I’m hoping this doesn’t start a fight, I’m just curious what the political orientation is of this community. I grew up in a liberal (in the American sense) family, and I identify now as a socialist, though a lot of the liberalism I grew up in has stuck with me, like interest in LGBTQ and women’s rights, environmentalism, etc. Wondering where people here land?
I’m aware of Cuba’s recent laws regarding LGBTQ rights. Cuba for decades sent homosexuals and trans people into internment camps because they were “deviants” and only recently has enacted LGBTQ rights because it’s been forced to open up to the rest of the world after the fall of the Soviet Union. Also it’s just one example, whereas the largest ML country, China, heavily represses anyone who is not heteronormative. So does North Korea. So did the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc. It was in liberal democracies where LGBTQ people first gained rights and have the strongest rights.
hi i’m trans and i live in florida, where are my human rights you dickhead? where are your precious liberals?
They’re not in communist countries. And Florida is led by illiberal increasingly anti-democratic figures that are directly inspired by Russia and even China, so what a terrible example to counteract my point, lol
“inspired by Russia and even China”
dawg what.
AmeriKKKans are incapable of realizing the evil is coming from inside the house
The GOP is directly inspired by the homophobic attitudes in both countries. Have you been living under a rock?
Conservatives have been homophobic and racist since there has been a conservative. “Actually China did that”
“here is why it is China’s fault for Amerika being rascist”
Love to accuse communists of being intolerant and socially conservative while engaging in Yellow Perilism and saying that America’s problems are the fault of evil inferior foreigners
You don’t even believe this yourself.
There is absolutely no way that you don’t understand that the GOP’s anti-queer stance is 100% homegrown, and you’re only making this ridiculous argument because you’re incapable of admitting that your previous comments on this topic are all bullshit.
Do better and just take the L, this isn’t fucking reddit.
" Americas problems are caused by foreigners"
Scratch a liberal, a fascist bleeds.
lmao are you doing a shitty bit, what absolute fuckin nonsense, absolving western homophobes of responsibility and agency while simultaneously peddling a racist conspiracy theory, get a grip you shitlib
You’re just straight up lying about Cuba, shut the fuck up.
https://www.guancha.cn/politics/2019_08_21_514563.shtml
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-lgbt-un/china-urged-to-take-action-on-lgbt-rights-after-backing-u-n-changes-idUSKCN1QO1MU
https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E6%80%A7%E5%B0%91%E6%95%B0%E7%BE%A4%E4%BD%93/19500488
https://issuu.com/undp-china/docs/undp-ch-legal_gender_recognition_-_
Homosexuality in China and Does China Ban the LGBT movement?
China has trans healthcare. You can find LGBTQ stuff on Bilibili or Baidu. China has a three-no policy. No approval. No disapproval. No promotion. As for you – no investigation, no right to speak.
As for Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc goes…
Article 121 (the “anti-gay law” passed by the head soviet) was designed as an anti-pederasty law. If you look at the law text,it mentions or at least implies pedophilia.
To quote The Sangha kommune:
“Article 121, despite its curious reading, appears to have been designed to protect Soviet society from the menace of child abuse and paedophilia, although it is recorded that Soviet academia was interested in the practice of homosexuality from a medical perspective, and attempting to ascertain its root cause (with a number of early Soviet researchers following the Czarist assumption of aberration). This did not mean that homosexuals were persecuted – far from it – the general underlying trend in the USSR was to end all oppression, and facilitate the integration of the individual into the collective.”
https://thesanghakommune.org/2016/12/28/the-ussr-and-homosexuality-article-21/ There’s no objective, verifiable evidence of a persecution of homosexuals in the USSR
To quote Sangha Kommune again:
Research By Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD
"The fact that the Soviet Union was considered enlightened and tolerant demonstrates that these laws were not applied as a deliberate attack upon homosexuals – although in the 1930’s, certain homosexual activity became associated with specific counter-revolutionary activity. In this regard, homosexuals who strove to bring-down the USSR were treated as ‘criminals’ – just as their heterosexual colleagues. Soviet records demonstrate that Joseph Stalin… was responding to various police reports about contemporary counter-revolutionary activities (usually within major cities). "
"Modern (capitalist) Russia has now imported much of the anti-Soviet Cold War disinformation fabricated by the US (and her allies) between 1945 – 1991. As a result, many modern Russian authors side with the reactionary forces of capitalism and adopt this pseudo-history as their own (apparently not realising its ‘racist’ anti-Slavic nature). The above article is anti-Soviet and is designed to give the impression that the USSR carried-out a continued pogrom against homosexuals – even though its author continuously states that there is no evidence to support his claims. Indeed, the only evidence the author can muster is ‘Western’ Cold War authors whose work – as pieces of official fiction – contain no Russian language sources. However, I have quoted this piece where I have been able to verify the facts within Russian language sources. It remains informative on two counts, 1) as a narrative history of homosexuality in Russia from early times to present, and 2) as a study of modern (Russian) anti-Soviet literature. I have found no objective, verifiable evidence of a deliberate persecution of homosexuals in the USSR. "
https://thesanghakommune.org/2017/01/05/the-ussr-and-homosexuality-part-iii-rsfsr-article-154a/
LGBTQ+ being put into camps in Cuba is also straight-up an anti-communist myth.
