The Girl Effect

It's not a new project but this video has just done its rounds on Facebook (again?) and I wanted to share it here.

 


I've also been crying (those new baby hormones...) at Swedish Save the Children's child poverty campaign, Fattigskolan, about poverty in Sweden.  Yes, it does exist.  It's all relative of course so poverty in Sweden is not necessarily about access to clean water and food on the table (although sometimes it could be the latter too of course).

 

Go Sweden!

Rooting for the Swedish ladies who are doing so well in the football world cup (next match on Sunday).


Via Anna's iPhone

Equals

Happy International Women's Day!

Mathematics

Some stereotypical humour one day after Women's Day and a little joke at the end.

ROMANCE MATHEMATICS
Smart man + smart woman = romance
Smart man + dumb woman = affair
Dumb man + smart woman = marriage
Dumb man + dumb woman = pregnancy

OFFICE ARITHMETIC
Smart boss + smart employee = profit
Smart boss + dumb employee = production
Dumb boss + smart employee = promotion
Dumb boss + dumb employee = overtime

SHOPPING MATH
A man will pay $20 for a $10 item he needs.
A woman will pay $10 for a $20 item that she doesn't need.

GENERAL EQUATIONS & STATISTICS
A woman worries about the future until she gets a husband.
A man never worries about the future until he gets a wife.
A successful man is one who makes more money than his wife can spend.
A successful woman is one who can find such a man.

HAPPINESS
To be happy with a man, you must understand him a lot and love him a little.
To be happy with a woman, you must love her a lot and not try to understand her at all.

LONGEVITY
Married men live longer than single men do, but married men are a lot more willing to die.

PROPENSITY TO CHANGE
A woman marries a man expecting he will change, but he doesn't.
A man marries a woman expecting that she won't change, and she does.

DISCUSSION TECHNIQUE
A woman has the last word in any argument.
Anything a man says after that is the beginning of a new argument.

HOW TO STOP PEOPLE FROM BUGGING YOU ABOUT GETTING MARRIED
Old aunts used to come up to me at weddings, poking me in the ribs and cackling, telling me, 'You're next.' They stopped after I started doing the same thing to them at funerals.

Source: e-mail from a friend

International Women's Day

This year, celebrating 100 years of women's rights!

(Picture from my friend Åsa)

Birgitta Continues

Just had to write again about our new EU Minister and all the talk about her pregnancy and how it will or won't affect her carrying out her duties and how it has (or should) lead to a wider discussion about women's role in working life.

Terri Eriksson writes in Aftonbladet "the Middle Ages called and they want their view of women back". Great line!

A translation of her article:

"When Dominika Psczynski had a baby in the beginning of the 2000s she went back to work after two weeks and hired a nanny to take the night shift.

The critics did not waste time. She was called "cheating mum" (who did not suffer through night watch, to be a mother = to suffer) and was interviewed under headings such as "How could you, Dominika?". Then it was Perrellis's turn, when she was back on the stage four days after the delivery. And when she soon thereafter crashed her car after a Christmas show, there were even some wacko debaters who were given screen time to point out that this was Charlotte's fault - she should not have worked but have stayed home like other sound mothers.

Then it wouldn't have happened!

This week the [differing] opinions come thick and fast about our new pregnant EU Minister Birgitta Ohlsson. People have spent time on discussing everything except EU policy: What will she do with the baby? Will she breast-feed? How will the association between mother and child go? How modern or unmodern is her husband? Does she have a heart of stone? Aren't mothers still most important in the end?

She shouldn't have taken the job, some say. Some wacko debater has again been allowed space to condemn a mother who starts working a few weeks after giving birth (can you remember if a "leadership consultant and linguist" has been allowed to make a statement about a political posting before?).

Well, what can one say? I saw that a person on the Internet wrote just apropos of the Ohlsson debate that women's greatest enemies are not male chauvinist pigs, it is women who think that chauvinism is correct. I wish I had thought of that first.

When we sit there and are retired and look back on this period of time when we thought we were so modern, we will be astonished that a pregnant minister could be subject to that much crap.

At the same time both Research Minister Tobias Krantz and Defence Minister Sten Tolgfors will become fathers - and participate in the election campaign - without anyone having any kind of moral aspects on that. Does Tolgfors have a heart of stone?

Because you cannot surely mean that we still, actually, really, live in a time where it doesn't matter at all what new fathers do, while the mothers' every departure from sitting at home and breast-feeding becomes a public concern?

Besides I wonder how it is that female politicians always, always are judged harder than men. In addition to Birgitta Ohlsson's pregnancy the national has recently been shaken by a debate about Mona Sahlin's bloody handbag. No one, which former Gender Equality Ombudsman Claes Borgström pointed out, has cared about analysing Fredrik Reinfeldt's extremely expensive suit, luxury watch or expensive car. I promise they are more expensive. The difference is that he got away with it.

