Kategori: women´s rights

My Experience Being a Human Book

Despite the American life I have built with two children, a husband, and a dog, I will always carry a deep sadness and a sense of loss that I have to live with every day.

Have you heard of the Human Book Project? Neither had I – even though the idea, which has become an international sensation, is Danish. The project has existed since 2000, when a group of young Nordic initiators saw it unfold at the Roskilde Festival.

The idea behind The Human Book project is beautiful in its premis. Human rights cannot solely be enforced through legislation, the general public must also participate in the fight against injustice, oppression, and discrimination through intercultural dialogue. Unjudging and breaking down prejudice is the main idea.

On October 7, the Human Book Project reached the other side of the globe when Folio in Seattle held a two-day event. Don’t judge a book by its cover could not be more apt for the Human Book Project’s mission.

So, how does the project work in real life? In all its simplicity, you borrow a person instead of a book. The “reading” takes place as a dialogue with the human book. The purpose is to break down prejudices and strengthen dialogue through meeting strangers you might have a prejudice against. Examples of human books are: a policemen, homosexuals, feminists, Muslims, etc.

The human books in Seattle were a disabled pole dancer, a woman who could see spirits, a stuttering gay professor, an unemployed man, and many more. I was there as a book because I survived the sect Jehovah’s Witness.

Before the event, I was not sure about what questions I would get, whether there was anyone at all who would “check me out.” I decided that I would answer any question and not hold back anything.

So I let it all out, answered every question. Questions about physical and psychological abuse, sexual violence, suicide, and about being a girl trying to navigate in a world dominated by (male) adults with misogynist stone aged mindsets and an eternal threat of risking becoming God’s enemy if you didn’t following their rules.

And then, I told about gaining my freedom – and that the price for my freedom was losing everything: Family, friends, my identity. I told people that despite the life I have been able to build with two children, a husband, and a dog in my American life, I will always carry a deep sadness and a sense of loss that I have to live with every day.

That fact is something people don’t like to hear. In many peoples minds, the story about the evil Jehovah’s Witness men, the rules, the manipulation, the years of loss and the search for a new identity must have a happy ending. Period. No insecurity, no inferiority, no frustration, no longing. There cannot be deep scars on my soul, only small tears are accepted. And certainly, people do not want to hear that I have living family members with their own lives far from mine with whom I have no contact. Much less, they want to hear, that my children have a grandmother, aunts, and cousins with whom they could have a relationship – if things were not the way they are.

The Human Book Project did what it was supposed to do – because I pushed back when one well-meaning person after another told me that I HAD to contact my family. Meanwhile, I was thinking about the purpose of the project: unjudge and face your prejudices, in a dialog between a human book and its “reader,” it goes both ways.

The world is not as simple as many of us would like it to be. I told the well meaning and kind hearted human book borrowers, that not everything in my life is as I wish it was, even though I have the life I want, a life I chose. In my case, there is a price to pay. It’s a realization I’ve spent years arriving at, a realization my “readers” were not immediately willing to accept. And that is exactly what makes the Human Book Project so important.

Menneskebiblioteket går i kødet på fordomme

På trods af det liv, jeg har fået stablet på benene med to unger, mand og hund i min amerikanske tilværelse, vil jeg altid bære en dyb sorg og et savn, jeg må leve med hver dag.

Læs hele bloggen her:

While women in Iran burn their headscarves, Danish Muslims talk about a non-debatable God given order for men and women

I recognize the Muslims’ rhetoric about fixed gender roles from my time in the sect Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Iran is on fire – women are burning their headscarves and protesting in the streets in hopes of freedoms Western Muslims take for granted.

On September 16, Masha Amini, a young 22-year-old Iranian woman, was arrested by the morality police. A few hours later, she died in their costidy.

Across Iran, women are protesting against the hard line the country’s leaders are increasingly implementing. More than 76 protesters have been killed, over 1,300 have been arrested.

“Sometimes you have to listen for what is not being said and pay attention to what is implied.

What do these women who put their lives on the line have to lose? Nothing. They see no future for themselves or their fellow sisters – that´s why they are willing to put their lives on the line. As a side note, this is a stark contrast to the hundreds of thousands of Russian men who are leaving Russia in droves these days instead of fighting a system that suppresses basic human rights.

In tiny Denmark, a group of Western, privileged Muslims discuss gender and equality on a radio podcast. “Patriarchy and matriarchy: Do they apply in Islam?”, is the theme of the program.

Sometimes you have to listen for what is not being said and pay attention to what is implied.

In the studio, are two guests; a woman and a man. Hamid and Kasper. The male radio host consistently lets Kasper answer first throughout the broadcast. Kasper has a smooth voice, but his words are as dangerous as snake venom.

