It seems that the web-wide buzz about Miley Cyrus has finally started to die down. As such, it feels like the perfect time to discuss a potentially unpopular opinion. So here goes: maybe Miley is helping some would-be lesbians.

In a perfect world, there would be role models of all sorts for young lesbians—butch girls wearing cut-off tanks and cropped hair, femme girls in dresses and killer heels, and every type in between. The unfortunate reality is that such a place does not (yet) exist.

While we work towards a world in which minority groups of all kinds are represented in main stream society, it seems important to acknowledge that even though our current selection is rather crap, there are occasionally some unintended side effects that are aren’t—side effects that I myself benefited from.

The backlash against Miley

After releasing her first music video in three years, ‘We Can’t Stop’, Miley has been a whirlwind of a new “bad girl” image, dancing bears, and tongue. Shortly after the release, Miley performed her little heart out at MTV’s Video Music Awards. The backlash started almost immediately and has yet to fully stop.

While there have been some very valid critiques of Miley’s new image— such as the racist elements of her VMA performance – there have also been some valid defenses: she shouldn’t be shamed for exploration of her sexuality.

But what about the pseudo lesbian elements of her new “edgy” image? Where’s the discussion about that?

Why is no one talking about the lesbionic elements of Miley’s new image?

In Miley’s music video for ‘We Can’t Stop’ she does all sort of bizarre things — eats Twerk soup, cuts a fake hand that oozes pink stuff, and trots around with her taxidermy friend, to name a few.

She also engages is some lesbian-esque behavior. Lesbo LiteTM, if you will.

There’s a moment when Miley does the universal symbol of cunninglingus, straddles another girl, and makes out with a female doll. In fact, the video ends with a shot of Miley grinding against a vaguely butch looking girl and then grabbing her boob.

Yes, it’s all totally strange, and it’s rather obvious that the lesbian elements exist solely as a marketing tactic and/or to add even more “edge” to Miley’s image.

What’s hotter than a straight, femme girl pretending to be gay? According to the media, not a whole lot.

To my knowledge, Miley identifies as straight and was even engaged to this man. She has never alluded to bisexuality or even hinted at engaging in lesbian activities. Nevertheless, her music video has a definitively sapphic slant. So what gives?

Straight girls pretending to be gay is lucrative

Using the image of “sexy lesbians” as a marketing tactic is nothing new. In fact, there is an entire multimillion-dollar category of porn dedicated to exploiting that very concept.

Magazines, movies, and websites constantly promote the supposedly tantalizing image of (straight) girls acting sexy with other (straight) girls. The sexualization of lesbians for consumption is wrong, degrading, sexist, annoying, etc.

However, the unfortunate truth is that this is the society we live in and the pop culture we’re subjected to. As such, it seems best to try and find the positive (while attempting to make change) and from an extremely personal view, I would argue that there is a potentially positive side effect: it can make lesbianism less scary for new lesbians.

Pseudo Lesbianism Helped Me

By the age of fourteen, I had already experienced (and immediately suppressed) my first stirrings of attraction for the same gender. Even though, I had attempted to shove my moments of lesbian attraction deep down in my subconscious, it was something I never entirely forget.

Which is why when I was sixteen I thoroughly enjoyed Katy Perry’s “I Kissed A Girl.” Katy proudly proclaimed that she had done what I had only dreamed of: kissing a girl.

It was the first moment I realized that maybe lesbianism wasn’t all about untouchable (and very intimidating) butches wearing oversized plaid and rocking shaved heads. But even beyond that, maybe it wasn’t so weird that I wanted to kiss girls and like it.

During the peak of I Kissed A Girl, I found myself on a bus full of girls after a high school cross-country race. It was the first race I had ever run and I remember feeling happy. One of my teammates brought out her IPod and began blaring Katy Perry’s song. Everyone immediately started singing along and belting out the words, “I kissed a girl and I liked it!” I looked around at my teammates smiling and doing outrageous moves as they sang and for the first time, saw my own desires reflected back to me.

