Bud Light finds themselves in the center of the WOKE debate

The controversy is about so much more than an American mediocre canned beer – it’s about identity politics

The American musician Kid Rock has posted a video that has been viewed by more than ten million people. In the video, he wears a MAGA cap with a semi-automatic weapon and shoots down Bud Light beer cans. Afterwards, he looks into the camera and hurls f-bombs at the viewers.

What is he so angry about? And what has made others on social platforms post videos where they destroy America’s best-selling beer?

It is, yet again, identity politics that is at the center. Bud Light is primarily enjoyed by people who crack open a beer after a long day at work and college students – people for whom the price of a beer means something.

The controversy is about the trans activist Dylan Mulvaney, who received a specially designed Bud Light can with her portrait on it at her one-year transition day.

Dylan Mulvaney has an extensive platform with ten million subscribers and more than a billion clicks on her videos. She is an actor and comedian and has documented her transition on social platforms. Additionally, she went to the White House to visit Joe Biden and talk about the legislation that has been introduced in some Republican states to limit the rights of transgender people.

Hence, the controversy is about much more than a mediocre cheap canned beer. It is about the American soul – and there is a vast difference in how that should be defined, depending on which side of the political spectrum one belongs to.

In this column, I am not addressing whether kids should be able to transition or which bathroom they can use – I am addressing the fact that adults should be allowed to be who they are. And in some states, transgender people are the target of legislation designed to limit their rights. Laws have been introduced to limit the access to medical care for trans people, changes have been made to change the ability to perform drag shows, and a whole host of other blitheringly hateful measures have made their way into legislation.

In recent years, there has been a great deal of focus on minorities and particularly vulnerable people. There was and is a need to put one’s own privilege and ‘blindness’ under the microscope. That is healthy and good for everyone. But, as with so much else in this country, certain elements have taken what could be a healthy debate to extremes – on both sides of the political aisle. In some schools caucasian children are taught that because of their skin color they are racist, in other schools they are not allowed to learn about other sexualities than heterosexualism. It should not come as a surprise that our kids are confused when even the adults cannot deal constructively with important subjects like these. Recess fights does not only take place in the schoolyard.

So now beer has become part of the WOKE war. Right-wingers boycott Bud Light under the slogan “go woke, go broke”. In the LGBTQIA+-community, Bud Light has been popular for decades, primarily as a response to another beer brand’s discriminatory hiring practices.

But there is hope. Nothing could be better for Bud Light than the massive attention they get these days. It’s win-win: while Anheuser-Bush is laughing all the way to the bank, the LGBTQIA+-community has received worldwide attention all over the world.

Ølreklame får amerikanere op i det regnbuefarvede felt

Det handler om mere end middelmådig dåseøl – det handler om identitetspolitik

Læs hele bloggen her:

Why did he shoot?

Excommunication from Jehovah’s Witnesses can result in trauma. Maybe that was why a man opened fire in Hamburg last week.

New drug for schizophrenia could meet desperate need for better treatments - leaps.org

We know them from public spaces, we recognize their magazines Watchtower and Awake! They engage with people in conversations at train stations and in public spaces. Dressed in a suit or a rather old-fashioned conservative length skirt they knock on our doors on Saturday mornings to proselytize God’s paradise and Armageddon. Maybe you feel sorry for them, especially their kids, when you see them knocking on door after door, preaching their “joyous” faith.

Most people have formed an opinion of them, but very few know what actually goes on in their churches, their Kingdom Halls, and about the indoctrination that pervades everyday life of these witnesses.

A few months back there was a shooting in the US in a parking lot outside a Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Thursday, the shootings in and around places of Jehovah’s Witness´ worship came to Europe with a shooting in Hamburg, Germany. Reporters in the US and in Europe have reported the Kingdom Hall shootings and compared them to other right-wing, radicalized perpetrators. But this parallel is problematic. Former Jehovah’s Witnesses who end up as perpetrators of mass shootings do not belong to the same group as racists and anti-Semites who run amok outside mosques and synagogues.

On Thursday, a perpetrator shot and killed six people and injured eight in a Kingdom Hall in Hamburg before turning his weapon on himself.

Violence is never a solution, no matter how much one understands why a person is suffering. Still, I would like to address and offer an explanation to the shootings within the sphere of Jehovah´s Witnesses.