“Patriarchy and matriarchy are words used in a gender discourse that is dangerous and that you have to be very careful with as a Muslim,” Kasper says. As the most natural thing, he draws up a view of gender that I recognize with a chill from Jehovah’s Witnesses. He would like to avoid concepts of gender, but that is “unfortunately” not necessary in society, i.e. the Danish one, in which he lives.

It is clear that one can easily be called Kasper and be brought up in Denmark without becoming a democratically minded citizen. In his soft voice, he continues with an argument that the two sexes have strict, God-given roles. The world is determined by Allah, the relationship between women and men is not up for debate.

His arguments are full of sardonic juice frosted with academic terms. He even refers to the feminist Simone de Beauvoir’s book “The Second Sex”, and pronounces the title in beautiful French. I wonder if the French feminist would turn in her grave if she heard how her words are being twisted in the mouth of a misogynist?

“Men and women are created as one body. If one part hurts, the other parts will hurt. If one part … makes a power takeover, the body becomes in conflict with itself.” The monologue elicits an approving murmur from the other two present in the radio studio. It’s been a long time since I’ve had to listen to such incoherent, illogical nonsense. Would they be able to see beyond their indoctrinated gender views if I with a twinkle in my eye asked them how the analogy makes any sense given that men’s health is statistically so much worse than women’s?

The woman in the studio, Hamid, personifies women at their worst – arguing against gender equality. She is skeptical of the terminology examining power structures between the sexes. And then she says something that sends a chill down my spine: “It’s part of the reality we’re part of right now.”

“Right now.”

That term was widely used within Jehovah’s Witnesses. “Right now” suggests that it will not always be like this. It is an encouragement or a warning depending on ones temperament.

There are no critical questions asked about the views presented, there is only a tunnel-vision conversation about how different a Muslim mindset is from the Western one based on gender equality. “We have a different approach to life… we fundamentally do not share the same outlook on life with this way of thinking.”

“This way of thinking.”

You mean the Danish, Western and extremely well-functioning one with a focus on gender equality? My thoughts drifted to the debate about integration and to the fact that the Danes are regularly criticized for using a them-and-us rhetoric. Ditches can be dug on both sides of the value frontline.

Iranian women and Afghan schoolgirls will probably disagree with Danish Kasper, who says: “The roles of men and women must not be challenged. This is a violent trend in the West.” He continues: ‘In Muslim environments there is a difference between the sexes. It is a man who is an imam … a man who teaches. The women are at the back of the room … that’s how it is.’

No matter how many academic phrases like “gender discourse,” “power structures,” and “post-structuralist” Kasper and Hamid use, the pot is full of the same dirty scum. I came to think of an expression we use here in the US, which reads: “to put lipstick on a pig.” No matter how hard you try to make something unpleasant sound or look nice, there will always be a stinking pig underneath.

Words are powerful, words can be twisted, and words can create prisons for those who are not allowed to speak freely. That premise is what Iranian women are rebelling against these days. They pay with their lives when they try to question the order their gender has been forced into.

It leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth when I hear Danish Muslims comfortably sitting in a radio studio in Denmark and pseudo-talk about how it is not important, yes indeed, downright ungodly to question the place, role and rights of the sexes. Western, privileged Muslims should stand shoulder to shoulder with their co-religionists in Iran and Afghanistan and fight for women’s right to be independent individuals who are not subordinate to men.

____

Mens kvinder i Iran brænder deres tørklæder, sidder danske muslimer og taler om en fastlagt orden for mænd og kvinder

Muslimers retorik om faste kønsroller genkender jeg fra Jehovas Vidner.

Læs hele bloggen her:

Forfattere i USA står op for ytringsfrihed

Hvad siger det om vestlige demokratier, at de ikke beskytter deres borgeres ytringsfrihed?

Læs hele bloggen her:

Writers in the US are standing up for free speech

What does it say about Western democracies if they do not protect their citizens’ freedom of expression?

This Friday prominent American writers like Paul Auster and his wife Siri Hustvedt gathered on the stairs in front of The New York Public Library on Fifth Avenue under the slogan “Stand with Salman: Defend the Freedom to Write.” (“In solidarity with Salman Rushdie: Defend the right to write freely.”)

A week ago, Salman Rushdie was stabbed during a literary event north of New York City when a man jumped on stage and stabbed him several times with a knife. Ironically, Rushdie was about to talk about how the United States is a safe heaven for writers who cannot stay safely in their own countries.

For more than thirty years, Salman Rushdie has lived a life with security guards 24/7 – simply because he did what writers do – used his creativity in a literary work. In one such experiment he played with the idea that the holy book of the Muslim faith, the Koran, was not divinely inspired but rather the result of a whispers from Satan. For that work, The Satanic Verses, he garnered a fatwa from Iran’s top Islamic leader that encouraged any Muslim to murder Rushdie. In addition, a bounty of 3 million dollars was put on his head.

For more than thirty years, Rushdie has lived with the knowledge that radicalized Muslims all over the world had a desire to kill him or would rejoice if others did. Rushdie moved from Europe to the United States, where he, for more than twenty years, was almost able to live a normal life. Until now.

Unfortunately, he is not the only one who has had to move from Europe because he criticized Islam. As Europe becomes more Islamized, several people with inside knowledge of Islam have spoken out and problematized various cultural and value attitudes that are not compatible with Western, free democracies. For their outspokenness, they have received death threats. Several have even paid the ultimate price. In several cases, the European governments have not wanted to spend the financial means needed to protect people who spoke against Islam. For example , Ayaan Hirshi Ali, who is originally from Somalia and became a politician and critic of Islam in the Netherlands, also had to move to the United States because her Dutch homeland could not guarantee her safety.

When an author, journalist, comedian or writer is attacked for what he or she has as a profession, namely his words, what does he have left?

“An attack on a writer, cartoonist, comedian, politician, or public figure because of his or her statements and writing is an attack on each and every one of us who believe in democratic values.

Salman Rushdie has never compromised on his beliefs, but has again and again and again pleaded for the right to express himself freely. He has done this with intellectual depth and quirky humor. Despite living under a constant threat, he has helped other writers and intellectuals who were in vulnerable positions because they spoke out against authoritarian regimes or extreme religious groups. Most recently, he has joined a network that helps Ukrainian writers.

It shouldn’t be necessary to say. But these days, writers and other creative souls cannot freely use their creativity and write without fear. All over the world there is a keen sense of awareness that when you speak out or write critically about totalitarian regimes and Islam, there might be a price of violence to pay.

Our rights and freedoms here in the West are more fragile than we dare to admit. Because if we admit that premise, then we also admit that our societal model and form of government have failed. If we can only feel safe within the borders of our own countries, when we shut down criticism, turn a blind eye, and refuse to speak out on specific subjects, and self-censor ourselves, then the rights we think we have are a hollow illusion.

We are faced with a choice: we can remain silent in fear. Or we can do as the writers who, without face coverings and with their names clearly stated today on the steps in the heart of New York to the library that contains thousands of books – all the result of a creative, free process, refuse to let violence destroy the principles we believe in.

An attack on a writer, cartoonist, comedian, politician or public figure because of his or her statements and writing is an attack on each and every one of us who believe in democratic values in a society with individual liberties.

May the voices that dare to speak against regimes of violence, hatred and religion never remain silent when threatened! May we fight for them to be able to write and say what they wish without fear of reprisals. And may our western democratic states wake up soon, so that you don’t have to be brave to express yourself freely. #StandWithSalman

Muslimske mænd: Mand jer op!

Hvor er vestlige muslimers kamp for afghanske pigers ret til at gå i skole

Læs hele bloggen her:

Muslim Men: Man Up!

Why are Muslims in Western countries not fighting for Afghan girls’ right to go to school?

It’s been a year since Biden threw in the towel and gave Afghanistan’s girls and women the middle finger. The American exit was a disaster and a scandal, both for the country’s reputation and for the Afghan girls and women who are now caged behind their veils and the walls of their homes. The United States has a responsibility for sure. But what is much worse is that Muslim men in Afghanistan and the rest of the world are not fighting for their Afghan mothers, sisters and daughters – and that is a disgrace worse than the failed US presence in Afghanistan.

A year ago, city after city in Afghanistan fell to the extreme Islamist group, Taliban. For more than 20 years, American soldiers had been present in the country and tried to make a difference in relation to democracy, gender equality, and showing the population an alternative to the Taliban’s regime of violence and terror.

“Where were the Afghan men who reportedly overwhelmingly support girls’ right to school? Why didn’t they form a protective ring around the women?

Faster than anyone could say failed democratization, Afghan men laid down their weapons that should have been used to defend the weakest part of the population, namely women and children. The coward for a president took his billions and fled the country.

We all remember the images of desperate people trying to get out of the country, clinging to the wings of an airplane but ending up dead, while we watched them fall to the ground like little dark specks as the plane took off. In a flash I remembered the towers in New York when they were hit and people jumped off the buildings and straight to their deaths.

Violence, panic, chaos; families that were torn apart; women gave birth on the premises of the base; people died of hunger and thirst in the scorching heat or as a result of violent episodes.

Thousands of Afghans desperately tried to get out of the country when they saw where things were headed. They remembered all too well what the regime of terror by the Taliban. They knew very well that the Taliban speak with a forked tongue. In particular, everyone knew how girls and women were treated.