None of the girls were gay (and to my knowledge none are gay now) but I was able to glimpse a world in which lesbianism wasn’t a disease that would separate me from my peers, but merely a preference, like Coke instead of Pepsi.

Maybe there’s another young lesbian who is also being helped…

Watching Miley Cyrus’s video reminded me of that long ago moment and of how being different was, and sometimes still is, scary.

I want to live in a world in which young lesbians don’t have to look to straight girls pretending to be gay in order to have role models that are a reflection of themselves, and I don’t think Miley Cyrus or Katy Perry are gay role models. In fact, I would love nothing more than to give them both the boot and make room for some real lesbians in the spotlight.

However, we might be able to find something positive in their commodification of lesbianism.

I’m not making excuses for celebrities who cash in on gay culture and preferences while opting out of the discrimination, fear, and isolation that often accompany being part of a minority group.

I also make no excuses for the fact that lesbianism has been made into a spectator sport as a result of pseudo lesbianism. I’m merely pointing out that while we work to change society, we can also acknowledge that unintended positive outcomes might in fact exist.

Just maybe, there’s a girl out there who’s sixteen and saw Miley stick her tongue out in between her fingers and thought to herself, “Maybe I’m not that weird after all…”

Watch ‘We Can’t Stop’ and decide for yourself: is Miley good news or bad news for lesbians?

Hattie Lucas’ article last week got a lot of attention. For those of you who got a bit lost in all the labels being thrown around, here’s a quick guide.

Sex

This is the easy bit. Someone’s sex is the male or femaleness of their private parts. Vagina and boobs – BANG, female sex. Penis and balls – male sex.

Getting down to the nuts and bolts...

Gender

So what’s the difference between gender and sex? Well, gender is more of a psychological concept. It’s the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with a sex.

Always with the bow...

Genderqueer

This is where things get interesting. People who identify as genderqueer typically identify with traits of both the male and female genders. If there were a scale with male on one side and female on the other, they’d fall somewhere in the middle.

Barbie or Ken? Barken?

Genderfuck

Genderfuck is a similar concept, whereby the person deliberately defies gender norms by sending mixed messages about their sex.

Oooh!

Bigender

Bigender people fill the full spectrum. They identify as fully male and female, generally switching between the two.

The best of both!

Agender

Agender is the term to describe people who don’t have a gender at all, or prefer to identify as a person rather than a gender.

Why choose?

Transgender

This is when someone’s gender doesn’t match their sex. Trans* people may identify with any of the above labels, or simply as male to female trans* (mtf) or female to male trans* (ftm). In this, the person may seek to transition, thereby altering their sex to match their identified gender. This can be done with hormones and surgery.

Chelsea Manning, one of the most high profile trans* people in the media.

Intersex

Being intersex involves a variation in sex characteristics. This throws the above definition of sex out of the window, as intersex people are often born with the sex organs of both male and female sexes. Their chromosomes may also vary on the traditional XY – male and XX – female. Often, intersex people are operated on at birth to ‘correct’ their sex. This can result in the person finding their gender doesn’t align with their sex. They may have this corrected in later life. Other intersex people may not have had surgery in childhood, and later opt to have it in adulthood. Some are raised in one gender and later identify as another. Others may describe themselves as agender, bigender, genderfuck or genderqueer.

Caster Semenya, a modern poster child for intersex ambiguity in international athletic competition.

Labels, labels, labels…

Sometimes it’s best to leave the labels on the soup cans, as the cliché goes. The strip below is a personal favourite in this regard.

Love is love! Enjoy who you are, whoever that may be.

In January 2014, Brighton will be hosting iConn, the first ever Nicole Conn Movie Convention. Fans are expected from all over Europe and the USA for this rare opportunity to meet Nicole and a number of the actresses from some of her hit lesbian movies.

