Confiscated Custody
Critique and graphic by: Chris Talbot-Heindl

Russia’s been in the forefront of the media on many accounts lately, from Putin’s eloquent (though slightly ironic) editorial about Syria where he concludes that “we must not forget that God created us equal,” to Putin’s equally ironic nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize, to the fining and jailing of people who speak about their LGBT-ness, to the extreme violence and murder happening in Russia to members of LGBT community.

What I would like to critique at the moment, however, is the new bill to be debated in parliament that would strip LGBT parents of custody of their children. Alexei Khuravlev, who authored the bill, had this to say: “A homosexualist shouldn’t bring up a child. He perverts it. He harms him a lot more than if he were in a children’s home.”

And where did this ridiculous idea come from? ‘Murica of course! The study that Khuravlev points to as his source is a widely discredited study by University of Texas professor Mark Regnerus. The American Sociological Association discredited the study in a brief to the Supreme Court, and yet every nut job that wants proof that their discrimination is warranted has been using the study for purposes exactly like this one.

The law itself would grant the federal Investigative Committee the right to investigate parents accused of homosexuality. Kind of like a new-age witch-hunt. Except, instead of witches, they’re hunting homosexuals. And stealing their children. And adding those children to the current 600,000 Russian children waiting to be adopted. And what, pray tell, are the other reasons that can warrant confiscating custody in this bill? The only other grounds listed are alcoholism, drug abuse, mental illness (debilitating), and physical abuse. Homosexuality is akin to all those things, according to this bill.

In other news, The White House held a roundtable meeting on September 23 with members of the bisexual community to discuss issues specifically facing that community.  I hope that one of the discussion points was how to use bisexual peoples to demystify the LG community. As a bisexual woman, I often think of what can be done by bisexuals in support of lesbian and gay people. For instance, in the discussion of marriage quality, I think it’s logical to point out that bi’s are allowed to marry a person of the opposite gender but not the same gender, when they are the same person asking a marriage license, with the same ability to consent, who will have the same type of love and relationship irrespective of the gender of their partner.

In the same vein, bisexuals could be explained to have the same ability to parent whether their partners are of the same…what the hell am I saying?! This is Russia. Which to me currently equates to the streak-filled dirty toilet bowl of sanity when it comes to all things LGBTIQ.

All I can really say is that hopefully the Nobel Committee will laugh at and toss Putin’s nomination on Friday, somebody somewhere (oh, I don’t know, maybe the United Nations Human Rights Council?) will do something for homosexuals in Russia so they aren’t tortured and murdered, activists around the world will make such a huge stink (maybe even boycott the damned Olympics, when this bill is scheduled to be discussed), so that if Khuravlev can’t manage to get his head out of his ass on the grounds of common sense, at least there may be enough economic pressure to toss the bill out.

Oh, and Barilla Pasta can eat my @##!

You can follow more about what’s happening in Russia and other LGBTIQ news on Bilerico Project.