NY Times Article: Russian Gay Activist Kidnapped By The Russian Government!!!

Gay Rights Icon in Russia Tells of Abduction

By MICHAEL SCHWIRTZ

Published: September 20, 2010

MOSCOW — In more than five years as one of Russia’s most vocal gay rights campaigners, Nikolai Alekseyev has been publicly insulted, repeatedly arrested, and pelted with everything from eggs to fists.

Now, Mr. Alekseyev says, he was kidnapped by people he believes to be members of Russia’s security services and held for two days at different locations outside Moscow where plainclothes officers threatened and verbally abused him.

Mr. Alekseyev disappeared Sept. 15, sending ripples of anxiety through Russia’s small and embattled gay rights community and prompting statements of concern from European Union lawmakers. He resurfaced two days later, saying he had been detained while trying to board a plane at Domodedovo Airport here. His detention was an effort, Mr. Alekseyev said in a telephone interview on Monday, to get him to drop lawsuits filed with the European Court of Human Rights against the Moscow authorities, with whom he has tussled for years over the right to hold rallies here in the capital.

Though homosexuality was decriminalized in Russia in 1993, and many large cities now have gay clubs and bars, many top officials have voiced strong opposition to broader gay rights.

Mr. Alekseyev has clashed repeatedly with the Moscow government in his attempts to organize annual marches. Moscow’s mayor, Yuri M. Luzhkov, has called the events satanic, and even small-scale demonstrations have been crushed by the police.

Mr. Alekseyev said he was preparing to board a flight to Geneva on Sept. 15 when security officials told him his baggage needed further inspection. He was taken to a room and held for more than two hours, he said, before four men in civilian clothes arrived.

“You can take him,” an airport security official said, according to Mr. Alekseyev. When he asked where they were taking him, he said, one of the men answered, “You’ll see.”

Officials at the airport told Russian news agencies that Mr. Alekseyev had been detained for refusing to abide by security procedures. He denied that.

He said he was able to make a few quick phone calls to Russian news agencies before the four men whisked him out of the airport and drove him to a police station in Kashira, a town about 80 miles from Moscow.

Once there, he said, the men “exerted constant psychological pressure,” demanding that he drop his lawsuits with the European Court.

The men also confiscated his cellphone and sent a series of bizarre text messages to Russian news agencies, including one that said Mr. Alekseyev had dropped his claims against the Moscow government and had fled to Belarus to seek political asylum. By that point, the story began to be picked up by major Russian and foreign news agencies.

Later, he said, he was moved to a police department in Tula, about 115 miles from Moscow, where he was held until Friday, when he was driven to the outskirts of town and told to “get out.”

“They let me go, as I understand, because of the noise that was raised over my detainment,” Mr. Alekseyev said.

Back in Moscow, Mr. Alekseyev said he still had little idea exactly who was behind his detention. The men never identified themselves, and Moscow’s tight-lipped police force has issued no statements on the matter.

Mr. Alekseyev said he and several other people planned to go ahead with a rally scheduled for Tuesday outside city hall to protest, among other things, Mr. Luzhkov’s use of the word “fags” to describe gay rights advocates.

The authorities, unsurprisingly, have not granted them permission to do so.

CBC News: Court Rules Landlord Cannot Discriminate Against A Gay Couple & Deny Housing!!

Gay couple awarded $13.4K for rental refusal

Landlord feared God’s wrath if he rented apartment to gay people

Last Updated: Monday, September 20, 2010 | 3:41 PM CT Comments71Recommend62

CBC News

William Goertzen, seen in a CBC-TV interview in July, acknowledged that he broke an apartment lease with two men after learning they are a gay couple. Goertzen argued that his religious beliefs are protected by law. (CBC)A gay couple in Yellowknife have been awarded $13,400 in compensation because a landlord would not rent them an apartment on the basis of their sexual orientation.

In a written decision issued this month, Northwest Territories human-rights adjudicator James Posynick ruled that William Goertzen did not give a justifiable reason for refusing Scott Robertson and Richard Anthony when they tried to rent the main floor of his Yellowknife house in May 2009.

Robertson and Anthony told the panel they had signed a one-year lease and paid a $1,125 damage deposit for the unit, but the property owner refused to recognize the lease after learning they were a couple.

Goertzen, a journeyman lineman who attends a local Baptist church, said he instead put the rental back on the market because he feared he would suffer “‘undue hardship’ by punishment administered by God” if he allowed gay people to live in his building, according to the decision.

Goertzen said he believed “that same-sex relationships are ‘unnatural and against nature’ and ‘the Bible warns against being associated with such wickedness,” the decision states in part.