Nicole Conn

(more…)

Meg Barker recently wrote an article for the September issue of Diva about “increasing numbers of people [who] are identifying as something other than male or female.” In a rejection of binary gender identities, some regard themselves as (deep breath): bigender, pangender, genderfluid, genderqueer, genderfuck, non-gendered, gender neutral, and transgender. (The fact that Microsoft Word is telling me I have spelled most of these words incorrectly is testament to their embryonic state in mainstream discourse). The problem with these labels is that they have become ridiculous and provide fruit ripe for satire. As soon as a satirist gets a whiff of something so self-consciously anti-establishment, they will not take you seriously. When you are not taken seriously, your two-fingers-up to society falls flat on its face. It backfires and your challenging traditional gender roles imposed on us by society never gets off the ground.

Gender vs. gender rules

Let us first consider what exactly is being objected to: is it the idea of gender as a concept or gender “rules”? Some would argue that these are inextricably connected, but this is not the case; if gender is binary, it does not follow that gender rules are binary.

For example, let’s imagine for a moment that everyone identifies as either “male” or “female”. If there were no “rules” connected to these genders and the concept of “male” and “female” could be interpreted on an individual basis, there would be no need for the explosion of non-binary labels. If gender itself were the problem, people would not be creating new gender labels; they would not identify as any gender at all.

In other words, rigid gender rules are the problem; they are prescriptive when they needn’t be. The problem is beliefs such as “to be male/female, you need to be/behave/dress like this,” rather than gender being inherently pernicious.

I am all for rejecting these rules and broadening the idea of gender to transform it into a spectrum rather than a dichotomy, where people feel they “fit in” and are accepted for the way they interpret gender. However, I think that a new, incredibly niche and convoluted set of gender labels is not the best way of starting a dialogue about gender rules. If anything, it closes down dialogue by introducing terms that are only used and understood by a tiny sub-section of society.

If non-binary people are rejecting gender stereotypes by creating new gender labels, it is only a matter of time before stereotypes emerge for the new labels. Stereotypes emerge spontaneously and it is naïve to think that we can run from them by constantly dividing ourselves off from “the norm” with new labels.

Further, it is important to remember that the conversation about traditional gender roles is an old (and a current) one: women going out to work, women becoming train drivers, men becoming house husbands etc. Women (and men) have been challenging the rules for centuries without these labels.

Preferred pronouns and social situations

Besides this, it is difficult to know how to negotiate the social minefield of non-binary identities. Are we supposed to have these sorts of conversations in order to accommodate all gender-related identities?

“Hello, nice to meet you. Where do you live? Do you mind if I refer to the gender you were assigned at birth or do you define yourself by one of the multitude of non-binary gender labels? Lovely weather, isn’t it?”

Uh, no. There is so much margin for error. Imagine if we did as Barker suggests and “ask for preferred pronouns,” with everyone we meet. It would be laughable if someone asked for my preferred pronoun (as a cis female); sometimes you want people to assume things about you. I would certainly be offended if someone asked whether I wanted to be referred to as he or she (or anything else) because I would consider my appearance such that there is no question.

So do we then only ask for preferred pronouns when we feel that we can’t confidently assume male or female? This doesn’t seem right either because we don’t want non-binary gendered people to feel that they are only being asked for their preferred pronoun simply because they don’t fit in with our idea of “male” and “female”; this serves to exclude them more.

Should we ever assume?

The question is one of balancing assumption with questioning. Some people actively want people to assume something about their gender, others want nothing to be assumed. You can’t please everyone and be treading on eggshells the whole time. When you include one, you exclude another. It is a balancing act, so let’s not be too extreme (in either direction).

I will refer to anyone by whatever pronoun they wish, but don’t expect me to take you seriously if you decide that your gender is “genderfuck”. Just like the Monster raving loony party is defined wholly by its being a protest party, a gender with no other characteristics other than a rejection of the binary is unlikely to cause much of a shift in public consciousness.