Just like the government's not especially present dads with young children Krantz, Tolgfors and Billström."

Gudrun Schyman, Leader of Feminist Initiative, says (you can always count on Gudrun) that it is of course possible to give birth while holding a ministerial post. "There are so many antiquated conceptions about parenthood and about how women should behave. They are two in this, right? And she's not married to an old patriarch! All of it is a logistical question." She added that she never had so much inspiration in politics and in life in general when her children were young.

So what do I, Anna, think? I probably wouldn't go back to work four days after delivery or hire a night nanny unless there was a very special reason. BUT this is not about the details, this is about something bigger; the roles of women and men, not just as parents, but in society in general, and how the "rules" are not the same for women and men.

Birgitta Rules!

Sweden has a new EU minister as of yesterday*, Birgitta Ohlsson, from the Liberal party. I don't vote for her party but if I could vote for one person (well, you could but I want to cast my vote on someone from "my" party) I would pick her. She's young and modern, intelligent, ambitious, and most importantly, she drives the gender equality agenda. She was a controversial choice for that very reason; being outspoken on human rights and democracy, and especially on women's rights, and as an MP has often voted against the government (where her party is one of four coalition partners). She is also a controversial choice for some people because she's pregnant and due in July. To these critics** she said: "I'm married to a modern man and not a dinosaur". Such a great response!

* The former minister, Cecilia Malmström, was appointed EU Commissioner for Justice and Home Affairs, so stepped down as minister. Ohlsson's appointment lasts until the general election in mid-September.
** One woman, Eva Sternberg, has written a column in Expressen and I don't know if she's serious or ironic??!! I sure hope it is the latter!

I Knew That!

Swedish men are apparently the world's most beautiful men! But I knew that already of course! ;) And it's not just my claim - a dating site especially for beautiful people* says so, or more exactly, the users of the site say so.

Swedish guys are followed by their Brazilian and Danish counterparts, in that order, whilst British men are at the bottom of the list, the poor sods!

As far as the other sex is concerned, Swedish women came in second after their Norwegian sisters.

An Oxford study has also concluded that Swedish men make the best husbands so it's looking good for Swedish women! Or women of other nationalities who have caught a Swede in her net! :)


* Questionable on moral and principal grounds in my opinion but...

Show & Tell: Blue and Yellow

New month and new Show & Tell hosts - Annika, Désirée and Petra. Today's theme blågult - blue yellow (though yellow blue sounds better in English) are the Swedish national colours and I assume the girls picked it because it's the Swedish national day tomorrow. But I'm going to make a very free interpretation and write about what I came to think of when I thought of the colours blue and yellow.

Blue and yellow - and purple, green and red - are the colours of an abused woman.

Before I continue I should point out that I'm not myself a beaten woman (if I were I would probably not write about it to start with) but fighting domestic violence, or violence against women in general, is a cause I support. I have a friend who's been working with women's rights and domestic violence for a long time - she's now heading a project called Centre for Relationship Violence in Stockholm - and I have followed some of the developments in terms of policy and legislation for work.

According to the UN definition (1993 declaration), violence against women is:

• - Violence targeted at women on the basis of sex/gender
• - Violence that cause or can cause physical or mental suffering or bodily harm
• - Violence that mean threat, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of freedom
• - Violence against women refers to abuse, rape or sexual exploitation
• - Mental violence refers to sexual harassment or sexual humiliation at workplaces or in schools, in media, press and advertising
• - Violence against women is a breach of human rights

Violence against women occurs everywhere around us. Amnesty illustrates this by shrinking the world to a village with 1,000 inhabitants and providing some frightening and sad statistics:

• - 500 are women; it would be 510 but 10 were never born due to sex-related abortion or died as infants due to neglect
• - 300 are Asian women
• - 105 are illiterate
• - 145 live on less than a dollar a day
• - 167 are being beaten or in some other way exposed to violence during their lifetime
• - 100 will be raped or experience an attempted rape during their lifetime

More about domestic violence (source: Amnesty):

• - At least one out of three women or as many as a billion women in total have been abused or forced to have sex during their lifetime. Often the perpetrator is a family member or someone she knows.
• - Approx. 70% of female murder victims are killed by their male partner
• - It is estimated that in Kenya more than one woman a week is killed by their male partner; in Zambia it is five women a week by a male partner or family member.
• - 35% of Egyptian women are abused by their husband at least once during the marriage
• - In Bolivia 17% of women over 20 have been subject to physical violence in the last year
• - In Bangladesh all murdered women have been killed by their partner
• - In Pakistan 42% of women are said to accept violence as part of their fate and 33% feel too helpless to put up any resistance. 19% say that they have protested and 4% that they have acted in some way.
• - In Canada the costs for violence against women have been estimated to be 1.6 billion dollar per year including medical care and decline in production
• - In the USA a woman is abused every 15th second, often by her partner
• - In New Zealand 20% of women are beaten or mentally abused
• - In Russia 36,000 women are abused on a daily basis by their men or partners
• - In Spain one woman is killed every five days by her male partner
• - In the UK two women a week die at the hands of their male partners.

