In the zone of silence

How to talk with adolescents after the adoption of the law on the ban on gay propaganda

On June 11, the State Duma adopted in third reading the law on the prohibition of propaganda of homosexuality. Complex problems are driven underground, where adolescents will remain with their questions one on one

On June 11, in front of the State Duma, skirmishes between LGBT activists and defenders of traditional values ​​passed

The author of the text is a teacher, editor-in-chief of the Literature magazine, associate professor of the Faculty of Philology, Higher School of Sciences, teacher of the Moscow Art Theater School, a member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation and the Public Council under the Ministry of Education and Science.

So, the law on the ban on gay propaganda has been adopted. And although his text appears a wider concept of “non -traditional sexual relations”, it will briefly call him that way.

What does this law have to do with me, the father quite traditional, from the point of view of the authors of the law, family? Direct. I am a school teacher. I am a university teacher. I am a magazine editor for teachers and teachers. I am a member of the Public Chamber. And more than two thousand people read me on Facebook, including teenagers. The word uttered by me ceases to be the word private, what I say and write can be regarded if desired to regard propaganda. You see, I have already approached this law to a step ... In addition, my main contingent is adolescents, minors and people who work with them. Here is the second step ... and I really want to find out some nuances of the law so as to try not to fall into its traps.

The law states that punctured propaganda will be considered the spread of information aimed at the formation of non -traditional sexual attitudes in children, the attractiveness of such relations, a distorted idea of ​​the social equivalent of traditional and non -traditional relations, as well as the imposition of information that causes interest in such relations. OK.

Does this mean that if I consider my student an unconventional sexual orientation (and I and many other teachers have come across this and I know firsthand) normal and I wish him to realize himself in the future as he wants, I am choosing a dangerous face of the unlawful? I still do not promote anything, but inside myself I feel this person as ordinary and “legal”, and the relationship that he will build with a similar to himself, too. I have not yet opened my mouth, but I am already not entirely clean before the law.

And if I open my mouth? Well, because the student will come to their hearts to talk (and I came across such conversations as many other teachers - also, believe me, I know), or write in a “personal”, or in the essay will share his problem. I have to tell him what I think or what does the law require? This law requires not to form a distorted idea of ​​the equivalence of traditional and non -traditional relations. So, if a girl-student comes to me to talk about suffering about the boy, I will listen to her, console and advise her. And if the suffering of another student will be about the girl? I must tell her that this is disgusting and perverted? And if I talk to her and console her in the same way as the first student, will I thereby assert the equivalent of the relationship? And will I fall under the law? Or is it not propaganda yet? Because with the eye of the eye. And not purposefully, not systematically.

Well, if the conversation comes with the class? Because it will be required, for example, an interference in the conflict situation around the “Inaccessor”. Or a discussion of a book, a film, a case, the same law (adolescents are not blind - both politics and what is happening in society are interested in). Or, say, they will ask me about the “Children 404” project - children with non -traditional orientation write to this site, tell how they live in the world of adults, in the world of homophobes. Then I will have to speak to the public. And what? What to say? Or I can stretch the text of the law for them, and mumble, shaking my head and not unclenching my lips, something inarticulate-they say, I can’t, you see, what are the fines, and suddenly they interpreted wrong? Does someone press? No matter what happens ...

"

I do not want my son to be seduced. No matter who is aunt or uncle. I want him to figure out what he wants, and that he should happen, as he himself wants

"

Or now: now the book of Daria Wilke “Shutovskaya cap” is published in the publishing house. Piercing and perfectly written. About the boy who literally lives in the puppet theater (his parents are actors), about the world of theatrical workshops, about dolls - and about love. The boy is aware of his unconventionality, sexual speciality. And he pretends not to be found, he plays the role of a jester. The jester is his favorite doll. Gradually, he internally grows up and understands that the jester is not the one who is lying a fool and gives himself to a peel, not the one who hides under the Shutovsky cap. Real jesters are freer and stronger than kings. And he decides to make his small camming out. And wins.