Imagine that you met some incredibly nice people. Maybe you are at a vulnerable state, maybe you are experiencing a personal crisis. You feel lost, rootless, lonely, lacking a sense of purpose in life. A group of people welcomes you into their midst with open arms. You are invited for a cup of coffee, dinner parties, and conversations about the meaning of life. You are invited to talk about your frustrations with humanity, your viewpoints are met with understanding and empathy. Being met with openness and understanding is liberating.

Little by little, almost without you noticing, new ways are introduced to you. When you are invited to a dinner, they say grace before eating. This seems quite harmless, and you are after all their guest plus you want to be accommodating, so you fold your hands and look down at the tablecloth while the man of the house leads his family in prayer. What is said in the prayers may not be entirely to your liking, but you ignore that, there is no reason to spoil the atmosphere. Jehovah’s Witnesses are such nice, well-groomed and smiling people. All their talk of death to unbelievers is far from who you normally think voice such death and destruction-obsessed topics.

You notice that the important presentations in the Kingdom Hall, where you now come regularly, are given by men. Women are on the sidelines with supplementary roles on the podium, but the microphone time goes to the men, who are also heads of the family. You hear of a great war in the last day, when all who do not share the faith will be annihilated. This includes children. It’s scary, but luckily it doesn’t apply to you, because you saw the light and managed to get the right faith before God’s Armageddon war. You learn that Christmas, birthdays, Easter, indeed all holidays do not have God’s favor, so you must stop celebrating them. And you are told that you should cut off all contact with those in your social circle who do not share your views. And you do that, because you want to be part of your new club, right?

And then the trap snaps. The warmth is still there, if you follow the narrow path defined by the religious community. But if you “stumble”, you will be given a warning behind closed doors after a meeting with three serious-looking elders, who will find Bible scripters showing you that you have committed a great sin – something that, of course, must be punished.

The congregation has a certain number of “elders” who know about the actions and behavior of the individual members – this is known to all members, and this naturally means that you do everything you can to follow the sect’s rules. The “elders” have eyes and ears everywhere, because everyone has a duty to report if they see or hear something unregulated. Excommunication hangs over all members as the supreme shame and fear that pervades every action – the consequences are unfathomable, especially since everything now in your social life takes place exclusively within the sphere of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Critical questions are unacceptable and will, if they persist, lead to excommunication. They were welcomed before you became a member, not after. If you get drunk, smoke a cigarette, have sex without being married, swear, lie, cheat on your taxes… the list is long – you will be excommunicated. The path of virtue is extremely narrow.

There are many reasons why one can be disfellowshipped from Jehovah’s Witnesses. But for the sake of simplicity, let’s follow our imaginary example above. When hormones are raging and a baptized Jehovah’s Witness meets someone (of the opposite sex, naturally) he or she develops feelings for, and if they follow that desire and end up having sex, he or she is excommunicated and loses everything.

Everyone treats the excommunicated person as if he or she had a dangerous virus – the only way to get your life back is to repent, do penance and spend a year in the back row of the Kingdom Hall without being allowed to greet your family, without being allowed to participate, and without the right to seek eye contact with anyone. I know this, I went through it myself in the hope that I would be reunited with my family.

Should you have seen the clear light that makes you doubt whether Jehovah’s Witnesses really have The Truth, you are doomed forever. Even the most peace-loving family-deprived person can be driven to the brink of desperation.

Is this what brought the former member of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Hamburg to his action, which tragically cost the lives of members of the religious community and himself their lives?

Hvorfor skød han?

Udstødelse fra Jehovas Vidner kan resultere i umenneskelige traumer. Det var muligvis grunden til skyderiet i Hamborg i sidste uge.

Læs hele bloggen her:

Is H.C. Andersen and his fairytales the next to be cancelled?

To become wiser and change the future, we must dare to face the past without censoring it.

Regularly, literary writers have their texts dragged through the woke movement´s machinery. This time, the British writer Roald Dahl was the target, but when will it be Denmark´s national icon, HC Andersen? Drawing: Rasmus Sand Høyer

My son and I are reading “HC Andersen’s Fairy Tales & Histories + Complete collection prefaced by Johannes Møllehave” from 2000. The goal is to work through the book this year. We read a few pages every day and talk about the stories and about Danish words he doesn’t know, such as mill wheel, horse carriage, galoshes and wadsack. It is an excellent way to expand his Danish language skills and for his cultural understanding not to mention the quality time I get with him. We just finished “The Little Mermaid,” which my son dryly noted was “very different from Disney’s version.”