There is also specific sexual violence (still Amnesty figures):

• - One of five women in the world will be subject to rape or attempted rape during their lifetime
• - In South Africa on average 147 women are raped day
• - Rape occurs every 90th second in the USA
• - In France 25,000 women are raped every year
• - In Turkey 35.6% of women have been subject to violence within marriage, 16.3% say that it has happened on several occasions

More statistics, e.g. for violence against women in wartime and harmful practices such as female genital mutilation, are available on Amnesty's page.

So what do states do about it?
In many countries it is not even considered a crime; cases of violence are often not even investigated or punished. Some facts:

• - In 2003 at least 54 countries had laws that discriminated against women in some way (based on a report from the UN rapporteur on violence against women).
• - 79 countries have no or unknown legislation against violence in the home
• - Rape within marriage is recognised as a specific crime in only 52 countries (read for example about new, depressing legislation allowing this in Afghanistan here)
• - Only 16 countries have legislation that include specific references to sexual assault
• - Only three countries have legislation that specifically headline violence against women as a criminal category in itself (Bangladesh, Sweden and the USA)
• - In Bolivia, Cameroon, Costa Rica, Ethiopia, Lebanon, Peru, Romania, Uruguay and Venezuela a rapist will not be punished if he asks the victim to marry him and she accepts
• - The concept "honour" as extenuating circumstances (partly or fully) exists in penalty codes in Peru, Bangladesh, Argentina, Ecuador, Egypt, Guatemala, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, the West Bank and Venezuela.

What about Sweden then?
According to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, reported case of abuse against women are increasing (up 34% in the last decade) - both because more and more women go to the police and because there is more violence. Some facts and figures:

• - In 73% of the cases the woman knew the culprit (2007)
• - The share of attacks (where the victim does not know the perpretator and it happens outdoors for example) has decreased with 12% (2006) and in 17% of cases of rape there is no close relationship
• - In 2006 the prosecutor gave a restraining order in 4,294 cases
• - There were 2,500 reports of abuse in 2007
• - In 2007 5,850 persons were suspects in connection to abuse against women. In the majority of the cases (around 4,750) the woman and the man knew each other. In 85% of those cases the suspect was a man (compared to 64% men where they don't know each other).
• - 21% of all cases were settled (solved) (23% for known perpretator and 15% for unknown)
• - According to estimates only 20-25% of violence against women in close relationship are ever reported to the police

We should also remember that not just women are victims of domestic violence, also children, both directly and indirectly. Save the Children/Rädda Barnen has done several excellent commercials about this:

I also believe that prostitution is a form of violence against women. I don't agree with those who say that "it is the world's oldest trade bla bla..." or that "they have chosen to do this bla bla...". I recently read a disturbing article about the "business prospects" for prostitutes in Copenhagen in connection with the climate conferences taking place there this year (one climate and business conference a couple of weeks ago and of course the big international climate conference in December). At the recent conference one prostitute said she had "a crazy rush" for business; "the politicians also need to relax after a long day"... Denmark has not criminalised sex-buyers (NB! not selling but buying, based on the assumptions that the prostitutes themselves are victims rather than criminals) like Sweden (1999), Norway (2008), Finland (pending) and Iceland (2009) and does not seem to be heading that way anytime soon.

Finally I just want to say that I'm not saying that all men are like this! I happen to have a wonderful man in my life and I know most of you out there do too. Violence against women in something that men and women have to fight together! It's a cause we should all support. I also want to say that I'm aware of the fact that there are women who abuse men, and violence in same-sex couples - this is for example why my friend's project talks about violence in relationships rather than just violence against women. That said, most of their clients are women who have been abused by men.

Keep Her Walking!

This woman walks around the world in the fight against breastcancer. Please send her on so that she can reach her destination and say a prayer for all those who are suffering from this horrible disease.

I found her over at Barbamorsan.

Mr Boss

Continuing on the gender equality topic...

Read a report from the (Swedish) Institute for Labour Market Policy Evaluation (IFAU), which concluded "dads become bosses - not mums". According to their research, when men become fathers their chances of getting a managerial position increase while the mothers' chances do not change. In other words, the family situation affects men and women differently. Men and women without children have equal chances of becoming manager, but as soon as parenthood enters the equation things change.

