BY ROB SALERNO - They say wild animals are most unpredictable when they're cornered -- I guess that's true of Sun Media, too. 

Yesterday, The Canadian Press broke the story that Citizenship and Immigration Canada staged a fake citizenship ceremony where bureaucrats stood in for new immigrants for reporters for Sun News Network to videotape and broadcast, and that this was done with the encouragement of Sun and Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney. The story raises a number of troubling questions about the government's collusion with a private broadcaster, the ethics of the journalists involved, and the money and time spent on staging this ceremony to benefit a for-profit business. But for some reason, Kenney apologized to Sun News Network for what the bureaucrats did. He ought to be apologizing to all Canadians, as Sun should apologize to its approximately 4,000 audience members.

Well, the people at Sun News Network were just outraged, OUTRAGED, that anyone would call their ethics into question. Of course, it's not news to regular readers of Xtra that Sun reporters tend to lack basic ethical judgment and intellectual curiousity. But the official response from Sun News Network in the form of an editorial by columnist Brian Lilley is a breathtaking piece of denial and misdirection. It appears that videos on Sun's website aren't working as I write this; I'll update with an embedded video when it becomes available.  [UPDATE: The video now appears viewable here, but it can't be embedded.]

Lilley starts by defending Sun News's integrity, claiming that they simply "did not know that these people were fake" -- that the ceremony was being staged by bureaucrats and didn't feature actual immigrants. So, to be clear, Lilley is saying that Sun journalists aren't unethical; they're just gullible.

Look, I'm not here to make Brian Lilley look stupid. That's his haircut's job, and I wouldn't want to put it out of work.

But what about that email from Sun producers that Canadian Press turned up in which they suggested that CIC stage a fake ceremony for them to broadcast? Well, Lilley says that email was sent more than a week earlier, so Sun couldn't have expected CIC to act on it. And maybe it refers to a completely separate fake ceremony that they could videotape at some other time for a non-journalistic, completely ethical reason! Shut up! I'm not the one on trial here! 

Sun host Krista Erickson calls the whole story a "drive-by smear," which is just so offensive, because that's the Sun's stock and trade. Just to show us all how it's done, Lilley launches into the deflection phase of the editorial.

In the House of Commons yesterday, politicians wasted time in question period posing "six questions!" about the Sun/CIC story as if this were real news. And then to prove how much more useless the opposition parties are, they asked two questions about "transvestites" not being able to fly, and absolutely no questions about the "state broadcaster" airing "pornography." Which, wait, what?

Look, we already know Brian Lilley is a proud homophone homophobe. But you'd think, as a journalist, he'd take a minute to actually understand the story he's belittling. It's not about "transvestites" not being able to get on planes. It's about new regulations that appear to make it impossible for many transgender people to board planes in Canada, because their presented gender doesn't match the sex on their identity documents.  

[As an aside, isn't it weird that identity documents even bother to mark the bearer's sex? I don't need a passport to tell me I'm male, and most people looking at me could figure that out on their own. It doesn't establish identity, and it's not like a terrorist who obtains or makes a fake passport would be stymied by the need to put down the correct one of two genders. For all its usefulness, we may as well ask, "Are you circumcised?" and "How long is your erect penis?" Then when a flight steward says, "I'm sorry, Mr Lilley, but I just don't believe you have more than two inches down there. You'll have to submit to a strip search in order to fly," he would understand what trans people are feeling about this.]

As for the state broadcaster showing porn, naturally, I assumed Lilley was referring to the Sun's own tradition of running bikini-clad models in all its papers, since when I hear "state broadcaster," I naturally think of a broadcaster that uses salaried government agents to stage events for broadcast. Apparently, I wasn't the only one who made this mistake. 

As it turns out, Sun media had just gotten a bug up its ass about a show called Hard that CBC's French language service, SRC, had made available on its web distribution service. SRC bought the show from France's Canal+ and wasn't broadcasting it over the air. Hard is a show about a widow who inherits her husband's pornography studio and keeps it going for various reasons. Here's its French Wikipedia page.

I managed to watch an episode last night, and man, calling it "pornography" is quite a stretch. There are some butt shots and a plotline about one of the main characters who has a penis that is "énorme" (you never see it), but you don't even see boobs. This would be tame by French standards. In fact, butt shots have appeared on standard broadcast television for decades (NYPD Blue, anyone?), and boobs go over on cable channels all the time. Actually, a very similar-sounding reality show, Family Business, aired on Showcase for three years.

And isn't it bizarre that anyone at Sun would object to a show about pornography, given that its parent company, Quebecor, also owns the cable company Videotron, which makes a tidy profit selling actual 24-hour pornography channels? Or is this yet another attempt to scare CBC out of a market that Sun wants for itself?

But yes, dodge the issue. Thanks to Sun's integrity-filled journalism, Canadians coast-to-coast now know they can get low-grade French butt shots online. Unfortunately, once the story broke, CBC rushed to put restraints on the show so that it can now only be watched online between the pervert hours of midnight and 4am, unlike the titties in Sun Media pages, which can be seen at any time of the day once you hand over 50 cents to the guy at the newstand.