Posynick ruled that while he did not believe Goertzen had acted maliciously against the couple, he “certainly intended to discriminate” against them.

“He wilfully and with disregard for their legal rights, including their rights under … a valid tenancy agreement, for reasons relating to the sexual orientation of the complainants, denied their tenancy and the respect and dignity they are entitled to as fellow human beings,” Posynick wrote in the decision.

Robertson and Anthony said they had to stay with friends for 10 days before they could find another apartment. As well, they had to take Goertzen to rental court to get their damage deposit back.

Religious freedom ‘not unlimited’

“I don’t know how more clear the discrimination could be, and I guess that’s why it’s so shocking for us,” Robertson told Posynick during a hearing in June.

At the same hearing, Goertzen read Bible passages as he attempted to justify not honouring the lease with Robertson and Anthony. He argued his religious beliefs are protected by Canadian law.

“I’d have to ask where are my rights … why can I not stand on my beliefs and what I believe in?” Goertzen told CBC News in July.

“They might think it’s discrimination against them, but I’m losing my beliefs and there’s definitely my religious convictions.”

But in his decision, Posynick said the right to religious freedom “is not unlimited” and Goertzen cannot justify evicting the couple on the basis that he was “following God’s word.”

“Mr. Goertzen made his own choices,” Posynick wrote. “I heard no evidence that God’s word included ignoring his legal obligations to treat other people — even people with different beliefs and different lifestyle choices than his own — with respect.”

Posynick ordered Goertzen to pay $6,500 each to Robertson and Anthony, $5,000 of which compensates for injury to the men’s “dignity, feelings and self-respect.” The remaining $1,500 are punitive damages.

Goertzen is also ordered to pay $400 to Robertson for wages he claimed to have lost while dealing with the human-rights complaint.

“It was evident to me during the evidence given by both of the complainants they were deeply hurt and humiliated by Mr. Goertzen’s denial of tenancy,” Posynick noted in his ruling.

The experience has strained the couple’s relationship, he said.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2010/09/20/yellowknife-gay-couple-landlord-ruling.html#socialcomments#ixzz102ZTHgXQ

National Post Article: Is Sweden Becoming More Xenophobic After Anti Muslim Party Gains Seats In Swedish Parliament?

Full Comment

Swedish voters say no to immigration

Araminta Wordsworth September 20, 2010 – 2:33 pm

Even Sweden, it appears, is tired of being a nation of open borders.

REUTERS/Fredrik Sandberg/Scanpix

Jimmie Akesson, chairman of the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats, will enter Parliament at the head of a party with 20 seats after Sunday’s election.

Often held up as an example of a country Canada should emulate — high taxes, plentiful social services, hockey players who don’t fight — Sweden appears to be going the way of the Netherlands, that other allegedly tolerant country that makes an exception when it comes to immigrants.

On Sunday, Fredrik Reinfeldt’s centre-right coalition won marginally under 50% of the vote in  Sweden’s general election and will take 172 of the 349 seats. The Prime Minister also logged a personal victory by winning more votes for his party, the Moderates, than ever before.

Also entering Parliament — for the first time — will be the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats, with 20 seats. Their success follows a string of electoral gains for similar parties  across Europe in such countries as the Netherlands, France, Austria, Hungary, Slovakia and Britain.

As in much of the rest of Europe, immigration was the issue that propelled them into power, more specifically Muslim immigration. Relative to its size, Sweden has been among the top five nations in the European Union in taking in refugees and asylum-seekers, including those fleeing the Balkan wars of the 1990s and Iraq after the U.S. invasion.

The new arrivals have changed the demography of the once-homogenous Scandinavian country. Today, one in seven residents is foreign-born. The Sweden Democrats say immigration has become an economic burden that drains the welfare system, one of the most generous in Europe.

Sanna Rayman, a correspondent for the conservative Svenska Dagbladet newspaper, says the elections results were predictable.

“Sweden is a baffled country today. At least seemingly so, at the surface.
Every newspaper seems surprised by the fact that a populist/anti-immigration party — the Sweden Democrats — has made it into parliament. Every politician has, in some way, expressed his or her feelings of shock.
This is despite the fact that everyone saw it coming … The polls have been telling us as much for a long time, and everyone knows that the Sweden Democrats have a habit of coming out stronger than their poll results.
This is also a part of the problem. For decades, the Sweden Democrats have been on the rise in the polls. No-one has taken this threat seriously — the only response has been to ‘demonize,’ not only the party, but more importantly the people who consider voting for them.
This has made the job of polling agencies difficult, since the shame factor makes people lie to opinion pollsters. But one also suspects that this demonization has actually contributed to the SD rise.”