One reason for this is that fathers maintain a stronger link to the workplace than mothers after they have become parents. But the correlation is also there when other factors have been taken into account; working hours, education, civil status (i.e. married or not) and whether the person works in the private or the public sector. The study is the first one that has showed a clear correlation between change in people's family situation and change in their management responsibility.

I think this report just goes to show that even if we have the best parental leave provision in the world, it can also be bad for women. As long as parents do not split the leave more evenly, employers will see women as more of "risk" and not promote them in the same extent as they would men. And in a way I understand them. If you are an employer and you are choosing between promoting a man and a woman who are equally good at their job, as ambitious, etc., but you know that the woman will stay home for a year once or twice or maybe more times and also perhaps take more of the responsibility when it comes to caring for a sick child (so-called VAB or temporary parental benefit), then it is natural to opt for the man. Sorry you women out there who take long parental leave, but it's true. And perhaps you do not mind, this is a sacrifice you are personally willing to make, but unfortunately your actions affect all women, women as group. This means it cannot be a choice for the individual or the individual family.

So, the only way to even start changing this situation is to split the parental leave allowance 50-50 between women and men. The leave entitlement is so generous anyway, 13 months (and longer if you count the 90 guarantee days paid at a much lower rate, but paid). That is minimum 6½ months per parents, and 8 months per parent if you include the guarantee days. Compare that to 2-3 months, often unpaid, leave in most other countries, and for just one parent. And the argument "but we can't afford that, my husband earns more", etc. is not a valid argument. Yes, it costs money to have children. If you did not know what you should not have had them in the first place. And in terms of the second argument, yes, then we have to go into reasons why many women earn less than men in the first place...

So, 50-50 by law is the only way to go! Now (today literally) even the usually conservative Moderate party is talking about earmarking more months to the father in the name of gender equality so maybe it is not such an unrealistic idea anymore.

Some facts
Despite the fact that Sweden is one of the world's most gender equal countries women are still very underrepresented in managerial positions. Over the last 30 years the share of bosses among female employees has increased from 15% to 20% while the share for men has been around 30% over the same time period.

Managerial positions are defined as jobs with leadership functions, i.e. that the individual has subordinates.

The Gender Constant

Time to write about one of my favourite topics - gender equality (my other favourite is climate change, as you've probably noticed).

Unfortunately last year, Sweden lost its no 1 position on the World Economic Forum's equality list, the Global Gender Gap Report. Fortunately we only dropped to place 3, after Norway and Finland (Iceland is no 4 and Denmark no 7 so the Nordic region sure dominates that list). The list compares 130 countries, covering 92% of the world's population.

The rest of Europe does pretty well; Ireland is no 8 and Germany no 11, while the UK occupies place 13 (I'm actually a bit surprised that Ireland and Germany do better than the UK; will have to blame it on my prejudices about Catholic pro-life Irish people and stay-at-home-mother-loving Germans). Don't move to Saudi-Arabia, Chad or Yemen if you are a woman.

The index is based on four main pillars: economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, political empowerment and health and survival. The Nordics score very high in all those categories; Norway overtook Sweden partly due to its work on increasing the share of women in top management position (by legislating; Sweden has decided against that route - we'll see what strategy works best in the long term).

The USA is in 27th spot. One factor for the average position (towards the lower end for developed countries) is the limited maternity provision at childbirth. Here's an article from New York Times on this topic (from 2007 but it's still very relevant):

Paid Leave for Maternity Is the Norm, Except in ...
AMERICAN women sometimes joke that they plan to move to Sweden or France before they become pregnant, to take advantage of the generous paid maternity leave those countries provide.

In fact, would-be moms may not realize they have many more options than just those two: 170 countries offer some paid maternity leave, and 98 of them offer at least 14 weeks off with pay.

The United States is not one of them.

This point was starkly illustrated in a world map published in the August issue of National Geographic entitled “Who Gives Parents a Break?” The data was provided by the “The Work, Family and Equity Index,” a report released in 2007 by researchers at Harvard and McGill.

On the map, the United States stood out as an arid brown blotch, one of only four — the others being Liberia, Papua New Guinea and Swaziland — with no paid family leave.

Why doesn’t such a policy exist now, on a national level? There is no simple answer.

First, the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act does require certain larger companies to give workers who meet certain criteria up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave. But as many as 40 percent of workers don’t qualify under the provisions of that law — because their employer is too small, or they haven’t worked for the company long enough. And a survey in 2000 by the Department of Labor found that 78 percent of workers who qualified for this leave said they didn’t take it because they couldn’t afford to.

Employees may want greater government involvement, but many businesses object to the idea of being required to give paid leave. The main issue is financial, said Marc Freedman, director of labor law policy at the United States Chamber of Commerce, which opposes government requirements for paid family leave. “Paid leave is widely provided by many businesses already,” he said.

