|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yulia and the Lena, two teens from Moscow known as t.A.T.u, are everything that Britney Spears wants to be: talented, beautiful
and in love with someone who really cares. Their music, a mixture of Pop and controversy, is spinning out all over the world
as folks figure out that brilliance and beauty do go together.
"People love us or hate us," said Lena Katina, the soulful redhead in the group. "But nobody thinks nothing about us." t.A.T.u's
stage and video performances are causing controversy in this largely straight, keep-it-behind-closed-doors kind of world.
Lena and Yulia are lovers, and they're not afraid to express that on stage, on tour, or behind their own closed doors.
One of the twosome's latest videos, Ya Soshla S Uma (All The Things She Said), is the story of a love affair between two young
women. It doesn't matter whether you speak Russian. You can hear emotion screaming through the overloaded mic as Lena calls
out her love for Yulia. Get the video, and you'll see that love.
MTV in Russia thought enough of t.A.T.u to name Ya Soshla S Uma Video of the Year in 2001. t.A.T.u's 2001 debut album, 200
km/h in the Wrong Lane, on Universal Music Russia, sold more than 1,000,000 copies, and t.A.T.u's concert appearances at clubs
and stadiums draw as many as 50,000 fans.
Now t.A.T.u's tempestuous teens are preparing to conquer America. But don't expect thouse of you who fear controversy shouldn't
expect ulia and Lena to tone down their bold, fearless music.
"Our songs are not silly," said Lena. "t.A.T.u is more sincere, more honest about ourselves and others. We don't shape ourselves
for the audience."
"In Russia, life is not polite. If we don't like something, we say we don't like it," said Lena. "If we don't agree, we say
'fuck you.'" t.A.T.u is not like any band in either the East or the West. Folks try to draw somparisons to Britney Spears,
Eminem or Prodigy. None come close. "Russians are not dark but we are not light either," says Yulia Volkova. "We have a different
view, maybe deeper, because life is more difficult in Russia."
"t.A.T.u is about saying what you feel, not what others expect," says Lena. "Be in love. Be yourself. We are."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LORDS BACK GAY ADOPTION - BREAKING NEWS
Gay and unmarried couples will be able to adopt children after the House of Lords voted to approve the liberalisation of adoption
laws last night.
A concerted effort by Tory peers to block the move failed after peers supported MPs who voted in favour of the Adoption and
Children Bill on Monday.
Last night, peers voted narrowly by 215 to 184 against a Tory amendment to restrict adoption to married couples. The vote
was a setback for Tory family values campaigners, who have consistently fought against reform and last month succeeded in
blocking reform in a similar Lords vote.
The majority of 31 delighted Labour frontbenchers who have argued for months that allowing gay and unmarried couples to be
considered for adoption would lead to more children in care finding loving and permanent homes.
Lord Hunt of Kingsheath, the Health minister, argued that the rigorous vetting procedure for couples who wished to adopt would
rule out those in unstable relationships, whether they were married or not.
He said there was an anomaly in allowing single people, including homosexuals, to adopt since 1926 but not couples.
"People in casual or short-term relationships are unlikely to put themselves forward," he said. "Adoption is about making
judgements about suitability based on evidence."
But Earl Howe, the Tory frontbench peer who proposed the amendment restricting adoption to married couples, said peers were
voting on an "important matter" and urged them to continue their opposition to gay and unmarried couples gaining adoption
rights.
"I am quite clear that the decision taken by this house on the 16 October was the right one. The optimum environment for raising
children is marriage," he said.
"Two people who live together but are not married signify that they are committed to each other but only up to a certain level."
Lord Lloyd of Berwick, a crossbench peer, spoke in favour of allowing gay couples to adopt and said that since they could
not marry they could not demonstrate their commitment with such a ceremony.
He said it was "surely better" that both members of a gay relationship should have a legal relationship with an adopted child.
Under the current law a single homosexual is allowed to adopt but not a couple.
The issue of gay adoption has resulted in a ping-pong match between the Commons and Lords, with MPs voting for reform but
their moves blocked by a coalition of Tory, crossbench and some Labour peers. Last night ministers persuaded some MPs who
had previously voted against reform to back reform.
Lord Campbell-Savours, a Labour peer and former MP, said that he had changed his mind and planned to vote with the Government
this time, despite reservations about the adoption of boys by gay men.