Imagine how the girls and women who stayed back are doing now – the hell they are living in. Taliban leaders told the West it was only a matter of time before schools would reopen to middle school-age girls. So we waited, and so did the girls in Afghanistan. On the day that was supposed to be the first day of school, they were more than ready. They smiled, there was a spring in their step; this was the day they had been looking forward to. Finally, they could go back to school. But when they showed up, long-bearded, robe-clad cavemen waited for them and told them that they wouldn’t be allowed back to school after all. What a vicious exercise of power, what a dehumanizing humiliating display of power. Since then, the girls have been hidden away and are back in kitchens, doing the laundry, and scrubbing the floors. If they move outside, they risk being beaten or shot.

A few days ago, approximately 40 women demonstrated for equal rights. 40 brave women. One almost get a lump in ones throat. The BBC reported that the demonstration was quickly dissolved when the Taliban regime’s scoundrels shot into the air in a show of force. The message to the women was loud and clear: Go home, or we’ll lower our guns and shoot into your little group.

Where were the Afghan men who reportedly overwhelmingly support girls’ right to go to school? Why didn’t they form a protective ring around the women? Why don’t they speak up for these girls when they clearly have no problem declaring in front of an open screen and in various opinion polls that they most certainly support girls’ right to go to school and absolutely do not agree with the Taliban? And where are the Muslims living in the West when it comes to supporting their fellow Afghan sisters? Here in the West, they live in safety with no threat when they utter their views. Here in the West, in stark contrast to the Afghan girls and young women, their sisters, wives and daughters have all the rights and access to free education they could ever dream of. So why don’t we hear a peep from some of the voices that otherwise shout so loudly that their rights in western democratic countries are not respected?

It is a cheap shot and a double standard to criticize things that you consider not adhering and accommodating Muslim values in countries that are based on Western freedoms, while enjoying these freedoms and simultaneously advocating and demonstrating for more legislative changes that accommodate Muslim values. The fact that you don’t lift a finger, take to the streets, or collect signatures to shout out about and for the rights of women who need the loud shouts more than you need to implement Muslim values into the legislation in western democracies, leaves me with a strong disgust, distaste, and lack of respect. So Muslim men : Man you up!

Pinligt, Danmark! Kravl ned fra den høje hest, og stik i arbejdstøjet – kvinder og minoriteter skal op ad ligestillingsstigen

Danmark ligger på en 32.-plads, når det drejer sig om ligestilling, viser ny rapport.

Læs hele bloggen her:

What an embarrassment, Denmark! It is time to crawl down from your high horse, and shift into work clothes – so women and minorities can climb up the equality ladder

Denmark is in 32nd place when it comes to gender equality, a new report shows.

” Denmark !?” is the reaction I am often met with when I tell people in the US where I am originally from. “Aren´t you the happiest country in the world with a high degree of gender equality?”

As Danes, we are taught to be proud of our country, our culture, our history, and our model of society. Maybe too proud.

A new report from the World Economic Forum, Gender Ecuality Gap 2022 , states that gender equality is overall declining. The report points out that it will take well over 100 years to achieve gender equality.

No country has full gender equality. But the countries in the top 10 are the ones we usually compare ourselves with – countries like Iceland, which top the list with 90%, Finland, Norway and Sweden, which all have a gender equality percentage of over 80%.

Although many Danes are quite proud when it comes to their country, they have to stop gloating about the degree of gender equality. Because the ranking for Denmark is embarrassingly bad. In fact, it has gone backwards, which is visibly marked by a small minus symbol on the right side of the column next to Denmark in the list of the country’s ranking.

Denmark is no longer a hippie-we-are-all-equal-because-we-burn-our-bras-are-and-our-men-knit-kids-hats-country. Denmark is not as equal as the Danes think. We lag far behind countries like Rwanda and Namibia. If Denmark wants to be in the same league as our Nordic neighbors, several parties must get off their high horse and pull on their work clothes.

This applies to men who do not want to give up their place in politics and business, it applies to men who are board members with an attitude about how a person on a board should look, act and speak. And it applies to women who have an expectation of themselves and their fellow sisters, when they let those with career ambitions feel like they are the worst mothers, if the home does not look like an Ikea catalog , the food is not made from scratch, the mother does not go to every school event, and tuck their kids in every night.

But equality also applies to minorities’ access to high positions in the labor market and in political life. And for those who have the skills but may not have the experience moving in the circles of the well read. People who didn´t grow up in a family with middle class dinner table discussions and therefore speaks a language that makes them seem like strange birds? These groups have a different perspective, different voices – and little duck pond Denmark needs that if the country is to survive in a more globalized world.

A few years ago I went to a panel discussion at the University of Washington in Seattle, where the then Minister of Foreign Affairs, Anders Samuelsen, and Crown Princess Mary spoke. But the wisest words came from a female grad student. “Give up the chair you are sitting on,” she said. “Only in this way do women and minorities break the glass ceiling.”