“Employers are at least resistant if not opposed because of their fears of the cost impact of this mandate. They would have to find the money to pay for these benefits.”

While companies may balk at the cost of paid leave, many workers often do need time off for reasons having to do with health or family responsibility — and they can ill afford to lose any wages, let alone their jobs.

As the lawyer Joan Williams notes in her book “Unbending Gender: Why Family and Work Conflict and What to Do About It” (Oxford University Press, 2001), many people, and not just employers, are still influenced by the outdated ideal of the single-income household, in which a working person typically relied on someone at home to care for a new baby or a sick relative or cope with any of the myriad situations that families face.

MOST families today are dependent on two incomes. But Debra Ness, president of the National Partnership for Women and Families, an advocacy organization in Washington, said, “Our policies don’t reflect the reality of working families’ lives.”

There have been changes at the state level. California has had a paid family leave law since 2004, and Washington State approved a parental leave law in April. Similar bills have been proposed in other states. Most of these measures are paid for entirely by employees.

In California, workers contribute a small percentage of each paycheck into a collective benefits fund; those who need a leave can take six weeks off at 55 percent of their wages.

At the federal level, Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, and Senator Ted Stevens, Republican of Alaska, introduced a bill in June, that would in effect become a financial supplement to the federal Family and Medical Leave Act. Unlike the California program, funding for the Family Leave Insurance Act of 2007 would come from a combination of employer and employee contributions, and general tax revenues as well.

Clearly, there are a lot of details to work out. But given all of these proposals, and the 170 countries with paid leave now, surely there is some solution for the United States. There are plenty of good reasons to go to Sweden or France, but paid parental leave shouldn’t be one of them.

Show & Tell: If I Were a Man for One Day, I Would...

As it's my turn to decide the Friday themes this month I should probably live up to it myself and post on a Friday and not on Saturday or Sunday as per my usual habit.

These are just things that came into my head when I thought about the topic, in the order of their appearance.  If I were a man for one day, I would...

• go out on the town and see how (because I'm sure there is no "if" there) people treated me differently
• not bother to shave since I was only a man for one day anyway and how much could it grow in one day?
• go to the guys' locker room to see a bunch of guys naked at the same time (this would appeal to me since I would still be a woman inside)
• have sex so I could feel how it is on the other side so-to-speak *hihi*
• not have to queue very long for the bathroom
• attend a job interview or a negotiate a pay rise to see how employers treat men and women differently and hopefully learn something from the experience
• not be able to say "no, I'm not very strong" if a friend asked me to help him/her with moving heavy furniture or other heavy lifting
• eat whatever I wanted and not worry about gaining weight (well, that doesn't apply to all men but to more men than women at least)
• fall asleep as soon as I put my head on the pillow (at least the man in my life can do that but it may just be a personal trait and not a man-woman thing)
• enjoy thinking like a man for a day and hopefully learn something from it for the future
• sport a short, easy haircut that didn't need much tending to
• get paid much more for that day's work (well, perhaps not at my current job, but for many woman around the world that is the case)
• walk around bare-chested without doing anything illegal
• propose to my girlfriend
• take an intelligence test and see if I scored any differently (probably worse of course) 
• hang out with the guys and see what they talk about
• not having to worry about putting on makeup

When I googled "if I were a man/woman for one day" I found some great quotes:

"I don't know, if I didn't have the 'male perspective' it would probably just be another ordinary day."

"Well, I'd get out and have a little fun with my new 'disguise' (at least for the time being)."

"If I were a man for a day I would wear a really expensive suit and just enjoy the different power dynamics of interacting with people."

"I would get rich and famous being the '1st man to actually change to a woman - supernaturally'."

"Knowing my luck it would be that time of the month."

"I would do the hip-circle-dance and swing it all around like all men do after their showers."

A Little Step Forward in the Fight Against the Sex Trade

I read that Nordic MEPs are trying to make its fellow (male) members of the European Parliament to set a good example by not using hotels that do not have an explicit policy against prostitution. 37 MEPs (out of 700 something) signed a letter addressed to the Parliament President stating "[We] strongly propose that the EU parliament without delay follow the Nordic Council* and decide that the EU parliament only use hotels that issue a guarantee that the hotel is not involved in the sex trade, and that all staff have written guidelines on this issue". The move is to particularly target hotels that turn a blind eye to what happens or even encourage it.

* The Nordic Council adopted a policy on prostitution and hotels in 2006.

McOld

McCain might have chosen a running mate who's young and a woman*, but it doesn't change the fact that the McCain team is an old** ticket.