Not even Conservative Culture Minister James Moore was buying this line of garbage, and now Sun Media has turned its ire toward him. They want an apology for calling one of their journalist's integrity into question, and they want Harper to fire him and "replace him with someone who doesn't appear to be in bed with the taxpayer-funded state broadcaster." Which, wait, what? Isn't it the minister of culture's job to be in the CBC's business? 

I don't love rushing to the defence of Conservative politicians, but as far as they go, Moore's one of the better ones. And when Sun starts questioning anyone's "objectivity," you can't do anything but laugh.

BY ANDREA HOUSTON - RyePride, the queer voice at Ryerson, joined thousands of students from across Toronto at Queen's Park Feb 1 for the National Student Day of Action, a country-wide campaign to call attention to the high cost of tuition in Ontario.

But MPP Glen Murray took exception to RyePride's banner, pictures of which were flying around Facebook and Twitter. With a swift jerk of the knee, Murray called RyePride homophobic, saying that calling a gay man a "queen" has always been, and continues to be, homophobic. RyePride, and several other #CanQueer folks on Twitter, shot back.

Here's Lady Gaga performing at the Grammys:

 

 

BY ROB SALERNO - It looks like Washington may win the race to be the next US jurisdiction where same-sex marriage is legal! Last night, Feb 1, state senators voted 28-21 to pass marriage equality. The state house could follow as early as next week, and Governor Chris Gregoire has already said she supports the law. Washington will bring the total number of US states that allow gay marriage to seven, including New York, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa. Washington, DC, also allows gay marriage, as do two West Coast native tribes. California famously permitted same-sex marriage for six months before Proposition 8 ended the practice.

Watch gay state senator Ed Murray defend gay marriage and call for cooperation on this issue with marriage equality opponents. Murray is planning to marry his partner of more than 20 years upon passage of the bill and told his colleagues, "regardless of how you vote on this bill, an invitation will be in the mail."

Other states debating same-sex marriage this year include Maryland and New Jersey, where Democrat-controlled state houses hope to see passage; New Hampshire, where the Republican state house wants to repeal it; and North Carolina and Minnesota, where Republicans are hoping to pass constitutional amendments to ban the practice.  

It's worth checking in on the status of same-sex marriage worldwide. Ten countries currently allow same-sex marriages nationwide: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain and Sweden. Brazil allows same-sex marriages in theory, through roundabout rulings of its state and federal Supreme Courts, but they've only been performed in some states. Mexico recognizes same-sex marriages performed in Mexico City only.

That's right, soon Seattle will be as progressive as Johannesburg, Sao Paolo, Mexico City, Buenos Aires . . . You'd think a city known for its plaid flannel would've been more lesbian-friendly.

Israel recognizes same-sex marriages performed elsewhere only. There are ongoing debates about allowing same-sex marriage in the UK, Australia, Finland and Uruguay, and Denmark is planning to pass same-sex marriage by June. France's Socialist party will be campaigning on the issue in national elections this year.

BY NATASHA BARSOTTI - If gay flight attendant Maxim Kupreev was going to continue flying the friendly skies with Russian airline Aeroflot, he had to get hitched -- the heterosexual way, Gay Russia reports.

Kupreev was allegedly forced into a union with a former school friend at the end of last year after he went public with his intention to form a group within the airline to fight for the rights of gay employees, according to the Gay Russia website.

It gets more bizarre.

Kupreev ended up marrying Sofia Mikhailova, who -- get this -- had to divorce her husband, Grigoriy Andreykin, so she could tie the knot with the 25-year-old flight attendant.

Gay rights activist Nikolai Alexeyev told Xtra by email Jan 31 that Kupreev has known his new wife "since the age of 6 as a schoolmate" and that she "had to divorce her husband in Siberia to enter into this marriage to help him. He basically faced an ultimatum."

"Aeroflot effectively broke a real marriage and created a sham one," Alexeyev alleges.

He told Xtra it was "a deal" for the couple. "She live in far away Siberia and now she can travel to Moscow for very very cheap by Aeroflot as much as she wants. He got the chance to continue his work and Aeroflot is happy cause they will not have to answer questions about the LGBT group anymore," Alexeyev wrote.

"The creation of an LGBT group in Aeroflot was announced on June 20, 2011," Gay Russia states. Kupreev, the founder of the group, said it would "fight for the direct inclusion of discrimination ban on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity into internal documents of Aeroflot," as well as "for the recognition of same sex partners of the employees," the report indicates.

A spokesperson for the airline reportedly denied the existence of the group.

Alexeyev says the group has now been put on ice. In the meantime, there is a call to boycott Aeroflot.

"We applied for the rally in front of Aeroflot office in downtown Moscow," he says. "We haven't got the answer from the authorities yet. But I expect a denial this week. With high probability they will ban the whole protest. Then we will go and organize without the permit. We already have a terrific plan."

 

[This post has been updated with video of the US State Department web chat.]

BY ROB SALERNO - The US State Department hosted a live web-chat on LGBT human rights open to journalists from all over the world, and Xtra participated.

Speaking for the US government was Daniel Baer, deputy assistant secretary for the Bureau of Democracy, Rights and Labor. Baer spoke frankly about the US government's aims and limitations in promoting a queer human rights agenda both abroad and domestically.

I asked Baer to explain what the US government's approach is to its own domestic religious organizations that are supporting efforts to criminalize homosexuality in many countries, particularly Uganda. Does the US bear any responsibility for these actions? And if so, how can the US prevent American organizations from undermining queer rights abroad?

Baer's response was measured. 

"We wouldn’t – we don’t seek to limit the activities of civil society or religious groups domestically or internationally, and there are many, many American groups that do enormously good work around the world. I know that there are reports of a number of organizations that have been advocating for laws that have, as their ultimate effect, a limitation on the human rights not only of LGBT people, but of other people. Because many times these laws cast a very wide net, and obviously it’s very important to understand the context in which you’re working in order to be able to know what kinds of effects your actions will take," he said.

A big focus of questions was the practical steps the US is taking to promote a queer human rights agenda abroad. 

Zoryan Kis, from Tochka Opory in Ukraine, asked: "LGBT individuals in Ukraine have no protection against being fired if their sexual orientation or gender identity is discovered. Has the US considered working with American Chambers of Commerce, the Foreign Commercial Service, or Economic Sections in Embassies to encourage US firms working abroad, or internations firms in any country, to adopt LGBT-friendly Human Relations policies?"

"You’ve hit on something that we are in conversations right now about how best to engage the private sector," Baer said. "The private sector really has an opportunity to play a role here, and how should we talk to them about that. One of the reasons that people bring this up, of course, is that in the American context, it’s a little-known fact, but in the U.S. there is no federal legislation protecting – right now protecting LGBT people against discriminatory firing and employment." (Some states and cities have anti-discrimination statues, but most do not.)

"However, the American private sector has really led the way. And so I believe – I don’t know what the exact proportion is, but it’s the vast, vast majority of Fortune 500 companies have as a matter of corporate policy nondiscrimination policies that include LGBT people. And the private sector has led the way on this, because it makes sense for business that you don’t want to lose out on any talent for a silly reason. And so they’ve made their own choices, and I think that there certainly is an opportunity. It’s probably the case that that principle applies in other places around the world as well, and so there’s certainly an opportunity for the private sector to lead in other places around the world as well," he said.

A major theme of Baer's comments was the need to engage non-state actors on the ground, including businesses and civil society, to build momentum for human rights in places where governments are obstinate against queer human rights. 

"If you look back at the progress that we’ve made as a country toward a more perfect union, toward a country that is more respectful of the equality of each and every citizen, I think that progress is largely attributable not – it certainly wouldn’t have been possible without the leadership of those in civil society. Obviously, Dr. King is somebody who comes to mind, and he was not a government figure, and yet he is somebody who many of us credit with having shifted the national conversation in ways that we are all still benefitting from today," Baer said.

A journalist from Suriname wanted to know why gay rights are a priority for the US.

"Human rights are a priority for the U.S. Government. When President Obama gave the Nobel lecture after he won the Nobel Prize, he talked about the fact that the only lasting peace would be a peace that was based on the inherent dignity of every person. And I think that one of the things that this Administration has recognized is that in many places around the world, as in our own past and present, LGBT people are often left out, pushed aside. They don’t have access to social services. Sometimes they are thrown in jail, sometimes they are even killed for who they are. And that if we believe that human rights apply to everyone and that human – that a world that respects human rights is more likely to be safe, prosperous, and good for all of us, then it stands to reason that we should be committed to human rights for everyone," he said.

On the touchy situation in Russia, where local governments in some cities and regions have taken steps to make it illegal to promote homosexuality, Baer spoke forcefully but tactfully.

"The situation in Russia is obviously very difficult, and we are well aware of that," he said. "There are many places where LGBT is not called out as a particular vulnerable group that needs protection, and in those cases – and indeed, in the U.S. hate crimes law has been a recent innovation and in the last few years. And so I think where there isn’t specific protection in the law, you have to rely on the general protections that apply to everyone. Now, I understand that in various contexts even those protections are not firm enough supports and that they are unevenly applied and often discriminatorily applied. And that is a real challenge. I think as much as possible, appealing to general protections of freedom of expression or freedom of association is obviously the legal route that is available.

"Now, you also raise the worrying trend, which we’ve seen not only in Russia but in other places around the world, of trying to limit speech as a way of trying to curtail various forms of citizen participation in government or citizen activism. And I think one of the things that really needs to be highlighted about these kinds of laws, the laws that say you can’t talk about homosexuality, is that they’re not just a limitation of speech for LGBT people, they’re a limitation of speech for all Russians or all people, all citizens of whatever states in which they might be – or municipalities in which they might be considered. And so they are a violation of international standards of freedom of expression, and we should argue against them not because we’re seeking to protect one particular community but because we’re seeking to protect that standard of freedom of expression for everyone."

Watch the video above or read the transcript here.