To be clear: challenging traditional gender roles is something I wholeheartedly support, however, I don’t believe that this approach will be effective.

Update 21 September 2013

Lesbilicious articles are written by a diverse team of writers from the LGBT community, and we don’t expect, or ask, that all our writers have the same opinions or outlook. Having said that, at Lesbilicious we do have a committment to promoting the values we believe in, and those values include a consciously pro-trans attitude.

A lot of you felt that we didn’t uphold these values in this article, and you’re right. We encourage our writers to talk about their own views and experiences, even when those might be unpopular, but this article made assumptions and generalisations that disrespected the experiences of other people.

We want to encourage healthy, respectful debate and discussion, because the LGBT community is wide and diverse and there will always be things we see differently from one another. But in this instance we got it wrong, and so we apologise. The article will remain unedited, and we encourage you to read the comments from other people at the end of the article.

Milly Shaw, Editor

September 23rd marks the 15th annual Bi Visibility Day. Wait, what? You’ve never heard of Bi Visibility Day? Well that’s the whole point, isn’t it? Bi Visibility Day was created not only to celebrate bisexuality, but also to increase awareness and acceptance of bisexuals around us.

According to the Bisexuality Report released in 2012, while many people engage in bisexual behavior, and even more people experience bisexual feelings, only a small number will actually identify as bi.

In a study done in 2010, 3.1% of adults polled checked the bisexual box, and 4.9% of adolescents identified as bisexual. Part of this stems from the negative stereotypes surrounding bisexuals that keeps them feeling on the outside of both heterosexual and homosexual. It is also due to the fact that the percentage of bisexuals in the LGBTQ community is still very small, making it harder for people to ascertain where they fit in, because they have less people with which to identify. This is yet another reason that it is important to spread the word of Bi Visibility Day.

What is bi invisibility? According to the Bisexuality Report, “bisexual invisibility is a type of biphobia which generally takes the form of a conventional view in many western cultures; that people’s sexual identity is defined by the gender that they are attracted to, and that people are only attracted to “the other gender” or ‘the same gender’.”

Simply put, when I was dating a boy last year, people assumed I was straight. Now that I am dating a girl, people assume I am gay. Even when I tell them, my friends included, that I am bi, they occasionally make comments like, “Don’t you think you might actually be gay?” or “I think you’re really straight, but you just like having a girlfriend for now.” These are all examples of bi invisibility.

So what does Bi Visibility Day look like? Well, it depends on where you live, and it depends on your involvement. If you live in the UK, there are a variety of options to choose from, hopefully one near you.

If you live in Manchester, there are events starting on Friday and going through Wednesday, including the main event on Monday evening that will be hosting a few speakers, including a lead author on the Bisexuality Report, Dr. Meg Barker.

If you live in the U.S., and more specifically, anywhere near Los Angeles, you should definitely check out “The Bi Chill: 2013 Bi Arts Fest and Social” in the afternoon at The Village at Ed Gould Plaza.

If, like me, you don’t live anywhere near a city that is hosting an event over the weekend, you can still join in on the discussion and the pride by posting about it on Facebook or joining the Twitter storm on September 23rd.

Do you have a purple, pink, and blue flag? Hang that baby over your desk and be proud to support bisexuals. Start a conversation with someone who maybe harbours those aforementioned stereotypes and help erase the everyday invisibility.

Celebrate Bi Visibility Day, and feel good knowing that you are doing your part to increase awareness that “yes, there truly are such things as bisexuals”, “no, they are not just confused”, and “yes, they often end up in monogamous relationships with either same or different gender partners, but it does not mean they are suddenly no longer bisexual”. Someone you know may be struggling with their own identity, and by creating and joining in on the conversation, you could potentially create a safe and encouraging stepping stone. Don’t forget to spread the word!

There are approximately 5,000 professional male football players in the UK, but not one of them has come out as gay. Statistically, the chances of this happening by random are one in 22 quadragintillion – that’s 22 followed by 132 zeros. It’s about as likely as predicting the correct score in 150 consecutive football matches.