10 things younger than John McCain, according to GQ Magazine and thingsyoungerthanmccain.com:
1. ISRAEL: Born in 1936, McCain was 12 years old when the Jewish state as formed in 1948
2. McDONALD'S: Opened in California in 1948
3. ALASKA: Became the 49th state in 1959. McCain is older than Hawaii too.
4. NYLON: The synthetic material was first used in a toothbrush in 1938
5. THE GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE: Completed in 1937
6. THE DANDY: The comic premiered in the shelves in 1937
7. BALLPOINT PENS: The biro was patented in 1938
8. THE FIRST COMMERCIAL: The Bulova Watch Company aired the first ad in 1941
9. SCRABBLE: Patented by Alfred Butts in 1948
10. SPAM: Introduced in 1937

*If I were an American voter I would never vote for someone who's a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and opposes women's right to abortion; it doesn't matter that she's the first female vice president candidate.
** Old as in policy and age.

Abstaining from the Truth

In the early days of my blogging and reading other people's blogs, back in early 2005, my friend Nonna blogged about the abstinence education in Texas that had proven unsuccessful. In a comment to Nonna I cited a Swedish article on the topic, "Living in celibacy easier said than done":

"More and more Americans promise to abstain from sex before marriage, zealously supported by President Bush. But only every tenth keeps his/her promise.

Solemn promises of a life in celibacy until your wedding day ought to be quite difficult to demand of the drinkers at the clubs in Stockholm - and of the rest of Sweden. Statistics show that young Swedes on average make their sexual debut at 16. In the USA however, there is a nation-wide movement to persuade the youngest to practise abstinence. President Bush supports the work and Congress has assigned 131 million dollar to abstinence teaching. As a rule the debated is conducted with Christian characteristics. But the problems with teenage abortion, spread of HIV, and STDs have made a great deal of people outside of church listen. Since 1993 the movement True Love Waits has alone convinced 2,4 million young Americans to sign a promise of chastity:

'As a believe that true love waits, I commit before God, myself, my family, those I date and my future partner to remain sexually untouched until the day I enter into marriage'.

The effectiveness of the abstinence model is however strongly questioned by scientists. And many sexuality specialists believe that medical arguments can make more people wait than can promises to God. Especially if the promises are not kept anyway.

A new scientific report from the University of Columbia shows that 88 % of those who have given a promise of celibacy have not kept it. The frequency of STDs among these people was just short of as high as among those who had not promised to abstain. Those who broke their promises, quickly came even with the promise-free group by having many partners in a short period of time.A study at the A&M University in Bush's homestate Texas has showed a similar result. Among teenagers who have been taught abstention, the number of people making their sexual debut following the end of the course increased, in particular among the boys. The many young people getting pregnant in the USA are petitioned more and more firmly by abortion opponents. Around the country these organisations offer free ultrasounds in order to persuade women to reassess. Spokesmen claim that up to 90 % of these women have abandoned the thought of abortion after having undergone these examinations.

The abortion advocates accuse these clinics for leading the women to continue their pregnancies. At the same time these women do no get any information about contraceptives. Instead they are encourage to - exactly - abstain from sex."

I just read another article on the subject (from October 2007), by Amanda Robb at the New York Times, titled "Abstinence 1, S-Chip 0"

"DEMOCRATIC leaders are right to contest President Bush’s veto of their bill to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance program. But sadly, their “bipartisan compromise” will leave millions of young Americans vulnerable to sickness and suffering of the most preventable kind.

To entice Republicans to support the bill, the House of Representatives agreed to increase money for abstinence-only sex education by $28 million, to a total of about $200 million a year. Abstinence-only courses, the only form of federally financed sex ed, teach that sexual activity outside of marriage is likely to cause psychological and physical harm. If that were true, our health care system would be not only broken, but besieged. A 2002 survey found that 93 percent of American adults had had premarital sex by the age of 30.

In addition to provoking shame about a nearly universal activity, abstinence-only sex education is ineffective and dangerous. Last April, a 10-year study found that students who took abstinence-only courses were no more likely to abstain from sex than other students. Previous studies revealed that abstinence-only students avoid using contraception.

Programs in public schools teach patently false information like 'the chances of getting pregnant with a condom are one out of six' and H.I.V. 'may be in your body for a long time (from a few months to as long as 10 years or more) before it can be detected.'

The results are tragic. The United States has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in the developed world (about the same as Ukraine’s), and the highest abortion rate in the Western world. Sexually transmitted infections like syphilis and gonorrhea are on the rise for the first time since the 1980s, and chlamydia is being diagnosed twice as often as it was a decade ago.

Among Americans living in poverty — those who might see the $4 price of a three-pack of condoms as the take-home pay for an hour of work at minimum wage — the unintended pregnancy rate has increased 30 percent since 1994. Our teenage pregnancy and abortion rates have declined during the last decade, but research suggests this is mainly because of increased use of condoms, something young people must learn about outside of school.

By dropping the financing for abstinence-only sex ed, Congress could save enough money to insure 150,000 children a year. And it would also demonstrate much needed resolve to protect all aspects of children’s health."

