Suchergebnisse

Статья исследует влияние государственной кампании о запрете «пропаганды гомосексуализма» на публичные проявления гомосексуальности. На основе 77 проблемно-ориентированных интервью с представителями ЛГБТ мы реконструируем три наиболее популярных поведенческих реакции (игнорирование, принятие и протест) и объясняем причины их выбора. Мы показываем, что те из респондентов, которые до кампании демонстрировали гомосексуальные отношения на публике, продолжили это делать, несмотря на давление со стороны официальной политики. Кампания заставила ЛГБТ переопределить свою жизненную стратегию в терминах политической борьбы, а не субкультурной идентичности. Респонденты призывают к расширению повестки дня ЛГБТ-движения до «общегражданской» и защите прав всех дискриминируемых групп. Они не отмечают значительного усиления повседневной гомофобии: те группы, на которые была направлена государственная кампания, склонны к дискриминации ЛГБТ до ее начала, а группы, которые занимали нейтральную позицию, получили больше информации о проблемах ЛГБТ. В результате респонденты зафиксировали рост сочувствия к себе в ближайшем социальном окружении. ; The paper explores the response of the LGBT community to the expanding homophobic campaign in Russia. Contrary to state intentions and the expectations of LGBT activists, everyday practices within the LGBT community have not dramatically changed. The majority of our respondents perceive the campaign as a political instrument used to achieve consolidation of votes within the electorate. On the basis of 77 in-depth interviews within the Russian LGBT community, we identifed three main types of reaction to the newly introduced homophobic laws and explain the factors driving these choices. These choices include: "exit" (indifference to the policy); "loyalty" (acceptance of the rules of game) and "voice" (protesting in response). Rather than being determined by social or economic status, the particular type of reaction is prescribed by the level of an individual's integration to an existing LGBT network and the degree of personal independence they enjoy from agents such as the state, partners or parents. Less well-informed respondents, especially those who have grown up in a relatively hostile environment, have not changed their public sexual practices. According to the respondents'descriptions, they learned to behave in a socially acceptable way. This "exit" pattern of behavior is preferred by those respondents who are about 30 years old and have a constant partner. These respondents are resolving their property and family issues without being "visible" to the state. Around a fifth of our respondents considered it necessary to respond actively to government interference in their private life and force the government hear their voice. Integration within everyday institutional environments and political awareness also help respondents to make a distinction between the state's homophobic rhetoric and the general level of homophobia in Russian society. Respondents describe Russian society as largely indifferent rather than actively homophobic. They are sure that being "other" predominantly means to be invisible or to frame your otherness as political choice. Thus, the impact of state homophobia on actual sexual practices in intolerant cultures could be limited by social indifference.