.

So yes, all could have same jobs. There are legal gay clubs here and I do not think authorities have plans to close them. But public demonstration of "non-traditional sexual relations" could lead to problems. I strongly suspect that the majority of population is indeed against such relations at present time. Well, give it 20-30 years more and see then...

I wish there were more brave girls like that - fighting for basic human rights in non violent ways.

This reminds me of Rosa Parks too - an icon of the Civil Rights Movement in America. On December 1, 1955, in Montgomery, Alabama, Parks refused to obey racist bus driver James F. Blake's order that she give up her seat in the colored section to a white passenger, after the white section was filled.

Parks played an important part in raising international awareness of the plight of African Americans and the civil rights struggle. Actually, the Pussy Riot are raising awareness of what's happening in Russia too. I think Pussy Riot deserves a Nobel peace prize.

Martin Luther King wrote that Parks' arrest was the catalyst rather than the cause of the protest:

"The cause lay deep in the record of similar injustices."Actually, no one can understand the action of Mrs. Parks unless he realizes that eventually the cup of endurance runs over, and the human personality cries out, I can take it no longer

Question is simple - will there be more people in future Russia who have guts to fight against stupidity of homophobia - will there be brave people who stand up...or lazy cowards who just go with the flow of injustices and look away.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-26 00:24 by seitan.

Well "Rockman", would ya?

...........hey man.. you must be putin me on ....



ROCKMAN

Quote
mr_dja

Quote
seitan

Quote
mr_dja

Quote
seitan


The way Putin runs Russia, including making homosexuality crime - I would endorse anyone who wants to have non-violent protest against his government, and if they had non-violent protest during Ramada or Christmas, I really wouldnt give damn as long as nobody get's hurt. Hows that for an answer...

I didn't ask the question but will say that it's a pretty good answer but could be viewed as a bit incomplete...

Assuming that it is non-violent, would you support the rights of Putin's supporters to hold a celebration in honor of his administration? THAT would be a great example of defending the right to free speech.

I understand that you think it's amazing and wonderful that a bunch of international celebrities are seemingly supporting your point of view in a case that's important to you. If I were in your shoes and shared your beliefs, I don’t doubt that I would be happy to have the support of just about anyone who was willing to lend their voice to my cause.

That being said, can you understand (and accept) that there are people here (myself included) who don't think this specific case is "one of the most important free speech cases on the planet”? Some (myself included) see these celebrities jumping on a media-created bandwagon of easy opportunity and think it reeks of hypocrisy. Show me a celebrity who is defending freedom of speech when it’s not in line with the media’s popular opinion agenda and, even if I don’t have a personal interest in the case, I’m going to be far more apt to get interested about it.
To use a bit of a recent Stones discussion as an example, I think what we’ve got here is a case of one side being happy that Mick Jagger is allowing some rarely played songs into the Stones show and others wishing that he was changing up the entire setlist every night. I know that’s not a great or totally accurate example but it’s the best I could do on short notice.

--------

While not wanting to hijack your thread, something you said to me got me thinking that a new thread might be in order. You said “rebellion against government has always been important part of rock n roll”. As I read that statement, I questioned the accuracy of it, and the more I think about it, I think you’re actually wrong in that statement. Although much of the press and media at the time hyped what was viewed as teenage rebellion in association with rock & roll music in its infancy, the early rock & roll artists themselves, to my knowledge, almost always denied this connection. I’ve listened to and read MANY interviews from that period and, from what I can remember, Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Buddy Holley, Chuck Berry all seemed to DENY any association with rebellion against the government or society at large. Later, after the protest/folk singers started to electrify and start playing rock & roll, it seems that the protest movements adopted pop & rock music as a medium to get their views to that target audience. As time went on more and more artists also decided to use their music as a medium to preach their beliefs as well. A statement along the lines of “rock & roll and other forms of popular music have become important tools in rebellious movements against government” I would have a hard time disagreeing with. Your statement seems to ignore the first 5-10 years of Rock & Roll depending on when you give it credit for starting. Could make for an interesting conversation though I don’t know how you’d defend your point when the biggest star of the time (and possibly all time) willingly served in the US Army after being drafted into service.

All the best to you seitan. Regardless of my feelings on the Pussy Riot case, even though I’m sitting here in the USA, I assure you that, although not everything that happens in Russia has an impact on my country as you said it does yours, some of it most definitely impacts us here as well. You have my partial agreement that it’s “sad to say but that’s the case”. Many times I find the impact to be positive.

Peace,
Mr DJA

Good post ! - Thanks.

Yes, I know Putin's supporters have every right to hold a celebration in honor of his administration and so should everyone who hates him and his political views. Sure - in democracy there should be open discussion and press should have every right to publish whatever they want, - I think Russian people will learn that democracy and freedom of speech is not an alien, scary thing; it's not a western invention - it's something that belongs to everyone regardless of politicial view. Including your opinions too.


Celebrities jumping on a bandwagon - is totally trivial question in my opinion. Lot of times we need celebrities to get attention to important causes. It's better to do something than staying home and complaining, being cynical is not being smart - being cynical dont help anything, it's not smart individuality, cause falling back to apathy just makes people useless.