“Denmark is no longer a hippie-we-are-all-equal-for-we-burn-our-bra-are-and-our-men-knit-kids-hats-country.

Not unexpectedly, the report from the World Economic Forum has shocked the Danes. Today I listened to a podcast called “Debatten” on P1, where the result of Denmark’s ranking in the report was debated. Among the guests was the Danish Minister for Gender Equality, Trine Bramsen, who unfortunately was neither a particularly great communicator nor had a clear message when it came to propose suggestions on what can be done to get more women on the boards and give them the incentive and courage to be self-employed.

I was cursing out loud when I heard her say that one way to address the gender gap is to rethink corporate culture and where meetings are held between 5pm and 8pm, “during tugging-in time”.

Since when can ones partner, no matter how he or she is attached to the relationship, not tug the kiddo in? And since when is it implicitly the role of the mother? And if she’s single, then there’s probably a nanny who can do the bedtime story for one or two nights without the kid being long term harmed by it.

Maybe something is simply fundamentally and structurally wrong with the way we look at the role of a mother, when even Denmark’s Minister for Gender Equality uses words, it seems neither she nor the other guests in the radio studio find disturbing. Words that explicitly express a view of antiquated gender roles. Maybe her way of expressing herself was not a Freudian slip, maybe she was simply expressing a view that permeates the view of family life in large parts of Denmark – and which keeps women in a role of expectation that they have a hard time breaking free from, if they do not wish to be shamed as mothers?

Another reason why Denmark is ranked so incredibly bad in the new gender equality report may have something to do with the way the welfare state is set up. No matter what line of work you have as a Dane, you will be fine. An ordinary job will pay for a house, a car, several holidays, all the material goods you need- why work your butt off – and why stand out in an ambitious dream of reaching the top, when the whole Law of Jante socialization from preeschool through the entire education system teaches you not o stand out?

Of course, it’s perfectly ok to love that view on society – it just does not look good in a gender equality report. Therefore, Denmark must either accept that the price for their model of society comes with a disparity when it comes to exceptionalism and gender equality. Otherwise they have to do something about it and actively fight for equality and against the law of Jante where noone dares standing out for fear of being socially ostracized.

So next time an American asks me a question about happiness and gender equality in Denmark, I might answer: “Yes, Denmark ranks second among the happiest countries in the world – perhaps because we do not expect much. And in fact, the United States ranks higher on the Gender Equality Index than Denmark .”

10-årig pige voldtaget, gravid og udskammet af amerikanske politikere

Nu ser vi konsekvenserne af abortlovgivningen i USA, og det er de svageste, der ofres på de selvgodes alter.

Læs hele bloggen her:

10-year-old girl raped, pregnant, and shamed by Republican politicians

We now we see the consequences of abortion laws in the United States. The most vulnerable are sacrificed on the altar of the self-righteous.

Not long ago, many states changed their abortion laws. It came after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade, a 50-year-old ruling that put a woman’s right to make health decisions over higher than the states’ desire to do the same.

In a short time after the Supreme Court ruling, the so-called trigger laws came into affect. These laws were to be activated in the event that the Supreme Court reversed its decision. Imagine how many things you can come up with to make it difficult for a woman to have an abortion when you have almost 50 years to be creative in making it as difficult and illegal as possible to have an abortion or help assist with one. One of the more popular moves has been to ban abortion after week six and not to make any exceptions for incest or rape. The misogyny is unfathomable.

These days, the media is covering a story about a ten-year-old girl from the state of Ohio. She was raped several times and then became pregnant. When the pregnancy was discovered in week six plus three days, the state’s six-week deadline for abortion had been exceeded. Therefore, the girl had to travel to the state of Indiana, where she had an abortion.

Imagine what it must be like for a ten-year-old girl to be exposed to the trauma of a rape. And then imagine that the country’s most famous politicians use your misfortune in a political game. And then imagine yet again how the case is now running it course in the media, where even President Joe Biden has weight in on it.

This is not exactly a dream scenario pro lifers want. So, they reacted in a rather predictable way – by accusing their political opponents and the media of fabricating the story. The caveat, however, is that a 27-year-old man has confessed and that samples have been taken that prove his heinous act.

But the case does not end here. Now, investigation after investigation is being launched. For example, the doctor who performed the abortion must be prosecuted, says the Indiana state Attorney General.

Meanwhile, a ten-year-old child has been both physically and mentally abused and forced to endure the most horrible thing imaginable. She will always carry her experiences with her. But even though her body is now safe, she is being abused in a political stunt by Republicans.

Shame on the self-righteous suburban moms, Republican politicians, and religious forces in this country! To be pro-life should mean fighting for a ten-year-old girl’s right to life.

Højesterets udmeldinger i USA er politiske – derfor stritter deres afgørelser i denne uge i øst og vest

En religiøs, amerikansk fodboldtræner bad sammen med spillerne på banen efter kampene – og har nu Højesterets ord for, at det er helt ok.