I often tell teenagers about new books, because we read a lot outside the program. I want to tell me among others and about this. But can I do this now, without fear of being accused of that propaganda? Where is the guarantees that some parent will not come to school with shouts that his child is imposed on a “book about fagots”? He will not even bother to open it - but I will be sure that I am committing a criminal case, even just introducing the students to her. Remember how quickly the parental community rose to fight Ilya Kolmanovsky, demanding to protect children from the teacher-gei, who was not gay, but just went to the State Duma to support the protest against the adoption of the law and explain to people that homosexuality in man is natural. Yes, of course, this was not the entire parental public, only a small part, but we have enough and one inadequate parent to forever ruin the life of the teacher and school. Believe me, again I know what I'm talking about.

The law has been adopted, but disputes about it do not subside. In them, I noticed, problems are often mixed, not affected in the law. For example, can a same -sex couple be considered a family? Is it possible to register a marriage or is this union to somehow call it in a different way? Is it possible to adopt children with same -sex couples? These questions are aggravated due to the fact that in Europe they are increasingly resolved - for many it is a sign that we should prohibit. Unfortunately, such confusion and tension do not allow you to understand the issue calmly.

Aggression splashes out of many people when discussing same -sex relations (and the new law in particular). This aggression reveals internal fear. The medicine against fear may be the pronunciation of the problem. And the law drives her into the zone of silence. And puts people working with adolescents before a difficult choice.

Silence is destructive for adolescents who have found their own specialty. They need to talk about her with someone. And I am very grateful to my colleagues-pedagogues, who, in response to my question on Facebook, wrote that nothing will change for them with the adoption of this law and that they, like before, will strive to help any of their students in any problem. Because all students are equivalent to them.

And the last. Homophobic -minded people as one of the most powerful arguments in their favor use the following move: "Do you want your own son to seduce gay?" I answer. I do not want my son to be seduced. No matter who is aunt or uncle. I want him to figure out what he wants, and for him to happen what should happen, as he himself wants. Or how they wish with those or those with whom this will happen. And so that he knew that at any moment I am ready to talk with him and accept him. Or what are other adults who are ready to do this.

But what I really do not want is that he breaks himself to please the majority and his laws and does not have the opportunity to be himself. Or that he remains without the help of people who could submit it, but prefer to remain silent - under pain of punishment.

How does the law on the prohibition of propaganda of non -traditional sexual relations with the norms of international law and the Russian Constitution correlate? The New Times turned for comments on lawyers

Dmitry Agranovsky, lawyer: "It will turn out the same as with extremism"

In my opinion, this law contradicts the European conventions signed by Russia. But this will only become clear. Now someone will fall under this law, try to appeal this, receive the right to appeal to the European court. Since the issue is quite acute, it can quite get priority for consideration. In the law, the criteria are not defined and everyone who has fallen will fall under the ban.

Igor Simonov, lawyer of the Knyazev and Partners collegium: “The law has a ban on propaganda, and not for discussion”

Each person has the right to express their opinion, and no one can limit it. In the Constitution, we have prescribed freedom of opinion and censorship is prohibited. But there are exceptions when restrictions are necessary. This is when higher values ​​are threatened than freedom of speech, namely the life and health of people, especially children. Extremist statements and calls, propaganda of suicide, for example, fall under the restrictions. Information about non -traditional sexual relations can be spread limited so that everyone can at their discretion, in accordance with their addictions, realize themselves in their sexual life. It may not be worthwhile to promote and promote this lifestyle. I assume that the law has a ban on propaganda, and not for discussion. Propaganda is a certain popularization of these relationships. I think that this is the fundamental significance of the law.

Anna Stavitskaya, lawyer: "You can immediately apply to the European Court"

This law contradicts not only the international treaties that Russia ratified, but also the constitution, because it guarantees that all people are equal before the law and the court. But it turns out that this law speaks of inequality and, in general, discriminates people on the basis of sexual orientation. It is also important in this law that the very concept of propaganda is spelled out in such a way that it is very difficult to understand what exactly is propaganda. To appeal to the European court, sometimes the formulation itself is enough. It is not necessary that the law be put into practice. If it contradicts the Convention, then based on the fact that the law is ratified, you can apply to the European Court.

Photo: Reuters