It’s not a new issue – in fact we’ve covered it several times already on Lesbilicious. But Stonewall’s latest attempt to combat homophobia in football is to send rainbow boot laces to every player in all 134 clubs, and asking them to wear them at the weekend’s matches to show their support for gay players.

“It’s time for football clubs and players to step up and make a visible stand against homophobia in our national game,” says Stonewall Deputy Chief Executive Laura Doughty.

“That’s why we’re working with Paddy Power on this fun and simple campaign. By wearing rainbow laces players will send a message of support to gay players and can begin to drag football in to the 21st century.”

Whether or not the rainbow laces stunt works – and I hope it does – it seems very strange for Stonewall to be teaming up with Paddy Power on this campaign.

Paddy Power is a gambling company with a reputation for creating edgy adverts, many of which are funny, some of which are offensive. A case in point is this advert, which was banned from TV in May 2012 because it was transphobic:

Upholding the complaints, the Advertising Standards Authority said: “We considered that the ad trivialised a highly complex issue and depicted a number of common negative stereotypes about trans people.

“We considered that by suggesting that trans women would look like men in drag, and that their gender could be speculated on as part of a game, the ad irresponsibly reinforced those negative stereotypes. And, particularly by framing the game in a way that involved a member of the public who had commented on Paddy Power’s Facebook page, the ad condoned and encouraged harmful discriminatory behaviour and treatment.”

At the time, Paddy Power expressed dismay that the advert was banned, rather than at the offence it had caused.

Perhaps Paddy Power are hoping that this new association with Stonewall and gay rights will help endear them to the LGBT community and undo some of the harm they’ve done in the past.

Or, perhaps they’re happy to support an LGB issue, particularly when it’s likely to attract some publicity, but they don’t care so much about trans issues. We’ve seen that before too.

UPDATE 17 September 2013

We tweeted Paddy Power asking if they were planning to apologise for the Ladies Day video, but they haven’t responded.

We also tweeted Stonewall asking why they chose to work with Paddy Power. Stonewall responded “The ad was offensive and wrong. We’re glad PP put their hands up, admitted they got it wrong and apologised.”

We asked where Paddy Power had apologised, and we were sent a link to a PDF press release about the rainbow laces campaign on the Paddy Power website, intended for journalists. In the footnote at the end of the press release there was an apology for the Ladies Day video.

If Paddy Power respond directly to us we will update this article.

So you’ve got your best crisp white shirt on (that took FOREVER to iron), a quick slick of lipstick and a comb through your hair. This means one thing – the big date. But what should you expect? Read on baby beavers, and welcome to the world of lesbian dating.

1. You both try to open the door for each other.

It’s only the nice thing to do, right? Lets hope there’s a few sets of doors so you can take it in turns.

2. You brought her a flower

Yes. A single flower. Or spent so long humming and hawing over a bouquet that you came empty handed. Yeah right.

3. You’re so busy gazing into each others’ eyes that you can’t think of a thing to talk about.

The classic. This is awkward enough on a hetero date. Put two ladies together and BAM, awkwardness times two. (But her eyes are pretty magical.)

4. So one of you tells their life story.

Well, someone’s got to start the conversation!

5. Exes inevitably come up in conversation.

6. You know all of each others’ friends… and exes.

7. There’s a short fluster over the bill, as you’re both just so chivalrous.

“But you paid for the drinks last time…”

8. You either give a carefully restrained peck after the date, or it’s a snog-fest.

There’s no in-between.

9. You call each other about 7 minutes after you leave the date.

Just to say a polite thank you, of course.

Have fun ladies!

Many of you know about, and perhaps have even contributed to, the “It Gets Better” campaign that was started by author and speaker Dan Savage in the fall of 2010. The campaign is a collection of video testimonials that feature people (and celebrities) telling their own stories to LGBT youth, promising them that life gets easier, life gets better, growing up LGBT. Well, if you were ever wondering about an “It Gets Better” directed at Christians or struggling LGBT Christians, you need look no further. The “NALT Christians Project” has officially launched, and much like the “It Gets Better” project, the growth and success depends on people like you to contribute and share.

“Not All Like That”, or “NALT Christians”, is a term coined by Mr. Savage after hearing Christians pledge or plead to him that “we’re not all like that” in order to defend Christianity. Of course he knows that, but that doesn’t change the fact that the loudest, most well known Christians happen to be the ones who “are like that”, the homophobic conservatives calling down the brimstone on gay sinners.

I have been a follower of Dan Savage’s columns for a long time now, despite our differing views on God and Christianity. Though we disagree on on our spiritual views, one thing we definitely agree on is the harm that Christian leaders and speakers are causing to young, impressionable LGBT kids, whether they are Christian or not. In his video, and certainly in his writings, Dan Savage calls out the likes of Pat Robinson (founder of the Christian Broadcasting Network who actually said “Feminism is a socialist, anti-family, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.”), Brian Brown (president of NOM-you know, your favorite organization that fights to demolish marriage equality), and Tony Perkins (President of The Family Research Council, which has distributed a pamphlet that claims gay men are more likely to molest children, and supports “reorientation” for gay people). He brings these men up because they are well known, well funded, powerful Christian men who allegedly speak for the “Christian people”, and boy do they speak loudly. The fact is, we are not all like that, and it is time that we speak up.

On a personal note, I am a Christian woman who identifies as bisexual, and I know firsthand how painful it is when Christians, especially those that are part of your spiritual family, rain down hateful slogans or offer to pray for you, but not in a supportive way. I created the comic “Jesus Loves Lesbians, Too” as a way to share my story and to provide an outlet for other young Christians who are trying to reconcile their faith and their sexuality, those that feel like they have no one to talk to, no one to understand. Today, confident and strong in my sexuality and beliefs, I find comfort in the videos posted on the NALT site. Ten years ago, these videos and these people could have provided a lot more than that to a young girl who was scared to tell her Christian friends about her new girlfriend.

Here’s where you come in, readers. If you are a Christian, and you want other young LGBT people and young Christians to know that we are not all like that, post a video to their YouTube site. If you have Christian friends who have never stopped loving you because of your sexuality, send them the link. Share on Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, or any and every other site you can think of, and share often. Together, our voices can diminish those loud and few who claim to speak for God and God’s people. Together, we can show those that need our love and support that we are not all like that, and that they are not alone.

Hey, advertisers. Listen up. Inferring that having a gay child is heartbreaking is pretty offensive.

On a pink background, the words 'uhh dad, I'm gay' in the shape of a bullet fired towards a human heart made of china

Now you’ve probably figured that out, after that massive backlash you’ve received on Twitter. But getting called on your homophobia by The Daily Fail, of all people? Wow. That’s embarrassing.

Even the company you made the advert for are distancing themselves from you as much as they can. You’ve really dropped the ball on this one (butter fingers).

The now infamous advert, designed for Flora by South African advertisers Lowe + Partners Johannesburg, has received a barrage of criticism for its homophobic imagery and has churned up a lot of bad feeling.

Unilever, the company that own Flora, said in a statement that: “This advert was prepared by an external agency in South Africa and was not approved by anyone at Unilever.

“The advert is offensive and unacceptable and we have put an immediate stop to it. Unilever is proud of the support that our brands have given to LGBT people.”

So, why oh why oh why did this even get as far as Unilever HQ? I’ve never seen tongue in cheek go so horribly wrong. It’s not funny, it’s not clever, and it’s incredibly depressing to see advertisers trotting out these kind of images again and again.

I don’t need to explain why this is so problematic, and I don’t need to tell you that coming out to your parents will not have the same effect as a bullet to their heart.