My kids loved reading Roald Dahl’s books when they were younger. The British author with Norwegian heritage is best known for “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” but published a total of 49 books for both children and adults. My daughter especially loved “The BFG.” Roald Dahl was anti-Semitic, racist, and a misogynist – traits I actively teach my children are unacceptable.

The way Roald Dahl described gender and obesity tells us something about him and his time that we can learn from today when talking to our children about how to treat each other.

There has recently been an enormous public backlash after Puffin, the children´s imprint of Penguin Random House, publisher of Roald Dahl’s books, announced that they would change the author’s language to make the books more inclusive. The publishing house hired the consulting agency Inclusive Minds, and it was decided that words like “fat” and “ugly” were to disappear, and content that had to do with gender, race, ethnicity, mental health, appearance, and weight would change. “Words mean something,” the publishing house wrote. “The fantastic world of Roald Dahl can transport you to different worlds and introduce you to the most wonderful characters. The books were written many years ago, and we regularly edit the language to ensure that it can be enjoyed by as many people as possible.’

The outcry was substantial – from literary figures such as Salman Rushdie, from the British royal house, and from freedom of expression groups, such as PEN America. So loudly did people protest, that the publisher pulled back and announced that the books would be available both in their edited editions and in their original form. The censorship controversy hits directly into a groping zeitgeist, where the fear of stepping on someone’s toes risks introducing self-censorship and compromise freedom of expression.

Where do we draw the line if we start canceling books and make them unavailable? Censoring or making things disappear because times have changed is a dangerous direction. Shouldn’t large parts of the Bible then be cancelled as well? How do you accept the art of the past when it is based on views we have moved away from? How do we make room for literature written in another time when the content holds viewpoints, we now find inappropriate?

We are finding ourselves in a time of change. Most of us can remember a world that looked somewhat different from the global society we live in today and this forces us to grabble with this topic.

That reality is, that we must find a way where diversity is embraced and where it is simultaneously ok that literature does not satisfy all viewpoints, skin colors, religions, or body sizes. Because if we start introducing censorship, if we start regulating what our kids and youth have access to – then we are moving frighteningly close to totalitarian societies we pride ourselves of being far removed from.

Should Salman Rushdie’s “The Satanic Verses” disappear, should books written with a British imperialist worldview? The balance is difficult – because what kind of literature is ok today if we simultaneously advocate freedom of expression and the importance of learning from the past as we move forward?

I don’t like seeing women depicted as cashiers if they could be research scientists or CEOs, as they now are in the edited Roald Dahl work, or to see someone being called “enormously fat.” The way Roald Dahl described gender and obesity says something about him and his time that we can learn from today when we talk to our children about how to treat each other and how a short time ago people looked at and mocked women and minorities. But the reactions to changing “mother” and “father” to “family” and the elimination of “girls and boys” to “children” and that phrases like “beautiful light skin” has been changed to “beautiful smooth skin,” shows that the woke movement is not backed by the general population.

When HC Andersen wrote “The Little Mermaid,” Denmark looked different. Denmark was a homogenous country, a country where Muslim headscarves, dark skin, and a diverse cultural population were not a natural part of the cityscape. If you wanted to experience the big world, you had to do like Andersen and go outside the country’s borders by horse-drawn carriage. The ideal of beauty was fair skin, blue eyes and blond hair.

And it is that reality, Andersen writes his stories from. Not the global world that surrounds us today. Therefore, the little mermaid is “the most beautiful of them all, her skin was as clear and bright as a rose petal, her eyes as blue as the deepest lake.”

Is this problematic? Is it something that should be cancelled the next time HC Andersen’s collected works are republished? No, because if we erase the past, we erase the possibility of conversations with our children about where we come from, what beauty is, how people before us were viewed. And we delete the possibility of taking a stand and making conscious choices based on a reflection on the world in which we find ourselves.

Hvornår begynder de at rette i H.C. Andersens eventyr?

For at blive klogere og ændre fremtiden er vi nødt til at turde se fortiden i øjnene uden at censurere den.

Læs hele bloggen her:

Harvey Weinstein, the renowned Hollywood producer behind #MeToo movement, receives another sentence for sexual assaults

The sentencing of the movie mogul Harvey Weinstein is a sign that men’s yearlong exploitation of women ends now.

Harvey Weinstein has been sentenced to 16 years in prison for rape. Women can no longer be treated as sexual objects and exploited with impunity, writes Desiree Ohrbeck.