Læs hele bloggen her:

In the United States, the Supreme Court’s announcements are political – which is why their decisions this week are all over the place

A religious, American football coach prayed with the players on the field after the matches – and now has the Supreme Court’s word that it is perfectly ok.

The Supreme Court has taken Americans hostage in a right-wing religious propaganda stunt that is dividing the population more than it already is.

Here in my state of Washington, a football coach has become known nationally overnight. The story centers around Joseph Kennedy, who was the coach of the local high school team. After each match, he prayed, often with several of the players. Some have later said they felt obliged to participate – it is after all the coach who chooses which players get to play on the field. When the school district learned about the coach praying on public grounds, they asked him to stop, which he refused. That got him fired from his coaching job.

I imagine the Russian tennis coaches at our local club praying to their orthodox God, after the kids have finished their backhand exercises, I see for my inner eye how my son’s Colombian soccer coach extracts a crucifix from his front pocket instead of a yellow card and gathers the kids around him to some Roman Catholic cheer, I see myself standing for the flag and national anthem at my kids swim meets while being forced to see the coaches standing with their arms up in the air, rocking back and forth, praying as if the Holy Spirit were upon them. You get the point: Jews, Muslims, Hindus and all sorts of other faiths and ways of life that force feed our kids and everyone around them with their religious beliefs.

The football coach in my state of Washington, who felt that his right to practice religion had been violated, took his case to court. Today, the Supreme Court ruled. He and everyone else has the right to practice his religion in public.

The verdict falls on the tail of last week’s Supreme Court announcements that have sent shock waves around the country. Among other things, we learned that Americans have a constitutional right to bear arms in New York and all sorts of other places in the public domain. The following day, we learned that women do not have the right to make decisions over their own bodies. When it comes to choice and family planning, the states have the right to decide that a woman cannot choose to have an abortion. Indeed, The United States Supreme Court is busy these days waging a war on values.

But what if coach Joseph Kennedy´s name had been Yousuf Kamal and he instead of praying to a Christian God had rolled out his prayer rug and invited the players to turn their faces towards Mecca with him after every football game? Would the Supreme Court ruling have ben the same?

If there is one thing Europe is learning quite rapidly these days, it is that religion in the public sphere is a dangerous cocktail. Religion can be an integral part of a culture in our activities at school and in the workplace when the population is homogeneous and most belong to the same culture and religion.

That’s not how it works in the United States. Here the population is one great conglomeration of peoples with vastly different cultures and religions. Unlike in Denmark, it is build into the the American fabric that religion and state must be separated – it does not require a doctorate in either religion or political science to see why that constellation is a good idea if you want a society to function as peacefully as possible. The fact that we in the United States more than ever are moving into a value-based legislation rooted in Christian dogmas is far from the notion most Americans have of the powers of the legal system.

So what happens in an environment where the politically appointed Supreme Court justices are more than busy pursuing rulings based in politics? They may think they are doing what they are set to do by Trump, to please his base, when they announce their ultra-right-wing conservative rulings. But one day, it will not be a right-wing Christian who is praying with the children, but a radical Muslim, a Mormon, or a Jehovah’s Witness. Like Joseph Kennedy they will believe they have the right to practice their religion where ever they are. And they will have the Supreme Court´s ruling to back them up. Maybe it’s a matter of time before young people, and all of us, come to stand as spectators at sporting events, where we are taken hostage in a religious propaganda stunt that can only divide the country more than it already is.

The Supreme Court’s announcements this week point in different directions. We now know, it is more important that an individual has the right to bear arms in the public sphere than the sense of security and safety of the surrounding citizens. Conversely, it is not the individual woman herself who has the right to choose over her own body, it is a decision that elected politicians at the local state level. And in terms of practicing your personal religion and trumpeting it to everyone who is near you, well, then again, it is the individual´s right that stands above people’s sense of discomfort.

So, now this is what I have to look forward to: Being pray to other people’s religious beliefs being forced on me when I just want to see my kids run around and have fun at some sporting event. Land of the free? Well, for those hardcore gun loving, religious fanatics, maybe.

Hvis du kan kontrollere kvindens krop, kan du kontrollere hendes liv

Jeg er på vej til demonstration – nu skal der kæmpes for vores, vores døtres, vores søstres og alle kvinders rettigheder.

Læs hele bloggen her:

If you can control a woman’s body, you can control her life

I’m on my way to demonstrate in downtown Seattle – we must fight for the rights of all women.

“ Men!, are you capable of being fair? A woman is asking. At least you will allow her that right. Tell me: What gave you the sovereign right to oppress my sex? The man wants to command like a dictator. Given their ignorance, disregard or the disdain of the rights of women we have decided to declare the following rights of women:”

These words could have been written today, but there are from 1791 written by the French activist Olympe de Gouges, who ended her days in the guillotine after writing “The Declaration of the Rights of Women.”