Don’t just take my word for it. Ask my Mum. She’ll tell you I’m the best thing since sliced bread with real butter, and coming out hasn’t made the slightest bit of difference to how much she loves me. My Dad’s heart didn’t shatter in to a thousand pieces when he found out I liked girls, and the world kept on turning.

But coming out is still an incredibly difficult process, even when your family is loving and supportive like mine, and the last thing anyone needs is advertisers like Lowe + Partners Johannesburg undermining the message we’re trying to get through to vulnerable young people.

Thankfully, there are many advertisers out there spreading the love for the queer community like Ben and Jerry’s, American Apparel, Target and Ray Ban, all of whom have released adverts in support of LGBT equality and visibility.

A 2012 advert for Ray Ban

But advertising doesn’t work, right? So we shouldn’t be getting so upset about it. Wrong.

We have to be careful not to downplay the importance that advertising has, and those advertisers have a duty of care. They need to make sure that the words and images they’re putting out for our consumption don’t carry negative connotations that can and do have a very real impact on people’s lives.

Ben and Jerry's 'I Dough I Dough' released in support of marriage equality in Australia

Despite pulling the advert, Flora’s image has really taken a knock, and judging by the colourful language directed at them across social media, the company are going to have to work hard to butter us up.

“The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of humankind, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.”

You have just read the 2^nd of 7 Fundamental Principles of Olympism; the moral code, if you will, which guides the Olympic movement itself and everyone involved in organizing, or competing in, a Summer or Winter Olympic Games.

I’d like to draw your attention to the last 5 words: “the preservation of human dignity”.  No matter who you are, where you come from, or what moral views you hold, I think we can all agree that the current situation for LGBT people in Russia, the host nation of the 2014 Winter Olympics, is in direct violation of this aim.

The law, introduced by Vladimir Putin’s government, which bans the spread of “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations”, has been re-worded since its first incarnation.  Originally it specifically cited “homosexual propaganda”, but was then re-written to ‘soften the edges’.  Personally, I’m not sure why they bothered.  The hatred and discrimination aimed directly at LGBT people in Russia is so clear and determined that the wording of the actual bill almost becomes irrelevant; the ultimate, despicable aim is still the same in the end.

 A controversial history

Russia has hosted a variety of international sporting events in the past, including the particularly infamous and equally controversial 1980 Olympics in Moscow.  At the height of the Cold War, this Games was boycotted by a variety of countries, most notably the USA, after the Soviet Union’s support of the Communist regime in Afghanistan was deemed to be a violation of human rights by the then President, Jimmy Carter.

As political protests go, the overall effectiveness of this method was debatable, but what it does show is that sport, and the Olympics in particular, will always be inextricably linked with international politics.  And, in truth, how can it not be?  Ultimately, all human existence is inextricably linked with politics; my human right to speak freely and publish this article for the world to see is a good example.  As I write I’m drinking a cup of tea; the fact that my girlfriend and I were able to pop to the supermarket to buy said beverage without being beaten half to death for being lesbians, or being refused service, is inextricably linked to politics.  So, of course, an Olympic Games, one of the biggest international stages there can be, with the entire planet watching, automatically becomes a showcase for all that is good (or bad) about all countries and athletes competing, and about the host nation in particular.

Standing up

Racism, for example, has been both addressed and actively battled using the Olympics as a vehicle.  Possibly the most famous example of this was Jesse Owens, who bagged 4 gold medals at the Berlin Olympics in 1936, expertly bursting Hitler’s ‘supreme Aryan race’ bubble in the process.  He didn’t even need to say anything; his brilliance as an athlete and a magnanimous human being were enough.  32 years later, Tommie Smith and John Carlos, the gold and bronze medalists respectively in the 200m, used their medal award ceremony to raise their black gloved fists into the air in support of all the black people, particularly in America, who were living in abject poverty and / or in fear of their lives.  In the immediate aftermath of this act, both men were ostracised by practically everybody, however as time has gone on both have been recognised as heroes.