He is known for movies such as “Pulp Fiction” and “Shakespeare in Love”. The man whose abuse sparked the MeToo movement, Harvey Weinstein, has received another sentence, this time for 16 years, for sexual assault. Scores of women have come forward and told of rapes, humiliations and years of sexual abuse committed by the man with enormous power, a man who could make or break a career in the Hollywood film industry. Today the court in Los Angeles handed down the verdict. The former Hollywood producer already been sentenced to 23 years in another case in New York – also for rape and various sexual assaults.

“Cancel culture is not without its problematic areas – but when it comes to rape and sexual assault committed by men in positions of power, I have no problem seeing their names dragged through the mud

It has been despicable to watch the media mogul on tv. The man who for decades exploited, raped, and manipulated young women was suddenly so frail that he had to use a walker and a wheelchair to get in and out of court. It’s far from the first time we’ve seen men who have taken advantage of their positions of power arrive in huge muscle cars and leave as if they’ve aged several decades the very second their time for reckoning has come – just look at Bill Cosby and various Catholic priests. Every time I watch with rage running through my body. They took advantage of their position, subjecting children and women to physical, psychological and sexual humiliation, and the second they have to face what they did in court, they turn into pitiful men, playing victims without taking responsibility for their misdeeds.

Weinstein’s predatory tactics were the same every time. He used his influence to lure women into private meetings, assault them and, after his abuse, threaten to silence them. He is neither particularly unique nor inventive – men who take advantage of their position of power often share common traits. The list of women who have come forward in the Weinstein cases is long – actors, models, dancers, physical therapists. Instead of admitting and apologizing to the victims, the abuses continue in the courtroom: The charges were either denied or alleged as part of a “transactional relationship”.

“I was excited about my future,” cried one of the witnesses. “Everything changed after the abuse… I became invisible, to myself and to the rest of the world. I lost my identity. I was broken, empty and alone.’

Cancel culture has its problematic areas – but when it comes to rape and sexual assault committed by men in positions of power, I have no problem seeing their name dragged through the mud. This is not much of a reparation for the brave victims who came forward, but does show a change in sentiment and that the judicial system is on their side.

The misogynistic pig was found guilty and was sentenced. The 70-year-old will serve 39 years for sexual assaults – a sentence that came decades too late, but better late than never. Today is a good day for the legal system and for justice – and an expression that women can no longer be treated as sexual objects and exploited with impunity.

Manden bag #MeToo får endnu en dom for seksuelle overgreb

Vigtig strafudmåling til filmbagmanden Harvey Weinstein kan tages som udtryk for, at mænds årelange udnyttelse af kvinder stopper nu.

Læs hele bloggen her:

NGOs aid the Taliban if they stay in Afghanistan

If NGOs bow to Taliban’s newest demand, barring women from working with NGOs, they accept the regime´s misogynistic agenda.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban have once again found a way to curtail women´s freedoms and opportunities. After coming into power, the first thing they did, was to barre girls from going to school beyond sixth grade. Then, women were banned from going to college. Now, Taliban is banning female employees working with NGOs – the ban includes foreign women. Did I mention that girls and women above sixth grade are not allowed to sing in public? The completely male-dominated Taliban government wants girls and women out of the public eye and sphere.

Taliban wants women at the same infantile level they themselves belong to by introducing one misogynistic law after another. They cover their women, hide them away, deprive them of every opportunity to think, see and speak independently, and from singing and dancing – a clear strategy that makes the likelihood of organizing and rebellion minimal.

Imagine, if Western NGOs comply and bow to these horrible power-hungry, misogynistic types and allow themselves to be cowed and shod and submit to these outlandish rules. It would mean they accept the role as the cowardly dogs, dodgy Westerners and yes, the women, Taliban hate so much.

Millions are deprived of access to aid because of the Taliban’s cruelty. Meanwhile, Afghanistan’s Minister of Economy, Qari Din Mohammed Hanif, announced in a press release that those organizations not complying will have their licenses to operate in the country reevoked.

According to The Red Cross, Afghanistan is facing one of its worst winters with a starving population. Millions are forced to choose between heating their homes and feeding their families. We are looking at a humanitarian disaster. Still, taking a stand should not be a difficult choice. Looking at the Taliban´s history and the ever-tightening grip on Afghan women, it is unlikely that the Taliban will stop at their latest attempt. The West has no choice, it cannot bow down to the Taliban´s latest insanity. Imagine the victory these cloak-covered men would see this as, if they could make the good-hearted industry of the West jump when they say “jump”.