To say that “It was in liberal democracies where LGBTQ people first gained rights and have the strongest rights.” is ridiculous. AES countries had LGBTQ+ rights first and continued progressing, The DDR was fairly progressive in the 1980s and continued to progress – similar to the USSR and Eastern Bloc, however, I discussed the famous article 121 above how ""homosexuality was recriminalized. Meanwhile, during the Red Scare in Amerika, gays were specifically investigated because they were seen as more likely to be communists. In many parts of the West, it took until the late 20th and early 21st centuries for the advancement of rights for the LGBTQ+ community.
https://www.economist.com/china/2023/05/25/why-the-communist-party-fears-gay-rights
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_history_in_Russia#Soviet_Union
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Cuba#Homophobia_and_labor_camps_during_the_1960s
So no, reality doesn’t conform to what you’re saying.
It was less progressive than West Germany/West Berlin, and only began tolerating LGBTQ people (not granting them equal rights) after opening up more to the West near the end of its existence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_German_Democratic_Republic
Sources: LE FUCKIN ECONOMIST – “journal that speaks for British billionaires.” It’s just more anti-China absurd nonsense. AT LEAST TAKE A LOOK AT MY BAIDU LINK WHICH IS LITERALLY WRITTEN BY A PERSON LIVING IN CHINA. It summarizes things nicely, and you could just translate it.
do some more digging than just wiki.
the sources that wiki links for its claims are: " #37Archive from Resource Information Center Washington D.C in 1998. Their claim of punishment for sodomy and homosexual relationships being 5 years of hard labor was States News Service 28 May 1991; The San Francisco Chronicle 18 Oct. 1992. I found the San Francisco Chronicle newspaper article, but it was paywalled, so I will have to see if my local library has it, or if I can get access to it.
Then the book “Hidden from history: reclaiming the gay and lesbian past” from pages 347-364 “Russia’s gay literature and culture :the impact of the October revolution” by Simon Karlinsky – gay scholar of Russian literature at Berkley. He often contends that the “Marxist Leninist ideology is at odds with homosexuality.” Why does he contend that? Good question. He says the ideology goes against homosexuality. Which is weird, because he isn’t arguing about real world socialism, but the ideology, which is synthesized from many socialist authors/works/theories but isn’t inheritly anti-homosexual
The actual wiki states " there were several high-profile arrests of Russian men accused of being pederasts. In 1933, 130 men “were accused of being ‘pederasts’ – adult males who have sex with boys. Since no records of men having sex with boys at that time are available, it is possible this term was used broadly and crudely to label homosexuality”
And I am getting a 404 to the 43rd resource
The book “Homosexual Desire in Revolutionary Russia: The Regulation of Sexual and Gender Dissent” by Dan Healy is referenced a lot. He actually is pro lenin, (and trotsky?), but very anti-Stalin, and uses a lot of primary sources/narratives about sexuality in the USSR.
" “In the first criminal code they composed after the revolution (1922), the Bolsheviks decriminalized sodomy. They did so because they were intent on secularizing and medicalizing the language of sexual crime. Old Testament concepts like “sodomy,” “fornication,” and “feminine honor” were purged from the law. In their place came a modernized, gender-neutral language to describe a sexual revolution. Henceforth, the sexual inviolability of all young persons was to be protected by the state, and the maximum self-determination was offered to both adult men and women: freedom to marry and divorce without having to explain why, freedom to engage in harmless consensual sexual relations without the interference of a moralizing higher authority. Homosexual relations were not explicitly welcomed by the Bolsheviks and raised to an equal status with heterosexuality. Yet they were regarded in principle as no great vice. The majority of Bolsheviks perhaps subscribed to the view that homosexuality was a medical condition, probably (if they read the popular sex advice tracts that they sponsored) a hormonal anomaly, and perhaps one day science would be able to control or even eradicate it. In the meantime, the legal persecution of homosexuals found in Britain and Germany was seen as irrational, reactionary, and bourgeois.” — Daniel D Hailey
and from the wiki ITSELF!!
“Soviet legislation does not recognise so-called crimes against morality. Our laws proceed from the principle of protection of society and therefore countenance punishment only in those instances when juveniles and minors are the objects of homosexual interest (emphasis mine, because that is literally what I was fucking saying)”
—Sereisky, Great Soviet Encyclopedia, 1930, p. 593
DO YOU NOT READ? Even from le ant-commie wiki. 5 short paragraphs are all for “Stalin era”
and again, this is in THE FUCKING 1930s. THE BASTION OF “LIBERAL DEMOCRACY” IN AMERIKKKA IS LYNCHING BLACK PEOPLE
Also, the thing about Cuba is again, a myth. I am not going into that. But you can’t use WIKI AS A SOURCE. They are a compilation of sources. Can give a good run-down on things. Generally bad for political stuff. And there is a lot more shit I wanna say but I have to go to work very soon.
ALSO YOUR FUCKING NONSENSE ABOUT THE DDR IS STRAIGHT-UP INCORRECT. LIKE ACTUALLY STUPID. LIKE THE MOST STUPID THING I HAVE HEARD ALL DAY. AFTER HEARING THAT, I AM ENDING THIS CONVERSATION.
I am going to touch le grass. not bother replying to Kautsky
Even the wikipedia article on LGBT rights in Germany, despite being very slanted and anti-communist, admit that West Germany had no national progress in gay rights until after the cold war. Saying the West/West Germany was more progressive and tolerant is just straight up false.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Germany
The US didn’t decriminalize homosexuality until 2003, decades after most of the Eastern Bloc. You’re kidding yourself.
Wikipedia links got thrown around like it’s the absolute truth source, people would frown upon Wikipedia link back then and linking them is more of a reference. For sensitive topic like politic, people should praise a big doubt if it’s from Wikipedia.
Furthermore, linking and not even quoting relevant points is just lazy and low effort.