Despite this legacy of political protest, the IOC insists that the Olympic Games is, and has always been intended to be, an apolitical forum.  To this end, point 10 of the IOC mission statement declares that one of its aims is “to oppose any political or commercial abuse of sport and athletes”.  Any political stands made in the past by any country or individual athlete, no matter how effective they have retrospectively been considered to be, have always been looked down upon and, in many cases, punished by the IOC.

The here and now

So, with this as the ‘potted’ backdrop, we fast forward to February 2014, and the Sochi Winter Olympics.  So much has already been discussed and debated in this arena; celebrity involvement has been much noted, including the writing of open letters on the topic by both Stephen Fry and one of my own personal heroes, British-born NBA basketball player John Amaechi.  The latter called for the IOC, as well as all athletes and competitors, to recognise the part they play as moral and ethical role models and to use the platform created for them by the Games to show their presumed opposition to the human rights violations perpetrated by the Russian government.  Fry’s letter likened Putin’s treatment of LGBT people to Hitler’s treatment of Jews.  He has also since voiced his support of the idea of athletes using the Games to protest, although originally he, like many others, was very much in favour of the Games being moved from Russia to a less controversial setting.  However, like the similar request made by Jimmy Carter in 1980, it is highly unlikely to ever happen simply due to the logistics of moving an Olympics so close to the event.

I have to say that, of all the suggestions made as to how the situation in Russia should be dealt with, I like the idea of the Games being used as a platform for protest.  When the 1980 Moscow Games were boycotted by America and the 1976 Games were boycotted by African athletes (due to their disgust at the apartheid regime in South Africa), all that really happened was that talented athletes lost the opportunity to perform on the greatest stage in the world.  And, in the case of the Moscow Games, it effectively made it even easier for the Eastern Bloc to purvey their ridiculous propaganda by topping the medals table and apparently ‘proving’ their physical dominance over every other nation.  Obviously, it later became apparent that all they were really proving was what happens when the state becomes complicit in the biggest display of cheating ever known in modern athletics.

Athlete protests

In many ways, the protesting has already begun.  This summer, Russia hosted the World Athletics Championships, giving rise to the first wave of sporting demonstration over the host nation’s LGBT policies.  Previously to this, most protesting had come from other arenas, such as the boycott on Russian vodka exercised by a variety of gay bars and clubs.  However, actions such as those taken by Swedish high jumper Emma Green Tregaro, who painted her nails in rainbow colours in support of Russia’s LGBT community, and US 800m runner Nick Symmonds, who dedicated his silver medal at the Championships to his gay and lesbian friends at home, showed the power and media coverage that such demonstrations can bring.

And, ultimately, as we all know, the media coverage and the social networking mentions that this topic receives are key to this message being spread as far and as wide as possible.  Russian officials have confirmed that their highly discriminatory LGBT laws will not be relaxed or discarded during the course of the Games or at any other time; what gives them the right to decide who can and can’t feel safe to be involved in an Olympic Games?  But then, what gives them the right to arrest, torture, ‘convert’ and harass their own citizens every single day?  No decent human being would tolerate prejudice and discrimination on this level towards anybody.

Making history?

Despite the IOC’s assurances that the laws will not impact the Winter Games, I’m really not convinced.  Firstly, they have also urged all attendees to ‘respect the laws of the host nation’; what on earth does that mean for an LGBT person?  But secondly, is that really the point?  “Please, Russia, carry on with these atrocities towards your own people…just don’t spoil our fun”.  Seriously?

And so I find myself in agreement with Mr Fry and Mr Amaechi.  I would love to see a wave of protest in support of LGBT people who are suffering at the hands of their government everywhere.  I would love to look back on this event in years to come and hear it mentioned in the same breath as the 1936 and1968 Games.  In his closing speech of the London 2012 Games, Lord Coe said that he hoped that the world would remember that “we did it right”.  With every ounce of my being, I have the same hope for Sochi 2014.