“Imagine, if Western NGOs comply and bow to these horrible power-hungry, misogynistic types and allow themselves to be cowed and shod and submit to these outlandish rules. It would mean they accept the role of the cowardly dogs, the codified Westerners and yes, the women Taliban hate so much.

Save the Children ‘s Norwegian spokesman, Neil Turner, has announced that his organization can no longer operate in Afghanistan. “We cannot help women and children without our female employees,” he said in a BBC interview the other day. “We have followed all the cultural norms; it is impossible to reach the Afghan women in desperate need without our 468 female employees.’

If NGOs choose to stay in Afghanistan under the new demand, they are aiding the Taliban – and the Afghan misogynist men. Afghan women will be left to their own devices in complicated childbirths and in other circumstances where men are not allowed to be present, while Western NGOs help little Ibrahim, Muhammed and Ali band-aiding their booboos and patching up Mustafa’s gunshot wounds.

I wonder what is going through the Afghan girls and women´s heads in the light of this new ban. What are their reactions to the fact that some organizations choose to stay – without being able and allowed to help them, those most vulnerable? The NGOs can invite men into their aiding tents for help – but not women, exactly as was intended by the greybeards.

Girls and women are the future in countries with living-conditions far from the rights, opportunities, and economic possibilities women enjoy in the West. Hungry for knowledge, these girls risk being flogged for logging on to an online class, offered by a Western educational institution. Finding that the very part of the world they look up to, as a representation for equal rights and freedom, is willing to let the turban, tunic shirt dressed village terrorists dictate Western representatives to work and obey in accordance with the Taliban’s view on women – that must be incredibly demotivating.

Hjælpeorganisationer hjælper Taliban, hvis de bliver i Afghanistan

Kvinder og piger betaler prisen, når nødhjælpsorganisationer bøjer sig for Talibans krav om, at kvinder ikke må arbejde for dem.

Læs hele bloggen her:

Time has run out for places like Noma

Showing our distain for the treatment, employees in the culinary world must endure can be done when being mindful of where we put our money.

The closest I’ve come to dining at the world-renowned Danish restaurant Noma was when I visited The Willows Inn on Lummi Island. The chef used to work at the famous Copenhagen restaurant.

Sipping on my sparkling bubbles at an outdoor patio overlooking the Puget Sound, the tranquil atmosphere was abruptly interrupted when an infernal noise erupted. A mixture of shrill shouts, chants, megaphones, and musical instruments handled so effectively that every note that was out of tune reached me and the other guests.

“I’ll go talk to them,” I told my husband. All he wanted was to enjoy an evening without kids, hold hands, and have a private conversation. But he knows me well enough, so he didn´t object.

“What are you protesting against?” I asked them.

The person in charge told me about unpaid wages, inhumane working conditions, non-existent overtime pay and sexual assaults.

We often talk about that night. Not because the food left an impression, it was rather boring and predictable – but because that night we got to talk about what gentrification does to a community and about, and I understand this may come across as a bit of a white woman´s privilege, that we as consumers have a choices to make when it comes showing our values by being mindful of what we decide to spend our money on.

Had I known that the restaurant on Lummi Island with its 900 residents was at the center of a controversial case about pay, gender discrimination and physical and psychological abuse, I would never have set foot in that place – regardless if the food had been world class or not.

This weekend I watched the movie “The Menu” and couldn’t help but think of Noma and other high-ranking Michelin-aiming restaurants known for unacceptable working conditions.

The mood has changed, the winds are blowing in a different direction. It’s no longer cool to brag about having been to Noma – on the contrary, it’s almost considered a distasteful waste of money that could have been spent in so many other useful ways. The Menu points a finger, claiming that dining at a high-end Michelin restaurant is like a metafiction. The clown is the guest who leaves behind thousands of dollars on the restaurant table where he has been taken for a fool all night. Through a nonsense avantgarde description of food, the guest is tricked into believing that what he consumes is art – and so what ends up in the toilet is praised through a dance of words.

It is not benign things kitchen workers at Noma must put up with: odd working hours, being treated like brainless amoebas, physical and psychological abuse, poor pay, etc.

In the film “The Menu” it is clear that the emperor has no clothes in the sense that one of the guests, a woman who does not belong to the one percent of the population who can afford to eat at a fancy Michelin restaurant, lets the chef know that his food is boring and that she would rather have a cheeseburger.