The Supreme Court has overturned the ruling on Roe v Wade, which for 49 years has given women, not the states, the right to decide over their own bodies when it comes to abortion. The rollback that puts states legislation higher than women’s autonomy is a brutal attack that steals women’s right to self-determination. And the theft is committed by none other than the Supreme Court.

Now women are de facto second-class citizens, with men ruling over women’s bodies. It is a crime against humanity, misogynistic and undemocratic.

We knew it was coming. The document about the Supreme Court´s intention to reverse the Roe v Wade ruling was leaked a few months ago. In the reversal, there is no exception for rape, incest, or if the woman’s life is in danger.

“Now women are de facto second-class citizens, with men ruling over women’s bodies. It is a crime against humanity, misogynistic and undemocratic.

The vast majority of Americans are in favor of a woman having an abortion. But the Supreme Court ruling is entirely in Trump’s misogynistic spirit. As you know, Trump nominated three Supreme Court justices to cover his right-winged, religious, ultra-conservative base.

In the United States, church and state are separated – but now all women are force fed a Catholic, right-wing, religious attitude to abortion through legislation.

And why? In order for men to be able to control women through legislation. This desire is certainly not new. Women have had to fight for the right to vote, the right to own real estate and many other things, and as they gained those rights men lost some of their control. With the announcement today, the official United States shows that control over women’s bodies does not belong to women. If you become pregnant, then you must give birth and become a mother – even if it is against your will. This is how men want it.

My mother had an abortion, as did my grandmother’s sister. One through the official healthcare system, the other by a quack. Abortions have always been a way for a woman to assert autonomy over her own body and future – even if or because she was in a difficult situation.

And now we are at it: Where is the focus on the difficult choice women have to make? No woman takes the choice of abortion lightly, but where are the voices focusing on how woman end up in a situation that requires a life-changing decision in the first place? I also hear no talk about what responsibility men bear for the choice the woman has to make.

Imagine if men were told that they could only have sex with women if they used protection, and that there was a life sentence for it if the woman became pregnant – that would surely result in politicians taking action. Until then, we women must be the ones reacting.

Today, I walk with thousands of other women. We must show men that their lust for power stops now. Stop the discrimination, stop the hatred – once and for all!

New York vil ikke have våben i det offentlige rum, men det må de leve med, fastslår en ny Højesteretsafgørelse.

Højesteret trækker i én retning og Senatet i en anden. Imens må vi vænne os til at være levende skydeskiver, hvis vi bevæger os uden for døren.

Læs hele bloggen her:

New York does not want people carrying weapons in public. But a new Supreme Court ruling states that is against people´s constitutional right.

The Supreme Court pulls in one direction and the Senate in another. Meanwhile, we have to get used to being with live shooters if we move outside the door.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that it is against the “second amendment” (which gives a citizen the right to possess and carry a weapon) if a state tries to make restrictions on whether people can carry a weapon in public space.

A few weeks ago, the United States had a school shooting that was one of the worst in the country’s history. Nineteen children and two adults were killed, most of the children between the ages of eight and ten. The Americans were in shock, parents demanded changes to the gun laws, and politicians in the Democratic Party once again saw an opportunity to try to get tighter gun laws through.

In the United States, Supreme Court justices are appointed politically. Trump elected three judges, all with ultra-conservative, Christian views. Although Trump is no longer in the White House, the reverberations of electing these Supreme Court justices will shape U.S. law and society for generations to come.

A few weeks ago, I was sitting in my kitchen talking to a man about gun laws in the United States. The mood was respectful even though we were far apart in values and opinions. One of his remarks stood out, and gave me an idea of what people who believe in equality and tighter gun laws are up against.

“You want to have the right to decide over your own bodies. I support that. You can do what you want. I as a man do not have any right to go against that. But at the same time you want to take my right to bear arms away from me. You cannot insist on an individual right on one hand but not on another.”

Rhetorically, it is a rather ingenious argument – even if it does not make sense upon closer inspection. Initially, it makes sense to insist on the individual’s right to own and carry any weapon and as many as possible and compare that directly to a woman’s individual right to make a choice about her body.

“The difference is that you can kill an entire school class in one minute while the woman is not harming anyone,” I replied.

“I would argue otherwise,” the guy said. “She kills too, she kills her child.”

I was dumbfounded for a second. But that´s where we are, that’s where many Republicans stand. The Supreme Court is aware of this, and their role is t stand by the base that Trump has placed them to represent. We now see the consequences of this, because the Supreme Court is currently making a name for itself with controversial announcements.

