As others have pointed out, the problem across the board is that you cannot meaningfully define the word "propagandize" in the legislation. It functionally means simply "to be gay in any way in public," and once you've hit that point, it's meaningless to proclaim that the IOC's rules on "political propaganda" apply or are relevant to what's being talked about. The IOC is being slippery (I would say cowardly, quite frankly) about this.To Dashenka:
There are 76 countries in the world with anti-homosexuality laws on the books. Most of them criminalize specific sexual acts, and while that's bad enough, the fact is that very few of them, including Muslim ones, go to the extreme of criminalizing the fact of being or looking gay in public*. And none of them are hosting the Olympics and threatening to arrest athletes and visitors under such a law. I get that you're uncomfortable having Russia come under a negative spotlight, but they've done it to themselves; a law that baldly ridiculous was always going to attract international attention, the moreso when you're hosting an international event.
And that last line is heartbreaking. No, it is not the job of gay people to "accept" straight people if that means "accepting" having sewage like this constantly dumped on them. For most of history they just didn't have a choice. It's kind of perverse to ask them to just hunker down and take it in the first era where other possibilities have opened up... and one of the only things that shifts any kind of bigotry in any real sense is shame
, knowing the world does not
tacitly accept and approve one's backward attitudes.
(* The major notable exception to this is, on paper, Saudi Arabia... though there are interesting complications
to that. But note that during the one major international event the Saudis host every year -- the Hajj -- its religious police keep an extremely low profile
. There is no tough talk about enforcing Wahhabi norms upon visitors, because they have the sense to know what problems this would cause them.)