Maybe it’s time to tear down restaurants instead of the people who work in them? And maybe it’s time for us as guests to make choices that don’t show what sophisticated avantgarde-ish we are. Maybe it´s time to stand up for people who´s working conditions we would never ourselves accept?

Tiden er løbet fra Noma

Med pengepungen kan vi vise vores modstand over for den behandling, medarbejdere i den kulinariske verden arbejder under.

Læs hele bloggen her:

Jehovah´s Witnesses violate the rights of children

Exclusion of minor children is in violation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child

Norway’s State Administration has settled a case in which it determines that children’s rights are violated when Jehovah’s Witnesses practice their exclusion methods. Children are exposed to negative social control and are held accountable within the organization´s closed legal system – and are judged as adults. All children deserve the same level of rights, not just Norwegian children.

If you are registered as a “recognized religious community” (Act no. 1533 of 19 December 2017 on religious communities outside the national church) in Denmark, you have a number of financial advantages regarding (property) tax and VAT. In addition, members can donate a tax-dectable amount.

In Norway, brave members of Jehovah´s Witnesses contacted the authorities because they felt trapped and did not dare to leave the sect for fear of the personal consequences it would have. Yesterday, Norway’s State Administration announced to the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that the religious freedom of the members is violated when the organization expels its members. The decision does not mean that Jehovah’s Witnesses will disappear from Norway. They can still practice their religion, they just no longer get millions of tax crowns every year, and then they lose the right to seal marriages.

In October, Jehovah’s Witnesses in Norway were warned that the financial state support was about to end. On the same occasion, the organization was asked whether it wanted to change its exclusionary practices so that it could continue receiving government support. To that, the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization replied no. At the same time, the organization hired a high-profile lawyer.

Jehovah’s Witnesses practice what was previously known as “excommunication” and has since changed name to “exclusion,” probably to create an illusion to the public of a softer punishment.

But excommunication is exactly the same as exclusion. In practice, it means that you are dead to your family and former friends. I know how it works, because I have experienced it myself. If you are walking in the street and pass someone you have known since you were a child, he must pass you by without acknowledging you. If you call home, your parents must hang up immediately. No contact, whatsoever, is allowed. If you become desperate and show up outside your parents’ doorstep, they must must close the door on you – the treatment of an excommunicated member is the same, no matter how old or young he or she is. Imagine how many excommunicated members die from suicide or go back into the cult – not to mention those who do not dare to leave for fear of the treatment they know they will have to endure.

That is precisely why Norway has now had enough. It is inhumane to treat especially children and young adults like this. When I confronted my mom with this, I was told that had made the choice when I chose to be baptized and therefore knew the consequences when I chose to leave the sect. To be clear, I was baptized two weeks after my 14th birthday, had not yet had my first period, had never been in love, or kissed a boy – in short, I had accepted restrictions, I had no understanding of.

The sect strongly encourages you to get baptized as early as possible – after that you are reliable for your actions according to their rules and restrictions. You are held accountable for your actions on equal terms with adults. I have heard of children as young as 8 who have been baptized – and judged as adults when they start asking questions or breaking the sect’s rules.

There has been a citizens’ proposal to deprive Jehovah’s Witnesses in Denmark of their recognition as a religious community. Unfortunately, not enough signed the petition for the Danish Parliament to consider the proposal.

That’s a shame. On the one hand, Jehovah’s Witnesses are immensely happy to receive the economic benefits that the Danish state provides, on the other hand, such a state-supported economy is de facto a symbol of accepting the inhumane, sectarian doomsday cult’s practice, which, with its Gestapo methods, forces the members to rat on each other – with severe personal consequences.

So, what has been Jehovah’s Witnesses reaction to the decision in Norway? Ironically, they state that they are a persecuted minority, that their freedom of religion is challenged, that they are the victims of a crusade that tries to make the lives of the witnesses as difficult as possible, and pressure them to change the interpretation and practice of the Bible’s message, which they of course “have no intention” of doing. It is tragicomic to see how their manipulative rhetoric trickery is turned upside down.

My hope is that more countries will look to Norway as a pioneering country – not only when it comes to financial support and lucrative tax-exemptions for Jehovah’s Witnesses, but for all religious communities, cults, and sect organizations that take children and young people hostage and use social control contrary to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and general common sense. The state must play a greater role – especially in democratic countries. After all, we can only expect more insane religions and sects on our doorstep in the future.