The peer said he was not averse to adoption by unmarried straight couples or lesbians but did not have enough information
about the effect on the sexuality of boys of being adopted by homosexual men.
"There have been many successful placements of children in lesbian circumstances. My main concern is the placing of boy children
in a homosexual household where two men are adopting parents" he said. "It's not the problem of abuse that concerns me ...
Could boys in these circumstances become sexually confused?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homosexuality is biological, suggests gay sheep study
05 November 02
A study of gay sheep appears to confirm the controversial suggestion that there is a biological basis for sexual preference.
The work shows that rams that prefer male sexual partners had small but distinct differences in a part of the brain called
the hypothalamus, when compared with rams that preferred to mate with ewes.
Kay Larkin and colleagues from Oregon Health and Science University found the difference was in a particular region of the
hypothalamus - the preoptic nucleus. The region is generally almost twice as large in rams as in ewes. But in gay rams its
size was almost identical to that in "straight" females.
The hypothalamus is known to control sex hormone release and many types of sexual behaviour. Several other parts of the hypothalamus
showed consistent sex differences in size, but only this specific region showed differences that correlated with sexual preference.
The differences are almost identical to those identified by the neuroscientist Simon LeVay in his studies of the brains of
gay men. His work has always been considered controversial, partly because the brains he studied were mostly from men who
had died of AIDS. So it was not clear whether the differences were related to the disease or to sexual preferences.
Sheep are particularly interesting, he says, because besides humans, they are the only animal where the males may naturally
express exclusively gay sexual preferences. As many as one in 10 rams can be gay.
Larkin's team also found that the hypothalamic region had a rich supply of the enzyme aromatase, which converts testosterone
into oestrogen. It is in this form that the hormone interacts with the brain. This may help support one theory that sexual
orientation, in part at least, may be related to the hormones present during fetal development, says Balthazart.
But Larkin suggests there may also be the influence of genes at work, at least in predisposing the animals to homosexuality.
This is because selective breeding seems to have been responsible for the high proportion of gay sheep compared with other
animals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 | Aids and other Sexually Transmitted Infections are a huge factor to consider when you are thinking of having sex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you are unmarried but live together as a couple you are denied a whole range of rights, no matter how long you have lived
together or how much you love each other. These include:
KEEPING YOUR HOUSE AND INHERITING POSSESSIONS
If your partner dies you are not entitled to stay in your home, even if you have paid the mortgage off together. Equally you
are not automatically entitled to keep any of the belongings which you believed were joint owned. This is because inheritance
protocol says the next of kin is the nearest relative. Similarly, you have no right to keep your partner's possessions, despite
their sentimental value.
SHARING IN PENSIONS AND BENEFITS
The benefits system is often structured around marriage. This means that there is inequality over who can and can’t apply
for benefits. This includes benefits which cover you if your partner dies. Pension rights often relate to you and your married
partner, only you are often not eligible if you are not married. This applies to different extents in state, personal and
occupational pensions.
ALLOWING YOUR PARTNER TO MOVE TO THE UK
If you are married, your partner can immediately register for British citizenship. If you are unmarried, they can only register
once you have lived together for two years. This is often difficult or impossible.
BEING NEXT-OF-KIN
When your partner is unable to make decisions for themselves because of their health you do not legally have the power to
make decisions on their health. The Mental Health Act of 1983 says that the ‘nearest relative’ is responsible for
the person in question. If you partner is seriously ill; when the hospital staff ask if you’re family, its simple, you’re
not.
TRANSFERRING ASSETS TO YOUR PARTNER
Married couples are currently treated as a single economic unit if they transfer assets between themselves. Unmarried couples
are charged capital gains tax.
BEING ABLE TO CO-ADOPT
Unmarried couples cannot both adopt a child. Usually, married couples are given preference in the adoption process.
REGISTERING YOUR PARTNER'S DEATH
If your partner dies you have no right to register their death, you are ignored in the process, even if your partner is 100
and you have lived together for 80 years.
These inequalities have dramatic effects on people. They financially penalise people regardless of how long they have lived
together or how much they love each other. They are however granted to people in a short loveless marriage.
Homophobia and inequality in society means that gay relationships face even greater pressures then heterosexual cohabiting
couples. They are turned away from marriage and therefore have none of the security provided by the rights associated with
it. Prejudice within families may mean that a partner will be forced to leave their home by the next of kin of their partner.
Companies will often give fringe benefits to the heterosexual partner of a member of staff, whether married or not but fewer
companies give equal fringe benefits to same sex partners.
Partnership registers have been set up in London and Liverpool and many local authorities throughout the UK are looking into
the issue. The register does not have a legal grounding in respect of the rights outlined above. However, it is the first
step in securing these rights. It provides greater evidence to couples involved in a dispute with authorities that they are
in a relationship. Setting up more registers is a positive step which will give people greater choice and increased rights.
To extend people's rights we believe that there should be a partnerships register in the UK, which would provide stability
and security to thousands of people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The Christian Institute Scotland's Section 28 Views........What Do You Think Of Their Article?
|
|
SECTION 28 DEBATE: Gay Lessons Will Manipulate Children
School children in Scotland should not be manipulated into believing that homosexual practice is exciting and morally right.
Yet, according to a report from a Christian research organisation, this is precisely what is happening now. The repeal of
Section 28 will open the flood-gates to the promotion of homosexuality and increasingly explicit sex education materials.
A new report from The Christian Institute "The Case for Keeping Section 28" has uncovered: Publicly funded pornographic material
used to promote homosexuality to children; Inconsistent sex education policies of local and health authorities some promote
marriage, others want homosexuality promoted and marriage "avoided at all costs";
Public bodies that advise homosexuals on committing illegal sexual acts in public.
The first half of the report criticises the arguments put by the Scottish Executive who want to repeal Section 28. The second
half reveals how councils and health authorities are currently getting around the law.
North Ayrshire, and the Western Isles have been singled out for praise for teaching responsible sex education programmes.
However, the report reveals many findings that give serious cause for concern:
* Glasgow City Council (£50,000) and Glasgow Health Board (£134,000) funded the setting up of PHACE West and its "Bi-G-LES"
youth project for children as young as 12. The youth project gives out a booklet called Gay Sex Now. The online version of
the booklet includes pornographic images of anal intercourse and oral sex.See http://www.bi-g-les.freeserve.co.uk/info.html
and http://www.bi-g-les.freeserve.co.uk/reading.html
The Education Authority in Midlothian is leading a project with two gay groups to improve the "level and relevance" of sex
education to gay, lesbian and bisexual young people. To that end, the Council recommends the use of a voyeuristic sex model
of a life size penis with "ejaculation function". The model comes complete with a tub of fake semen.
The Health Authority in Grampian has produced a teaching pack that says "resources which advocate monogamy/marriage as a solution
to HIV should be avoided at all costs"!
The University of Strathclyde has produced teaching guides that encourage teachers to promote homosexuality. The guidelines
even say that teachers should tell children how to improve their sexual technique and increase their knowledge of a wide range
of sexual practices.
Two books recommended by councils including Midlothian, Falkirk and Borders promote homosexual families. The books incorporate
a half-hour lesson for 10-year-olds on masturbation and discussion pointers include, among other things, multiple orgasms.
Fife Men Project funded by Fife Health Board gives tips to homosexuals on performing sexual acts in public. Detailed legal
advice is provided on "cottaging and cruising" and what to do if you are arrested.
A publicly funded gay group in Edinburgh have produced a gay guide to the city. It includes a section on cottaging and cruising.
It also reviews gay pubs, clubs and sex shops giving them marks for "totty factor" and the quality of their toilets.
Outside of education, Section 28 has been used to block the funding of gay rights events in Edinburgh, Lothian Region, and
Aberdeen. But the Institute report shows how vast sums of public money funded Glasgow's "Glasgay!"
Colin Hart, Director of the Institute said today: "The Scottish School Boards Association have warned that the repeal of Section
28 will lead to the use of pornographic teaching packs in schools. Today the Christian Institute's report shows just how true
their warning is.
Some 70% of Scots men believe that homosexual practice is wrong. The Scottish public must be told that they are currently
funding the recruitment of young people to the gay lifesytle and homosexual experimentation amongst the young. To cap it all
their taxes are funding "cruising" guides which give tips on where to have sex in public places and what to do if you are
arrested by the police.
Section 28 was introduced because some councils, particularly in England, were spending inordinate amounts of money promoting
homosexuality in schools. Our report shows that there are serious problems in Scotland. If Section 28 were to go the situation
would quickly get out of control."
Note for Editors: The Christian Institute is a Christian policy research organisation which seeks to influence public policy
from the perspective of historic Christian teaching.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