I can't believe that in 2008 some people still have such old-fashioned views and are turning a blind eye to the evidence and the social reality around them. Scary.

Abort now!*

* i.e. stop this development now

I'm a bit worried by the latest developments on the issue of abortion in the EU. European Parliamentary Forum (EPF) has just published a new survey of European parties' view on abortion, which concludes that 36 out of 75 parties, mainly Social Democrat, Liberal and Left parties, are in favour of the right to abortion. EPF defined this as "still big support for" the right to abortion, as some of the parties that don't specifically express the right to abortion in their party manifesto implicitly support the right, but to me, that isn't good enough. Actually I don't know what the views of the party was last year or five years ago or ten years ago, but it feels like people are questioning this fundamental right for women to decide over their own body.

Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden are some of the countries where there is broad consensus on the right to abortion (though one wonders sometimes what the Swedish Christian Democrats really think), while parties in Ireland, Poland and the UK are more divided. For example, in the UK there are differing opinions within the Labour party if the right to abortion on socio-economic grounds should be extended or restricted.

24 of the 75 surveyed parties want to reduce the number of abortion, which is not obviously the same as wanting to ban them, but it depends how (and why) you want to reduce them. The Swedish Christian Democrats, Liberals, the Centre Paty and the Left party belong to this category although the Christian Democrats want to restrain the grounds for the right to abortion. I can also support measures that reduce the number of abortions if these concentrate on the causes of unwanted pregnancies, increasing access to and use of contraceptives and discouraging the use of abortion as a type of contraceptive, but any means that try to limit women's right and access to abortion is really a no-no for me. I think it's probably safe to say that countries where abortion is banned or restricted have as high number of abortions as countries where access is free, and more women in dying in the process.

Some facts about the right to abortion in the EU
Completely free until at least twelve weeks into pregnancy: Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Czech Republic, Germany and Hungary
Allowed on socio-economic grounds (also to save the women's life and on physical and psychological grounds): Cyprus, Finland, Luxembourg and Great Britain
Allowed only to protect physical health: Poland
Allowed only to protect mental health: Spain, Northern Ireland
Allowed only to save the woman's life: Ireland

Sources: Europaportalen and Political Party Mapping by European Parliamentary Forum on Population and Development

Show & Tell: Change

This week's theme is change. Two different things sprung to mind:

• Climate Change - the change happening and the change we need to make
• Gender equality and the change achieved and the lack of change

I have chosen the second topic this time around. It would have probably been the perfect post for last Saturday, which was International Women's Day, but six days late isn't too bad!

8 VOICES ON GENDER EQUALITY IN SWEDEN
First, some thoughts from Swedish personalities on the best and worst with being a woman in Sweden today*.

Jan Guillou, author:
- The best is that we live in the world's most gender equal country. The worst is that the gender equality has not come very far. (It's all relative.)

Katrine Kielos, temp. Editor-in-Chief, Dagens Arena, columnist
- That we live the world's most gender equal country according to the Global Gender Gap Report 2007. At the same time the worst thing is that Sweden is not gender equal, just least unequal according to the same report.

Pär Ström, integrity and gender equality debater, author of the book "Mansförtryck and kvinnovälde" (Oppression of men and female empire):
- The best with being a woman is that there is great understanding and great interest in society for women's problems and difficulties. The worst is that Sweden to an unusual high degree has typical female and male professions. This has to do with people's free choice, but a consequence is that it is more difficult for the average women to have a career.

Anitra Steen, CEO Systembolaget [state monopoly alcohol stores]:
- The absolute best thing is that there is an infrastructure that makes it possible to have children and at the same time develop your career and yourself. That there are childcare, parental leave allowance and other tools helping one to manage family life in parallel with a career. I don't want to point out the worst things; I think that the most dangerous a woman can do is to see herself as a victim, then I rather see the advantages.

Thomas Bodström, Chair of Parliament Justice Committee:
- The best is that we probably live in the most gender equal country. The worst is that women are being abused and sexually assaulted in Sweden today.

Ebba Witt-Brattström, Professor in Literature, feminist
- That we have a global task to before the world's women show that it is possible to achieve our relatively high degree of gender equality, and at the same time combat the increasing contempt for women within and outside the country. The worst is that we right now have a meaningless debate about feminism directed by the media and with little relevance to women's reality.

Tobias Billström, Minister for Migration
- We live in one of the world's most gender equal countries. But there are still informal barriers, for example that womens labour market is so limited to the public sector.

Dilsa Demirbag-Sten, journalist and author
- The best is that me and my male fellow beings are equal before the law. That I live in a country where the state is obliged to protect me from oppression on the basis of religion, opinion, gender or sexual orientation. The worst is cultural relativism, that women are still oppressed in the name of culture and religion.