Børn skal ikke straffes som voksne – men det bliver de inden for Jehovas Vidner

At udstøde mindreårige børn er i strid med Børnekonventionen

Læs hele bloggen her

World Cup in Qatar: Dictatorships 1 – Democracy 0

The soccer World Cup was one big victory lap for authoritarian regimes.

“I don´t give a shit! I’m here to watch soccer,’ the Danish soccer fan said on TV.

He was in Qatar to watch the Danish national team play and was asked by a journalist how he felt about the debate about human right violations in the autocratic desert state.

To the democratic-minded journalists who focused on the atrocities – thank you. The Western World Cup journalists who focused on the conditions in Qatar did their best to shine a light and raise awareness, but unfortunately they lost the debate. The rest of the world doesn’t seem to care. The western values have lost, helped by FIFA, who lashed out at Europe and the West, accusing us of double standards and hypocrisy. In the Arab part of the world, that announcement was received with gloating smocks.

If we roll over and denounce our values to enjoy 90 minutes of yelling, high adrenaline, and testosterone-filled roars over 22 young men running around a field, I worry for our democracies in the future.

Sports and politics have always been inextricably intertwined. But focus have changed. Now, the focus is not on money for underprivileged states. Instead, identity and an awareness of privilege. FIFA signaled that it is time for Europe to have a diminished role and that the arrow of influence and power should be pointing elsewhere. Europe was once, due to its colonial empires etc., the villain and must apologize for thousands of years before it can allow itself to criticize the conditions in non-democratic states. So, FIFA is turning its interest towards authoritarian states – I would be suprised if Saudi Arabia doesn´t get to host the World Cup in 2030.

There has been a shift in the debate. Democracy versus autocracy has become the overarching theme and FIFA seems to have picked sides – in favor of autocratic states. Democracy-minded states are facing resistance when trying to focus on human rights violations, and Qatar’s PR machinery have succeeded in bringing together large parts of the Arab and Muslim world and dominate the narrative. Even sports journalists initially concerned with human rights ended up writing more about soccer and less about human rights at the end of the World Cup.

Europe’s values were attacked and tested during this World Cup final. Should it have escaped anyone’s attention, democracies are under attack. Apparently, most people in the free Western democracies are indifferent to the conditions women and children and critical voices have to endure, as long as it does not affect their everyday life. We seem to be confident that we will never have to fight for our democratic values in our part of the world. But we are wrong. Meanwhile, thousands of innocent people lose their lives far from our hemisphere, but we don´t care as long as we can gobble down hot dogs and chuck IPAs, and feel entertained.

It’s that easy – if you choose to close your eyes. But doing so is ignorant, selfish, and not particularly far-sighted. The stakes could hardly be any dirtier. History repeats itself – Berlin should never have had the Olympics in 1936, despite a heated public debate in Denmark at the time about the conditions in nazi Germany. Clear minimum requirements should be in place for who is worthy of hosting major sporting events – and in that context, authoritarian states have to be left off the ranking list.

So what does the future look like for major sporting events? – Belarus, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have already been granted major sporting events in the near future. So cheers! – sporting events are on their way to take place in dictatorial autocratic states with arenas of human life on these countries conscience.

VM i Qatar: Diktaturstater 1 – Demokrati 0

VM i fodbold var én stor sejrsrunde for autoritære regimer.

Læs hele bloggen her:

Will exposing the British royal family destroy the institution from within?

In a new Netflix documentary, Meghan and Harry reveal life within the royal family.

“Meghan and Harry” is the name of a new documentary series that will premiere on Netflix on December 8. The series covers the period from the couple started dating till they withdrew from the English royal house.

“For royalists and traditionalists, Meghan and Harry are the worst thing that could happen.

Viewers were shocked after Oprah Winfrey’s interview with Meghan and Harry, that revealed that the royal English house was steeped in structural racism. That debate was healthy and good and came, like so much else in royal circles, far too late.

The couple have their own production company and are now ready with a documentary series. Reportedly, the series will lift the veil on the reality of conditions within the castle walls.

The American people, who generally love the English royal house, as well as the English population, are divided. Are the two media darlings taking it too far, financing their Hollywood jet set life with various interviews, a podcast, and public appearances while burning all bridges behind them, or are they brave in insisting on a conversation that is long overdue, when they focus on the antiquated life in the highest royal circles? A lavish life paid for by taxpayers, so that the royals can dine in their expensive robes and dance the lancer in one castle hall after another, while the next day waving to their subjects with gloved robotic twists in their wrist?

