List of figures and tables viii Acknowledgements ix Series editor's preface xii Introduction: neo-disciplinary power 1 Part I: The authority of law 23 1 The legal field 27 2 From a place of indifference 48 Part II: Unruly sexuality 74 3 Russia in queer colours 77 4 The sexual subject of law 101 Part III: Affects, emotions and law 125 8 Conclusion: the global Memeticon 198 References 211 Index 227VIOLENT AFFECTIONS viii List of figures and tables new guests brought along two more bottles of vodka. In the courtroom, these two men claimed that during the time that elapsed after their arrival, there was a marked increase in tension between Tatyana and Oleg. Tatyana allegedly called him a person with 'non-traditional sexual orientation', requested money from him, and repeatedly bothered him. At one point, Tatyana took Oleg to her bed and 'sat on his face with her genitals, also trying to push her panties into his mouth'. He resisted, which she saw as proof of his homosexuality. One of the guests stood up for Oleg and was locked in a closet, only to be taken to a cemetery later where he was forced to dig his own grave, in which he was buried alive.As the night progressed, Oleg was forced to put on the yellow dress and tights in which the police later discovered his body. The three defendants would soon be found guilty of beating him with their fists, feet and empty vodka bottles. According to the case file, blood was all over the place and Oleg could hardly walk when the drunken group took him to their car and drove in the direction of the Oka River dam. When they arrived, they opened the boot of the car and took Oleg out. He started to walk but fell into a nearby ditch, where he would lie for another week, unfound and eaten by maggots. The defendants left and headed to the victim's flat to pick up some of his belongings, including a TV, a microwave oven and a loudspeaker system. They returned to the original flat, where one of the defendants engaged in sex with Tatyana, and the rest of the guests had sex with another woman.The events of that night were interpreted by the district criminal court as manslaughter (the man who had been buried alive luckily survived the assault and was simply ignored by the court). The judge held that the defendants did not have the intention to kill (this would have constituted murder), but simply caused injuries eventually incompatible with life (manslaughter). In establishing whether the victim was a gay man, the court reviewed a forensic examination of his anus, in which 'spermatozoa were not found'. The three attackers were sentenced to 8 and 9 years in a high-security facility -two of the men were already convicted criminals and therefore received one additional year on their sentences. The rest of the group were summoned only as witnesses, including Tatyana.