A FEMINIST GOVERNMENT VOICE
Second, some thoughts from the Swedish Finance Minister Anders Borg**. I didn't vote for them and I don't agree with most of the stuff they are doing, but Borg is one of the most sensible members of the Cabinet and he's not afraid of calling himself a feminist.

Why do you call yourself a feminist?
- Because I think it is one of our time's greatest restriction on freedom that men and women are limited by gender roles, that say what they should do and shouldn't do. Freedom is about shaping your own life, and the fact that gender roles endure is one of the greatest barriers.

It has been a bit taboo to call oneself a feminist in your party [Moderates/Conservatives], why is that?
- Historically it's been like that, but I think the attitude has changed a lot. Young people want to have the right to shape their own lives and young fathers want to be part of family life. If you want to live a good life you must take responsibility for your children and then you cannot let gender roles hinder that.

The lack of gender equality is one of Sweden's and Europe's biggest problem. When did you have your feminist awakening?
- I have worked with gender equality issues for a long time, but it becomes more concrete when you have children. More practice and less theory.

What can you as Finance Minister do to reduce the gaps between women and men?
- At the moment there is a positive development, women's salaries are increasing and women work more so that their incomes are growing. The one with the power over the money has great influence over the family; if women earn 40% less than men it has consequences. I work for getting women into the labour market, and making it easier for them when they are there.

What development has been most important during the 2000s from a feminist perspective?
- I think that the gender equality work has stood still. The positive exception is that I think I'm seeing that young men are more active as parents. When I took parental leave for the first time people laughed and said "now he's going on vacation". But the next time I saw a change in attitudes.

What is the most important feminist issue for you right now?
- The gender equality bonus. When a couple share the parental leave, and the lowest earner go back to work and the highest earner stay at home, they get 3,000 SEK in tax reductions each month.

What is required from the feminists of the future?
- You have to make yourself aware and discuss these issues with others. You have a personal responsibility.

* Source: Svenska Dagbladet 8 March 2008
* Interview in Dagens nyheter 2 March 2008

Feminist Inspiration

I attended a very interesting lecture by Nawal El-Saadawi tonight. El-Saadawi is a leading Egyptian feminist, sociologist, medical doctor and writer on Arab women's problems. She is one of the most widely translated contemporary Egyptian writers, with her work available in twelve languages.

I just wanted to share a few of the interesting points she made (in the order they were raised):

• I don't like the term "the Middle East". Middle to whom? If we call it the "Middle West" people laugh but why? When I go to America I say that I go to the "Far West".
• We don't live in a post-colonial world; it is neo-colonial.
• There are global and local dictators. Local dictators imitate global ones.
• I challenge the concepts of "democracy", "diversity" and "multi-culturalism". They divide people. They are words of post-modernism, which in turn is neo-colonial.
• Condoleeza Rice is biologically a woman but when you open up her brain, George Bush is there.
• Nakedness and veiling are two sides of the same coin = the paradox of the woman's body. Plastic surgery is the post-modern veil, the veil of the body.
• The father (or the [male] teacher, professor, etc.) is the representative of the divine power.
• Religion (Christianity) has caused a split between body and spirit. The woman is associated with body, physical and feeling, while the man is spirit, mind and thinking. Eve ate from the tree of knowledge and became a sinner. Why was knowledge condemned?
• One cannot get away from the history of patriarchy in the bedroom.
• If someone says they are apolitical it means they are political but that they are hiding their politics. Everything is political.
• The education is system is based on fragmented knowledge. We specialise. We are not organised and united. But a physician must know why people get sick.
• We must believe that things are possible. The veil of the mind is the most dangerous.
• God is my conscious. Religion has no meaning if one does not do anything. If one just goes to church/mosque or read the bible/quran but never works for justice, is one then saved by religion/God?
• The religious backlash is a political backlash.
• A woman cannot marry two men because then one won't know who is the father of her children. The father's name is important. We should give the mother's name to children instead.
• There is a difference between sexual liberation and economic and political liberation. Women have the first but not the latter [not even in Sweden].

Still A Long Way to Go

Sweden may be one of the most gender equal countries in the world, but in some areas we are far from reaching the goal. Some stats:

Women in the 20 biggest stock-listed companies' boards
2005: 16.1%
2006: 18.1%
2007: 18.3%

Swedish stock exhange companies completely lacking women on their boards
Industrivärden
Handelsbanken
Skanska
Volvo
SCA
Nordea
Telia
Sonera

The share of newly appointed board members who are women
2005: 20.6%
2006: 26.9%
2007: 16.8%

Share of female chairs
2005: 0%
2006: 0.7%
2007: 2.7%

Board election committees
Women: 18
Men: 84

7 election committees completely lacked women

(Source: Svenska dagbladet)