The new documentary promises to reveal dirty tricks, structural racism, planted stories and divergent agendas between the various family members.

It has only been a few months since King Charles III took over the throne from his mother. Hardly has Queen Elizabeth II been laid to rest, barely has he and Camilla found their royal footing in their new roles, which, to put it mildly, lack some of the glamour and class one expects from a king and his spouse, before the English royal family is again in a deep crisis.

The discussion about misogynistic families, structural racism, discrimination against children and grandchildren, mental health, etc. is important and does not get a larger platform than in the world’s most famous (royal) family.

But for royalists and traditionalists, Meghan and Harry are the worst thing that could happen. One has to ask: Where does the revelations end in this new world, where old ways of life are changing and where the next generation is turning everything upside down? It will not end with a revolution, which has traditionally been the way to get rid of emperors and tsars. It is not at all necessary to resort to this because the English royal family themselves manages to annihilate from within.

Er åbenhed den visse død for kongehuset?

Meghan og Harry åbner igen op i ny dokumentarserie.

Læs hele bloggen her:

A bitter taste of hypocrisy and a lack of integrity in the world of soccer

The threat of a yellow card is enough to make soccer players stick their tails between their legs. Meanwhile, violations of human rights cost human lives, every day.

It would have been an honor. It would have been a minimal price to pay – a yellow card for the national team captain for wearing the message ” 1 love” on his armband in solidarity with LGBTQIA+ people. A small price to pay for staying true to one´s values and a convenient statement without actually having to participate in the fight for human rights.

It would have been beautiful. Imagine seeing Western democracies stand up for those who do not have the opportunity to express themselves freely, without facing consequences – in the form of beatings, imprisonment, persecution of family members, or even death. But a gentle pressure and poof – there goes their solidarity down in the gutters. The thought of being met with consequences for standing up for their values in the form of effecting their professional performance and financial future was enough to make them retreat.

I have written about why authoritarian dictatorship states should not be allowed to hold prestigious sporting events (tillykke med kvalifikationen, Danmark). It is a way of legitimizing their regimes, it is a mockery of the thousands of people who have paid with their lives so that our Western well-padded bums can sit and howl during the staged events, orchestrated by deeply anti-democratic and corrupt regimes.

Instead, it is the players on Iran’s national team who are leading the way by refusing to sing along to their country’s national anthem – and according to Amnesty National risk torture when they return to Iran. A country in chaos, where women have been protesting for weeks for freedoms every woman in the West takes for granted – hundreds have paid with their lives, many have been sent to internment camps, and even more have been tortured.

Once again, the West acts like fools. Little by little, the measures that have been negotiated in advance – such as getting a draft beer during football matches – are being withdrawn. But it’s not so much about the draft beer that fans don’t get down their throats – it’s about the fact that you can’t trust regimes that play by completely different rules than those Western countries are used to following. And when you bow your head and model your participation according to views far from those the West stands for – you give the violent regimes the platform they want and the recognition that invites them into the same club as Western democracies – a club they don´t belong to.

Not all countries are equal, that should be ok to say. When FIFA’s president, Gianni Infantino, in his infantile way said that the West must apologize for the next 3,000 years for the past 3,000 years of misdeeds, it screams to the high heavens. The logic is that the countries that have become wiser, i.e. the Western democracies, in no way have the right to hold countries without respect for general human rights accountable. This means that the killing of LGBTQIA+ people, the killing of women and migrant workers, the oppression of girls, etc., etc., should not be prosecuted and that nothing should be done about the fates of the weakest.

The lesson seems to be that we must close our eyes and rejoice that we live in countries where we do not have to fight for rights as independent, free individuals – and let the rest of the world’s weakest populations carry on as best they can. The soccer players seem to agree: The national Danish team (with DBU as the supreme body) has indicated that they will leave all integrity in the dressing room and crawl onto the field like mice – not like men – unwilling to take advantage of their unique , privileged position to show the onlooking world their solidarity with the world’s weakest and stand up for the values that the West, at a safe distance from the world’s focal points, prides itself on standing for.

___

En besk smag af hykleri og mangel på integritet i fodboldverdenen

Truslen om et gult kort er nok til at fodboldspillere stikker halen mellem benene. Imens koster brud på menneskerettighederne hver dag menneskeliv.

Læs hele bloggen her: