Who Is Interested in the Rights of Nigerien Homosexuals?

According to a recent news report, Niger, located in West Africa, has criminalized same-sex relationships. As a result, people who engage in homosexual activity can be sentenced to up to ten years in prison and fined.

In addition, the law states that attempting to engage in "LGBTQ acts" may be punished in the same way. And that is not all: participating in the activities of organizations representing sexual and gender minorities can also result in an equally severe punishment.

* * *

The reason given for the new law is that same-sex relationships are not in line with the country's social and cultural values. It remains to be seen, therefore, how various European organizations and civil society activists will react to Niger's values and culture.

Will we see rainbow activists demonstrating in the streets of Helsinki, Stockholm, Berlin, or Paris in support of homosexual people in Niger? Will European politicians condemn the actions of Niger's government? Or will Nigeriens themselves rise up against the country's military regime as a result of the decision?

* * *

Personally, I believe that the plight of homosexual people in Niger is of little real interest to Europeans. Neither politicians nor rainbow activists are likely to be motivated to protest over the issue.

For my part, I maintain that a person's sexuality is a private matter and should concern no one other than the individuals involved, provided that it does not involve violence, coercion, or exploitation. This principle applies equally in the European Union and in Niger, and for that reason I wish to express my disapproval of the actions of the country's military government.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
When Free Speech Is Prosecuted: Päivi Räsänen’s Case Explained for Americans
Gender identity and the future of Finnishness
Library Scrubs Queer Creator’s Character from Moomin Exhibit

Finns Give Their Government a Green Light to Ban Face Coverings

According to a new public opinion survey, 54 percent of Finns support and 26 percent oppose banning face coverings in public places and public services. This view is especially common among supporters of the Finns Party (92%), the National Coalition Party (70%), the Centre Party (62%), and the Social Democrats (54%). Thus, only the supporters of the left-wing parties (the Greens and the Left Alliance) are, on the whole, opposed to such a ban.

In fact, support for banning face coverings among different parties is even higher than the figures above suggest. For example, 14% of National Coalition supporters did not express an opinion, meaning that only 15% of them opposed the idea. Moreover, among those Green Party supporters who did state a view, around one-third supported a ban on face coverings.

There are at least two main justifications for prohibiting face coverings. First, they complicate criminal investigations.

Second, wearing a face covering is not always voluntary, since in certain cultures women are forced to cover their faces against their own will. Therefore, a ban could promote gender equality and the rights of girls and women.

That is why I now ask whether Prime Minister Petteri Orpo’s (NCP) government, together with the Social Democrats, could ensure that the will of the people on this matter is implemented as soon as possible. Drafting such a law should be fairly straightforward, as Finland could follow the example of countries such as Norway, the Netherlands, or France, where such bans are already in effect.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Managing Societal Change with a Growing Muslim Population
A young woman skiing in a swimsuit caused a controversy among women
Did police have the right to strip women

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Hallitus sai kansalta valtakirjan kasvojen peittämisen kieltämiselle

Supercell’s Ban: The Sanction That Hit Russians the Hardest

During the war in Ukraine, there has been much discussion within the EU about boycotts directed against Russia. Unfortunately, the measures taken have not led to the paralysis of the aggressor or to citizen protests capable of toppling the government.

However, today, it was revealed which EU action has hit Russians the hardest. The chairman of the Russian Esports Federation, Dmitry Smith, stated that the "biggest blow of all" came from an announcement by Supercell, the company known for its numerous hit games.

According to him, competitions in the game Clash Royale had been organized in Russia for several years. However, after the invasion of Ukraine, Supercell banned Russians from using their game.

The company had also immediately condemned Russia’s invasion in the spring of 2022. Additionally, it removed its games from Russian and Belarusian app stores and, in the spring of 2023, blocked Russian and Belarusian players from accessing its games.

As a result of Supercell’s ban, the representatives of Russian players have launched assessment processes, as, according to the Russian constitution, every athlete "has the right to engage in sports that should be publicly available." They have also held discussions with the Duma (Russian parliament) and the relevant committee, which believe that major esports titles should be publicly accessible rather than entirely under corporate control.

Nevertheless, Supercell has reaffirmed that the restrictions on Russians and Belarusians remain in place as long as the war continues. One can only hope that this gaming ban will eventually lead to such an uprising among game-hungry Russians that Putin’s administration will be forced to withdraw from Ukraine to appease them.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A Finnish Deputy Mayor Wanted to Ban an Old Board Game from Children
Anecdotes and Jokes About Vladimir Putin
Which one should be excluded from the Olympics?