And yes, I do think Pussy Riot is important case - when one of the most powerful countries on the planet starts fall back on Stalin era dictatorship, it becomes important, - there should not be any homophobic laws in 2013 and freedom of speech is a basic human right, it belongs to everyone. Whatever happens in Russia has a massive impact on neighborhood countries like Finland. ( For example - I'm against Putins opinions on nuclear power - how could I not - living here in Finland,- I do recall Chernobyl)

A celebrity who is defending freedom of speech when it’s not in line with the media’s popular opinion agenda - well, late Christopher Hitchens is the first one that comes to my mind, and most people in the western civilization didnt really support Salman Rushdie at the time of the Satanic Verses scandal, most people in the media were worried about offending Muslims, when in fact - it was a freedom of speech issue - so I will give credit to Bono for stickin to his guns and supporting Rushdie at the time.

I think playing black music in say..Alabama - was real rebellion during the 50's for early days of rock n roll. Think of Little Richard - gay, black, wearing make up and screaming his lungs out on stage...in front of white audience.. That broke every social norm back in the 50's - so I do consider Little Richard truly rebellious against society...or Screamin Jay Hawkins - bringin snakes and coffins on stage back in the 50's was rebellion against social norms, dont you think ?

You're welcome! While I'm not a fan of online argumements, debates and discussions I'm all for even if I don't always have an interest in the specifics...

Regarding Little Richard & Screamin' Jay Hawkins (and many other black artists we probably never heard of) I'd be hard pressed to argue that they weren't breaking or rebelling against social norms in their performances, it was more the "rebellion against the government" comment that I was taking exception to in your post.

Regarding Richard specifically, although he was performing in make-up in the 50's (before rock & roll he was in a drag show) it was considered at that time to be "part of the act" and even he is on record as saying that the makeup actually made it easier for him to be accepted by white audiences. Although from our 2013 prespective we know that he was gay 1950's, at the time, he most certainly wasn't performing as an out of the closet, openly gay musician.

I've got to run... Hope you have a good night/morning as I think it's MUCH later where you are than where I am!

Peace,
Mr DJA

Playing black music in the South in the '50s wasn't just rebellious, it was downright dangerous! Still can be today whether we like it or not.

Quote
seitan
I think Pussy Riot deserves a Nobel peace prize.

Dont't worry, that'll happen. Noebl Prize is always given to US supporters and US'ennemies'ennemies, check out Lu Xiabo for instance, the Nobel Prize who said :

Quote

During the 2004 US presidential election, Liu again praised Bush for his war effort against Iraq and condemned Democratic Party candidate John Kerry for not sufficiently supporting the wars in which the U.S. was then involved.

That's funny how the Nobel Prizes have a certain polarization... 2012, EU; before that: Obama. ANd even before that; Xiabo, someone who publicly defends all the wars the US are involved in, what a striking peaceful stance !

Of course, Saudi dissidents, Qatari dissidents, Snowden or Assange, will never get any Nobel Prize...

Quote
beepee2

Quote
seitan
I think Pussy Riot deserves a Nobel peace prize.

Dont't worry, that'll happen. Noebl Prize is always given to US supporters and US'ennemies'ennemies, check out Lu Xiabo for instance, the Nobel Prize who said :

Quote

During the 2004 US presidential election, Liu again praised Bush for his war effort against Iraq and condemned Democratic Party candidate John Kerry for not sufficiently supporting the wars in which the U.S. was then involved.

That's funny how the Nobel Prizes have a certain polarization... 2012, EU; before that: Obama. ANd even before that; Xiabo, someone who publicly defends all the wars the US are involved in, what a striking peaceful stance !

Of course, Saudi dissidents, Qatari dissidents, Snowden or Assange, will never get any Nobel Prize...

Actually, Bradley Manning was a candidate for Nobel Peace Prize last year, who knows what will happen in the future, he might get it some day, just like Assange or Snowden might get it too. Time will tell...you just have to wait. what's really disgrace is that they gave Nobel to war criminal Henry Kissinger.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-30 19:06 by seitan.

Break the rules play by the rules. Now the punishment does NOT fit the crime, as mentioned above.

Quote
seitan

Putin's anti-gay laws have this result. Nobody is protecting gays from this:

[www.thegailygrind.com]

Of course, but then all the pro-gay marriage/adoption are for instance responsible for this:

Quote

Gay Connecticut couple accused of raping adopted children will face trial

[www.nydailynews.com]

Quote
beepee2

Quote
seitan

Putin's anti-gay laws have this result. Nobody is protecting gays from this:

[www.thegailygrind.com]

Of course, but then all the pro-gay marriage/adoption are for instance responsible for this:

Quote

Gay Connecticut couple accused of raping adopted children will face trial

[www.nydailynews.com]

Why do you feel the need to defend violent, right wing nazis who attack teenagers ?? Friends maybe ?

I don't know what post you are talking about.

Quote
beepee2

I don't know what post you are talking about.

The failure of Moscow police to protect gay people from physical attacks is well documented and well reported all over the world - it shouldnt come as a suprise to anyone anymore. And most people are shocked and horrified by grossly disproportionate and unfair homophobic laws in Russia and the violence - but still you've been defending and making excuses for this homophobic society on almost every post on this thread. - It speaks volumes of your "values". Federal authorities' legal and administrative initiatives effectively fuel discriminatory attitudes and violence against gay people in Russia. I cant respect anyone who feels the need to defend homophobia. It's disgusting and so are you.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-31 18:49 by seitan.

Blabla... show me in which post i "defend violent, right wing nazis who attack teenagers"; actually, show me one post where i just mention "violent, right wing nazis who attack teenagers" or use a pronoun relating to them.