A short time ago, a document from the Supreme Court was leaked. It made it clear that the court intents to reverse Roe v Wade that ruled that the woman’s right to choose over her own body was higher than the state’s right to make restrictions on her right to an abortion.

Today came another announcement, this time about the right to bear arms in public space. The case was about New York but will have consequences for the whole country.

Both decisions wil make white men feel as if they are in control when they tell women that they can not decide for themselves what they want to do with their body. At the same time, they can strut up and down streets and alleys with their weapons as an extension of the masculinity they so clearly do not possess – and seen in the light of who got the Supreme Court judges appointed, that war on values targets women and minorities.

So dear Danish tourists: Welcome to the wild west. If you’re planning to take a trip to New York, be prepared for that pit in your stomach when you can visibly see people carry guns. And prepare for what every American child knows by heart because they practice it several times a year, namely what you will do if a shooting takes place in the subway, in the mall, or in the public space.

Ingen kvinde, homoseksuel eller minoritet kan vide sig sikker i USA

Den amerikanske højesteret tager politisk standpunkt imod kvinders rettigheder. Tiden er ikke til at fortvivle, den er til at kæmpe – for kvinder, minoriteter og sociale udsatte gruppers rettigheder.

Læs hele bloggen her:

No woman, gay, or minority should feel safe and protected in the United States

The US Supreme Court takes a political stand against women’s rights. The time is not to despair, it is to fight – for the rights of women, minorities and socially disadvantaged groups.

“Keep your fingers from my uterus!”, “My body, my choice!” and “Abortion is a matter between a woman and her doctor,” are some of the statements on the banners the demonstrators carry. For the last few days, I have been following the debate about the leaked document from the Supreme Court and the intent to reverse Roe vs. Wade. The population in the United States is shocked about this news. My shock goes deeper than just shaking my head when it comes to the polarized stands in America on weapons, politics and abortion.

The hatred, the lies, the desire for power and oppression leave me with a sad uneasiness and feeling of having been manipulated and misled- even though I was aware that Trump’s appointment of no less than three Supreme Court justices could have fatal consequences, beyond his time in the White House.

Nearly 50 years ago, a case was settled in the U.S. Supreme Court that grants a woman the right to abortion. The law is known as Roe vs. Wade – a woman sued the state of Texas because the state banned abortion unless the woman’s life was at stake. The case ended before the Supreme Court, which ruled that the individual woman’s right to choose abortion is above a state’s abortion law.

“Maybe we should do something about the structural reasons for why a reversal of abortion legislation will disproportionately affect the weakest in society instead of making life harder for them?

Since then, the debate has been heated. In recent months, several states have enacted legislation on abortion that makes it virtually impossible for a woman to detect that she is pregnant before the time limit for having an abortion is exceeded.

There are, of course, many arguments from both the pro life and the pro choise sides shouting and waving their banners. That´s how it is in the United States, especially when it comes to highly contested political views.

What I do not understand is why pro lifers can not just be against abortion – for themselves. Why can´t they let other women decide what is right for them? How can you be so self-righteous in your indignation that you feel you have the right to judge another human being who may or may not have a thousand reasons for her choise? Freedom for all, is something America pride itself of, apparently that does not apply to a woman’s right to decide over her own body.

For when self-righteous, often white, ultra-religious with privileges and access to health care feel they have the right to impose their anti-abortion message to vulnerable women, it honestly makes me sick to see their desire for self-assertion and lack of empathy.

This is America, and here, as opposed to Denmark, you do not have access to the health care system when you need it, without having to pay for it. It is primarily black and Latina women who need an abortion – and there are many reasons for this.

Maybe we should do something about the structural reasons for why a reversal of abortion legislation will disproportionately affect the weakest in society instead of making life harder for them? How anyone can think they have the right to harass and persecute others with their arrogant, cynical stance on something that should be a private matter between a patient and her doctor, I fail to understand.

One of the Supreme Court judges’ argues that Roe vs. Wade should never have been in favor of the individual woman’s right in the first place – because the Constitution does not mention abortion. There is quite a lot of our current way of life that is not mentioned in the American Constitution of 1788. If the argument is stretched, then what implications does it have for gay marriages just to name one example?

Several states are ready to introduce legislation that makes it illegal to have an abortion. Other states have indicated that they will help women with the procedure who cannot have an abortion legally in their own state. The United States is more divided than it has been for decades, and women’s rights are now an active part of a larger movement that divides the country even further.

Wanting to control and oppress women is nothing new, men have always wanted to dominate women and their right to control their own bodies. But if you think they will stop at women’s bodies, you are wrong.

In a society with racial, cultural and religious diversity and with a disparity between rich and poor, sontrol and oppression of the vulnerable and minorities is what keeps you in power.

The time is not to despair, it is to fight – for the rights of women, minorities, and socially disadvantaged groups.