At The Daily Telegraph, Bruno Waterfield and Matthew Day report on the party’s rise and rise.

“The previously marginal group … entered the mainstream by demanding cuts to immigration and by describing Islam as Sweden’s biggest national security threat since the Second World War.
Its election broadcasts, showing burka-clad Muslim women jumping the queue to take benefits from white Swedish pensioners, fuelled resentment over waves of immigration which have changed the make-up of Sweden, a once-homogenous Scandinavian country, where one in seven residents is now foreign-born.
‘The immigration policy is the most important issue in this election and we want that to be debated and we want the other parties to change their policy,’ said Jimmie Akesson, the group’s leader.”

Andrew Brown believes reporting from outside Sweden has helped fuel the xenophobia.

“If you believe the international right-wing press, the answer is simple, and has been since 2004, when Fox News made a special report on the subject: Sweden, and especially Malmo, has become a laboratory for the creeping Islamization of Europe. The most common child’s name there is now Muhammad; police dare not go into immigrant districts, where only sharia law is respected; and soon all the Jews will be driven from the city. All this, flecked with varying amounts of spittle, is recounted as fact on the net and in U.S. papers …
No one in Sweden believes there is any serious terrorist threat there, but Islam has become the symbol of all that is strange and menacing and un-Swedish about immigration.”

The BBC’s Gavin Hewitt analyzes the roots  of the anti-immigrant backlash.

“Firstly, there is the economy. There are fewer jobs. Fewer outsiders are needed. But the economic downturn provides only part of the answer. In both Germany and Sweden the economy is rebounding strongly.
There seems to be a growing fear about identity, of living in a fast-changing society where people’s known world recedes.
Much of this new populism is built on questioning whether Muslims can ever successfully integrate into the West. If they can’t, so the argument goes, then Europe risks developing into separate, parallel communities.
Many Muslims argue that they are barred from fully integrating into society, and so assert their own identity …
This new populist movement should neither be exaggerated — but neither can it be ignored. At its root it raises fundamental questions about the type of society Europeans want to live in. These parties tap into a desire for new arrivals to become ‘European.’ ”

Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/09/20/swedish-voters-say-no-to-immigration/#ixzz101v80tB3

Are You Apathetic Or Do You Care About The City Of Toronto Mayoral Election Race?

Guardian Article: Is It Sexist If Men To Make Comments About A Woman’s Appearance?

Sexual harassment is not just a problem for Ines Sainz

When a sports reporter was catcalled in a players’ locker room, she experienced what all women have and no woman should

• 
• • Holly Kearl
  • guardian.co.uk, Friday 17 September 2010
  • Article history

TV Azteca reporter Ines Sainz said on her Twitter account she felt ‘very uncomfortable!’ at a Jets practice Saturday where players catcalled her in the locker room. Photograph: AP Photo/Ross D FranklinLast weekend, when Mexican television reporter Ines Sainz and her male colleagues entered the New York Jets football players’ locker room to conduct interviews, several players whistled and catcalled at her. After the incident became public, the Jets owner appropriately apologised, but a number of commentators, bloggers and individuals discussing it on and offline are defending the Jets players’ behaviour.

Like most people in our society, they still think it is fine and socially acceptable for men to whistle at female strangers, especially if they are conventionally attractive and especially if their male friends are watching, condoning it. As someone who has been the target of scores of whistles from male strangers, and as a researcher of whistles and catcalls, I argue that it isn’t fine, it shouldn’t be social acceptable, and that it must end.

Why? Because most women, like Sainz, who said it made her feel “very uncomfortable”, do not like it.

In a 2008 informal international survey I conducted for my book, most of the women were very clear on this. Only 8% of the 811 participants felt flattered, while 25% felt insulted, 40% felt angry, and 62% felt annoyed.

Context, of course, contributes to the variation in how women feel, as do several other factors. According to my study, some of these factors included the number of times men had whistled at women (the more it happened, the angrier women were), the level of risk harassers posed (women were more likely to be flattered if they felt safe), and whether the woman was a survivor of assault or a bad harassment experience (survivors did not like it). Additionally, women who support conforming to traditional gender roles are more likely to feel flattered by whistling, while women who support women’s rights usually feel it is demeaning, according to sociologist Carol Brooks Gardner’s research.

Regardless of these differences, whistling not only needlessly breaks all women’s train of thought and can make them pause to evaluate their safety; it could contribute to long-term body image and mental health issues. A 2008 study conducted by psychologists at Rutgers University in New Jersey found that young women who experienced high volumes of whistling and catcalls engaged in self-objectification and were consequently susceptible to eating disorders, low self-esteem and depression. Clearly, these are undesirable outcomes.

And while movies, music videos and even stock photos would lead you to believe that whistling and catcalls are something that only happens to “hot” women like Sainz, it’s a near-universal experience for women. One hundred percent of women surveyed in studies conducted in Indianapolis and the California Bay Area reported experiencing public harassment by men, with whistling being a common form. In my 2008 survey, 94% of the 811 women had experienced whistling and over one third said they experience it monthly. Its commonality is invisible in part because most women don’t talk about it.

One reason women don’t talk about it is because so many people blame the incidence on a specific style of dress. A woman might chastise herself, as certain commentators have criticised Sainz, for being guilty of wearing tight-fitting, provocative clothing. But harassers are men who whistle at women no matter how they dress. Studies conducted in Yemen and Egypt showed that, regardless of dressing modestly or wearing a veil, a majority of women had experienced whistles, catcalls and worse from men in public spaces. As women around the world know, even school uniforms, work clothes and winter coats do not stop all whistles and catcalls.

But wait, you may be saying, whistling and catcalls are just compliments. Really?

In the documentary War Zone, when men who whistled or catcalled women were asked how they would feel if male strangers did that to their sisters, daughters, mothers, girlfriends and wives, nearly all were upset by the idea. They did not want women they respected treated that way.

Masculinity scholars, including Michael Kimmel, Jackson Katz and Hugo Schwyzer, have found that many men who whistle at women do it to impress their male friends and to prove their masculinity, not to pay a compliment to the woman. The woman is simply an interchangeable pawn; it’s not about her.

I wonder, had Sainz entered a locker room where only one man was present, would he have whistled at her?

Additionally, Martha Langelan, Cheryl Benard and Edith Schlaffer, researchers of sexual harassment, found that some men whistle or catcall women as a form of intimidation to remind women they are on men’s turf – whether that is the street or the locker room – and men can treat women however they want.

What’s a guy supposed to do to grab a woman’s attention? Almost every female in my survey said interactions like a hello, smile or small talk about non-sexual topics made them feel happy, flattered or neutral. You’ll find it’s surprisingly easy to make that first step toward making the world a more respectful place.

If you’re like me and want the next generation of girls to grow up in a society where they are valued and respected, routine blatant objectification of women from male strangers – including whistling – must end.

Deadline.com Article: Nikki Finke Tries To Create A Controversy That Since Tyler Perry Is Make He Should Not Direct For Colored Girls.

Even Oprah Didn’t Want Him To Do It! Trailer Unveiled For Tyler Perry’s ‘Colored Girls’

By Nikki Finke | Thursday September 16, 2010

Of all the film franchises at Lionsgate, the most financially reliable are Tyler Perry’s. Tolerate his racial stereotyping or not, he’s a money machine for the studio especially when his films star his loathesome female alter ego Madea. That is also why, after his lobbying, Lionsgate released last year’s Precious. Remember how controversial that pic was? Well, trust me: Lionsgate doesn’t begin to understand yet what a PR nightmare will surround its movie For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Suicide When the Rainbow Is Enuf because Tyler Perry is at the helm. It starts screening in 2-3 weeks now that the studio recently moved up the release date from 2011 to November 5th. Look, just my reporting last September of Perry’s plan to make the pic elicited some of Deadline’s most vicious attacks on a filmmaker.

Now I’ve learned that even Tyler’s close pal Oprah Winfrey did not want him to make the film version of the iconic 1975 play by Ntozake Shange. And that her reaction echoed the outrage of many black females along the lines of, “How dare you!” because the storyline is profoundly their story, not any man’s, and especially not his. The play is a collection of 20 poems, dealing with love, abandonment, rape, abortion, and more, told by seven different women who are identified only by color. Perry’s version has given names to the women, and is described as a poetic exploration of what is to be of color and a female in this world.

I’m told that despite her horror Oprah gave Perry “huge feedback” on the script, which Perry shot in June and July. Though he’s still finishing the film’s music, I hear Oprah and her gal pal Gayle King recently saw a rough cut and both gave Perry big props. Yes, but was Winfrey simply admiring her own handiwork or his? Perry, by enlisting Oprah’s fame and forum, ensured Precious got seen by a crossover audience. But this time I don’t think even Oprah can help him with the pic’s base. Not when there are predisposed attitudes among black women like this: “Even if Tyler Perry were just writing the script to For Colored Girls, or just directing, or just producing — even that would be too much for him to handle. He simply does not have the sensitivity, ingenuity, or abilities in any of those three capacities to do this film a sliver of the justice it deserves.” On the other hand, Lionsgate hopes controversy fills seats. Here’s the trailer: