In what ways were the Russian media and Orthodox Church influential in the passing of the ‘Gay Propaganda Law’ of 2013?

Molly Steele Upper Sixth

On 11th June 2013, Article 6.13.1 – “For The 2013 amendment extends this bill to the Purpose of Protecting Children from cover the “propaganda of non-traditional Information Advocating for a Denial of sexual relationships”; aiming to protect Traditional Family Values” – passed with children from exposure to content that only one abstention, and 88% of Russians portrays homosexuality as a “behavioural agreeing on its necessity. This law became norm”, or information that may cause known as the ‘Gay interest among Propaganda Law’ (GPL), as This law became children. There is it focuses on prohibiting the “propaganda of non-traditional sexual known as the ‘Gay Propaganda particular focus on how LGBT people, and their lifestyles, relationships”. There was Law’ (GPL), as can be presented as international outcry at the blatant discrimination and persecution of LGBT it focuses on prohibiting the ‘attractive’ and that this is inherently wrong: it indicates to a people, as it has facilitated “propaganda of “distorted perception public discrimination against LGBT people and since the country has non-traditional sexual of social equality between traditional and non-traditional sexual seen its hate crimes rise relationships”. relations”. significantly. The two main politicians who pushed this The GPL is an amendment to the law, Vitaly Milonov and Yelena Mizulina, censorship law, “On Protecting Children both have connections with the Russian from Information Harmful to Their Health Orthodox Church (ROC). Vitaly Milonov and Development” – which was introduced was the deputy who introduced a similar in 2010. law in St Petersburg in 2011 which banned the “propaganda of homosexuality” – inspiring the national amendment. He is an Orthodox Christian, and was also training to be a priest when the law was enacted; highlighting his dedication to the ROC. Yelena Mizulina is the Chairperson of the Russian Duma’s Committee on Family, Women and Children (CFWC) which aims to protect family and traditional values, and in 2013 wished to amend the constitution to involve Orthodox Christianity as a defining feature of Russian identity. Mizulina has been quoted as saying that homosexuality and heterosexuality are incompatible in Russia: homosexuality dilutes the concept of the nuclear family and the union of man and women, therefore limiting a child’s freedom to choose their own sexual preference. These traditional family values that she works to protect stem from the Christian values that many Russians (74%) abide by.

There were three main narratives that were pushed in the lead up to the passing of the GPL: homosexuals are paedophiles, homosexuals are sinful, and homosexuals threaten traditional family values.

The belief that homosexuals are paedophiles stemmed from Sebersky seminars in 2012, which led to an increase in the diagnosis of paedophilic sexual orientation. This was due to the belief that perversions come together therefore homosexuality and paedophilia were connected. The Russian media then picked up on this and started producing articles about the ‘Paedophile Menace’ and how homosexuals were the leaders of this. This assimilation was further promoted by Mizulina, who accused her opposition of being members of the paedophile lobby.

Yelena Mizulina

The idea that homosexuals are sinful stemmed from the ROC, which promoted the idea that permitted evil gives rise to further evil. Many ROC members argue that accepting homosexuality will lead to the acceptance of paedophilia. This reinforces the idea that homosexuality and paedophilia are closely linked, and with 73% of Russians identifying with the ROC, and the ROC having advisory commissions within government, it is easy to see the extensive power it has over Russia. to procreate, this means that they will steal acceptance of homosexuals will destroy the concept of the nuclear family. As Russia is trying to establish itself as a strong country (post USSR collapse), children are considered the future and should be

The idea that The ROC, media The Demographic homosexuals threaten traditional family values stems and government have worked Summit, held in 2012 by the World Congress of Families (WCF), from the fears of together to enforce reignited the fears a demographic crisis within Russia: Russia has a the ‘fear of the other’ mentality. of a demographic crisis in Russia. It blamed gay rights declining population; and other progressive therefore, it is important to ensure children advancements, such as birth control and are being born. As homosexuals are unable legal divorce, for the falling population. protected in order to secure Russia’s future. your children from you, or try to convert The WCF is a Western organisation, led them to homosexuality. A further fear is by religious conservatives such as Larry that the Jacobs, dedicated to the fight against gay rights, abortion rights, and gender studies. It is classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Centre; partially due to its close association with anti-LGBT activists such as Scott Lively, who blames homosexuals for the Holocaust, Rwandan genocide and the spread of HIV/AIDS.

Since Larry Jacobs first came to Russia to attend the ‘Sanctity of Motherhood’ convention in 2010, over 13 anti-LGBT laws have been passed. The group has also praised Putin, and taken credit

for the GPL. This indicates the detrimental effects of the WCF on social progress in Russia: the WCF is the only foreign body to work closely with the ROC and the government. This outside approval gives strong internal control over Russia’s social progress.

The ROC, media and government have worked together to enforce the ‘fear of the other’ mentality, scaring the majority through the dehumanisation and estrangement of homosexuals. This has been rather successful: state-controlled media and the 24-hour news cycle meant that there was constant exposure to the three narratives and the ‘otherness’ of homosexuals; heightening people’s fears. As many Russians believe they have never met a gay person, the dehumanisation process is incredibly easy.

The rhetoric used teaches citizens that the protection of the majority is far more important than the minority; the acceptance of homosexuals is “the sign of the apocalypse”. These ideas were first planted during a televised debate over the GPL in 2012, on Russia 1 (a state-owned national TV channel). The hour and a half special was set in a mock court room, with four people on each side.

The pro-ban side was made up of famous, straight, white Russians; including a priest and Dmitry Kiselev, a TV presenter of the Russian equivalent of the News of the Week. On the other hand, the anti-ban side was made up of two Jews, a Georgian, an American and Ludmila Aleseeva, a Russian human rights activist. These two opposing

sides made it easy for Russians to decide regularly watch Kiselev’s news programme who they wished to believe. The anti-ban meaning they faced constant reminders of side was made up of people who didn’t the message he spread, allowing negative seem to represent Russia, instead they attitudes to fester and grow. However, there could be seen as outsiders; ‘others’; whereas is an issue with the reliability of research the pro-ban side embodied traditional on Russian media; the existence of the Russia. Roskomnadzor, a government censorship This tactic of using ‘others’ to defend content online. ‘others’, in this case homosexuals, makes it easy for the public to reject the ideas It is very possible that negative, or even of the anti-ban side and perceive them as positive, coverage of homosexuals or the foreign, western ideals, GPL was removed in rather than something Russians should agree with: ‘true’ Russians [B]oth the media and the ROC will the lead up to the Sochi Winter Olympics 2014, in an attempt to present were not presenting this side of the case. The debate was opened have affected public perception of homosexuality. Russia as a more welcoming host. Russia had been criticized internationally for its by the well-respected human rights laws, in Dmitry Kiselev. His explicit language particular the GPL, meaning that Putin can reduced homosexuals to second class be seen backtracking in 2014 interviews. citizenship, with rhetoric similar to that of Hitler and Stalin (linking persecution The existence of the Roskomnadzor and strong state power). This will have means we cannot be sure of the scale left a serious impression on the minds of of information that was produced and viewers; they absorbed such negative ideas, circulated about the GPL in Russia. The and validated their own negative views assumption made in this report was that all of homosexuality. Furthermore, Kiselev’s media outlets were presenting similar antirhetoric makes viewers believe that the gay agendas to the public: the vast majority ban of propaganda is a mild reaction to are state controlled. Therefore, the extent of homosexuals in comparison, making it the media’s influence in the passing of the favourable. The pro-ban side won the GPL is questionable, but we know it mainly debate with 82% of the votes; 34,770 in affected public perception of homosexuals favour of banning gay propaganda and rather than targeting the legislators. 7,533 again. body with the power to block and remove Overall, it can be concluded that the both In the following months, anti-gay rhetoric the media and the ROC will have affected increased in media outlets. Many Russians public perception of homosexuality, and the necessity for the GPL. This was caused by the three narratives constantly surrounding citizens, in places of worship and formal institutions, online and in real life. The media acted in a facilitating role in the process of passing the GPL, focusing on warping the perceptions of the public, whereas the ROC created the narratives that people became invested in, as well as working with the WCF to push their agenda in government. This means that the ROC was able to influence and rule over both the government and the citizens; controlling the messages and rhetoric that was distributed in Russia. Without the work of the WCF and Larry Jacobs, this wouldn’t have been possible. Due to the yearning to create a new identity for Russia, Putin welcomed the WCF into Russia; together creating narratives and committees that ‘protect’ Russian families. The support from Jacobs and other Catholic Westerners in warping policy has ignited a conservative flame in Russia, meaning it continues to sway towards the extreme.

Although those outside of Russia are able to look in and see the bubble of social lies that Russian citizens are indoctrinated with, it is unlikely those within will ever see such clarity due to the sheer power of the ROC, controlling the regime.